CCMtg09-27-04WSMinLONGWOOD CITY COMMISSION
Longwood City Commission Chambers
175 West Warren Av¢nue
Longwood, Florida
hI1NUTF.S
WORK SESSION
SEPTF.MRER 27, 7A704
7:00 P.\9.
Present: Mayor 1{,G. "Hutch" Hundy
Deputy Mayor Brivn D. Sackett
Com issioner Join: C Maingo[
Commissioner Dan Avderxon
Commissioner Mike Holf
Richard S. Taylor, Jr., City Attorney
John J. Drago, Ciry Adminlitrafor
Sarah M, Mijares, City Clerk
Linda P. Coff, Rvcortling Secretary
Pat Miller, Dfrec[or of Cummani[y 9erviees
Julie Wnlls, Cammnnity Servicos Coordinator
Paul Siumore, Communir Services Coordinv[or
i. C4LI.T0 ORDER Mayor Hundy called the meeiingworder at']:00 p.m.
Commissioner Maingol moved [o suspend [hc Wilco. Seconded by
Commissioner }soli and carried by a unanimous voieevotc
2. BUSINESS.
A. The Planning Division of ebe Community 6ervices Department
mends the Ciry Commission review and tltecuss proposed
changes to [he Longwood Development Code.
Mr. Drago s aced there n the Longwood Developmen
Code that ioleaz nneed of clarifica n. Ha said tl:ua were
also some areas which tho codedocs nut address.
Sect on 1 4.2 C
Mr. Siaumore advised this section wns iv convndivHm: with later parts of
the code where the development design standards regulate colors of
buildings as well as decorative architemvre of the exterior ofbuildings.
Staffrewmmanded editing language io eliminate the exemption by
deleting;" rrhe refo. ofeltes rrhe deco nofthe ee
ofrhes excePrfo.sur]i work wehiu rite Ksmr(c lNer(aY Dis<na
fiom Pnmgraph C.
CC 09-27-04231
Diseusslon was held regarding the oxterlor Aecoraflons of snuefurea
Mr. Size readvised that eliminating this section would not require the
Triggering of v s to plan. He stated this exe+npfion was specihcally
addressing an individual piece of work. He reiterated that if the work was
just fapadc work it would not trigger a site Plan.
Mnyor Bundy stored the city would want m rnceurage atfoNable
improvenvants.
Commissioner Anderson crated it was good to encourage incremental
impmvemenry bur have the improvements fit [he new coda
Mr. Sizemore advised they would be reviewing anoNer secTiov regarding
n of no onformity development. He said there oultl beabreak
ofi point, such asnif elimin tmg 50% ofnonconformity.
Diswssion was held regarding whaT percentage of improvements would
trip NII compliance.
h waz the wnsensus o(the Commission To eliminate the verbiage as
recommended and Nat 50% of improvements trigger full compliance.
Section 3 2.I
Mr. Sizemore slated this table lists the setbneks and imperviova eurface
as fac the different laud use districts. Staf(recommends adding the
words "pvl lot' after Maximum Impervtoas Slvface Ratio and Maximum
Dloor Area Ratio.
Disc as held regarding impervious surface ratio and run of"in
snbdiv lions.
Uiscussien waz held regarding a developu going before Ne Board of
Adjustment reque [inga anance.
Mr. Drego advised requests for variances were limited to specified items
Diswssiov ensued regarding [he percentage of impervious surfce ratio.
Mr. Miller Hated Ne purpose to this recommendation was to clarify
impervious surface ratio. It should be figured on a per lot basis, not m
average.
It was the consensus of the Ceirimiesiov to add the verbiage "per lot".
Mr. Size eadvised s[aR'also was rewmmending amendments To
paragraphsAand Bof this n. He explained the recommendation
adds dimensional standards tocparagraph B in ordor to provide for the need
CC 09-2y-04Y132
ofan access eesentmrt being gaoled by the adjacent pmpertY ormer when
there is less [ban two (2) feet kom the propony line.
Mr. Dago stated statTwas conceptually making [Iris recommendation and
would bring Ponvard language
Discusston was held regarding aceess easements.
The Commission was i t egrcemmn to stafi'recommentdatiens_
Mr. Sizemore advised staff was recommending the addition of Medium
Density Residential to paragraph A.
Mr Drngo stated them has been a pmblun with outraging eaisfivg
neigltborhoode. He said it needs to be clear this is regarding surrowtding
neighborhoods N the city, not taking the county inw constideration
Mr. Sirz a stated a lazge a vial lot would not be included in the
eraging He stated staff would work on the language for averaging
existing neighborhoods.
Sect on i2 9 D
Mr. Miller stated there were some <onceme regarding roof colora He said.
ample, pizza Hut used a standard roof design of a red roof as part
of Neer building design. He advised brat roof color was not addressed in
the Longwood Development Code. He stated it should be determined
whether to reshiat roofs by colorpalettes or by some other means He
added that metal roofs were available in limited colors.
Mc Drego said vinyl awnings were also a problem.
Discussion was held whether [here should be a color palate for roofng.
It waz the consensus of the Commission to insert language requiring roof
color to NI low a color palette.
Mc Size aced another azea of eoncem in this section was in regards
to repainting not explicitly included undo the desigp standard requirement
for the color polotte. He orated staf(would like to see this mom explicitly
added to the end of Section 3.2.1 D. 2 by adding; Re-att~rttt8 /°-riselrig
ba!]dlttgs sAa]] wmply wirh the rWttironrrrts ofrhls.swlov.
Discusson ensued.
It was the consensus of the Commission that this language being added.
Mr. Sizervom stated some of tlra colors in Ne Dolor palettewueoutdated
or discontinued. Staffwould like to insert conceptual language authorizing
CC 09-2]-04/293
me eaminirramr m update mp comr paleuc web eowr~ <onaiatem to
(hose adopted by the Commission.
The Commission was in egreemutl to this language acing added.
Mr. Siva a advised Iher rl requir n for maI
sidewalks mr ring city sidewalks. lie staled staff would like
to propose Ivnguegetbe i sened ar the end o[ Section 3.2 i D 6; "hnarnnl
padesm'an Parisi shall carmen to ecisririg sidmvalkv, whore aPplieabfe, n~
order mI mumrev~~umrr aoee>•, ro are aira rtmw~e ara.e are nrntdpte
brnlrlings on a parcel, sidewalks, m~ orha~ app>oprlare pedesrrlari
paanvays shall eormee[ are entry n>eas ofafl orr-site bnlldlrcgs."
Mayor Aundy stated mere needeA m be added language ro dre code Ihel
n approval ofa submitteJ site plan does not release you from
wmplpng wills all standards.
Disc as Held regarding an approved aira pion That staff may have
mrssedsa~ equirement by code.
Mr. Taylor advised there should be a phrase added to the application [arm
sting if the silo plan end airy coda conFliu, city code shall prevail unless
otnerwise exempted in writing.
Disenssran ursued.
Commwsronu Anduson said the code gives extensive leeway on oectain
ns. He said citizens deserve to underotand the code end have equal
protection under the code. Ae stated he bad a peablem with going beck to
people after the fact.
Mr. Sizemore stated They issue a development order onve all signetwes
fiom the reviewing tlepartments are on the approved final site plan. Ae
said the developme order that racy is ncludes smtements along the
Zinc that an appmvalsof site plmr dons noteexempt them 6om complying
with ell airy codas. He staled the developmem order is signed by a
representative of the developer and the city.
Mr. Miller stated they would bring this forward for the Commission's
approval.
Mr. Size rated staff was also ending an endure to pan 8
uvdu this section to clarify Ne defin~on ofprohibited exterior metal
fnishes. Staff recommends adding to 8 6. Corrugated metal siding; the
Ivrguege `or other metal esrulo>Rnish"to clarify dwr all metal fivishee
see prohbimd ov building faWdcc
Discussion ensued regarding aluminum sidinK also being excluded with
this verbiage.
CC o9-27-o4R34
Mr. Miller stated s'ta(Cwould bring fonvvrd now language
Ms Walls said stafiwould like to rewmmGCd including a new pan eleven
(I l) undo SoGion 3.23 D Providing standards for decorative light Vosts
and fixtures.
Discussion was held re~aNing lighting end illumination
hw sthec so(dte Commission to add an wpart for dewranre
light Posts and fixtures.
Mc Sizemore sorted there were no desie~t stvtrdards forrhmpster
ncloe s. Hesaid swff would like to propose addingnvew pun twelve
(12) tonSection 3.2.3 D to read; "Drnrrpsrars shall ha enclosadon rhree (i)
sides by masonry tvo[ts wnsur¢nr rvlrh the color and derlgrr ofrAe
development ofa height srr~icienr ra errrlrelu screen the rlumpner from
tv_ The dimrpsrer enalosine's gave shall corrrplerely screen the dumprrer
jinn wliar ctosad. IJdddldovol dumprrer eaddedfol/owing the
inhial devaloPnrorrprnaess rliese drmrpsrers moat also eonrply wieM1 the
standards frhis secam+.
Discussion was held regarding dumprrer encloswes.
Mayor Bundy daelared if the property changes ownership, then they
would need to coma trno eomptiance.
It was the consensus ofllte Commission to add a new part for the
rncloswe ofdumpstem.
Sec ov 3 2 4 (vro used sec on)
Mr. Sizemore said, with thecunant design standards undo 32.3 D for
general co cial and industrial parcels, there was a lo[ left to
nterpretation. Hesaid Nere were basically two sections that give
architectueal design elemutts that stvte articulation of mof end wells is
r {aired Ae r wed Nese s; Se< ov 5 for oofi end Su
8 for walls. He said the rat culation grave rho city the ability to implement
e of the design stvvdvrds iv buildings developed recently. He reviewed
rho amhiteotural definition ofaniculetion sNting fiat enieuletiov infers ro
the giving of emphasis to archi[ecNral elements such es windows,
balconies, entries, eta. that croate a complimentary pertain or rhythm
dividing large buildings into smell or itlentitivblepieaes. Eie reviewed
several randuings of buildings pointing out the aniculatipn eloments.
Discussion was held regazding articulation with tilt up walls
CC 09-27-041235
Mr. Drago poinicd out in oneof Nc renderings how the architect
attomp(ed to achieve articulation through shadings oCpaint. He six(ed (hie
did not meet the true defnihon of arliculation.
Discussion ensued
Mr. Siu slated staff would like some guidance in oNer to move
fonvaM wd create a comprehensive list of desirable design fvnires Thal
express this anieulanml more speei[cally end glue developers tlieoption
o choose from these and armngo i a vay that snits Iheir oxn
architeemml desnes.
Mayor Bwdy inquired if the Ccinmission desired to wntinue the meeting.
It was thec sensus af(he Commission to continue the meeting to
10:00 p.m. on
Sec on 3 2 5 (vrovosed seati_onl
Mr. Sizemore stated there were currently no provisions to the development
code for infill development design standards that allow medium donsity
eaidential developmc t specifically suited (o existing neighhorhoods. He
said there were a few vacant parcels surrounded by developed properly.
He stated this vacant land tende (o be smaller in size and because o[Neir
or shape, adhering to the design standards for a subdivision is not
profitable for development. He said staff would Tike to explore creating
sepemte infill development design standards (or residennel Droperlies in
established neigfiborhoods to allow appropriate nee of limited land These
standards would allow closer, denser development, shared driveways;
bringing front setbacks up almost to the sidewalk He reviewed example
rendeings of this type of development.
Mr. Miller stated Nay recently rw into this by the apanmen(s at Oak and
Magnolia. He said a developer came in with ideas to develop this azea, but
with the current development code they do not have the ability to move in
Nis direr n. He declared thue achw<e to createawhole new
housing clement not incorpornted in the LDC.
Discussion ensued.
Mr. Mille stated this type ofdevclopmem could be accomplished and
meets the dreinvge requiromwds.
Mayor 6wdy said a pmject like Nis could utilize grass parking.
It was the eovseosus oPthc Cemmisston to bring th's concept forward
CC o9-2]-04236
Sec on 3.3.a
Mr. Siu said the prelim Hazy plats were very ex end required
almost the fidl engineering detail ea regwred in the site plan process. Hu
eyed by dte lime n pmliminvry pint is submitted for staff approval, Choy
sobmi ring almost the idenucai information (r the siteplan_ He
declared this is defeating the puryoso ofhaving e preliminxry plat that
allows the developer the opportunity (or deaigo change. He said staff
~ould like m propose sun~eying other platting processes for municipalities
and wunties in the area and fiud v scaled back version of the preliminary
plat. This would allow the preliminary plat to be more design oriented and
require lea nthat Dhnse. Onc ring prcliminnry plat
epprovvl, they would then move on to their s ie plan where they wotdd do
all the wlcelationa w submit m the City Engineer.
Mr. Miller stated with the wrtent standards, they have so much invested
with the preliminary Vlat; the developer does not want to go back to the
designing board.
Discussion was held.
Mr_Siur rated they aro Vroposing to scale down (he preliminay plat
from the extensive list that imludes engineering details to the lots being
dawn at a realistic scale.
It was the consensus of the Commission to proaecd.
Sect ons 3 3 4 and 3.3.5
Me Sizemore stated these sections connect to the prior item. Sections
33.4 and 33.5 are the requirements far preliminary end final plats end vre
looatad io the section for design standards He saitl s[aHrecommends
relocating Uese requirements m Arivle 10, Administration, by creating u
platting section.
It was the consensus of the Commission to create a separate section order
Article lo.
5 336
tvG. Size rated this rtfere a being
allowed In cross onto multiple lots. fle advised the CityrLngineer
mends this not be allowed to happen. Staffwculd like to
mend language be inserted to state; "Corr shall nor be planed so as
ro divide anyparr ofrhes wr pond ar oseparara tors. Far
resldoniai daveloporenrs, al! pars ofarrererrtion pmrd(including slopes
and Aerrns, shrill be cmrstnrerad ernlydy within n dadfcared Hate" He
advised it was of good practiceto include sides ofretennon ponds io
CC 092'1-04123"/
auewanle Im e~wa, nowever, me way the enae is ommmly wduea, nda is
annwea.
u wet the oo~ensna eons emnmiamn m maert d,e recemm~ttaed
Ivoguago.
Section 3.3.6 e
Mr. Size aced staff would like to recommend lvngunge regmnng
walled subdir isions.
Mayor Bandy stated he agreed with this recommendation and said he
would like to sec walls required between canunwcivl developmutt and
residential propentes.
Mr. Drago suggested n limved height of six (fi) oc eight (g) @et. He further
suggested the walls beof bock or stone for subdivisions.
Discussion was held regarding required heights and buffor requirements
consisting of a combination of landscape and walls.
It was the wreensus of the Commission to require an eight (8) foot wall
betty cial vnd reidential end a six (6) foot wall hetwernt
raside~irt~inl developments.
Sx'o t 3 6 I C
Mr. Size staled that grassparkingw ently not requirM to be
einforced~Be said staff would Tike to recommend language be inserted so
that any grass parltlug shall be reinforced using a method approved by the
City EUgioott.
It waa the wnsensus otthe Covm»ssion to insert recommended Ivnguago.
Section 3.IO.l
Mr. Sizemore stated this section, Stormwater Management Plan
Requirements, wes very vaguely wrineo. Fie said Char staff would like to
clarify and rewrite this eeetion to reflect thepractices they are currently
usiog. kte said staffwould like to propose the following changes;
~.
swbmmed'(e'seeem6arey
eppreveFBtld'ne pw~~it ap~('o star any drveloater act Y'lv
rvhlch dlshtr6s the exis[in ode o shag ra alts
ie tan. i~~(;S~ia ~e rM1le
wnen oral Q d u a(t to dere mid
CC 09-2J-04/238
st der elo rrrwn drairra e n s..lrhour addirlmial surrey mrd
des'er.
Q. The G'ryEnSineer shall revlerv Ne sta~nmvrm~nrunngeninrr plmr
raquirad 6y rhiv vecrion. No olenrirrg pannlr. bralding~ernrlr, or
develaymwit Plmr aPOrova] slral] oea<r for m~y(,rroJers ivh/dr
raquirrs a starnnvmer nranngenrerrt plmr unless the Cln~ Lngirreer
opprar rs the plnri_
hest rmuate rr larr shn(l earns/aro the alfotrnr .
1. Asune rhar ir~dlcrsres rhec rodeo then e r 1 ro
2 Aerndine plan shmvirie the nr nowt eha ee to tle err d're
3 eud' eJrar ee
e meal as e'etne oa sr er arre
toes not adr_ Iv u)f cr rl e dr~ririn¢e ofsr°, ii_mLone rlre
Mr. Size rated this rething they have been doing in prat
with the building perm t appl cations for same time now. He stated Chet c
City Hngineer does review elI eesidentivl vnd oommereial and wnfirms
they are not shedding excess.vater onto the adivicent properties.
Mayor Bundysuggesied emending Paragraph A so than insreod of"The
Clry Errgirreer Wray waive_ " to have it state "The C'try Atlminisnalar may
warve upon the advlea o/the Ciry F•ngiriear._"
Discussion was held regazding swrtnwater run off
It was the consensus of the Commission to proceed with Ne recommended
language
It was rhea softhu Comn mhold another Work Session
October I1 o2004sro wntinue tfie review of the Longwood Development
Code.
3. ADdOUIN. Mayor BUndy adjourned themeeiing at 10:09 p.m.
_ [ ~~ ~oodG annoy, Jr,'V yo
[.iuaa ~ ~ma aeee, e ~ ~ ~,serarary
ATTEST:
~~~~~
Sarah M. Nijares, City C er( k
CC 09-2]-04/239
~nd. rase ~~rt uie~~~: mr~m~oeenv.
cc oe-n-oanao