06-14-06 Min LPA CITY OF I:®NGW®®I~
Land Planning. Agency
Amended Minutes, June 14, 2006
ATTENDANCE:
BOARD Staff
Bruce Noyes, Chair Patrick Miller, Community Services Director
Johsu~ie Richardson, Vice Chair Paul Sizemore, Community Development Coordinator
Judy Putz Janinna Lenzi, Planning Secretary
John Cardinal, Sr.
ABSENT:
Scott Pride
1. CALL TO ORDER:
Mr. Noyes. called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Regular Meeting April 12, 2006
Mr. Richardson made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Ms. Putz seconded the
motion. The motion was approved by a unanimous voice vote.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT: No public comments.
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Mr. Noyes opened the Public Hearing.
A. LDCA 03-06 Longwood Development Code Amendment.
City of Longwood
Ordinance # 06-1800
MOTION/RECOMMENDATION:
Mr. Sizemore stated that the Community Development Division of the Conununity Services
Department recommends the Land Planning Agency recommend to the City Commission
approval or denial of an amendment to the Longwood Development. Code (LDCA 03-06) by
Ordinance 06-1800.
EXPLANATIONBACKGROUND:
Mr. Sizemore explained that at the April 17, 2006 regular City Commission meeting the
LPA 06-14-06
Amended Minutes
Page 1 of 4
~ Commission directed staff to prepare an ordinance to amend the Longwood Development
Code. The proposed ordinance makes a number of revisions and clarifications to the current
Code in order to streamline review processes and enhance the effectiveness of development
regulations. It includes the addition of new definitions, improved analysis systems, new design
standards; and more appropriate denotation of legislative intent. FS 163.3174 requires that the
Land Planning Agency make recommendations on all changes to the City's Land Development
Code. All land development regulations must remain consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
of the City of Longwood. The LPA may recommend approval, denial, or approval with
amendments to the City Commission.
Mr. Miller added that the Longwood Development Code is a living document and changes will
• always be necessary.
Ads. Putz made a motion to close the Public Heap°ing. Mr. Richardson seconded the motion. The
.motion was approved by a unanimous vote.
Mr. Miller suggested the Board review the recommended amendments page by page.
In section 1 the definition of Facade was amended.
Section 3.2.1 A amendment in regards to non-vertical concrete surfaces.
Section 3..2.2 A and B amendments in regards to lot sizes and dimensions.
Section 3..2.3 A and B the Design Standards were amended.
Section .3.2.3 D 2 amendment to clarify the color palette section.
Ms. Putz suggested that an appeal process be available for the color palette.
Section 3.2.3 D 9 amendment regarding chain link fences.
Section 3.2.3 D 13 amendment in regards to the brick walls.
Section 3.2.3 D 14 a new part regarding the development regulations for new constructions on
our corridors.
Section 3.2.5 a new section concerning duplex and multi-family design standards.
Section 3.3.1 B an addition regarding the driveway access of residences.
Section 3.6.0 C 10 amendment to the lighting standards for parking areas.
Section 3.6.1 A amendment in regards to parking spaces for residential use.
Section 5.3.3 amended to clarify fencing issued.
~ LPA 116-14-06
Amended Minutes
Page 2 of 4
Section 5.3.5 a word change regarding canopies.
Section 5.6.4 A amended regarding telecommunication towers.
Section 6.4.4 F amendment about window signs.
Ms. Putz mentioned that the window signs might be a safety issue for lack of visibility for the
Police Department.
Mr. Miller responded that he would contact the Chief of Police regarding the matter.
' Section 6.4.4 H amended regarding ground signs.
Section 6.6.2 part E was added regarding temporary signs.
Section 6.7.5 references to "Planning" were removed and ..replaced with "Corrunuiiity
Development".
Section 6.7.6 added parts C and D regarding removing signage when a business is not in use. •
• Section 10.2.1 C the section numbers were updated.
~ Section 10.10.0 part E was added regarding site plan approval.
Section .10.11..3 amendments regarding lot splits and replats.
1Vlr. Miller wanted to remind the Board about recommending adding the asterisk in section
3.2.3 or 10.11.3 referencing- the historic and downtown overlay. Also, recommending that the
color palette have an administrative appeal process.
Mr. Sizemore stated that there were a few additions to the recommendations listed on the
memorandum that must be reviewed.
Section 10.3.2 amendment in regards to hearings by City Commission and waiver requests.
Section 3.2.5 amendment in regards to development borders around duplex and multi family
dwellings. .
Ms. Putz suggested adding the word "dwelling" in front of "units" in the paragraph.
Ms. Putz made a motion to recommend to the City Commission that they appfrove the changes
as presented here tonight with the exceptions that Mr. Miller outlived earlier a~~d-with the
additions that were discussed its the memorandum dated June 14, 2006. Mr. Richardson
seconded the rrrotion. The motion was approved by a (4-0) roll call vote.
LPA 06-14-06
Amended Minutes
Page 3 of 4
t
5. DISCUSSION AND SCHEDULE FOR FUTURE AGENDA. ITEMS
Next Regular Scheduled Meeting July12, 2006
6. ADJOURNMENT: 8:23 p.m.
Bruce Noyes, C it
ATTEST:
y '
J ninna Lenzi, Reeor in cretary
ti
~ LPA 06-14-06
Amended 1'VIinutes
Page 4 of 4
I . i