Loading...
LPA05-12-2021Min LAND PLANNING AGENCY Longwood City Commission Chambers 175 W Warren Avenue Longwood, Florida MINUTES May 12, 2021 6:00 P.M. Present: JoAnne Rebello, Chair Judy Putz,Vice Chair David Gritton, Member Chris Kintner, Community Development Director Anjum Mukherjee, Senior Planner Kristin Zack-Bowen, Recording Secretary Absent: Glenn Kirwan, Member Elias Khoury, Member 1. CALL TO ORDER Recording Secretary called the meeting to order at 6:12 p.m. 2. ELECTIONS Judy Putz nominated JoAnne Rebello for Chair of the Land Planning Agency, seconded by David Gritton and approved by consent without objection. David Gritton nominated Judy Putz for Vice Chair,seconded by JoAnne Rebello and approved by consent without objection. 3. ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS None 4. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR A. Regular Meeting held September 9, 2020 Member Gritton moved to approve the minutes from the September 9, 2020 meeting.Seconded by Vice Chair Putz and carried by a unanimous vote. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT No public comments. 6. PUBLIC HEARING LPA Meeting 5-12-21/1 A. ORDINANCE NO. 21-2200 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LONGWOOD, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1019, SAID ORDINANCE BEING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF LONGWOOD, FLORIDA; SAID SMALL SCALE PLAN AMENDMENT (SPA 01-21) CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM COUNTY INDUSTRIAL (IND) TO CITY OF LONGWOOD INFILL AND MIXED USE (IMU) AND COUNTY ZONING FROM SINGLE FAMILY (R-1) TO CITY OF LONGWOOD LYMAN PLANNING DISTRICT TO THE PROPERTY WITH PARCEL ID 06-21-30-508-0000-0630; AND CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION ON CITY OF LONGWOOD'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM INDUSTRIAL (IND) TO CITY OF LONGWOOD INFILL AND MIXED USE (IMU) TO THE PROPERTY WITH PARCEL ID 06-21-30-300-031E-0000; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. Chris Kintner read Ordinance No. 21-2200 by title. He explained that when staff looks at a land use change they look at the overall effect on the Comprehensive Plan itself and do not look at the specific type of project because a project can change. Mr. Kintner noted that you cannot condition a land use change for a specific type of use. Eric Lagasse with Kimley-Horn gave a presentation on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Lagasse explained that they were requesting a change from Industrial (IND) to Infill and Mixed Use (IMU) for the 2 parcels to be included in a larger mixed-use development. The proposed development would include multi-family residential options and retail opportunities. He advised that this would be consistent with market trends and would help address an increased demand for mixed-use development and additional housing options. Mr. Lagasse noted the demand for this type of use in this part of the City, and referenced the nearby Alta Cypress. He explained that the project would not adversely affect levels of service as there is adequate public facility to serve the land use. He added that the amendment is consistent with the City of Longwood Comprehensive Plan, thus discouraging urban sprawl and encourages the development of infill properties. Chair Rebello explained that the applicant said the surrounding properties were Infill and Mixed Use, but the larger property on North Street is surrounded on three sides by Industrial. This made her question the strain as far as traffic which is already a problem during rush hour. Chair Rebello asked if they were taking Alta Cypress into account,which hasn't been built yet,when figuring the numbers. James Taylor with Kimley-Horn explained that they were doing a theoretical analysis, but what will actually be built there is going to be multi-family. In order to get the site plan developed they have to have compatible zoning for the site, which in this case would be IMU that allows for other things such as commercial. Mr. Taylor reiterated that this is looking into the future of the site, and if this developer didn't come in what was the maximum intensity that could be on the site.The study in the agenda package showed a theoretical 300,000 square foot commercial development, which would have to be multiple stories, and was more than the Industrial it was currently zoned for by about 300 trips in and out of the site. If it LPA Meeting 5-12-21/2 were developed with the maximum intensity of Industrial compared to multi-family, there's no net increase in traffic. Mr. Taylor replied to Chair Rebello's point about multi-family, that when the site plan goes in front of them there are many things they have to do with Staff to make sure that traffic is all accounted for. He specified that what they were talking about at this point was roadway capacity and what would be the impact of the maximum density on this. Mr. Taylor concluded that there were not any additional capacity needs due to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. He offered to talk about the multi-family but wanted to make it clear that was not what they were deciding on tonight. Chair Rebello asked if based on their traffic study, did they include the traffic from Alta Cypress. Mr. Taylor replied that they had to look at a short term 5-year range of what it would look like with this amendment and a longer range that went out to 10 years. In order to get to the 5 and 10 years they had to consider all of the area growth, so Alta was included in this study as well. Chair Rebello asked if the area was at a level "E". Mr.Taylor noted that in the existing conditions adopted the level of service on every road in the study area in the Land Development Code was a level service "E". In the short term, with or without the amendment, it is going to trigger the need for improvements on 434 between Rangeline Road and CR 427. That is the Department of Transportation's road so they will be monitoring that and doing improvements in the future, if they find the funding. With this project no additional impacts are triggered at the maximum development. Chair Rebello asked what the worst level of service was. Mr.Taylor replied it was"F". Member Rebello stated that she wanted to look into the future impact it was going to have on the area and she questioned it because there is Industrial on three sides of the property and only the one to the East that is Infill and Mixed Use. Mr. Kintner stated that they wanted to go through this theoretical exercise because they are looking at taking 8.84 acres from Industrial, or not having City Zoning, and changing it. He explained that they aren't looking at the full project site, only the 8.84 acres and what happens when you up zone from Industrial, which has some limitation, to Infill and Mixed Use which is broad and allows multi-family. Mr. Kintner advised that through the information provided by our Public Works Department, who also reviewed the utilities portion to make sure we are meeting a level of service in the Comprehensive Plan, Staff was confident that this would not create any issues with utilities. He also added that whenever a project is presented for a site development plan review, all of that review happens again specifically. As it relates to transportation, not only is our Engineering team looking at it but the County's Engineering team would be looking at it. This is a land use exercise, but ultimately all of the numbers for utilities and transportation will get reviewed at LPA Meeting 5-12-21/3 that time. The biggest thing Staff looked at and discussed was what the nature of the area is supposed to be. Right now and historically it has been Industrial, but Staff has seen a change in how property owners and developers see this area. Having the Dog Track go to Alta Cypress changes the perception of the area. With the Future Land Use we are looking at where the area is headed and are seeing more interest in a mixed-use component. Staff is comfortable looking at this as a change based on conditions we are seeing out there and recommends approval. Anthony Godinho, 149 Pineda St, Longwood, FL 32750 spoke in opposition of the Ordinance. Mr. Godinho stated that his company had been there since 1979 and does construction from 5 in the morning until 8 or 9 at night. His concern was that with multi-family residential next to their business that has noise between those hours will result in noise complaints and code enforcement action. Mr. Kintner responded to the concern. He stated that this property is not within the City limits of Longwood but rather Seminole County, so it would not be Longwood Code Enforcement responding. He added that if this property were within the City, they would not send Code Enforcement out because everything he described is part of the business and not a violation. Mr. Godinho reiterated his concern over the noise and there being complaints about the noise from possible tenants at the apartment complex. Mr. Kintner responded that while there may be people who complain, the scope of their work is not anything outside of the norm for this type of business and their zoning, and would not result in Code Enforcement action from Longwood or Seminole County. He explained that there may be challenges developing the site into something other than Industrial, given that there is Industrial around it which might create a marketability issue, but not a Land Use issue. Vice-Chair Putz moved to close the public hearing. Seconded by David Gritton and carried by a unanimous vote. Member Gritton moved that the Land Planning Agency recommend approval of Ordinance 21-2200 to the City Commission, Seconded by Vice Chair Putz and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. 7. DISCUSSION AND SCHEDULE FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS a. Discussion of the Land Planning Agency's role as the "Board of Appeals" under the International Property Maintenance Code Chris Kintner cited the International Property Maintenance Code which is a standard that can be used to ensure existing buildings are in working order, as opposed to the Building Code that often deals with construction. One thing that needed to be done was establish a Board that could handle appeals to the old Code. Rather than create a separate board, City Commission preferred to have the Land Planning Agency handle it,which was approved and included in the City Code Ordinance. Mr. Kitnner LPA Meeting 5-12-21/4 explained that is was not the expectation that the LPA be completely familiar with every aspect of the Property Maintenance Code.The way the Board functions,the Building Official would serve as a member of the Board to help interpret things. Mr. Kintner continued on to address the Commission giving staff direction to start reconsidering our land use proposal at the recent Commission meeting. Mr. Kintner noted at the meeting the Commission were comfortable exploring redefining and utilizing our zoning more.The City has a lot of different zoning categories, and there were things done as part of the Longwood Design Guidebook and as part of the Heritage Village Urban Code that don't really touch land use. Mr. Kintner suggested a revised zoning and land use map that allows us to create different areas in the City. The Infill and Mixed Use category allows for apartments almost everywhere on Ronald Reagan Blvd and on 17-92. Mr. Kintner stated that in one of the June Commission meetings he would bring a draft map to the Commission, not as a formal process but to show the direction we could go. If the Commission is okay with that concept,then it would be brought back to the LPA. He suggested that if we were going to open it up we should look at anything else we aren't happy with as far as growth and development. Mr. Kintner also noted that this is an opportunity to streamline the process to get the desired growth.Something else the Commission asked about was having a zoning district such as Country Homes which doesn't allow agricultural uses but allows larger lot single family homes with lower level equestrian uses. Vice-Chair Putz commented that it seems as though each time there is a mixed use development it begins as apartments and retail and ends up just as apartments.She cited Alta and the Dog Track property and asked if there was any way to require some degree of retail going forward. Mr. Kintner replied that there is a way and acknowledged that many projects have indeed gone that way. He mentioned one project that went from 50,000 square feet of retail to including a 4-story apartment and finally ended up just as apartments. Mr. Kintner noted that apartments serve their purpose and there are benefits like taxable value,transportation impacts and character impacts, but our focus has been retail and restaurants. He continued by stating the concept Member Putz described may be something that needs to be looked at where some areas of the City apartments are allowed and others require a first-floor retail in order to have apartments. Mr. Kintner mentioned that a lot of the land along the Ronald Reagan and 434 corridors is relatively shallow which would be hard to do apartment projects on. In 2010 we did the major comprehensive plan amendments and were at 13,000 people then,the City is close to 17,000 now and by the time Alta Longwood and Alta Cypress is filled will be well over that. Vice Chair Putz asked if it was possible to give a nice restaurant incentive to come to the City. Mr. Kintner replied yes, and that we have a jobs incentive and a facade grant program. He advised that Cities don't have power to tell a single land owner what will go on their property, but do have the opportunity to have discussions. LPA Meeting 5-12-21/5 Vice Chair Putz mentioned the demand for restaurants in the area by her shop customers. Mr. Kintner referred to a discussion at the City Commission Meeting regarding a downtown study, marketability study and revised Master Plan for the area. He cited the Taurus Group study done last year and mentioned that as a City we don't have a cohesive vision for our Downtown.The Commission voted to consider the study for next year's budget. Mr. Kintner comments that there was a lot of new development that we don't know the impact of on the market so there's reason to evaluate that. Vice Chair Putz asked if they had started on the new Fire Station yet. Mr. Kintner replied that on Monday night's Commission Meeting there would be an item to sign a contract with a company to begin two processes, a space needs analysis and site selection process. He added that we are asking the consultant to evaluate different sites in terms of layout, access and cost-benefit matrix. If there is a property large enough there may be a decision to co-locate the police station there. Mr. Kintner talked about the safe room grant which the City has moved to the second round of selections. Out of that the City would get money for the safe room as well as property acquisition. In order to get the money,you have to scale up the scope of the project. Chair Rebello asked if there was any discussion about making a Public Safety facility for both Police and Fire. Mr. Kintner responded that if we got the grant money for the safe room it would make sense for it to be a combined Public Safety Facility.The safe room grant came in while working on the Fire Station contract so it's a new addition to it. Discussion continued about the possibilities and concerns for the future of the Fire and Police Stations. 8. ADJOURNMENT Chair Rebello adjourned the meeting at 7:11 p.m. Minutes approved by the Land Planning Agency: 7-14-2021 411111)1 I , / JoAnne 'ebello, Chair ATTEST: Kristin Zack-Bowen, Recording Secretary LPA Meeting 5-12-21/6