Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVI(B) Olympia PUD - Exemption from Locational Requirement for Sale of Alcoholic Beverages by the Drink Agenaa 4-U0-77 Item VI B /' e FOLEY & LARDNER MEMORANDUM CLIENT-MATTER NUMBER 020377-0482 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners of the City of Ocoee FROM: Martha H. Formella, Esq., Assistant City Attorney i DATE: March 29, 1999 RE: Olympia PUD - Exemption from Locational Requirements for Businesses Selling Alcoholic Beverages within 1,000 Feet of School As proposed, the Olympia PUD includes commercial land uses on Lots 1 through 6 and a public elementary school on Lot 8. Section 38-5 of the Ocoee City Code prohibits the location of businesses selling alcoholic or intoxicating beverages by the drink within 1,000 feet of an established school. Section 38-5.1 provides that the City Commission may exempt land within a PUD from the locational requirements after an advertised public hearing upon a finding that the exemption will facilitate and encourage the location of the school within the PUD. Further, "the City Commission may impose such conditions of approval as it deems necessary to protect school children ... from unwarranted exposure to alcoholic and intoxicating beverages". The Developer has requested the following exemption: Lots 1 through 6 of the Olympia PUD are exempt from the locational requirements of Section 38-5 of the City of Ocoee , Code which prohibits the sale of alcoholic or intoxicating beverages within 1,000 feet of an established church or school, as more particularly described therein. This exemption as to Lots 1 through 6 of the Olympia PUD, all of which lie within 1,000 feet of a school which is proposed to occupy Lot 8 of the PUD, shall apply only to restaurants containing seats for 100 or more people, whose primary business is to prepare and serve food, but which, incidental thereto, sell alcoholic beverages by the glass or drink for on-premises consumption, including such restaurants containing a bar, lounge, or micro brewery. 614 006.130186.1 A letter from the Developer's attorney to the City Manager explaining the exemption requested is attached hereto for your information. The exemption requested by the Developer is limited to a restaurant with 100 or more seats. Pursuant to PUD Condition of Approval 11, Lots 1 through 6 may be developed with uses allowed in the C-2 zoning district. Section 38-5 addresses the sale of alcoholic beverages by the drink only. The lots may be developed in a manner to allow the package sales of alcoholic beverages for offsite consumption without City approval since grocery stores, convenience stores, and liquor stores are permitted uses with the C-2 zoning district. Pursuant to Section 163.3177(6)(a), Florida Statutes, local governments must amend their comprehensive plans by October 1, 1999 to "clearly identify land use categories in which public schools are an allowable use", "include criteria which encourage the location of schools proximate to residential urban areas", and "require the local government to seek to collocate public facilities, such as parks, libraries, and community centers, with schools to the extent possible". A letter and report from the Department of Community Affairs regarding school location planning is attached for your information. If.the City Commission wishes to approve the requested exemption, the following motion should be made: - Pursuant to Section 38-5.1 of the Ocoee City Code, the City Conunission finds that the exemption will facilitate and encourage the location of the school within the PUD and grants.an exemption from the locational requirements of Section 38-5 of the Ocoee City Code as to Lots 1 through 6 of the Olympia PUD applicable only to restaurants containing seats for 100 or more people, where the primary business is to prepare and serve food, but which, incidental thereto, sell alcoholic beverages by the glass or drink for on-premises consumption, including such restaurants containing a bar, lounge, or micro brewery. Attachments -2-006.130186.1 The Orlando Sentinel,Thursday,March 25,1999 CITY OF OCOEE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN EXEMPTION FROM THE LOCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS APPLIED TO . BUSINESSES IN WHICH ALCOHOLIC • BEVERAGES ARE SOLD BY THE GLASS OR DRINK • (OLYMPIA PUD) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to Section 38-5.1,Ocoee City Code,that the OCOEE CITY COMMISSION will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on April 6, 1999 at their regular session to begin at 7:15 p.m.,or as soon thereafter as pos- sible, in the Commission Chambers, Ocoee City-Hall,150 North Lakeshore Drive,Ocoee,Florida to consider the request filed by OLYMPIA DEVELOP- MENT GROUP,INC.,to allow for an EX- EMPTION-FROM"THE-LOCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS APPLIED TO BUSI- • NESSES IN WHICH ALCOHOLIC BEV-. ERAGES ARE SOLD BY THE GLASS OR DRINK for the Olympia PUD, on certain real property located on the south east corner of Silver Star Road and Clarke Road intersection. I The complete case file,including a le- 'gal description of the subject property, may be inspected at the Ocoee Plan- ning Department,150 North Lakeshore Drive,between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.,Monday through Friday, except legal holidays. The Ocoee City Commission.may con- tinue the public hearing to other date sand times as they deem necessary. Any interested party'shall be advised - that the dates,times,and places of any continuation of this or continued public hearings shall be announced during the hearing and that no further notices re= garding this matter will be published. Interested parties may appear at the public hearing and be heard with re- spect to the request.Any person who desires to appeal any decision made during the public hearing will need a re- cord of the proceeding and for this pur- pose may need to ensure that a verba- tim record of the proceeding is made which includes the testimony and evi- dence upon which the appeal is based. Persons with disabilities needing assis- tance to participate in any of the pro- ceedings should contact the City Clerk's office 48.hours in advance of the meeting at(407)656-2322. JEAN GRAFTON, ' CITY CLERK, CITY OF OCOEE OLS2626069 MAR.25,1999 r 17, • a ren:rm a.$ t + v�Yam^ "''; \1 t .'� 1 I I 215 NORTH EOLA DRIVE LOWNDES %� ij�� ORLANDO,FLORIDA 32801 DROSDICK FEB EB 1 POST OFFICE Box 2$09 '~y DOS ORLANDO,FLORIDA 32802 CITY �r ,�_OEE, KAv 1 U TTOR & TELEPHONE: 407-$43-4600 FAX: 407-423-4495 REED, P.A.- Attorneys at Law - February 12, 1999 Ellis Shapiro, City Manager City of Ocoee 150 North Lakeshore Drive Ocoee, FL 34761 • Re: Olympia PUD Land Use Plan and Preliminary Subdivision Plan Dear Mr. Shapiro: This shall serve as the request of Olympia Development Group, Inc., the applicant and proposed developer of the Olympia PUD referenced above, for an exemption from the provisions of Section 38-5 of the City of Ocoee Code pertaining to the sale of alcoholic or intoxicating beverages within 1,000 feet from an established church or school. This exemption is being requested pursuant to City of Ocoee Ordinance No. 98-32 which was passed and adopted by the City Commission on December 1, 1998, in order to facilitate and encourage the location of schools and churches within Planned Unit Developments, such as the one proposed by Olympia. The exemption would apply only to Lots 1 through 6 of the proposed Olympia PUD, and would provide an incentive to Olympia's designation of Lot 8 of the PUD for school use. - The exemption Olympia seeks is not a "blanket" exemption to Code Section 38-5; which would_ allow the sale of alcoholic beverages by the glass or drink in connection with a wide range of uses, many of which may be objectionable to the city. It would be only a limited exemption, applicable to restaurants, the primary business of which is to prepare and sell food and which exceed a certain minimum seating requirement. The sale of alcoholic beverages by the glass or drink in such restaurants would be incidental to the establishments primary purpose of preparing and selling food. This type of dining accommodation is required e•: staurant Olympia wants to attract to its project. The exemption is essential to . r �, • Ellis Shapiro, City Manager February 12, 1999 Paget Olympia's being able to successfully market the project and achieve the desired tenant mix. The exemption would be worded as follows: - Lots 1 through 6 of the Olympia PUD are exempt from the locational requirements of Section 38-5 of the City of Ocoee Code which prohibits the sale of alcoholic or intoxicating beverages within 1,000 feet of an • established church or school, as more particularly described therein. This exemption as to Lots 1 through 6 of the Olympia PUD, all of which lie within 1,000 feet of a school which is proposed to occupy Lot 8 of the PUD, shall apply only to restaurants containing seats for 100 or more people, whose primary business is to prepare and serve food, but which, incidental thereto, sell alcoholic beverages by the glass or drink for on-premises consumption, including such restaurants containing a bar, lounge, or micro brewery. ' Please schedule this exemption request for consideration by the City Commission concurrent with the Commission's consideration of Olympia's Annexation Petition and proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and PUD Zoning. Thank you very much for your cooperation and consideration in this regard. Sincerely, - 1 Brian D. Forbes BDF/mba c: Paul E. Rosenthal,Esquire. T. Edward Entreken William R. Bird,Esquire • • § 38-5 ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES § 38-6 § 38-5. Locational requirements. Any place of business in which alcoholic beverages or intoxicating beverages are sold or furnished at retail to the public by the glass or drink within the city shall open directly and immediately upon the street, and no such place of business shall be less than one thousand (1,000) feet from an established church or school, which distance shall be measured by following the shortest route of ordinary pedestrian travel along the public thoroughfare from the main entrance of said place of business to the main entrance of the church and, in the case of a school, to the nearest point of the school grounds In use as part of the school facilities? • § 38-6. Hours. [Amended 12-20-1988 by Ord. No. 88-69; 7-5-1989 by Ord. No. 89-153] A. Hours of sale and consumption on premises. No alcoholic beverages shall be sold, consumed or served or permitted to be served or consumed in any place holding a license from the Florida Department of Business Regulation, which license permits the consumption of alcoholic beverages on the premises, between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. each and every day of the week. B. Hours of sale and_ consumption off premises. No alcoholic beverages shall be sold, in any place holding a license from the Florida Department of Business Regulation, which license permits the package sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises, between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. C. Additional requirements. . (1) Within the meaning of this section, a sale shall be regarded as being made if the alcoholic beverage is delivered to any person during prohibited hours regardless of whether payment therefor is made at some time. If any such licensed vendor is a corporation, 2 Editor's Note: Original Sec.3-3,Sale,etc.,to minors,which immediately followed this section,was deleted at time of adoption of Code;see Ch. 1,General Provisions,Art. I. 3 Editor's Note: This ordinance also provided as follows: 'This ordinance shall be deemed to be cumulative and in addition to any other act,law or ordinance regulating hours of sale of alcoholic beverages.This finance supersedes and repeals any existing hours of sale of alcoholic beverages ordinance.This ordinance shall be liberally construed in order to effectively carry out the purposes of this ordinance in protecting the interests of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Ocoee,Florida." • 3803 ORDINANCE NO. 98- 32 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OCOEE, FLORIDA RELATING TO LOCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS REGARDING THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN PROXIMITY TO SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES WITHIN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS AND SPECIAL OVERLAY AREAS; CREATING SECTION 38-5.1 OF ARTICLE II OF CHAPTER 38 OF THE OCOEE CITY CODE WHICH PROVIDES A PROCEDURE FOR OBTAINING AN EXEMPTION FROM LOCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 38-5 OF THE OCOEE CITY CODE IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH LIMITED CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH BUSINESSES SELLING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES MAY OBTAIN AN EXEMPTION IN ORDER TO ALLOW THEIR LOCATION WITHIN 1,000 FEET OR • LESS FROM AN ESTABLISHED CHURCH OR SCHOOL; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS; Section 38-5 of the Ocoee City Code prohibits the location of businesses selling alcoholic beverages or intoxicating beverages within 1,000 feet or less from an established church or school; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Ocoee desires to encourage the • location of schools and churches in areas of the City that are in close proximity to and conveniently accessible to the residents of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Commission recognizes that Section 38-5 of the City Code imposes a restriction on the location of schools and churches within Planned Unit Developments and Special Overlay Areas which include businesses selling alcoholic beverages; and WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to facilitate and encourage the location of schools and churches within Planned Unit Developments and Special Overlay Areas by • establishing a procedure whereby an exemption from the provisions of Section 38-5 of the City Code may be obtained. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OCOEE, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Commission of the City of Ocoee has the authority to adopt this Ordinance pursuant to Article VIII of the Constitution.of the State of Florida and Chapter 166, Florida Statutes. SECTION 2. A new Section 38-5.1 of Article II of Chapter 38 of the Code of Ordinances.of the City of Ocoee, Florida, is hereby adopted as follows: SECTION 38-5.1 - Exemptions to Locational Requirements. In order to facilitate and encourage the location of schools and churches within Planned Unit Developments and Special Overlay • Areas, the City Commission may, following an advertised public hearing, exempt land located within a Planned Unit Development zoning district and/or a Special Overlay Area from the provisions of Section 38-5 of the City Code upon a finding that the granting of such exemption will facilitate and encourage the location of schools and churches within the Planned Unit Development and/or • V • • Special Overlay.Area. In granting any such exemption the City , Commission may impose such conditions of approval as it deems V . . • V necessary to protect school children and church members from V . • • V • unwarranted exposure to alcoholic and intoxicating beverages. - 2 • . SECTION 3. Codification. It is the intention of the City Commission of the City that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Ordinances of the City; and that sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or relettered and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "chapter", "section", "article", or such other appropriate word or phrase in order to accomplish such intentions; and regardless of whether such inclusion in the code is accomplished, sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered.or relettered and the correction of typographical errors which do not affect the. intent may be authorized by the City Manager, without need of public .hearing, by filing a corrected or recodified copy of same with the City Clerk. SECTION 4. Severability. If any section,subsection,sentence, clause,phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion hereto. SECTION 5. Effective Date. • This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon passage and adoption. • • • PASSED AND ADOPTED this / day of Ec,c-r 1998. APPROVED: ATTEST:. . CITY OF OCOEE, FLORIDA • J Grafton, City erk • S. Scott Vandergrift, 'Mayo • (SEAL) • ADVERTISED NOVEMBER 19 , 1998 READ FIRST TIME NOVEMBER 17. , 1998 READ SECOND TIME AND ADOPTED • l)ecc--r►/I ,3 E-R / , 1998 UNDER AGENDA ITEM NO.- -*f} 3 • FOR USE AND RELIANCE ONLY BY . THE CITY OF OCOEE, FLORIDA . APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY this day of G(, Y998. • FOLEY & L• INER 5. /0 By: .. City Attorney • A:\ordinance.Pud17/14/98I sac disk#1Isaca:fec 4 . ' 41-4A4 • • r.�r`ye t"- .. • STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY , AF„..F..A.;I:RS ' - "Helping Floridians create safe, vibrant, sustainable communities" • JEB BUSH STEVEN M.SEIBERT • Governor - Secretary • February 5, 1999 Dear Local Planning Official: Last year the Florida Legislature amended section 163.3177(6)(a), Florida Statutes,to'require • local governments to include school-location criteria'in their comprehensive plans. The criteria are to encourage the location of schools near urban areas and to collocate them with parks, libraries and community centers to the extent possible. Local governments are required to revise. their land use elements by October 1, 1999 to incorporate these criteria and designate the land - use categories where public schools are an allowable use. Enclosed is a technical assistance report prepared by the Department. The report: School Location Planning Including Comments on Collocation with Libraries, Parks and Community Centers encourages a collaborative planning process involving planners for the school board, city • and county comprehensive land use,parks and recreation planners, library planners, and the public in the development of the school location criteria and school siting process. Examples of school location and collocation criteria are included that are intended to stimulate discussion and ideas toward establishing locally derived criteria. The legislation also states that any local government that fails to incorporate school location and ' collocation criteria by the October 1, 1999 deadline will be prohibited from amending their comprehensive plan as provided by section 163.3187(6), F.S. Because of the significance of this prohibition, the Department will establish a tracking system to monitor compliance with these requirements. By August 31,we will notify any local governments that have not complied • by that time of the impending deadline. To assist us with this effort,to avoid confusion, and as a check on our records, we encourage all counties and municipalities to: 1. identify any amendments related to schools in their amendment transmittal letters, or 2. if you believe that your local comprehensive plan presently addresses the. school siting requirements of section 163.3187(6), F.S., in whole or in part, 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD • TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2100 Phone: (850) 488-8466/Suncom 278-8466 FAX: (850) 9.21-0781/Suncom 291-0781 Internet address: http://www.state.fl.us/comaff/ FLORIDA KEYS GREEN SWAMP Area of Critical State Concern Field Office Area of Critical State Concern Field Office 2796 Overseas Highway,Suite 212 205 East Main Street,Suite 104 • Marathon,Florida 33050-2227 Bartow,Florida 33830-4641 yq Local Planning Official February 5, 1999 Page Two `please send a letter to the Department identifying the amendment or location of this information in the comprehensive plan. Letters should be addressed to the Department of Community Affairs, Division of Community Planning, Bureau of State Planning, and sent to the attention of Ray Eubanks, Community Program Administrator. After reviewing the school siting information, we will provide a letter in response outlining the results of our review. We are committed to working with you to address these school siting requirements as efficiently and quickly as possible. I encourage you to discuss these issues with the Department staff assigned to your county or city. If you are unsure who your Department contact is, please call Beth Barineau at(850) 487-4545 for assistance. Sincerely, &WV Carol A. Forthman, Director Division of Community Planning CAF/bd Enclosure SCHOOL LOCATION PLANNING INCLUDING COMMENTS ON COLLOCATION WITH LIBRARIES, PARKS AND COMMUNITY CENTERS by Bob Dennis Community Program Administrator Florida Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 Steven M. Seibert, Secretary February 1, 1999 Final Report • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Several individuals contributed to the preparation of this report by taking the time to review drafts of the report. Their comments and suggestions resulted in improvements and,I believe,to a more useful document. Special thanks and appreciation are extended to Val Hubbard, City of Orlando Planning Department; David Powell,Hopping Green Sams &Smith PA, Chairman of the Public Schools Construction Study Commission; Kelvin Robinson,Florida League of Cities; Lee Killinger, Florida Association of Counties; Keith Hetrick, Florida Home Builders Association; Mary Jane Little,President, Florida Library Association and Tatjana Martinez,Florida School Boards Association distributed the draft report to members of their respective organizations for review; and Jack Villagomez,Florida Department of Education. I also thank following individuals from the Florida Department of Community Affairs for their review and comments on the report: David Jordan, Deputy General Counsel; Carol A. Forthman, Director, Division of Community Planning; Jim Quinn, Chief, Bureau of State Planning, who ' • also recommended this project; Paul Noll, Senior Management Analyst II, retired, and Jennifer Zadwick, Planning Manager. • INTRODUCTION All we are trying to do is build a school. We've been the victims of the Comp Plan. -Scott Dailey, Chairman Leon County School Board Coordinating local comprehensive planning and the planning for new schools has been a goal in Florida since 1975. In adopting the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975, the Legislature included schools in the intent language: It is the intent of this act that its adoption is necessary so that Florida local governments can . . .facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of. . . schools. . . within their jurisdiction (section 163.3161(3), FS (1975)). To achieve this goal, the legislation required local comprehensive plans to include an intergovernmental coordination element showing relationships and stating principals and guidelines to be used in the accomplishment of coordination of the adopted comprehensive plan with the plans of school boards. . . (section 3177(6)(h), FS (1975)). The 1975 Act also required that future education land uses were to be designated in the future land use plan element of the local comprehensive plan. Ten years later, the Legislature adopted the Growth Management Act of 1985. The Growth Management Act preserved the intergovernmental coordination provisions of the 1975 Act, but expanded the land use provision to require future land uses, including educational uses of land, be shown on a future land use map (section 163.3177(6)(a), FS (1985)). In 1995, the Growth Management Act (Chapter 163, Part II, FS) was amended to help facilitate collaborative planning between school boards and local governments. Section 163.3177(6)(a), FS, was revised in 1995 to require the future land use element of the local comprehensive plan to clearly identi.6)the land use categories in which public schools are an allowable use and to ensure that sufficient land is available in those categories to meet the projected needs for schools in coordination with public school boards. The Leon County School Board Chairman's comments were made in 1997 (Fineout 1997). The events that led to these comments, along with other examples throughout Florida, were demonstrating that improvements in intergovernmental coordination were still needed (Public Schools Construction Study Commission 1997)., In Leon County, the school board had selected a site for a new high school. Before construction could begin, several controversial issues involving the school board, Leon County, the City of Tallahassee, concerned citizens and the Department of Community Affairs had to be resolved. A land use change for the property was required, urban sprawl concerns were raised and had to be addressed and residents in the area were opposed to the property owner's plans for commercial development on another nearby parcel of land (Fineout 1997). 1 In response to similar school siting and concurrency controversies in various parts of the state, the 1997 Legislature established the Public Schools Construction Study Commission (Public Schools Construction Study Commission 1997). In 1998, based on the Commission's recommendations, further revisions were made to Chapters 235 (Educational Facilities) and 163, Part II (County and Municipal Planning and Land Development Regulation), FS,to improve and encourage collaborative planning between local governments and the local school board. These changes were discussed in the Department's Community Planning newsletter (DCA 1998). One of the changes made by the 1998 Legislature was to include a new provision in section 163.3177(6)(a), FS, concerning the location and collocation of schools: The future land use element shall include criteria which encourage the location of schools proximate to urban residential areas to the extent possible and shall require that the local government seek to collocate public facilities, such as parks, libraries, and community centers, with schools to the extent possible. A similar provision was added to section 235.19(1),FS, encouraging school boards to locate schools proximate to urban residential areas to the extent possible, and shall seek to collocate schools with other public facilities, such as parks, libraries, and community centers, to the extent possible (section 235.19(1), FS (Supp. 1998)). The legislature emphasized the importance of establishing school location criteria and incorporating them in local comprehensive plans by October 1, 1999, or the deadline for the evaluation and appraisal report, whichever occurs first. Any local government that does not comply with this requirement will be prohibited from amending its comprehensive plan as provided in section 163.3187(6), FS (Supp. 1998)). This report is intended primarily for local government comprehensive planners. The information presented provides a general overview of the factors that are considered in deciding the location of new schools and libraries. The school siting and collocation recommendations are intended to stimulate discussion and provide examples of criteria that could be included in local comprehensive plans. While some local governments may develop criteria based on the suggestions contained in this report, other local governments may decide that a different set of criteria best meets their needs. Either way, the criteria should be based on data and analysis derived from professionally accepted and applied methodologies and developed in consultation with school board and library representatives. Success in meeting the new school siting requirements can be achieved through the collaborative efforts of planners for educational facilities, comprehensive planners for land use and recreation facilities, library planners, and concerned citizens. By sharing information and assessing future needs, areas of mutual concern will be identified. These areas of overlap provide the greatest opportunities for achieving the benefits envisioned through this joint planning effort. 2 DISCUSSION Local school boards have established criteria for determining where and when new schools are needed based upon total enrollment projections for each school level (elementary, middle or junior high, and high school). The need for new schools or enlarging existing schools is determined by comparing enrollment capacity in existing schools and enrollment projections within the schools' attendance zones. Attendance zone boundaries are primarily influenced by residential land use patterns (density, household size and housing type), enrollment size for each school level, integration of social, economic and ethnic groups, and standards for maximum walking distances and school bus travel times (Engelhardt 1970 and Kaiser, et al. 1995). Considerations for evaluating potential new sites for schools include possible revisions to school attendance zones, compatibility with surrounding land uses, future development plans, compact urban development,provision of public utilities (e.g., water, sewer and stormwater), accessibility, safety, noise and other nuisances, and environmental constraints (Engelhardt 1970, Parsons and Davis 1979, City of Gulfport 1996, Manatee County 1996, City of Okeechobee 1996, and Florida Department of Education 1997). • Acquiring a site and construction costs for a school can be expensive. The 70-acre parcel for the new Leon County high school cost$1.37 million and the construction cost is estimated to be another$30 million.. A Certificate of Participation will be required to construct the school and will be repaid over a 25-year time period. Interest on this certificate is expected to reach$26.5 million over this 25-year time period (Leon County Schools 1998a. and b.). Collaborative planning for educational facilities can provide school boards with the certainty they require to know where future schools will or can be located. Local governments also benefit by knowing when and where future schools will be needed because it allows them to anticipate potential impacts and prepare for them. Collocating schools with such facilities as parks, libraries and community centers has been discussed in the planning literature (see, for example, Engelhardt 1970, Parsons and Davis 1979, De Chiara and Koppelman 1982, Kaiser, et al. 1995, and Brubaker 1998), was recommended by the Public Schools Construction Study Commission, and is encouraged by the 1998 legislation. In many cases,the school itself can be used as a community center providing day care facilities, continuing education and adult education opportunities,youth programs, and a place for meetings (Engelhardt 1970, Moore and Lackney 1995, and Brubaker 1998). Communities can derive economic benefits where facility collocation is possible. Schools can be constructed on smaller parcelsif they are located near libraries or parks with playgrounds and athletic fields that the school can utilize. Such an arrangement reduces land acquisition and school construction costs. Similarly, the need for a community center may be eliminated if the school can be used for this purpose: It is also possible that collocating facilities on a single 3 parcel may require less land area than locating facilities individually on separate parcels deriving cost savings through "economy of scale" considerations. Libraries, especially mainlibraries,require locations with high concentrations of pedestrian and vehicle traffic, such as the downtown business district of a city or the main business center in a suburban area(So 1968 and Dahlgren 1996). Convenient access and parking are also important. Parks and municipal complexes are not good locations for libraries (So 1968 and Dahlgren 1996). Dahlgren(1996) explains the reason why: ...experience has shown public library use to follow commercial/retail-use patterns, and if a park or municipal complex is located away from the community's general commercial/retail flow, as they often are, the site becomes less convenient and serves the library poorly. The public library often is better served if its neighbors are popular commercial enterprises that operate with a similar schedule of open hours (p. 8). In a study funded by the State Library of Florida, Aaron (1980) concluded that communities that can support separate school libraries and public library facilities were unlikely to improve these. programs by combining them. Where separate facilities are not providing minimum library services, a combined school library and public library offers a possible solution. Reasons for a combined school-public library program include the opportunity to hire professional library staff where none presently exist; improvement in providing resources to the community; a planned program will be developed and implemented to meet the needs of the public and the school; and the program will be evaluated on a regular basis for revision and to meet future needs. Aaron's study includes a 49-item checklist designed to assist a community in evaluating whether a combined school library and public library will be successful. A copy of this checklist is attached as an appendix to this report. Bauer (1995) applied Aaron's findings to evaluate the Azalea Middle School and Branch Public Library in St. Petersburg, Florida. She concluded that success in implementing a combined school and public library program required proactive planning in establishing the combined facility, including a shared vision; a participatory planning process involving all affected stakeholders; processes for resolving and preventing conflicts between school and library personnel and programs; leadership to successfully connect the library to the community, the school and other schools in the service area; and a single governing board to oversee the program. A public library should not be located within a school unless school noise that will disrupt library patrons can be mitigated through site design or buffering, access to the school can be controlled, and the library remains open when the school is closed. Other factors to consider in collocating a school and public library include: ensuring there will be adequate resource materials, facilities, and staff to serve the needs of students and other patrons; hiring properly trained staff to serve as school librarians and as librarians for the general public; finding a site for the library that is 4 convenient for patrons as well as for students from other schools; avoiding possible conflicts between students from rival schools utilizing the library; and locating the library where patrons will feel safe going to and from the library(Woolard 1980). New large scale developments and redevelopment projects such as developments of regional impact, military base reuse plans, sector plans, and sustainable communities initiatives provide ideal opportunities for collocating schools, libraries, parks and community centers. Ewing (1995) compared five "traditional" Florida towns with seven "contemporary" developments (developments of regional impact) to find common design features that made them exemplary. He summarized the results as best development practices for land use, transportation, environmental, and housing. Six of the seven developments reviewed by Ewing (1.995) include schools or sites for schools. Three projects are especially noteworthy. The Hammocks (Miami-Dade County) include shared parks/playgrounds and schools, Palmer Ranch (Sarasota County) includes a school, community center, and library in its Rivendell master plan, and Miami Lakes (Miami-Dade County) is identified as the best example for its combination of public schools, shared parks and playgrounds, library, and community center. The presence of schools, libraries, churches and . • other civic uses in these developments helped to establish their town character. Ewing recommends the inclusion of these uses in his list of Best Land Use Practices. SCHOOL SITING AND COLLOCATION RECOMMENDATIONS The 1998 school siting legislation requires local governments to include criteria in their future land use elements to encourage the location of schools near urban residential areas. To meet this requirement, intergovernmental coordination mechanisms must be used to establish a collaborative planning process involving the school board and the local governments within the school district. The outcome of the collaborative planning process will establish school location criteria and identify areas where schools will be needed in the future. Once this information is known, it can be incorporated, as appropriate, into the local comprehensive plans. This section includes recommendations for school location criteria and suggestions for collocating schools, parks, libraries, and community centers. These recommendations and suggestions are based on information from Engelhardt (1970), De Chiara and Koppelman (1982), City of Gulfport (1996), Manatee County (1996), City of Okeechobee (1996) and Florida Department of Education (1997) and are included for illustrative purposes and to facilitate discussion. Local needs and standards may lead to different results. The collocation of schools, libraries and neighborhood and community centers are based on population figures provided by De Chiara, et al. (1995). They recommend a.branch library to serve a population 5,000, a neighborhood recreation center for up to 5,000 residents and one • 5 community center per 25,000 people. It may not be appropriate to collocate a library, recreation or community center with a school that does not serve a similar population base. Schools, libraries and recreational facilities should be located where they are needed based on professionally accepted methods of analysis, location criteria and the characteristics of the community these facilities are intended to serve. Collocation of facilities should be considered when the site is appropriate for each of the collocated facilities. School boards and local governments should resist the use of inexpensive land or donated land that does not meet the location criteria or meet community needs. To ensure coordination and cooperation in the use of collocated facilities, a joint use agreement between the school board and the local government may be appropriate and should be negotiated well in advance of the use of the facilities. The agreement should address_governance, administration and personnel requirements and guidelines, budget and finance responsibilities, liability issues, ownership of property, conflict resolution and termination procedures. General Recommendations for School Location Criteria I. Collaborative Planning Process A. Planners for the school board, city and county comprehensive land use,parks and recreation planners, library planners, and the public should be included in both the development of the school location criteria and the school siting process. B. Development of school location criteria should be initiated and the location of potential sites for new schools determined as early as possible so that sites can be acquired well in advance of the need for these new schools. C. Consideration should be given to making schools and their location the focal point for new developments. II. Compatibility with the Local Comprehensive Plan A. Proposed school sites should be located away from industrial uses, major arterial . roadways (e.g., freeways), railroads, airports and similar land use to avoid noise, odors, dust, and traffic impacts and hazards. B. 'Disrupting_influences caused by school yard noise and traffic may require that schools be located sufficient distances from hospitals, adult communities,nursing homes and similar land uses or buffered from these areas. C. New school sites should be located within urban growth boundaries or be compatible with compact urban growth patterns. 6 s. III. Site Acceptability A. In general, school size and land area requirements increase from elementary to high school to meet different needs such as increased enrollment; additional classrooms, including science labs and vocational classrooms; parking and athletic fields. Local school boards have guidelines for determining school size and land area requirements. Collocation,joint use and creative school design provides the opportunity for utilizing smaller sites than currents guidelines would allow. B. Schools should be centrally located within their intended attendance zones, to the extent possible,and be consistent with walking and bus travel time standards. High schools are often an exception to a central location because the large land area they require is usually not available. C. The site should be of sufficient size to ensure that buildings and ancillary facilities, and future expansions can be located away from flood plains, flood prone areas, wetlands and other environmentally sensitive areas, coastal high hazard areas, and will not interfere with historic or archaeological resources. D. Public utilities (e.g., water, sewer, storm water) should be available to the site or can be accommodated onsite. E. -Access to the site should be from a collector road (minor collector or local road for elementary schools)and avoid the need for slow down zones, if possible. F. Ingress and egress should not create detrimental impacts on roads adjacent to the site. G. Approaches to the site should be safe for pedestrians, bicycles, cars and buses. H. A mass transit or bus stop should be located near the site. School Specific Site Location Recommendations I. Elementary Schools A. Elementary schools generally serve a neighborhood or a group of small neighborhoods where students have a short distance to walk. Land uses should be predominately residential that includes housing types and densities to meet the school's enrollment capacity.with students that are predominately within walking distance of the school. . B. Playgrounds can be collocated with elementary schools. In areas with densities high enough to support them,neighborhood parks,with facilities for the elderly,' neighborhood recreation center and a library sub-branch can be included. II. Middle Schools A. Middle schools have a community orientation and the mix of land uses can include more commercial uses than would be allowed in a neighborhood. Enrollment comes from two or more elementary schools. B. Community parks and athletic fields are appropriate to locate with middle schools. A community center, if the school will not be used for this purpose, and a library sub-branch or branch can be included depending on the school's location and the population to be served. III. High Schools A. High schools should be buffered from residential areas. Enrollment for high schools • • comes from two or more middle schools: B. The campus should be large enough to encourage students to remain onsite and to ensure sufficient parking or parking controls to avoid disruptive offsite parking. C. Community parks with a community center,if the school will not be used for this purpose, and athletic fields can be collocated with high schools. A branch library is also appropriate. If justified by the population to be served, a district park could be collocated with the school. For a high school located in a city or where the service population is high enough, a main library could be collocated with the school. 8 REFERENCES Aaron, S. L. 1980. A Study of Combined School-Public Libraries. American Library Association, Chicago, Illinois. Bauer,P. T. 1995. Factors Affecting the Operation of a Combined School/Public Library: A Oualitative.Study;Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida. Brubaker, C. W. 1998. Planning and Designing Schools. McGraw-Hill Inc.,New York. City of Gulfport, Florida. 1996. Ordinance No. 96-22. Adopted by City of Gulfport City Council on March 4, 1997. City of Okeechobee, Florida. 1997. Ordinance No. 693. Adopted by the City of Okeechobee City Council on August 19, 1997. Dahlgren A. C. 1996. Planning the Small Library Facility, Second Edition,Small Libraries Publications No. 23. American Library Association, Chicago, Illinois. De Chiara, J. and L. Koppelman. 1982. Urban Planning and Design Criteria, Third Edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, Inc.,New York. De Chiara,J.,J. Panero and M. Zelnik. 1995. Time-Saver Standards for Housing and Residential'Development, Second Edition. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York. Engelhardt,-N. L. 1970. Complete Guide for Planning New Schools. Parker Publishing Company, Inc.,:.West Nyack,New York. Ewing, R. 1995. Best Development Practices: Doing the Right Thing and Making Money at the Same Time. Prepared for the Florida Department of Community Affairs,Tallahassee, Florida. Fineout, G. 1997.. High School has a Home. Tallahassee Democrat, August 28, 1997, Tallahassee, Florida. p. 1A. . Florida Department of Community Affairs. 1998. 1998 Growth Management Legislation. Community Planning, vol. 7, no. 2 (Summer), Tallahassee,Florida. Pp. 6-8. Florida Department of Education. 1997. State Requirements for Educational Facilities. Tallahassee, Florida. 9 Florida Statutes. 1975. Volume 1. Chapter 163, Part II, County and Municipal Planning and Land Development Regulation. The State of Florida. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida Statutes. 1985. Volume 1. Chapter 163, Part II, County and Municipal Planning and Land Development Regulation. The State of Florida. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida Statutes. 1997. Volume 1. Chapter 163;Part II, County and Municipal Planning and Land Development Regulation. The State of Florida. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida Statutes. 1998 Supplement. Volume 1. Chapter 163. Part II. County and Municipal Planning and Land Development Regulation. The State of Florida. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida Statutes. 1998 Supplement. Volume 1. Chapter 235, Educational Facilities. The State of Florida. Tallahassee, Florida. Kaiser, E. J., D. R. Godchalk, and F. S. Chapin, Jr. 1995. Urban Land Use Planning, Fourth Edition. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois. Leon County Schools. 1998a. Information provided by Mr. Paul Byrd, Director, Department of Facilities Planning and Construction, on October 23, 1998. Leon County Schools. 1998b. Information provided by Ms. Nancy Gress, Director, Finance Office, on October 26, 1998. Manatee County, Florida. Ordinance No. 96-07. Adopted by the Manatee County Board of County Commissioners on November 26, 1996. Moore, G. T. and J. A. Lackney. 1995. "Design Patterns for American Schools: Responding to the Reform Movement", Chapter 2, pp.11-22. In: A. Meek (ed.). Designing Places for Learning. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, Virginia. Parsons, K. C. and G. K. Davis. 1979. "Education Services", Chapter 11, pp. 300-329. In: F. S. So, I. Stollman, F. Beal, and D. S. Arnold (eds.). The Practice of Local Government Planning. International City Management Association, Washington, D.C. Public Schools Construction Study Commission. 1997. Final Report, December 1997. Florida Department of Community Affairs, Tallahassee, Florida. 31 pp. and Appendices A through D. So, F. S. 1968. "Governmental and Community Facilities", Chapter 8,pp. 208-245. In: W.I. Goodman and E. C. Freund(eds.). Principles and Practice of Urban Planning. International City Manager's Association, Washington,D.C. 10 • • Woolard, W. L. B. 1980. Combined School/Public Libraries: A Survey with Conclusions and Recommendations. The Scarecrow Press, Inc.,Metuchen,New Jersey. 11 App°D" A CHECKLIST ••• 63 ' • 62 PHASE 3 - areas will be hired to provide adcquatc dircc- ' • _ 13. If two boards arc to govern different parts of lion for the program.the combined progrm a , their responsibilities 22. — The professional personnel who assume(s) pri- will be specifically defined in a formal agree- • mart' responsibility for planning and imple- ment drawn up during the planning phase. menting school library ,media services in. the- 14. A method exists for allowing one governmental : combined program will meet the requirements body to advance funds to or contract for scr- . for state certification. vices with another local governmental body in- 23. The professional personnel who assumes) pri- order to finance the combined library program • glary responsibility for planning and imple- cooperatively, meriting public library services in the combined 15. A formal written agreement which carefully program will meet the state-adopted criteria re- defines the responsibilities of each concerned • quircd for professional public library personnel. party will be adopted during the planning — 24. A sufficient number of clerical and professional phase. staff members will be employed to offer corn- . 16. .Proposed formal agreenients between concerned parable levels of programming to school and • groups will, cover areas.such as program; facili= community patrons. tics design and construction; responsibility for — 25. The hours of operation of the combined library purchasing furnishings, equipment, and mate- will be sufficient to offer a broad range of ser- • rials for the library; purchase of the property; vices for school and public library patrons and provision, Selection, and funding of personnel; " • the staff will be assigned to guarantee adequate• • identification of staffing pattern; building accessto professional library.personnel at times • ,, maintenance; responsibility for paying • the when students and other community members • costs of utilities; and. provisions for modifying arc using library services. - • and/or terminating the program. 26.. All staff members will be responsible to the 17. The proposed program is a combined one offer- same director. ing a broad range of services to all community = members rather than a separate school and 27.. Members of the staff will have comparable job public library program in the same facility. classifications and the same salary schedule and. benefits package. 18, An adequate amount of money will be budgeted 28. Members of the staff will' have 'comparable for the combined program to permit compa- s rable library services to both students and work schedules, annual leave, and holidaY • , other community members. 29. The library will be large enough to house a 19. The school board and the governing authority collection that will meet the needs of both for the public library arc willing to contribute school and"public library patrons. adequate funds to the combined program. — 30. Funds will be available to purchase selection 20. The library personnel who will work in the tools which will aid in the careful selection of . program understand and arc committed to the materials for both school and public library concept of the combined library program.. , patrons if these tools arc not readily accessible 21. A head librarian with sufficient expertise and • through other sources such as the district media ' knowledge, in both school(and public library center or public library system headquarters. • 64 . PIIASL.3 A CHECKLIST • 65 31. The selection policy will provide sound guide= access from:the street or parking lot, ' • lines for preventing censorship of materials and - 42. There will be a highly visible sign marking the • for building-a collection which meets the needs combined site as a public library. of all-patrons of the combined program. — _ 43. The facility will have a seating area set aside 32. The available collection and attendant equip- exclusively for the use of adults. ment will be broad enough and of such quality _ 44. Thcrc will be separate rest room facilities and quantity that they adequately meet the marked for students and'for adults. - needs of both school and public library patrons. ! _ 45. Adequate parking for community members de- 33. The materials and equipment in the library will siring.to use the combined library will be located - - — be accessible to all patrons at all times that the nearby -or adjacent to the. -library in. an area ' library is open. , which has appropriate security and lighting. . 34. The selection process will encourage involve= 46. Public transportation to the .library will be — — ment of .persons who desire to recommend • . available during hours that the library is open. materials for inclusion in the collection. _ 47. Cooperative services from various other library 35. All materials purchased for the combined library agencies—state library,.district.media,center, - .. .• will-be cataloged-and classified in the same way. regional resource centers, and the-like—will be 36. Concerned groups, including professional li- available.to the combined program. brary staff members; will.work with the archi- — 48. A planning phase of sufficient duration to es- test during the planning phase and throughout tablish a firm foundation for the program.will construction or remodeling .to establish a phys- precede the opening of the combined library. • ical facility adequate enough to accommodate 49. ,Developmental-.funding is available during the activities commonly associated with school and .planning phase of the combined program to public library programs. • support activities ranging from architectural 37. The combined program-will be located on a site - negotiations to postage.. • ' which provides a maximum amount- of access - to both school and public library services. 38. The facility will have adequate seating and . physical space to 'accommodate comparable public and school library programming simul- DIRECTIONS-FOR EVALUATING CHECKLIST RESPONSES . tancously. To determine whether or not a community should proceed with 39. A community meeting room will be available its plans for establishing a combined library program, the findings, for use of community members other than stu- conclusions, and recommendations from Phase 1 of this study of dents during school hours. combined programs, found on pages 1-49, should be used as a _ 40. The library will be located in a place that will guide when evaluating responses to the,checklist. By using this • permit its use during hours when school is not procedure community members,with the assistance of professional in session without endangering the security of library personnel, can compare the elements which arc present or the school. • , lacking in their situation with those in successful combined pro- 41. There will be separate entrances for students grams and'identify potential problem areas which may prevent the entering-from classrooms and other parts of the combined program from achieving the desired.results in a particular . • school and for public library patrons with direct locality. This information should give strong indications of whether- 66 I'HASE 3 the combined program presents the best way for providing adc- quate or improved library services for a community's students and . other library patrons.