City of Maitland Planning and Zoning Commission — April 2, 2026

Meeting Overview

Type: Regular Meeting Quorum: Yes (full commission, 5 of 5 members present) Duration: Approximately 1 hour 29 minutes (6:00 PM – 7:29 PM)

Attendance

• Present: Chair Glen Jaffee, Vice-Chair Jody Barry, Eddie Baird, Ken Linehan, Greg Hardwick
• Absent: None
• Staff Present: Director of Community Development Mike Daniels, City Attorney Drew Smith, Chief Planner Sara Blanchard, Senior Planner Barrett Chaix

---

Agenda Items

Item 1: Planned Development Amendment — Maitland Concourse North Lot 6 (601 Trelago Way)

• Type: PUD (PD amendment)
• Case Number: AZPD (2025)-0001
• Location: 601 Trelago Way (Maitland Concourse North / MCN area of special consideration, Lot 6)
• Applicant: Property owner, represented by Jonathan Hules (Lowndes Law), joined by Josh Conradi (Kimley-Horn and Associates)
• Request: Amend the planned development to permit an 85-unit townhouse project — five 5-unit buildings and fifteen 4-unit buildings (20 buildings total), three stories in height, served by a main access-road loop. Companion to Maitland Ordinance 1446 (adopted by City Council February 23, 2026), which amended the CDP for the MCN area of special consideration to add townhouse dwellings as a permitted residential type.
• Current Zoning: PD (Maitland Concourse North)
• Proposed Zoning: PD amended (townhouse type added)
• Acreage: N/A (Lot 6 of the MCN PD)
• Staff Recommendation: Approve with conditions (DRC report recommended 12 conditions)
• Action: Approved (recommended for approval) with conditions
• Vote: 5-0 (Baird, Hardwick, Linehan, Barry, Jaffee)
• Conditions: Recommended approval per the 12 DRC conditions plus the comments heard at the public hearing.
• Notable Discussion: Two members of the public spoke against. Monica Burnett, a resident of the adjacent Bell at Trelago Apartments, raised the lack of green space and environmental concerns (flooding, carbon absorption, heat reduction). Zachary Ingram (8535 Shadow Drive, Apopka) spoke for his uncle Alan Charone, the developer of neighboring Lot 1, arguing that he had bought Lot 1 expecting office development next door and that the townhouse design — particularly the parapet walls and build quality — would deteriorate his investment in an "elevated, high-income location." Commissioners drilled into site engineering: Hardwick on lake access control; Barry on whether any units were ADA/disabled-accessible (Hules: no) and on additional landscaping; Linehan repeatedly on the t-intersections/hammerheads, which Conradi explained were a Fire Marshal requirement — Linehan and the board suggested eliminating redundant hammerheads to recover space for overflow parking and landscape buffering. Chair Jaffee floated a fire-gate alternative (as used on Ventris Ave.) instead of hammerheads, and discussed viewshed, development rights, guest parking, and the residential-vs-office development-mix tension.

---

Public Hearings Summary

• Number of speakers: 2 (Monica Burnett — neighbor/Bell at Trelago resident; Zachary Ingram — for Lot 1 developer Alan Charone)
• General sentiment: Opposed (both speakers objected, on green-space/environment and on land-use-expectation/build-quality grounds respectively)
• Key concerns:
  • Loss of green space and environmental impacts (flooding, carbon, heat) — Burnett
  • A neighboring landowner's expectation that the adjacent parcel would be office, not residential townhomes, and objections to design/build quality (parapet walls) eroding an "elevated, high-income" positioning — Ingram/Charone
  • Engineering: excessive Fire-Marshal-mandated hammerheads/t-intersections consuming land that could serve overflow parking and buffering

---

Key Signals

• Lowndes Law is representing residential intensification on a Trelago parcel — cross-corridor counsel network surfaces in Maitland. Jonathan Hules of Lowndes appearing for the 85-unit MCN Lot 6 townhouse amendment places the same Orlando land-use firm seen across the US-27/Lake County corpus (Tara Tedrow's firm on Citrus Grove / Camp Lake Industrial in Minneola) into north Orange County's most density-protective city. When the same handful of firms shepherd intensification through both the growth corridor and the identity-preservation city, the legal-counsel network — not the local board — is the connective tissue of regional development.
• The opposition came from a fellow developer, not just neighbors — a "wrong-product-next-door" objection. The sharpest objection wasn't NIMBY green-space concern; it was Lot 1's developer arguing the townhomes would degrade his planned "elevated, high-income" office vision next door. This is a developer-vs-developer land-use-expectation clash inside a master-planned PD — a signal that Maitland Concourse North's internal program mix (office vs. residential) is genuinely contested, and that the city's pivot to add townhouses (Ord. 1446, Feb 2026) is reshaping investor expectations parcel by parcel.
• The board governs through engineering minutiae, not just up/down votes. A 5-0 approval still came wrapped in granular commissioner pushback on hammerheads, fire-gate alternatives, landscape buffers, and overflow parking. Maitland's PZC treats even a conforming, CDP-blessed townhouse project as a design negotiation — consistent with its form-and-character governance posture. For an applicant, "approved" in Maitland means "approved with 12 conditions and a board that read the site plan."
• MCN is Maitland's active residential-densification frontier. With Ordinance 1446 adding townhouses to the MCN area of special consideration in February and this 85-unit amendment clearing P&Z in April (first reading at Council set for May 11), Maitland Concourse North is where the city is actually adding units. For a homebuyer or investor, MCN/Trelago Way — not Downtown Maitland — is the address where new attached-product supply is materializing.
• Full board, contested hearing — Maitland shows up for density decisions. All five commissioners present and an actively opposed public hearing stand in contrast to the empty-room 4-0 code amendments of March. When the item is a concrete project with neighbors, attendance and scrutiny rise — the inverse of the large-votes-small-crowds pattern that governs abstract code work.

---

Raw Notes

• March 5, 2026 minutes approved 5-0 (Baird moved, Barry seconded).
• The call-to-order line in the minutes erroneously reads "March 5, 2026" as the meeting date (a carried-over template error); the meeting is the April 2, 2026 regular meeting per the header and all internal references.
• Public Period: Monica Burnett initially approached during the open Public Period to speak on the MCN Lot 6 item; Chair Jaffee directed her to hold comments until the agenda item itself.
• New Business — Downtown Maitland LDC discussion (continued): Director Daniels presented current DM-district standards for residential uses on smaller lots and the question of whether existing single-family homes should be allowed to expand/rebuild in a larger footprint. Chair Jaffee framed it as a "culture shift in Maitland to move away from suburbia to urban in downtown," citing the Parker at Maitland Station as the project that prompted the mixed-use requirement — and noting those post-Parker rules have "frozen" small residential projects. The board debated whether allowing single-/two-family redevelopment would disincentivize the intended transition to commercial. Daniels said the next step is to consult the City Manager on appetite and possibly a draft ordinance; the board discussed a joint workshop with City Council if it is not yet on Council's radar. (This thread continues as the May 7 "Small Lot Residential Development in the DM Zoning District" item.)
• Adjourned 7:29 PM.
• These April 2, 2026 minutes were approved 4-0 at the May 7, 2026 meeting.