Lawrence Martin, Lauderhill resident, stated that while he served on the
Commission, he was very pro-development, but in the subject instance, he
asked members of the Commission to visit the site of the proposed
development.
He said along that corridor, there were four businesses that
would be immediately affected that totaled over 120 years in the City: Moty’s
Auto Repair, Roro Tire, the music guy on the front of that building, and Joy’s
Roti. With the subject development being built almost on their backdoor, and
the City’s noise ordinance being what it was, these businesses would likely
have to shut down.
He understood the subject resolution was part of the
preliminary stage to get the process moving, and that there would be other
opportunities to address the concerns being voiced, but he wished Ms. Howson
and Mr. Keester-O’Mills to verify that the drawings in the presentation showed
that the proposed development would abut the building in which the Joy’s Roti
was located, or would there be adequate space between them.
He hoped
members of the Commission were going out into the subject area to get
feedback from area businesses and that the developer was speaking with those
businesses to discuss any opportunities to relocate, as this was a quality of life
issue. The tire shop alone usually had 30 to 40 cars waiting to be serviced, and
Joy’s was a staple in the Lauderhill community. He looked forward to smart
development in Lauderhill, echoing residents who previously spoke on their call
for community meetings with developers, as they were promised a few years
prior by the then commission.
Mae Cooper, Lauderhill resident, said she represented the West Ken Lark HOA;
she expressed concern that no one attended their HOA meetings to educate
residents on the development planned at the Lauderhill Mall site. She found this
very disrespectful, as residents refused to be overlooked and the City’s elected
officials had an open invitation to attend HOA meetings; Mr. Keester-O’Mills
knew how to contact her.
Mayor Grant received no further input from the public.
Interim City Manager Hobbs indicated Mr. Keester-O’Mills would respond to the
four questions posed by the public, specifically, the traffic study completed, and
the one underway, the timing of the projects, the impact to existing businesses,
and the public meeting requirements.
Planning & Zoning Director Daniel Keester-O’Mills began with addressing the
public meeting requirements, stating the Commission adopted regulations
requiring certain applicants to meet with HOAs in the areas affected by their
development prior to city commission approval. This applied to the approval of
applications for site plans, variances, and development agreements; the subject
application was for a special exception, so it did not fall under the City’s public
noticing requirements. He said, however, the applicant was well aware that the
site plan application required them to present their plans to the public to receive
feedback; he believed this to be one of the reasons the Commission
established the public meeting requirement, so the community could voice
concerns, questions, etc. on the various aspects of the development, such as
how the site would be laid out, the logistics of fire truck access to the site, traffic
impacts, etc. He said these items had yet to be ironed out at the staff level,
hence the applicant not presenting preliminary drawings for the proposed
development to the public as yet.
The applicant was submitting the subject
special exception application to confirm to the Commission that the proposed
