Planning Board/Local Planning Agency Regular Meeting

States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. roll. Call, please. Yes. >> Mister Newhouse, you're Mister Leo here, Mister Clermont there. Mister Christie here, Mister much here. Are there any requests to or any any changes here in the day? No one item. Okay. We have the last one 0st. Yes, I'm for First last. All right. So no approved by consensus, a pledge of conduct. We may disagree, but we will be respectful to one another. We will direct all comments issues. We will not engage in personal attacks. >> Set time limits for that petitions committee. You never mind around this place. >> this. the city I'm in this for person numbers in the good with that. Yes, okay. All Anybody who's willing take 3 a? >> Could you Anyone speaking before the board today? Please rise and raise your right hand. >> Do you swear or affirm that the testimony evidence or factual representations you're about to give. We're presenting the play board during this hearing held this 40 day of January. 6 All right. Now I'd like to give a summary, a quasi judicial percent procedures as the item before you because usually matter. A quasi judicial hearing is a slightly more formal hearing. The legislative public hearing. There are parties usually hearing the parties include the applicant city and anyone who has applied for it qualifies for affect a person's status or the criteria of the city's own good a proper evidence. Testimony, expert testimony and documentary evidence parties have the opportunity to cross examine opposing parties into presented closing rebuttal argument. The decision of the planning board in a quasi judicial hearing must be based on the competent, substantial evidence in the record and the board must apply the appropriate standards of review in the zoning code relating to that type of approval request. It. At the beginning of the public hearing, the board members will indicate if they had any ex parte communications on the better that is contact with any parties outside of the public hearing today. I will now ask the board members. Each of had any ex parte communications on this matter. Starting with board member Christi. >> No, not I have not. No expert to contact. My answer is no. But I also spoke to staff so my usual. Thank you. All right. There. Any request for affected person sent us? They're not that I'm aware of. All right. That brings us to the question. Did issue public hearing. So it'll open the public hearing. And can we have the applicant to come on to A staffer says a staff member. No, it's Please introduce yourself for the record. money was Jackson, manager moment who represent the applicant. And shipments? >> So as we talked about before this, the Morehouse Storage. So he. Located at 10, a 7 or Orange Avenue, Sarasota, Florida, before to the 6 essentially we're The development acres. Open space storage area, parking garage. Peoples. So so we have access Orange Avenue here. 2 buildings. For storage. know the individual cars storage and a second building here as well. Loading and those that trash pickup This location here. Does the board have any questions for me at this Mister Christie just arced. I didn't could have reviewed the prior site plan. Understood the summary of the site plan changes, but what precipitated the site plan changes in this case. The yeah, I more building changes that cause some major modifications to the site plan. Okay. We were going to I think General store, which is storage facilities and now they want to go to more of luxury car storage. Okay. So it's not going to be subdivided is not going to be calm. Know it's going to be a single site ultimately. >> Correct. Okay. And then just one other thing. I noticed a slightly larger building size and the traffic. Currency. And also as I think it was 17. First and find it 17,000 roughly square feet. Now the application reflect 6 team. For 77. Was the discrepancy or change there? I'm sure it doesn't actually affect the. Or He is not. The issue is not going to take the I'm not sure it was >> I take you change from a building expansion, OK? Yeah, I'm looking at your letter. Dated May 9 that says roughly 17,001 square feet parking, etcetera. So just okay. >> All right. No further questions. House. And the question. Thank you. Okay. Mister no questions. Thank you, Mister Clement. I just want to clarify the staff mentions that there are a total of 53 on the subject. Property. 53 are proposed to be removed. But when I look at the response, maybe it was you and the proposed site has no trees. president to comply with the above mentioned conditions refer to the landscaping I just. One of the square that that might there might be more of a push for that. The city. As in your comments, 7? Yeah, I'm not sure which. Comments trying to keep a lid but clarify that. Yeah. This. This came from Bowman. Its Well, you know what? The questioner with the standard is whether the proposed development site layout his reserve, the natural features and not on is the proposed site has no trees. Natural features president and so complies with the above-mentioned conditions referred to landscape plan. And so I. You understand their trees to be Medicaid because the city is saying that it does. to clarify with that, OK, we met with the city site. Actually, I did it. But a clue as to you are. trying to see assisting Lee is mostly the same as mostly clear that ready this So maybe it is the scripts may have been on those. There's There's might have been before it was cleared in years it was Yeah. Okay. mitigation. That is to take place is based on prior before those were cleared. That's my understanding is just more. Maya, just. I'm sure you understood the retreat center. One time that that just was for me to read through that and see that such a discrepancy, OK, that's all I had. I just want to make sure that we're getting triesman the makeup of the trees that were there and remove. And that is correct. That's correct. So here you can see the size. landscaping plan kind of self evident, but that just I is that the demo plant conditions. So as you can see, most majority of the trees on the South side. just to clarify. ? we kind of went out there and same deal there by what's out there and and with trees that the city had issues with us having to try save in You know. Keep us there in the separation from the Or that's what I have Thank you. What's finish for elevation of the building? Yes, the like I could tell you, 21. Kind of Snow says as Thank you should be just I think that's all we Great. Thank you. Good any other And that gets us to a city staff. >> Hi, good afternoon. So for the record, I'm Deven glands. Development review planner. So a little bit about this property of the subject. Property is 1.0, 3, 3, 10 87 North Orange Avenue and is zoned industrial district of been mixed use. Future land use. So the applicant is requesting a major vision to improve site plan to construct 2 storage buildings totaling 16,477 square feet with an additional office, which is approximately 520 force square feet located in building one. So that's the 17,001 square feet total. So the plans include a revised parking and loading areas and a new sidewalk connection and a vehicular access is proposed from North Orange Avenue. So parking meets the minimum could requirements with 13 spaces traffic concurrency was deemed to in a mess. So a traffic study wasn't required. The proposed exceed the minimum setback requirements and are 16.3 feet on the North. 40.8 feet on the South. 16 feel the west and 21.6 feet on the east the 53 trees that were there. 11 were proposed to be removed and only one cabbage, Palm requires mitigation. So. The site plan proposes. 26 can be trees. 10 understory trees in 10 palm trees which exceeds the mitigation requirements and that there are no grand tree is located on the subject. Property. All other landscaping buffer requirements have been the project received full DRC sign off on December 18th 2025. the application has. Been found to meet all applicable standards of the zoning code. So we are recommending approval with the conditions that are in the staff report. So I can answer any questions. Questions, Mister. >> Just a couple of comments first, this thank you very much for following up with We had a discussion about the septic system there. He's probably going to. John. He's the memories. 3 of our current board members. I was particularly just just feedback. I'm I was particularly interested. And the recording of that meeting at which Mister discovering how the DRC had made the decision to permit this, which, of course, was my question to you, independent, even knowing. So I guess what I'm really trying to say is. In terms of process, we haven't gone that far in 2 years. I know you're, you know, I knew right? Which is why somewhat meek about asking about a septic system in a part of the city that unfortunately has no utilities, but into which we're going to put a 1050 gallon septic tank Hart up against North Orange Avenue. In a flood zone. Right? I mean, there are other areas on this on property where it could be placed great cost. John, just echoing what what the city not you in particular this not you've been very helpful, just echoing what DiLeo said in November of 2023, which is how did we get to that? Where is the? Where is the description or the data that's provided? let's the planning board make a good decision about that particular use. So I just want to say that I'm not it's not a problem. I get it. is. You watch the meeting? I did to write it. It's exactly what we were talking about the other day. So I don't know how we preserve institutional memory and making come forward. we have kind of the same question about at least in my mind at the end of this. I have the same question in my mind how we got to proving that tank. Mister had in November of 2023 and no data answer them more now. >> back in November, the first time we approved and I did vote for this project. I thought it was a good project. The only wish that I had was the the septic tank, which case it seemed to me to be. A and short-sighted to put a septic tank in that location. And the problem is, as I understand it, the the problem is been made much more significant by the proposed changes here. What I mean by that. The septic tank, I believe is significantly larger needs to be larger because as I understand it, there's a the intensity of the uses changed a little bit. Anybody who knows anything about these car condos and how they're used. And most people probably don't know because they've never been to one. But there becoming increasingly more popular in communities like ours, particularly where you have a, you know, a segment of wealthy people who have more than one car there. So there's a sort of side recreation where people have these car condos and they're sort of like little clubhouses where they socialize and do things. And so there's an intensity of use. Where you could have multiple people for extended periods of time utilizing these car condos and have significant flow and use it so. You know, too, to put a septic tank here in the beginning. It's too bad in my opinion. You know, to to intensify the use and then have a septic tank here. Just doesn't make any sense. And, you know, it was it was some time ago what I recall is that I really didn't get a satisfactory reason why you couldn't connect it upticks other than cost. But nobody could tell me what the actual cost to hook up would be. So if the city or somebody else can address those issues certainly would make me feel better. Give us information that would address those kinds of things. >> I expand the a little bit. So I'm I'm trying to go back to the original approval from 23 to compare the size that you mentioned. But I do recall talking to the city attorney of the time, Mister Connelly. And I believe there's regulations in state statute that if you're more than 500 feet from the sewer line that we are not required to make them that we cannot require them to connect a sewer. They're entitled to septic. And then the septic system is not actually reviewed by the city interviewed by the county in the state. Right? if the if what you're telling me is and this is not something that we're told that the last meeting. On the prior approval. If you're telling me now, if you're representing to me that you had a conversation with prior counsel and we don't have the ability to regulate sept again anyway and can consider it as a factor in an approval or denial. And there's nothing we can do in our hands are tied and that's fine for today's purposes. But, you know, one of the roles that we serve here is flag issues for the public. We're you know, we're public servants. That's one of our jobs. And if we're doing something on a regular basis, that doesn't make any sense. Then maybe we ought to talk about that at some future time. >> And that can be something we under the topics by planning board members. But I do don't want to I don't want to represent that. We're doing this all the time. I think when we did that research back in 2023, when this came up before I believe there's maybe 16. Total septic tanks in the city. So it's not significant or not creating new ones all the time and you would see them when they call the reason that same issue. Yes, it's a yeah. It's when they are. We can't require them to connect because distance to existing sewer lines. you know, that let me ask this. Whose responsibility is it at the city? >> To look at our future development where it's occurring and lines are because we, you know, it has to be somebody job to monitor those things. >> Utilities is member of the DRC said they would look at that in relation to the new projects coming in and where existing lines are when they need to be expanded. When we can require development to expand it. And when we can. So utilities has that responsibility. Yes, okay. >> Can can somebody from at some point provide us with a map of where the utilities so that we as people who are charged with looking at future development, have an understanding of the adequacy of our utilities. It seems to me that something that we ought to know about. Sure we can provide that. Thank That will miss Take Is that your Yeah. That's what think is going. And I don't think we have an expert on this here. But in regard to the septic tanks and how resistant to either flooding and so on. I think that's a concern. >> But state and Federal has responsibility for approving them. I some have. >> With this with this particular one. So I think the more thorough review is done during building in the severe for their building permit. They'll provide all that you technical data and all of that will be Septic and engineer. I'm a okay. So we would have approval of this point. >> I'm sorry. Let me a question about that. This is the building permit process I'm sorry. Just at that point with a building permit process include the leaching field and the per tests and all of that stuff. Have to do with the actual operation because the tank holds a slight edge. But then you have to park out the right? So, yeah, I don't want to. I'm sorry. Mister thank you. I don't want to miss guy because I did not the person that does the review. So I don't want to say what's included in that. And what's not all I know is that our utilities department, the city employees do not review that. It's reviewed by the >> county in the state when these that they're building permit. Thank you. so just from. >> The little experience I have doing this on the other the county will review again building permit and they were going to prove the best So a engine ear. There's a lot of rules or regulations regarding the field distances from buildings, things like that even more so in flood zones and then it will be inspected on by the county as well. But it would be helpful in There was a lot of discussion about this 2 years ago. You remember and it would be helpful to have a little bit of education on. I'm sure there's. It was from the city's perspective, there's there's you know, but the cost benefit analysis. And I'm sure there's on one hand just probably been a lot of. Technological that probably come a long >> I understand it's not as a business. It's not preferred to the city hook-up, but I do wonder for the cost of what it would take to cut 16 people in city sewer. >> What is the real, you know, harm? might be guy could comment sure. Yeah. That's and it's always a cost benefit analysis. And obviously you're looking for the reasonable ways >> it's just that, you know, people may not understand that what we as a community are trying to do and have been trying to do for literally decades is reduce the number of septic tanks right in the county because that has an effect. And there is a scientific relationship between septic Leach into the bay and and algae blooms. And so, you I think we have a responsibility to be aware of these issues. It because they're not insignificant. And so, you know, at a minimum, our obligation is to ask questions even it doesn't cause us to have to affect the decision we're making today. It's still our obligation to address these issues. I believe certain. Sorry, that was your, you know, the more questions have. No questions I don't have any questions myself. So I suppose Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank And >> go to the. Citizens which there are not. Dennis okay. And on the that could affect a person's. There are none. So we'll come back to city staff. assume you All right. And that brings us back to the applicant. Would you like to come back up? Yeah. Yeah. just to clarify. >> Based on septic, I think will pose an system which is elevated above the Senate floor. I mean, above the FEMA flood zone. And in those chambers, a self that read the septic system has been, you know, foot above the lows play libation based on the ground. So we'll be talking to those considerations. And I was I. Just one note that for the record and I believe this is a prime it that's active. In the county health department for the septic system already. And I we have 2 more years on to expire. And the questions. Yes, if I could follow up on that, sir. Thank you. Thank you for coming back. >> So I took a look at the FEMA from it. They call it for this area and it's in a flood zone where you show it at 19.2 feet and on C 4, 0, of your plan held trouble reading the lines because I'm not good at this. You share that has can you speak a little Mike, thank you on on the plans on C 4, 0. You show the tank Well, right there, too. You know, tanks somewhere between live something Mark 20.0, 5, 8 21.0 9. that says. I correct in understanding that you're about a foot, maybe a little more above. The flood elevation. That's that's what you maintain STA required. I call it but for current and I'm not an engineer or anything approaching it. I thank you. If you look at the 5.1. This shows kind elevation, 9.2, which is a little behind in which >> And this shows the bottom of the system, system. And 2020. I'm sorry where you point it, sir. look 25 That's kind of a blow. You. Just to give you idea where the for this great is saying 2 feet above. I was if you look over to the left in the I didn't understand what allegation. 16.9 5. >> That's the clean out the top of the tank. >> Yes, the clean up before you get into this is the subject thing. Thank you for answering my questions. do it. No questions. Thank you. Can Questions. But so what that will close the public hearing. Done well, play for that There will be assistance we're going out to motions. Any discussion there. I will move that we adopt to find that site plan application. 25 that's SP deaths there. 40's consistent with the Tree Protection ordinance. >> It's the political criteria of section. Remember 4 dash 506, and section room. 4 dash 203, zoning code. Interpret site plan subject to the following conditions which are wanted to as an integrated are. All >> OK, Mister Newhouse. Yes, Mister Ditullio. >> Yes, I want since we didn't have a the moment in there to to discuss anything. want to say for purposes of the record that the issues associated with the septic sufficient for me to be able to deny this. And I I don't think there's a rationale to do so here. It's a good project. but that does concern me and I don't think we should be dismissing those issues. I think it's something that we have have to deal with in some way. Thank Mister Clinton. Yes, Mister Christie. Yes, I do like motion. Mister Ma. Yes. Motion passes 5, 0, Thank you. Board. And thank you. Thank you. forward to citizen input now, there will be not. All >> Meeting minutes, we have a consensus from the members to approve the pay meeting. Minutes. Yes, this okay. Not because this presentations by staff. >> Yes, I do have staff here from that wants to come Give you a little bit of an update on some things that are coming before you in the future. Doping time. >> All right. Good for the records cover planning director here at the City of Sarasota. We didn't want to give you a heads up of the significant initiative that will be coming before you and the series of meetings. And that is the. The updating of our comprehensive plan or the The city plan the last time that was updated was in 2008. And it really deals with a whole series of chapters. Some of these chapters have been such as when we had the density bonus program is part of are attainable housing program. We didn't update to the comprehensive plan with that as well as the transfer development to protect historic buildings. And that was another one. That wasn't another update that that we did with the comprehensive Some of the chapters do need to be to reflect the current conditions policies and also some of the changes that have been made at the state. The estates of valuation, appraiser report, which is called the E a R where the year process direct local jurisdictions to update the chapters of their plans and reflecting changes that have taken place at the state level. Our particular comprehensive plan update is due in December of 2029. So we do have time. But we do want to get rolling on and we're not going to be bringing all the chapters to you. And once we're going to present them a little so we can concentrate more on the details of each of those chapters. The chapters in Twenty-twenty 6 settle. That will be coming up for you here in 2026. is the transportation chapter, which is well under way and also an update in the future Land use chapter as it relates to population projections, something else. But just the population projections and those changes but also supporting documents along with those 2 chapters. And so those actually are projected to come before you in March. There are other chapters that will be looked at as well this year that see historic preservation chapter government coordination and recreation and open space chapters next year, 2027. We will bring forward the other chapters utilities, Housing, Environmental Protection Coast on the one's public school facilities, capital improvements and neighborhood chapter. also most likely be bringing the future land use chapter back again in 2027, which that we have to wait and see what changes are proposed incorporated in the downtown. A master plan update, which be kicking off this year. The plan the planning components are adopted by ordinance. The sort support documents or not, they're just really there to provide the information in the background for what's in the comprehensive plan. Population projections we have right we're done last year and there 2045. But with this update to the comprehensive plan, we have to do new projections and Project 10 to the year 2055. and each as it comes forward before you will need to reflect the 2055 timeline up to 2045 tumbling. As Ed mentioned will be coming back to you in March with the transportation chapter in sport argument. Support document the future land use a support document. And then as we move forward with each of these changes, we will be reaching out to the to the appropriate of I read boards. We'll have public open houses, public input throughout this process. The eventually they will come before the planning board. You will. You know, hopefully, you know, adopt what's what's being presented and then agreed to 42 the state thus we have to for each of these changes to the state for their review. And that takes and depending on their timeline, anywhere between 30 and 90 days and then they want come back and then the if there are no major changes, those will go before the city Commission for final vote. If the state does make significant changes, we would actually come back to you again, a review review those changes through that process. And so really, that's that's about it that we just want to give you a heads up as to what's coming in terms of the company's plans going busy be a busy couple years, but changes that need to yes. Thank you for the presentation. obviously the the comp plan and the city plan are 2 very significant documents. >> That is significant because so often they're tied to the standard that we're using to evaluate whatever projects in front of us right? That's correct. Action. you say that this the standards are due to be revised by statute by December of 29. Is that right? And that's when we need to complete this in this effort. Yes, okay. So that's 4 years from now. Right? We'll a little lesson. How many chapters that? >> What's what's that Hill is it is it. chapters we have? Yes, it's roughly around tension. So you're proposing to do 5 of them are half of the chapters this year. Well, we're going to be doing a search preservation. German court nation recreation, open space. Those 3 chapters, transportation, and then a future land use just as it relates to the population changes and it actually will be coming back in 2027 when that downtown master plan, I-5 Z 5 chapters. Yeah. Okay or not. 4 and a Okay. But you're going to dress 5 chapters. Yes. Okay. Why use such a hurry? You know, because the if the issue is, you know, revising these really important documents, it seems to me if you have 4 years to do it, you're trying to do half of it in one year. Why in such a hurry? Don't think we are in But it's just something that we're ready to move forward with. >> You never know what might come back from the state. You never know what state state legislature does in terms of changing the rules. And so we would just like to get this moving forward and and when I could be Russia will take your time on this and make sure it's done right. Terrific. Thank you. Got Yes. Thank you, Mister cover for being here boys that fortuitous because I want to ask you a question about the project that we voted on. >> And in my mind, I have a a this on call it an NFL. You hanging Chad. So issue here is that the so on that? The zone that we just approved, the project that we just approved is in a zone that's not in implementing zone. Of its future land use. I realize things aren't perfect. never going to be completely contestant. I like consistency. So tell me a little bit about what you think you can do to make the revisions to the future land use chapters. Drive more consistency, right? I we talked I talked about this with staff and there's really nothing they can do. To for someone to apply for a rezone to an implementing zone district. But I'm in my mind just looking at the code as it is the description of this zone and the future land use as a pretty mixed use are completely incompatible with each other. And so my question is really how do we as we revised the plan and in the process that you've outlined over the next few years, how do we? Encourage more consistency to the extent possible. He you know, keep in mind the comprehensive plan. It's a it's a den, a fine and designating land uses not zoning uses. And so that really acts as a guide. >> 4 the direction the city wants to go in for every throughout the city, for you we had when we created the new urban mix use zoning categories. We also have an urban mix use land uses, which were adopted a fairly recently. The comprehensive plan acts as a guide. And then the zoning as it comes the life of the zoning to be consistent with the land use plan and most of the time it if there's sometimes you have multiple options for for individual pieces of property to be consistent with that comprehensive plan. Sometimes just one option yeah. And that's OK, You know, there's only one option to rezone something to that's consistent with the future land use. that's fine. That if that's essentially what we want to see. So I can't really can't speak specifically for And I know that think you for that answer really trying to ask you. Let me be a little less for bucks. What can the city planning process do with future land? Use map it. >> To encourage. Applicants fundamentally to rezone when they're in the nonconforming district. Anything at all? Is that is that impossible? And we certainly can't force them to do it. I understand that. But it's stick is not what I'm after parents. Yeah. >> I mean, if you have a nonconforming use that's been there a long time that they have the right to maintain and operate that he is eventually over time. If the property is sold and someone wants to propose something brand new for that site. Then in the 8th inning, one reason that, yes, you know, that we look at the comprehensive plan. But that's not I get it doesn't look good for me. Use continue the First. And that is super interesting. The planning level like, you know, I design buildings. You're designing things that are going to see the play on 100 years. Maybe a U.S.. >> It's a long-term. Yeah. I mean, we just we just talked to nonconforming so no use in this zone for what, 2030, 40 years, however, long car condos are popular. Exactly It's technically not a non government use. I'm sorry I get thank you. Yeah, it's not technically, but it itself is not because it's allowed in the zone. Districts own district isn't on implementing zone Thank you all. Those things are true, blah, blah, blah. It's supposed to be there. >> Right. That's the point. The whole point of the of the units of the discussion supposed to be there in the future future, not currently if you know what he out there now, if I could go to ban from the 80's named evoke the future is now we're doing something that doesn't make sense because we kind of have to. You're in the We haven't seen yet. thank you, Mister Chairman. I just want to ask about the tea We've implemented the TV ours. other thing you lost or have we had lived without. We actually have one being proposed. >> Well, it's good. So, yeah, and I think they'll be to be more interest in the future. You know that once people get learning to familiar with the process, I think you to the our programs to typically start off very slowly because people go and what's that someone is it really mean? And once you have a couple examples in 2 animal started building to me. That concerns Main Street. And you all those one single level to to to to level, you know, old buildings Main Street, don't >> And cars are meant to protect that aerial flood. I will say this, you know, our table housing program, we thought that was probably in fairly slow start to the Did not. It took off right away. We're now at 1060 some 10 will housing units there now in process here in the city, which is amazing, especially for a city of this size. It's amazing numbers was Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. We don't have any other stuff. Topics. All right. And then the second clue. The meeting unless serves where members side most important you get to hit the gavel again. I think >> you try