Loading...
05-11-07 Min LPAATTENDANCE: BOARD: Bruce Noyes, Chair Johnnie Richardson, Vice Chair John Prince, Member JoAnne Rebello, Member ABSENT: John Cardinal, Member CITY OF LONGWOOD Land Planning Agency April 11, 2007 Minutes STAFF: Paul Sizemore, Interim Community Service Director Ryan Spinella, Executive Assistant Marveen Kelly, Recording Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Noyes called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. 2. ELECTIONS: A. Chair Vice Chair Richardson made a motion to retain Bruce Noyes as Chair. Seconded by Member Prince and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Member Cardinal absent. B. Vice Chair .Member .Rebello made a motion to retain Johnnie Richardson as Vice Chair. Seconded by Chair Noyes and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Member Cardinal absent. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: . November 8, 2006 Regular Meeting Vice Chair Richardson made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Seconded by Member Prince and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Member Cardinal absent. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT Vice Chair Richardson made a motion to close public comment. Seconded by Member Rebello and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Member Cardinal absent. LPA 04-11-07/1 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Chair Noyes opened the Public Hearing. A. CPA 01-01 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Future Land Use Element, Map Amendment Ordinance # 07-1825 MOTION/RECOMMENDATION: Mr. Sizemore stated the Community Development Division of the Community Services Department recommends the Land Planning Agency (LPA) recommend to the City Commission approval of an amendment to the Longwood Comprehensive Plan (CPA 01-07) by Ordinance No. 07-1825. Mr. Sizemore stated the Future Land Use Amendment expresses the new vision for Planning and Development within the City. This vision recognizes the zoning prototypes for Central Florida's high growth environment. He explained the State requirements for land use require Longwood to define and calculate that vision using a step system for standards. Mr. Sizemore explained that this amendment creates four new mixed -use land uses and applies village mixed -use to the property at 881 West Warren Avenue. An evaluation of public facilities finds that adequate public services exist for the land use change. He advised that specifics of the design would be addressed by the next agenda item. Discussion ensued regarding the State's requirements for Comprehensive Plans. Corrections were noted to Exhibit A of the Proposed Amendment on page 4 of 7 in that Policy F should be changed to Policy E, and on Page 5 of 7 -Policy H should be corrected to change to Policy F. Vice Chair Richardson made a motion to approve with corrections. Seconded by Member Prince and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Member Cardinal absent. B. LDCA 02-07 Longwood Development Code Amendment Article III, Adopt Design Guidebook Ordinance # 07-1828. MOTION/RECOMMENDATION: Mr. Sizemore stated the Community Development Division of the Community Services Department recommends the Land Planning Agency (LPA) recommend to the City Commission approval of a Longwood Development Code Amendment, Article III, Adopt Design Guidebook, by Ordinance No. 07-1828. Mr. Sizemore stated that this was the second part of the Commission's vision. He mentioned that Mr. Adams with ACi will be a presenter for the City regarding the Guidebook. This is a supplement for existing codes with a coherent vision plan for new planning districts. Larry Adams, ACi, stated they have been involved with the process for the last year and a half. The Hamlet concept is sustainable and will help create a humanist environment for LPA 04-11-07/2 Longwood. He said the market data shows Longwood has potential as a Commuter Rail/lake restorative area, with Highway's 427 and 434 being major contributors for retail, leisure and residential growth in adjacent communities. Mr. Adams stated he felt that success for a common vision/goal was obtainable with continued growth with parties like South Seminole Hospital, Northland Church, and the community support of the Commuter Rail System. He advised the Primary and Secondary Trade Area's demand is $1.22 billion for 2008. He said that over the next decade Longwood will consider the historic quality, walk -ability and the health core as major factors which have helped to evolve the Design Guidebook. The Hospital main entrance might move to Warren Avenue to further evolve the sense of place. Community identity would increase by using Longwood Boulevard instead of Highway 434. Mr. Adams suggested using the old name for that section of the highway to increase a sense of community. Seminole County knows that smart growth is fundamental in building communities and that smart growth also looks to younger singles and couples and affordable housing. Mr. Scott Webber, ACi, stated that good design was timeless. He said good design always has a strong sense of place, respects smart growth, and has a sustainable quality. He declared good design also has meaningful architecture. He stated they applied those principles to come up with eight unique districts; Heritage Village, Island Lake Park, The Artisan Village, Lyman District, General Hutchinson District, Longwood Boulevard East, The East End, and Southern Longwood. He pointed out the areas they see as important gateways into the City proper and great opportunities to celebrate entry and exit from Longwood. He stated the focus areas of the book, cover good planning principals of architecture, place making and architectural pattern language. He said they were recognizing and encouraging green building. He declared that we start to look at solar devices, passive solar, insulated windows, and efficient air conditioning systems, all of which make good sense for everyone. Chair Noyes inquired if there were benefits to the developer if their building was LEED Certified. Mr. Webber advised they have not gone as far as to say LEED Certified. However, they were asking for developers to move toward building green buildings and using green materials. He referred to the Design Standards and said the districts were color coded to help ease the use of the book. He said these were good planning principles for urban design and could apply anywhere throughout the City. He reviewed the architectural types and the proposed design for the various districts. He said they envision Warren Avenue as the spine and connectivity between the Transit and Rangeline Road. He advised they show a street section in each village, and a street plan to show the character of what they would like as a contiguous street. He said the guiding principles for the Historic District were intentionally left blank and refers to the Longwood Historic District Code. Chair Noyes said it seems the number of parking required for commercial and residential areas were less than what he was used to seeing. Mr. Webber responded in the affirmative. He explained these were mixed -use projects, and the theory was that residents would be leaving during the day to go to work while LPA 04-11-07/3 others would be coming to patronize the retail. He affirmed there was a sharing factor with these projects. Chair Noyes inquired if the Historic Downtown would fragment the other more modern areas. Mr. Webber said they saw the Historic Downtown area as being able to walk through a living museum. Mr. Adams said they wanted to have some breathing space between some of the more intense developments. He stated the Historic District was the sanctuary that people would want to visit. Chair Noyes inquired what "B" was referring to on page 2 of 8. Mr. Sizemore stated that "B indicates the setbacks and building height will now be established by the District Plan and Design Guidebook rather than the Development Code. Member Rebello said that Longwood has a Church Avenue no Church Street and on page 2, Other Automotive, gasoline was only allowed in one section. Mr. Webber explained the reason for the Design Guidelines was for large mixed -use projects. He said you would not want to see a gas station in a large mixed -use project. He stated the gas station would be a stand alone project, which could be done in any part of the commercial district. Mr. Sizemore pointed out that in the bottom right corner of page 2, there was a note that states this page was for mixed -use projects. He said it was not intended to be applied to commercial property being developed according to the existing land use designation. He explained that the Design Standards of that district would apply and they will need to comply with site design and architecture. Member Rebello stated that she did not want to force the mixed -use on people. Mr. Sizemore responded that mixed use would be elected by the developer. Mr. Webber stated that each district would have different criteria. Member Rebello questioned page 11 "e", all playgrounds will be fenced and also on page 3, it references a minimum of 10-foot sidewalks. Mr. Webber said the references to fenced playgrounds and 10-foot sidewalks would be removed. Discussion was held regarding trees and landscaping along West Warren. LPA 04-11-07/4 Vice Chair Richardson moved to close the public hearing. Seconded by Member Rebello �— and carried by a unanimous voice vote with Member Cardinal absent. Mr. Sizemore restated the recommendations made to include changing any references of Church Street to Church Avenue, clarify on page 2 that the standards are for mixed -use developments, on page 3 remove the minimum 10-foot sidewalk that might conflict with sections of the District Plan, and on page 11 remove the section about playgrounds being fenced. Vice Chair Richardson moved the LPA recommend to the City Commission approval of an amendment to the Longwood Development Code as discussed with the recommended changes as restated by Mr. Sizemore and the adoption of the Longwood Design Guidebook (LDCA 02-07) Ordinance No. 07-1828. Seconded by Member Rebello and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Member Cardinal absent. C. LDCA 01-07 Longwood Development Code Amendment Article III and Article IV, Sign Code Ordinance # 07-1826 Chair Noyes opened the Public Hearing Mr. Sizemore introduced Ryan Spinella. MOTION/RECOMMENDATION: Mr. Spinella stated the Community Development Division of the Community Services Department recommends the Land Planning Agency (LPA) recommend to the City Commission approval of the Longwood Development Code Amendment, Article III and Article IV, Sign Code, Ordinance No. 07-1826. Mr. Sizemore stated that the proposed amendment has been a matter of discussion for quite a while with the Commission. The Commission had indicated they wanted to see some proposed revision to the existing Sign Code. They did a thorough evaluation of the Sign Code and Article 6 of the Development Code, and found that it was very adequate in its structure and flexibility. He said a matrix was presented to the Commission that showed the current Sign Code standards in comparison to several other cities in Florida. The matrix being presented included existing Sign Code requirements and also shows the requirements, from other cities. The last column contains what is being proposed in this ordinance. He explained following this public hearing, the amendment will go before the City Commission for two additional public hearings. Discussion ensued regarding use of the matrix as the basis of explaining the changes. Mr. Spinella said the matrix focused on changing the first line to the types of signs being allowed. The Commission expressed an interest in reducing the number of pole signs in the City. They have proposed to allow monument or wall signs. Chair Noyes inquired if a monument sign was a sign mounted on a base to the ground. LPA 04-11-07/5 Mr. Spinella responded in the affirmative. He reviewed some pictures of what a �- monument sign would look like. Chair Noyes commented that one sign looked like a big tombstone. Mr. Spinella said there were a lot of styles in the City and a lot of freedom in the choice of designs. He continued to review the matrix. Discussion ensued regarding the size of the Collison Family Funeral Home sign and whether it was based on the current Code. Chair Noyes asked if the sign considered as the 100 square feet included the pedestal where the Collison sign was mounted. Mr. Sizemore responded that allowable size is based on building frontage and includes only the sign face. Mr. Spinella stated that maximum height will be going to the strictest reduction allowed. Currently it is 25 feet and will be reduced to a height of 10 feet. Discussion ensued concerning examples of over large monument signs in the City. Monument Signs would have the anchor stores displayed on the Monument and the supporting stores would be allowed to have signs on the building and in their windows. Plaza and mixed -use would be in a special section which would allow one sign per entrance. Mr. Spinella said they had included some miscellaneous criteria. He made note that color standards were three miscellaneous design standards limited to three colors, and that monument signs would be perpendicular to the street. He stated they were also stating that the base on the sign needs to be at least two thirds of the width of the sign and made of brick or decorative block Chair Noyes asked if someone allowed 100 square feet, could do ten, three foot by three foot signs. He inquired what the limits were for keeping signs on the frontage of the building. Mr. Spinella explained that the limit on building signs was one times the lineal footage of the building frontage with a maximum of 100 square feet. The only standard on window signs was 75 % in one place in the code and 25 % in another place in the code. He said it was equalized it to 25 % allowed as long as they maintain visibility at pedestrian height. He advised this was a request from our Police Department. He affirmed they would like to allow electronic message centers. If an electronic message center is installed, temporary signs or changeable copy signs would be allowed on the property. He stated neon lighting and back lit awnings were stricken out all together. The opportunity provided for people to conform to the new standards, will be seven years. A letter from the City would then be sent to advise that there would be thirty days allowed to come in to compliance. LPA 04-11-07/6 Chair Noyes reiterated all existing businesses would have seven years to come into compliance. Mr. Spinella stated that was correct. Member Price inquired about the new video signs that were now being produced. Mr. Spinella stated the billboard industry was handled completely separately from all other signs. Member Rebello asked what the height of the Collison sign was. Mr.Spinella stated that the sign is probably about 8 feet. Member Rebello inquired what they do about areas such as the sign at Baywood on County Road 427 where the actual base is below the road. Mr. Sizemore stated the standard for measuring sign height is currently from grade. However, if that was a concern you would certainly have the option of addressing it in a number of ways. He said the way that seems the most appropriate would be tying it into the grade or tying it to the crown of the road and measuring the height from there. That could certainly be a recommendation. Member Rebello suggested that the recommendation be made. Mr. Sizemore said there were people present interested in the real estate signs. He confirmed discussion was held before the Commission regarding real estate signs. The way that the Code is currently, you can only place a real estate sign on property that is being sold. The Commission worked through some solutions. If these new regulations are adopted, realtors would be able to have two off -site real estate signs advertising the property being sold. It would be the responsibility of the person placing the signs to obtain the permission of the property owner. He stated real estate signs can't be placed in the public right of way. Signs for residential properties would be restricted to four square feet. In the event of an open house the size rule would apply. Discussion ensued regarding the number of allowable real estate signs. Mr. Sizemore stated there were also some changes to the garage sale section. There is a reduction in the number of allowable garage sale signs. However, it would allow them to be in the public right of way. 0 Ms. Anne Marie Ferraro, 424 Pine, Altamonte Springs, said she is employed with Watson Realty. She stated that signage has been a problem for quite some time. She had been experiencing a lot of trouble with signs in general and when she came to City Hall and told them of her dilemma, she felt that it wasn't taken seriously. They found signs were being removed on weekends. She would use two signs to direct people back to her property for sale and open house and found that someone had removed the signs. She said it was very frustrating for the sellers, especially in today's environment. She stated there was a cost associated with the signs and it gets really bad when you are constantly LPA 04-11-07/7 replacing signs. She said they were looking to find a workable resolution to the signage issues in general. Chair Noyes asked Ms. Ferraro how long signs would stay in the public right-of-way. Ms. Ferraro stated only on the weekends when she has an open house. Chair Noyes suggested to Ms. Ferraro the possibility that open house signs could be treated more like garage sale signs. Discussion ensued regarding the frequency of open houses and the fact that some sellers feel that open houses help them to sell their house and request to have them frequently. Ms. Ferraro stated that she personally has an open house every couple of weeks. Thomas Stagnitta, 1445 State Road 434, Watson Reality, said the open house signs were needed for approximately 4 hours, and placed in the right -of- way. The bottom line was to get directional signs to the open house. He said people from their real estate office would be waiting for people to come by and find that their directional signs had been pulled. He requested that the sign ordinance be changed. Mr. Jim Ruddy 328 Pressview Ave., Watson Realty, showed a typical real estate sign. He said he would like for Longwood's common areas to be included for sign placement. He affirmed the need for directional signs for 3- 4 hours to be able to have an open house. Vice Chair Richardson moved to close the public hearing. Seconded by Member Rebello and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Member Cardinal absent. Discussion ensued regarding adopting a registration application for open house signs. Chair Noyes moved to send LDCA 01-07 to the Commission with recommendations of adding open house signs with the same criteria as garage sale signs with additional time restrictions, and that sign height be 10 feet from the crown of the road or grade, whichever is higher. Seconded by Member Richardson and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Member Cardinal absent. Mr. Sizemore advised this item will be up for public hearing at the May 2 1 " City Commission meeting. 6. DISCUSSION AND SCHEDULE FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Next Regular Scheduled Meeting: May 9, 2007 9. PUBLIC COMMENT: There were no public comments. LPA 04-11-07/8 10. ADJOURNMENT: Chair Noyes made the motion to adjourn. Seconded by Vice Chair Richardson and carried by a unanimous voice vote with Member Cardinal absent. Chair Noyes adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m. Marveen Kelly, Recordin LPA 04-11-07/9