Loading...
LPA_01-08-2020_Minutes LAND PLANNING AGENCY Longwood City Commission Chambers 175 W Church Avenue Longwood, Florida MINUTES January 8, 2020 6.00 P M Present: Judy Putz, Chair Glenn Kirwan,Vice Chair David Gntton, Member Chris Kintner, Community Development Director Anjum Mukherjee, Senior Planner Kristin Zack-Bowen, Recording Secretary Absent: JoAnne Rebello, Member Elias Khoury, Member 1. CALL TO ORDER Recording Secretary called the meeting to order at 6 00 p m 2. ELECTIONS Glenn Kirwan nominated Judy Putz for Chair of the Land Planning Agency, seconded by David Gritton and approved by consent without objection Glenn Kirwan nominated David Gritton for Vice Chair, seconded by Judy Putz and approved by consent without objection 3 ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS None 4. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR A. Regular Meeting held August 14,2019 Member Glenn Kirwan moved to approve the minutes from the August 14, 2019 meeting. Seconded by Vice Chair David Gritton and carried by a unanimous vote 5 PUBLIC COMMENT No public comments 6. PUBLIC HEARING LPA Meeting 1-8-20/1 A. ORDINANCE NO. 19-2169 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LONGWOOD, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1019, SAID ORDINANCE BEING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF LONGWOOD, FLORIDA; SAID SMALL SCALE PLAN AMENDMENT (SPA 01-19) CHANGING AND AMENDING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM COUNTY MIXED USE (MXD) AND INDUSTRIAL (IND) TO CITY OF LONGWOOD INFILL AND MIXED USE (IMU) AND COUNTY ZONING FROM RETAIL COMMERCIAL (C-2) TO CITY OF LONGWOOD EAST END PLANNING DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY WITH PARCEL ID 28-20-30-5AS-0A00-0070; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. Anjum Mukherjee read Ordinance No. 19-2169 by title and gave the staff report Ms Mukherjee explained the process of annexation and Land Use designation being assigned. Vice Chair Gritton moved that the Land Planning Agency recommends approval of Ordinance 19-2169 to the City Commission, Seconded by Member Glenn Kirwan, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote B. ORDINANCE NO. 20-2170 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LONGWOOD, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LONGWOOD DEVELOPMENT CODE, ARTICLE I, GENERAL PROVISIONS, ARTICLE II, LAND USE DISTRICTS AND OVERLAY DISTRICTS, ARTICLE III DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS, ARTICLE V SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS, ARTICLE VI SIGNS, ARTICLE IX HARDSHIP RELIEF AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, ARTICLE X ADMINISTRATION, AND ARTICLE XII HERITAGE VILLAGE URBAN CODE, TO ADDRESS BUFFERS AND SETBACKS BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, POLITICAL SIGNAGE, WORKS OF ART, CALCULATION OF BUILDING HEIGHT, AND TO OTHERWISE STREAMLINE AND UPDATE THE LONGWOOD DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. Chris Kintner read Ordinance No 20-2170 by title and gave the staff report Mr Kintner went over the changes page by page beginning with changes made to Definitions Mr Kintner addressed the changes to mini storage and drive-thru package sales Chair Putz asked for clarification on the land use on 434 to ensure it was not Industrial, to which Mr Kintner replied that it was not Discussion ensued about current public storage facilities in the City Member Kirwan asked why "cocktail lounge, tavern and saloon" were being removed from the definitions when Connolly's is a tavern and asked if it would cause any problems in the future if someone came in and labeled something as LPA Meeting 1-8-20/2 one of the listed Mr Kintner replied that functionally there was no difference but that there was nomenclature that has changed Mr Kintner explained the changes made in regards to building height and setbacks to give residents predictability Mr Kintner also addressed structured parking and what the code currently allows, which is another factor for changing building height allowances from stories to feet Discussion ensued over what is allowed under the current code versus what is allowed in the proposed changes Member Kirwan asked why General Hutchinson and Lyman Districts had a reduction in maximum height Mr. Kintner replied that they both run along Ronald Regan Boulevard and that the lots are relatively small, so it was unlikely they would see a building at that height, and in addition about 3/ of the property in those districts border residential properties Discussion ensued over proposed development at the Whitehead property Mr Kintner addressed moving the setbacks for accessory structures to Article V Mr. Kintner also addressed landscape buffers and the reason for change being that staff was not happy with the current performance of these buffers. Right now when Commercial or Multi-family borders Low Density Residential (LDR) or Medium Density Residential (MDR) they have to build a wall along the border, but a situation not addressed is where the Commercial use is next to a street and the other side of the street is residential Mr Kintner explained that with these changes the developer either needs to maintain the existing vegetation and keep the screening that is there or exceed code minimums to provide as opaque a buffer at planting as possible Member Kirwan noted that as a builder/developer he would love this, but had concerns about this bordering up to residential Allowing them to not have a wall in lieu of a landscape buffer. Walls give a sense of security and cuts down on people cutting through Mr Kintner clarified that this was only when separated by the street A wall would still be required when directly bordering residential Member Kirwan stated that made him feel better in those regards He continued by explaining that his concern with the landscape buffer was that "exceeding code minimum" was very vague Member Kirwan asked if there was something in the Ordinance that enforced specifics such a caliper, height of trees, mature vegetation, etc. and is that inspected by staff where a CO isn't issued until compliant LPA Meeting 1-8-20/3 Mr Kintner replied that there was to all of it Member Kirwan continued by asking if there is enforcement to maintain landscape buffers after a project is completed and there is no maintenance contract Mr Kintner responded that it wasn't one of the sections in the Ordinance, but there is language that everything has to be maintained and that Code Enforcement will cite them if not maintained Mr Kintner added that previously we required a hedge height at planting, but we didn't require a hedge height after a year which was added to this Ordinance Discussion ensued regarding landscape at current developments and what they would like to see going forward Mr Kintner continued his staff report noting that under protection of existing buffers there is language to incentivize developers to keep the buffer, but if not bump up what we are getting in return for that. Discussion ensued about maintain landscape buffers and tree replacement becoming more stringent. Mr. Kintner went over more details on the buffer requirements that were added He went on to explain foundation landscaping and the opportunity to provide landscaping along the main corridors and help the visual articulation of buildings as well as the right-of-way adjacent perimeter landscape areas Mr Kintner addressed the proposal to remove the Opportunity Node Overlay Zone and explained why this was being done Accessory structure setbacks were moved to be with the rest of the accessory structure section Mr Kintner noted that one change was to residential accessory structures such as accessory dwelling units, carports, garages or sheds cannot be larger than 50% of the size of the primary structure Chair Putz mentioned her own garage size and the concern for smaller homes in the city where they may be limited on size at only 50% Mr Kintner explained that a 1000 square foot home would still allow for a 500 square foot accessory structure which is large enough for a 2 parking spaces Mr Kintner noted that they were open to working with the number, and that the concern was having some guidance on the number Member Kirwan asked if it would take into account just ground square footage or on a 2-story residence would it take into account the second story. Mr Kintner replied that it would take into account the second story Member Kirwan explained that the 50% could be limiting if you had a smaller home but have the land to do a secondary garage and workshop attached He agreed that there should be a size limitation but that 50% may be a little too LPA Meeting 1-8-20/4 small Chair Putz asked if it could be 50% for a sheds and a little less for mother-in-law suites and garages Mr. Kintner said they could take a look at that He also mentioned that he liked the idea of tying it in to be designed consistent with the rest of the structure as opposed to a metal shed. Mr. Kintner continued going over the code changes pertaining to mini storage and home occupations Discussion ensued about the old and new rules pertaining to home occupation Mr Kintner asked if there were any changes that should be addressed regarding political signs There have not been any changes, however Mr Kintner wanted to make sure it was discussed Chair Putz asked if politicians could put signs on private property in expression of their first amendment rights. Mr Kintner replied that if someone puts a sign on private property they can take it down. Chair Putz asked about right right-of-ways and City property Mr Kintner said no, there isn't anything that can be done Discussion ensued over free speech and political signs Mr. Kintner explained that there were changes to language for exempt signs that were works of art Mr Kintner stated that there was no guidance on what a work of art is and what they are proposing is that works of art only be exempt if they are under and art program that is approved or endorsed by the City Commission by Resolution Mr Kintner expressed that at some point they would like to bring a program to the City Commission that would allow people to donate art easements to the City to be utilized for public art This would allow the City to do a call to artists and then choose from candidates. Mr. Kintner finished by addressing the code changes on stormwater management, bar and brewery language, self-storage and height and setbacks in the Heritage Village Member Kirwan moved that the Land Planning Agency recommends approval of Ordinance 20-2170 to the City Commission, Seconded by Vice Chair Gntton, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote 7 DISCUSSION AND SCHEDULE FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Kintner stated there would be a couple City Code Ordinances regarding tax LPA Meeting 1-8-20/5 abatement and city art coming up in front of the City Commission Mr Kintner shared that LA Fitness was opening tomorrow morning at 10am and Publix was still on track to open in the spring Mr Kintner also mentioned current projects such as the hardscape and landscape for Ronald Reagan Blvd, UPS expansion and Circle K Discussion ensued over the opening date of Alta Apartments and the future of the mixed use development on Dog Track Road 8 ADJOURNMENT Chair Putz adjourned the meeting at 7.25 p.m. 9t-ar Ju utz, Chair ATTEST: Kristin Zack-Bowen, Recording Secretary LPA Meeting 1-8-20/6 abatement and city art coming up in front of the City Commission. Mr. Kintner shared that LA Fitness was opening tomorrow morning at 10am and Publix was still on track to open in the spring. Mr. Kintner also mentioned current projects such as the hardscape and landscape for Ronald Reagan Blvd, UPS expansion and Circle K. Discussion ensued over the opening date of Alta Apartments and the future of the mixed use development on Dog Track Road. 8. ADJOURNMENT Chair Putz adjourned the meeting at 7.25 p.m. 944°4( Ju utz,Chair ATTEST: Kristin Zack Bowen Kristin Zack-Bowen, Recording Secretary LPA Meeting 1-8-20/6