Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CCMtg03-13-00WSMin
IgNG WOOD CITY COMMISSLON Longwood City Commission Chvnbers 1]5 M. \Garren Avenge I.ongwoorl, Florida lVOl2K SESSION hl[NUTES Mazch 13, 20110 PIiESENL Mayor Pawl Luvesrcand Deputy Mayor Butcn Bundy enmmisamner non mm~raon commiaamnerJnnn e. Mamgot John). Dcago, City Administmtoc Guuldinv D. Z.tmbr't Oty Clerk .Berlin D. Aoswonh, Deputy Ciry Clerk John Brock, Dicectot, community Services Depacvnem Jay Sargent, City Phnner, Pinnning Divisio~y Community Service Depunnene ABSENT: Commissioner Steve Miller (excused) 1. C-AIi TO ORDER The mayor cn0ed n work session co order at ]:03 p.m Con er M.ungot ved m nspend the mle. Seconded by Corn r Anderson nvd passed 4-0.1 by a voice vom, witlr Commissioner Mllerabsene ne Maly Loverand, pear ro eructing tlse wort: session on long rnnge planning/visioning, very bricRy rtcd on the r work se n pre n about Com pity liedevelopm nt Agen (GRAS) as.vell ns n p or presentation mndesby Seminole County snff relative so the I~Iighway 1]992 GIiA and enumenred some reasons ns eo why he wns sNl not convinced oe tirnir desicsbifiry. 2. CONTINUEUISCUSSiON ON LONG RANGE PLANNING/V[SIONING. Hacilitnxoe Gdl Easley, llre Gnil Haslet' Compvty Ms. Exley handed the Commissioners and staR'copins oC the Hinarir C#y ofLOrgmood FbriAu r/iriraf P. jmrw Ssuzry (PP$) where the consultants compiled citizens, staff, and Commissioners responses eo the 80 illustmtlvc slides snows vt the Erse longrunge planning/visioning meetlng. Referencing [he VPB, pvge 16, Section IV. Issues, bIS Healey explained the development patterns assessed by the City of Longwood VPS relnted ro the following issues: A-lie4a~ionship o[ buildings w S[reeq with su subcamgorie (tltose being- 10location of buildings, ®building sloe, C~0 rerminnrion of vistas, O residendnl garages, ~ residentinl enttylvays and porches, ®outdoor cafes); A-Stoats, with four subciregoties (those being- 1n width, mmmercin4 ®widtls, residwsual, fJ inrarsecrlons, CC 3-13-0U\904 ®siJew:Jks);~-4urdsrnping witlr nvo sub-mtegories (tltose briny-OO sweet vicea,® Inntlscnping of p:vkinglots}. D-Signs, with two aubcutegorics (those being-©olFsire signs (billboards], ®onaite signs); 6 -Perking with two subsategorics (those being- r0 oEf-s¢eet cct parkingl; and p-M1[iscellaneous, with two cub-categories (those being-m frnung public spaces. hls. Easley neat drew pazdcipana' attention ro page 35, Section V I. Conclusion, of the VPS, noting that based on the foregoing analysis of the illustrative slides, the Ciry of fangwood shoulJ consider ndopdny comprehrnxive phn policies and Innd dovelopmant regulations that courage or ruluire: O creation of commercial snecrscvpes where buildings me pulled up ro the sidewalq ~ placement of larger, multi-srory buildings alongwiele commercial thoroughfares, ^ plncemem of buildings or ocher structures in.a way that terminates the vista long sweets, ^ placenent of garnge doors eo d:c reu or side of residences, O plncemwr[ of porches and obvious entryways along residend:J sweets, O creation of outdoor cafes :Jong commercial srceers, ~ use of curial vtd residential sweets, ~ use of roundabours and other innovntrve in? iooaolen s,0ueofsiatcwalks and sweet tees al gg me cial and ccsidendal st ets prow noFl ndscnpingand shvde ee witltinp ki~~!ggI ql.l limited use of hrge office si rsigns Ibillboardsl, O use of fesar-ry smnllersonsite sites, U Ilmited use of Ivrge cvpanses of offsncet parking in favor of smaller, ~ ~ ;aped puking areas, ~ use of on-sweet parking along commercial stapes, O use of unifor;.::nasenry Eencingsepanting subdivisions from srceen instead of Icss uniform wood fencing O aeaeon of attn<t ve publ'< apse s sorb as green ways and plazas. [vlemben en~aged in =. h.,._ ring discussion, touching on such aspects as: ~fenecs, c.g., number of different types a. ~~ tiovd, ~ how brst ro promote these concepts so abet our cidzens had them of value to me community, ~ providing spaces for seniors end young purple to ongregate, enhan of ex rang parks and cr of additional parks as well as null ar of grec with benches e, passive patkse ell beingwell devigned, ~ laudxcnp rag of park, medians, and green spaces with proper phne instJlvtion end irtigadon, eg., drought~roletartt plants, with enphasia placed upon continual mainmrrance of dl Iwdacvped wee, ~ ndegoam pazking including handicapped perking ~ fvee tlme city will be feted wids limited warer resourms and wlnt as the possibility of iovoducing re<himed water, ~ wadable buffers, krrdscaping in lieu of w:rlle as a buffer, large commercial properties shoving residential and access from residential ro commercial, ~ look at acs adjacent ro city boundaries with view roward anneaations, i.c., compadb'dity, Density rchnv o the cage, ~ nnhlc c airy; ~ urdntorily m caned, ~ hndscaping mmsdarorly mainalned, ctievd as an examples\Vinter Springs, v retrofitting older subdivisions in planned phases, ~ roads and sidewalks -~ following meet prototype would enh;mce t side of the city, ~ creation of more bicycle paths, nod:sg the prorotype desigt critnn for paving of strecrs contained wider sidewalks with a bicycle park on other side of svcet ~ creation of rcial strmtscapes where buildings pulled up ro sidewalk -done as group or an entire bock, predicmble uniqueness, ~ outdoor cafes, would bring people inro the environment, pedesvian erafFe mode For an amenable community, ~ improper type sweet vacs were liability issuo, woulJ teed ro give drought to right species, spacing oE, and correct location of sweet trees, ho togene neighborhoods-braving apartments above with commercial esmblisbment at s«cet lave, ~ hught limitnuons. CC 3~L3~00\905 At Wis jun a specilc building was diet sed with respec it proposed height Atrer nebdetdisc n~Mayorlnve and belicv representatives needed w be no[ihed [here wars conceav ondt6e drys behalf with regard to rite proposed height. Additional ropics couched upon were: Took at having differene distracts, include vansition spacing between dram, keep planning Flexible, ~ signage-too many signs create confusion, consider solidating signs while allowing bus w get that ssagc s ~ gee rid of clutt ve public spaces -rake small littlesvrear and bee n'fy dram by wining tFem inro small Auks with quiet space by placing one or two bencFes in tFat environment ~ arbor ordinance, ~ creation of color pallette s~~thin rFe Design Smndards. Ms. Piasley next addressed the vicly graph: Single Map Agorn,en: OPuwre Land Use Map is the of dividing land into disv and assigning us s;®Changes in disco mquic oplan nmendmrvtt- eitlter smell srnle or large scale; ®Design standards ate contaitrned insrFC Wnda Development CUdz ZoAne M' o and Pnmre Land Use Mug: O'Cwo ;Hops am used ro assgn disvicts and must bo consistent with evch otltec ®Changos in disvicn or uses squire bodt u phn amendment vttl rezoning ®Design standards ate contained in the Land Development Code. Member consensus was in favor of the Singtc Map Appmacb. le was pointed out the Single btup Approach had safeguards conained therein, wa mote user friendly, and could encourage annexations. Ms. Jo Anne ]iebellU asked how the singJv asap approach would nfteccadul[ ontnrrainment which waz an vllowed use in the F2 zoning diserict only. Ms. Gaslcy responded tlsat fhe eequir is for adule e ould Fe c sed m the Single Map Approach in tltatwhatdis~ tguishod the 1-2 tk m otFertdistrictt could be incorporated so vs to end up witlt the same resulu. Ms. easley tFen addressed ofhrl view graphs: liegulai Un ofDeveloomenr /Uses decided by GUmpcehensice Clsn and Puwre Land Use Map; /Site design standards am conained in the lD lieguk<ions; /Sim design smndurds include the Following types of standards: ~ Location -m addres mpatibiliry widt the neigFborhood,o other tanaards about loin Impac ro address how a proposed us will affect the neighborhood or the facilide and se t es of me Gry-compatibility and roncutrencG~Design f©tures-setbvrL,haght landsnping [ parking access drives, drainage, ate: vSpecial snndurds - for specife uses witls special design needs. Procedures For Approving Develoom t: /lVhen aproperty owner wants ndiffcrenr use: Smill stile development rvnendmcm (map chwsges only, less tltun IO acres in size) -requires one public hearing and udopdon ofan ordinance ro amend dsv plant. NO DCA review. 0ecomes ve 3U days after adoption. (Very similar to rezoning process, but nv rezoning is requirM unrder the Sine Map Approach.) ~ Luge scale amendm requir o public hearings, trvnsmittal eo -CA, possible DCA reviow, adoption Uf an ordinance fo wneatd eho plan, CC }~j.UU\9U6 ompliance «vinv by UCA. Become effecvve upon Ending oFcompliance. (This u sell «yuired Far loge scale projecs, over 10 acres). JSire plan «view and approval based on sundaMs in she Ivnd Deaeinpmen~ Code Commission conameve m suspend long range planning/visioning eessiona umil Ms. Easleywae ready ro come back ro We commission wiW futther tlevelopmem of We [.and Derelopmem Code. i Adjourn. 11:e mewing adjourned ae n08 p.m. Paul wveavand, Mayor ATTEST: ~ ~~ ~ ~~ sa.1.~/ 13crlin U. Boswoaly Deputy Cary Clerk CC 113-d0\90]