The bulk of the Sanford City meeting’s time was focused on the third reading of a new development that homeowners are not happy about.
The Christian Sharing Center has proposed a neighborhood to be located on Ronald Reagan Boulevard. The problem with that is there are homes right next to the area, and the residents don’t want this project in their backyard.
For the past three meetings, people who live in the community have rallied to speak against the development in front of the Mayor and city commissioners. Some of their fears include destroying the natural vegetation line, the old historic trees being cut down, a tall wall where there was once nature, and congestion of the area they consider to be too packed. The most common concern amongst the residents is the wall being less than 20 feet away from some backyards, which is not the code requirement. Residents were able to express more feelings and statements, as well as get answers from the Christian Sharing Center.
“What the Sharing Center has done and continues to do is something that we can all see the good in and appreciate that someone in our community exists who’s trying to make life better for those who may be forgotten. As a Christian myself, I understand the virtues of being empathetic, compassionate and looking out for one another. These virtues help us with the light in what seems like a dark and scary world,” a passionate resident expressed from an email she sent Seminole County and the City of Sanford.
She continued “However, as a Christian, I also understand you can only help those you can. It is important that our efforts to help don't cause more harm and damage than good…How can a developer be a good neighbor when they want to shove people into tiny units with almost no parking to accommodate them or their family and guests? How can a developer be a good neighbor when they originally ignored our pleas for a natural existing buffer, only to change tune when they thought their plan could be potentially denied? How can a developer be a good neighbor when they purposely forgot to attach our initial comments and concerns from the very first public meeting at the church? How can a developer be a good neighbor when the space provided is nearly non-existent due to the amount of apartment buildings on this awkward shaped land? How can a developer be a good neighbor when the proposed live station is near feet away from the residents backyard? I do understand that sometimes to accomplish something amazing it may take sacrifice, but quality of life should not be one of those… Who are we really helping if people are going to be harmed in the long run by forcing them into this overpacked and overwhelmed area. Please give these people and the community a chance and don’t treat it like simple numbers. Build something that emphasizes the citizens and not simply maxing out the land.”
Commissioner Britton acknowledged her efforts in standing up for her community. Britton has expressed her concerns for this project and says the city has to do something about making sure vegetation and nature stays in the area in general, and voted against the item last meeting.
“If this was developed as a single-family, what would the wall and setback requirement be for two story homes?” the Mayor Woodruff asked.
“20(feet). Setback… no buffer required. Property line to property line, wall to wall, no fencing required. So they could have a building and accessory structures can be as close as four feet,” Eileen Hinson, director of planning for the city of Sanford said. “So they could have somebody else’s shed in their backyard. Like four feet off the property line.”
After a literal five second moment of silence in the room, Commissioner Britton replied “But that’s not what we’re talking about. We’re talking about this. Because we do this all the time, we have to look out for the rights of the property owners. Now we’re bringing up other things to say ‘well you could have something else worse or it could be that.’ We’re talking about this item right here.”
“I think we have been looking out for them,” Mayor Woodruff said back, possibly referring to the changes the developers have made to accommodate concerns including parking and moving the property line.
“I don’t think so. I really don’t think so at all. At all.” Commissioner Britton emphasized
“It’s the merit of a negotiated planned development. That’s the thing, and (with) a planned development, the zoning is site specific, based on the merits of the property itself. Hinson explained. “It’s an irregular shape, it could be done as a single family, they could pack in single families in here and have them 20 feet from their property line, with no buffer, no setback other than the 20 feet to the rear.”
Seemingly frustrated Commissioner Britton expressed “ I hear you Eileen, but that’s not what is being brought before us. And I want us to focus on what’s right here. So what our code says is that we’re talking about this item. Not ‘if you don’t do this then you could have a shed in the back of their yard.’Let’s focus on this and if it doesn’t meet all of the requirements then it doesn't meet all of the requirements…I really truly feel that it is way too much put into this very small space. Which is why I voted against it at the last meeting. It is just way too much. Now if there was nobody behind them, I would not have any say so.”
“Just to sum up, we have taken into account a lot of the comments that y’all made from different meetings,” The Christian Sharing Center representative said, “We moved two buildings, four and five, totally away from the property line to the other side. We moved the parking, we moved the entrance over a little bit so that we could get the parking. We moved the wall that was originally on the property line, into as far as we could get it into the property. We’ve agreed to leave all of the existing vegetation that’s possible to leave along there. In essence, we’ve created an additional 20 feet of backyard, for all of the neighbors all the way around. So we would respectfully ask that you approve it and thank you for your time and ability to have this conversation.”
Mayor Woodruff, Commissioner Mahany and Commissioner Austin all seconded the motion to continue this discussion into the next meeting at the developers request.
