LPA01-12-2022Min Land Planning Agency
Longwood City Commission Chambers
175 West Warren Avenue
Longwood, Florida
MINUTES
January 12, 2022
6:00 P.M.
Present: JoAnne Rebello, Chair
Judy Putz,Vice Chair
Michael Dodane, Member
John Blum II, Member
Chris Kintner, Community Development Director
Anjum Mukherjee, Senior Planner
Kristin Zack-Bowen, Recording Secretary
Absent: Elias Khoury, Member
1. CALL TO ORDER
Recording Secretary called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.
2. ELECTIONS
A. Chairperson
Member Judy Putz nominated JoAnne Rebello as Chairperson, seconded by
Member Michael Dodane and carried by a unanimous voice vote.
B. Vice Chairperson
Member Michael Dodane nominated Judy Putz as Vice Chairperson,seconded by
Member JoAnne Rebello and carried by a unanimous voice vote.
3. ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS
None
4. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR
A. Regular Meeting held August 11, 2021
Member Dodane moved to approve,seconded by Vice Chair Putz and carried by a
unanimous voice vote.
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
None
6. PUBLIC HEARING
A. ORDINANCE NO. 21-2214
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LONGWOOD, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE
LPA 01-12-2022/1
NO. 1019, SAID ORDINANCE BEING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF
LONGWOOD, FLORIDA; SAID SMALL SCALE PLAN AMENDMENT (SPA 04-21)
CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM COUNTY MIXED (MXD) AND LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO CITY OF LONGWOOD INFILL AND MIXED USE (IMU) AND
AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF LONGWOOD
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CREATING FUTURE LAND USE CATERGORIES, OBJECTIVE
IV, POLICY B, TO THE PROPERTIES WITH PARCEL ID'S 05-21-30-523-0000-OOBO
AND 05-21-30-523-0000-00A8; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY AND
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Chris Kintner read Ordinance No. 21-2214 by title and presented the item.
Brent Spain spoke on behalf of the applicant and explained that they support staff's
recommendation for approval and have been working with them to address any
concerns in advance. He explained that this was a site specific text amendment to
the City's Comprehensive Plan that imposes limitations on the property so there
are no surprises down the line. Mr. Spain noted that under the current Seminole
County Land Use it allows 30 dwelling units per acre. Mr. Spain's client is the
commercial property owner driving the front portion of the property, and the back
portion will be designed with garden apartments, which through this amendment
will be capped at 50 dwelling units. They are proposing 2, 3-story buildings with 8
units on each floor for a total of 48 units. Mr. Spain reiterated that in order to lift
the restrictions when are being presented will require his client to come back
through the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process in order to change the text.
Member Dodane asked if the multi-family developer was on board with it already
or would there be a delay between the carwash and residential phases.
Mr.Spain responded that they have the rear portion of the property under contract
with the multi-family developer and there are time frames on the contract to meet.
Member Dodane asked if it was possible the apartments would go up first.
Mr. Spain said it was likely it could happen concurrently, since there is a shared
access road it makes sense to do so.
Mr. Dodane asked if any screening was considered for all of the headlights coming
in and out of the property and the view of the carwash from the lake.
Mr. Spain handed out a draft conceptual plan to the Board Members and pointed
out that the carwash was completely shielded from the apartments in the rear and
included a landscape buffer between the uses.
Mr. Dodane explained that he designs carwashes and that they were very light
intensive and his biggest concern was the light spilling into the lake environment.
He also added he was concerned about the driveway aimed right at the lake.
Mr. Kintner noted that there were code requirements for landscaping that the City
did not have for previous projects that offer that protection.
Mr. Dodane mentioned that the 3-story buildings would do a good job of shielding
'lights from 17-92.
LPA 01-12-2022/2
Mr. Spain shared that he anticipated downward shielded lighting to prevent offsite
glade and light pollution.
Chair Rebello mentioned concerns over losing the trees and asked about having a
buffer between the apartments and the lake.
Mr. Spain referred to the conceptual plan and a 45-foot building setback but
presumes that a fair amount of the current vegetation will be within that setback,
but they will have to look at it when they finalize plans.
Chair Rebello asked Chris Kintner about replacement tree requirements for Site
Plans.
Mr. Kintner responded about the number of trees per inch requirements, the
burden of proof being on the applicant to show it is necessary for the site, and the
buffer requirement.
Chair Rebello mentioned the leaching of gas and oils getting into the lake based on
the parking placement being closer to 17-92.
Mr. Kintner confirmed this, and added that with it being on the lake it is something
we look at even further.
Barbara Dirienzo, 1441 S Grant St, Longwood, FL 32750, spoke in opposition. She
asked if the new residents of the apartments would have access to the lake.
Mr. Spain responded that at this juncture he didn't know whether or not they were
proposing anything, but did not see anything on the conceptual plan showing a boat
ramp or dock. He noted he would find out from his client and follow up with staff.
Barbara Dirienzo added that she didn't like seeing and hearing all of the
construction around the lake and had concerns about it being a slippery slope or
development.She also asked if the proposal could change or if this was a guarantee.
Mr. Kintner responded that the number of units and setbacks allowed will be
memorialized in the Comprehensive Plan, so a developer would not be able to go
beyond that without going through the entire process again to change it. He
continued with saying that specifics such as lake access would be handled later in
the site development plan process, and this process is about figuring out if the land
use is appropriate.
Chair Rebello added that the County rules were less restrictive than the City's rules
would be.
Peter Katauskas, 1401 S Grant St, Longwood, FL 32750, spoke. He mentioned the
overall environmental impact to the area and the runoff due to natural buffers
being eliminated, and asked if environmental impact studies had been done or
would come about in the process.
Mr. Kintner replied that it would be part of the site development review process for
any development that comes out of the land use change.
Mr. Katauskas said he couldn't imagine how it could not be detrimental to the lake
and that anything within a mile radius runs into the lake. Mr. Katauskas mentioned
that he was not notified of the building across the lake that had already taken place.
LPA 01-12-2022/3
He also added that he was not speaking against it or anti-development, but was
concerned about the view on the lake and the environmental impact on the lake.
Discussion ensued about the estimate of frontage on the lake.
Mr. Katauskas asked for clarification on the approval process for the project.
Mr. Kintner explained that there were 3 parts to it.The first was to seek Annexation
into the City from the County, which has happened and received Commission
approval. He continued by saying that they are within the City and the applicant
intends to pursue the Infill and Mixed Use designation,which is the process tonight.
Mr. Kintner described that the applicant was in the City, and did not have a land use
for the City, only the County, so it needed one. What was going before the LPA was
to assign an appropriate land use for this parcel. Mr. Kintner explained that all of
the other parcels along 17-92 had the Infill and Mixed Use designation which
allowed for apartments, carwashes as a Conditional Use, and so on. By assigning it
a Land Use it allows them to pursue anything on the table of allowable uses through
the site development plan process. The site development plan process is where
Staff reviews it, as well as St. John's River Water Management District who will be
very interested in the carwash component to ensure there is no pollution going into
the lake. Mr. Kintner continued explaining that during the site development phase,
the applicant must meet what is in the Longwood Development Code. The
standards in the Code were established by the Commission, but administered by
Staff. He pointed out that if a City land use was not assigned, they would have the
County land use and could pursue development under that, which actually allows
them to have more development rights under what they are proposing for the City.
Staff sees this as a benefit because it limits them compared to what they could do
in the County.
Discussion ensued about the process of granting land use and the development that
has occurred prior to this along the lake.
Mr. Katauskas expressed a few more of his concerns with and suggestions for the
project.
Mr.Spain clarified that with stormwaterthe rule is post-development runoff cannot
exceed pre-development runoff. He added that the carwash facility would be
sloped towards a central drain that would hold the water on site. He also mentioned
the concerns about the dock that he would bring to the attention of the developer.
Sharon Wesson, 481 Columbus Circle, Longwood, FL 32750, asked for clarification
on whether WaterVue was built under the City or County, and if this project was
going to City or County directed.
Mr. Kintner responded that it was built under the City, and in that situation that
developer was operating under a Code with no restrictions because they were
allowed 25-35 dwelling units per acre. In this case they are proposing 50 units total,
which is in the Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the Commission, and cannot go
past that.The same applies to the 45-foot setback.The density under the same land
use that WaterVue had would allow 171 units, but the applicant is voluntarily
limiting themselves to 50 units for the whole site. Mr. Kintner reiterated that the
LPA 01-12-2022/4
applicant cannot exceed that without going through the process again. Under the
County it would be their development regulations that the City has no control over,
whereas with the City land use we have control over it.
Discussion ensued about the land use designation process, approval of WaterVue
Apartments, and the current proposal.
Mr. Katauskas added that he believed they could not let it go back to the County,
because it was going to happen and needed to keep it in City control.
Member Dodane moved that the Land Planning Agency recommend
approval of Ordinance 21-2214 to the City Commission, seconded by
Vice Chair Putz, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
B. ORDINANCE NO. 21-2216
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LONGWOOD, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 1019, SAID ORDINANCE BEING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF
LONGWOOD;SAID SMALL SCALE PLAN AMENDMENT(SPA 05-21)CHANGING THE
FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE CITY OF LONGWOOD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FROM CITY OF LONGWOOD INDUSTRIAL (IND) TO INFILL AND MIXED USE (IMU)
FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY TO +/-2.47 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 811 AND
655 WILMA STREET, LONGWOOD, FLORIDA AND WITH PARCEL ID'S 06-21-30-502-
OROD-0000 AND ,06-21-30-502-0ROC-0000; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS,
SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
Chris Kintner read Ordinance No. 21-2216 by title and presented the item.
Hatem Abou-Senna, 13504 Phoenix Drive, Orlando, FL 32828 gave a PowerPoint
presentation on behalf of the American Muslin Community Center about the
proposed changes.
Member Dodane recommended they pursue getting Wilma connected to Florida
Central Parkway.
Chair Rebello commended the Community Center on being such a great
community partner and expressed her gratitude to them. She also mentioned the
potential effect on the intersection of 434 and 427 if AMCC decided to move.
Atif Fareed, 255 Morton Lane, Winter Springs, FL 32708 spoke in favor. He shared
that he was the former Chairman of the Mosque and now ran the clinic. Mr. Fareed
wanted to reiterate that they have been excellent neighbors and have a great
relationship with the City of Longwood and want to continue that. He explained it
was disconcerting for those watching religious services from the gym in order to
promote social distancing, which is why they want to open it up. He also thanked
everyone for their support.
Member Dodane moved that the Land Planning Agency recommend
approval of Ordinance 21-2216 to the City Commission, seconded by
Chair Rebello, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
LPA 01-12-2022/5
7. DISCUSSION AND SCHEDULE FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Mr. Kintner indicated that at the February 9, 2022 meeting they will consider the
Land Use and Comprehensive Plan Amendments related to the Commission's
discussion as it relates to multi-family apartments. The proposal will be less density,
but still provide pathways for people to get to it. With higher density projects the
Commission would have a role in assigning density that they don't have now. Also
proposed is merging the Heritage Village Code book, the Historic District Code book
and the main Code book into one zoning map rather than have it split up. Mr. Kintner
explained that after the LPA meeting February 9th, the Commission will consider it
the first meeting in March, then it gets reviewed by the State, so it could be
approved by April but may take more than the time mentioned. Another item that
may be on the February or March agenda will be the Hartley project previously seen
by the LPA.
8. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 7:27 p.m.
Minutes approved by the Land Planning Agency: 21 q 122
Jo nne Rebello, Chair
ATTEST.
Kristin Zack-Bowen, Recording Secretary
LPA 01-12-2022/6