Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 04-11-1989 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 1989 r The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Swickerath. PRESENT: Chairman Swickerath, Vice Chairman Smith, Board members Bond, Linebarier, Bello, Weeks, and Switzer, Director of Planning Behrens, Senior Planner Harper, and Deputy Clerk Resnik. ABSENT: Alternate member Breeze APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board member Linebarier moved to approve the regular meeting minutes of March 14, 1989 and the special session meeting minutes of March 22, 1989 and Board member Bello seconded. Board member Switzer asked to amend the motion to correct the minutes of March 22, 1989 to reflect his absence from the meeting. His name was not listed as either present or absent. Board members Linebarier and Bello accepted the amended motion and the motion passed unanimously. Board member Linebarier moved that the agenda be amended so as to have the bylaws discussion held at the end of the lkire meeting in order to accommodate the people who were present to discuss other items on the agenda, Board member Bello seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS Plantation Grove West PUD - Preliminary Subdivision Plan Approval Senior Planner Harper commented that this was one of the best plans the staff had seen. He said the staff had 12 comments some of which were basically for the record. Chairman Swickerath said he did not receive a copy of the plan and asked the other Board members if they had received a copy and they had not. He asked that staff make sure that plans be sent to the Board members from now on. Senior Planner Harper and the developer's representative Anil Deshpande each had a set of plans for the Board to review. Project Engineer Ray Bradick of Bowyer Singleton & Associates said the zoning for the property was approved in November 1988 for 4 1/2 units per acre. Engineer Bradick said the proposed lot size was 75' x 115' which was less than three units per acre. Developer Deshpande explained that this was part of the fir.► Plantation Grove PUD and would also contain a day care center on this parcel of the PUD. 1 Page 2 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting t April 11, 1989 Project Engineer Bradick said this portion of the Plantation Grove PUD was west of Maguire Road and contained 47 acres, one of which would be for the day care center site. He said the plan proposed 134 lots, none of which would front Maguire Road. Engineer Bradick said the entrance was planned for one lane in and two lanes out and upon entering the development the recreation site could be seen straight ahead. He said a tot lot and exercise path would be provided as well as open green space around the lake. Engineer Bradick said the entrance from Maguire Road would line up directly with the entrance to the Plantation Grove PUD on the east side of Maguire. He said the master pump station would be located at the northeast side of the site and that future development (the Arvida project) would connect to the utility lines. Engineer Bradick reiterated that the entrance would be a divided roadway with a median down the center and looking straight ahead the recreational facility would be in full view. He said it was planned for a tot lot and jogging trail r and open space around the lake which would have a fountain in the middle of it. Engineer Bradick said there would be a wall and signage at the entrance and probably colored concrete on the pavement to add flavor to the development and the entrance. He said the median and the entrance way would be maintained by the homeowners' association. Engineer Bradick explained that the Arvida project which was also part of the Plantation Grove PUD contained 230 acres and was proposing to have 460 lots. He said the project planned to have a boulevard concept with the roadway running from Maguire Road through the development to Roberson Road. He said this would provide for traffic circulation. Engineer Bradick said this development planned on being a secure development with gates at both entrances and because of this the developers were requesting that the access between Arvida and Plantation Grove West PUD be an emergency access only. Engineer Bradick showed the Board where the two projects connected on the original site plan and said they needed to show an access point until they knew what the projects would entail. Chairman Swickerath said one of the advantages of the new Comprehensive Planning Act was to enable the City to plan for roadways. Chairman Swickerath said the Planning and Zoning 2 Page 3 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 11, 1989 Board had voiced its opinion in the past that it wanted the two projects connected and unless he was mistaken, that was still the feeling of the Board. Engineer Bradick said both developers feel traffic flow and access to and from the subdivisions would be more than adequate and best served without the connection. Board member Linebarier said that two access points were needed to any development and with this concept, there would only be one. Board member Linebarier asked if something happened to block the entrance on Maguire Road, how would the residents of this project get to their homes? Board member Weeks said he did not see any difference between what this developer was doing and what the Sawmill project had done. Chairman Swickerath said the two were similar but that Sawmill would be accessible from Hackney- Prairie Road with a stabilized base and before Phase II of Sawmill was completed, it was a stipulation that this access would have to be paved as the second access to the Sawmill subdivision. Board member Linebarier agreed and said eventually Sawmill would have two access points. Chairman Swickerath agreed that the project did not need another entrance off of Maguire Road but that the connection to Arvida would provide access from another point. Senior Planner Harper said staff debated the issue but it was finally decided that it would recommend that the access to Arvida be kept as an emergency access only. Board member Linebarier said when the plan was originally brought before the Board it showed a through street at that access point and he asked Senior Planner Harper how staff could change its stance after the Board had conveyed its recommendation that this be kept as a through street. Chairman Swickerath asked if there was any public comment on this issue and there was none. Chairman Swickerath asked if the developer had seen the staff report and Mr. Deshpande and Engineer Bradick said they had. Engineer Bradick said the developer was willing to comply with Items 1 -9 but that it requested some clarification on Item 10 and wanted to further discuss Items 11 and 12. Senior Planner Harper explained that Item 10 was to incorporate any plans for the developer to phase the project. Engineer Bradick said there would be no phasing of this site and that it represented Phase I of the entire Plantation Grove PUD. 3 Page 4 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting Swir April 11, 1989 Senior Planner Harper said that Items 11 and 12 dealt with the recreation requirements for the site. He said staff felt that the project was not meeting the recreational requirement or that it was taking into consideration the stormwater retention basin as part of the requirement which was not allowed. Senior Planner Harper said that the developer needed to specify what land it was taking into consideration for the recreational requirement. Chairman Swickerath asked how many acres the site presently had allotted for recreational space excluding the retention area and Engineer Bradick said 1.24 acres excluding the retention area. Developer Deshpande said a 5 1/2 acre ballpark area was planned as part of the overall PUD and would be located across Maguire Road. He said the Ferdinands had agreed that this park would incorporate the recreational needs of the entire PUD. Senior Planner Harper said it was staff's feeling that the Plantation Grove West project had to provide the five percent land requirement independently of the project on the other side of Maguire Nitor It was explained that the entire PUD (for Plantation Grove West and Plantation Grove PUD) incorporated 196 acres and that five percent would be 9.8 acres of recreational land. If the ballpark on the east side of Maguire Road entailed 5 1/2 acres, then 4.3 acres would be needed as park land on the west side of Maguire Road. Chairman Swickerath said if the Plantation Grove West developer could get a certified letter from the developers /owners of Plantation Grove PUD stating that they would agree to make up the difference in the shortage of recreational area in the Plantation Grove West project, then the Planning and Zoning Board might consider it but until the City was satisfied that that was even an option, then the City would have to proceed with having the project independently meet the requirement. Chairman Swickerath said the Board was concerned about giving the impression that it was making one developer make up for another. Both Mr. Deshpande and Engineer Bradick said it would not be a problem getting a certified letter from the Ferdinands. They also added that the entire PUD would have the same homeowners' association. Board member Linebarier asked how it could be one PUD when there were two different developers. David Barth of Glatting Lopez Kerchen and Anglin, the planners for the project, said the subject project was Phase I of the existing development PUD. Chairman Swickerath asked Senior Planner Harper why 4 Page 5 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 11, 1989 staff considered this plan a substantial change from the previous plan. Senior Planner Harper said the developer had changed the configuration of the streets and lots and that under the new PUD, new regulations would have to be met. RECESS: 8:25 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: 8:30 p.m. Chairman Swickerath thanked the developer for his patience and asked Mr. Deshpande how it would affect them if the Board was to table discussion on the project until a later date. Mr. Deshpande said he had spoken with Lou Roeder and they had both been working closely with City staff and did not foresee any problems. He said if they had foreseen any problems, Mr. Roeder himself would have attended this meeting. Mr. Deshpande did not understand why the project would need to be tabled. He said they could get the letter from the Ferdinands on the recreational issue. Board member Bond asked if there would be any problem with r the Board approving the project subject to the letter. She said she trusted the developer but wanted to know that the City would have the letter for its records. Senior Planner Harper said the staff feels the plan constitutes a substantial change and is not comfortable with the recreational area being located across Maguire Road. There was discussion on the recreational space and Board member Linebarier said he did not like the idea of the residents of Plantation Grove West having to cross Maguire Road to get to the park. Vice Chairman Smith asked whether the developer could make room for tennis courts. Board member Switzer asked if the crossing between the subdivisions on Maguire Road would be a lighted intersection and Engineer Bradick said it would. Board member Linebarier said he did not see it as a substantial change in the plans but moreso as an elaboration of the previous plan. He said if the developer would provide the letter then he would be satisfied. Chairman Swickerath polled the Board members and they were in agreement with Board member Linebarier. Chairman Swickerath said Item 11 would be considered struck from the report. Engineer Bradick said Item 12 was dealing with the same matter so it too was resolved. %br 5 Page 6 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 11, 1989 Board member Linebarier questioned Engineer Bradick about the water lines for the project. He said the City required that the lines be looped. Engineer Bradick said the lines would be internally looped through the project. Board member Linebarier suggested they show this on the plan at the time of final engineering because the Planning and Zoning Board and the City Commission would not approve a project that does not provide for looping water lines. Board member Linebarier said that stagnant water is not good for fire protection, etc. Mr. Deshpande said the developer would take care of this at final engineering. Chairman Swickerath said his major concern was the concept of the crash gate. He recommended that the project be approved subject to the same provision as Sawmill, that the crash gate is satisfactory for the preliminary stages of the development but that it will be mandatory for that access to become a second access to the subdivision before the project is complete. Planner Barth said the developer's representatives had all met with staff and everyone had concurred that one entrance would be sufficient. He said they had done all the studies they were asked to do. Chairman Swickerath said when the Planning and Zoning Board approved of the conceptual site plan it showed and the Board stated that the road would connect the two projects. Chairman Swickerath said personally he felt the road should be a through street and that the requirement had always been that it would. Board member Linebarier agreed with Chairman Swickerath and did not understand how staff could give its approval otherwise. Board member Weeks said he did not have a problem with the crash gate, emergency only access. He said the only reason he felt the Board wanted two access points was in the case of an emergency and the developer had accounted for that by having the emergency access. Board member Weeks said if the Arvida project wanted to be a secure subdivision, then he did not see the reason the City would make them open their development for other people to cut through. He said he did not foresee any blockage ever causing a problem with accessing the entrance off of Maguire Road. Board member Switzer asked what would be between the two subdivisions, a wall or a fence. Engineer Bradick said there r would be something there but it was not determined as yet whether it would be a wall or a fence. 6 Page 7 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 11, 1989 Board member Linebarier moved to recommend approval of the preliminary plan subject to the developer agreeing to Items 1 -9 and with striking Items 10 -12 as not being applicable and further subject to the complete looping of the water lines and that the unnamed roadway between the subdivisions be a complete through street and not a crash gate. Chairman Swickerath asked to have the motion amended to state that the emergency access from Arvida would be sufficient until that project was developed with the stipulation that it would ultimately become a through street connecting the two projects. Board member Linebarier accepted the amendment. Engineer Bradick asked for clarification on the looping requirements and asked if Lots 7 and 8 on both sides of Maguire Road were looped if that would satisfy the Board. It was clarified that if that would loop the system internally as well as externally with the other subdivisions, then it would be sufficient. Vice Chairman Smith seconded the amended motion and the vote was 5 -2 in favor of the motion with Board members Bond and Weeks opposed. Senior Planner Harper asked for permission to address the advertising requirement at this point. Chairman Swickerath said it would be addressed later on in the meeting. Silver Springs Citrus Cooperative - Final Engineering Plan Approval Senior Planner Harper said staff was prepared to recommend approval of the final engineering plan subject to the items listed in the staff report. It was noted that the Board did not receive copies of the plan under discussion. Chairman Swickerath asked if the project was currently under construction and if they had a building permit without first obtaining final engineering plan approval. Senior Planner Harper said the project did have a building permit and was currently building at the site but that the Planning Department staff was not involved in issuing any permits. Vice Chairman Smith asked if this was the area with the temporary modular building. Project Manager David Fiskum pointed out the location on the map and said the modular building was part of the project going on next to the site under discussion. Chairman Swickerath asked staff for clarification on the dimensions of parking spaces because he thought they were supposed to be 10' x 20'. Senior Planner Harper said the correct dimensions were 9' x 20'. Sie 7 Page 8 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 11, 1989 Chairman Swickerath asked why the project was before the Planning and Zoning Board if it was already under construction. Senior Planner Harper said staff felt as the Local Planning Agency, the Planning and Zoning Board should review the plan if nothing else than strictly as a courtesy. Project Engineer John Frith said of the four comments on the staff report, Items 3 and 4 had already been incorporated on the plan. He said the developer took exception to Items 1 and 2. He said the pond would be two feet deep at the most and because of this the developer did not feel a guard rail was necessary. Board member Linebarier asked staff how long the railing would have to be and staff said about 120 feet. Engineer Frith said the pond is located 15 feet from the edge of the pavement and was designed as a dry pond. He said because of this and because the pond would have at most two feet (deep) of water, the developer did not feel a railing was necessary. Board member Switzer said there were ditches on the street that were deeper than that. Engineer Frith said the modular building was on the site %by adjacent to this project and the City had permitted that building through 1989. He said at the end of the year the property owner would need to go before the City Commission if they wanted to keep the modular building there any longer. Senior Planner Harper said if the modular building also utilizes this parking lot, then the lot would be a few spaces short. Contractor Fiskum said they were two different projects and should be treated as such. Chairman Swickerath asked if there was parking on the other site for the modular building and Contractor Fiskum said there was. Chairman Swickerath asked if it was paved parking and Contractor Fiskum said it was not. Chairman Swickerath said in order for an area to be classified as a parking lot, it needed to be paved. Some of the Board members said there were many churches in the city that did not have paved parking but Chairman Swickerath said those buildings were built before this was a requirement so they were grandfathered in. Board member Linebarier said if he was not mistaken, under the code enforcement provisions, churches and schools were exempted anyway. Board member Switzer asked if the site met all the necessary requirements or not and Board member Linebarier said there was concern that the modular building did not have adequate parking facilities. Contractor Fiskum said even taking the Sire modular building into consideration, the 11 spaces would still be within the requirements. 8 Page 9 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting fir. April 11, 1989 Chairman Swickerath said until the modular building is removed, the two parcels should be looked upon as separate and if the modular building wanted to utilize the other parking lot, an agreement would have to be made between the two parties. Senior Planner Harper said the modular building was there without stormwater management. Engineer Frith said the temporary building was put on a paved block area so the stormwater was not altered and no permitting was required. Chairman Swickerath said the City would have to handle the parking problem through code enforcement. Board member Linebarier said the first sentence of Item 1 should remain and the second sentence should be struck. Board member Weeks said they have adequate parking spaces for both if the numbers are right and Chairman Swickerath agreed. Vice Chairman Smith moved to approve the plan and Board member Bond seconded. Board member Weeks asked if the guard rail would be required and Chairman Swickerath said it would Nov not. Senior Planner Harper said the letter stated in Item #3 was not yet in the possession of the City. Engineer Frith said it was mentioned on the plan and the City had the form from Orange County. Senior Planner Harper said the staff would still request a letter. After discussion Chairman Swickerath said the letter would not be necessary. The motion made by Vice Chairman Smith and seconded by Board member Bond carried unanimously. RECESS: 9:45 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: 9:55 p.m. OLD BUSINESS Proposed Planning and Zoning Board Bylaws, Drafts and Discussion Chairman Swickerath thanked Board member Linebarier for all his work on the bylaws. Board member Linebarier asked the Board to read over the proposed ordinance and draft outline. He suggested that an additional item be added stating that the Board recommended certain actions for site plans, something that would give them the authority to make specific recommendations on site plans. Chairman Swickerath said he was not sure that the Board would want to review all site plans. Vice Chairman Smith suggested that the Board add the b 4ple following language to the sixth paragraph of Section 3 "and recommend specific actions to the City Commission ". 9 Page 10 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 11, 1989 Chairman Swickerath said Orange County and Orlando Planning and Zoning Boards take formal action and the developer either accepts it as final or appeals to the City Commission within a certain period of time. He said Ocoee may want to consider this. Chairman Swickerath said currently the Planning and Zoning Board's decision is not final until the City Commission approves it. He said the City may want to say the Planning and Zoning Board's approval is final unless it is appealed and then it is up to the City Commission. Chairman Swickerath said the City Commission may not want to reliquish that final say that it has now. Board member Switzer asked if the Charter addressed this and the other Board members thought it might but were unsure. Senior Planner Harper said he was not sure the City Commission would want to relinquish its power of final approval and was not sure the Planning and Zoning Board would want the power of issuing the decision since it would mean more telephone calls from citizens, etc. Director of Planning Behrens said as it stood right now, the developer did not have to come back before the Planning and Zoning Board at every step along the way. He said, for example, the Silver Glen subdivision came back before the Planning and Zoning Board because of a substantial change request, otherwise it would have gone right to the City Commission. Director of Planning Behrens said the Plantation Grove West project could have used the same argument to go right to the City Commission. He said he would like to see all plans go through the Planning and Zoning Board but because of the way the ordinance is written, projects do not have to come before the Board at final engineering. He said they go directly to the City Commission and used the Hammocks as an example. Board member Linebarier suggested that staff propose revisions to the ordinances that address this but in this specific ordinance, staff should incorporate that Planning and Zoning will review all plans up to and including the final plans and make specific recommendations to the City Commission as to approval or disapproval. Board member Switzer said the Board used to make recommendations to preliminary site plans and then never know if the Board's recommendations were considered because the final engineering plans would go directly to the City Commission. Director of Planning Behrens said this came to °4 41,0 10 Page 11 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 11, 1989 his attention with the Silver Glen subdivision. He said the Planning and Zoning Board needed to see each step along the process even when there is no substantial change. Chairman Swickerath agreed and said it was the best way of keeping advised of the status of these projects. Chairman Linebarier asked if staff could insert a paragraph in Section 3 of the ordinance that would allow for the Planning and Zoning Board to review all phases of a development up through the final engineering. Chairman Swickerath asked the Board if they wanted to review all site plans or just particular ones. He used the example of the property fronting Silver Star Road near Ridgefield Avenue that is zoned C -1. He said the property will most likely be developed into a small shopping plaza and asked the Board if they wanted to get involved in the review process for a project like that if the property was already properly zoned and all the developer would have to do was to comply with the building regulations. Board member Linebarier said that the Board would review such a site plan. Director of Planning Behrens agreed with Board member Linebarier and said it was essential to have the Planning and Zoning Board review everything. Board member Bello said at least the Board should have the option of reviewing everything. After some discussion Chairman Swickerath said it was the consensus of the Board that they wanted the option of reviewing every plan that came into the City. Board member Linebarier said the City needed to zone all newly annexed land regardless of whether or not it represented an increase in density or a conflict with the comprehensive plan. Chairman Swickerath directed staff to make sure the City Commission would agree to the concepts outlined in the ordinance and to have the City Attorney review it for form and legality. He said there was a part of the ordinance at the end that said any ordinances in conflict with this ordinance would be considered void and he wanted to make sure that this ordinance did not conflict with any others already on the books. Senior Planner Harper and Director of Planning Behrens both suggested that the ordinance be updated to incorporate the things discussed tonight and then to bring it back to the Planning and Zoning Board for a more formal motion before they incurred any legal funds or brought it before the Commission. Chairman Swickerath said they would review the updated version of the ordinance at the next 41116e meeting and then forward it to the City Attorney and the City Commission. 11 Page 12 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 11, 1989 Board member Linebarier asked if any other Board members had any comments or suggestions. Board member Weeks asked if the Board thought it necessary to have a guiding authority such as the Roberts Rules of Order in the event it was ever necessary. Chairman Swickerath agreed that this should be referenced in the ordinance. Board member Linebarier said the draft outline and the ordinance each discussed absence from meetings but the Board needed to decide how to handle this matter. Chairman Swickerath asked what constituted an "unexcused" absence and whether it would also apply to the alternate Board member as well. Board member Linebarier said it should apply to the alternates as well because if they do not attend all the meetings, they would not be informed if they were asked to fill in for someone. Board member Bello agreed. Board member Linebarier suggested that missing two out of three meetings with unexcused absences would be cause for dismissal from the Board. Chairman Swickerath said two out of three would be tough if you missed one for a vacation and then had the flu. Board member Linebarier said those would be considered excused. Board member Weeks said this was just a method of dismissing those people who really did not want to participate anymore. The Board agreed that missing two out of three consecutive meetings with unexcused absences would be cause for dismissal from the Board. Board member Weeks said as it was worded the Chairman had to grant the excused absence and suggested it be changed to the entire Board to safeguard against the possibility that the Chairman may have a personality conflict with a Board member and hold that against the member when ruling on absences. The Board agreed with the suggestion. Board member Linebarier suggested there be a provision whereby no public hearing would be started after 10:30 p.m. unless it was an extreme emergency. Chairman Swickerath said that might be a problem with the meetings that incorporate the new annexations and rezonings and that it might be necessary to have more meetings if they would not be able to hold all of the hearings in one night. Board member Linebarier suggested to add a paragraph that the Board has the right to continue public hearings to a date certain. Chairman Swickerath asked staff to check into this matter with the City Attorney in case it would cause any legal problems. err 12 Page 13 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 11, 1989 Board member Linebarier directed staff to incorporate all of the additions and or deletions to the bylaws ordinance and to put it on the May meeting's agenda. OTHER BUSINESS Senior Planner Harper read into the record the advertising requirements for the PUD Land Use Plan. Director of Planning Behrens said there was some confusion between the Land Use Plan and the Preliminary Subdivision Plan. Chairman Swickerath asked if the West Lake information that Senior Planner Harper had handed out was just for the Board's information or if they needed to discuss it. Senior Planner Harper said that it was informational and that he had handed it out because he wanted to bring a few issues to their attention before the project came before them again. He said the report dealt with whether the project fell under the new or old PUD ordinance and what advertising requirements were necessary. Director of Planning Behrens said the old PUD ordinance ceased to exist in May of 1988 and that all the PUDs were now acting under the new ordinance. He said this was the opinion of the City Attorneys. Director of Planning Behrens said he had some "good news" items to present to the Board. He said Sawmill subdivision was having a grand opening on Thursday from 4 -7 p.m.. He said the Infrastructure Element of the Comprehensive Plan was under way and that it was one of the most complicated elements. Director of Planning Behrens said there would be a new bridge constructed because improvements would be necessary to handle the traffic that would be generated by new development. Director of Planning Behrens said that staff had been in contact with the Postal Service regarding addresses for new homes in the City. Staff had written a letter requesting that Ocoee addresses be given to all those homes within the City limits so that the City could benefit from them. Copies of the letter were sent to members of the legislature. Director Behrens said that City Manager Shapiro would be chairing the Development Review Committee until further notice and that Director Behrens would still be attending Ittew represent the Planning Department. 13 Page 14 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting ,,, April 11, 1989 Director of Planning Behrens said City Manager Shapiro, Public Works Director Brenner, Commissioner Dabbs, Finance Director Poston, and Senior Planner Harper were all on the committee for selecting the new engineering firms who would be doing consulting work for the City. Director of Planning Behrens said that staff was working with the Historical Commission on putting together another grant application for the Withers - Maguire House. He said staff was also working on a landmark sub - element Lakes Preservation Grant through Gail Easley and that the City may have a chance at getting some funding for this next year. Director Behrens said staff wants to revisit the Highway 50 study at some point and wants to revisit the proposed Future Land Use Map in order to have one that will be formally adopted by the City for incorporation into the Comprehensive Plan. Vice Chairman Smith motioned to adjourn the meeting, Board member Switzer seconded, and approval was unanimous. Stow ADJOURNMENT: 11 p.m. 1 / (1 11161 , �.'t L. 4 CHAIRMAN SWIC RATH ATTEST: , , r, :UTY CLERK - ESNIK Slow 14