[0:01] The meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Wooder Park for May 5, 2026 will come to order.

[0:07] Let me begin by stating that the purpose of the Planning and Zoning Board is to review and make a recommendation on conditional uses, subdivisions, comprehensive plan amendments, land development code amendments,

[0:17] and other ordinances affecting the development of property and to make final decisions on applications for a lake for a home approval.

[0:25] Any decision regarding lake for homes under city code section 58-87 is under the purview of the sport and the boards vote is a final decision that will not be heard by the city commission.

[0:37] The city commission will consider the board's recommendations may tonight on other public hearing items on Wednesday May 27,

[0:44] 2026 at 330 p.m., or assume their actors may be heard, and the city commission will make

[0:49] the final decision on such matters. You're encouraged to keep a prize to the status of such

[0:55] matters, going before the city commission by reviewing the city's website, an upcoming city

[0:59] commission meeting agenda. The meeting will proceed as follows. The chair or staff will announce

[1:05] each public hearing item as it appears on the agenda, which is available outside the front door.

[1:10] Staff will begin by making a presentation on each item and will provide the staff's

[1:14] recommendation. Next we will hear from the applicant. After that the floor will be open to the public for anyone who wishes to speak in support of or an opposition to the request.

[1:24] After public comment, the applicant will be given an opportunity to respond to the public comments. Please approach the podium and state your name and address for the record.

[1:33] With the exception of ordinances proposing comprehensive plan amendments and land development code amendments, the public hearing matters coming before the board are mostly quasi judicial and nature.

[1:42] For quasi-judicial matters, the Board considers the testimony and evidence in the record at the hearing and determines whether the applicable criteria for approval have been met.

[1:53] The testimony that you give to the Board should be fully truthful in the same manner as if you were giving sworn testimony in a court of law.

[2:00] In the interest of time, we ask that each person appearing before the Board limit their comments to one appearance of three minutes.

[2:07] We have a large group tonight and I expect they're going to be a number of people who wish to speak.

[2:12] I want to give everybody the opportunity to say their peace,

[2:17] but I also want to be respectful of everyone's time including city staff,

[2:22] my fellow board members, the applicant, and all the members of the public.

[2:26] So I'm going to limit you to three minutes tonight.

[2:30] I reserve the right to let somebody go over,

[2:33] but we're going to be judicious with our time today.

[2:36] Okay.

[2:40] Large groups are asked to name a spokesperson. We asked that your testimony be relevant to the public hearing matter to which you are speaking and avoid repeating arguments and testimony made by yourself or others. Order into quorum will be preserved at all times. Please address all your comments to the board and not to the audience. After all public input, the public comment period will be closed. The board members will then discuss and we will vote on a recommendation to the city commission with any conditions that may be appropriate.

[3:08] Please turn off for silence all mobile devices during these public hearings.

[3:12] The first item of the business is the approval of the April 7th, 2026 meeting minutes.

[3:19] Does everyone have chance to review the minutes?

[3:21] If so, is there a motion?

[3:23] Make a motion to approve.

[3:25] Second.

[3:26] Of a motion in a second?

[3:28] Or are there any public comments on the agenda prior to a vote?

[3:31] Chairman, we have anyone registered?

[3:34] I have a motion in a second.

[3:34] Can I have a roll call vote, please?

[3:36] Mr. Seagull.

[3:38] Hi.

[3:39] Yes. Mr. Steinberg. Mr. Dick.

[3:43] Yes. Vice Chair Boenstein.

[3:44] Chairman Johnson.

[3:45] All right.

[3:46] The next item of business is public comments for items not on the agenda tonight.

[3:51] We did not have anyone to register to unless someone would like to speak.

[3:53] Thank you. We'll move forward with the first item on the agenda.

[4:03] Good evening board. First item on your agenda is a request of the development services.

[4:08] For condition use approval to develop for one story buildings,

[4:12] to only just under 30,000 square feet at 860 West Fairbanks Avenue,

[4:17] including approval for alcohol sales within 300 feet of residential properties.

[4:22] In conjunction with the Vestids C3 zoning and a community benefit agreement.

[4:28] So as you recall, the board tables this item at your meeting last month

[4:33] and gave the applicant two topics to address.

[4:36] Number one, to revise our architectural design, to incorporate additional building articulation,

[4:43] and to prepare a streetscape plan for Holt, which could include either a striping plan

[4:48] demonstrating dedicated on street parking or enhancement, such as a wide- and sidewalk

[4:53] and improved pedestrian buffer.

[4:56] So here's the updated site plan.

[5:00] You can see they also incorporated one of the conditions that we had on your table

[5:06] item to make the pond a more natural shape so that they have updated the plan to reflect

[5:12] that condition and then also decided to move forward with parallel parking along hold

[5:17] Avenue. It's a little bit hard to see in this plan so I blew it up and two sections here

[5:22] the western section of hold on the top of the screen and the eastern section on the bottom of

[5:27] screen. So their proposal is for two-way drive aisle and nine by 18. I'm sorry, nine by

[5:35] 22 parking spaces as well as a nine-foot sidewalk on the back of the curb and an eight-foot

[5:41] landscape buffer. And they were able to accommodate 13 parallel parking spaces. So they satisfied

[5:48] that plan with kind of providing both options and enhanced pedestrians experience there with the

[5:55] larger sidewalk as well as the buffer and then the 13 parking spaces.

[6:03] This is up to landscape plan that shows the reshape of the pond area.

[6:08] They also incorporated some sabers trees within the pond area.

[6:14] Again, this shows the landscape buffer on the private property side outside of the sidewalk for that eight foot landscape buffer.

[6:23] And then they also revise the articulation of the larger buildings at the end, the one

[6:32] at the corner of Dending of Fairbanks and the one at the corner of Cape End in Fairbanks.

[6:37] So the old is on top, you see the top area is flat on the new version, they've bumped

[6:43] out at least two feet on those two detail pieces, so it creates more of articulation along

[6:49] front longer buildings. And in terms of the smaller buildings in between, they do have a 10-foot

[6:57] articulation in between the two buildings. So it's not flat all across the four separate buildings.

[7:03] So it does jut out 10 feet towards Fairbanks Avenue. And then again with the buildings of the

[7:10] smaller versions in the middle, being only 61.5 feet wide, they decided to keep it as one fly elevation

[7:17] because the OEO code requires it to be set back every 36 feet, which creates for an awkward

[7:25] tenant space there for that restaurant space, so it's just the one art...

[7:30] Education piece that they don't have in the smaller buildings. But again, as I mentioned, they provide the ten foot articulation between the first building along the western edge as you move towards the east. It has a additional articulation, so it's not flat as you're looking down.

[7:48] And then here's another view of those two buildings in the middle, just wanted to point out within themselves.

[7:56] They do have articulation, it's just not at that 36 point foot mark in the middle.

[8:02] It's built into recess of the storefronts, the corners on the top, the recess of the windows, twice, one to the front face of the windows and then again where the insets of the windows are.

[8:15] So there's lots of articulation built in within the building, just not at that 36 point mark right in the middle,

[8:22] which would create for kind of an awkward view of the building due to the architecture they're proposing.

[8:28] Then just kind of recapping the comparison of what we have here. I went over a lot of this in our last meeting,

[8:35] but just to reiterate, we started with the OEO standards, which is what their zoning district is,

[8:42] but they requested a vesting agreement with the City Commission to go to the C3 standards.

[8:48] So we started with the ability to get 100% for a ratio invested to the lower C3 standards

[8:54] of 43% for a ratio, but they're proposing a 19.4% for a ratio.

[9:01] So they're 80 to 25% under the max for a ratio that could be built when we started.

[9:09] In terms of height, oil, that was four, C3, that was three, they're proposing one, so the

[9:16] three is two stories under what they could do.

[9:20] In terms of setbacks, the front setbacks of oil were much higher than C3.

[9:25] So oil requires a 35 foot front setback, C3 is a 10 foot setback.

[9:30] They're providing 35, 243 depending on which building you're looking at.

[9:34] So, again, 25 to 13.5 over in terms of parking,

[9:39] OEO and C3 required the same amount of parking at 175 parking spaces

[9:44] that are proposing 199 parking spaces at the first

[9:49] start of construction of this project.

[9:51] They'll be over parked by 49 parking spaces,

[9:55] but if they come back for the second conditional use

[9:58] for that 6,000 square foot office building,

[10:00] then there'll be 24 spaces over.

[10:05] So, either scenario, whether without the office building,

[10:08] they're over parked, and then that also doesn't include the 13

[10:12] on street parking spaces that they're going to construct as part of this.

[10:17] Just kind of summarize, because FAR is kind of hard to understand.

[10:22] It percentages with the C3 investing.

[10:24] You see there at the bottom, that means they're leaving 51,900

[10:28] to 6-square feet off the table with this proposed development.

[10:35] So with that, staff recommendations for approval with the four conditions that we had

[10:40] from the last meeting, number one, the community benefit, be fully executed prior to the certificate

[10:45] of occupancy, number two, that the oak trees identified in this community benefit agreement

[10:51] at the two intersections are preserved until such time that the future transportation

[10:57] and prevents on fair banks, can't commence.

[11:00] Number three, the pond be refined to incorporate

[11:03] a more natural edge shape.

[11:04] You can see they've already done that,

[11:06] but just continuing that on as a condition

[11:08] to make sure it doesn't get lost, as we move forward.

[11:11] And number four, that the applicant, again,

[11:13] enhanced the streetscape along Colt Avenue,

[11:15] which they provided and they revised some middle package.

[11:20] So with that, I will take any questions.

[11:22] The board has for staff.

[11:23] Is this a member?

[11:28] Allison, that our work session represented it's from the transportation group came in because

[11:36] we had a discussion on that intersection with whole and dining and they were going to do something.

[11:43] And now my question is what is it that they're going to do and how if any would that affect this project?

[11:55] So, you know, the issue with the traffic is happening now.

[12:00] So, what the transportation division is going to do is perform our own traffic study.

[12:05] So, take a look at what the applicant has provided as part of their updated traffic data.

[12:09] Once the property was constructed, they have all that trip generation and traffic study that they provided.

[12:16] So, we'll incorporate that into a holistic study that takes a look at a larger area other than just the single property.

[12:22] and then determine what steps need to be done from the city side to improve the streets

[12:28] if any changes need to be made as a result of that study.

[12:33] So in other words, theoretically, if we were to approve the plan as presented,

[12:39] that still would not prevent it from being amended further on if traffic the vision comes back.

[12:45] It would be on the city side.

[12:47] on the right, but they would have to do that they would look at it and say, I think we need

[12:52] to do something with this based on this or not. I mean, I'm just saying is it would be

[12:57] based on whatever the traffic division comes back with.

[13:01] Right, and we have control of the city rights of the way, so it wouldn't be impacting the city

[13:04] rights of it, not the private property.

[13:07] Right, so if the city recommends that something some adjustments be made with that intersection,

[13:14] they would do it.

[13:15] the city. Yeah, and DOT because the DOT route. Because there's a timing issue with regards

[13:20] my understanding also, so people understand is that DOT controls fair banks. That's not the city.

[13:27] So there's a question is to when that left turn Lane's going to be installed, there's going to be a

[13:32] project to resurface or something, so where the city's going to try and get that in there.

[13:38] We're made to do it this morning. It's made to make that reality sooner and if that happens, then the

[13:43] traffic signals will be adjusted to compensate for that.

[13:47] Yes, exactly.

[13:49] Thank you.

[13:51] Questions for city staff?

[13:53] Mr. Worsey.

[13:55] Under the condition two, the outtrees at the Fairbanks Denning and Fairbanks

[14:02] keep an intersection.

[14:04] So will they just get torn down at the point that future transportation improvements

[14:07] commence?

[14:09] Unfortunately, because they're in the way of the right of way that's needed for the

[14:12] Certainly.

[14:13] Will there be any compensation for those trees?

[14:15] Yes.

[14:15] And that would be by who the city or the developer.

[14:22] It would be within the right away.

[14:23] So would be the city's responsibility.

[14:26] Okay.

[14:27] And that's on the city's agenda.

[14:28] It knows it will have to happen.

[14:35] You have the questions for staff.

[14:40] Thank you.

[14:41] With the applicant.

[14:41] Care to make a presentation.

[14:50] Good evening.

[14:51] Bob Zigg and first.

[14:51] development services 12.01 East Robinson Street Orlando Florida 3.2804 was up here a couple

[14:58] weeks ago giving him a reason.

[15:00] Presentation, my job got easier tonight. We've done everything that's asked of us. We've gone through and created. I think some of the residents concerns that may be here again tonight and we come back up and certainly respond to any concerns that they might have, but to reiterate some of those safety of pedestrians was a common theme of what we talked about when we were here last time.

[15:22] And as Allison showed you, I've got a PowerPoint presentation here that's, you know, got some similar things in that what Allison showed, but I'm going to go ahead and get to the site plan here,

[15:37] eventually.

[15:39] So you can see the parallel parking in Allison had the little blow up. I think some important things to, you know, add to Allison's narrative on this is that when we talk about those overages in parking,

[15:52] we're not counting on these parallel parking spaces as part of that overage. So these are, in addition to the code required parking, I think a lot of the concerns that were raised here last time were, you know, more of larger events, maybe at the baseball field behind us and now there is overflow parking in the streets, not only that, but also wanting to create that separation from the driving public and the walking public and also give the walking public a wider sidewalk.

[16:22] So we've accomplished that by creating the separation with those parallel park cars and also

[16:27] with that wider sidewalk for pedestrian safety.

[16:30] So that's kind of what we've done along hold.

[16:33] And looking at the storm motor attention pond, it was just to make it a little bit more

[16:36] of an aesthetic feature, feel a little bit more natural.

[16:40] The landscaping plan, as you saw, there's enhanced landscaping around that wall there

[16:46] that intersection, as well as a enhanced slanscaping along,

[16:50] hold behind that wider sidewalk that I was just referencing as well.

[16:55] Allison did a very good job of explaining what was done on the buildings and what the thought process was

[16:59] of the architect as they went away from this last meeting and the feedback that we had received in that meeting

[17:05] and feel that we've met the intent of what everybody was looking for in that last discussion.

[17:10] So with that being said, I'm here to answer any questions now and reserve the right to come back up

[17:14] and respond to anything that might be brought up here this evening.

[17:18] Thank you.

[17:19] Questions for the applicant?

[17:23] Anyone?

[17:25] Thank you.

[17:26] We have members of the public who wish to speak on this application.

[17:30] Chair, I have three registered.

[17:31] There may be more in the audience.

[17:33] The first one is Ken Brown.

[17:41] Good evening.

[17:41] Members of the council.

[17:42] My name is Ken Brown, 1044 North Kentucky.

[17:46] I run a land entitlement investment fund here.

[17:48] And as such, I regularly evaluate projects.

[17:50] such as this, and so I'm well positioned to speak to its merits.

[17:55] I'd like to express my support for the redevelopment of the property 860 West Fairbanks.

[18:00] Winter Park thrives when development is intentional, and especially residential office

[18:06] and thoughtfully designed and retail they come together to create energy and community

[18:10] restaurants play a key role in that process as they bring people together.

[18:15] They increase walkability.

[18:16] They support the surrounding businesses and contribute meaningfully to the local economy.

[18:23] Beyond that, projects like this tend to have a ripple effect, I'm sure you guys know

[18:28] that.

[18:29] When you introduce high quality restaurant space into an area surrounded by residential

[18:34] office uses, you don't just fill the space but you create a destination.

[18:39] That drives foot traffic, supports nearby businesses, increases property values.

[18:44] and enhances overall experience of the area for both residents and visitors.

[18:50] As it stands today, if you guys are familiar with this property,

[18:52] I feel that the property does not reflect the standard,

[18:55] nor the potential of winter park.

[18:58] This proposal represents a clear improvement,

[19:00] one that aligns with the city's vision, and with the OA overlay guidelines

[19:06] for thoughtful development.

[19:07] I mean, in many cases, even below what the OA requires.

[19:11] So I think that was really well done in their park.

[19:13] I also want to acknowledge the stewardship behind the proposal, the Hall of Family, has a long-standing

[19:18] presence in the community, which reflects leadership, innovation, and a commitment to doing things

[19:23] the right way values that clearly continue today.

[19:27] And when you look at the project holistically, you will find a well-qualified developer, a project

[19:32] that improves and beautifies the area, a use that strengthens the local economy and a proposal

[19:37] that aligns with and even proves upon the OA of Framework.

[19:42] For my perspective as an industry professional and as someone I actually live a Jason to

[19:46] this property, so a couple hundred yards away.

[19:50] This is exactly the kind of thoughtful community line development that Winter Park has known

[19:54] for and I respectfully encourage approval.

[19:58] Thank you, members of the council.

[19:59] Thank you.

[20:00] Next is Sonja McLean.

[20:07] Well, I'm Sonja McLean, 935, North Kentucky Avenue.

[20:11] First off, I just want to say Allison has been great.

[20:14] She's been kind of feeling all our project ideas and everything, and I just wanted to give her a shout out.

[20:23] Again, the last time I was here, I'm, again, I'm in for the project.

[20:28] I appreciate the fact that it's not something that's opposing, you know, that it's not a multi-story structure,

[20:36] which is nice because I've been planning to do these meetings where, unfortunately, people will complain that all of a sudden there's no more sunlight.

[20:43] Now we have a shade garden versus a sun garden, so I really do appreciate that fact.

[20:51] I've also lived at this property for 36 years, and I remember when Holland Chevrolet was still there.

[20:59] And there was four lanes of traffic, I know we discussed this last time.

[21:04] And even when they were at their busiest, I never had a problem turning left out of my property from North Kentucky on to Denning.

[21:13] And then of course, the two lane happened.

[21:16] Which we couldn't understand because we knew that property was going to be redeveloped at some point and also that six points was going to be redeveloped.

[21:23] So it didn't make any sense to us.

[21:24] So now, you know, we have the issues with the traffic and all of you are quite familiar with, you know, what with this with the backups.

[21:34] And since since that's happened, we've also had in a very short period of time, at least two cars trying to try to turn themselves into lawn ornaments or neighbors corner property.

[21:48] And as it is half the time, I have to go over to South Kentucky to make a left because

[21:55] well, the traffic backs up, so I'm now creating more traffic on their area.

[22:01] And my husband and I were the ones that came up with the right turn in, right turn out.

[22:06] And we kind of updated it and sent it into Allison.

[22:08] But we want to make sure that we can actually, you know, enter and exit our properties without having to, you know, check our blood pressure right afterwards.

[22:24] It's, again, it's, we've kind of had a re-adjust ever since it's too late and we can't go back. It's not there.

[22:30] There's no time machine to go back and change that. But we're just want to make sure that it doesn't

[22:36] create more imposing traffic into our area and work cut through traffic. I use cuts through traffic

[22:43] all the time, so I'm not going to be at hit the grid about it. I do it. I wish we had a lower

[22:49] traffic, you know, speed sign, because as you well know, when you put 15 people go 20,

[22:59] if you put

[23:00] But we just want, again, we're for the project, we just want the city to be thoughtful about our roads and to give our, you know, ideas and to give more consideration.

[23:14] I thank you so much. Next is Susie Stein.

[23:26] I'm Susie Stein, and I live at 1035 in North Kentucky. And I don't want to repeat what Sonia said, but my biggest issue is still the traffic.

[23:35] Like just coming here tonight, I was trying to go straight from North Kentucky to Holt.

[23:41] And I had to wait for two cycles of lights because I could not get through.

[23:45] And so, two things will one, I don't know what we're doing about this traffic, but two

[23:50] is there any talk about making that light a little bit longer so that more traffic can get

[23:55] through, because there's times of day that three cars get through.

[23:58] I think there was a discussion not to get into a back and forth with the community, but there

[24:02] discussion with Mr. Steinberg and Allison, where we talk about something that was discussed

[24:06] at our work session recently, where we had somebody from City Traffic Department come and

[24:12] speak, and once the turn lanes are put in, this can't happen until that happens, but once

[24:18] the turn lanes are put in, and you have that change in the intersection, the lights will

[24:24] be retined. We can't guarantee what that's going to mean, but that will happen when

[24:29] the turn lanes are put in.

[24:30] I wasn't sure what specifically you guys had discussed.

[24:32] And the second thing is is there any way

[24:34] to have resident only parking on our street

[24:37] or anything like that?

[24:38] So our street doesn't become a parking lot.

[24:41] It's just such a narrow street to begin with.

[24:45] I don't know the answer to that question.

[24:49] If it's a public street, or not,

[24:51] able to restrict it based on residents.

[24:54] I mean, there's not a framework for that.

[24:57] That's, that's, that's my expectation

[24:59] for what the answer is, but yeah.

[25:00] Okay.

[25:02] That's it.

[25:02] Thank you.

[25:03] Our last speaker is Steve Sikri.

[25:15] My name is Steve Sikri.

[25:17] I live at 1041.

[25:18] South Kentucky Avenue.

[25:19] And there is actually street parking over New Orleans where it's required to have a sticker.

[25:23] So there is some president.

[25:25] My question is that I'm visiting the cut through traffic being substantial.

[25:32] And do we have any obligation to study it ahead of time and come up with some base numbers?

[25:40] and then assuming so what would be that process and then what would be the threshold that we

[25:47] say okay we have to make some changes to that cut-through area yeah I'm happy to allow

[25:55] city staff to answer these questions but frankly this is more related to just sort of

[25:59] general traffic and sermons about a particular neighborhood in the city and less than having

[26:04] to do with the application.

[26:07] But Allison, Nicholas, can you answer that question?

[26:11] I can't tell you what the threshold is.

[26:13] Are they need to be studied?

[26:16] I mean, yeah.

[26:16] And that's my observation is I haven't met anyone

[26:20] in the neighborhood or otherwise that's opposing the development.

[26:23] The only concerns I hear are the cut-through traffic.

[26:27] And I've lived there long enough.

[26:28] It's going to back up from Dending towards 1792.

[26:31] And people are going to turn right on the ward.

[26:33] Go down North Kentucky and try to get across.

[26:35] when they're leaving, that light's going to back up and people are going to turn left and want

[26:40] to go through that neighborhood back to ward and then head because that's, you can't otherwise

[26:45] get west so it's going to be a problem and it's going to be relatively high volume of certain

[26:55] busy times of night. So I guess I'm not opposed at all to this. I'm just curious if we can

[27:01] set some thresholds and then maybe have some kind of a plan in the event that it does exceed

[27:05] those thresholds.

[27:08] So again, if this is the right form of my apologize, but I am curious, I guess I am curious,

[27:14] does the city have any obligation to monitor that and to take action with regard to this?

[27:21] With regard to this particular project, I don't think that this particular project envisions

[27:28] any sort of traffic study being done to make sure that it falls within whatever...

[27:34] Yeah, and you know, maybe a wound, but that's what that's my question is couldn't we establish and I've been talking to the transportation people about doing that, but I haven't got any really like answers.

[27:45] I know they're planning on doing something with the retiming of the lights.

[27:49] Absolutely.

[27:50] Yeah, that I do understand.

[27:53] That might solve some of it, but I have a feeling that the cut through traffic, I have a feeling that it's going to be dramatically more than it currently is, which is substantial right now.

[28:02] So, I guess so, it sounds like I need to speak to them, see.

[28:07] Well, I think if the, it just seems to me that if the applicant were proposing to build

[28:12] something that was 50,000 square feet larger, there would probably be more traffic than

[28:18] what is, you know, going to happen with what's being proposed for any of that.

[28:21] Thank you.

[28:22] Thank you, sir.

[28:24] Anyone else?

[28:26] No, chairman.

[28:27] We don't have anyone else scheduled?

[28:30] Would the applicant care to make any rebuttal?

[28:40] Hello, Bob Zigg and Puss again.

[28:41] The only thing I would add, we have talked about it before, but the landowner and developer

[28:47] in this particular case is making a dedication of right away both on the north side of Fairbanks

[28:53] and the south side of Fairbanks to help with the city's desire to put in that westbound

[28:59] left-turn lane from Westbound Fair banks on to Southbound Denning.

[29:04] So we are contributing and trying to help the greatest extent possible here with the

[29:09] development plan that we're putting forward, both with the development that we previously

[29:13] approved.

[29:14] We do have near approval on the north side for the start construction there as well as the

[29:19] dedication right away on this side as well.

[29:21] So, it's certainly willing to participate and talk where we deal with city staff all the time

[29:26] their transportation department as they move forward in their study in any way that we might

[29:30] be able to help them out in that study as well.

[29:33] And then just here to answer any questions you might have.

[29:36] Any questions for the applicant?

[29:38] Thanks sir.

[29:40] All right, we'll go into closed session.

[29:42] Let me start down at this in Charles.

[29:45] Well my main concern and I had expressed it was the effect of the project on the traffic, on

[29:53] setting and that intersection with whole. And to the extent that the city is now.

[30:00] The Transportation Department is making a study and a determination as to whether or not anything has to be done, as well as trying to accelerate with the state, you know, the turn lane on Fairbanks. I think that, you know, as far as the city is concerned, they've alleviated that issue. I mean, we'll see, but I mean, they're addressing that issue as much as possible.

[30:23] And I would otherwise before the project, you know,

[30:27] now the city is on, it's on their time table to do something with that.

[30:33] So I would before the project as submitted.

[30:38] Mr. Dick?

[30:40] Yeah, I think I initially shared that I was on the Orange Avenue

[30:45] overlay steering committee.

[30:48] And under those guidelines, I was always a little apprehensive

[30:51] of what this application was going to look like.

[30:54] But I was very pleasantly surprised.

[30:57] It's pretty much understated from what

[31:01] could have been there.

[31:02] I do appreciate the later changes to the building,

[31:10] especially the setbacks.

[31:11] I think they're a lot more effective than the art

[31:15] speculation on the one longer building.

[31:17] So I was pleased with that.

[31:21] So, I'm very pleased with him, and for this occasion.

[31:30] Yeah, I really appreciate all the changes that were made to the site plan.

[31:35] I think there are substantial improvements to what was before.

[31:41] And again, like others have mentioned, this is underdeveloped for what could be developed here.

[31:50] So, I appreciate the quality of the site plan, the materials, articulation of detail and I think it'll be a great improvement to this intersection and hopefully in time we can address the traffic concerns that the residents have expressed and there can be some resolution to that issue.

[32:19] Mr. Seigle?

[32:21] Just a popular area.

[32:23] Traffic is always going to be a problem, but this is a very good result, and they've made some great changes so happy to vote for it.

[32:34] Mr. Seigle?

[32:34] Yeah, I think this is a great example of a sort of synergistic opportunity where a development comes in and not only improves an area, but potentially leads to

[32:46] to the solution to some existing problems.

[32:51] The one thing I would recommend is as traffic studies are done

[32:55] and information comes out that the public,

[32:59] I don't know if there's a way for the public to be notified

[33:00] or the neighborhoods affected to be notified,

[33:04] so that there is some transparency.

[33:07] And the city can inform people about plans for the area.

[33:12] I just think it'd be a really good idea to do that

[33:14] as it takes place.

[33:16] Otherwise, I think it's a great project.

[33:20] Yeah, I shared Mr. Dick's apprehension.

[33:22] If you'd asked me two and a half years ago,

[33:24] what was going to come on this property?

[33:26] I shared his apprehension about what it would look like.

[33:30] I was heartened when the applicant came in with its plans

[33:33] for the north side of Fairbanks.

[33:37] And I think flowed through to this proposal.

[33:40] It is underbuilt over-part, and I've long said that, you know, development isn't a dirty word.

[33:48] If it's attractive in scale and fits within the charm of the city of Winner Park, it should be encouraged.

[33:56] And I, like many other members of the board, appreciate the fact that the applicants come in with something that I believe is attractive in scale

[34:04] far under what they could have proposed to put on this property and for those reasons I would

[34:10] support it.

[34:11] I would note that everybody on the board shares the concerns of the local residents on North

[34:17] and South Kentucky about the traffic in that area, specifically how you get westbound

[34:24] onto Fairbanks when you're coming from Denning from the South.

[34:29] It's a nightmare intersection, hopefully it will be improved with the addition of those turn

[34:36] lanes and the retiming of the lights.

[34:38] But as I said at the last meeting, that's not really the applicant's issue, it's really

[34:43] more the city's issue and DOT's issue.

[34:46] So I appreciate the applicant making the changes that the board requested and being patient

[34:50] with us.

[34:52] And so at that point I will entertain a motion.

[34:55] I would move to approve as submitted.

[34:59] I have a motion of a second, can I have a roll call vote, please?

[35:01] Can I get a clarification if that includes the staff?

[35:04] Can I get a clarification if that motion includes the staff conditions?

[35:10] Well, yes.

[35:13] With the conditions.

[35:14] I said as proposed.

[35:16] Well, I said as submitted, but I stand corrected, so with all the papers in the agenda.

[35:23] As it appears in the agenda, thank you.

[35:26] I'll be still second in that.

[35:28] Miss Cable?

[35:29] Yes, I'm here.

[35:30] You're school.

[35:30] Motion to the second.

[35:31] Can I have a roll call, though, please?

[35:33] Yes.

[35:33] Mr. Dick?

[35:34] Yes.

[35:35] Miss Ackesian?

[35:36] Yes.

[35:37] Mr. Steinberg?

[35:38] Yes.

[35:39] Mr. Seagull?

[35:40] Yes.

[35:40] Bester Borenstein?

[35:42] Yes.

[35:42] Chairman Johnson.

[35:43] Hi.

[35:54] Good evening, boy.

[36:10] We're going to the right direction.

[36:12] Okay.

[36:24] Here we go.

[36:26] All right, my name is Karina.

[36:27] Plan R1.

[36:28] I will be presenting your, like, fun item for the night.

[36:30] This is a request of Verge Properties for approval to construct additions to the existing single family home, totalling at 652 square feet.

[36:39] Located on Lake Berry at 673, a ball moral road zone, R1, Triple A.

[36:47] Here is the Location Map to show where it is on Lake Berry.

[36:54] And here is the aerial map.

[36:57] The applicant's property is highlighted in purple.

[37:00] We did get neighbor letters in approval.

[37:04] And from the north and the south highlighted here in green.

[37:08] Here is the survey.

[37:11] And here is the proposed site plan.

[37:14] So this is our one triple A.

[37:16] So they get a maximum of 35%.

[37:19] They're meeting that by 19%.

[37:21] They are impervious. They're meeting it at 39%. They are meeting the front step back if you follow the green highlighted line.

[37:30] They're existing setback is 32.1, and the addition is also meeting that setback. They are asking for a variance for the side setback and the rear setback.

[37:42] The existing side setback is 10 feet, but because of the pinch of the property line and with the addition set, the new setback is now at 9 feet, 7 inches, so 5 by bench difference.

[38:00] So the rear sub back, they are proposing 90 feet because the addition is moving closer to the

[38:10] lake.

[38:10] This applicant also needs to meet the four Lakefront criteria.

[38:14] So first is tree preservation.

[38:16] They are not removing any of the trees on site, so they meet that requirement.

[38:21] Actually, there are no trees, I think, on this site.

[38:25] Second is view of the lake.

[38:26] So, where the lowest point of the grade on the lot is 77.98, and they're proposing the new deck at

[38:37] 862, so it's actually under that three-foot maximum, so they need that requirement.

[38:44] Third is storm water retention.

[38:46] They are adding an additional soil right here at the southwestern portion of the property, and

[38:53] They also have an existing swell here at the Lakefront along that rear.

[39:02] And lastly is the view of the neighbors.

[39:06] So my fun little view plan here.

[39:10] So the applicant is the house with the pool.

[39:18] The neighbor to the north actually came here for approval last year.

[39:23] They're rear setbacks on 92 and the south neighbor is that house no longer exists

[39:31] It's now a vacant lot, but we did take the rear setback of the what you see here in the aerial and that's around 110

[39:38] So that's an average of 101

[39:42] feet setback and again the proposals 90

[39:48] Um, however,

[39:52] what did I say? Um, so similar to recent Lake Front approvals along the portion

[39:57] of the Lake of Lake Barry, the curvature of the Lake creates the southwestern facing view,

[40:03] which I try to create with these view of the north and south neighbors. Um, and therefore,

[40:10] even with the prior home, if it still existed there, what and even, um, affect the traditional

[40:15] view of the lake and it also puts the proposal structure in line with the existing properties

[40:24] on Lakebury.

[40:28] Here are some elevations and

[40:34] here's a summary of that Lakebury. Do you

[40:36] criteria? There are no trees being removed. Use from the lake. They're not exceeding that three foot

[40:43] maximum. The neighbor views. Again, both neighbors approve the additions on the site plan.

[40:51] The neighbor to the north is on 92, they are requesting 93.

[40:55] The south is a vacant lot, which might come to you in the future.

[41:00] The curvature of the lake creates the southwestern facing view lake.

[41:05] Like recent lakefront approvals along the portion of this lake, there would not be any significant

[41:10] effect of the traditional view.

[41:13] And the storm water, they're adding an additional swell to the ones that's already existing

[41:19] and a lot. And with that stuff,

[41:21] recommendation is for approval.

[41:23] So it meets all the recurrent review criteria.

[41:27] And the only variance is requested

[41:29] or a five-inch side setback variance.

[41:32] And then the rear setback variance.

[41:34] How much is the rear setback variance?

[41:36] That's being requested.

[41:37] So I believe there.

[41:41] Let me go back to that.

[41:48] Think they were at.

[41:50] See what the rear was.

[41:52] So the average lakefront has to be 101 and they're asking for 90.

[42:00] So the 11 foot variance?

[42:03] Yes.

[42:04] And if you look at the other houses on the lake, they're roughly around that 90.

[42:13] So the only one that's set back really far is that vacant lot.

[42:17] So that's why the average is a little bit higher.

[42:20] then let's say if you if you go down the line.

[42:28] Any other questions for city staff?

[42:30] Yeah one you kept referencing a neighbor to the north with Balmer out sort of runs pretty

[42:37] much east in the west which one is the one to the north. The top green property.

[42:45] Okay.

[42:48] So more north western.

[42:53] Can we see the site plan again?

[43:02] The area in dark gray is the

[43:05] So there's a line in the rear, they're extending the garage, I think some storage space.

[43:20] We had any comments from any of the neighbors negative or positive?

[43:24] Yes, both neighbors are in favor of the proposal.

[43:30] So that's the one of the north and the empty lot to the south.

[43:33] Both owners.

[43:38] What are the questions for staff?

[43:40] Mr. Dick?

[43:40] Yeah, just one screen, similar to our application last month for a single family, Lakefront home.

[43:53] We know that the city is sort of restricted on front-loaded garages.

[44:00] And again, I didn't see any specific elevation here that gave dimensions that you showed compliance with that particular guidelines.

[44:09] So are you talking about the three foot or are you talking about the dimensions of the garage doors the the maximum opening?

[44:20] I did see one one measurement of the total wall the wall of 22 feet in my insinuate

[44:29] That that arrows down to an 18 foot opening which is you can't exceed that

[44:34] but I can't tell plus the mentioned.

[44:38] So I just want to put the same caveat in the approval.

[44:43] We can put the same condition.

[44:44] You know, that is in compliance with that one specific kind.

[44:47] Yeah, so if you go, if the board wants to put that condition,

[44:52] that can be done.

[45:02] Okay, thank you. Do we have any members of the public who wish to speak on the application?

[45:08] We did not have any one of them. I'm sorry. Is the applicant, would the applicant care to make a presentation?

[45:13] My apologies.

[45:30] First, the one on the, or is it?

[45:32] All right, Chris Barnes, First Properties, ten-fourteen, West Fairbanks Avenue.

[45:37] The owner is also in presence here, but looking at what you've got here, the existing house.

[45:45] Everything gray to the south is all solid edition.

[45:50] Everything towards the lake is an open one eye.

[45:54] So it's roofed, but it's currently has no one eye.

[45:57] So that's the only thing we're encouraging on the lake side.

[46:00] It's still an open air of the line.

[46:05] I know the property to the south is already developed their plans.

[46:10] They're moving in line with our house.

[46:11] So at that point, if you took the averages of what they proposed, I know it hasn't been

[46:16] permanent yet and approved.

[46:18] We wouldn't need the variance on the south side or the lakeside.

[46:22] The five inches is just us trying to keep the house where it up and make the

[46:27] roof lawns work perfectly.

[46:29] So as far as the garage door question, yes, it is an 18 inch 18 foot garage

[46:33] door with two foot side columns on either side of it.

[46:37] It gives you the 22 feet.

[46:46] We've got approval from both the neighbors to the north and the neighbors to the south.

[46:53] Any questions for the applicant?

[47:04] So when you said the gray, the dark gray part, where are the 9.7, 9 feet, 7 inches is that box.

[47:13] If we were to cut that along that line, the box with the 9.7 is enclosed.

[47:17] The other box to the left of it is open.

[47:27] So if you look here, where you see the cut to A41, that's an open air porch, where it's open at the top as well, when beam across there, and then the line that comes just off to the peak to the right vertical down, that's the rise to the addition portion.

[47:50] Is there a rear view elevation?

[47:52] Which one is top as the rear view?

[47:54] Top as the rear view.

[47:57] So that's over to the right side.

[48:01] Right.

[48:06] And then here you can see the bottom.

[48:10] This is the additional the rear.

[48:12] You see how it's an open air condition.

[48:21] I guess in conjunction with this, I'm at.

[48:27] Do we have any idea what the neighbor to the south is proposing to build on that property right now and how we don't.

[48:33] No.

[48:34] of considering this be a waiver, a very answering, measuring a house that was demolished.

[48:41] So it's no longer really relevant, it's just the only house we had to measure the average

[48:47] to.

[48:48] I got you.

[48:49] My only concern, the reason I'm asking you a question is, is I'm worried about presidential

[48:52] effect?

[48:53] Yeah, I mean, this is the new lake for an average.

[49:01] The property does sit along sort of the houses are facing one way kind of opposite.

[49:08] Curve it like that.

[49:09] They're not going to block each other's views.

[49:11] Within the last year, we saw the neighbor to the Northwest.

[49:15] And the one beyond that have both asked for, like, front and approachments to be in line with the other houses.

[49:21] That continue along that curvature.

[49:24] So they're basically in line with the prevailing pattern of that top portion.

[49:29] You know, the next house is probably the last one that I can say is on that northeastern curvature of the lake.

[49:38] So in terms of precedent, we've either seen either a new house or an addition bill on most of the properties that we've seen that are going to have that same view shed.

[49:50] Thank you. Mr. Seagull.

[49:52] The house on the back in a lot just went down two to three months ago.

[49:58] If it was still there, would always work, would it?

[50:02] Okay.

[50:03] That's when everything comes from right now.

[50:05] We're treating it as it is still there because we have no idea what the new house is going to be.

[50:11] Obviously, the setback here is advantageous in terms of the Lakefront average for the neighbor to the south.

[50:19] But we have no idea what that's going to be proposed as we haven't seen any plans.

[50:25] You know, it's in one of our, I'm sure they're going to underbuild it.

[50:32] Thank you, sir.

[50:33] Thank you.

[50:36] I think I asked once Mariana, there are no members of the public who are just speaking on this?

[50:39] No, there we go.

[50:41] Okay, we'll go into closed session.

[50:43] Open the floor to any comments.

[50:46] I'm wondering why there aren't no issues with this.

[50:50] Honestly, the issue is going to be with the next house that comes in and make

[50:54] sure that they just meet line of sight.

[50:59] So, well, they're asking for two variants.

[51:01] The five inch variants, I don't consider to be material.

[51:04] 11 feet is a material variance, but which may probably go away with the next house

[51:08] comes in.

[51:09] And that's where the issue is going to come up.

[51:11] But we're establishing what Allison's my question Allison was making the point that we're

[51:17] but if we approve this we're establishing a new rear setback average at that the new owner

[51:25] that the person building to the south could use to their advantage to put that house closer to the lake.

[51:30] And I'm just concerned about creating precedent here.

[51:33] Yeah, I mean every single time you approve one of these you set a new average.

[51:37] right. So.

[51:41] But there was a house there. We'd know what the, what the, what the real

[51:45] averages and what we were really talking about as of now. Yeah. Yeah. We were sort of

[51:49] pretending like you old house is still there. It's worth noting. I'll pull up the map too.

[51:53] But as we get closer to the actual eastern portion side of the lake, the lot start

[51:59] to shrink. They get, they get closer. I couldn't tell you what those setbacks are.

[52:09] You

[52:09] do encroach closer to the lake. This and the neighbor to the south are probably the deepest

[52:14] two lots on that portion of the lake. You know, so we have the neighbors to the north that

[52:20] are encroached, you know, that are roughly about 90. I've adventure to guess they're probably

[52:24] about 80 to 90 on that portion, but you know, I can't tell you. I mean, with any lake front,

[52:29] a lot worse.

[52:30] It's on the curve of less concerned about presidential effect, because of this unique nature of the type of lot we're talking about, but still, I wanted to ask the question on address it.

[52:42] But I mean, I see your point that there's not a lot to discuss here, but I mean, as always looking at the pictures, it looked like the issue is that those two deep lots that are creating that 110 feet.

[52:54] And if you, I mean, it's all a guest in it, obviously.

[52:57] But as I looked at the pictures of the houses to the north

[53:00] and the few to the south, it looked like those, uh,

[53:03] we were setbacks were short. Yeah.

[53:06] So I guess I'm just not as concerned as, I understand the issue of precedent.

[53:10] Makes total sense. I'm just not back concerned in this particular case.

[53:16] Could look at that picture again and see where, you know.

[53:18] No. I noticed the two, and I think the reason the setback is what it is right now

[53:24] because that house that has been torn down was pretty safe and way from pretty

[53:29] people.

[53:31] Thank you.

[53:32] Thank you.

[53:33] Thank you.

[53:34] Yeah.

[53:35] You can tell those two houses to the directly to the south of where the one that's been

[53:39] torn down, they're pretty close to the lake.

[53:43] Okay.

[53:44] Thank you.

[53:46] Thank you.

[53:47] Other comments?

[53:50] I'll entertain a motion.

[53:53] The vacant lot is somewhat pretty much rectangular as opposed to I should, I think, it shouldn't

[54:01] him in, but anyway, it looks good to me.

[54:05] Is that a motion to approve?

[54:07] A motion to approve.

[54:09] Well, second.

[54:10] The motion is second.

[54:11] Can I have a roll call, though, please?

[54:13] Yes.

[54:13] Mr. Steinberg?

[54:15] Aye.

[54:15] Mr. Dick?

[54:16] Yes.

[54:17] Yes.

[54:17] Mr. Siegel?

[54:19] Yes.

[54:20] Yes.

[54:21] Chairman Johnson.

[54:22] Aye.

[54:29] See.

[54:30] Any board members?

[54:31] Nick Lewis, Planner 2.

[54:33] I'll be handling the next item.

[54:34] This is conditional user quest.

[54:36] This is request of L car wash Florida LLC.

[54:39] For a conditional user approval to construct a new 3,707 square foot automated car wash facility.

[54:47] The property is two parcels, 2011, along with Avenue and four 16-lander road, both parcels

[54:53] are zone and C3 commercial.

[54:57] Here's a quick location in zoning, both C3, flanked on the eastern west with C1 and

[55:02] C3 properties, the difference between C1 and C3 is C1 is generally reserved for more shopping

[55:08] center types.

[55:09] Zoning, C3 is our general standard commercial, and then we have single family residential

[55:14] and the rear behind the back of the lander property.

[55:18] We've got the Sprout shopping center to the west.

[55:22] We have the public shopping center and the mellow mushroom to the right.

[55:27] On-site currently, both parcels are not being utilized.

[55:31] We have the former fifth-third bank building with the drive-through in teller lanes on the

[55:37] a loma parcel. We have a previous self-service car wash facility on the northern partial

[55:44] offlander. Here's just a quick existing condition survey. You can see we've got the car wash

[55:51] facility in the rear and then we have the bank facility with the tele lanes towards the front of the

[55:56] loma.

[55:58] Quick site photos of what exists there today. You can see the banks developed the car wash

[56:05] relatively old development, a lot of pervious coverage, a lot of curb cut area, and that's

[56:11] on the land or road portion. There are two trees that are going to be preserved as part of

[56:16] this request. The tree on the left is on the subject property that's the fifth or third bank. It is

[56:24] within the subject parcel, however, it's being preserved by the applicant. And then there is a large

[56:30] specimen oak tree in the back, that is also being preserved, that's on the current car wash

[56:36] facility.

[56:39] Here's a quick site plan of the proposed car wash facility, a couple of things

[56:44] that I want to note here. We have as proposed a left-in right-in left-out only entrance. I'll get into

[57:00] up towards the aloma side as opposed to back towards the residential side. We have internal

[57:08] location or transformer. We have a proposed dumpster enclosure that's meeting the 35 foot

[57:14] setback and then we also have the required six foot masonry wall screen with the 10 feet of

[57:20] landscape buffer facing the single-family residential to the rear.

[57:27] A couple rear setbacks. It's 45 feet

[57:30] proposed to the opening of the driveway is 35 feet, which is the minimum to the corner of the dumpster enclosure.

[57:40] It's just under 70 feet to the closest vacuum facility, and then it's 150 feet from the rear property line to the edge of the building.

[57:50] Also here on note queuing, there's enough for 14 spaces, there's 12 weighting spaces, and there's two more weighting spaces in here,

[57:59] and then we have the pay stations here before you go into the car wash in a single file format.

[58:07] Stormwater management plan.

[58:09] We've got both above ground and underground storage.

[58:13] We have underground retention located in the dry vials here highlighted in gray.

[58:19] And then on the northwestern corner is an above ground retention pond.

[58:24] Staff is proposing the same condition that we saw with the Haller property that that

[58:31] change to a more natural shape, and I'll get into that in a little bit as well.

[58:38] Tree management plan, again, those two oak trees are being preserved.

[58:41] There are five other specimen trees currently on the two properties.

[58:46] The three highlighted here, one, two, three are all within the existing landscape islands

[58:52] of the bank building, and then the two others are within the property boundary between

[58:59] the two parcels. Obviously the parcels are now becoming combined, being redeveloped, the applicant

[59:06] has provided a tree mitigation plan for the five trees being removed, seven trees will be proposed.

[59:13] And here is that landscape plan, so they're meeting all of our landscape requirements,

[59:19] they're screening any type of enclosure, be it dumpster, vacuum, transformer, otherwise,

[59:26] They're meeting the 10-foot buffer, Mr. Drink Fellow brought up at our work session about the understory trees, making sure that they're going all the way down.

[59:37] That's been added as a condition of approval since that comment.

[59:41] So we can address that a couple quick elevations,

[59:50] renderings

[59:53] with that.

[59:55] I spend most of the time going through the conditions of approval.

[59:57] Yes, sir.

[59:59] Take the aerial.

[1:00:07] So

[1:00:10] we've received correspondence from the neighborhood in the rear. We've received three letters in opposition, one letter in favor.

[1:00:20] The main issues include additional cut-through and increased traffic on Taylor Edwin and basically the neighborhood at large.

[1:00:29] noise, stormwater runoff and retention, and just the general use as a car wash itself.

[1:00:36] By and large traffic concerns are the largest concern.

[1:00:42] I think that was first seen from the offset, so staff had requested that they do

[1:00:46] a left-out only.

[1:00:47] The applicant did that, seeing the amount of opposition to making sure that there's any sort

[1:00:57] cut through traffic, staff has proposed the first condition that you see here that it be adjusted

[1:01:03] to a right in, left out only pattern with the appropriate radius, directional signage, and

[1:01:09] raised curve to minimize the amount of potential illegal right out turns and cut through traffic

[1:01:14] through the neighborhood. What this does, this gives our transportation folks some teeth in order

[1:01:20] to make sure that the applicant provides no justification of permitting that whatever the final

[1:01:24] proposal is, we have done everything we can to limit any sort of illegal right out in traffic

[1:01:33] patterns. Also with the right end and left out, that means that we become a little bit

[1:01:38] sharper, making sure that we're actually directing people to the south, and what it does

[1:01:43] that keeps people going south on Lakemont who want to cut back through those property, the

[1:01:49] neighborhood to the back, to be able to come in the back way and enter the property. You have

[1:01:53] enter from the Aloma portion. There's also going back to the aerial row fest.

[1:02:03] You can see

[1:02:04] it so if you're directed south on Aloma, let's say you wanted to go north on Lakemont,

[1:02:09] the main entrance to the Sprout Shopping Center is about 30 feet north of the Lakemont.

[1:02:14] That does bump out or pop out on the opposite side to be able to go north on Lakemont.

[1:02:19] If you didn't want to go on Aloma, just to go north on Lakemont.

[1:02:31] There's no

[1:02:32] egress from either from that shopping center north onto Edwin Wright?

[1:02:38] No.

[1:02:39] Okay.

[1:02:41] The second condition, the other thing that we've heard of was noise.

[1:02:45] This is an attempt to limit that somewhat later in the evening.

[1:02:49] Most L. car wash locations located in Central Florida closed APM.

[1:02:54] Per their community meeting.

[1:02:56] They mentioned that their operating hours would go till 9.

[1:02:59] It's asked proposing that their car wash and vacuums facility sees it eight, consistent with all other L-car wash locations, and then the all non-essential lighting and related to the building and vacuums be cut off promptly at APM.

[1:03:16] The third that I'll use in a band and curb cuts that exist on site of both parcels today are have the apron removed and replaced with appropriate curb and landscaping.

[1:03:26] the applicant did show that on the site plans.

[1:03:28] They're already meeting that, but we want to make sure

[1:03:31] that that goes all the way through permitting.

[1:03:34] For, they provided a preliminary sign package.

[1:03:39] Staff's recommending approval that the final sign package

[1:03:41] meets all sign requirements.

[1:03:43] The general areas, locations, signage types are OK.

[1:03:48] There's just some minor modifications

[1:03:49] that need to be made, so we want to make sure

[1:03:51] any size, as illumination, any sign types are adjusted accordingly.

[1:03:58] Five, right now, the proposals that employees will be parked in the vacuum stations,

[1:04:03] just making sure that there's not a world where employees are parking over across

[1:04:07] its sprouts or behind the public's shopping center.

[1:04:13] We want to make sure that employees are being parked on site.

[1:04:18] 6, that the design of the pawn,

[1:04:20] be refined to incorporate and naturalize shape rather than rigid edges.

[1:04:25] And then 7, based off of Mr. Schringfeld's comments

[1:04:29] of the work session, that we make sure that those provided

[1:04:32] understory trees along the northern property line,

[1:04:36] as part of the landscape buffer, are there throughout the entire property line.

[1:04:42] So with that, I'm happy to take any questions.

[1:04:44] I know the applicant's team is here as well.

[1:04:47] Yes, they're going to close the car wash and vacuum facilities at 8.

[1:04:54] So I would imagine that would mean no one enters after 730 or so, right?

[1:05:00] Yeah, since I'll let the applicant speak to maybe the last amount of time that they would

[1:05:04] need in order, you know, when the last car could essentially go through in order to make sure

[1:05:08] that all facilities cease at 8.

[1:05:16] The question is Billy, any other questions for staff?

[1:05:20] Mr. Dick.

[1:05:23] Yeah.

[1:05:24] On number one, Nick.

[1:05:28] You know, I just had an observation.

[1:05:30] You know, looking at the signage on,

[1:05:32] I think that's landers.

[1:05:36] There's only one sign there, you know, saying no parking

[1:05:40] and then one sign on the same pole, you know,

[1:05:44] you're saying no, no, through traffic.

[1:05:47] And that sign was more than halfway into the project

[1:05:51] on landers.

[1:05:53] So I'm wondering, and this isn't the applicants' responsibility,

[1:05:57] but I'm thinking maybe the city might want to relocate

[1:06:02] that existing sign closer to a Loma,

[1:06:07] not that that's going to make a whole lot of difference,

[1:06:09] But it might, and then maybe add one additional no-through street parking up closer to the, you know, the residential neighborhood, you know, it's extra reinforcement. Again, it might not help.

[1:06:26] it might.

[1:06:29] On the number of five, all the employees must be parked on site, I think there's

[1:06:36] a total of 17 vacum stations. So it is a my understanding that the employees will be

[1:06:44] parking in one of those 12-ness private applicants, you know, response, you know, parking spaces

[1:06:53] or 17 maybe. Yeah. Yeah, that's that's staff's concern as well. There's 17 parking spaces.

[1:06:59] There's 16 vacuum spaces. The last space is 80A so they can't put back in facilities there.

[1:07:05] The applicant is answer and I'll let them speak to it as well.

[1:07:09] Is that the employees will be taking up if there's only going to be two or three employees at a time.

[1:07:14] They'll be taking up two or three of those vacuum spaces.

[1:07:18] That's how it's supposed to make sure that the employees are staying on site.

[1:07:22] So if the applicant's desire is to...

[1:07:26] That's how the aerial showed the additional parking on the back side of it, isn't it?

[1:07:36] So, we've got the 10 spaces here, plus the 7 spaces here for 17.

[1:07:46] Yeah, I didn't see any designated employee parking, which is why I was asking the question because

[1:07:52] I think I saw somewhere also in the parking details that accompanied the site plan that there was five employees.

[1:08:03] I don't know if that's five employees on one shift,

[1:08:06] or you mentioned two or three of the applicant can provide the number.

[1:08:10] Speak to you.

[1:08:11] And I can't imagine, you know, taking up five potential,

[1:08:16] or even the three potential, you know, money-making,

[1:08:23] you know, opportunities, I guess, for the vacuum stations,

[1:08:26] but I'll let them.

[1:08:27] Yeah, yeah, I'll let them speak to it.

[1:08:29] I think what they're coming from is that besides peak hour, which is usually Friday evenings

[1:08:35] and Saturday mornings, not every station is going to be full, probably about half the

[1:08:41] stations at maximum would be full, but I'll let them speak to it.

[1:08:48] You mentioned that previously, Mr. Strinkfell, I had mentioned the four understory trees along

[1:08:56] the back, because I only saw four in the specs, but one of the conditions now is to bring

[1:09:04] those all along the back wall.

[1:09:07] Right, I'm not sure if they were left off intentionally or not, but we added that condition

[1:09:11] that they do that.

[1:09:13] Then the other thing that Mr. String fellow brought up was the vacuum tower.

[1:09:18] It is enclosed, and it is the enclosure's landscape.

[1:09:21] I believe the applicant is prepared to talk about the noise from the facility at

[1:09:26] and the bits and pieces and to see if there's a better location for that, or if that is in the best available location.

[1:09:33] Okay, one known as long the front, the landscaping that was specced.

[1:09:41] You've got four or five crate murdals, one, two, three, actually six crate murdals, along that whole frontage.

[1:09:50] And, you know, that's, that's colorful, which is good.

[1:09:54] I always like to see seasonal color, but that has a downside of, you know, being leafless,

[1:10:01] you know, a deciduous, you know, for six months out of the years.

[1:10:06] So, you might want to, you know, add some, you know, solid, you know, non-deciduous, not across

[1:10:15] the whole front, but maybe on the anchor corners, and whatever that was being would be

[1:10:23] up to the applicant,

[1:10:26] I think I noticed on the east elevation and I know these are probably

[1:10:33] conceptual, but it looked like there's a chain length fence along that property line on

[1:10:41] the east elevation on the colored one.

[1:10:43] if anything that is probably existing on the property line well the polls are existing but there's no no

[1:10:50] fencing yeah either in residence or commercial chain links not a permitted fence type so they would have to do a permitted

[1:10:58] fence type be aluminum you know rod iron picket would

[1:11:02] PVC something along okay so there is no chain link fence on shown in the elevation correct yeah okay

[1:11:11] Could you go into a little more detail from a zoning point of view on the heights of the

[1:11:20] buildings and see three zoning and I know C3 allows two or three stories but it doesn't

[1:11:28] really designate feet per say. I think this project expected 35 feet. I was wondering how we got

[1:11:38] Yeah, so the 35 feet, so the single story, the proposed tower up towards Aloma is the only portion, it's a 35 feet.

[1:11:49] The majority of the building sitting about 20 feet. Both of those are consistent with the one story commercial building in C3.

[1:11:57] Well, the point of concerns is the front tower.

[1:12:01] being 35 feet, as opposed to 30 feet, per example, which is a one typical, two-story,

[1:12:12] you'll see three versus 35. So yeah, I mean, for like if this was a residential, if it was on the larger side,

[1:12:21] we allow 35 feet for a two-story, you know, single-family home, so there's not not precedent within the city to allow 35 feet.

[1:12:31] But I hear what you're saying, you know, do the applicant see if the, if 35 is.

[1:12:35] I think there's more of a zoning thing.

[1:12:39] You know, I know one of their sites doesn't have a tower at all.

[1:12:42] So I don't know if that's, obviously part of branding versus, you know, visibility and whatnot.

[1:12:49] But you know, I'll let the applicant do that.

[1:12:51] I prefer, you know, I feel the 35 feeds a little, you know, imposing.

[1:13:02] So, and finally, was there any, you know, question or, you know, thought of doing a noise

[1:13:12] abatement study, you know, there's a lot of studies attached to this, you know, soils

[1:13:17] and drainage, stormwater, et cetera, with this particular application at this particular

[1:13:23] site. I'm wondering if that was considered and whether that might be something we might want to see.

[1:13:32] Yeah, I believe the applicants prepared to speak to the noise of the different, you know,

[1:13:36] the decimal levels and different portions of the structure, the vacuums, the vacant hours,

[1:13:40] all that. I believe they're, you know, available to speak to that. The code requires the traffic

[1:13:46] study in the stormwater analysis. We don't have a noise abatement, a requirement as part of the

[1:13:51] additional use required documents, but I believe the applicants prepared to speak to that.

[1:13:58] That's all.

[1:13:59] I have a question.

[1:14:01] Regarding the tower, is there any other building along Aloma that has a building of

[1:14:11] this height at this setback along the corridor?

[1:14:20] There's office buildings along Aloma that has three stories.

[1:14:24] Okay, but what's the front set back for 10 feet, 10 feet?

[1:14:31] What's the requirement for C3?

[1:14:33] Okay, but.

[1:14:34] I think the point is the 35 foot portion of it is right up on the road.

[1:14:38] Yeah, right here you have a four-story height limit.

[1:14:41] Because it's next to Eloma.

[1:14:42] But I'm just wondering.

[1:14:44] Is there any other building along?

[1:14:47] I don't know.

[1:14:48] I don't know.

[1:14:54] because we didn't do that. I don't think they're building that's ten feet from...

[1:15:00] The question is probably 10 feet from the right of way, but it's not. It's probably 28 to 30 feet tall, which will be the most room next door. It's right up on the street. It's only as a 10 foot setback.

[1:15:18] So in terms of setback, I mean, that's what C3 requires, but yeah, you're right, in terms of height.

[1:15:23] I'm sure it's a consistency along the corridor and the visual appeal and then also you've got this 35-foot tower kind of stands out like it's worth on

[1:15:35] Well, the hot pink neon sign will help with it.

[1:15:39] Yeah.

[1:15:39] The motion has parking in front.

[1:15:41] So it's set for the back,

[1:15:46] right?

[1:15:46] Does the proposed signage comply with the code?

[1:15:50] Yeah, we don't allow neon signage, so they're not proposing neon signage.

[1:15:53] Yeah, yeah, it's not neon or anything like that, it's, it's not some of their other locations.

[1:15:58] I think they do, they're proposing channel letter.

[1:16:02] The proposed locations are all fine, they're, you know, they're all slightly larger.

[1:16:06] We have a maximum of 45% I think the proposed are roughly 60 in the preliminary.

[1:16:12] And then there were some other minor things, like the directional signage, we're on polls.

[1:16:18] We would prefer those to be a monument style.

[1:16:20] So that's all things that we would catch in the sign permit

[1:16:22] with the final sign code.

[1:16:24] That's why we added the sign code condition of approval.

[1:16:32] So there is, so sort of, no, because I have another,

[1:16:36] it's unrelated to what we're talking about, sign it.

[1:16:39] Mine's unrelated to sign code, so please.

[1:16:41] All right, so I have a question about employee

[1:16:43] back to the employee parking situation.

[1:16:48] We really have no designated employee parking

[1:16:50] spaces on the site plan and you're saying that they're going to park in the vacuum spaces.

[1:16:58] So then I go to why do we have so many vacuum stations then? If employees are going to be parking there?

[1:17:07] Yeah, I don't know. So my brain is still. Why can't the footprint be reduced and eliminate

[1:17:19] some of the vacuum places and create a greater setback from the residential development.

[1:17:27] My question is along the lines of what Miss Sarketian just asked, and that is, there is

[1:17:32] one parking place here for handicap.

[1:17:37] Right.

[1:17:38] That is not a vacuum stop-correct, correct.

[1:17:41] In my mind, the vacuum stalls are, might as well be part of the building, they're part

[1:17:46] of the business.

[1:17:46] It's not parking.

[1:17:48] There is no place to park the employees on this proposed property,

[1:17:56] unless you park them

[1:17:56] somewhere inside what the business is using to conduct its business.

[1:18:00] That's not parking to me.

[1:18:03] I don't know.

[1:18:04] I agree.

[1:18:06] I only initially brought that up because I did visit one or two sites and this one site in particular,

[1:18:12] I think in Casalberry, you know, so cars, which I assume were employees, but that was just

[1:18:20] an assumption, not really in the space, it was kind of parked, you know, off to the side

[1:18:25] of the curb, you know, within the property, but it wasn't really a designated space, so it's

[1:18:30] just kind of like a haphazard, you know, wherever they could grab a space, that's where they were

[1:18:35] going to park.

[1:18:41] Other questions for staff?

[1:18:43] This is your time work.

[1:18:44] Could you go back to the landscape plan

[1:18:50] and the reason I ask is I'm looking at the rendering

[1:18:55] that goes from the dumpster and it comes down, you know, the driveway? What is that?

[1:19:07] Yeah, it should be some sort of ground cover hedge. This line here that goes right up.

[1:19:13] Yeah, exactly. So how high is that?

[1:19:17] It's just continuous hedge and one understory tree and

[1:19:24] I don't know how tall I can be out and speak to that.

[1:19:29] What's got to cover the entire enclosure so are these six feet?

[1:19:33] At least six feet?

[1:19:36] And do we know what type of hedge it is?

[1:19:40] The applicant can enter that.

[1:19:44] Also, and all of these spaces are vacuum spaces.

[1:19:49] All except the ADA space, yeah.

[1:19:51] Well, the ADA space is the handicap spot.

[1:19:55] And then everything to the right of that is vacuum spaces.

[1:19:58] All right.

[1:19:59] And then what is that space that looks like it's incorporated.

[1:20:03] There's a hedge or some landscape that's going, that's right next to those spaces.

[1:20:08] Right next to the ADA space?

[1:20:10] No, it's all the way down at the end.

[1:20:11] down at the end here.

[1:20:13] No, the other end.

[1:20:15] The other end.

[1:20:15] Right there.

[1:20:16] That's the pump for the vacuum facilities.

[1:20:20] OK.

[1:20:20] So there's a tower.

[1:20:21] There's another essentially mimic of the dumpster enclosure.

[1:20:28] Right.

[1:20:28] That's what that is.

[1:20:29] OK.

[1:20:30] OK.

[1:20:30] I see.

[1:20:31] Thank you.

[1:20:34] I'm just.

[1:20:39] There's equipment in there.

[1:20:41] Yeah.

[1:20:41] It's mechanical equipment.

[1:20:42] And so how high is that?

[1:20:44] I'll let the outcomes speak to that.

[1:20:46] That was the other one of Mr. Stringfeld's comments,

[1:20:49] was is that the best location of that,

[1:20:51] or is there a difference?

[1:20:52] Also, it's to the residential area.

[1:20:54] Correct, which is the genesis for the comment.

[1:20:56] Is that the best location or could it be location

[1:20:58] in one of the other parking islands

[1:21:00] or next to the Transformers, something along those lines?

[1:21:02] OK, yeah, I'm just trying to,

[1:21:04] that's obviously a concern is.

[1:21:07] Sure, yeah, I think we can.

[1:21:08] All right, thank you.

[1:21:10] Other questions for staff?

[1:21:14] Thank you, Nick.

[1:21:14] The applicant care to make a presentation.

[1:21:19] Good evening everyone.

[1:21:19] McRegger, love to 15 North Eola Drive here on behalf of the applicant.

[1:21:25] I'm going to have to adjust to Nick's very thorough and clear presentation and not walk you through a painstaking review of mine.

[1:21:32] Nick did a great job outlining most of the points that we would have hit on.

[1:21:36] What I will do is introduce the team we have here tonight.

[1:21:39] We have Jordan Draper from Kimley Horn.

[1:21:41] So our project engineer, we also have Alex Quintana from El Carwash, I can tell already from a couple of the comments here that some of you have a background in potentially development and you all have some specific questions for both potentially Jordan and Alex, I know that Alex can speak certainly to the concerns raised about the employee parking, and I also know that he's very familiar with El Carwash is looked into the

[1:22:11] sort of noise abatement issue internally in their operations, and he can I'm sure speak to that as well.

[1:22:20] So I'll briefly go through our presentation.

[1:22:23] You've seen much of this. This is the location.

[1:22:26] And I'll hit on, you know, this is again the existing.

[1:22:30] Board is familiar with this property, certainly the residents are familiar with this property.

[1:22:36] But just to underscore, we have the northern parcel, which is a more recently developed bank property.

[1:22:43] And we have the southern parcel, which is an old carwash, just to note along the western boundary, along lander,

[1:22:53] There, on the car wash parcel, there's currently no screening from trees.

[1:22:58] So along that, along that boundary for the car wash parcel, there'll be additional trees.

[1:23:04] Add it as was discussed.

[1:23:07] I'll go through these really quickly.

[1:23:10] We've seen, we've seen these.

[1:23:11] We've asked questions about them.

[1:23:13] Here are the renderings.

[1:23:16] This I think is an angle that the boards not see initially.

[1:23:21] As this may be.

[1:23:37] And if you would like to discuss any of these at any point during our, during our hearing, please let me know.

[1:23:52] That gives you a better view of the, of the vacuum spaces as well that we're being discussed.

[1:23:58] And I believe that's the last rendering we have.

[1:24:01] Let me, let me just ask the question right now, because you said that the, you know, the representative of the car wash could address there.

[1:24:08] How there employees intend to park, but let me ask you as a, as a land use attorney.

[1:24:16] Are the vacuum stalls parking spaces?

[1:24:20] Yes, that's the intent.

[1:24:21] That's the intent that it would be vacuum space.

[1:24:24] They would be in employee spaces.

[1:24:26] And again, operationally, that's not something

[1:24:28] that I've discussed in detail with Alex and the team.

[1:24:34] That's not vending issue that has been raised until recently,

[1:24:39] but we can discuss that tonight.

[1:24:40] I understand it's the intent to park their employees there.

[1:24:43] What I'm asking you is, do you consider, as somebody who does a lot of land use law and

[1:24:48] development work, do you consider those slots to be parking, dedicated parking for employees?

[1:24:55] I would consider them to be dedicated parking in this context because it is an automated

[1:25:00] car wash facility that has limited number of employees.

[1:25:05] I think they meet the requirements.

[1:25:07] There are members of the general public who are speaking in the gallery during the presentation.

[1:25:12] Please stop. You'll have your chance to come up and make your points, but it's a little bit distracting.

[1:25:16] So, what I would say to your question is that any business that's open to the public has a parking lot of spaces and most of them don't have a separate employee parking only section.

[1:25:29] So, every business is going to have some of its parking lot dedicated to employees, boss. The only difference with these is that those also have the ability to be a vacuum spot.

[1:25:40] that is the only difference. I don't think that makes it less of a parking spot,

[1:25:44] makes it a more usable parking spot for multiple uses, but it's still the same principle.

[1:25:50] A portion of your parking structure is going to be taken up by employees.

[1:25:56] What happens when that needs that spot needs to be used as a vacuum?

[1:26:03] And again, I think that's what...

[1:26:04] Just the employee move his car to his or her car to.

[1:26:08] I believe that's what Mr. Quintana can speak to operationally. They're not operating with kind of a deficit of those vacuum spots, but he can speak to that.

[1:26:20] And it's a reasonable question. I'm not trying to downplay this question at all.

[1:26:24] It doesn't matter if it's employee or guests, there's usually designated on-street or

[1:26:31] there's designated parking spaces, so that's our concern that there's no designated parking.

[1:26:38] It's serving a dual function, but at peak hour, what happens?

[1:26:46] Again, there's also a refractory time when certain people come to replace the other people.

[1:26:54] when they're getting off, said there's going to be two cars for a while while they're handing off their duties.

[1:27:04] I didn't mean to.

[1:27:04] No, no, it's totally fine.

[1:27:07] Please jump in anytime you have a question.

[1:27:10] So this is a question again that we can go into in more detail.

[1:27:15] We are aware that there are folks here tonight and folks that have written this city with concerns.

[1:27:21] I will note that there are many of the concerns that we have read

[1:27:26] from the neighbors that do related

[1:27:29] does seem that there is a real problem

[1:27:30] with cut-through traffic in the neighborhood.

[1:27:32] And not to similar from the discussion

[1:27:34] that you had in your first item,

[1:27:38] that is not necessarily something

[1:27:39] that the applicant has the obligation to make better.

[1:27:44] Certainly they have the obligation

[1:27:45] of not exacerbating the problem,

[1:27:51] but the broader concern is one of,

[1:27:54] that the city has to deal with.

[1:27:55] When a park is a popular place to be, and this is a Loma is a busy street, and there is a problem that residents have with cut through traffic.

[1:28:05] Yes, sir.

[1:28:06] I'm going to jump in here for a second, sir.

[1:28:08] You're talking about traffic.

[1:28:10] Now, traffic studies were done for this project, is that correct?

[1:28:14] That's correct.

[1:28:15] Were any of those traffic studies address any of the traffic issues on this neighborhood as opposed to the other locations of this company?

[1:28:28] How do you mean, what I mean is, is that in the traffic studies that I saw, they were looking

[1:28:34] at the locations in Highly of Florida and South Miami, Burbroan, 69th, which is a two-and-a-half

[1:28:41] two miles from the high school I went to, Cork Ables High School, and they were doing traffic

[1:28:50] accounts to those locations and then trying to do an addition and subtraction as far as

[1:28:58] what the traffic was going to be at this location. But my concern was that this location

[1:29:03] has a particular issue with cut-through traffic and a residential neighborhood that backs

[1:29:08] right up to it that none of those locations have. And the traffic study didn't really address

[1:29:14] what the traffic was in this location, which is where it's going to be built.

[1:29:20] That was a concern I had. So I'm asking you, don't you think there needs to be a traffic

[1:29:25] study addressing this location of the current issue and how that issue may be exacerbated

[1:29:31] or not depending on what this property is going to bring to that location, that this business.

[1:29:40] And it doesn't, as far as I can see, I didn't see one.

[1:29:44] If you did, there is, you know, tell me, correct me, but my concern is that there wasn't

[1:29:49] a traffic study that was done that addresses this property in this location and the traffic

[1:29:56] concerns there.

[1:30:00] I understand your question entirely. I don't believe that the city staff accepted the traffic study that we submitted.

[1:30:08] And we're not to stay off. I'll ask a few of the questions on that.

[1:30:11] That's fair.

[1:30:14] So the answer is no.

[1:30:16] The answer is no. Not at this stage, not at the conditional use permit stage.

[1:30:22] So again, back to the concerns.

[1:30:25] And that is, the concerns are the reason why we, and I encourage you as we're discussing

[1:30:32] these things, don't feel as if the applicant doesn't have any room to listen to your

[1:30:38] concerns and incorporate them into approval conditions.

[1:30:43] I think I don't know that we've said no to one of city staff's requests yet, and many

[1:30:50] of these have come above what the code would require.

[1:30:54] And that's another point that I would make about this company, L. Car Wash.

[1:30:58] What you're looking at is not a prototypical L. Car Wash, as far as I can tell, there is not a prototypical L. Car Wash.

[1:31:05] This is designed to custom forward this property and to address the interactions we've had with staff and the concerns they have related to.

[1:31:15] buffering, landscaping, tree preservation,

[1:31:20] and we want to bring that same attention to your concerns

[1:31:24] and any comments that you have tonight. So don't feel as if this is simply what we're

[1:31:30] proposing and there's no room to work. That's what this, you know, applicant is willing to do

[1:31:35] that we're happy to work with the on these issues.

[1:31:40] I want to briefly touch on some of the

[1:31:43] conditional use permit criteria because that's something that is not, was not as emphasized in

[1:31:49] staff's presentation. One of them says that the conditional use permit has to be consistent with

[1:31:56] the goals of the comprehensive plan. Again, I'll go back to the existing condition.

[1:32:05] There's a reason why every comprehensive plan that's passed for cities and counties has an element

[1:32:12] to it that encourages infill development.

[1:32:15] Infill development means you're taking in underutilized

[1:32:18] or vacant property and you're redeveloping it.

[1:32:21] This one in particular has two structures that are vacant.

[1:32:28] And nothing is a more attractive nuisance

[1:32:30] than a vacant commercial structure, especially at night

[1:32:34] when it gets dark.

[1:32:35] So the opportunity to redevelop it as a use

[1:32:39] that could serve the residents in nearby area is certainly one that's consistent with that goal from your comprehensive plan.

[1:32:52] The second criteria I'll talk about is that it meets her exceeds the minimum standards in your land development code.

[1:33:00] this certainly does, those conditions that Nick went through many of those are not required

[1:33:06] by your code.

[1:33:07] They're simply, and if they're usually, if they're required, they don't have to be listed

[1:33:10] as conditions.

[1:33:12] They are over and above.

[1:33:16] The use type operating hours traffic impact commensurate with the area, this is a C3 zoning

[1:33:24] district.

[1:33:25] This is in the commercial core.

[1:33:26] or as you know, this is an intensely developed area.

[1:33:33] And I could go through more of these, but I think that you understand what our argument is,

[1:33:40] what our cases for redevelopment of this property.

[1:33:43] I know that you have specific questions about the employee parking and the landscaping materials

[1:33:52] and the height of the building.

[1:33:53] I'm going to go ahead and call up Mr. Alex Quintana to address those of which he can speak to now.

[1:34:01] I'm happy to answer any other questions you have as we continue to talk.

[1:34:05] Thank you.

[1:34:10] Good evening, Alex Quintana.

[1:34:12] Senior Director of Development, L. Car Wash, 253, Northwest 87th Avenue, Darrell Ford, 33172.

[1:34:20] Not sure.

[1:34:22] Here we go.

[1:34:23] Okay, so I was taking some notes, so the first one is the employee parking, as you guys

[1:34:29] have mentioned, we do operate upwards of 95 sites across our two markets right now between

[1:34:35] Michigan and Florida.

[1:34:37] What we try to develop our sites is to maximize what we consider our vacuums, which are

[1:34:42] complementary to the purchase of a car wash.

[1:34:46] At any given moment, we're going to have a maximum of two to three employees on shift that

[1:34:51] give a moment. So we understand that at those shift changes per se, we could have a potential

[1:34:58] of five cars. It's kind of one of those things that our crews are our staff works out

[1:35:04] together. What we were proposing was, if it is a rainier day or gloomier day or towards the end

[1:35:10] of a day, where we kind of see those seasonal down shifts, we will reduce the staffing of just

[1:35:21] in line. So what we're kind of our proposing is we do understand that, you know, these flex

[1:35:28] faces, but they're not going to be taking up, per se, the prime ones, which would be kind

[1:35:33] of to the right of the ADA space, where we would be having them as more down towards the

[1:35:40] pastation area. Those two to three spots right there, where we would kind of direct them to

[1:35:45] there. Just to kind of mention also we do have numerous sites down in South Florida that

[1:35:50] do significant volume upwards of 1,000 cars a day, 1,000 plus a day, which we're not predicting that this site would be doing.

[1:36:00] And we have less vacuum spaces where the employees are doing that.

[1:36:06] So we do have the three primary positions are the pay station.

[1:36:09] We will always have an employee there to keep people flowing.

[1:36:13] We'll have a lot of tendon where someone is monitoring the lot, making sure people aren't playing music too loudly.

[1:36:19] And that they're also using the Vax and a respectable manner of timing, not sitting there for 30 plus minutes detailing their car, we try to ask.

[1:36:27] We've started instituting signs at each vacuum stall that says, be courteous to your other members that keep it to 10 to 15 minutes.

[1:36:36] If not, and we also realize that keeping stock of towels and any other products kind of expedites that timing.

[1:36:44] So I think that right now we're anywhere down towards like seven to eight minutes where most people are detailing their car detailing and getting in and out of there

[1:36:53] Another one is hours. You asked I'm not sure which member asked, but when is the last customer?

[1:37:00] We usually will not turn away someone that's in queue at 8 p.m.

[1:37:05] But we will kindly ask them to kind of we will put out cones at the entry point of that queue right there where that last car shown on this plan

[1:37:12] We'll move cones out there kind of decks as an APA. It's shutting down time at APM or we can adjust to 7.45

[1:37:19] If you guys wanted to give a 15-minute warning, we'd be willing to bait adapts to that condition.

[1:37:25] Afterwards, all the equipment will be shut off. They'll probably be an out.

[1:37:30] Or ish of maintenance inside the tunnel? No loud equipment will be going on, it's mainly just kind of pressure washing inside the tunnel. Just to clean up for the day and then the employees will be out of there, lighting will go down to a minimum and stay within the city standards.

[1:37:46] Another one was the sound, so let me book you on to some extra slides here in a second.

[1:37:54] Okay, so here's a good representation.

[1:37:58] I'll try to put the decibel scale on there because I know decibels.

[1:38:02] We all learned about it in seventh grade physical science and then we forget about it.

[1:38:06] But just decibels right now me speaking.

[1:38:09] We're setting around 70 decibels more than likely over this microphone.

[1:38:13] So, this is the bottom chart, is taking from one of our most recent sound studies that was done for a project in Del Rey Beach.

[1:38:22] I can also provide a study that we had recently done for a project in Melbourne, off North Wickham that was approved at the end of last year.

[1:38:32] But as you can see, they take the sound from various points around the site and as you at various distances.

[1:38:40] and as you can see the sound dissipates and this is without any solid walls as we've all

[1:38:46] learned in this car wash industry solid wall stop sound better than any other thing possible.

[1:38:52] So that is a 3D rendering of our vacuum enclosures. It's a 8-foot CMU block construction.

[1:39:00] On three sides with a metal gate on the opening so the employees can get in there or maintenance

[1:39:06] crew can get in there and service the equipment as needed.

[1:39:09] It's open to the air just to keep air flowing through it to prevent overheating.

[1:39:15] And so what we've realized is that sound reverberating and then being projected upwards

[1:39:19] or outward really helps and then also I just want to accentuate that also we have that

[1:39:27] solid wall on the back end of the property, don't know if we.

[1:39:31] Yeah, you can see it there on that northern part that will help also dissipate the

[1:39:37] another one that you guys mentioned was the Tower height. As Mr. Love went over the current

[1:39:49] conditions, we do have that monument. There's that existing Pylon slash monument sign

[1:39:54] with the building out there in our initial meetings in our tack review with staff. We kind

[1:40:01] I conceded or we compromised, I guess, in that sense that we would not be going for a monument

[1:40:07] sign there.

[1:40:08] In the sense that we could get our tower at that 35-foot height and then actually it's creating

[1:40:13] a better visibility.

[1:40:14] I know that we've provided site triangles to staff inside of our packet that Mr. Draper can

[1:40:20] go over if needed.

[1:40:22] And then also, I know that there are some concerns about traffic, sorry, going around direction

[1:40:27] here.

[1:40:27] Um, we did have our, uh, legacy, uh, traffic consultant, they've been with, uh, L.

[1:40:33] Car Wash and stay one.

[1:40:34] They're based out of medley for the, uh, HBC engineering, uh, Dr.

[1:40:39] Modet's, uh, side, uh, for conducted this report.

[1:40:42] And as you can see, on the top of that top table, it does take into account the traffic

[1:40:47] counts at the proposed site of 416 land or road.

[1:40:52] Um, and then compares it to our bird road, our F, I, I, you, West Miami and our coral

[1:40:57] of reef sites. These are our most mature sites in our repertoire. These are the sites. I know

[1:41:03] that it is down in Miami, but these are sites that have less vacuum, shorter tunnels,

[1:41:09] and do thousand plus cars a day that don't have any major issues. They run cars through

[1:41:17] there constantly. And, you know, that's where our model was perfected and brought up, you know,

[1:41:27] it meets ITE standards. And as you can see on the lower table, they kind of compare it to

[1:41:34] serrigate sites where what we've noticed is a lot of our traffic is passed by traffic. So

[1:41:39] it's not a destination location like our restaurant or grocery store. We try to incorporate

[1:41:45] our locations into everyday life where you're going from one place and then you know stop

[1:41:51] another. Yes sir. What's the well time service big for time the

[1:41:56] end or until the time they may leave at the right now at our

[1:42:00] drought. Yeah right now at our drought HQ location we've actually

[1:42:04] integrated into an AI camera system that has been logging in you know cars

[1:42:08] as they enter our property to when they leave the property based on some

[1:42:12] initial readings what we're finding is right around I think the average is

[1:42:16] right around 12 minutes based on peak times that's actually as you're in the

[1:42:20] you moving through and then going out.

[1:42:24] So as a new detail, and then a new, sorry, I'm going the wrong way.

[1:42:32] And then just to show, we have one more slide here to show that this is just how it integrates

[1:42:37] into your daily traffic, sorry, for the smaller graphics.

[1:42:42] This is actually using a Placer AI data, so it takes cell phone data from existing sites.

[1:42:47] So this is using our golden rod location, and so what it's finding is that, yes, 42%

[1:42:56] of people come from their home, but as you can see, they're going to various locations

[1:43:00] afterwards, whether it be to the Costco nearby.

[1:43:04] So this is one of those locations when we were initially doing the real estate reconnaissance

[1:43:08] was, it's a Sprouts, you know, you're out on your Saturday errands, you're going to the

[1:43:17] found that the market kind of calls for it here is that this winter park location would fill

[1:43:25] in a central gap in between our three existing stores where hopefully it seems like traffic

[1:43:32] is a pretty big concern especially me trying to come up here from South Florida at a rush hour

[1:43:36] traffic time that we would be moving a location closer to some of our core demographic in the

[1:43:44] and core members in the area, and that they would have an easier location to reduce their

[1:43:49] times on the road.

[1:43:51] So, and then...

[1:43:53] What's the distance between the proposed location and the castle burial location?

[1:43:58] I believe right now we're right around five miles.

[1:44:02] Ish?

[1:44:02] Yes.

[1:44:04] And they're completely two different markets.

[1:44:05] I mean, I know that they overlap, but you can faintly see it that kind of the red blue and

[1:44:10] green kind of designates where they're all pulling from.

[1:44:13] And so, what we're hoping that this location will do is equalize and kind of infill right now

[1:44:20] in the sense that it'll be a closer commute and you bring it's closer. Yes, sir.

[1:44:25] Okay. Where exactly is your Castle Berry location? Can you point it out on a?

[1:44:32] Castle Berry is up there in the blue. There's a blue with a white circle.

[1:44:37] Yes, my question is. It's on 436.

[1:44:39] Yeah, does it back up to a neighborhood?

[1:44:42] No.

[1:44:43] Okay.

[1:44:44] All right.

[1:44:44] Your ECF location.

[1:44:46] Does it back up to a neighborhood?

[1:44:48] Listen.

[1:44:48] Your golden rod location.

[1:44:50] Does it back up to a neighborhood?

[1:44:52] No, sir.

[1:44:52] But on the other side, I can name you off multiple locations on the South Miami area

[1:44:57] and across all of our markets that backup into.

[1:45:00] Residents. Well, I looked at the five, and it's been a few years. I mean, I did graduate

[1:45:05] high school, but not yesterday from down there. But I know where the bird road location is, and I

[1:45:13] know where the Carl Reef location, 152nd Street. I didn't hang out in Highland, but I looked

[1:45:18] on the map where those two locations are. None of them backed up to any residential. They were

[1:45:26] are on a major thoroughfare, and they don't have the back-street issues that this location

[1:45:34] potentially has. That's my issue is we're dealing with apples and oranges and I understand

[1:45:42] the traffic, so that's why I ask Council about that because that's the big issue that I see right

[1:45:49] here.

[1:45:50] And we heard from staff and all of our meetings and that's where we adjusted our site plan.

[1:45:55] that we adjusted our initial entry point from our pre-application meeting to one

[1:45:59] preserve the oak tree that's on land or right there. The second one was to create a

[1:46:07] extended throat distance into the

[1:46:10] entry of our site down land. I think we're about 400 feet up there. I don't know. I don't

[1:46:17] pull me to it, but I think we're significantly farther off the road than a sprouts.

[1:46:20] So you don't have any of that extent, and then also staff requested that we, you know, make it a left out only.

[1:46:29] We've accentuated that curve, we can accentuate even more.

[1:46:33] We have some directional signage.

[1:46:35] It's a little bit right there.

[1:46:39] You can see it by that white SUV.

[1:46:41] We'll, our 3D rendering, real oriented at the incorrect direction, but we'll turn that so it's forcing those in.

[1:46:48] like we can do all we can to force patrons to go left out of the site.

[1:46:56] So, which I know that, I mean, but, you know, the person wants to take a right.

[1:47:02] They're going to take a right.

[1:47:04] And you can't even get people to walk across a street and winter park on it.

[1:47:08] But what I guess what we're getting at is that we've worked with staff.

[1:47:12] We've done everything we could to force the traffic to the left.

[1:47:17] I know that the sprouts development has a full movement there, so I mean what we've done is we've done our best to accommodate to the staff and that's all we can do for you guys.

[1:47:29] I know it seems like, you know, just as Mr. Love pointed out, first project it seems like it's a citywide issue. We have it down in Miami a lot.

[1:47:37] people love cutting through alleys and access streets and, you know,

[1:47:43] probably the nature of the beast unfortunately.

[1:47:44] Mr. Tick?

[1:47:47] Yeah, you've mentioned you've done noise studies in other sites.

[1:47:55] What triggered those studies and why?

[1:47:58] I've only done here.

[1:48:00] I believe Melburn, so to speak to Melburn,

[1:48:03] They, it was part of their conditional use requirements built into their city code, so when we had their pre-app, they requested it, and we provided it, and then the Delray Beach, same, same issue with the conditional use process, that one's actually borders are residents as well, or a neighborhood right behind us, so we, we did the sound study as they requested at the pre-app meeting.

[1:48:31] Another site that we are doing,

[1:48:34] I'm completely blanking, Miramar Parkway, Miramar 3,

[1:48:37] our third site there.

[1:48:39] It backs up to a residence right now.

[1:48:42] And we provide a sound study for them.

[1:48:45] And we're going into PNZ and June on that project.

[1:48:49] Okay.

[1:48:51] Getting back to the front,

[1:48:54] you know, signage monument, which is, you know, I guess what it is, because you're actual office

[1:49:01] building is like 19 feet, two inches, to the parapets who add on another, you know, one or two feet,

[1:49:09] you know, I guess for the full height of the building, and then you've got another, you know, 14 feet of,

[1:49:17] I guess airspace, you know, to get up to the 35 feet, I just don't, you know, to me that's

[1:49:24] I mean, that's a sign monument, it's not a real structure,

[1:49:30] so it's part of our brand.

[1:49:32] We have it at, I would say probably 85% of our stores have that tower feature, it's, you

[1:49:39] know, we build within city codes and, you know, that's what we presented initially to staff.

[1:49:47] We're willing to compromise some, but I know that we've also compromised and said to staff

[1:49:52] that we weren't going to submit for a monument sign, per se, or a pylon sign, to promote

[1:49:58] signage.

[1:49:59] And so this is our kind of our compromise that we get some height back for advertisement and

[1:50:05] visibility from the road.

[1:50:06] I mean, I know we're built right up against the road, but with a limited signage, it's

[1:50:11] easier to kind of get your signage up.

[1:50:24] Okay.

[1:50:25] I mean, when you're to find a lot, this size down in South Florida, you're paying upwards

[1:50:30] of eight figures.

[1:50:32] So we have a lot more room to work with here and so the longer the tunnel, the more cars

[1:50:36] were able to process and the better wash that were able to give to our customers.

[1:50:41] And so the capacity of this tunnel is five cars versus an 80 foot tunnel where you can

[1:50:47] maybe only fit two cars in there at any given moment.

[1:50:50] So we can process cars through faster, which means less stacking, which means more people

[1:50:55] get into the vacuumed quicker and get off-site quicker.

[1:51:01] Yes, I'm just wondering, have you done a sort of, you had the, the aerial with the

[1:51:07] different locations, and then this location, the, the projected volume of cars that you're

[1:51:16] expecting and then does this size merit that volume is, it's a long building, I guess is what

[1:51:27] I'm getting that. And is it? And when you're saying that you have.

[1:51:30] So right now, uh, sorry to catch you off. Sorry.

[1:51:33] Your car washes in South Florida do a lot of volume, but they're smaller. So why the

[1:51:40] large building footprint, when probably the volume will be less here?

[1:51:46] It's, like I said, it's a, it's a business decision in the sense that we can have a longer

[1:51:51] tunnel, which kind of, it's more touchpoints for the vehicle. What we found also up in central

[1:51:57] footers. We don't have as big of a bug problem down in South Florida as you guys do up here.

[1:52:03] And so we try to have more touch points and longer tunnels up here. So there's a better

[1:52:07] clean on your car. You're not coming out with three-quarter clean car like you see at some

[1:52:12] car washers. If that makes sense. More touch points for these more locations? More touch points

[1:52:18] is inside the tunnel. There's more ability to rinse and soap your car. There's longer,

[1:52:23] Soak time on your vehicle that the soap is on there because the that's getting tuned into the

[1:52:30] Weeds Car Washular is the longer the soaps on the vehicle, the better it is to penetrate smashed

[1:52:38] bugs on your car and get them off easier. But this is based on the golden rod, site which

[1:52:43] opened in July of 2025. And as you can see, our visits have been stayed pretty consistently

[1:52:50] as we've taken over the site. And I know we purchased it recently and rebranded it as of last year

[1:52:58] and it's operating anywhere between four to seven hundred cars per day.

[1:53:02] So that's what we're estimating for this site,

[1:53:05] which can easily handle this volume.

[1:53:07] You're estimating that for this site,

[1:53:10] based on what Golden Rod's doing?

[1:53:12] Yes, sir, because as I mentioned,

[1:53:13] it's that infill location in the sense that

[1:53:17] also this one is it's customers benefit from our network

[1:53:20] and the sense that they use multiple locations

[1:53:22] that are depending on where they are,

[1:53:24] just what side of the city they're on,

[1:53:26] which way their communities for that day, et cetera, et cetera.

[1:53:30] So the ability of adding an extra car wash in this area

[1:53:36] will open up that ability for it to kind of stabilize.

[1:53:48] How do you determine, well, I think you've

[1:53:53] said that based on the unique nature of this site,

[1:53:57] the length of it, you were able to put a longer tunnel in,

[1:53:59] Is that why you have a large number of vacuum stalls that you say you probably won't need or

[1:54:07] Do you make the number do you determine I mean we think I want to say okay to determine the proposed number of vacuum stalls based on what the volume

[1:54:14] You think is going to be at the store

[1:54:18] No because I have I have sites that down in South Florida right now that I'm developing that are only going to have eight vacuums

[1:54:24] And we're projecting that these cars are going to do a thousand cars today. Is that it because you do have enough space on those smaller lots in South Florida?

[1:54:31] Yes, but if I had more space, but at the same time, there is a fine line also because you don't want them to be

[1:54:40] Godian, I don't want to get up here in slander in the other companies but some of the car washes that we inherited

[1:54:45] have

[1:54:46] 3040 plus vacuums that when they were operating at a

[1:54:50] 400 to a 700 cars per day

[1:54:53] the cycle looked empty at any given moment and an empty business is not a profitable business in our eyes, and so there's a fine line of managing and

[1:55:01] what we landed on with 17 spaces here also because of space constraints and kind of redesigning

[1:55:06] the side I think staff has maybe seen two or three iterations of the site plan and this

[1:55:10] is what we settled on that would be most efficient and also meet all city standards.

[1:55:15] Well, I mean it doesn't need any parking standards because it doesn't have any dedicated

[1:55:18] parking but that is you aside to the sites that you for instance the site you said

[1:55:24] that has eight vacuum stalls of the South Florida. Is there any parking for staff dedicated

[1:55:29] parking on for staff on those properties?

[1:55:32] Those can be a little bit different.

[1:55:34] In the sense that Miami people have mutual agreements with neighboring properties, or shared

[1:55:40] parking agreements in alleyways, but I know that one or two of them we kind of designated

[1:55:46] this space by the dumpster that was kind of unused that was just we created this parking

[1:55:52] space out of it.

[1:55:53] You know, you just get creative with maximizing your space there.

[1:55:56] Right. And if we, I think, was Mr. Keyesons point earlier, which is if all of the things or if all the

[1:56:02] stalls are being used and somebody comes to park their car, maybe it was Mr. Seagull,

[1:56:06] they're just going to find a place they could put the car on that lot, which isn't necessarily

[1:56:10] a parking place. And that wouldn't be that would be the area manager, the regional manager,

[1:56:16] the site managers, responsibility to make sure we have a clear policy in our staff that are in our

[1:56:22] company policies that we don't let them just park on a curb and I understand the

[1:56:27] concern of whatever happened at Golden Rod and you know we can look into that

[1:56:30] from an upside.

[1:56:33] I just want to clarify you had said that you had a South

[1:56:36] Florida location that does 1,000 cars a day. Multiple guests there. Multiple

[1:56:41] look at I can imagine that and then the one you were talking though you referenced

[1:56:47] had eight vacuum stalls.

[1:56:49] Yes, sir.

[1:56:49] Okay.

[1:56:51] This one has what?

[1:56:52] 17?

[1:56:53] Yes, sir.

[1:56:54] And is it fair to say?

[1:56:55] And I'm looking at a projection of between four and seven hundred cars a day?

[1:56:59] That's the golden rod.

[1:57:00] But I mean, is that something that you would?

[1:57:01] Do you know how many cars a day would come to this?

[1:57:04] If I had a crystal ball, I'd be a lot more profitable man.

[1:57:08] But yes, sir.

[1:57:09] I mean, based on the data, that's what we can just concurrent right now with the mark our central

[1:57:14] for the market is operating, that's what we're estimating

[1:57:16] that we're talking about.

[1:57:17] Between $700.

[1:57:19] Yes, sir.

[1:57:19] So you got a space before and $700 cars a day

[1:57:22] with 17 vacuum stalls when you got another,

[1:57:25] that does 1,000 cars a day with eight vacuum stalls.

[1:57:28] So is there any rhyme or reason to pick that?

[1:57:32] I mean, why?

[1:57:33] One, two, one.

[1:57:34] It's just, you know, not to get to any of the weeds.

[1:57:37] The sites are designed differently.

[1:57:39] You know, I know the highly,

[1:57:40] the site that you mentioned, the old one.

[1:57:42] That one was a back first concept.

[1:57:44] So you have people actually vacuuming in the queueing.

[1:57:47] I mean, I'm just trying to find out if there's any, if there's any relationship

[1:57:53] between a number of vacuum sites and the number of projected cars per day.

[1:57:58] And I'm not seeing it, but I think I can say, I mean, I could, I could develop a site.

[1:58:03] You know, there's one of our rock-wood sites has, I think, 54 vacuumes on it,

[1:58:07] and probably at most 10 are used at any given moment.

[1:58:12] Is that on North Morrell Road?

[1:58:15] Near Eister?

[1:58:16] I believe so.

[1:58:17] Yeah, the Rockwich.

[1:58:18] I mean, I think it's just, you've maxed out to sight.

[1:58:22] We maxed out to sight. We prepared for the worst conditions.

[1:58:25] We would rather have, I would rather have 17 vacuums or 14 operational because two employees

[1:58:31] or three employees are part there then.

[1:58:33] And thinking, you didn't have to max out to sight.

[1:58:36] You just made it smaller and then maybe created a greater buffer from the residential.

[1:58:42] So, you know, there's at the same time I also don't want to impede the residents and be respectful of them and don't ever want our site to

[1:58:51] stack out onto the road if someone, if we were to only reduce down to a certain number of vacuums and the site is occupied at that given.

[1:58:59] back to the combat, you know,

[1:59:01] but you're projecting maybe 400 to 700 visits a day.

[1:59:05] It doesn't sound like that merits 17 vacuum stalls.

[1:59:11] Anyway, back to the tower.

[1:59:14] What are you all willing to do in terms of reducing the size of the tower?

[1:59:20] You said you might be willing to compromise or...

[1:59:24] I mean, I was kind of just looking at Google Street View

[1:59:27] to see kind of surrounding businesses.

[1:59:29] I know there's a three story office building kind of across the street ish and then I know that

[1:59:34] this sprouts is set further off the road, but you know, mellow mushroom has a pylon sign out by the road.

[1:59:42] Does that mean the answer to your question is you're not willing to?

[1:59:44] No, I am willing to. I'm just trying to give, I'm just trying to give a reason of why we presented to staff and

[1:59:50] we're at 10 feet, you're at 10 feet, and they're not at 10 feet. So, you're right at the edge of the right away.

[1:59:58] What would be a cup of

[2:00:00] Dr. Will Hype for you guys, and I can take that up to our higher levels to make a business decision on it, but I think right tonight I would be authorized to say that we'd be willing to look into it.

[2:00:11] Yeah, and because this is a recommending body, you can make a recommendation to city council with a specific number and we can take that to the final decision.

[2:00:22] So I think to Alex's point, I encourage you to discuss internally and suggest a number because this is a recommending body.

[2:00:35] Any other questions for the applicant?

[2:00:40] Thank you.

[2:00:42] Could I briefly just make one clarifying question.

[2:00:44] I just want to ask staff or maybe a Dan.

[2:00:47] Because the question of parking has come up now a few times that I just want to make sure that we're clear on the record,

[2:00:54] whether the city considers these to be parking spaces.

[2:01:00] So we don't have a requirement for parking spaces for a car wash.

[2:01:05] All we have is retail operations,

[2:01:09] is the closest thing I could say that it would conform to,

[2:01:13] and it's based on the square footage.

[2:01:16] It's not based on the number of employees.

[2:01:18] No, we don't have that requirement in the code.

[2:01:22] Obviously, this move forward for approval so you aren't really concerned about the parking

[2:01:29] issue.

[2:01:33] I'm not going to answer your question.

[2:01:34] I'm piggybacked in the last question.

[2:01:37] Even though there may not be a minimum parking requirement as I also said for this type of

[2:01:42] use, the factors that you consider in a traditional use of approval do factor in parking

[2:01:49] is one of the things that the board does review.

[2:01:53] So it's the one in the purview of the board to consider that issue.

[2:01:57] Absolutely.

[2:01:57] And absolutely.

[2:01:57] I think it's in a requirement because of the city code, and this is not retail, then why is there a handicap space there?

[2:02:04] I just...

[2:02:04] That's a building code requirement.

[2:02:07] It just isn't making sense to me.

[2:02:10] What I'm hearing is we've just maximized the lot, and we're going to put as many vacuums on this as we can.

[2:02:17] And we'll park some people there and get away with it,

[2:02:20] but there's not dedicated parking.

[2:02:22] And we'd really like to use them all to have vacuums

[2:02:24] because we want to bring as many cars

[2:02:26] through this things we can't.

[2:02:27] That's what it says to me.

[2:02:30] I'm sorry, this is really more close session commentary,

[2:02:32] but are there any other questions for the applicant?

[2:02:36] Thank you.

[2:02:37] Thank you.

[2:02:41] Sorry, I was just getting a text message from our senior VP

[2:02:45] of development and construction.

[2:02:46] We are willing to compromise a couple of spots,

[2:02:48] just to be solely dedicated to employees and not backing them there.

[2:02:53] So, yeah.

[2:02:55] Do we have members of the public who wish to speak?

[2:02:58] Chairman, I have two requests, but one may have left.

[2:03:02] The first one is Julia Gettinger.

[2:03:05] I saw a number of people in the audience raise their hands.

[2:03:09] If you would like to speak, can you please go back and fill out one of the forms?

[2:03:13] So we have your name so we can call you up in orderly fashion.

[2:03:16] Thank you very much,

[2:03:22] and the first speaker again is that you, ma'am.

[2:03:27] As a reminder, if you could start by stating your name and address for the record.

[2:03:37] Hello, I'm Julia Guessinger.

[2:03:38] I'm a resident of the East Gate neighborhood.

[2:03:42] My address is 106 bell place in winter park.

[2:03:47] And I'm a resident of the neighborhood.

[2:03:49] been there for many years.

[2:03:52] Love our winter park neighborhood.

[2:03:55] And I'm very concerned that there's another car wash going there.

[2:04:01] The old car wash is dilapidated, I can see that.

[2:04:05] And surely would be nice to have something new there.

[2:04:08] But I don't think a car wash would be a good addition

[2:04:12] for the winter park community.

[2:04:15] There's so many car washers already in the area.

[2:04:21] And several of my main concerns are, of course, the traffic, like we already discussed.

[2:04:27] This already is a very tricky neighborhood.

[2:04:30] We have animals and kids, and there's a lot of cut-through traffic to avoid the light

[2:04:35] between Aloma and Lakemont.

[2:04:38] So the neighborhood is already very heavily used for cut-through traffic, and I think cars going

[2:04:46] with a car wash are just going to make it worse.

[2:04:49] It doesn't matter if they only can turn left,

[2:04:51] that's only going to make the exit from land

[2:04:56] or onto Aloma much worse.

[2:04:58] It's already terrible because of the sprouts location.

[2:05:04] Sprouts also is very noisy in the middle of the night.

[2:05:07] The unpack their groceries.

[2:05:11] We have a very much noise problem,

[2:05:13] even though there is a wall between the neighborhood

[2:05:16] and the shopping plaza. And if we now have to deal with a car wash that has up to 70

[2:05:23] even if it's just eight vacuum's. I don't think the noise study was considering all of those

[2:05:31] aids running at the same time. I saw that it shows one edit time, but I don't think they have

[2:05:38] noise study that will tell you how loud it will be.

[2:05:44] Just go to any of the car washes, like on four sites, and Aloma, there's one.

[2:05:49] It's very noisy.

[2:05:51] Also, the runoff, I'm very concerned about chemicals being sprayed,

[2:05:55] chemicals being going into our groundwater.

[2:05:59] We have a female urban farm in our neighborhood.

[2:06:03] I'm part of that initiative.

[2:06:05] and I want no chemicals in the vicinity.

[2:06:11] The other thing was, oh yes, is there an emissions test done?

[2:06:18] Because if people are in the line, constantly their cars are running,

[2:06:23] there should be some sort of a pollution emissions test for the cars running.

[2:06:29] I don't think we should in this area have any sort of drive-through traffic.

[2:06:34] If you want to build a office or a doctor's office or something like that, that's, you know,

[2:06:42] it's not going to show heavily impact the neighborhood that's behind it.

[2:06:47] Thank you very much for your consideration.

[2:06:50] Next is Jenna Four.

[2:06:55] Thank you everyone for filling those out.

[2:06:56] It makes us much easier than me picking people from the audience.

[2:07:01] Hi, my name.

[2:07:02] Oh, sorry.

[2:07:03] No, we can do that.

[2:07:03] I'm at the better for us, yeah.

[2:07:05] My name is Jennifer. I live at one one eight bill place. I am the owner operator of the small urban farm there.

[2:07:11] It is midmodder bin farm. I am licensed through the city.

[2:07:15] So everything that I'm doing is legal. It's an organic farm. I am also very concerned about chemical spray,

[2:07:22] the water runoff, the ground pollution. I also have a four and five-year-old children who it is already, like nerve-wracking to let.

[2:07:30] Then, play in the front yard in any way, shape or form. Because of the traffic, I know everyone's talking about the cut through traffic, through the neighborhood. But like Julia said, my concern is more of the traffic turning out. It is a nightmare to turn on to a Loma from lander. There are so many near misses all the time. It's awful. So, I'm also, I have a petition that the neighbors and I put together. This is the signature of every state.

[2:08:00] single person that lives on lander and bell place and the majority of the people that live

[2:08:04] on Byron and I also have people from Glenarton as well, none of them want the car wash

[2:08:09] there.

[2:08:10] So this is literally went door to door and got every one of our neighbors to sign.

[2:08:16] They don't want it.

[2:08:18] Brett also has an online one that I'll let him talk about that people signed as well.

[2:08:24] It's also not enriching our community.

[2:08:26] If they're only having two to three employees,

[2:08:29] it's not like it's creating jobs for anyone.

[2:08:31] It's not a third space for people to go to

[2:08:35] and no offense to El Car Wash.

[2:08:37] It's ugly, so sorry, the other thing is,

[2:08:42] is there's a bunch, it is, it's an isor.

[2:08:46] And there's also caliber car wash is 2.3 miles away.

[2:08:49] It's not five miles to the castle, very El Car Wash.

[2:08:52] It's 3.6 miles.

[2:08:54] the golden rod location is 3.1 miles away. There's also a spotless car wash 4.5 miles away

[2:09:00] and a water's car wash 4.8 miles away. I think we're good on car washes. So yeah, so I just think

[2:09:08] it's not creating jobs. It's just making money for our car wash. It's, and like Julie said,

[2:09:13] anything else there, a restaurant, a doctor's office, anything, anything but a car wash. So

[2:09:19] Um, it's also a, like, the echo, the, my kids play outside.

[2:09:25] I'm embarrassed when one of them hurts themselves and starts crying because the way our

[2:09:29] neighborhood is set up, it echoes.

[2:09:31] Like, you can hear it all the way down the street.

[2:09:33] So I can only imagine, like, when a car washes there, what that's going to do also.

[2:09:38] So, and like Julia said, the idling of the cars and just the extra traffic.

[2:09:44] I just don't think that we need it.

[2:09:46] there's so many other car washes around there everywhere.

[2:09:50] So I also just think as the City Commission,

[2:09:53] you guys, we voted you guys in and-

[2:09:55] Not the City Commission, we're planning it so-

[2:09:57] Plating and zoning, but as far as it's like,

[2:10:00] we're the residents and all the residents,

[2:10:02] we don't want it.

[2:10:03] And they're an L car wash from like, not here.

[2:10:06] So, and I just ask, would you guys want this

[2:10:08] backed up to your neighborhood?

[2:10:11] Thank you.

[2:10:12] Thank you.

[2:10:16] staff so that it's in the record? It's up to you, but I think when we get emails from

[2:10:24] residents, it all goes into the record. Otherwise it's just you saying I've got a bunch of

[2:10:29] people signed those? Next is Brett Bissie.

[2:10:40] Hello, thank you for having me. I just read Bissie at

[2:10:43] 530 Lander Road about five houses down from the proposed development. I just want to start by

[2:10:49] saying I also have a petition that I did online.

[2:10:53] We have 101 signatures, majority of those are in winter

[2:10:56] park, some of which are in our neighborhood.

[2:11:00] The main point of the petition is the incompatibility

[2:11:02] of this lot with directly bordering a residential lot.

[2:11:08] It's also bordering a minimum mushroom.

[2:11:10] I don't think people want to be eating outside and hearing

[2:11:13] vacuums.

[2:11:15] Also sounds like a lot of compromises

[2:11:17] or having to be made to make this happen.

[2:11:19] So why do we have to make all these compromises?

[2:11:22] Because it's an isor because it's loud,

[2:11:25] and it directly affects the residents of the neighborhood.

[2:11:28] There's not a single car wash that directly borders

[2:11:31] a residential lot in winter park.

[2:11:34] And you would struggle to find one in the surrounding

[2:11:36] greater Orlando area, that directly borders a residential lot.

[2:11:41] So I don't think this is the time to enforce that standard

[2:11:44] in winter park.

[2:11:45] Like Jenna mentioned, there's many car washes nearby.

[2:11:50] Another issue I have is the entrance,

[2:11:53] that we see on the rendering right here.

[2:11:55] There's the stop sign to get,

[2:11:57] that if you're driving on lander to get into our neighborhood.

[2:12:00] So as I'm coming up with that stop sign,

[2:12:02] I would have to simultaneously monitor

[2:12:05] left turns out and that stop sign intersection.

[2:12:09] So that seems like a confusing or difficult traffic situation

[2:12:13] for residents and people entering and exiting the car wash.

[2:12:18] Additionally, a left turn only is, you know, a suggestion to drivers, and they might just turn right in turn neighborhood.

[2:12:29] For the previous conditionally this permit, we were talking about the charm of winter park and the walkability.

[2:12:35] It's really rare to find a home and I'm very grateful that my wife and I were able to buy a house in this neighborhood,

[2:12:41] because of the walkability, I'm always biking or skating or walking around in this area.

[2:12:49] And this would destroy that charm.

[2:12:50] It would make it really difficult for me to bike skate walk around the car wash,

[2:12:56] because of the 400 to 700 additional cars that are going to be on lander.

[2:13:01] I think it's worth mentioning and you pointed out that their traffic analysis is based on

[2:13:07] surrogate modeling from South Florida. None of those car washes have a residential neighborhood

[2:13:13] right next to it and their traffic analysis actually looked into it a bit. It's purely

[2:13:19] talking about alumma. It's not considering the additional traffic on lander.

[2:13:28] I, you know, I've

[2:13:31] Another thing, I was the only resident at the community meeting and, you know, they didn't really make that community meeting known to residents outside of that 500 foot radius.

[2:13:44] And they did it at the second closest elementary school that at Rush Hour.

[2:13:50] So there is no real community outreach effort.

[2:13:53] Thanks.

[2:13:54] Thank you.

[2:13:55] Next is Sean Travis.

[2:14:08] Okay, this is Sean Travis, I'm from 2108 by Rode, I live in the neighborhood as well, pretty close to them.

[2:14:14] Mine, just one of the points has already been mentioned, but it's a lot of the traffic information is like everybody said,

[2:14:22] you know, it's based off of traffic going on to land a road and trying to impact that from happening less,

[2:14:28] but the big concern for me, like mentioned they had mentioned is the traffic going out.

[2:14:32] You know, if there's like a semi-truck or something like that that's coming out as far out, it's already like extremely difficult

[2:14:36] to get out of there. Sometimes you're waiting like 10-plus minutes and people are cutting

[2:14:39] through spouts. Like this is only going to intensify that. So it's going to make it worse.

[2:14:43] Like regardless of what is said. And then, you know, we're having a traffic study done by

[2:14:48] that's out of state or not out of state, but from South Florida and it's also being paid for

[2:14:53] by them. So, you know, they're going to tailor that traffic study in any sort of way that's going

[2:14:58] to benefit them. Obviously, you know, you know.

[2:15:00] I'd like to, honestly, I wish I would have known about the sooner I probably would have had my own traffic study done by a third party company that, you know, obviously, I could share, I pretty positive, could come up with a different answer and then it just to, I think, to reclassify the land use or property use to say it's compatible, it's just false, it's not, it's not true, you know, a bank is extremely low impact and this is not that it's high impact and they're going to have hundreds of cars there, it's just not the same.

[2:15:29] so that's all I have. Thank you. Next is Steven Jacobs.

[2:15:50] Good evening. My name is Steve Jacobs.

[2:15:52] I live on 1928 Taylor Avenue. I live there since November of 1998. So for about 27 and a

[2:15:59] half years I'm speaking today against the approval of the conditional use permit for the L. Car Wash.

[2:16:05] One of the reasons which has been talked about a lot is the traffic study. If you look at the

[2:16:10] So the last appendix, the last two pages, it talks about driveway conflicts, and all of the driveway conflicts that have been identified are right turns from

[2:16:21] Aloma and left turns from Aloma.

[2:16:23] There's no driveway conflicts from all the people, most of the people that are coming from winter park, the central area of winter park are going to come down Palmer.

[2:16:32] Then they're going to make a right turn at the Y and come down Lakemont and then they're going to make a decision.

[2:16:36] am I going to sit at the left turn to go on a loma and then make another brutal left turn

[2:16:41] on the lander or am I going to cut down my street tail or avenue and come in the backway.

[2:16:46] That traffic study doesn't even comprehend the possibility of those drivers.

[2:16:51] It completes leap completely omits them.

[2:16:54] And so it's completely flawed and you can't base your decision on that.

[2:16:58] And as far as the left turn only as you lead, come on, please.

[2:17:02] We see those types of curbs all over town, and what you see is tire marks going over the curb because people aren't doing what the the turn thing is telling them to do you see those all over the place

[2:17:14] So this is going to create an entire mess regarding the traffic

[2:17:19] As far as aesthetics are concerned, I think a lot of people have used words

[2:17:23] I'm not going to say I saw some people have said I saw but the bright turquoise hot pink color scheme certainly does not fit in

[2:17:31] the aesthetic of winter park, which is more historic, elegant, conservative and restrained.

[2:17:38] It sticks out. The height makes it stick out, the colors make it stick out.

[2:17:42] But the most important thing, and the thing that no one's people talked about noise, and they've

[2:17:46] talked about vacuums, I'm more concerned about the industrial dryers at the end of the tunnel,

[2:17:51] that below the water off your car. I went and got my car wash today at rain dancer,

[2:17:56] which is on the other side of town, off a 1792,

[2:18:00] bordered by 1792 train tracks in a gas station,

[2:18:04] by the way, not residential neighborhoods.

[2:18:07] The good thing about these apple watches

[2:18:09] is that you can record the decibel levels right on your watch.

[2:18:12] And I stood outside of the wash

[2:18:17] where these commercial dryers are located

[2:18:20] on the other side of a block wall, 88 decibels

[2:18:23] on the other side of a block wall.

[2:18:25] I crossed the parking lot about 50 feet.

[2:18:28] That was 76 decibels once and 81 decibels a second time.

[2:18:33] 85 decibels can cause hearing loss after eight hours.

[2:18:37] So we're talking about noise levels

[2:18:39] that are far beyond what this space.

[2:18:42] I know it's commercial space,

[2:18:44] but this is not the highest in best use of this commercial space.

[2:18:47] It's the worst use, and it's because of the noise,

[2:18:50] and that's something we're going to have to live with

[2:18:51] if this goes through for the rest of our lives.

[2:18:54] from seven o'clock in the morning until eight o'clock at night every day. Thank you very much.

[2:19:01] Next is Mike Emerson.

[2:19:23] Howdy, I'm Mike Emerson, 215 Taylor Avenue. We live right in the corner of Taylor,

[2:19:29] land there where there's an anti-degree corner there. It's just to echo what a lot of other people

[2:19:36] are saying about the traffic in the area. I will tell you right now that I'm not with FDOT or

[2:19:41] You know, I never ever go down land or to make a left end to a Loma in the morning or in the afternoon.

[2:19:49] It's just impossible. You're not going to get out there.

[2:19:52] One or two crazy people who want to do that, and they're going to hold up traffic for 10 or 15 minutes at that point.

[2:19:57] And it is actually easier to go down.

[2:19:59] Taylor, make a left on Lakemont and go to and make a left on to a Loma if you want to go left on the Loma.

[2:20:06] It's just ways you're to do that.

[2:20:08] There's going to be a bunch of people cutting through, guaranteed.

[2:20:11] There's no way they're going to, you know, this, this left turn only thing coming out of

[2:20:15] there.

[2:20:15] I am at Sprouts several times a week and every single time I go to Sprouts, there's somebody

[2:20:21] going up the wrong way.

[2:20:23] They've got a one-way parking lot on the side of Sprouts between Sprouts and Landr.

[2:20:28] And guaranteed, if you spend 15 minutes there, you're going to see someone going to

[2:20:31] the wrong way up there.

[2:20:32] There's two huge signs that they do not enter on both sides of that and people just ignore

[2:20:36] and go through there all the time anyway.

[2:20:39] So there's no way that they're going to listen to a no right turn sign there at that

[2:20:45] point.

[2:20:46] It's just not going to happen.

[2:20:47] But that's it.

[2:20:48] The traffic thing, traffic is already terrible there.

[2:20:53] I kind of like the idea of a car wash that the car washers are neat, you know, you get your

[2:20:56] car clean, get it done pretty quick and get back to it.

[2:21:00] But this is just terrible location for that traffic.

[2:21:03] There already needs to be a light there, light there, light has landed as it is.

[2:21:08] That's it.

[2:21:10] Thank you.

[2:21:11] Scott Patton.

[2:21:23] Your name's Scott Patton.

[2:21:25] 2 007 Byron Road.

[2:21:29] My family has lived on Byron for 62 years.

[2:21:33] Paying property taxes in winter part and enjoying the quality of life in winter part.

[2:21:40] What we have here is a conflict of two ideologies.

[2:21:50] The applicant has a profit motive.

[2:21:55] The city of Winner Park has a quality of life motive.

[2:21:59] And I would hope that the city of Winner Park would stick with that profit motive

[2:22:05] with that quality of life, motive, and protect the quality of your life for the citizens

[2:22:10] in one or part, and in our little neighborhood that I'm guessing these folks probably

[2:22:16] don't know the name of, it's East Gate, by the way.

[2:22:22] So thank you for having me, we're not supposed to repeat each other a lot, but you see a

[2:22:28] here.

[2:22:29] It's...

[2:22:30] Traffic congestion, period, and quality of life. And I hope that you side with the quality of life. Thank you.

[2:22:39] Thank you.

[2:22:40] Greg Ackerman.

[2:22:49] Good evening board members, Greg Ackerman, 1933, Taylor Avenue. I just want to echo a lot of what other people have said here.

[2:23:00] Traffic is a huge problem. I've lived in the neighborhood since 2003, so 23 years approximately.

[2:23:06] race, three kids. And over the years we've actually consulted with the State of Winter Park Police Department

[2:23:14] to try to minimize the already bad cut-through traffic that we have in the neighborhood. The police departments

[2:23:23] have done traffic studies. They've laid down strips on the road to monitor how many cars come through.

[2:23:29] They've done some speed, radar ring, and we believe it or not, we've got the results of those tests,

[2:23:36] and we've had people come to the neighborhood at 80 miles an hour, done on Taylor Avenue.

[2:23:42] It's only by the grace of God that no kid in our neighborhood has been killed by one of these vehicles

[2:23:49] coming through our neighborhood. And having a car wash here with 400 to 700, it's just going to be an

[2:23:56] absolute unmitigated disaster to have his car wash and that location. Frankly, the self-serve car wash that's bit that was there for a while.

[2:24:09] I don't know why it's there. I think that particular location should be re-zone to something else.

[2:24:15] The bank is much different than a car wash.

[2:24:18] And so I oppose this very much, and I think that some of the things that the car wash people

[2:24:26] have said, you all picked up on it, it doesn't make it's not right.

[2:24:31] The left hand turn, the fact that employees are going to use some of the parking spots that

[2:24:36] are there for customers, it's just, it's not believable.

[2:24:40] So I think that you should recommend that this be rejected, thank you very much.

[2:24:46] Thank you.

[2:24:49] That was the final speaker, Chairman.

[2:24:51] Okay, would the team care to make her a bubble?

[2:24:56] Again, for the record, McGregor loved.

[2:24:58] I will say that I'm sorry that I didn't hear from most of you at the community meeting.

[2:25:02] To Brett's point, the notice was sent out consistent with the city's requirements.

[2:25:08] That's not something that was intentional.

[2:25:11] We certainly would have genuinely would have liked to hear some of this feedback prior to being here tonight.

[2:25:17] That's what the process is for.

[2:25:18] and it would certainly guide our decision-making.

[2:25:23] So thank you for coming out and speaking tonight.

[2:25:27] Another thing that we were discussing internally

[2:25:29] while folks were getting up and discussing these concerns,

[2:25:33] this is a general statement, but to the city staff,

[2:25:37] we're absolutely open to making,

[2:25:40] I don't know whether the folks here feel

[2:25:42] that there are off-site improvements needed

[2:25:45] to the roadway networks in their area.

[2:25:48] of the gentleman mentioned, you know, the idea that a signal would be necessary, but we're

[2:25:55] open to making off-site improvements that the city feels would actually improve the situation

[2:26:00] on this property. And again, that is not because that's necessarily something that a traffic

[2:26:09] study would say you must do, but we've recognized the situation is real. I know that these folks

[2:26:16] start making up the traffic situation they're dealing with, and, you know, we're happy to address

[2:26:22] that if possible. So I don't know that that could be reduced any sort of condition,

[2:26:27] but it's on the record statement that we're willing to accommodate, you know, traffic

[2:26:33] improvements off-site. Thank you. Any questions for the applicant before we go to the

[2:26:43] Mister Quintana speak briefly. I'm sorry.

[2:26:48] Sorry about that. I just wanted to hit a couple of the topics that were brought up by

[2:26:53] The community which I appreciate you guys all coming out. It's

[2:26:56] important to be part of the community

[2:26:58] Elcar Wash tries to integrate into our communities. We are a just want to clarify. We are a four to own business

[2:27:04] Yes, we do operate down in South Florida, but as I mentioned we are

[2:27:09] Slowly becoming the number one operator here in central Florida and so

[2:27:14] most of our employees live anywhere from three to five miles from our sites.

[2:27:20] And yes, per shift we only have two to three employees, but you're thinking two shifts.

[2:27:25] Multiply that. That's four to six employees.

[2:27:27] But then also you're talking about all the further jobs that come down the line.

[2:27:32] Area new area managers, new regional managers, et cetera, et cetera.

[2:27:36] That grows the business. And you know, we promote internally.

[2:27:40] we believe in, you know, someone starting from the ground up and then working there where I have to

[2:27:45] corporate, we have numerous employees like that. The chemical runoff I know is a big question. Mr.

[2:27:52] Draper, with Kimway Horan, has designed our site to meet all city and state regulations that

[2:27:58] maintains all of our rainwater on our site. I'm headed to give a moment. We also design our

[2:28:03] with three 2000 gallon reclaim tanks that come out of the tunnel. They use a

[2:28:11] baffle and wear system so essentially they flow from one tank to another and at

[2:28:16] that given point when that reclaim water is reused one gallon is reused six

[2:28:22] different times at various points of the car wash. From there it goes through an oil

[2:28:27] sand separator where then it is put out into the city system. So every chemical that we

[2:28:33] use as biodegradable and that we can provide MSDS sheets from

[2:28:38] Sonny's who's also a four-to-one company that we work with and we get all our

[2:28:42] chemicals from. And then community

[2:28:52] meeting as we mentioned we were there. I was

[2:28:55] there present and attendance. I know that we sent out the notices,

[2:29:00] personity regulations and shows based on accommodation to meet the

[2:29:05] should do get to this meeting in time. And then also the blowers out coming out of the tunnel

[2:29:10] and that was a big concern. Our car wash, we tried to, we recognized that pain point at a lot

[2:29:17] of our sites and we developed what it is is a pressure plate system. So when your car gets to a

[2:29:22] certain point in the tunnel, then those blowers activate for a temporary time as you're going

[2:29:27] through that only that section. They're not running 247. So if a car is not in the tunnel or active

[2:29:33] in that point of the pressure plate, then those blows aren't doing. We also have the ability

[2:29:37] to, you know, turn them inwards, a lot of older car washes, point them just outwards

[2:29:45] because they want to blow the water out of there. We try to keep all of our water in the tunnel,

[2:29:49] so they kind of move with you, but they don't point outwards towards the building and then I know

[2:29:55] one other citizen had a concern about where the sounds coming from.

[2:30:00] I didn't clarify fully, but those backing producers, it's not a motor at each individual vacuum. I know it looks like it because we have our little trash cans there in the towel bins, but all the motors are being powered by that single producer. That's inside that concrete enclosure. So that's where the sound is coming from when you pull the nozzle off. That's why the sound is different at just that one. Just sounds like you're vacuum running at a given moment. But the main one is we keep that vacuum enclosure or the producers inside that vacuum enclosure.

[2:30:33] And that is mainly it.

[2:30:38] Okay.

[2:30:38] Can I ask one question?

[2:30:40] Did I hear you say that a single gallon of water is used six times in the same wash cycle?

[2:30:47] Yes, sir.

[2:30:47] So we use a combination of what we call reclaim water and fresh water.

[2:30:52] So at various points.

[2:30:53] So the initial soak of your car.

[2:30:56] I can provide all this data to you guys.

[2:30:57] So what we've done is every single piece of equipment.

[2:30:59] and we've deemed that it either uses fresh water

[2:31:02] or reclaim water, mainly we use the reclaim water

[2:31:06] for like the undercarriage spray.

[2:31:09] And so what it does is then it goes into that trench,

[2:31:12] which is then funneled back out.

[2:31:13] And we have also RO tanks inside the equipment room,

[2:31:17] which then pulls that water back in,

[2:31:19] is treated with a biodegradable chemical,

[2:31:21] and then used on this undercarriage spray.

[2:31:24] And then after it's reused all those different times,

[2:31:27] then it goes to the oil sand separator

[2:31:29] make sure that everything is fully out of it and then put into your

[2:31:32] rescue.

[2:31:32] Appreciate it.

[2:31:32] It has really nothing to do with the application.

[2:31:34] I was just curious whether every time I go through one of these car washers, I'm

[2:31:37] getting five gallons of dirty water versus one gallon of clean.

[2:31:40] No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

[2:31:42] You're getting anywhere from, I think that we've worked it down on a different project

[2:31:46] on an orange counting.

[2:31:47] I think we've worked it down to anywhere from 18 to 20 gallons of fresh water per

[2:31:51] car and then the rest is reclaim water.

[2:31:53] Thank you.

[2:31:54] Yes, sir.

[2:31:54] Mr. Chair, over here.

[2:31:57] I was hoping that applicant could clarify

[2:31:59] they had made a comment that they were willing

[2:32:01] to concede parking spaces for employees,

[2:32:04] but they did not specify the amount of parking spaces.

[2:32:07] It's not aware.

[2:32:08] I mean, I'd like that put on the record

[2:32:10] and I appreciate that.

[2:32:14] Specifically, you said specifically,

[2:32:16] I'd be willing to give up three

[2:32:18] because we keep three on any given moment,

[2:32:21] but we're open to discussions.

[2:32:22] Thanks.

[2:32:23] Good.

[2:32:24] So thank you for that.

[2:32:25] Three to five.

[2:32:27] Give her take.

[2:32:30] While I have the microphone, did anyone leave a pair of glasses up here?

[2:32:36] Thank you, Mr. Love.

[2:32:38] Okay.

[2:32:39] We'll go into closed session.

[2:32:41] Who wants to start?

[2:32:43] Left or right?

[2:32:48] I'd

[2:32:53] like to see a traffic study.

[2:32:56] I think that's a big issue here.

[2:32:58] I think everyone's commented on the traffic conditions that already exist, and if there's going to be 400 to

[2:33:07] 700 cars,

[2:33:09] using the facility per day, then where are those cars coming from and where are they going?

[2:33:19] I kind of have issues with a lot of things, so I guess the bottom line is it just feels like

[2:33:27] the wrong use in the wrong location to me.

[2:33:33] I could go through the tower height that bothers me.

[2:33:37] I appreciate the fact that you're willing to remove

[2:33:41] three of the vacuum stalls to create three parking spaces.

[2:33:50] It feels

[2:33:53] like there's a lot of issues with this project,

[2:33:56] and I think maybe the number one thing is probably the traffic.

[2:33:58] So I'd like to see a specific location traffic study on this particular location.

[2:34:07] Mr. Seagull?

[2:34:10] This is a good example of why we have public hearings because we were briefed on it.

[2:34:18] You know, you hear the staff.

[2:34:20] point of view, you look at it, but then you have neighbors that come out and point out

[2:34:25] a lot of things that maybe didn't meet the eye, and this is an example to me of cumulative

[2:34:34] impacts. You just, you know, it checks a lot of boxes, but, you know, it just gets there

[2:34:39] and maybe meets the test, but maybe doesn't barely meet it, but, you know, when you have

[2:34:46] So many issues, and then I look at East Gate and, you know, it's a sweet little community.

[2:34:54] And it has been the victim of a lot of cut-through traffic over time, and this is a conditional

[2:35:04] use, not a by-right.

[2:35:08] So I'm leaning towards not supporting it.

[2:35:15] Mr. Vice Chair, it's your last meeting, so I'm going to give you the last word on the last application, so let me move on.

[2:35:23] I'm sorry.

[2:35:24] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[2:35:28] You know, I think they're trying, but it's just not compatible for the location.

[2:35:33] I don't think that the uniqueness of this location by virtue of the fact that it backs up to the neighborhood

[2:35:41] and has cut through issues and none of that was addressed in determining whether or not this would be

[2:35:47] compatible for the location and a lot of their other locations, not one of the other locations

[2:35:52] in Florida has the same issue that this one does. So why should they be special? I just

[2:35:58] don't see it. I think it's not compatible for several reasons and I think that's the main

[2:36:04] one. So I would not recommend it. Mr. Dick?

[2:36:09] Yeah, as minimum I was, you know, thinking that we needed to table this first, you know, additional information, you know, certain issues come up, pink, well, you know, have any architectural guidelines and winter parks, so, you know, you can't really judge, you know, a development by its color,

[2:36:33] you know, my initial concerns were, you know, basically the, the imposing, you know, tower,

[2:36:39] When you have a 20-foot basic building, you can still put some signage on that that would

[2:36:48] kind of mark the territory that is there so that possibly could have been dealt with.

[2:37:01] Yeah, it just comes down to you have a conditional use that allows car washes.

[2:37:11] But that doesn't guarantee a car wash so you know, I'm hoping that the applicant didn't get too much of a

[2:37:23] You know, not from staff that this would

[2:37:26] You know, be acceptable certainly probably check the

[2:37:30] On the boxes, I was a little distressed that it was a local traffic study. I was also distressed that there was no noise studied done, notwithstanding the fact that it wasn't required.

[2:37:47] I think anybody would have to realize that this was going to be a sensitive application and a sensitive location, so that should have been forthcoming.

[2:37:57] So I would have been willing to do a table and have all these other things come back positive

[2:38:03] and fix, but I think, you know, from hearing the neighborhood, I think it's pretty

[2:38:09] conclusive to me that this is not the right project for this particular site.

[2:38:15] I'm going to give my vice chairman the last word.

[2:38:19] I echo Mr. Seagull's comments that this is, you know, a textbook example of why it's

[2:38:25] to have a public meeting, at our work session, I think some of us had a few concerns about it.

[2:38:32] We talked about a few things, but I think my concerns were heightened by hearing more

[2:38:38] about it tonight and by hearing some of the public comment. This is commercial property.

[2:38:47] There is going to be some commercial development of this property, but it's a conditionally

[2:38:51] use request and we're allowed to recommend approval or denial of it based on what we see

[2:38:59] fit.

[2:39:00] And I understand that having the tower and having the brand and hot pink is part of your

[2:39:05] brand.

[2:39:06] And the reason you want that big tower with that hot pink signage is to get as much attention

[2:39:11] as possible.

[2:39:12] But I don't think it fits within the scale and charm of what the city of Winter Park is looking

[2:39:18] for there.

[2:39:19] is a new auto zone that's going in where the old Denny's was, right?

[2:39:26] Right next to Interstate 4, doesn't back up to a residential property, and we forced them

[2:39:31] to change the look of that property, so it fit more within the type of architecture

[2:39:37] that we like here in the city of Wooder Park.

[2:39:39] I mean, I just don't think this fits in with what the city's idea of what redevelopment

[2:39:47] some of these parcels looks like. I think you found a unique parcel or two sets of parcels

[2:39:55] that were pretty deep. You maximized what you could put on that to the exclusion of having

[2:40:01] any dedicated parking. I understand you're conceding that now. But if you had cut this back

[2:40:07] to a much smaller, more normal sized tunnel, or maybe you couldn't fit as many cars throughout

[2:40:12] same time, you could have created a greater buffer with the residents to the back, but I pulled

[2:40:20] up an area of this and I didn't realize to lies zoomed in that like immediately to the

[2:40:25] north there was a house and you couldn't tell on the original area I saw because the roof

[2:40:29] is dark, but you're right up next to homes in this neighborhood. I share a lot of the concerns

[2:40:37] about traffic, I think making it right in, left out only is going to be a name only.

[2:40:43] People are going to drive over that curb and cut through the neighborhood.

[2:40:48] I don't know if there's anything the applicant can do about that, but it's a concern of mine.

[2:40:52] But more for me, and it's not that it's car wash, it's that I just don't think it fits

[2:40:58] within the scale and charm of what the city is trying to do with its redevelopment

[2:41:01] for that reason.

[2:41:02] I would vote against it.

[2:41:03] Mr. Vice Chairman,

[2:41:07] if I could for a second briefly, Mr. Chairman, if I could interrupt before.

[2:41:12] Hang on one second, let me give you the Vice Chair's.

[2:41:16] My last, maybe my last words.

[2:41:20] I always try to come in here with an open mind.

[2:41:26] And I'm always willing to change my mind based on new testimony and what I hear at meetings.

[2:41:37] I came in honestly, sort of liking the idea of a car wash two minutes from our house,

[2:41:45] where my wife could use, and she loves the semi self-service car washes, so the convenience

[2:41:53] of that and the fact that it was going to be a new facility taking the place of what right

[2:41:59] now is an empty bank and a really derelict old car wash seemed like an improvement to me.

[2:42:07] That being said,

[2:42:11] the residents, tonight were pretty damning.

[2:42:18] And I, you know, listening to the impact to everybody behind the car wash had an impact on me.

[2:42:30] So,

[2:42:34] I mean, I would strongly recommend to you all that you table this or type pull it off the table before you go to City Commission.

[2:42:42] You know how the vote's going to go from planning and zoning tonight.

[2:42:45] I think that's pretty evident.

[2:42:49] I do hope that this property gets developed in an appropriate way at a certain point.

[2:42:55] And move forward from there, my goal and my six years on planning and zoning has always

[2:43:02] been to try to look out for the greater good of the city of Winter Park, not the single

[2:43:07] resident, not necessarily even the single neighborhood, but what will make the city a better

[2:43:15] place to live.

[2:43:17] And right now for better or for worse, what we are hearing is that this car wash, a car wash,

[2:43:23] not this car wash because you guys are not the enemy. You are not, you are not doing a bad

[2:43:29] thing by looking at a business model here. But this does not seem to me to be something that

[2:43:38] will promote the greater good of the city of Winter Park. Thank you. Thank you. And Mr. Borenstein

[2:43:47] your comments dot tell nicely into what I was going to say, which is it just in the

[2:43:52] as the same for you, it was the first time that you've heard a lot of these objections.

[2:43:56] It's really the first time we've heard them as well, unfortunately, and that I know that

[2:44:01] there are residents here tonight that were outside the buffer area.

[2:44:06] There was one resident here tonight that was at the community meeting, but it really wasn't

[2:44:10] until we saw the online petition that we even knew that there was a really a sustained and

[2:44:17] and sizable concern about the project and it wasn't until tonight that we heard those

[2:44:23] concerns and like you that has an impact on on how we think about this project and what

[2:44:29] might need to be done to potentially make it compatible with the neighborhood.

[2:44:35] We would ask for a continuing to table in the results of that maybe that the team concludes

[2:44:42] that it can't be made to address these concerns or that we don't move forward with it,

[2:44:48] but it provides us with an opportunity to digest what we've heard tonight, and see if we can address

[2:44:54] those concerns and revise.

[2:44:56] I appreciate that.

[2:44:58] Dan, is it-

[2:45:00] Within my authority's chair to just, I mean, we've been through a lot tonight. We've heard from a lot of the members of the general public who came and spoke on the issue, I think you're entitled to an upper down vote, and I would say no to a tabling of it. Can I make that decision, you know, laterally, you're doing need to have a vote at the board?

[2:45:20] It's the vote of the board.

[2:45:22] The applicant's not entitled to a table,

[2:45:25] and it's up to the board by vote.

[2:45:28] Okay. Thank you, Mr.

[2:45:29] Mr. Wood?

[2:45:30] I mean, they could pull it from the agenda for city commission

[2:45:33] prior to the meeting. Could they not?

[2:45:35] They could do all the application, right?

[2:45:37] They could withdraw the application before you vote.

[2:45:39] If you start voting, they cannot.

[2:45:42] But they could withdraw it right now.

[2:45:45] They could withdraw it right now, before they start voting.

[2:45:48] But then if they would draw, they have to start over.

[2:45:52] The question, I'm sorry, was the question whether they can ask the commission the table?

[2:46:01] Yeah.

[2:46:02] This can go forward with a recommendation for denial.

[2:46:06] Right.

[2:46:09] Once it gets to the commission, if they ask the commission the table, they could table.

[2:46:13] That's up the commission.

[2:46:14] That's true.

[2:46:14] Right. My opinion, though, is that these residents deserve an upper-down vote by this board,

[2:46:21] tonight, what the applicant does with its application after that is up to the applicant, of course.

[2:46:27] Okay, so there is a request by the applicant to table the application.

[2:46:34] Is anybody on the board want to do that?

[2:46:37] So please make a motion and we'll see if there's a second.

[2:46:41] If they withdraw their application prior to a vote, what does that do to their timetable?

[2:46:47] It's a sort of process all over.

[2:46:48] Because they start the process all over.

[2:46:50] Another community meeting, another advertising, another application fee.

[2:46:58] The facts over Maine.

[2:47:00] Would you like me to answer kind of what we might do?

[2:47:02] Because this is a recommending body.

[2:47:04] We wouldn't really wouldn't be any benefit to us with drawing it right now.

[2:47:10] But we could always do that before City Commission, but what we've asked for is a tabling so that we can actually come back before you because you've done some of the brain damage to understand the issues here, and we'd like to present you with a revised plan, and I think you'd all remember, and we'd be able to show our progress and you could judge it just like you judged the first application today that came back to you.

[2:47:41] Thank you, Mr. Love.

[2:47:44] If anybody wants to make a motion to table, I'll entertain it.

[2:47:53] Is there a motion to, with respect to the application itself?

[2:47:58] I'm not hearing a motion to table.

[2:48:07] You want to make the final motion, Mr. Bordstein?

[2:48:11] Let's go through two ways.

[2:48:13] I'll make a motion to table, which we can vote.

[2:48:17] Is there a second on the motion to table?

[2:48:20] And if there's no second, then it dies there.

[2:48:25] I will recommend that we recommend the city council, then I hope.

[2:48:30] That's okay.

[2:48:31] So I didn't hear a second of the motion to table, so the motion fails for like a second.

[2:48:36] I'll make a motion to the nine.

[2:48:40] Billy, would you like to second it?

[2:48:41] Is this the application?

[2:48:43] Yes.

[2:48:44] I'll take it.

[2:48:45] And then just for the record, the recommendation to the analysis based on the comments

[2:48:50] from the board collectively, since the motion that are articulated, but we do get a lot

[2:48:55] of comments from the board.

[2:48:56] Is that the intent of the motion to essentially wrap up all the members' comments on

[2:49:02] the record with respect to the board?

[2:49:03] Is the need like some specific reason?

[2:49:07] It's helpful for the staff to communicate to the commission why you're making that recommendation.

[2:49:14] My opinion is that above all, it was traffic, seems to be in the surrounded bulk to the surrounding neighborhoods, that's my opinion.

[2:49:23] So, let me do this.

[2:49:25] Will you withdraw?

[2:49:28] I have in the past refrain from making motions myself.

[2:49:33] In this situation, I think what I would like to do is go back to sort of what we used to do on the Board of Adjustments,

[2:49:41] which is recommend approval so that no votes are very clear on what they mean when the city

[2:49:49] commission hears it. Does that make sense? So if people, if I vote to approve and everybody

[2:49:54] votes know, then there are six no votes in the city commission hears, it got six no votes.

[2:50:00] Whereas if we vote to deny, and there are six yes votes, it's still denied, but I make a motion

[2:50:09] to approve. May I interject, I'm sure. My concern is that, okay, so if you move to approve,

[2:50:18] and that's denied, there isn't a decision at that point. You still have, there has to be a decision

[2:50:25] because a motion to approve that's denied does not actually deny that. Oh, it's not making a

[2:50:30] recommendation, okay. That's different. That's just different. That's the difference between

[2:50:34] Yeah, are boarders for it, yes, you're right.

[2:50:37] Thank you for that, Mr. Langley.

[2:50:39] Okay, so we are sticking with the motion for tonight.

[2:50:43] For the reasons for the stated in closed session by the members of the board.

[2:50:51] Is there second?

[2:50:52] Okay.

[2:50:54] The motion is second. Can I have a roll call vote, please?

[2:50:56] Yes, Mr. Dick.

[2:50:59] Mr. Steinberg.

[2:51:00] Hi.

[2:51:01] Mr. Seigle.

[2:51:02] Yes.

[2:51:02] Mr. Seigle.

[2:51:03] Yes.

[2:51:04] Vice Chair Boycein?

[2:51:05] Yes.

[2:51:06] Chairman Johnson.

[2:51:07] Aye.

[2:51:09] Thank you.

[2:51:11] Do we have any action items?

[2:51:19] Do we have any other items on the agenda?

[2:51:22] No, just the last split that was on your agenda,

[2:51:25] that was withdrawn by the app.

[2:51:27] And then to the plan moving forward with that

[2:51:29] is to have a work session in June to talk about it.

[2:51:31] And thank God for my ability to have dinner tonight

[2:51:33] that it was what you wanted.

[2:51:35] Right, I know.

[2:51:36] Almost eight o'clock.

[2:51:38] Let me take the opportunity under board comments to thank Vice Chairman Bornstein for his six years of service to this board and for a number of those years as chairman of this board.

[2:51:50] I just sincerely appreciate your work and dedication.

[2:51:54] We certainly invite you to the work session later this month.

[2:51:57] Thank you very much.

[2:51:59] Hopefully there will be somebody else that can.

[2:52:01] Will we hope to see you in the future?

[2:52:03] I'll second that one.

[2:52:07] Okay, we return.

[2:52:08] Yeah.

[2:52:08] Thank you.

Planning & Zoning Board Regular Meeting

Agenda

Transcript