Planning board approves Perimeter Park West Phase 3 rezoning with tree‑survey condition amid traffic concerns

The Clermont Planning & Zoning Commission voted 4‑2 to recommend approval of two ordinances related to Perimeter Park West Phase 3 — a small‑scale comprehensive plan amendment and a rezoning to a planned unit development with M1 industrial uses — with an added condition that the developer conduct a comprehensive tree survey.

Staff planning director Kurt Henschel summarized the proposal as an approximately 12‑acre addition to the existing Perimeter Park industrial campus that would allow up to roughly 185,000 square feet of industrial warehouse space across three buildings, require a 100‑foot right‑of‑way dedication for a Hook Street extension, and request cut‑and‑fill waivers to address a depressional sinkhole on site. "Therefore, staff does recommend approval of ordinance 2026‑004 and ordinance 2026‑005," Henschel said.

At the hearing Commissioner Tadano urged caution, presenting archived aerial images from Google Maps and Lake County GIS and saying the neighborhood is "absolutely saturated" with development; he asked how the city would respond if truck or car traffic backed up onto Ray Goodgame Parkway and Hartle Road. Commissioners referenced a staff‑provided traffic‑exemption letter that estimated the Phase 3 addition would add about 229 trips (roughly 20 AM peak and 25 PM peak) on top of previous studies. Commissioner May contrasted those figures with an earlier study for the first two warehouses that showed higher trip estimates (the earlier study had projected about 758 trips, with 66 AM and 84 PM peak trips), and asked whether that prior work had been included in current calculations. Staff and the traffic engineer confirmed the tier‑1 exemption request based on the projected low incremental traffic.

Applicant representative Rebecca Wilson said the applicant agreed with staff recommendations and the proposed conditions and that the team was available to answer questions. Commissioners also pressed about site stability and geotechnical work for a historic sinkhole and sought clarity on maximum square footage; Wilson said a concept plan fits about 165,168 square feet but the PUD language retained engineering flexibility up to the 185,000 cap to accommodate final design. Several commissioners asked that the PUD language be updated to match current city time‑to‑build standards and to include enforceable recourse if traffic impacts proved worse than projected; staff said such conditions could be drafted.

After discussion a motion to approve the rezoning with the additional requirement for a comprehensive tree assessment passed 4‑2. The transcript records the outcome as a 4 to 2 vote; individual yes/no votes by commissioner name were not recorded in full in the transcript.

What happens next: the record indicates the annexation portion of the proposal will go to City Council for consideration; the P&Z action is a recommendation to council. The applicant will need to provide the tree survey and subsequent engineering materials as part of the development review process.