Loading...
LPAMin09-11-96LAND PLANNING AGENCY Longwood, FL September ll. 1996 PRESET F. STAFF: Richard E. Bullinetoo JohnlvL Brook, Dir_of Planning&Bnilding Serv. Mervin Meltzer Cael D. Ooslive, Cily Planner Barry C. Revels Johv Groenendael, Plxnnivg Aida John Livs Uamar~s Cnrbel0. Planning SecrGery PUBLIC PARTICIPATION- Robert Webster Jeff Dotson Uavid Demetree Sheldon Terry I. CALL TO ORUER'. The meeting was call to order by Chairman Bullingtan at 6-00 P.M. 2. APPROVAL OF THE Al1GI1ST Ia. 199G MRJUTES: ML Bullington stated that hewould liketo reeorzunend an amendment [hero was vo en that we were opev oz closed the puhlic hearing Mr. BullinErton smted Than it should be menvoved in the minutes as public reeord_ Mr. Revels made a motion to approve the minutes for August 14. 1996 subjett to Mr. Bullingtons recommendation. Mt. Lins sewntled the moriov and it passed unanimously. ~. SITE PLAN REVIEW -AAA OF'F[CE PARK, PHASE II -SP-05-96 -SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FLORIDA CENTRAL, PARKWAY AND COMMERCE WAY QUASI-1IIDICIAL MATTER'. Mr. Goslinc stated shat Ihis property is aDProximately at the southwest corner ofFlorida Cenrcal Parkway and Commerce Way. Tltis is a site plan that wen[ [hrongh the LPA abou onlhse .This is phase ll. The s[aff report as providing to the LPA embers and also othe applica s The scoff re ends [Ito LPA approval with the ondition, that she applieavl put turf block in the parking spades adjeeenl to islands where trees are located. Tom Skelton with Nnerloan Civil Engineuing Co., stated hie name for the record- He is the representan.e oftlie AAA Rosiness Center. ~vm e ~TVaa~u+nsliva Mr. Bulhngton asked if Mr. Tom Skelton has sewt the memo dated September 11. 1996. Mr. Skelton replied the[ Fx has not by the owners did receive the mmno and that they _ wan as rndmgt. Mr_ Meltzer made a motion to recommend approving ofrho site plan that was xubmieted with the rtalY recommendation of September 11. 199fi_ Mr_ Revels sewnded the motion and it passed unanimously- 4. VAR[ANCE-CONSTRUCT ASiX POOT FENCE IN THEFRONS SETBACK AREA AT'/44 INDUSTRY ROAD -VAR-04-9fi -QUASI-IUDICIAL MATTER Mr_ Gosline stated Nat the applicant, Rodgers and Edmunds propetties. is seeking permission to fence in their parking lot located at the north end of Industry Road. They ere deniM a fence permit because it encroached into the setback area bur rha staff feU titer they have other optic vailable w solve the vandalism problem The applicant has provided ivPorniauon to indicate they havebeen vandalized on several ouasiona Mr. Gosline stated there is e 20 Poot wide utility drainage easement along [he entire west side of the lvdusinal Park which extends northward to Raven AVe. The property iv Ivduetry Rd. have fences. all but three The applicant is one that down t have v fence alone the drainage easement of the west side of his propery so that allows persons to trererretha area. Mevy swdente use [he easement to walk to Longwood Elementary School and it being av isolated area does not justify the need to tlnce iv the entire parking area to provide curity for the business- A 6-POOL Pence could be constructed along the rear west property live the side pmperry lines end up ro the Mont se[beck line without a variance Mr. Bullington asked whether ehe [bnee that the applicant wants to erect would it block the a s. Mr. Gosline rated that cold not bec a the fEvoe Net ehey w vt ea erect woultlcheve e geee whiohswould be open during work'mg hours Mr. Ooslive explained that the applicant could erect a fence 25 f t back from the street rightbC-wzy Line without gemvg a verienae Howevu, the Pence would be in the middle oftheirparkinglot and loading; a. Thissnuauon would present seat us parking and loadin¢ opera ion problems. Mr-Meltzer asked what the applieavt's ahernetive is. Mr. Goehne explained that it is the steR's opini other the noPa fence along the back property would elimineteaccess from the utility easement evd reduce theopportnnitias for vandalism. Mr_ David Wright representing Rodgers & Edmunds Propettiea staeed his name Por tfie recoed. Mr. Wright stated Nat he had personally observed juveniles accessing the yam yr wgNG~.2,u~rss _ propeny from rhea and using the parkinK area for skateboardinK and illici[ i Hef'eele ehetconsruuion of the fnce along the front property line would stop this pr'ecttce. A propenyow er decdedro urityfnce around the Eontpui rofthat property, ie, lots 9C and IODc The fencewould be wnstrvued from one corner oPthe building on the north end around to lot lOD to the east and 9C. The request Por the tails placement oPthe fence across the fiont setback of the boundary line of bodfllots end propeny. Mr. Meltze made a to disagree with the staff re endati and to end approval of the Verien~eo Mr. Revels seconded tlsa motion and it passed unanimously- 5. PUBLIC HEARING -ORDNANCE 96-132'1 TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO 8E CONSISTENT W 1TH THE COMPREHENSIVF. PLAN - LEGISLATIVE MATTEIL Mr. Gosline began by statinK that the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 1993 stablished land use designations for every parcel of land in the City pursuant [o the nandtes of chaptu I63. Pen 1I, Florida SYetutes. Once adop[lon ofehe Plen was ompleted, the Ciry should have adminisratively rezoned all the parcels of land on which the zoning classification was not wnaistent with the lend use designa ion in the Plaa This step was never accomplished for a variety oCreasons. The proposed Ordinance 96-132] will amend the Official Zoning Map oPthe City to make all the z ning on all the parcels in the Ciry co with the Comprehen ve Plan required by Chaptu I63 3202. Florida Stamtes.stHetrefured the LPA and the audience to map Prepared by the staRwhich identified all the properties subject w change and will be Exhibit A to the Ordinance- Mr. Gosline also explained that the specific zoning category allowed for a land use designa is Bete ned by the Land Use Designation / ZoninS classifcation matrix on paSes IIlo32 and ILI-33 of the Comprehensive Plan's Goals. Objectives end Polices doe t. In most rases-there is only on ning category fora given land ute designa n. Ho.v n those few owhere a than one zo ring to the least reatncnve eeteyory available for that land use designa oa Mr. Gosline stated that the Dublic hearing has been duly advertised in the Sanford Herald. He also stated that the Ordinance has been scheduled for a first reading/public hearing by the Commission on October ], 1996_ Chairman Bnlling[on opened the public hearing and asked whe[lier anyone pretent wished to speak in favor of Ordinance 96-132'1. No one present indicated the desire to speak in ~. one.. em,.pa-,trn~lras r var nfine ommance. Mr. Robert N. Webster. 3435 Holiday wvenue. Apopka. FL 12]03 asked.vhether the city adopteda Comprehensive Plan whioh was contrary to theirown zoning laws. Carl responded that acwrding to Chapter 163, Pen 11, Florida Statures it is the Comprehensive Plan which controls the zoning nos viceversa. The zoning regulations simply implement the Plen. Mr. Webser sated that changing the zoning ohanged the value oPthe propeny and chat ihei etal in erred property of which ar arced in this regard. He claimed that changing the zoningwes depn ing someone of a proparry right which was ovally theirs. He stated that he thought the proposed anion was taking of p~opa'ny under the Fifth Amendment of U S. Conmtution and was e violation of Seciton 1983 of the Civil Nghrs Act. Mr. Webstu also stated that the lames A. Centralia Trust. 114 Mingo Trail, Longwood objects [o the proposed rezoning end wishes to be considered an aff ed person pursuant to Cheptu 163.3184. Florida Statutes. He staled that "- phis has a goss effett nn the value ofthere properties end a lawsuit would wst much more than whet somebody is trying to accomplish iv this particular Plen.." He also said `.. this is essentially snorting thevelue ofthasa people's property because it doesn r conform ro somebody's mep_: Mr. Gosline responded that the value of the property was created when the Plan was adopted in 1992 end that Chapter 163 3202, Florida Statutes requires the Ciry's lend development regulations to bec with the land use designations in the Comprehensive Plau. Ordinance 968132] simply discharges the Cty's statutory obligation iv this regard. Mr. Gosline stated that the Plan was adopted pursuant to the state statutes. Pan of these requir umber of public workshop and hearings betty en 1990 and I992ceFurthermore, all these workshops and hearings were advertised, o9en with quarter page ads in the newspaper. Mr_ Gosline said that he thought it was very important that everyone understand that thus o taking of private propeny in this matter. The Ordinance is only complying withthe andates of sta to get the z ting on the subject properties wvsistent with the lend use designs gone in the City'e Plan. Chairman Hull'mgton sakes whether anyone else wishes to speak in opposition w Ordinance 96-13?]. Mr. fell Dotson, 16]5 Kingston Road, Longwood. FL 32]50 identified himself es representing Carol B. Harpu and CM] Properties who own a parcel at 125 Mingo Trail He srated the property perceives the changes as fl down zoning, thereby reducing the propeny value. Mr. Gosline responded tnet the mason that his property. and several others in the Mingo Trail aaa en being ohanged is that the Comprehensive Plan designates these properties as Light Industrial. In additioa the Plan establishos the coasistency between the land use designaton and the zoning categories in a matrix found on pager III-32 and 111-3J oPthe Goals. Objectives end Polities portion oClhe Plea The only zoning category which ie consistent with this land use designation is I-I. Mr. Gosline atod further thet,c ernl other property owners in the audiencethink many of these parcels in this area should have av lndunrial land use designation. lyre staff would not necessarily disagree with that position. However, the question ofthe eorteet laud use designa of germane to this heating If a property owner wants to change the use designationnhe mux file an application and conPonn to the process outline in Chapter 163 3184. I6; ~ I B] and 163.3189. He Bttthor staled that Mr_ Brock had preliminary wnversetwns in this regard with Mr- Deme[rea. Mr. Dotson ergnerl that the Comprehensive Plan land use designation should reHeat the zoning map. The zoning map was iv place before the Plav was adopted- Mr. Gosline stated that accoMing to Florida law, the Comprehensive Plan is predominant r the ning map. That s, ifthere onflia betty o the Plan land rise designa and the z ~ing designa n, the Plan preeeils. As such. ay disc n about land us designations must takeplace in the plan amondmen[ process not the zoning processe Furthermore. the process to change the Plan is deliberately very cumbusome to protect property owners from having their land use designation changed "ovetnighi'. Mr. Mcltze anted that there us Hearings and adve is during the Plan adoption process and virtually nobody came Potwerd to object to the land use designations in the Mingo Trail area. He questioned why they were doing so after four yearo. Mr. Brock saiU that he suggested to Mr_ Dentetree m get all Neowners in the arts to becomeapeny to the application to amend the Plan The only areas ofcomplaim about the zoning are in the Mingo Trail area. Mr. Shel[on Terry, a property owner a[ 115 Mingo Trail, also spoke in opposition. How t oPhis eonversatton was not recordod because hewas not at the miunphone~ Mr_ Brock intujeeted that ell rho discussion should betaking place iv the plan amendment process. We c a permit for any use which ie not consistent with the Plan. He further stated thet~idoesn't make evy difference what the zoning n>ap sayr. obligated by state law to be that any permits whidt ere issued are consistent with the Plan. The only appropriate channel for these aReaed property owners to take is the plan amendment prooess. Mr. David Demetree. a property ow on Highline Drive, said that he was not aware of the land use change- Ho expressed wncern that tba advertisements were in the Sanford F{erald end that many people do nos read the Huald. He indicated they were willing w submit an application end go through the plan amendment procesb Mr. Webster asked whether every property ow m due pro e shat this ning was going to be changed. Mr. Gosline statedethat Chapter 166 041 (3), Florida Stet es provides the notifica on pro ss POr ning Essentially_thin process requires publica nofthe eof then ting in wspapar which is published at least five days per week fot plan amendnte and eomprehen ning such as Dropoeed by Ordinance 96-I i2"1- If individual peroels ere seeking rezoning, the Chy mails diroot notice [o [he property owners in the area as well as advertising in the newspaper. The City.. and most local governments in Seminole Cowty, use the Sanford Herald far aII legal ads. the Herald was chosen by the City Commission because it meats the requir sot rhea end the wise tabou ethird ofe. miler ad in the Sentinel The edoptnon oPthe Plant and all oPthe amandmentsnsinoethea have followed the statutory notice prooess. Mr. Revels asked how long it takes to process a plan amendment. Mr. Gosline responded thaz the process requires a minimum of nine months to wmplete the process Mr. Revels expressed contain that the Mittgo Trail property owners were losing Tots of oney during the time period it sakes to process a plan amendment Mr_ Gosline said that these property owners were not losing money because the exisdng use of the property is graudfathered in and can continue so long as the property does not stay vacant for more than 180 days. The stat£ has met with Mr. Terry on sa~eral occasions and have explained his options in writing. Mr. Terry can lease the building for any use permitted in the l-l zoning district Mr. Brack again smted that the Plan wa. propuly adopted in 1992 and the City must live with the land use designation until it is changed through the proper amevdmem process. Wa cannot process an amendment in any other way. Mr. Dots asked that if their plan meadment Rom Light Indus rialto Indus rial is granted. would they hev o then e the property to I-? 7 Mr_ Brock answued it could be processed some what simultaneously. Mr. Webster asked whether someone Rom oueaide the City is ditxaeing the plan. Mr_ Gosline explained again that the Plan was developed through axrensive public pertiuparion and ultimately approved by the City Commission in 1992. Mr. Webster again expressed co n about the notificarion proc ss for the Plan. Mr. Bullington explained chat the queaxeon about the no[ioe requirements is a legitimate one. but of panincnt to this disc n. Mr. Brock also statod that all oPthese arguments about the Plan must be made durinS~he amendment process and have absolutely nothing to da with the subject of the hearing. l'he public hearing was closed. Mr. Meltzer moved that the LPA find that the proposed ning map changes are consistent with their respective land use designations on [he Future Land Use Map: that the changes are necessary to comply with the requirements of Cnapter 16l 3202, Florida Statutes; and that the LPA rewmmwd approval of Ordinanu 96-1321 to the Ciry Commission. Mr. Bullington puseU the gavel to Mr_Meltzer and seconded the motion. The monon passed onenimously_ 6. AD)OURVIvIENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:2U P M. Minutes Approved~~c to bei y~996 Dace LPA Chainnaa ~ys/ wcnam e Bunmgton These minutes represent a summary of the anion which occurted. Audiotapes of the LPA tingle rained as part oftheCity records end are available for listening during normal working hoe amain ~~am v ~A~vu~caasti to