The Apopka City Commission on Wednesday unanimously rejected a small-scale future land use amendment that would have allowed an eight‑unit townhouse project near downtown, citing worries about neighborhood compatibility and the project’s density. 

The newly seated commission voted 5-0 to deny a first-reading request to change the future land use designation for properties at 171 W. Orange St. and 15 N. Washington Ave. from residential low to mixed use. The move indicated the new commission may take a different approach to development, which was the top concern of voters in the recent city elections that brought big changes to City Hall. 

The amendment would have increased the allowable residential density from five dwelling units per acre to 15 dwelling units per acre for the nearly 0.9-acre site, paving the way for a proposed eight-unit townhome development.  

City planner Jun Sohn told commissioners the request was intended to make the properties’ future land use designation consistent with their existing Mixed-Use Downtown zoning designation. 

“The requested future land use is mixed use, and it will make the future land use consistent with the current zoning,” Sohn said. “Mixed use land use allows 15 dwelling units per acre or a 1.0 floor area ratio.” 

Sohn said the proposal called for “two townhome buildings for the total eight residential units,” though he emphasized the site plan shown during the meeting was only conceptual. 

The Development Review Committee recommended approval Feb. 18, while the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval April 14, according to Sohn.  

Nearby resident Lynette Anderson urged commissioners to reject the proposal, citing concerns about traffic, drainage and density in the neighborhood. 

“With these eight two-story, four-bedroom, two-and-a-half-bath, two-car garage units, there could be an increase of 16 to 20-plus vehicles accessing the intersection of West Orange and North Washington,” Anderson said. “Any increase is too much.” 

She also criticized what she described as overdevelopment of a small parcel. 

“The actual size allotted for both the eight townhouses and the section for additional parking is only approximately 0.64 acres, barely more than one-half acre allotted for the townhouses,” Anderson said. 

During commission discussion, Commissioner Sam Ruth repeatedly questioned whether the proposed density fit the character of the surrounding area. 

“The surrounding neighborhoods, the houses around it, are of single story,” Ruth said. “And then in this corner, there would be eight assembled, but it would be multi-story.”  

Project representative Alynne Cordray defended the proposal, arguing it aligned with urban planning goals encouraging walkability and redevelopment near commercial areas. 

“When areas are redeveloped and you want to add density to have city services kind of closer together and walkable area, this fits the traditional town planning,” Cordray said.  

Commissioner Yesenia Baron said she believed the proposed buildings were attractive but incompatible with the neighborhood. 

“Respectfully, I think your units are aesthetically beautiful, but I don’t think they fit in this area,” Baron said.  

Baron suggested lower-density single-family homes may be more appropriate for the site. 

Once discussion concluded, Commissioner Nadia Anderson moved to deny the ordinance. Ruth seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.