Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Recreation Facility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resubmittal for downtown pickleball courts flagged for drainage, fencing and irrigation issues
Summary
The DRC reviewed a resubmittal July 2 for a downtown Apopka pickleball facility including three courts, restrooms and a ticket office; staff cited unresolved trenching/utility comments, recommended curb‑drain connections to avoid sidewalk overflow, and flagged fence and irrigation compliance issues.
Amir, the project manager, presented a resubmittal for three pickleball courts, a ticket office, restrooms and parallel street parking on Third/Fourth Street in Apopka’s downtown mixed‑use area. Planning and zoning provided minor comments; the applicant and staff acknowledged receipt of late public‑services comments and agreed to coordinate to resolve them.
City Engineer Vladimir Simonovsky recommended a small structure north of the project's spillway and routing runoff from the parking area into the curb using two 4‑inch pipes to avoid overflow across the sidewalk and to minimize conflicts with shallow utilities. He said that approach would require some future maintenance but would prevent runoff from reaching the driving lanes.
Staff confirmed there is no parking requirement for this use in the city’s downtown mixed‑use zoning; the applicant intends to use city street parking. The project raised a fence issue: a security exemption plan is under review and, per staff, the director or designee will determine whether a higher fence is warranted; the railroad has requested an 8‑foot fence along its right‑of‑way, with 6‑foot fencing elsewhere.
Landscape and irrigation were heavily discussed. The applicant proposed a minimal irrigation plan (three oaks and a sodded area under 9,000 square feet); staff and some committee members pushed for required irrigation to establish trees and maintain a high‑quality downtown appearance and warned that granting a waiver could set a precedent for future downtown projects. The applicant agreed to coordinate on irrigation details with staff and with public services (Dale) and to upload any required certifications.
Staff and the applicant agreed to resolve remaining technical comments (trench details, self‑certification for stormwater where applicable, and fence/security exemption) with public works and other reviewers; no formal action was taken.
