Loading...
LPA07-13-11Min = a CITY OF L,ONGWOOD Land Planning Agency Minutes CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS July 13, 2011 - 7:00 P.M. 175 W. Warren Avenue Longwood, FL 32750 ATTENDANCE BOARD: STAFF: Bruce E. Noyes Chair Sheryl L. Bower, AICP, Director Brian Fiore, Vice -Chair Chris Kintner, AICP, Planner Judy Putz, Member John Hambley, AICP, Planner Robin Thorn, Member Giselle Gonzalez, Recording Secretary ABSENT: John R. Prince, Member 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Noyes called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS None. 3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR A. Regular Meeting April 13, 2011 Member Putz indicated that she would like to move to approve the April 13` 2011 minutes as submitted and compliment the recording secretary on an excellent job. Seconded by Chair Noyes and carried by a unanimous voice call and vote tivith Member Prince absent. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT Ms. Bower stated she would like to present to the Board a new Staff Member, Planner Mr. John Hambley. The Board welcomed Mr. Hambley. 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. LDCA 03 -11 Longwood Development Code Amendment Ordinance 11 -1969 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LONGWOOD, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LONGWOOD DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE II LAND USE AND OVERLAY DISTRICTS, ARTICLE III DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS, ARTICLE V SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS, ARTICLE VI SIGNS, ARTICLE VII CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT, ARTICLE IX HARDSHIP RELIEF, ARTICLE X ADMINISTRATION, AND THE LONGWOOD DESIGN GUIDEBOOK, TO STREAMLINE AND CLARIFY EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES, REFLECT CHANGES FROM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 01- 11, AND EXTEND THE BOUNDARIES OF THE TRANSIT VILLAGE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. Chair Noyes asked if someone would like to speak in favor or against the item during the Public Hearing section. Mr. Patrick Fulton proceeded to the podium. Mr. Fulton indicated that he would be speaking on behalf of Collison Family Funeral Homes located at 335 E. State Road 434, Longwood, Florida. Mr. Fulton indicated he had a comment in regards to Section 5.4 D, which is on page 10 of 18. Mr. Fulton indicated to the Board that they had discussed with Staff that Collison Family Funeral Homes would not cremate for other firms but would be able to cremate for themselves. However, the language of Section 5.4.18 D states that at no time shall a crematorium serve any other entities. Mr. Fulton indicated they were concerned with this section because it would prevent Collison Family Funeral Homes from being able to cremate for their own locations in Sanford, Maitland and Winter Park. Chair Noyes asked Mr. Fulton if Collison Family Funeral Homes had other crematoriums. L Mr. Fulton indicated that they did not have any other crematoriums. Chair Noyes asked Mr. Fulton if they were looking to establish a crematorium in Longwood that would serve their other franchise locations or chains. Mr. Fulton indicated that was correct. Mr. Fulton pointed out that the way the language is written in Section 5.4.18 D, the Code would only allow Collison Family Funeral Hornes to cremate for another firm if it is licensed under the same name and located within the city limits of Longwood. Ms. Bower explained that the City Commission was concerned the cremation process would become a more intense use. For that reason, Staff wanted the crematorium to be an accessory use just to that specific funeral home location. As oppose to allowing Collison Family Funeral Hones to bring bodies into Longwood from other locations. In addition, Ms. Bower indicated that Staff wanted to make sure crematoriums were serving the residents of Longwood. Chair Noyes stated that the way the Section 5.4.18 is worded, the Code would allow a crematorium as an accessory use for a funeral home on a specific location. Ms. Bower pointed out that if Collison Family Funeral Homes had another facility within the City of Longwood, then that other facility could use the crematorium. Staff would prefer that they just have one crematorium instead of two. Ms. Bower indicated that Staff is concerned that the cremation process could become a more intensive use if Collison Family Funeral Homes is allowed to bring in bodies from other facilities that are outside the city limits. If that is the case, then we should be looking at either restricting the use or moving the business to the Industrial District. Ms. Bower pointed out that this was a controversial topic a few years ago. Ms. Bower indicated she did not realize Collison Family Funeral Homes was planning on bringing in bodies from outside the City. Ms. Bower stated that it was her understanding the crematorium was only going to service their Longwood location. Vice Chair Fiore asked Staff if the ownership limitation was not restrictive enough to prevent Collison Family Funeral Homes from subcontracting and bringing in bodies from other funeral homes under different ownerships. Ms. Bower stated that Staff was hoping the ownership limitation would address that issue. L Vice Chair Fiore asked Staff if the language "within the city limits of Longwood" could be eliminated. Vice Chair Fiore also asked if the ownership limitation and the regulation of one crematorium per funeral home could be enough to regulate these businesses. With these regulations in place, these businesses could bring in bodies form their other facilities that are under the same ownership. Ms. Bower stated that Staff's approach was that the crematorium would be servicing the. citizens of Longwood. However, Ms. Bower indicated that the Land Planning Agency could recommend to the City Commission that the language be changed to "outside the city boundaries" instead of "within the city limits of Longwood ". Member Putz asked Mr. Fulton how many funeral homes they had outside the City of Longwood. Mr. Fulton stated they have locations in Sanford, Maitland and Winter Park. Member Putz asked Mr. Fulton if they anticipate expanding to other locations. Mr. Fulton indicated that they do not anticipate expanding to 'other locations. Mr. Fulton explained to the Board that the understanding was that they would not cremate for other firms but would be able to cremate for their own facilities. Mr. Fulton stated they explained to Staff that Collison Family Funeral Homes had other facilities outside the City of Longwood. Mr. Fulton pointed out that they will not be cremating for other funeral homes under different ownership, the just want to be able to cremate for their own facilities. Member Putz asked Mr. Fulton how many bodies does the company cremate a week. Mr. Fulton stated that for the year the total cremations are about two hundred and fifty. Member Putz indicated that would be approximately five cremations per week. Mr. Fulton pointed out that there are a lot of myths about crematoriums. He wanted to make sure it was clear to the Board and Staff that there will be no smoke or smell coming from their facility. Mr. Fulton indicated that the only item that will be seen from the outside is the heat signature. t C Member Putz asked Mr. Fulton if they had two locations in Longwood. Mr. Fulton stated they have locations in Longwood, Sanford, Maitland and Winter Park. Member Thorn asked Mr. Fulton if there was any particular reason why they wanted to have a crematorium at their Longwood facility. Mr. Futon explained to the Board that Collison Family Funeral Homes was actually pre- approved to establish a crematorium at their Longwood facility. When Mr. Greg Collison was looking into purchasing that location, he wanted to make sure he could establish a crematorium. For that reason, Mr. Collison approached the City and received a letter indicating that the City approved the crematorium as long as they stayed within the boundaries. It has been five years since they received that fetter. Mr. Fulton explained to the Board they have even already ordered the machine. Member Thorn asked Mr. Fulton if there are Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements the business would have to go through. Mr. Fulton stated they have already been through the EPA process and have been approved. Mr. Fulton explained that the State is very particular about the location and if it is close to residential areas. Mr. Fulton pointed out that their Longwood facility is the only location where they could establish a crematorium. Member Putz asked Mr. Fulton where exactly their Longwood facility was located. Mr. Fulton indicated that their location is about two blocks from the offices of the City of Longwood. The address is 335 East SR 434, Longwood, Florida 32750. Their location is next to a doctor's office and across the street from the Public Works facility. Mr. Fulton explained to the Board that nothing except the smokestack will be seen from the outside, which can even be placed at the back or on the side of the building. There will not be any kind of visual impact or smell. Member Putz asked Staff what was the land use at that location. Ms. Bower indicated it was Infill and Mixed Use, which allows for residential and commercial uses. Member Putz asked staff what was currently around that location and if a mixed use development could be built there. C Ms. Bower indicated the location was in the TOD area, which meant there could possibly be developments in the future. Ms. Bower explained to the Board that Staff reviewed the crematorium as an accessory use. However, it cannot be an accessory use if they are allowed to bring in bodies from other locations outside the city limits of Longwood. If we are going to be allowing crematoriums as a principal use, then the Infill and Mixed District is possibly not the district they should be in. It is necessary to determine how intense a use can get. Staff needs to look into what the impacts on the site will be. Mr. Fulton pointed out there will be no increase in vehicle traffic because their Longwood location has the cooling facility which already holds all the bodies for their different locations. Mr. Fulton indicated that a"t this moment there are no issues with the removal vehicles bringing i;n the bodies. Everything will remain the same and therefore there will be no impacts. Member Thorn indicated that his main concern is that other funeral homes will want to establish in Longwood and have their own crematoriums. How many crematoriums will the City of Longwood have. People are not going to want crematoriums on every block. Member Thorn stated Ile believes the City should honor what was written in the letter to Collison Family Funeral Homes. However, he understands Staff s concerns and the issue of having several funeral homes wanting to do the same thing. Chair Noyes asked if there was someone else that wanted to speak in favor or against the item. Mr. Steve Talley proceeded to the podium and indicated that he: lives at 2045 Sprint Boulevard, Apopka, Florida 32703. Mr. Talley indicated he works with Mathews Cremation Division and has over thirty years of experience in this profession. Mr. Talley pointed out to the language of Section 5.4.18 D which states that "at no time shall a crematorium, serve other entities ". Mr. Talley indicated that this language severely affects the independently owned funeral establishments because they need to have their own crematoriums in order to be able to compete with other major corporations. Mr. Talley explained that the main thrust for these businesses is not in the quantity but the different services they are able to provide for families. The only way for these small entrepreneurs to be able to compete with larger corporations, is for them to be able to have a crematorium that services their facilities. Mr. Talley stated that not every funeral home is going to establish its own crematorium. The reason is that most funeral homes would rather sell the casket and all the services associated with the viewing. Mr. Talley pointed out that nine times out of ten the cremation family will use the services of a funeral establishment that has its own crematorium. Mr. Talley indicated that putting the language "within the city limits of Longwood" is too restrictive. Mr. Talley pointed out that a lot of families in smaller cities are going to Orange County or VOILIsia County to have the services done. Mr. Talley stated he believes the City would like to keep the services within their jurisdiction as much as possible and not have families go to other cities. Mr. Talley stated the cremation process from start to completion is ;about two hours. Therefore, based on the numbers Mr. Fulton provided, ninety four percent of the time the machine will not even be in operation. Mr. Talley explained to the Board that this type of business is heavily regulated by both the Florida Department of Professional Regulation and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Mr. Talley noted that over seventy percent of the manufactured units are sold to funeral homes that are Located in residential or light commercial zoned areas. Member Putz asked Mr. Talley how these funeral homes were able jo go around the EPA and locate in residential areas when Mr. Fulton just indicated that Collison Family Funeral Homes was not allowed to establish a crematorium close to residential properties. Mr. Talley stated lie was not sure of the circumstances. Mr. Fulton explained to the Board that Collison Family Funeral Homes cannot establish crematoriums in their other facilities because they are located close to wetlands and right next door to homes. Mr. Talley stated that he believes it is important for Collison Family Funeral Homes to be able to serve their families in Sanford, Maitland and Winter Park out of one central location. Mr. Talley pointed out that the equipment costs over one hundred thousand dollars. For that monetary reason is that it would not make sense to have two crematoriums in one area. Mr. Fulton explained to the Board that there is a large Hindu community in Longwood. The Hindu community seeks the services of crematoriums in order to have their religious ceremony. Currently, this is a service that none of the facilities of Collison Family Funeral Homes can provide, Chair Noyes moved to close the public hearing section. Seconded by Member Putz and carried by a unanimous voice call and vote it ith Member Prince absent. Member Putz asked Ms. Bower if she had a copy of the letter from the City that was written to Collison Family Funeral Homes indicating they were approved for a crematorium. Ms. Bower stated that her predecessor wrote a letter saying a crematorium was allowed. However, this statement was incorrect because the way the City Code works is that if something is not specifically spelled out then it is not allowed. Surrounding communities allow crematoriums in the Industrial or Commercial areas. However, Colli.son Family Funeral Homes is located in the Inf Il and Mixed Use District. Ms. Bower stated that she suggests keeping the language as is and add a conditional use level that would allow the City Commission to add conditions. Chair Noyes pointed out there was no permitted use for a crematorium in the City of Longwood at the time the letter was written. Chair Noyes stated that currently Staff is adding provisions for a crematorium to be used as an accessory to a funeral home within the City of Longwood. Chair Noyes asked Staff if they were concerned that the crematorium would exceed the definition of an accessory use. Ms. Bower stated that an accessory use is supposed to service the use on the site. Allowing businesses to bring in bodies from other locations outside Longwood is crossing that boundary. If we just leave that aspect open and have no control over how many different places a business is bringing in bodies from, there might be a potential for it to become more than an accessory use. Chair Noyes asked what is the downside of the crematorium becoming more than an accessory use. Ms. Bower indicated that if it is going to be more than an accessory use it is necessary to look into a different method of approval. Other communities do not allow crematoriums in their Infill and Mixes! Use District. Crematoriums are allowed in either an Industrial or strictly Commercial area. In Longwood we are allowing a crematorium in a district that allows for residential and commercial uses. Ms. Bower pointed out that she is not stating there will be a problern but if it was raised to a level of a conditional use, the Commission would be able to add some criteria so we can properly manage the impacts. Member Putz stated that the issue is not so much with this particular business but the potential for other businesses that. have three hundred funeral homes and service five thousand bodies a year. Member Putz indicated that personally she does not have a problem with this item. However, she understands Staff's concerns. Ms. Bower suggested that businesses who want to bring in bodies from outside the City should go through a conditional use process. Member PUtZ pointed out that the business will still be allowed, however there will be certain conditions established by the City Commission through the conditional use process. Chair Noyes stated he is trying to understand fully the City's concerns with this item. Chair Noyes asked Staff if the concern was because this would open the door for larger corporations or chains that could turn one of their facilities into something that would not be part of the permitted land use. Ms. Bower indicated that through research Staff learned that a lot of municipalities around Longwood do not even allow crematoriums. For that reason, Staff was concerned that if Longwood is less restrictive, the City could become a magnet for crematoriums. if the City allows for crematoriums to be more than an accessory use, it would mean having crematoriums as standalone uses in the Infill and Mixed Use District. The burning and embalming of bodies is really more of an Industrial use. Member Thorn asked how would a person know if a funeral home had a crematorium if there was not going to be any change to the outside of the building or any increase in traffic. Very soon the whole City of Longwood will be in the Industrial District because it seems the City is pushing all the businesses there. Ms. Bower explained that if a crematorium had the potential of becoming more of a principal use, then it is necessary to prevent this by using regulations through conditional uses. However, if the City allows crematoriums as a principal use then it is necessary to determine where crematoriums should be allowed. Member Thorne noted that in the case of Collison Family Funeral Homes the crematorium is an accessory use. Member Putz stated that an accessory use is a subservient to the main use. If a business is servicing five facilities it is no longer an accessory use. Ms. Bower explained to the Board that accessory means servicing the use of the site. It does not mean an accessory to the business. Member Thorn indicated that he would rather have crematoriums as an accessory to funeral homes than as standalone crematoriums on SR 434. Member Putz noted her concern would be if a funeral home had two hundred funeral homes in the area and would like to accessorize all of them. Member Putz explained that the conditional use would basically state they are allowed to establish a crematorium on the condition they only service certain named funeral homes. Ms. Bower pointed out that it is the City Commission's decision to determine what the conditions will be. Chair Noyes asked if the City Commission had the authority to pick and choose. Ms. Bower indicated that the City Commission had the authority to draw the line. ]Member Putz stated that the City Commission might allow the use for Collison Family Funeral Homes because of the existence of the letter. Ms. Bower indicated that the letter does not hold up in a court of law. Ms. Bower pointed out that taking it to a conditional use level will allow the City Commission to limit the crematorium services to the five facilities that Collison Family Funeral Homes currently has. Vice Chair Fiore asked what were the premises that the crematorium is only supposed to serve the residents of Longwood. Ms. Bower explained that a crematorium had to be an accessory use. Vice Chair Fiore asked if cemeteries are limited to Longwood residents. Ms. Bower stated that the City of Longwood does not allow crematoriums in cemeteries. Vice Chair Fiore asked if there was a similar rule for cemeteries, in which only Longwood residents are allowed to be buried in Longwood cemeteries. Ms. Bower stated no. Vice Chair Fiore asked if the issue was more with crematoriums because of the burning of bodies and not just necessarily servicing the residents of Longwood. Ms. Bower stated that Staff is trying to keep the crematorium in theInfill and Mixed Use area. However, if the Board decides to recommend leaving the criteria more open, crematoriums should be moved to the Industrial area. Ms. Bower indicated she is not saying Collison Family Funeral Homes should move to the Industrial area, she is just saying there should be conditions established. Member Putz indicated that she agrees with having a conditional use to allow a facility service a couple of locations. However, if a big company wanted to come in Longwood and service a large amount of different locations, then they should probably be located in the Industrial district. Vice Chair Fiore asked if it is possible to delete the portion that says within the city limits of Longwood and instead add language that refers to ownership of certain number of units. Member Putz pointed out that this would not solve the accessory use issue. Member Putz asked Staff if it was possible to pass the language as submitted with the recommendation to the City Commission that they consider allowing this company to service its facilities through a conditional use. The final analysis is really up to the City Commission since LPA only recommends. Ms. Bower indicated that at the time the letter was written in the year 2005, the zoning of the parcel was General Commercial and did not allow for residential uses. Since that time, the parcel has changed from General Commercial to Intill and Mixed Use. Member Putz asked if the applicants had given any reason as to why it took five years to decide on having a crematorium. Ms. Bower responded no. Mr. Fulton explained that it was for monetary reasons. Ms. Bower pointed out that because codes change constantly, zoning letters like the one written to the applicant, are practically only good on the day they were written. Vice Chair Fiore asked what was the actual definition of accessory use. t Ms. Bower stated that an accessory use has to be subordinate to the principal use. Vice Chair Fiore asked if Staff were to assign a percentage, what would be the number assigned to an accessory use. For example, would an accessory use be forty nine percent. Ms. Bower indicated that it is not possible to take into account just the size but also the intensity of the use. Member Thorn asked if Collison Family Funeral Homes had no other facilities, would they be allowed to have a crematorium that services Longwood. Member Putz stated that if the ordinance was passed then the answer to the question would be yes. Mr. Fulton indicated that servicing their facilities was part of the business plan all along. Mr. Fulton stated lie discussed with Staff that Collison Family Funeral Homes would not cremate for competitors but would cremate for their own facilities. Mr. Fulton pointed out that there will be no increase in traffic because the bodies are already coming to the Longwood facility. Ms. Bower stated that when Staff saw the letter that was provided to Collison Family Funeral Homes, Staff knew there was a problem and wanted to reach out and help. Staff would not have written a code that did not help the customer. Ms. Bower stated that it was not her impression that Collison Family Funeral Homes wanted to bring in bodies from outside Longwood, otherwise she would have put in a conditional use. Member Putz noted that adding a conditional use could still be done.' Chair Noyes asked Mr. Fulton if a crematorium could cost effectively support only one funeral home. Mr. Fulton responded no. Chair Noyes indicated that the reason he asked that question was because he does not want to be creating language for something that cannot financially exist. Member Putz asked Staff what was involved in having Collison Family Funeral Homes apply and receive a conditional use. Ms. Bower noted that they would need to submit an application. Staff would review the application and take it to the next available City Commission meeting. Member Putz suggested moving on and discussing the other items of the ordinance. Board members agreed to move on to other items. Chair Noyes noted that he had a question in regards to the definition of Medium Density Residential which was on page I of 18. Chair Noyes stated that he thought MDR was up to ten dwelling units per acre. Mr. Kintner indicated that this change was made in order to match what was in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Kintner explained that initially Staff had discussed about the maximum density being ten but it was changed to fifteen in order to match the Comprehensive Plan. Vice Chair Fiore referred to Section 2.2.3 and pointed out the change in the density range. from one to seven to now six to ten. Vice Chair Fiore asked Staff what was the purpose of eliminating the range between one and five. Mr. Kintner explained that the purpose was to promote the density in the area close to the train station. The largest collection of Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use properties are currently around the train station area. Vice Chair Fiore indicated his concern was if an existing structure got destroyed by a catastrophe, would the structure be grandfathered in or will the owners need to comply with the current code and have to build a multifamily unit on their property. Mr. Kintner explained that if the structure was destroyed completely or beyond fifty percent of the value, the new structure would need to be in compliance with the current code. Member Putz indicated that she called Mr. Kintner this week because of concerns she had with items related to the Temporary Sign section. However, Mr. Kintner explained that these items were already in the code and Staff was just moving them under the Temporary Sign section on page 12 of 18. Mr. Kintner apologized to the Board for the lack of clarity on that item. Mr. Kintner stated he has always tried to label each chapter heading so the Board could easily identify what section of the Code Staff was referring to. However, that did not get done for chapter six. Mr. Kintner indicated he will immediately rectify this issue. Mr. Kintner explained to the Board that there are items in the Code which apply to signs but are not under the temporary sign section. This may cause confusion to the resident, business owner or developer that reads the temporary sign section and does not know there are other places in the code that also refer to sign regulations. In order to avoid this problem, Staff decided to move items under the temporary sign section so ,these regulations can be found in one single place. Member Putz noted she was not aware these regulations were already in the Code and Staff was just moving them to the temporary sign section. Member Putz pointed out she was concerned with the sight -line clearance distance for signs because it would mean that in order to comply with the Code she would need to relocate her sign to the roof of her property. In addition, Member PUtZ stated she believed it would be very difficult for properties in the Historic District to comply with the regulation of the sign being no closer than five feet from the right -of -way. Member Putz explained that a couple of years ago the City was encouraging people to build close to the road. However, now the City is requiring signs to be no closer than five feet from the right -of -way. Member PIItZ indicated that she believes these issues might cause problems for residents and business owners. Ms. Bower indicated that Staff will review and address these issues. Member Thorn pointed out to the over pedestrian way of page 12 of 18. Restated that he did not think a minimum of seven feet above pedestrian way was high enough. Ms. Bower explained that the over pedestrian way was really meant for a strip plazas that have hanging signs. Member Thorn stated he was not aware the over pedestrian way was meant for strip plazas that have hanging signs. He noted that seven feet was acceptable. Ms. Bower referred to the section on page 15 of 18 under the Artisan Village and noted Staff was going to be striking that language. Ms. Bower stated Staff is instituting a brownfields program. Because of this program, Staff has been in communication with several industrial property owners, which have indicated they prefer to be part of an Industrial District and not an Artisan Village. Ms. Bower stated Staff sees the value of having an Industrial District in the City of Longwood. For this reason, Staff is planning to have the Artisan Village as a floating district. Ms. Bower explained to the Board that the language on page 15 of 18 would have removed the Artisan Village completely. However, Staff believes there might be a need to keep the Artisan Village as an option in the case someone would want to use it. Chair Noyes asked if the Artisan Village would be a transition. Ms. Bower explained that the Artisan Village would be a floating zone. Chair Noyes asked Staff if in the case a person wanted to establish a business in an area where there was no conditional use for a particular business, could that business then apply to have the area designated Artisan Village. Ms. Bower stated that it would probably not be applied to just one property. Ms. Bower indicated Staff will need to put some kind of limitations on how small an area could be. The Artisan Village starts to get into gentrification and people like the aspect of having an Industrial District where they can have warehouses and keep rental rates low. Member Thorn indicated he would like to address the crematorium' item. He believes there will not be any major impacts since all the bodies already go to the Longwood facility. Chair Noyes pointed out that the issue is with the particular land use where the facility is located. It is not that the City of Longwood is against mass production. Member Thorn asked Staff if the facility is located far from residential properties. Member PUtZ stated that the facility is located near the Transit Oriented District which allows for mixed use development. Member Thorn indicated that a whole subdivision was built around a sewer tank located near Rangeline Road. Therefore, people would probably not have a problem living near a crematorium. Since the funeral home is already established, Member Thorn stated he does not see a problem for Collison Family Funeral Homes to have a crematorium at their Longwood location. Chair Noyes asked Mr. Fulton when the property was purchased. Mr. Fulton responded that the property was bought when the City provided them the letter indicating they would be allowed to establish a crematorium at that specific location. The letter was requested for due diligence before the property was actually purchased. Vice Chair Fiore asked if it was possible to delete the language that says within the city limits of Longwood. Then, if Longwood starts becoming a magnet for crematoriums, the issue could be addressed by allowing crematoriums only in the Industrial District. Chair Noyes stated that establishing a crematorium sounds very expensive. It seems like a crematorium would need to serve more than one location in order to financially exist. In other words, why allow something that cannot financially take place. Member Putz stated it is not the business of the Board to discuss if a business is financially feasible. The Board is here to discuss whether or not the use of the land makes sense for the City. The crematorium as an accessory use apparently makes sense with a conditional use established by the City Commission. The Board needs to take into consideration all of the planning involved in creating the Transit Oriented District and also all the people that have invested and bought properties in that District. Member PUtz indicated she believes it will all work out if the Board passes the ordinance and recommends to the City Commission to establish a. conditional use. In that way, the funeral home will be regulated and at the same time will be allowed to bring in bodies from their other facilities. Since we cannot legislate just for one company, this will allow other funeral homes that share the same conditions to come into Longwood. Member Thorn pointed out that the bodies are already transported to the Longwood facility. Chair Noyes indicated that he would like to know more about the conditional use process. Ms. Bower explained that zoning is supposed to be applied evenly. However, there are cases in which the nature of a use could potentially result in having greater impacts. The conditional use process allows for the possibility to address or review a use of a specific property. Also the conditional use process allows for the approving body, in this case the City Commission, to add conditions to the approval. Vice Chair Fiore stated he is still thinking about the accessory use aspect. This particular location operates as a funeral home and also does other non - crematory type of services such as storing, viewing and preparing bodies. Vice Chair Fiore indicated he does not see how the crematorium will become the overriding use of the property. Ms. Bower explained that the accessory use has to serve the use of that property. If the funeral home is bringing in bodies from other locations, they are not serving the use of that specific property. Chair Noyes pointed out that the crematorium is not the primary use, it is the accessory use. Vice Chair Fiore indicated he understands what is being said. However, even though the Longwood facility services other locations under the same ownership, it should still not make the crematorium the primary use. Member Putz noted that other facilities besides the Longwood location were involved. For that reason, the crematorium would not be an accessory use for the Longwood facility. An accessory use is limited to a specific property at a specific location. Member Putz stated that through a conditional use process, the crematorium might be allowed to service their other facilities. Member Putz also pointed out that if the company suddenly decides to expand and start bringing in bodies from thirty or forty different funeral homes, they would have to re -apply and go through the conditional use process. The City Commission would be able to determine what is allowable and what is not. Chair Noyes stated that was a valid point. Member Putz moved to approve Ordinance 11 -1969 as submitted with the recommendation that for section 5.4.18 which refers to Crematoria, the City Commission allows for a conditional process for crematoriums that are under the same ownership and have more than one funeral home within or outside the city limits of Longwood. Seconded by Chair Noyes and carried by a imanimous roll call and vote with Member Prince absent. 6. DISCUSSION AND SCHEDULE FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Ms. Bower stated that there was an RFQ for a Redevelopment Master Plan for the Heritage Village which includes the Historic District, Transit Village, Hospital Core and both sides of State Road 434 from Rangeline to Grant. Staff is currently reviewing the proposals that have been taken in. If the Commission .decides to go with one of the teams that have submitted the proposal, there will be a process taking place in the early fall. Both the Board and the public will be involved in that process. Next Regularly Scheduled Meeting: August 10, 2011 7. ADJOURNMENT Chair Noyes moved to adjourn. Seconded by Member Pulz and carried by a unanimous voice call and vote with Member Prince absent. Chair Noyes adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m. Bruce Noyes, C it ATTEST: - Giselle Gonzalez, Recording Secretary