Loading...
CCMtg05-12-03WSMinLONGWOOD CITY COMMISSION Longwood Cily Commission Chambers 175 West Warren Avenue Longwootl, Florida MINUTES WORK SESSION May 12, 2003 7:00 P. M. PRESENT: Mayor Dan Anderson Commissioner Butch Buntly Commissioner John G. Maingoi Richartl S. Taylor, City Attorney John J- Drago, City Atlministrelor Sarah M. Mijares, City Clerk John Brock, Dlredor of Community Services Jay Sargent, Division Manager of Planning Debby Reimers, Recortling Secretary Chris Nance, Dlx-Nance ABSENT: Commissioner Paul Loveslrand (Excused) Deputy Mayor Steve Mlller (Excusetl) 1. GALL TO ORDER. Mayor Anderson called the Work Session to order a17:05 p.m. 2. REVIEW HISTORIC DISTRICT CODE BOOK. Mayor Anderson inlrotluced Ms. Nance who recommended That they review the Cotle Book page by page antl receive comments from both the public and Clty Commission as they go. Mayor Anderson asketl members of the autlience that if they woultl like to atltlress any specifc issue, to raise their hantl and They will be recognizetl. Ms. Nance saitl she welcomes the comments of those in the autlience because it is designetl to work for the City of Longwootl antl it is Longwootl's book. Ms. Nance commented that the Historic Preservation Boartl hatl reviewetl the proposed doc enl antl said as ahe goes Through the book in tletail, she will note their comments. Ms. Nance saitl the Table of Contents is not uptlaled but will be motlified when the book is fnalizetl. CC 5-12-031408 Page i Ms. Nance said this is a desuiption of the Urban Code. She stated the one thing the Historic Board commented on was the Manjura property, which was represented on this page, and should be shaded In blue fo indicate amixed-use property. She noted the Women's Club and Police Station nestled to be shaded in yellow to indicate their civic Ms- Nance wanted to address on ping Jessup Avenue and Florida Avenue. She said Florida Avenue hadsalwaysnactetl as an alley to the properties it backs up to. She said in the Code Book, she had strongly encouraged that access to the properties be from the alley. However, for businesses on Jessup, i[ had been her observation that a lot of the businesses function from both sides. Her recommendation s to allow both a ways miler to Mona Lisa's Restaurant. She encouraged discussion on this part tutor point Cam er Maingot believed it was important that each street in the Historic District is treated the same, The Commission discussed the issue of rear access in the District from the standpoint of a esident, a business owner, a residence becoming a business, spaedinq in the District and public safety. Ms. Nan said that the uses in the District are mixed and there are different setbacks I for eachu e. She said it could be defined to say, if the property re esitlential property, the city would prefer a ss from Florida Avenue, but H thesparoperty is a commercial property, the city would allow access from both. Mr. Drago said he walks the District a lot and does not believe Magnolia Avenue is siWatetl relative to the lot depth to allow for both. He believed if you allow it from the ar, you would be totting the house to face the street because you need the depth of the lot for the turnaround, and those lots are no[ deep enough to accommodate both. He said if someone wants to place a back load into the driveway, they would have to forfeit the front opening to the garage and this gives them more on-street parking for their guests. Ms. Nance said she felt that condition was positive and on-street parking is normal when people hold an event. She believed it is a traffic deterrent She said this is what happens in W nter Park on their residential streets. She added saying on-street parking is very traditional. Corn er Bundy v cetl his c with on-street parking saying that having people pa~k in the gras could presenlca public safety issue. He believed almost every house on Magnolia Avenue had children. He said the Magnolia Avenue residents are always commenting on how people use their street as a cut through. CC 5-12-03/409 Mayor Antlerson saitl he liked the concept but, suggestetl thinking about how to word it and bringing it back to next meeting. Ms. .Nance refertetl to the Master Plan, recalling that it re entls the through ection from Jessup Avenue to Floritla Avenue to Magnolia Avenue, which she believed will create more accessible routes far traffic and take the traffic loatl away from Magnolia Avenue. Page 2 Ms. Nan saitl on ent she hatl untler Mixetl Use is where they are itlentifying all the setbacks, the Code says building coverage shall not exceetl 45%: however. within the city itselF, if the properly has a commercial use and also has an adlacenl parking lot that is included in the impervious calculation, then the percentage should read 70%. She saitl in this case, she believetl the Code neetletl to differentiate whether the mixed esitlential o cial and slate fora esidential u e, them m tot erage is 45%antl form commercial use the maximum lot coverage is 70%u She asked Mr. Sargent what he thought the percentage should be. Commissioner Buntly saitl he believetl if the city tlitl that antl s e builtls a widen and 10 years from now they waM to convert it into an office, the e neetletl to be a number in between that could apply to all uses. He said he woultl not be opposed to setting It at the commercial rate as long as all the parking areas are consitleretl impervious. Mr. Sargent saitl the biggest problem is when a person wants to convert a residence into a business antl there is no parking available. Mayor Antlerson asked why mulch parking is counted as impervious. Mr. Sargent explainetl the re ning for that to the City Commission. Discussion suetl regarding impervious asreas.. pervious areas, parking and building coverage further. Mayor Antlerson asked Ms. Nance if only resitlenlial was requiretl to meet the builtling erage percentage, or if they had to concern themselves with pervous and mpervious areas. Ms. Nance said from a storm water standpoint, there were guitlelines Thal had to be met. Mayor Antlerson wanted to co up with ene formula to rq all u o if the property w re to change a s, the same formula woultl apply regardless of the use. He believetl this would treat everyone fairly. If they go io a larger surface, they will have to adtlress tlrainage. CC 5-12-03/410 Commissioner Suntly saitl if they can't tleal vnth the runoff of a 70%or 60%, then they would have to cut it back anyway. He saitl this woultl still allow for a cap. Mayor Anderson saitl he woultl like tc see 45% for building, which keeps things in harmony, and then they can do more impervious if they deal with the site plan to make it work. Coco er Maingot commentetl that he read so ewhere in the Cotle that mulch parkingsss nsitleretl hantlling storm water runoff and, therefore, measured as a pervious surface area. Ms. Nance said, itleally, if you have a business in the District and the property owner turns a house into a business, she would make the parking pervious, so if the use ever changetl back to residential, the property owner woultl not have to tear out the concrete. She saitl this is why she is encouraging the pervious parking. Mayor Anderson said that is why he is steering toward having tha building coverage 45% antl the maximum imperv set at 70%for everyon regartlless of use. He saitl this way no one hatl to worry of the use of the property changes. He asked Mr. Sargent if he was comfortable with the 70°5 number antl he said he was. Commissioner Maingot asketl how much chimneys, balwnies antl bay windows may encroach wiNin the setback. f Ms. Nance said she believetl architecturally it was 3' or 4' feet. Commissioner Maingot asked for a limitation to be set. Ms. Nance said that she could set a limit of 4' feet. Page 3 Commissioner Maingot commented on the building coverage tar both storefront antl civic uses and questionetl why the percentage rate was tlifferenl for each use. Ms. Nance explained that usually store fronts were more urban antl typically store fronts have zero setbacks and very often parking is available on the street accessing the business. She said Store Fronts speak specifically to the stores Iccatetl at the corner of CR 427 and Church Avenue within the Historic District. She said they puryosely gave a lot of Flexibility to civic structures. Commissioner Bundy refertetl to the first paragraph untler Civic, antl expressed that he woultl prefer to have the requirements for civic buildings rest with the City Administrator antl not the Head of Planning. He saitl he could then delegate authority as he sees flt. CC 5-12-03!411 It was the co of the City Commission that all were in agreement with Commissioner Bundyus Page 4 Untler Mixetl Use, subtitle c eretl porches.. Commissioner Maingot wantetl to know how this Impactetl the front setback zone. Ms. Nance said she believed porches were allowetl to intrude into the front fa{ade setback. Commissioner Maingot refertetl to the sections for Mixetl Use and Civic, where the m tlepth (or the front porch is mentionetl, antl esketl why the section for Store Fronts tloes not list a measurement there. Ms. Nance said in a Store Front contlition, the porch may actually go inward rather than outward because of the zero setback line. The Commission further tliscussed porches and setbacks. It was agreetl to change the section untler Store Fronts to say that the porches can encroach 7' feet within the front fagatle setback. Ms. Nance saitl that should work. She intlicated that this change would also need to be reflectetl on Page 2 as well. The Commission tliscussetl the use of awnings, both metal antl canvas within the Historic District. Ms. Nance said she would clarify false antl partial awnings at the next meeting. Mr. Drago asketl Ms. Nance to bring picWres to the next meeting of porches and awnings. Commissioner Bundy questioned the note on the bottom of the page concerning variance approval on the basis of architectural merit. Ms. Nance saitl this note will give well known architects room to express themselves, without the confnemenl of the Cade. Commissioner Buntly asked Ms. Nance who had the ability to gram the variance. He oultl prefer that the Commission hatl this authority. He wanted to make sure that no matter who the architect is. the structure would fit In with the rest of the Historic District. Mr. Taylor left the meeting at 7:49 p.m CC 5-12-03/412 Mayor Antlerson untlerstantls to refer an item or a few items on the structure, latitude ould be given but not on the entire sWdure. He referretl to an expert ce his tlad hatl with getting an wnirg approved for his restaurant He wanted to make sure that there is set process people would have to go through to receive approval for thls Commissioner Maingot saitl he felt this approval should come from the Commission. He believed the Commission hatl an appreciation for talent but also knows that they answer to the people. Mayor Antlerson notetl he does not want to see every issue wming back to him. He woultl rather have staff hantlle the issues. Commissioner Buntly suggestetl having any variances to the Code subject to the approval of the Historic Preservation Board. Mr. Drago suggestetl that, hrst, there would have to be a defnilion to the variance in what daft coultl do versus what the Commission wants. He suggestetl the Commission define when a variants would be hantlled by staff antl when it woultl have to come before the Commission for approval. Mayor Antlerson agreed antl suggestetl keeping the everytlay, mechanical approvals from the Commission. Mr. Taylor retumetl et 7:55 p.m. ( Ms. Nance notetl That she would define what would be defnetl as staff issues versus what wlll need to 80 [o Commission for approval. Page 5 Ms. Nance wmmentetl on General Conditions, where it says trees are not required if a 6' Foot opaque fence is utilizetl antl a tree should still be requiretl every fifty (50') feat whether there is a fence (here o nat. In order to maintain the tree canopy in the District, that porlion shoultl be edltetl from the Code. Commissioner Maingot saitl basetl on his experience of free maintenance, same trees became a hazard with regards to maintenance of these trees. Ms. Nance said those issues are atltlressetl in the back of the book under Lot and Building Maintenance Regulations. Com er Maingot said as far as maintenance goes, he tlescribed tlifterent aspects of maintenance antl the frequencies that need to be tlone in order to properly maintain a properly. He wanted to make sure that after all the work the Commission does in setting standartls for the Historic District, that [hose stantlartls are upheltl. CC 5-12-03/413 Ms. Nance saitl it is adtlressed further in the book. Mayor Anders saitl he does not want Cotles Enforcement going by everyon 's house and telling Them when to mow their yards. He believed the city needetl to be careful not to be too heavy hantletl with the properly owners. He wanted the Code to be in place when there is a problem, so the city can tell them That they tlo need to take care of their properly. Commissioner Maingot asked about the replacement of dead or tlamagetl plant material. He believed a weetl over 16 inches is unsightly. Ms. Nance refereed to Page 34, untler Lantlscape Elements, and said the issue is adtlressetl there. Commissioner Maingot saitl there is a timeframe to replace tleatl trees. He believed dead trees took away from the look of the District and thought they shoultl be given a timeframe to replace them. Mayor Anderson said he does see a need for a timeframe because some people pui it off. He said he likes simplicity. Ms. Nance suggesletl giving 30 to 60 days [o replace dead plant material. However, she does not think this should apply to perennials. Commissioner Maingot said he was referring to woody ornamentals antl trees. Commissioner Buntly said he is concernetl with having a timeframe; there is no IatiWtle for Codes to enforce it. He saitl there are circumstances where it may not be the right time to replace a dead tree. He believetl if it becomes a eye sore then the AdmMletrator wlll get Cotles Enforoement to take Dare of the problem. If there is a problem, it will go before the Codes Enforcement Boartl and they will sal a timeframe for the plants to be replaced. He notetl the Cotles Enforcement Boartl will give the applicant time to comply. Com er Maingot wanietl to make sure property within the Historic District Is mainta nadn Commissioner Buntly saitl this gives people the opportunity to respontl and shows the city wants to be reasonable. Mayor Anders referretl to the Site Elements column on Page 34, and saitl the wortl "plumb" was misspelled "plum." Commissioner Maingot saitl he wantetl to look at canopy trees antl noted they will not tlestroy the sitlewalk. He referretl to highrise oak as a better choice antl it being used in CG 5-12-0314f 4 the city's metllans already. He said w ning laurel oak trees, he said they experience problems with them after twentynYears, a lot o{ (hem eXperience heart rot. He gave other suggestions for trees as well. Discussion on types of trees, problems with different varieties, and positive charederistics of different varieties was discussed as well. Mr. Drago asked if the Master Plan had a list of recnmmentletl species of plants and trees. Ms. Nance said it will ba listed in the Cotle Book. Mayor Anders said he prefened (o have something that will not break fhe sidewalk. He said he would prefer nopy tree should be planted per '/. aae lot and suggested making a list of recommended types of trees. Commissioner Bundy said he would prefer to give more flexibility to the owners. He said he would like to give a broader list of trees, prohibit certain species that are tlesWCtive from being planted, and make a list of what you can't plant. Mayor Anderson asked if balance could be achieved, saying one canopy tree required, not listing a specs and adding a note listing r commended and discnuragetl specimens. Commissioner Bundy liked giving people the flexibility of choosing their own trees. The City Commission further discussed types of trees which could be used. Mr. Drago asked what a 60% opaque fence or hedge looked like. Ms. Nance said it just meant that they were encouraging picket fences. She said maybe it should read maximum rapacity for Ronf yard fences and no( hedges. Mr. Drago asked if [hey wanted m strike the parenthesis on the parking under civic as well. Ms. Nance said she had a copy that she is marking up with the recommended changes. A member of the audience asked what if a resident does not want a fence, She also inquired if adjacent properties should have look2-like fences. Ms. Nance said it is discouraged but not forbidden. The member of the audience also commented that a lot of people want to get rid of oak trees due to problems with allergies. CC 5-12-03/415 Another member of the audience asketl how this Code book is going to be enforced when some of the language setl in it says things like, "su99esletl, tliscrouragetl and mentleU." She asked that the Commission keep In mind that Ne city neetletl uniformed enforcement, and asked how they could have equal enforcement when the Cotle is so ambiguous. Ms. Nance spoke regartling picket fences. She said II once reaq picket fences of the e style shall not be placetl next to each other on different properties. She said if there is any tlisagreement on this section, it should be struck out antl not to say that picket fences are tliscouraged. Com er Maingot said he agreed wiN the member of the autlience and said when you specify things, it makes things a lot easier for everyone because there are no gray Mayor Anderson says he sees it a little diRerently. He agrees with the member of the autllence as well and gives an example. He refenetl to the section that talks about nopy trees antl saitl although there will be a tree, from that basis the city gives freetlom of choice to the property o s from a Ilst of r endalions antl tllscourages other types of trees- Ha saltl on the opposite side, ha was frustrated with the previous Cotle which was comprised of wortl sentences. He said the public hatl difficulty interpre[ng it. It was up to the Community Services Department to come up with Its own interpretation of the Cotle. This Cade Book is different as it builds up a picture of what is being accomplishetl, while still having a standard which has to be followed. He likes the exfra notes in the Code so That when there is a question in Com unity Services, there Is an answer in Ne Cotle which is easy to interpret. Page 6 Commissioner Bundy referred to Line 2 under General Contlitions. He wantetl to make re that the Cotle is going to require trucks, boats, campers and Vailers be locetetl in the back yards and fenced like the rest of the city. Ms. Nance said she wultl specify that in the Cotle. Com er Maingot refenetl back to Page 5, the last line, antl wantetl to know how they arrive at the 25% figure for landscape material. Ms. Nance said she had studied various Godes antl lantlswpe studies antl that Is how the percentage was arrived at. Commissioner Maingot said ifs e hatl a large piece of properly. 25% of lantlscapa material Is a lot of material to require. Ms. Nance said she will look at the issue before the next meeting CC 5-12-03/416 Mayor Anderson suggested making the requirement 25% of the front yard and the side could be a different percentage or no percentage at all The Commission returned to Page 6 far review. Mayor Anderson said the stipulation on fencing should apply to all three paragraphs of Rear-Nerd Parking. Com er Bundy wanted to re w the sections which require the number of parkingsspaces, may be reduced by demonstrating the possibility of shared parking. He said someone could demonstrate the possibility of shared parking, but he would rather they show some farm of agreement before reducing the number of parking spaces That they ate required to have. Ms. Nance agreed with Commissioner Bundy that there should be some form of agreement required. Mr. ~rago asked if some of the parking requirements need to be lessened. Ms. Nance said that the city could just say i for every 250 square feet of use. She did not feel that it is a super restricted requirement. She said she would research It further and would come beck with a different recommendation. Commissioner Maingot left the meeting at 8:35 p m. Commissioner Bundy brought up the question of putting in curbs and gutters with on- street parking. He wanted to know If this would be a problem or where cut out parking would be located. Ms, Nance sad she was referting to the a[ out areas of parking. Commissioner Maingot returned to the meeting a18:37 p.m. Mr. Otago said if you take a look at West Wanen Avenue from Wilma Street to Milwee Street, some existing businesses there would probably not meet the general conditions of parking, e n if you requited some on the street. The properties are just not big nough. He asked Ms. Nance to revisit that issue. He asked Ms. Nance to wnsider centralized parking. Page 7 Ms. Nance said she had a comment that another way to measure the outbuilding would be that it should not exceed 40 % of the original building. CC 5-1 2-0 3141 ] Discussion ensuetl antl the Commission ageed to have the Cotle state ... "shall have a m of 625 square feet or 40% of the original builtling whichever is greater...", with a note that Bates that this oounts lowartl total buitdin8 footpdnt Page 8 Ms. Nan saitl that it just slates That prev s parking a n be usetl to motlate stormwater antl the stormwater management requir menu conform to the Lantl Development Cotle. Mr. Drago asketl Ms. Nance to bring hlm up to tlate on what the Land Development Cade says about stormwater. Mr Sargent says that the Lantl Development Cotle reverts to the Public Works Manual for same of the information. Commissioner Bundy asketl that each of these sections refers to the land Development Code antl the Public Works Manual. Ms. Nance agreed to retlo the wording stating._ "shall conform to Longwood Development Code and the Longwootl Public Works Manual." Page 9 Ms. Nance saitl the nert (ew pages tlepict typical lots within the District. Page 10 Ms. Nance saitl this page illustrates the integration of a new structure of either office or retail built on a vacant or tear-down lot. Page 11 Ms. Nance said this page depicts a new house on a vacant or tear-tlown lot Page 12 Ms. Nance said this page gives an itlea fora large lot which coultl be subtlivitletl into three or four smaller uses. She mentioned chat the Cotle BOOk is available on line. Commissioner Buntly suggested to the City Administrator That the city should make a direct link from its home page to the Code Book. He hatl received comments from individuals who felt that Ne Cotle Book was tlifficult to find on the city's website. CC 5-12-031416 Mayor Anderson just wanted to clarify that the pages which w suggestions and ideas of haw the Code works. He said Pages t through Bea e the i Rules for the Code. Page 13 Ms. Nance said this page showed shared parking and parallel parking. Page t4 Ms. Nance reviewed this page saying II illusUated if a new civic use were to occur and how it can be positioned within the District. Mayor Anderson asked the Commission to keep going or If if was a good place to slop. Ms. Nance said That the neat part is architectural and this was a good place to smp. Commissioner Maingot said It is important to give the property owners a chance to study the Cotle before the neat meeting. He wanted to make sure the residents knew the date of the meeting. 3. ADJOURN. Mayor Anderson adjourned the meeting at 8:57 p. m. _IJw ~--II~ Daniel J. Anrte , MaYOr Dc rs, Record'n rotary ATI~ $arnl~ At. Mi~cr___ k~~ " CC 5-12-03/419