Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sharing Center Rezone topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sanford approves first reading for Sharing Center workforce apartments; neighbors press for bigger buffers
Summary
The commission approved on first reading a planned‑development rezoning and comprehensive‑plan amendment for a 5.77‑acre project at 6498 N Ronald Reagan Blvd intended as workforce housing by the Sharing Center. Neighbors pressed officials and the applicant over 15‑ to 25‑foot buffer variances, parking and tree preservation; commissioners asked the applicant to revise Building 6 before second reading.
The Sanford City Commission on Aug. 12 approved on first reading a planned‑development rezoning for a 5.77‑acre property at 6498 North Ronald Reagan Boulevard that the Sharing Center proposes to develop as workforce ("missing middle") apartments.
The commission first adopted the comprehensive‑plan land‑use amendment recommended by the Planning & Zoning Commission. During the subsequent quasi‑judicial rezoning hearing, the Sharing Center's representatives outlined revisions made since the project's prior review: buildings were swapped with parking in some locations, the clubhouse and tot lot repositioned, covered parking placed between buildings and neighbors, a masonry stucco wall moved off the property line to provide landscaped buffer on the neighbors' side, and many buffers were set at a 20‑foot minimum.
"This is more than just building apartments," Nina Yan (speaker 15), who said she leads the Sharing Center, told the commission. "It's about addressing a critical gap in our community, affordable housing for the hardworking individuals who make Seminole County the vibrant community it is." Russell Maynard (speaker 9), the applicant's engineer, detailed site changes intended to increase privacy and move the wall into the property so landscaping can be added on the neighbor side.
Multiple nearby residents said the revised plans still leave some lots with buffers down to 15 feet and place apartment buildings much closer to existing homes than earlier plans. Laurie Downing (speaker 18), who identified lot numbers she said would have 15‑foot buffers, said residents wanted the natural tree line preserved and asked for assurances the wall type would be masonry and that a robust, natural buffer would remain. Other neighbors raised concerns about visitor parking and stormwater pond reshaping.
Planning staff explained that the application was coming forward as a planned development, which allows negotiated deviations from some dimensional standards, and that stormwater sizing is determined during engineering review and is subject to St. Johns Water Management District requirements. Staff also said the city code has evolved since an 8‑unit‑per‑building standard was written in 2008 and that the code now accommodates different apartment configurations.
Commissioners and staff walked through options to address Building 6 (the corner building impacting lots 37 and 38). The applicant said moving the building 10 feet would require losing up to three parking spaces; commissioners discussed whether to require a unit reduction or a parking trade to achieve more setback. The motion that carried directed approval on first reading while asking the applicant to return at second reading with revisions to increase buffers around Building 6; the motion passed 4–1.
What this means: The action advances the project to a required second reading and final vote; the applicant must attempt to adjust Building 6 and work with staff to improve buffer and privacy mitigations for the immediately affected neighbors. If the applicant cannot sufficiently increase setbacks, commissioners said they will take that into account at second reading.
Source: On‑the‑record staff presentations, applicant statements and public comments at the Aug. 12, 2024 meeting.
