CCMtg05-14-01WSMinLONGWOOD CITY COMMISSION
Longwood City Commission Chambers
175 W. Warren Avenue. Longwootl. FL 32]50
Minutes
Work Sasslon
May 14.2001
PRESENT: Mayor Paul Lovestrantl
Deputy Mayor Jahn C. Maingot
Commissioner Dan Anderson
Commissioner Butch Buntly
John J. Drago. City Administrator
Geraltllne D. 2ambri, City Clerk
Richartl 5. Taylor. Jr. City Attorney
Berlin D. Bosworth, Deputy City Clerk
John Brock. Director. Community Services Department
Jay Sargent, Manager. Planning Division. CSD
Chad Harvey, Planner. Planning Division. CSD
Gail Easley. The Gail Easley Company
ABSENT- Commissioner Stev¢ Miller (excveetl)
i. CALL TO ORDER.
The mayor calletl a work session together at ]:06 p.m.
Commissioner Bundy moved to suspend the rules. Secontled by
Deputy Mayor Maingot antl concurred 4-0-t, with Commissioner
Miller absent.
Mr. Dave Powers, Presitlent & GEO, Unitetl Hantaga Bank, 1411 Etlgewaler Drlve_
Orlando 32604, telephone 407<4]-0386. spoke regartling e pantling application before
the Federel Deposit Insurance Company (FDIC) and the Florida Department of Banking
m bring Its heatlquarter bank building to the City of Longwootl using the unimproved
perceL al the intersection of Wayman Street and SR 434. Mr. Powers gave an overall
outline of the problems the bank facetl with respect to locating in Longwood. The
purpose o! bank representatives was not to see what needetl to be done to get
Commission approval. but rather, direction on how they might proceed under the Code.
as it previously existetl.
Commissioner Buntly atlvised them to have preparetl antl turn in their Site Plan to the
city so that by the time the Ordinance became Law'. it would then be grantl fathered in.
Dapuly Mayor Maingot auggestetl consideration be given [o what was envisioned for
the city of Longwood and there was an opportunity for a meeting of mintls.
CC 5-14-Ot\111
Ms. Easley thought the bank was interestetl in flexibility, which the new Cotle offered:
this was an opportunity for them to be Trendsetters. She woultl be glad to meet with Mr.
Powers and Mr. Sargent. as she believetl a mitltlle grountl coultl be fountl.
The Commission heltl tliscussion amongst members as to what should be, e.g.,
develop a eat Downtown but have blentletl-change in the Corritlors as They move
further away from the Downtown area, e.g.. SR 434 being one of the Corridors. as it
Quad toward I-4 it would gratluelly change its character from that of the Downtown
District to a more rural look. AnoTher point raised was there would be difficulty during
transition; however. o ce the Commission decitletl on the future look of Longwood. that
eetled To be the focus from the citys viewpoint while stall worketl with businesses on
their site plans. That flexibility antl options were built into the proposed LDC. Viewing
photographs of other bulidings in the mid-Poritla area -discussing the setbacks of
buildings, some having 15 to 20 feet building entrances on the front of builtlings while
their parking is on tha aide of the builtling or back of the building, tlesign of roots.
canopies and other-type tlesigns to shade customers, heights, parking lots, antl such.
Commissioner Bundy was of the opinion That there was a 20-foot setback in the
Corridors to achieve This Type transition.
Ms. Easley sugges[etl -that at the next workshop -she bring
photographs which illustrated the various distances of setbacks and
the various kinds of configurations that would fit within those
setbacks; there were an infinite number of choices of minimum and
setbacks and ways to design what would happen in those
setbacks and it might be easier to have actual photographs that
illustrated what was being discussed.
It was the consensus that [he Ci[y Administrator woultl talk to Public
Safety Director with regard to any possible public safety issues
contained in the Draft LDC.
2. REVIEW DRAFT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE(LDC)
(Gail Easley, The Gail Easley Company)
Ms. Easley briefly reviewed [he one-page hantlout graphic: The Developmen( Process -
- how a user woultl go through the Development process in a very general way: when
deciding about a development was to, 1st-look In Article II to tletermine if the use was
allowable', 2n° -Then look at the general design stantlartls that were containetl in Article
III. many of which were previously tliscussetl; 3`° -were there any special circum~
stances relatetl to the location, e.g.. i a flootl plain, in an Historic District; 4r'"
there any other circumstances which relatetl to the lantl Thai woultl limit development
choices. Once those were done, then one arrived at the tlecision-making processes.
Next Ms. Easley reviewetl the revised Adicle V. Thes re the Supplemental
Standards. Once one knew their use was allowed antl hatl looked at The Standards
CC 5-14-011112
that applied to ALL USES within a particular lantl use district, there may be Design
Standards that were uniquo to the use itself rather Than applying to all the uses within a
district.
1. ARTICLE V -SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS
S70 HOme OCCUOations
~qYa~ Firs[lino-DELETE Iha word mi~h[afler the wortle -shall be
permitted that".
ADD the following language. Vou w II not be allowed to do enVthing that
does inte_rfere_yf you are 'sued a license antl It is later fountl that you are
Interferin Ice 'll be revoked.
woe V-2.C4, No changes.
5 3 0 Accessory S(r tctures
Ms. Easley will do research on canvas carports antl canvas awnings.
~ge_ y--_ Keep front fences at no more than 3 feet. No chain link
fence allowetl In front. Fences allowed in front can be of tlecorative wootl, masonry. or
fences treatetl for plastic so long as they ere wall malntalnetl.
5.3.5 Outdoor stora and display
Mr. Drago suggested that the Items only relatrvc to land tlavelopmenl stay in this
Section and lhoso items croUe-oriented be put In [he General Cotle.
Consensus fo insert Design Requirements no matter what kintl of
wall would be required.
The Commission recessed at 8:34 p.m. and reconvened at 8:44 p.m.
5.5.0 Temporary Uses ~- No Changes.
5 5 1 ftefase Salvaoe vaNS and Junkyards
Ms. Easley stated she would make sure that in the new section,
Article II, tlefnition of Salvage antl lank yartls, not [o inclutle auto
antl hazardous materials.
Paq_e VS 5.3_5 B.
Ms. Easley s[a[etl more time would be spent reviewing the issue of
urdao
CC 5-14~Ot\t 13
~e.~3.: s.~ s F.
Ms. Easley will gef with the Gity Attorney antl make changes antl
bring them back before the City Commission.
At this point in the review process. Ms Easley suggestetl the Commission began Its
review of the 2-page hantlout. Additional Corridor Standards.
D. Desion Standards
D. 1. 2. and 3
That parking should be in the rear and on the sides;
To add the following stone (natural or artificial) antl tlecora[ive block.
Commission consensus was to have stall and Ms. Easley prepare a
palette book for review by the Commission.
D. 4 5 and 6
Commission concurred with Ms. Easley re-writing the language to allow
mansard roots.
D. 7 B and /g.a. through 9 D. No changes.
t0. Fences wells
11. Additional siun re¢uire ants
Signs shall not have more than 3 colors.
At this point in the meeting, Ms. Easioy returned back [o the revised handout
Supplemental S(antlaNS'.
6.5 2 Outdoor Recreation jacllllles Amusements end A(tractlon
Delete Section 5.5.2 in its entirety. This will be relocatetl to the
General Code.
5.5.3. Kennels
5.5.3.A. Delete the words ~, breetling. Also DELETE the secontl sentence of'A"
in its entirely
Mayor Loves[rantl left at 9:57 p m_
CC 5-14-011110.
/..
)~\i t5
This page left blank Intentionally.
CC 5~14At\116