LPAMin06-26-85LAND PLANNI N6 Af, ENCV
LDNGIIIX)D, FLOR SDA
June 26, 1985
The Land Pla nni n9 Agency held its re9 vlarly scheduled meeting at ):3D P.M. On
June 25, 19II5 in the Longwood City Coiwnis Sion chambers:
Present: Herbert Nayni e, Lhai moan Lhris Na91e, City Planner
Robert Nanunontl feri zamnri, Recording Secretary
Oa vid IJi ckham
Absent: Fmery Mei nekn
6erna rd Linton
1. The meeting was called to order by Chai Haan Naynie at ]:30 P.N.
2. Approval of Mi notes of May 22, 1985, May 29, 19R5 and June 12, 1985 Llork Sessions
and tli notes of May 22, 1985 Regular Meeting. Motion by Mr. Llic kham, 5 ontled by
Hr. Nanmond t0 approve the Minutes Of the May 22, 1985, May 29, 1985 and June 12,
1985 41ork Sessions and fiinu tes of May 22, 1965 Regular Meeting as submitted.
Motion carried by a unan lmous roll call vote.
3. Site Plan - LOngwOOd Office 8vf ldi nq. Location: South side Of SR 434, imetl-
iateT~ Let s Putt America. Ong L-3. Owner: Richard II. C.a rl and.
Devel ~~er: newemo Equ; tv Retonrces.
Mr. Nagle presented the site plan stating 'L'haY his <0 menis, dated June 13, 19II5
and June 20, 1985 would be made part of the record. mhle stated that Mr. Beaver,
Engineer on the project, had addressed sane comments and they were submitted as
an addendum to the revf ew packet.
t1r. Na91e calmented as follows:
Tne developer Has relocated some Of the handicapped parking away from the
busy intersection of the driveways,
A par ki n9 space Surma ry has been provided,
A va ce has been 9ra ntetl by the Roa rd of Adjustment for 13 spaces and
the additional 30 spaces required have been provided on an adjacent parcel wh icn
Has bean pwrenasea fran ane veter; nary cl;mc,
Gre space req uiranent of 25X neets the letter of the law but not the spirit
s the major portion of open space is located in the rear of the project adjacent
to Island Lake and not di str ibv tetl e enly on the site.
Two off-street loading spaces ar required, only one was provided. Developer
will need [o request a re mnenda tionefrOm the land Pia nni n9 Agency and approval
of the Board of Adj us 4nent to permit one off street loa ding space 1n lieu of the
two required.
Landscape plan for additional parking has been provided.
Developer has verified that adjacent driveways a cl0 ser than iD0 feet.
Oevet oper has Obtained FOOT driveway Dermit for n orb cut.
Building eleva ti0ns and floor plans have been submitted as requested.
Exi sti nq and proposed utility easement nave been indicated on site plan.
OevelO per will be required t0 provide the 3" wet tap.
Handicapped pa rki n9 is property signed.
- Mr. Nagle stated that the major problem with the plan is the intensity Of land us
which allows no flexibility for any additional changes. Ne further sta tetl that e
the parking spaces shown on the plan are 9' % 18' which are not in ccortl with the
City's ordinance. He stated m m parki n9 spaces a e 9' (doubt eda stri ped) by 2O'
l on9. 41e stated that this requirement was not addressed by the developer's
Land Pl anni n9 A9 ency -2- June 26, 1985
architect no it brought to the developer's attention by the City staff, however,
Mr. Nagle stateds the ultimate responsibility is on the tlevel peer to be aware of
the City's requirements, y
Oir. Nagle stated the following options were available:
The Land Pl annin9 Agency recoimnend that the Ooa rd of Adjustment grant a
variance for the one off-street loading space in lieu of the two required
and for 9' % lII' parking spaces in lieu of the required 9' (doubled striped)
by 20' spaces.
The Land Planning Agency deny the site pi an based on parking spaces not meeting
the City's requirements.
leave the decision to the Li ty Lommi ss io n, However, tir. Nagle stated, Che City
Attorney had advised that a variance fs required.
Recommends Lion: Redesign the site plan to accommodate the proper size parki n9
spaces.
Nr. Deaver stated that although the spaces we not drawn doubled striped pn the
plan, a statement to that effect was written on the pion
Motion by f1r. tli ckham, s tootled by flr. Hammond to re Ommend the site plan be referred
to the Board of Adjustment for their comments regarding a ce for the 9' (double
striped) by 18' spaces, length of stall, prior to Land Pl anni ngnAgency Forwardi n9
their re fends Lion to the City Commission, notion camietl by a unanimous roll
call voteom
4. Site Pian - East Longwood Lommfercia7 Center - Location: E side of 1]-92,
opposite Longwood La es South Shopping Center. Present zo ni n9 C-2 in the County,
n the process of bei n9 an exed into the Li ty with C-3 zoning. Owner: Roger L.
Jablonski. Developer: East Longwood Joint Venture.
Mr. Nagle presented the site plan stating that his commen is dated June 24, 1905 would
be made a part of the record-and would be required to be addressed by the developer.
Mr. Na91e also stated that prior tp site plan approval, a Conditional Use would have
to be considerd fora wholesale qu ti et and distribution business to be located on
the site, as the developer was utilizing the site for office/co~ferci ai (9,000 s.f.)
with no -active storage space (8,4D0 s.f.). Mr. Na91e also stated the site is
under c sides Lion for a xat ion into the Li ty at the present time, water to be
'cedmto the site by theeCf ty, and further that the owner has requested
exa Lion be contingent upon site plan apProvat. Mr, flagle stated the plan wa
complex in that the site has exi sti nq cr e agreements which tie three parcels
together for parking, uCil iti es end drainag eufacili ti es - Cwo of the parcels
ved site plan approval Fran the City about two years ago. Ne stated the
drainage and utilities did not pose a probl en, however, the parking proposed did
not neet the required five spat s per thousand and no parki n9 requiremen is a
listed in the ordinance for thees cif is u e bei n9 requested. He stated there
developer, along with the conditional u request, i asking that the parking,
shown on the plan, be approved. flr. siVagle sta Led s that approval can be granted
for the us with the parki n9 as shown, however, it can be contingent upon the use
Df the building continuing as approved.
Mr. Nagle suggested the developer proof de two less loading a which would still ~
eet City codes and would provide more parking spaces than shown. t1r. Calvin Peck,
Architect, stated they were n w designing the boil d inq and it appeared the building
would be smaller than originally intended, which would require less parking.
Land Planning Agency -8- June 26, 1985
M1loti on by Mr. Ili ckhem, s conded kY Ilr. Ilammond, Chet the developer rasa quit a
completed re sed site plan showi n9 a footprint of the bu it ding, re sed landscape
plan and cFang es fn parking to a re that the conditions have beenvmet with a
sti Dul anon that the City Rttorneyuapprove the cr anent agreements. 11o Lion
ri ed by a un roll call vote. 11r. Bouck reyu es Led cla rifi<a ton of the
motion. Mr, flagl em~ta Led the La ntl Pl annin9 Agency would review the revised plan
on July 10, 1085.
5. Prel imi War Plan - flat son Court Subdivision - Location: S of Bi stlf ne Avenue and
IJ of East Street. Zoni n9 R-1. wneri Oeve opera Superior Lons true ti on Company, Inc.
Pir. Nagle presented the pre1 im inary plan sta Ying thaC the required 9ina1 en9i neeri n9
~puld be incorporated into the final plan and that although the prelfm ina ry plan
does not incorporate all the ne sary in nna ti on, the infonna Lion supplied is
sufficient for apnroval of the concept. Ile stated the xoni nq is sistent wf th
the zoning map and with the Comprehensive Plan. Ne stated his cpmments would be
made a part of the record and must be addressed before Final approval is granted
for the subdf vi lion.
Mr. Nagle re ommentled that the Land Planning Agency re mend preliminary approval
for the prof act wf th the vnderstandi ng the all c en is be addressed at the time of
sW Mai ttal of the final plan. Mr. Na91e stated the developer had a9 reed to parti-
cipate in the paving of East Street assumi n9 the Li ty can work out an equitable
Went. Mr. Wickham questioned whether a wall al onq East Street bufferi n9 the
esidences fran the co cial businesses could be required? Mr. No11S S,
Enn i Weer on the project, addressed each comment and stated that all of the comments
not addressed would be submi [Led with the final plan. Mr, 1io 11 is Bugg es tetl that the
City mi9 ht consider vsi ng the retention area within Nelson's Court for storm
water runoff from East Street when it is paved. Mr. Hollis also stated that East
Street is pertia1ly under the ti ty's jurisdiction and perCi al ly under the County`s
jvri sd icti on end Chat this is needed to be resolved. Mr. Hollis sta tetl he
could check onto the land scapeu buffer Drov id ed at the rear of the cor~merc ial project
as requested by Mr. 4li ck ham.
Motion by Mr. Wickham, 5 conded by Mr> Haynie that the preliminary plan for the
Nelson Court Svbd ivisi onebe re mmen0 ed for approval as long a es hrpu9 ht
forth by City staff and City En9i Weer are adtlres sed at final pl anssu bmission.
MOtion carried by a unan~mpu5 r011 call vote.
5. PProp d Ordinance Np. ]04 - Revising Section 504.2 of the Code of Ordinances
of the Clt~ Longue regarding Ni s[oric Lorumi ttee approval of Dl ans and speci-
fications and re9ardi nq chan9 es of use r purpose Lei thin the Historic gi stri ct.
11r. Nagle stated Ordinance No. ]04 will improve the role of the lit stork Commission
for tlevel o0ment review and he recommended approval.
Motion by Mr. Nanmond, s conded by M11r. (lick ham that Ordinance No. ]04 be recomnentl ed
for approval. ^to Lion carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
6. 1leeti ng adjourned at 9:45 P.M
C,eri Zambr i, Record inq Secretary