Loading...
CCMtg08-13-01Min LONGWOOO CITY COMMISSION Longwootl City Commission Chambers 1]5 W. Warren Avenue. Longwootl, FL 32]50 Minutes Work Session August 13. 2001 Present: Mayor Paul LOVestrantl Deputy Mayor John C. Maingot Commissioner Dan Anderson Commissioner Butch Buntly John J. Drago. City Administrator Richard S- Taylor. City Attorney Berlin D. Bosworth. Deputy City Clerk John Brock. Director. Community Services Department Jay Sargent, Manager. Planning Div.. Community Services Dept Absent: Commissioner Steve Miller Also Present'. Gail Easley. The Gail Easley Company i. CALL TO ORDER. The mayor calletl a work session together at ]:00 p.m. Deputy Mayor Mainygt moved to suspend the rules. Secondetl by Commissioner Anderson and agreed to by voice vote. 2. CONTINUE REVIEW OF THE REVISED DRAFT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (Gail Easley. The Gail Easley Company) ARTICLE III -Development Design Standards Paae III-43 - 3 6 1 OIf~Street Perk ng dnd Loedna Commission hatl no questions. Page III-44 - 3 6 1 Park ng Space Reouirements Ms. Easley stated, in going over parking standartls with staff, they suggestetl that the parking standartls for Banks antl eimllar linanciel Inetilutione be 1'.250 el( instead of 200 slf as [here was no[ that much need for parking. Likewise on CC 8-1 30112 0 5 Medical/dental/opticatlve[erinary conics and oFfces be 1:200 s/f to ensure (here ough parking for those type uses due to overlap appointments. Too, Day enters. private schools, and similar facilities would be 2 per classroom plus 1!250 s/! o! office as well as private schools K-6. A private high school would have the same standards as a public high school. Commission uvrncurred with these changes. Page il1~46-G. Park nq jot design 3. Ms. Easley pointed out that churches end other institutional uses having office eeds on a tlaily basis woultl need to have a small number of paved spaces on the basis of neetl, ae well es paving 0( handicap spaces'. under this ecenario churches would he allowetl to have unpaved parking. Commission concurred on (his. Com er Bundy asked what was the (anal decision on counting resitlenflal parkingsspaces. Mayor Lovesirantl replied four spaces. two of which could be in the garage or carport. Ms. Easley oonfirmetl that was her untlerstanding. Mayor Lovesirand asked why specifying bicycle parking Ms. Easley answered This was retained because it has been customary to provide those faciliiles. If the Commission decidetl it was not needetl, then it oultl be removetl lrom the text. In reply to the Mayors question about 2.c. o page III-46. Ms. Easlay peintetl out that that text only referred to the bicycle rack itself. Paoe III-4] - 3.6.2 Leatlino Soace Reaulremenls Ms. Easley. respontliny to a question by the Mayor, said City had loatling spaces previously and whatever tliscussion took place in Ihe, first work session. there have been no changes since then- Mayor Lovesirantl asked why loading in multi-!amity? Ms. Easley said yes. Paoe III-48 - 3 6 4 Retluction o! Parkino Soace. Requirement Ms. Easley informetl there were minimal changes to this section GG 813-Ot\206 Page III-49 - 3.1 0 Standards for Urive-Up Facilities Sasetl upon previous work sessions. lfils secion was atlded- Paae Ifl-51 -3.9.9 S[ormwater Management Mayor Lovestrand asketl if the setback requirement was adtletl -when a retentiUn pond waS bui}t it was nUt t0 be up to the next property line. Ma Eeeley saltl she had Yhet note from the last meeting- while it was not in this document yet. it would be. Mr. Drayo. soeakinp to 3 E.1 -Parking Space Reouirements. said if the Commission was going to change single-family to allow the garage to count as Nuo units. antl [he driveway count as two units, there has to be a note on the table specihcally saying that that cars parked on the ddveway, no pnd of the car can touch the sitlewalk. Mayor Lovestrand concurretl. ARTICLE IV -Resource Protection Stantlartls Ms- E' alley pointed out there ware very !sw changes metle to Article IV lrom the lust round of work aesaions. Page IV-3 -Water Bodies Mayor Lovestrand asked it there were not times when tlry. shallow retention ponds coultl be used !or water. Ms. Easley respontletl, based upon the design, they can have alternate uses. She did not know if Yhat was tratlitional for Longwood to allow that or not. Pape IV-3 -4 3,2 A Surface Water-Prgtection Mayor Lovestrand stated he woultl like an explanation as to what that meant. Ma-Easley said this section was saying mat I! one hatl an existing. vegetetlve buffer, one must preserve it antl one hatl to preserve 25 feet of il. Ms. Easley s[atetl that needed to be re-wortled. Commission consensus for Ms. Easley to re-word so as to be more untlerslantlable. Pa IV-4-R Protect on Stantlartls There was a brief interchange regarding Resource Protection Stantlartls. No changes were made to the text CC B~t 3-01\20] Paae 4 4.0 - Protectetl Habitats Ms. Easley informetl no changes on Habitat, other than minor wortling Paae IV-] -Flood Plains antl Flood Zones Ms. Easley informed no changes were made to Flood Plains and Flood Zones. other than minor wortling. Mayor Loves[rand asked if It ete[ed no builtling below the 100-year flood mark. Ms. Easley confirmed the Mayor s untlerstanding. Paae IV-I - 4 52 A 1 -General Regu-re ants Mayor Loveslrand saitl one-half of his property was within the 100-year tlootl plain. Ms. Easley reiteratetl that (here was no storage there; there coultl be storage in that area outside the hood plain. Deputy Mayor Maingot spoke to oage IV-fi 4.4.2 - ReOUirements for a Critical Habitat ManaOe ant Plan. wanted to know M1ow this woultl impact upon the tlevelopment of Lazy Acres. Ms- Easley saitl This requiretl that a professional elologiat identify whether there actually any species versus the possibility that they coultl occur. Cehain habitats are likely to have the listed species. but (here may no[ actually be any. A survey needed to be done [o tletermine if there were any. then the City would have to tlescribe how much land was needed and develop a Management Plan to protect the species. Depending on what species were fountl. [he Management Plan might be relocation. Mayor Lovestrand saitl this section talked about vegetative community. He asketl why the City needed that paragraph. Ms. Easley replied this was a stantlard practice: this section was saying that when one discovered there were listetl species to be protectetl on the site, antl ne developetl the Management Plan and. -for example, if relocation was not possible (or whatever reason and there were no more alternatives. nevertheless 25 percent (25 0) of the lantl could be tleveloped. Hopefully, a Management Plan would identify some alternatives that would make it possible to develop on more of the lantl. Commissioner Buntly pointetl out that without This clause, there could be no tlevelopment. When i1 comes to endangeretl species the City would not be the final arbiter On that. CC 8-1 3-0112 0 8 Mayor ~ovestrand awed if mere waa a state law mat the cfry Had m nave mra Plan. Ms. Easley statetl the City s Comprehensive Pian hatl to address Habitat antl how the City was going to manage it. Alsc, the City has to have a way to Implement whatever it states in the Plan. Mr. Sargent confirmetl that this was a State requiramem. Commissioner Buntly informetl that tlevelopers were aware that when they option eparcel-antl before they sign on the dottatl Ilne-that was part of the Information they needed to know as that would affect whether they coultl develop or not. Mr. Drago pointed out that there was an error in the Hama of the City department -- Depadment of Planning and Community Services. Me. Easley advrsetl there viers several Items, such ae that, that she weuld be doing globally changes on those for the final document. Ms-Easley said when this section waa {Inelizotl she oultl itlenti(y fhe correct agencies wiN responsibility in this area. Pa IV-9 -4 5 5 51 tl d for__D_e__v_elovment in the Area of SDecial Flood Hazartl - C 5 Mayor Lovestrentl asketl if there were not atandarda by the County Healm Department (CHD) on septic tanks'. why not lust say go to the CHD for one's permit. Further discussion ensued with respect to septic tanks. drain fields. 1DD year tlootl plain. city s rating, the fad that the current Code states septic tank ebsorydon fields shall not ne located within 200 feet of the area of Special Fleotl H32artl. Paae IV-10= ParaaraDh 2. (too of oagel Mayor Lovestrand spoke to this, wanting to know if this could be entercetl wim the County. Mr. Taylor statetl it possibly coultl, but not be retroactive CC 8-13-Ot\209 Paoe IV-t2 - F Exempt on (barns antl trailersl From Flood Plain Ms. Easley atlvised IYlese were the Ctly's current exemptions'. there was very II[Tle change m the City s LDC flood plain slantlards es compared to what was currently enforced. ARTICLE V -Supplemental 5[antlartls Ms. Easley informed there were several changes in Article V. the Home Occupations was completely stricken Through as that will be movetl info the City Cotle antl net part of the LDC'. there were some clarifications antl so forth In e of [he sections; there was a new section on Shetls and Storage euiltlings which was provided as d result of The first ropntl of work sessions, That has not been reviewetl. Continuing, Ms Easley talked to, Swimming Pools o ae V-3 5.3.1 A.. noting staff pointetl out to her That it was the current practice to allow the enclosure for pools to have a rear setback of eeven (]) fee[. inetead o(15leef for the mein builtling. Commission consensus tp reinsert that back into the LDC. Parye V-4-_ 5.3.3 Fences D. antl D 1. Mayor Lovestrantl believed there was a clash: Paragraph D. staled six (6) feet antl then below, untlar ],,. eight (S) feet Is stated. While this was previously tliscussetl, there was never a motion agreed upon by the Commission to go to eight feet. Ms. Easley said zero lot lines were tleleted so, 1., was no longer neetled. Mayor Loveshantl askatl IF the Clty was outlawing eight (S) foot fences. Ms Easley said that in a previous work session -not the session where Deputy Mayor Lovestrand brought up the issue of uniformity of fences- that by ue. the Commission hetl directed her to change the eight (S) feel to six (6) (eat for consistency in height. She [hen spoke Ie. Paae V5 2.. noting there was a provision to achieve a consistency of fence height. Mayor Lovestrantl saitl he woultl bring that up as an amentlmenl, to him, the eight (8) fool fence was a good itlca. Discussion con[inuetl regarding height of fences No consensus tleveloped. CC 8-13-Ot1210 Ms. Easley. speaking to. Page V~5 ~ 5.3.4 Shetls and Storages Build'Inos. pointing out this was newly atldetl text: that Page V-5-5.3.5 Outdoor storaoe entl disolav. w s stricken through as it was being moved into the Clty Code', and. cn page V-6- 5 3.6 Canopies. w ewty added text basetl on previous commenle at an earlier work sass on, Commissioner Bundy pointed out that any canvas canopy was not going to meet the wind load. Ms. Easley replietl that there were references to canopies and awnings in the Building Cotle entl this directs one to comply with whatever those are. Commissioner Buntly s understanding was that the Building Cotle did not allow them as there are no engineered tlrawings as such. there was no way fo Mate the wind load o(a canopy. He wanted to know if he was wrong in that enderstanding. Mayor Lovestrand asketl if (he Citys Builtling Code allowed any canvas attuctures. Mr. Brock was aeked to check lYlat. A brief discussion continued with respect to canvas canopies. It was suggested that canvas canopies be allowed and text added to Me LOC to that eHert', other canopies - of ngitl matersel(s)- woultl need to meet stantlard requirements. Discussion ensuetl with respect 1e page VV_5, wherein Ma. Easley s9aletl that fence materials be treated wood entl whether there shoultl be added text to make sure treated wootl tlitl not have arsenic in it. Mention was made that there actual, legitimate sWdies by government laboratories with scientific pfocf statetl [his was a problem. Commission ecnsensus to leave text alone until that became an ussue- Paoe V-] -- 5.4 0 Supolemental Stantlartls for Specifietl Lantl Ilse Activities Ms. Easley informetl that a number of changes were matle to various intlivitlual activities that were reFlectetl basetl upon prior discussions. In (he Salvage yartls and Junkyartls where the opaque fences were required, it tlitl not specify a type offence. There was consensus at a prior work session to allow masonry walls entl ptaeticlencing- CC 8-1 3-011211 Pane V-8-5.4.2 Kennels B. Commission consensus to Include the following atltletl language- afence or wall around kennel--so that the site was containetl. Pa V-8-543F 'I Da Care Ms. Easley in(ormetl the changes eliminated a number of etantlerds that were dupilcative of State Iicensin8 requirements. P V-9-544V h' I S I R tat Facilities Ms. Easley stafetl she atltletl the section that the parking. which was required (or oH-street parking.. w not also usetl for the sale of vehicles and the Information on the Ilghiing pian_as Com er Bundy speak'mg to, 5.4.4.A., noted the Commission had now, in effect, not only eliminatetl them in the Downtown district. but also ellminetetl Them from (hose parcels Immediately atljacent to the Downtown district. which meant the Downtown restriction was extended 150 feet. Mr. Taylor explainetl that car sale lots alreatly [here woultl be grandfathered in. Com us to keep 50 feet for resitlential antl alilm5natenthe 150 feet for the Downtown tlistrict. Pane V-10 - 54 6 Bed antl Breakfast Establishments Ms. Easley explainetl this was a new section and that the text was based on prior work session tllscussions. Com us to limit Betl antl Breakfast establ shmenLS to the Downtown end Corritlor districts. Mr. Drago pointetl ou[ the Historic District might have a tliHerent seI of stantlards !or Bed and Breakfast establishments. Pane V-71 - 5 4 6 Adult Entertainment Establishments Ms. Easley thought this shoultl all be properly placetl in the Clty Cotle. with A. remaining In the LDC referencing the Longwootl Cily Cotle. Commission consensus in agree. CC 8-13-011212 Commissioner Bundy wishetl to err on Ne slde of caution. make, sure these changes multaneously so that we bring forwartl the changes in the ortlinance ellhes beforo or at Me same lime as the adoption of [ha LDG. Commission consensus to agree. Pape V-12 ~- 5.8.8 Mobile Home Parks Deletetl. Pape V-13 - 5.4.] Nursino antl Convalescent Facilities Mlnorchanges- Paae V~13-4.8 Hospitals No changes. Paae V-13 - 4.9 Communi[v Residential Homes (CRH1 Some language changes lp Ihls section. Paae V-14 - 4 10 Group Homes Minor changes. Pale V-14-_ 54.11 Religious Institutions New section. Religious Insli(uiions. which was not previously tliscussetl. Mayor Loves(rantl asketl why it should be atltletl. The primary reason for adding lhie section. Ms. Easley saitl, was Ihet these ncillary and/or accessory uses were identified in the Land Use tables as subject [o Supplemental Stantlards. The contemporary issue with churches was Thal they have a number of ancillaries andlor accessory uses. In the past, it had been okay to allow churches to locate wherever they wanletl because. typically, as tlealing with a weekend or a one- or Iwo~tlay~a-week aclivityl~ies) and they did not generate the kintl of traffic impacts as they tlo today. This section tried to capture those issues and tliscuss how They would be regulaletl antl healed. Commission tliscueslon tou<hetl on the potential of over-regulation of churches as their ancillary antllpr accessory uses provide certain benefits [o community. It explainetl [hat. on pie V-~, ?_thr_~. w e addressing-for instance -~ thesissue of a small church opereting a vary large e ~hpol. Thore coultl be the category, as an example. of an aratlemic school where it was not the primary activity but the church was the primary iunclion. On the other hand, if the school CG 8-13-011213 re [he principal use. then if would be regula[etl as a school antl net a church, antl the same for aft other categories. Commissioner Anderson wanted to know how "principal use" was tlefinetl. Ms. Easley suggested looking al the principal use in several ways. e.g., a xisting church that was clearly adtling en some accessory activities. Items which one woultl look al would be hours ofoperation. parking requirements, 10 tletermine what was the primary activity. This semen trietl to capture what was going on in modern tlay churches: they were providing a wide variety of legitimate social, educational, cultural, re national needs in the communify~, and yet, most standards and criteria tle not atltlress the full impacts because they [antl to focus on the primary activity. Paoe V-15 - 5.4.11.D. Cam er Anderson next, referring to paragraph D., said If a church had one ncillery uses. This LDC would mandate a butter level o!'C" without ~egartl to what thane uses might be- The document should look at the ancillary uses antl set that up accortlingly. Ms. Easley concurred with the gratluated buffer approach. Commission consensus to have Ms Easley change text in D. to read, "up to buffer level C". Ms. Easley statetl. for example, (hat i(a school was the principal use by size antl hours of operation. this section states that if an ancillary use (in this case. a school) was the principle use. then one woultl use the Standards which relatetl to school. This was not to say It was not a church nor was it 1o prohlblt (hoes ncillarylaccessory uses, it was to try to atlequately atltlress the impacts en the neighborhootl. Page V~16 Telecommunications Towers Page V-16. 5.5.13 has been deleted. Paoe V-16. Telecommunications Towers To be reserved. Commissioner Maingot mentioned !here was a new version of a lelecommunicallone tower-~ I[ looks very much like a tree (an Australian pine)- There was a prototype off Lee Road going to US 1 ]-92. on the left hantl side. II Is very hard to identify unless one were looking for it. Commissioner Buntly polntetl out 9here were a lot of land uses that are subJect to Supplemental Standards ier which there were ne slantlertle. CC e-13-a1\2t4 Ms. Easley said Table 2 still reflecfetl Supplemental Stantlarda for items that, in an earlle~ work session. it was tlecitletl that (here woultl be no adtlitional Stantlartls. She will furnish e corrected fable 2 that changed some of the "Se" to As`. Once Ms Easley made that chanye. it there were some atltlifional copies of correctetl Table 2. she would furnish the proposed Standards to the Commission and staff. Mayor Lovestrand reminded there were two "AS' Ic be put on Table 2 -~ an -A" in Downtown antl an "A" in Intlus[rial. Ms. Easley informed she neetled to provitle a revisetl Article II tO the Cemmiesion/6faf( because in an earlier work session a number o! "Ss'-were changed to'AS'. Com er Buntly wanted to know ii Outtloor Storage was going to be reterretl toountler lantl uses. Ms. Easley explainetl That was a section of Standards - the accessory activities -that was being deletetl oui of the LDC and placed in the City Code. Ms. Easley pointed Io the front of [he Lantl Development Code (revisetl Draft, .tune 2001 ~, !o be placed in the City Gode rather than the LDC, Temporary Uses A antl B (1 through 11) and the next section, Outdoo~storege and display, A through G. which prohibits It, for example. in (root yards. residential areae, parking areas, fire lanes. antl so forth. It tloes not prohibit it in the back so long as it is screenetl so long as loose materials are enclosed so [hey tlo not svelter', display materials must be taken in at the end of the business tley. The commission recessed at 8:40 p.m. and reconvened at 8:4'I p. m. ARTICLE VI -Sign Regulations Pa VI 38- E P I't I5 n Mayor LovesHantl esketl Commission t0 reconsider the use of 10 square foot political signs in residential neighborhootls and give thought to 9 square toot signs. Thirty~[wo square toot political signs were only allowetl in cialfintlustrial MsmEaeiay, respondng to a question. advieetl that the Historic Dlstdd was now a Downtown district and would be considered commercial. GC 8-13-01\2t5 Commissioner Anderson saitl he could go along with 4 square foot political signs in resitleniial. The issue of billboards was the next issue discussetl. Ms. Easley atlvlaed That the sec9lon on billboards stetetl they may be allowed in erclel entl industdal. prohibited In the Hls(orie distrlU overlay. wifh regard to ant, they may tlisplay any message Ihat was in conformance with the Clty Code. She explainetl that political signs were a specific type of Temporary Signs. Consensus 1o change realdental political signs to a m cl4 square feet and leave the non- esitlential at4 x 8. Page VI-41 - I Street Banner Signs 2.c. Mr. Urago brought to the attention of Ms. Easley that it statetl a bontl. The City oultl want an actual cash tleposit of 5500. I(the Clty had to remove the sign, they would be refunded the tlifference between the tleposit less the cos[ incurretl by the City to remove the banner. Com us [c tlelete the word "bontl" and changesthe text to reFlact that a Fiva Hundred Dollar ($500.00) cash tleposit is requiretl. Page VI-39 - G. Garage Sale Sians Commissioner Antlerson relatetl the travails o! a constituent who hatl a garage sale with respect 1o her garage sale signs entl the tact that twice Codes Enforcement removed her signs. His cencern was how to assist resitlents in This regartl. Discussion ensued with various solutions proposed that might help tlevelop a geotl process far garage sales entl placement of signs. Commission consensus to fable entl IeY Commissioner Antlerson tlevelop a solution. Page V1-45 -6.8.2 Removal of Illeoal Slgns A. B. C. and D Mr. Drago said A. and B. w e okay. With respect to C. and D. , he fountl a problem with them befog glegel, es well as befog determined by a Cotles Officer whether II Is unsafe, in ant tlanger relative to the construction. The other problem is the Cncon~istency of 0., as i[ says the Cotles Officer fnds the sign to be in eminent tlanger. but IM1e Building Official notifies the properly I(there were a sign in the Rlghts-of-way, a Building Official shoultl not be thenone to remove it. unless it was something constructive. 8., on the other hand. was That signs placed in the public Rights-of-way are not placetl there in accortlance with the Code. The Cotles Officer cnultl easily remove that. CC 8~1 J-011216 Gc e ~i a~a~~2r'~ This page intentionally left blank- GG 6-1 3-01121 8