Ordinance 96-1313AN ~ GP N D AMENDING
o I~~°~~ 1~~
~ F'IARIDA. PI MP~ENDMENT
(NtENDMENT 95 O1-N)TY CHANGINGNG TLIRE LAND
ATION THE PARCP.LG IiEREIN PROMNS IINEItAL
CIAL TO ONI STORK; PROVIDING CPOR CONFLICTS, EEVLRA6ILITY
AND EFF CTIVE DATE.
on my 2 the City of Longwood adopted a
ompreheslive planJ(Oidinance99 19) pursuant to the requirements oP
Chapte[ 16], Part II, Florida Statutes and Chapter 9J-5, Florida
WFtEREAS, on ovember the Florida Department of
ommunity Affairs determined theLCity's Comprehensive Plan w
NCE with the eequirements o haptei 161, Pait 22, Florida
Statutes and Chapter 9 - FloridafAdministrative Code; and
WNCREAS, Chapter 163. 4 (4) (a7, Florida Statutes, requires
the Land Planning Agency 3(LPA) o ma e recommen ns o the
governing body regarding amendments to the Comprehennsive Plan; a
the LPA held a public hearing on April 2 which
resulted i recommendation that Am n men 96-O1-B be transmitted
to the Floeid'a Department of C nity Aff ai s (DCA); and
WI{EREAS, t e ity Commrss mn held a public hearing on May 2 ,
1996 and v ted to transmit Am ndm n~9F=4} _Q to the DCA for their
review and ocomment pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 163.3184
and revrsed the A d t 9 - - support document accordingly; and
Revisea orainance 96 - 1313
page 2
EAEAS, the city Ras complied with the procedure for enacting
ordinances as described by CRapter 166.041, Florida Statutes;
BE IT 5 COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF LONGWOOU, o PLORIUA ED ASY FOLLOWS TY
The Future Land U D designation foe parcels
desarSbetl below, and depicted an ethe attached EXHIBIT axe
changed from General commercial to x s oric.
Lot 1')0 and 1J0 1/2, less tRetwest 2 .61 feet of Lot 1J
Plat of Longwood, PB 1, P of the public r cords of
Hole C my (Tax ID k 3 0-1 JOOj e
Sbemi less road, and Lot 01 A 3/20and the west 2
feet oftLOt91J0, Plat of Longwood, PB 1 of the public
oeds of 5 Hole County (Tax ID k 31-20G3085AU-0000-1690)
Lot 4.6em iLOt 4 and tRe v n Avenue, Plat of
Longwood, PB 1, PG 2 of the publict records of Seminole County
(Tax ID R 31-20-30-SAU-GOOD-0040)
d. Plat of Longwood, P of the public
ordstof s Hole County (Tax ID k131 P20-30-5AU-0000-0030)
Lot 2 1/2~, Plat of Longwood, P6 1, PG 20 of the public
oeds of Seminole C unty (Tax ID k 3 - 2A)
feC Lots 1 1/2 and 2 Plat of Longwood ? PB OI SAPG 02000of Othe
public r orris o£ Seminole County
(Tax ID kc31-20-30-5AU-0000-002AJ
f. Lots 1, less road, Plat of Longwood, PB 1, PG 20 of the
public r orris of Seminole C unty
(Tau ID ko 31-20-IO-5AU-oa00-00107
FIRST t b (f '1 d)
T READINGG dg .U_N9~L~be 96
SECOND READING: R.eC ~LC<:L~~`+/r' v ~4I ~~ 1
ADOPTED THIS „J~DAY OF ~l~p/ii 1996
~./f~~
/f '~ ~ WILLIAM E. WINSTON, MAYOR
GF.EULDINE O. ZAHM?'. , CITY CLEFK
Approved a., forml and legality for the use and reliance of the
t
city of Longwood, Florida, only , ~~
RZCFWEU S. T , CITY ATTORNEY
F 3M I JL?
Ju
giI °' ~,
R r~ ~
D
2 ~ ~ P
O .~ Y
h
a5
~ i ~ a 5'/r
~~..
d,<sa..,a<o
~,~ ~avara_a,xs
~,~~~f<,.~,~P a,«e.~a,~amm~
POR: December 2, 1996
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
PROM: W. SHELTON SMITH, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
VZA: John M. Brock, Di lector of Planning and Building Services
DATE: Novembe[ 25, 1996
SU&TECT. sitler of Ordinance 9 changing the land u
designation from General Commercial It c fo[
ertain peoperties along Church Avenue be<ween thetrailroad
and CR 42~
RECOMMENDATION:
It i my r endation that Ordinance 96-1313 (Plan Amendment 9 -B)
to change themm a Mao designation along the north and south
sides of Churc .en the railroad and CR 42l be adopted.
ON /BACKGROIn+D
nPNOVembex 4, 1996, the City Commission agreed to a Sider Ordinance
96-1313. A copy of the draft ordinance, a staff report dated October
21, 1996 and a staff [ePOrt dated November 12, 1996 a attached for
your c siderat ion. A letter answezing t raised by Mr. White
n his October 30, 1996 letter a hembe[c16 ns1996 City Commission
presentation is also attached fodr your ~eview.
The proposed a endment compliments the City C
October 21, 1996 to add Prese[vations 6lementct on tRe
Comprehensive Plan and continuesii ent to p[eservation<of the
City's historic resources, particularly intthe downtown area.
p~~ *~Z!@ACT_
The proposed amendme ~~~Xp/''11 have lit~t`,`l.^(ye~~vf fiscal impact.
PREPARED BY Jt ~c~tor of manning 6 Building Services
5 e/ h~ ~ stoat
wpity Admini or
~~ na7a f~„ec ~.n.
. Pmy.eed, ~4"k,.Aa co
B (cmJ rc . o
~.,.! >)scrasss nti.~uwai co ^~r
November 25, 1996
nald L. white
Clea rvi ew C
Palm Coast, FL 3213]-8344
RE. Response to Your Statements In Opposition To Proposed Plan
Amendment 96-O1-B (Ordinance 96-13137
wnitd:
zner purpose of t s letter ~ espona to vour letter dated
October 3 and your presentation t the City C
November 18,11996 objecting to the proposed a ent lforoyour
property o Church A dogwood. o date, myoudmhave r
copies of the City C (Agenda M s for the October "/
and N ember 1 eetings a well a taff m s dated October
and BN ember 12, 1996 which further mdiscuss various
aspects9 of tM1is ~ ssue.
The City apologizes for the delay in your r ing notice of the
October ~ ity C ing. rely o the
property Appraiser's orris if or public noticed addresses. Chapter
166.041 (37 c Florida Statutes provides that notice shall be
given far ' actual z ing map c doges... w address is known
by reference to the latest ad valorem tax records...
of August 8 996, the Property Appraiser's Office listed your
address as Terry S Altamonte Springs. suggest you
cate with the dPropertY Appraiser's Office regarding the
correct address. we have corrected our records in this regard.
The r ord should s that direct n e to property o
required for pl an hd endment act ionsc Chapter a(SSJt
Florida ncludes provisions for n wspaper3 advertising
notice which supersede the notice requitement s n Chaptee 166.041,
FS this regard. However, ity chose r o provitle dieeet
notice t all the property o record for tthe first reading
of orainanoe 96-.1313 as a conrtesy.f
letter a your vember 18, 1996
presentat ~on make many9a of ConditionsNw ich will o if
the Futur drdesignation changed from G ral
ial (GC) t wntown Historic (DH)swhich a e partiallyd, o
Ompletely i o The staff offers the following responses to
each of these assertions.
White Objection Response
vember 25, 1996
page z
ertio St (the D41 designation) restricts the type of tenant
swhom negotiate a lease.
All 1 1 governments i Florida a andated by Chapter 1
II, elorida statutes, to prepare and implement a comprehensive
tlensity and ity of of all ands within
jurisdiction. rThe City's Plan wes prepared and found in compliance
wrth this iegislat ive mandate. a
This law mandates that ach local government enforce the
objectives and policies of ethe Plan through land
development regulations. All of property ery local
government r Florida r subject5eregulat ions s setbacks,
landscaping, ntree protection, sign controls, Therefore,
property o anywhere has u d discretion to do anything
he wishes onehis property. Thesc of the City's Land
Development Regulations has been uin place rfor more than 10 years.
The City of Longwood does N regulate Che types of tenants as you
claim. All local governments i Florida regulate t DSE of Land,
not the o rship or leasing of land. Any property o may lease
space to any tenant to conduct any business Chat is permitted i
the z ing district, provided the aPPlicable site development, fire
and building codes are met.
any u of property which is legally i istence at the time a law
s passed may continue indefinitely as Tony a t become
t for a nth period. Therefore, se d~fs any of the
fisting u of%your property w not perm ittede in the D Doing
district, which they are, the use would be grandfathered in.
Zt delays a permitting process for any
impro ents and/or repairs.
mit r s for properties designated DH do takes ewhat longer
than mostvother permit reviews because the current process requires
the aechitectural integrity of the s e ism intained.
TheuCity i ntly e ing the permi tir w process to find
ways to shoetens the r w rtime without s rif is ing thoroughness.
Specifically, the n istoric Preservation Element of the City's
Plan contains a recommendation to streamline the permit review
The r f your August I request C Che porch
erhanginq the public sidewalk Ldid require a nobly long
this building ributing u
istoricsrD strict, t toff rattempted to determinec whether the
National Register of e istoric Places the Florida Bureau of
Historic Preservation had any permit revrew authority in such
matters. After s e delay O the part of t agen
ned that the permitting function etly s, ilocal
government responsibility antl the demoli ti oni permit was issued.
ord should also show that [he staff attempted to get you t
finds othee way rather than r vat of the porch t address the
eakeneda cond ition of the Porch eme ample, the u of angle
beating to shore up the porch c d have m ned the e
integ[ity of the buildings at a modest cost ntaYOU ref used tto ibe
cooperative in this matter.
The porch has been hanging o r the public right-of-way for m
than t n years. The r ord s oultl a show that this porch was on
the building long before youhpurchased it.
It m nother group will be able to tell me what
nidonwith my property.
This s ent is partially true. The City's Plan, and Appendix A
of the aCity Code, establisR s e development criteria such a
setbacks, Refight limitations, free and safety codes, e against
which all proposed development i valuated. If a proposed project
u<h a asRUildi ng a substantially
meets tRe criteria in the City Code, the project is approved.
The City Code requi any a expansion, o
the a of a structure o of land, other than single family o
dvplexe[esidential, Co complete tRe s e plan review process. This
process requires approval by the technical staff, the Land Planning
Agency the City This process andatory
regardlessdof the land u classification o Doing. iThemH
vation Boaed's r ithin [Re t of the technical
review and therefore doeseNOT add to thei reviewsp[ocess time.
The s e plan process requires the u of licensed civil engineers,
veyors and landscape rchitects and typically requires
appro mately three nthsa omplete the technical
application i approved ~ The c ty i ntlycevaluating ways to
reduce the site plan x w process.coThe draft Land D velopment
Code proposes changes inithe site plan e w process which will
significantly reduce the time required for review.
It m any a fisting business that i n t2~e
approvednlist will be unable to sell, or change ownership, even
though it is gtandfatheied in
Any u of property which does not conform to the u e limitations
the ePlan, or the Land Development Regulations, i called a
onf orming u A (57 of the City's Land D lOpment
Regulations provides that e iE a land v structure ew e to
become a - ing u may continue < operate so long as
the structure is not vacant for six months or mole.
Tno aesignation of yoar property o Charon A onla +as~
suet r any of yonr e ent tenants Reingec siaerea a
onformi ng u Furthermore, e if the proposed tl signationntlid
salt i t tenants being a - onformi ng u it
could continue so hlong ras rt was not vacant for srx months, se
Once again, the City does erfere any change of
rship t Any c n buy,arsell, or lease any
parcel withoutsapproval. Thereforen this n._ys_comoletely
false and without basis in fact.
claim t anging the land u
designat will ytake your property rights away and stated that You
ould expect no less than $ 2 ompen n for this loss.
toot cean ~ BB Tarn a aesi ~ way
i hts i the first place, the
staff m onto the city C n dated October 21, 1 and other
materiaim aemonsuates ocnezeros Little anal aiftere„ce r
perrniccea u s between the c ral c ial ana o wntown xrstorro
districts land use categoriese in the Compeehensive Plan.
n the s and place, Florida c e law generally provides that
ompensation is NOT due unless aagovernmental action deprives tRe
of all r noble u of his land. This determination i
mailer thzough a ompetent c art of jurisdiction. The October 2
3996 staff m cclearly s e proposed designation a
t deprive you of ALL o of your land. n fact, the proposed
land u designationn antl egrandfatherinq provisions of the land
developme regulations ould NOT significantly change the
existi ng,nor future use of your land.
Lastly, you claim that should a t determine that you w e due
ompensation because of the cRange in land u e designation, you
ould expect no less t n $ 2 0 for this property. While you
Rave a ery light t ert you property r [th whatever price
you wish, sROUld abe noted for t ord t the S Hole
unty roperty Appraiser's Off ice hvalves yovratproperties at
approximately S 100,000 and taxes you accordingly.
Ado- Zt (the ox designation? multiplies the cost of
modeling
As evidence for this claim, you c the c of r modelling a
Rouse located a Church A Apparently, i s house w
ted from a ial office a
thevpast. n doings ethe Building C requirements n ted
inging the building into compliance with the c ial building
code requirements. The m Safety ands Building C
regal ents must be met eegardlessrof the land use designation or
zoningsclassi.f ication.
Therefore, it v not completely a hat the D
signation c higher r modellingic Aal arge portion Of
cne o cneed spit o ring the commercial f. safety ana
building code requirements me
urthermore, the land designation and the DH ing
classification ned sabout the a appearances of
buildings and the su oof ethe buildings. It does vnot concern vtself
wi[R the intervor appearance of a structure.
sg [y¢p,_~ TRe change would suppress tM1e chance of a business
eeding.
This a eeks to blame the City f a potential business
failure swhich nmay o e because the City did n allow huge signs
verywhere. Chaptez 163.3202, Florida Statutest mandates the City
regulate signage [o be c ith the Objectives and Policies
of the comprehensive Plan 61 The s e limitation in the DH a
ith the City's Objectives and Policies fox the Downtown
NistoricnDVStrvct.
that the unt o signage permitted on properties
des ignateda as DowntownaHistoric i significantly less than i any
othez land u e designation. Thissreguirement is present i order
the architectural integei ty Of the Historic District.
Allmnew signs in the Historic Distzict are limited to 16 sg. ft.
E.2 of Appendix A of the City Code [pg. 20117 limits
theta 6of signs to 30 percent of the facade a of a building i
as designated G ral C ial. Therefore, your e fisting
buildings a e limitede to a of 14o sq. ft of signage and 1!1 =
1400 sq. ftr as Your November 118, 1996 presentation indicated.
s_SlIQIdB%
1. The city does not in any way regulate the sale or leasing
of PropertYa
2. mRere ways to streamline the s e plan r w process
all projects, Sncluding those designated a
The Historic P rvation Doard's r of projects
ithin the timeframe Of ecMical few and
therefore does NOS' ADD time to thetr w process rev
A grandfathered business o landau may [
ope[ation so long as it does not become vacant fo[ six months
oChanging the land use designation from General Commercial
to Downtown Historic i ing subject t Ompensation
unless ruled so by a courttaf competent jurisdiction.
ost remodelling costs a fated with meeting the
safety and Building c requirements.
The City's sign regulations a istenf with the
Comprehensive Plan as mandated by Chapter 163.3202, FS.
Don White Objection Response
vember 25, 1996
page 6
The City views the Downtown Nistoxic District as a valuable
The Goal of t Element i ..to actively pursue the tlevelopment,
redevelopment isand ration of the City's historic and
icheologi cal tby ing t e permitting process;
through City f ings of appropriate capital improvements; and
assisting the ixi stori< District's property owners in taking
states " .[Ipon adoption of this Element, Longwood shall i
its efforts to improve its historic preservation image nin ethe
Element, the City shall pursue financial incentive proyrams to
I hope these responses will e e your c about the proposed
change in land u e designation? I£ you have any further questions
regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at 40>-
260-3462.
Si ly,
Ga~~
cc. Mayor and city c
W. Shelton 5 ith,mCitylAdministrator
Sohn M. B ock, D of Planning and Building Services
Mistorio areservation eoara
a
~~ ~~
ICI f ~ 'r°.~]lyye~~
1\.
~ ~ eS3',wLVZ w
MEXORANDUH
TO: HONSRABLE MAYOR AND CITY COMMI55 Nzy> E
helton Smith, City Administratoe O
EROM: John M. rock, Di ctor of Planning and Building
emberBl2, 1996re
BU&TECT: N Additional Information Regarding the cation of
Ordinance 9 - CRanging T and U snignat ion Along
ChurcR Avenue Between The Railroad And CR 42"1
ON/BACRGROIIND'
PtheAO tuber City C mmission meeting, there w siderable
discussion regarding90rdinance 96-1313. This Ordinance will change the
land designation the City's omprehensive Plan from ral
Commercial (GC7 to D wntown Historic (DH) for a mall a a between CR
and the railroad. This psoposetl a matted by the
City C n tD the DCA f and c entr ons May 20, 1996.
The OCAmdidsnot offer any objectionrtoitbis proposed amendment.
The staff prepared a report dated O tuber 21 96 which compared the
permitted the ral ial and Historic
tegories.LLSeThisn alsoe provided er ary f the wdevelopment
crateria in the C-3 and OH zoning districts.o~
The purpose of this m s to provide s additional information for
<Re c e in r sidering ordinance 9 3i3. TRere is no
significance insthe o er of the information shown below:
The City hard been implementing a preservation program since
ing w established i The c ing regulations
taterl ?TRe H c District i nigae and i replaceable a of
Ristoeic importan ~ei and significance whose uctures, lands aand
should be protected, preserved and m paged t its
desirable character, appearance, niqueness as a historici place...
(Section 5oa.17
Aftee nalysis of all the and
properties i ra In part of the City, the City passed cR solution
rcR 1 1990 designating the D c District and
reg0e ing designation by the National Register ofnni stork Places. The
Historic District incladed the s of the grope eties described
Ordinance 9 and shown in g,ygus~b• istrict w
ded on6 the 3N pal Register i tuber 1990to Achieving t
designation by t National Register is a prestigious achievement that
few districts ever accomplish.
Tne National Pegis{er of xi e<oric nclvaes the
properties s s pact of the City'PS aH
These propertieslnlnclude lthe following historically rl signif icant
str a esi - _ k ld'nq___]3]~
Edward H nck w the original s ttlers o the City and
wilt s ral other structures which a e part of the Historic
D ct.e He served a., mayor in the late 18805.
b. h ch A it i
Lester Payne builte thisa structurena grocery store and a
residence Sn the eaely 19005.
c. 11~ e ola P
This structure,~enbuilt by o Payne,3p the first
1a1 structure in the City Ce It later became the City's
firstrpost office.
When the Comprehensive Plan w adopted i July 1 map
made in that the subject properties, s not which9 halo been
designated a ributinq 5 s to the National Register District
less than Coyea pre usly ur takenly xcluded feom the
Downtown H istrictcon the Fat erem land l..e Ordinance 96-
1313 simplysseeks to correct this map error.
The Comprenensive Plan states " .The purpose of the D wntown
ist tic District is to B oof the
icy and its citizens by pre ing ana protec ing historic s
and eighbornoods se tangible finders of the his{ory and
cultural heritage o4 the City. Furthermore, it Ss the purpose of tors
aistrict to s n { n {
ae e eaeveiowm xea to wcnax will b
harmonious with e ing Risto structueesmand the eo tall theme of
the District..." (page I I-J7, Goals, Objectives and Policies Document)
Therefore, contrary t a popular m ception, o of the principal
purposes of the Downtown Historic District is economic development.
May Ordinance 92-1076 orporating the design
guidelinesl for historic properties w adopted. TRese guidelines
reflect the policy of the Comprenensive Plan to generally peeserve the
architectural integrity of the City's Contrr ing Str
Another m ception about propeet ies designated as historic
mere a estrictions o types o s permitted.
required by s e law, the Comprehensive Planf designates the types of
land u e permitted i ach a of the city. Each land u tegory i
object to regal ationsasuch a etbacks, landscaping, etc se All u of
all s and lams c <ne city a subject to v types of
developmentr restrictions. may lease apacel for any use
permitted in the coning district in which the property is located.
orainance 9 - econsiaeracion Hemo
ember 12, 1996
page ~
The development r w process for properties designated a
ewhat rm e lengthy t s because
s directed r the rchitectuze tofr rhea proposed
eol of tRe e rchitecture in historic a
rely c cal and witho teSitra c preservation program i
ingless. r ong the r endat ionshoftthe n vation
Element, adopted on Octoberm 2l, 1996, a provision rt the
review trme £or all projects, especially rthose designated ohistoric.
o truth t legation tRa[ a ing businesses
will nable tors ell cRange
rshipo~tThe City tloesa not ontrol rship of property
~nteefeze in any way with changes of ownership. FurtRermore, any
The property subject to the proposed ordinance i shown r
Fiau e02. The dank shaded a ned by G Mr. Tzad w
the gentleman who v opposition t the ordinance ra
6 hearing regarding dthe proposed ~hanges. However,t it OShoubld be
red that Trad did benefit the rnformation
subsequently Mprovided in the00ctober 3, 1996 staff memo.
TRe a shown in the checked pattern i ned by the H t family i
Tallahassee. The dotted pattern a ned by R. G Trusteen
The area depicted by horizontal stripessis owned by Don White.
Any expansion of any property i ither of these land u
classifications (General C ial o wntown Historic) m onform
to vel opment capi ng, etbacksust ilding
eights, applicable t tithe district. Any n
reguieed t onform to the appropriate criteria as would development of
vacant properties.
The O staff m the difference i <he
development trite era b n properties designated a ral C ial
and those d si gnated a wntown Historic. 1'he principal diffe ante i
tRat Downtown Historio o properties are required to maintain the
ontinue its twenty plus year history of preserving its Ristoric
There i significant difference between the ability t
velop t object s whether they a signated D oric
rat C to The m significant differencewis theHability
to preserve theeCity's historiciresourc es.
cc. Subjec< Property Owners
HPB Members
Q' 3}6 1317
~u
i
ry
~ o n
t5
~ i Y 4 5'~r
eicuae i iiirzivs scarf memo
Nat>onal Register of His <o ric elaces P p tics
f~ JM I JV
}u
gi
~i r
~~ ~ L~
0 o n
n
a5
n I Y a 5~/i
FIGO R6 2 11/12/96 sC aff memo
a
~,~ ~~
~,m~,P,so_,~ea
~o,,P~_
ONSRABLE MAYOR AND~oCI~TYODCOFiMISSI OM
A: helton smitn, city Aaminiatrator
Sohn M. Brock, Director of Planning and Building Servi
DAT~C October 21, 1996
su CT, i Commercial and D n F[i storic Land Use ca egories
ompar - Proposed ordinance 96-SI1J -
Plan Amendment 96-OS-8 (a portion thereof)
F%P~_>N T~OMlgACX
At the O tober '/ R~996 City Commission m ing, there w table
discussion regarding O Ordinance sought t achange
the land u e designatiodnl inn the 6C ity }s Comprehensive Plan feom oG ral
rciala(GCj t istoric (DH7 for a limited a aof c
This proposed a wendment w wed by the City C May
and the C agreeds to vtransmit i o the mD As Pot ltheir
and c enti ss iThe findings of fact i support of the proposed
change w supplied t the Commission in the Plan Amendment package
report dated October 1996.
I
During t o discussion o tober J, 1 affected property o
indicated he did not support the proposed a endment. His opposition
appeared to r salt from s onfusion about the land u s permitted i
the General. Commercial andmDOwntown Hlstorlc land ssse classifications.n
In a empt t clarify this i the staff has prepared a ompaxison
of t ea level opment requirements sfor the G ral C ial and D
istoric land u categories. The permitted land mu s in the Plantoa
belowe a e general i cope. The detail ss of the development
criteria are provided in the land development regulations.
MHERCIAL _
Retail\Hotel \MOtel 1 Retail
Mixed R sidenti al\Retail\Office Mixed Residential 6 ail
Officese
ial\Medical\Dental Governmental
ants, e cept f t food
culariS and B nspoitation F cilities
Personal 5 na1 Services E oup H
orainance 9fi-IJ1J Memo
October 21, 1996
page 2
ach land u tegory contains a of purpose. These statement
for the land use categories are providean below.
p
~f Che ral ia1 District provide
Buff icientu landei appropriate locations rfor v s types of is
and s and to provide a wide range ofi goods and services...
4.ow toryg
Then purpose of the Downtown H c District i o promote the
and cultural welfaee of the City and i citizens by Preserving
andnprotecting historic s and neighborhoods as Tangible
the history tuand ral heritage of the City.
rthermore ~fi the purpose of thislD engthen the image
and iability too downtown a a bys e raging development and
redevelopment (mixede uses) that twill be nharmonious with xlsting
historic structures and the overall theme of [he District...
The affected property o indicated c n that if the property w
designated D he wouldwn < be able to develop t ing portioneof
the t angle bounded by the railroad, Church A and C The
basic rs e development c a for the c-S and DHn2 ing d stricts a
zed below. The landscaping requirements apply equally to both
O
C DP.VEI~OPMENT CRITP.RIA ISTOR?c
No00 sgc
ft. 10,000 sg. ft.
5 feet Minimum rot width 50 f
0 feet m Lot Depth
1
25 feet ont Setback
D 25 feet
25 feet Minimum
R Setback to feet
30 feet Minimum Side Setback 10 feet
25 feet Hin. Corner etback LS feet
35 F wilding Height 5 feet
5 percent Lmperv. urface
x 70 percent
0.50 . Plooi Area A 0.50
5 per 1000 59. ft. ark ing Spac Regtd. fable
v
0 & of facade a of Signage sq. ft.
25 feet Sign eight
e
' 6 feel, wooden
o Arch
itectural
COntrol sign G delines
u
S
per a hade P S
per a
Ordinance 96-131} Hemo
October 21, 1996
page }
The principal difference between the two designations is that
to preserve and protect the City's historic s The parking
requirements generally lower for DH properties than for GC
properties. The sign and height greater for GC
properties than for aDHm propeetiesCea The m required tree shade
points a almost double £Or DH properties o nr those for GC properties.
Since these i tchitectutal c col o C designated parcels, a
ould demolish these properties and econsttuct anything that met
theevarrous code requirements.