Loading...
CCMtg04-23-01WSMinLONGWOOD CITY COMMISSION Longwootl City Commission Chambers 175 W. Warren Avenue. Longwootl, FL 32]50 Minutes Work Session April 23. 2001 PRESENT: Mayor Pdul Lovestrantl Deputy Mayor John C. Maingot Commissioner Dan Anderson Commissioner Butch Bundy John J. Drago, City Atlministralcr Geraldine D. Zambri, City Clerk Richartl S. Taylor. Jr.. Cily Attorney Berlin D. Boeworth, Deputy City Cled< .IChn Brock, Director. Community Services Department Jay Sargent, Manager. Planning Division. Community Services Dept. Chad Harvey. Planner. Planning Division, Community Services Dept. ABSENT: Commissioner Steve Miller (excusetl) 1. CALL TO ORDER. The mayor called a work session to ortler at 1',03 p m. Deputy Mayor Maingot movetl to suspend all rules. except the 10'.00 p m. rule. Secontled by Commissioner Anderson and concurred 4~0-1, with Commissioner Miller absent. 2. REVIEW DRAFT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) (Gal Easley, The Gail Easley Compeny) Ms. Easley, referring to her Memorandum io the City Commission datetl April 1], 2001 regarding Community Resltlentlel Homes referencing Section 419.001(2) antl Section 419.001(11 ~ Floritla Statutes pertaining to community resitlential homes -~ which was handed out at the meeting ~- wherein, homes of six (0) or fewer were allowetl in both Low-antl Metlium-Density antl seven (]) or more only in Metlium-Density- Thefle uees oultl be per statutory citations and subject to supplemental stantlartls to ensure ompliance with elate licensing requirem¢nts which would be reilec[etl in Chapter 2 as well as being cross-referenced in the Slantlartls. 6 0'i-Z++-ei / 95 ARTICLE 3-DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Ms Easley advisetl that two corridor streets throughout were misnametl and woultl be corrected to read CR-427 and SR-434. 3.2.1 Table of Dimensional Stantlartls Consensus that corridor streets were to include US Highway 17-92 antl Dog Track Roatl. Mr. Drago explainetl in was the Countys intent -- through fhe Community Retlevelopment Agency (CRA) design standartls -- [o control placement, tlesign, and architectural features of buiitlings along Nighwey 1192 Lantleceplnq should be hased on_ (1). selection, and (2), very well maintainetl. Commercial corritlors: if did a percentage Then there would be a strip of lantlscaping that would soften a buiftling. Com us for General Commercial was to not set a soetbackebut to set a maximum setback of zero feet to 29leet whnch would allow no parking in Front; they muet allow (or parking in back. Should they opt for any setback up to 20 feet, they would neetl to provide for landscaping as detertninetl In the Design Stantlartls -which they must continue to maintain. The Commission next reviewetl and dlscussetl Industrial. Commission consensus for Industrial was to make no changes. Ms. Easley raoommended Public[Inslltution be the same as General Commercial. Commission consensus tar Publlclinstltutlon was that if be the same as General commercal. With respect to Resitlential, the tliscussion tlealt with minimum setbacks, maximum impervious surface ratio, side yard setback, how these woultl apply to new developments. building in-fll, how these measurements applietl to a house with swimming pool, fire stops between houses. parking of boats antl RVs. antl such. Ms. Easley remindetl the zero lot line only applies to new subtllvisions antl not to the perimeter lots of e subtllvlsion antl, with a smell subtllvision there would probably be no lots that woultl he eligible or quality. CL ~9-?.gat / vb Mayor Lovastrantl esketl if there was a consensus Deputy Mayor Maingol end Commissioner euntly were in favor of no zero lot Ilne antl Gommissionar Antlaraon antl Mayor Lovastrantl were for leaving it as it was. Ms. Easley pointetl out that the rear setbacke and impervious surface were similar to what existed currently. Commissioner Antlereon eaketl what appropriate and adequate open space shell be set aside rePerretl to. Ms. Eeslgy replied whatever the impervious surface requirement was: whatever dra/nege requirements weu(d 6e /or the parcel. whe(ever landscaping might epply- wheteversetbacks might apply 9 the sum foal o/all those Things add up to is the open space. She agreed to adtl a sentence that states what she had just saitl. Page III-4. 3.2 2A. Lct Design Standartls. 3.b. Consensus of [he Commission to change 50%, where it appears on the second line of the sentence, to ]0%. Page III-4, 3.228. Lot Dimension SYendertle. 2. b. Consensus of the Commission [o change 50%, where it appears on the secontl line of the sentence, to ]0%. Page III-4. 3.2.3A. Purpose Consensus of the Commission to expantl the corridors fo include D.S. Highway 1]-92 antl Dog Track Road. Page III-5, 3.23C. Dimensional Standartls Commission consensus to change Maximum Builtling Height from Over 25'to Over 35' for the minimum 10' Front Setback. The Commission recessed at 8:19 p.m. antl reconvened at 8:2] p,m. Ms. Easley discuseed the poselbllity of having a pattern book for the corridors preparetl the way It was being done for [he Historic District, so that the architectural dosign features would be spelletl out in more tletail. Page III~5, 3.3.0. SUBDIVISION DESIGN AND LAYOUT. 3.32Ganeral Requirements, A. Commission consensus to change wording "Into two (2) or more lots or parcels" to read "three (J) or more...." Page III-6. 3.3.2 General Requirements, C. Commission consensus to reword the first sentence from "A <on<eptual plan of proposed...." to read "A plan of proposed...." Page III-6, 3.3.2 General Requirements, D. Commission consensus on [he third line from the bottom which starts with the words, plat shall be, to delete the word "approved" and insert the words "submitted for review and decision...." Commission consensus to have Ms. Easley review Section 3.3.3 Exemptions, prior to its being deleted in its entirety. Page 1119 19. and 20. Go together as one item. Mr. Drago asked if the Cily was required to keep the preliminary ple(and, it so, for how long. Mr. Drago recommended to the City Commission that me preliminary plate, all other plans. and the final plat be fumishad to the City in a microfilm type as approved by the State as well as on CD-Rom. Page III-~. 3.3.4 Requirements for Preliminary Plats, #]. Com as to have Ms. Easley cr -reference [he list of natural resources as contained in the Comp Plan. Page III-10. 3.3.5 Requirements for Final Plats Commission consensus was to no[ specify the number in Code; add action on how to provide to city, i.e., mi<rofilm In accordance with State requirements, and tlo global search relative [o #13, above, as to 'registered civil engineer." Page III-11, 3.3.6 Design Standards ¢ W-zi-O[ ~ 9A Ms. Easley stated she would atld language to the effect [hat the names of streets approved by County. Page III-13. #7 Commission consensus was to delete the entire first sentence. Leave the second sentence: Sidewalks shall conform to City design and construction standards. Page III-t4, t. e) Lighting.... Mr_ Drago explained [hag In tho Public Works SfandardS there will bo pictures of stantlartl, common street lights, and that those were the lixlures the City would pay the nergy coat and rental of the fixtures; anything over and above that, the developer was responsible. If developer wanted anything over and above the City's standards. the homeowners association would be rasponsibie- Electric and phone cables shoultl mantlatority be undergrountl. Mr. Drago requested that on Page III-t 4, in c) and d) that [here be language to the effect they would have to follow City specifca[ions relative to water and sewer installations. Page III-14. () Commission consensus that the Fire Code shoultl state the distance bertveen fire M1ydrants antl that should not be left to the discretion of the Fire Marshal. Page III-16, E. and G. Commission requested Ms. Easley qet with the City Atlministrator and develop additional language so that Section G, will conform to Section E. Page Ill-16, 3.4.0 Commission consensus to delete 3.4.0 in its entirely. Commission requested Ms. Easley, using vacant lantl antl recently approvetl site plans, apply the tlraft Development Design Standards to see how they would affect these subject sites. Ms. Easley will provide the Commission with Section references to the current Code for each of researching for comparison. i ~~p~,