HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ 05-09-1989 .r.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING HELD ON
TUESDAY, MAY 9, 1989
Simmy
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Swickerath at
7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairman Swickerath; Board members Bello, Switzer,
Linebarier, and Weeks; City Manager Shapiro; Director of
Planning Behrens; and Deputy Clerk Resnik.
ABSENT: Board member Bond and Alternate member Breeze.
Chairman Swickerath notified the Board that Board member
Bond's father had passed away. He also said that Vice
Chairman Smith had resigned. Chairman Swickerath asked all
Board members to submit their nominations for a successor for
Vice Chairman to the Planning Department by Thursday in order
for City Manager Shapiro to place the item on the City
Commission meeting agenda. Chairman Swickerath said for the
record that he did not think that Alternate Board member
Breeze should be considered for a permanent position on the
Board since he had not regularly attended meetings and had
not attended the last five or six meetings. Chairman
Swickerath suggested that a replacement be found for Burton
Smith and that the vacant alternate position be tilled.
Chairman Swickerath said for the record that he also felt
that Mr. Breeze should be replaced as well. There was some
%or discussion about alternate members and the importance of
these members attending every meeting so they would keep
informed on all issues in the event they are called to fill
in for a Board member.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Board member Switzer moved to approve the regular meeting
minutes of April 11, 1989, Board member Linebarier seconded,
and approval was unanimous.
OLD BUSINESS
Proposed Planning and Zoning Board Bylaws Ordinance
Chairman Swickerath asked the Board if they wanted to discuss
the bylaws even though some members were not present.
Board member Linebarier said the minutes of the last meeting
showed that the Board had asked staff to include an
additional paragraph on the Board reviewing all plans up to
and including the final plans and to make recommendations to
the City Commission at each stage of the plan review process.
Board member Linebarier asked staff why this was not added to
the ordinance.
*Noy'
1
Page 2
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 1989
City Manager Shapiro said it was his decision and that at
the pleasure of the Board, he would explain further.
Chairman Swickerath asked City Manager Shapiro to continue.
City Manager Shapiro said there was some question about the
particular functions and powers of the Planning and Zoning
Board. He said it may very well be that there are some
legal rights and obligations due to the Planning and Zoning
Board being the LPA (Local Planning Agency). City Manager
Shapiro said that certain questions must be answered before
the Board moves further with its bylaws discussions. He said
he first wanted to have the City Attorney research what legal
obligations are tied to the Board being the LPA. He said the
City was in the process of adopting the Orange County
development review process and that this would entail a
review of the current process that the City has and that the
Planning and Zoning Board may want to wait to see what
happens in these discussions before adopting bylaws. City
Manager Shapiro said he did not want the ordinance to be
adopted and then have to be changed 30 days later.
Board member Switzer said the Board wanted to incorporate the
1 11101,, , review of all plans because one of the things they had
experienced was that they would meet and work with developers
at the preliminary stage and make recommendations but then
never see the Developer again and have to find out what
happens by watching the City Commission meeting on
television. Board member Switzer asked why the City had a
Planning and Zoning Board if developers only have to work out
things with the City Commission. He said he was unsure
sometimes whether or not the City Commission was even made
aware of what the Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation
was.
Chairman Swickerath said there have been instances where
staff has diminished the Planning and Zoning Board's
recommendations in reports, discussions, etc. He said he was
aware of the Board's "advisory" capacity but said in other
city and county governments if the Planning and Zoning Board
approves something, it would go on the consent agenda at the
City Commission level unless it had strong opposition from
citizens or the developer. Chairman Swickerath said that
this method took some of the heat off of the City Commission
and provided "due process" where the City Commission was
there for an appeal of any kind.
Chairman Swickerath said there had been occasions where the
Planning and Zoning Board, staff, and the Developer agreed on
something and then that agreement fell through for some
2
Page 3
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 1989
ern
reason and the P &Z Board was not made aware of the change
until it was too late.
Board member Switzer said the Route 50 study was another
example. He said it was approved by the City Commission and
then someone at City Hall made changes to it. He said the
Planning and Zoning Board had discussed the study for two
nights and then the change went through and by the time the
Planning and Zoning Board found out about it, it was too
late.
City Manager Shapiro asked for the purpose of discussion,
what if the City Commission did not take into consideration
the Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation even though it
was made well aware of it. Board member Linebarier said the
Board was not questioning the City Commission's ability to
act on the Planning and Zoning Board's recommendations but
was questioning whether the City Commission was in tact being
told of the Planning and Zoning Board's recommendations and
whether staff was accurately portraying these recommendations
on the P &Z Board's behalf. Board member Linebarier said
there had been several instances where staff either
arbitrarily changed or left out the P &Z Board's
recommendations in staff reports. He used Plantation urove
as an example. Board member Linebarier said the plans
originally showed the crash gate as a through street and that
was how the Planning and Zoning Board had approved of the
plan. He said when it was brought back, it showed a crash
gate even though the P &Z Board had let the Developer know
that the Board was opposed to such a concept and staff had
also not only allowed the change but put on the staff report
that it approved of the crash gate. Board member Linebarier
said again that the P &Z Board recommended that the crash gate
only be a temporary measure and that the street ultimately be
a through street. He said this was only one of the recent
occurrences when staff had either failed to mention a
previous recommendation by the P &Z Board or went against what
the Board had approved in the pant.
City Manager Shapiro said in most cities, the Planning and
Zoning Board meeting minutes are given to the City Commission
to read so that they know what occurred. Chairman Swickerath
said this was a good idea but that the minutes do not get
done for the most part until after the City Commission has
met and already discussed what was discussed by the P &Z
Board. He said the only way this would work would be to
delay the Developer from going right from the P &Z Board to
the City Commission. He said if the City waited for the P &Z
Board to approve its minutes at the following meeting and
3
Page 4
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 1989
then gave each City Commissioner a copy, it would be about
six weeks between the time the Developer went in front of the
P &Z Board until the time the Developer went in front of the
City Commission.
City Manager Shapiro said this was not a probable solution
unless the City Commission could be given a brief synopsis of
how the P &Z Board voted on certain issues. City Manager
Shapiro said that staff should not be editorializing the P &Z
Board's recommendations in staff reports. He said staff
could include how the Board voted on something but it should
not be followed by any staff opinion on that vote.
City Manager Shapiro said the time element was important
because sometimes staff only has half a day to a day to get
the staff report formalized after the P &Z Board meeting to
get it into the agenda packet for the next City Commission
meeting. He said it was a pipeline problem because the
City Commission had a policy of addressing developers only at
the second Commission meeting of the month.
Director of Planning Behrens said sometimes it would be
possible to give the City Commission excerpts from the P &Z
Board meetings. He said the P &Z Board had approved minutes
tonight that dealt with Plantation Grove West and that these
would be included in the packets for the City Commissioners.
City Manager Shapiro said if the P &Z Board wants to become
more involved, the Board will probably have to start meeting
weekly because the Development Review Committee was starting
to move projects through the pipeline faster and was meeting
more than once a week to get the pipeline unclogged.
City Manager Shapiro said the perception from the Developer
is that the developers feel that neither staff nor the P &Z
Board hold any weight and they have shown this perception by
continually bringing several items to the City Commission
that should in fact be worked out with staff. City Manager
Shapiro said the City Commission is tired of being the
ones to decide and that they only want to have to decide
policy issues. Everything else, City Manager Shapiro said,
should be decided beforehand.
Board member Linebarier said the Board had requested the
paragraph on reviewing final plans be inserted into the
bylaws ordinance to help with this process. City Manager
Shapiro said that by having the P &Z Board review plans again,
Spe the process would be held up because developers would have to
wait another month for a P &Z Board meeting. Hoard member
4
Page 5
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 1989
�I1r�►
Switzer asked City Manager Shapiro how else the P &Z Board
could make sure that the City Commission knew their
recommendations. City Manager Shapiro said in other cities
the Chairman of the P &Z Board or one of the members,
generally attends the City Commission meetings when something
is on the agenda to testify on behalf of the Board.
City Manager Shapiro said he thought the City Commission
would respect the P &Z Board and allow them to speak at
City Commission meetings. Chairman Swickerath said
either he would attend or a member would attend the City
Commission meetings as a representative of the P &Z Board from
now on.
Chairman Swickerath said that still did not mean that the P &Z
Board did not want to see the second generation of plan. He
said personally he did not feel the need to see all plans or
even any plans on such projects as strip shopping centers,
site plans on single homes, doctor's offices, etc. as long as
they met all the criteria and they do not need rezonings or
they are not a PUD. But Chairman Swickerath said he might be
in the minority since there are Board members who want to
`, review everything. City Manager Shapiro said he would oppose
such a concept aince the Board only meets once a month. City
Manager Shapiro said since the Board was not made up of
engineers, he did not know why they would want to or think
they should review such things as size of parking spaces,
etc. City Manager Shapiro said the City had engineers for
that and that unless the Board was willing to meet every
week, he would be opposed to any such reviews because it
would delay the process.
Board member Bello said she agreed with City Manager Shapiro
but that she had been on the Board for two years and
sometimes precedents were set and if she was going to make a
decision or vote on something, it needed to be an educated
decision and be supported by staff. She said she had spent
many long hours to make sure her decisions were well thought
out. Because of this, she felt staff should take her vote as
well as other Board members' votes into consideration more so
than is normally the case. She also said she would like to
be kept informed on all development projects in the City.
Director of Planning Behrens said by law that staff was not
required to bring Plantation Grove West back before the P &Z
Board but it was done as a courtesy review. He said
whenever possible, it had been his policy to bring things
back before P &Z in order to keep them up to date.
5
Page 6
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 1989
City Manager Shapiro said there was nothing wrong with staff
having a different opinion from the P &Z Board. Chairman
Swickerath said he did not believe that staff should comment
on policy issues, but rather only on technical matters. City
Manager Shapiro commented that the crash gate was technical
in nature but Chairman Swickerath said he did not agree.
City Manager Shapiro said that the P &Z Board at present only
gave a recommendation and that if the Board wanted to
recommend a policy change, then it would have to ask the City
Commission to change the City's policy.
City Manager Shapiro said the Board could recommend that the
City Commission change the necessary ordinances and
development review process in order to give the P &Z Board
more authority. Board member Linebarier said that was what
they were trying to do when he asked that the paragraph on
reviewing all plans be added to the new bylaws ordinance.
City Manager Shapiro said the Hoard needed to set up a
dialogue with the City Commission to let them know a change
is requested. Chairman Swickerath said that was one reason
that the P &Z Board was looking to adopt a bylaws ordinance.
City Manager Shapiro said he was only trying to start the
conversation and not trying to get in the way of the P &Z
Board. He said he wanted to clarify what was required of the
P &Z Board versus what was being requested of the P &Z Board
before this ordinance went before the City Commission. He
said the way to do this was to get everything out in the open
and not have any underlying questions.
Board member Linebarier said City Manager Shapiro got on the
wrong side of him by editing out his recommendation that
something be put in the bylaws ordinance. City Manager
Shapiro said he did not edit anything but rather was
attempting to clear up some issues before the P &Z Board went
further with its proposed ordinance and this was his way of
starting the necessary dialogue.
Chairman Swickerath asked City Manager Shapiro to list the
items that needed to be discussed and resolved before a final
ordinance could be presented to the City Commission.
City Manager Shapiro said there were four items:
1. The City needs to change its procedure for home
occupational licenses. Currently there is no public hearing
process and the process is handled entirely by staff with the
Noe City Manager heading up the process. City Manager Shapiro
6
Page 7
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 4 011.0
said if someone lives in a neighborhood and wants a home
occupational license, there is no way for others in the
neighborhood to become aware of this request or to discuss it
before the license is granted. City Manager Shapiro said the
P &Z Board in other cities is generally used for this purpose
because it does involve land use and he wanted the Board's
input as to whether they would want to be involved in this
process.
2. The City is in the process of coming up with a Capital
Improvement Plan. City Manager Shapiro said many people
believe that this is one of the most significant parts of the
Comprehensive Plan since it details how the City plans to pay
for everything. City Manager Shapiro said because the P &Z
Board is the LPA, he wondered if the Board would want to be
involved in the Capital improvement Plan and the Capital
Budget process.
3. The City needs to have the City Attorney research what
obligations the P &Z Board has as LPA.
4. There needs to be discussions between the P &Z Board and
the City Commission as to what part the P &Z Board will play
in the development review process.
Chairman Swickerath asked if the Board members had any
comments on Item 1. There was some discussion on home
occupations and City Manager Shapiro said that code
enforcement could be used to handle cases where business was
being conducted improperly or without license. City Manager
Shapiro said the P &Z Board could become involved with the
occupational licenses if it was interested in doing so.
Board member Switzer gave a hypothetical case for an example
to illustrate a question he had. He asked if his wife did
typing at her home for a doctor, would the neighbors be
notified of her request for a home occupational license.
City Manager Shapiro said they would not. Board member
Switzer asked how long the licenses last and City Manager
Shapiro said they were renewed yearly. Board member Switzer
asked what would happen to the businesses already established
if the City were to start a new procedure. City Manager
Shapiro said the businesses up for renewal would have to be
grandfathered into the new process but that anyone new would
have to go through the public hearing process.
Chairman Swickerath asked whether or not under the zoning
Ste ordinance, under specific classifications, it delineates what
is allowed and any special exceptions. He said as tar as he
7
Page 8
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 1989
was concerned, nothing else should be allowed. He commented
that bringing work home from the office and having an
"office" or "study" to do it in did not constitute a home
occupation.
Chairman Swickerath said his point was that if It was legal
and allowed under the zoning, then why would the P &Z Board
have to get involved or why would a public hearing have to he
held? City Manager Shapiro said there was some question in
his mind whether or not it was necessarily legal. He said
his concern was with the issue of due process. Chairman
Swickerath said his point was that if the zoning ordinance
permits the occupation and he lives next door to the
applicant, why should he have any right to say anything about
it if it is legally permissive.
After some discussion it was the consensus of the Board that
although it may be a good idea to give neighbors a chance to
speak on a home occupational license request in their
neighborhood, that the Board of Adjustment would be a better
avenue and more appropriate for this than the P &2 Board.
Chairman Swickerath suggested that all home occupations be
considered exceptional uses but Board member Linebarier said
such things as letter stuffing, typing, etc. should not be
classified as exceptional uses. Chairman Swickerath
suggested that City Manager Shapiro take up the matter with
the City Attorney for his opinion on how to change the
process.
Chairman Swickerath asked if the Board was interested in
getting involved with the Capital Improvements process.
Board member Weeks said he did not want to get involved in
it. Chairman Swickerath said he thinks that the issue is if
the City says a developer will have services (water, sewer)
then the City will have to see it through. City Manager
Shapiro said he thought that the City needed the tool as
well, meaning the budget itself, and thought it would be a
good idea for the Board to be involved. Chairman Swickerath
said this may, in fact, be a legal obligation of the LPA.
City Manager Shapiro said this was also a way of making the
P &Z Board a part of the prioritizing of things. Board member
Bello said she personally would like to be involved. Board
member Switzer said he wondered what would happen to the
Board's recommendation on something like this. City Manage2
Shapiro said the Capital Improvements Budget will show all
P &Z Board recommendations.
Sir
8
Page 9
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 1989
Nbw
City Manager Shapiro said although the staff and the P &Z
Board may differ in what they think the P &2 Board should be a
part of, he sincerely thinks that the P &Z Hoard is the most
important Board of the City and he would like to see the
Board involved in several things.
City Manager Shapiro said he would consult the City Attorney
for a legal opinion on the responsibilities of the LPA
regarding what the P &Z Board is required to review. Chairman
Swickerath asked if they could have the legal opinion by the
next meeting and incorporate the other things that were
discussed tonight as well.
There was some discussion about limiting the size or scope of
projects brought before the P &Z Board. Chairman Swickerath
suggested that the Board individually come up with some ideas
and present them at the next meeting. Board member Switzer
thought as a suggestion that there might be a set limit on
commercial acreage and a set limit on the number of
residences proposed. Chairman Swickerath said that was a
good suggestion and that all Board members should think about
this for the next meeting. He said the most important
fir► consideration is that the staff be clear as to what the P &Z
Board is to be involved with and what the Board does not need
to review.
City Manager Shapiro said it would be good to have a work
session with the P &Z Board and the City Commission to discuss
the review process of the P &Z Board.
RECESS: 9:15 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER: 9:30 p.m.
(Mr. Switzer left before the meeting resumed.)
Board member Linebarier moved that the staff take the
ordinance back and include the paragraph the Board
recommended in April (see minutes of April 11, 1989) and
incorporate the three other items discussed: namely the
legal responsibilities of the P &Z Board as the LPA, the P &Z
Board's involvement in the upcoming capital improvements
budgeting process, and to note that the P &Z Board recommended
that any home occupational license review be the
responsibility of the Board of Adjustment and not the P &Z
Board. Board member Bello seconded the motion.
9
Page 10
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 1989
`1rr
Director of Planning Behrens pointed out that the ordinance
did include mention of the paragraph that Board member
Linebarier referred to as being left out. Director Behrens
said Section 3, Number 5 contained the added language. Board
member Linebarier said he did not receive the revised
ordinance. Director of Planning Behrens read the revised
ordinance. Board member Linebarier said that the wording in
the revised ordinance was not the same paragraph that was in
the minutes. He asked that it be incorporated in addition to
what was in the revised ordinance. A vote was taken on the
motion and Chairman Swickerath and Board members Linebarier
and Bello voted in support of the motion and Board member
Weeks was opposed.
Director of Planning Behrens asked Board member Linebarier to
point out for him exactly what part of the minutes he wanted
included in the ordinance.
NEW BUSINESS
Infrastructure Element of the Comprehensive Plan
`rr Board member Bello motioned to table the item until the next
meeting in view of the length of the document and Board
member Weeks seconded. Director of Planning Behrens
explained that this was a work product or interim
deliverable" due into the Department of Community Affairs
(DCA) on May 30, 1989. He reminded the Board that staff gave
them the schedule and that this item needed to go to the City
Commission next Tuesday. Director Behrens said if it was
delayed, it may cost the City some money. Board member
Linebarier agreed that staff had given the Board this
document in sufficient time for them to review it and that
staff had said this was the only item on the schedule that
would have to be pushed through the process because of the
due date. Board member Bello said in lieu of this
discussion, she would withdraw her motion.
Director of Planning Behrens said the document was very
comprehensive and met all the criteria of a finished element
much leas a work product along the state criteria in 93 -5.
Director Behrens said Associate Planner Claman and
Professional Engineering Consultants had put the document
together working with other cities. He said they were open
to suggestions, modifications, etc. if the Board had any.
Director Behrens said there would be public participation
before the final work product was finished. Board member
Weeks asked if the DCA would give a critical overview of it
Sir
10
Page 11.
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 1989
r
and Director Behrens said the courtesy review may or may not
happen since the DCA is overloaded with these elements. He
said the City may not get a critique from DCA but that the
City would have public review before the final submittal.
Board member Weeks said in reading it he saw a reference to
the ocean and asked if maybe it should be removed. He said
he figured that this was standard verbage taken from another
element and that maybe before the product was finalized,
staff may want to read it over for such things thay may not
pertain to the City of Ocoee. Director Behrens said he
appreciated these types of notations and wanted to encourage
the Board to speak up if they had such comments.
Board member Bello and Chairman Swickerath both stated that
they were impressed with the document. Board member
Linebarier said he read the document and was impressed by it
but did not feel qualified to say whether it was good or bad.
He said he could not find fault with it as tar as his limited
knowledge of it He said if staff felt confident in it, he
was satisfied.
Chairman Swickerath said that the City should be sure that
there is adequate sewer facilities to support these treatment
programs (capital improvements) in the event that a
subdivision such as Brentwood may eventually need to go on
sewer in the future.
City Manager Shapiro said the sewer connection scenario may
not seem important now but that it will be in the future when
the City Commissioners are all from areas in the City that
have sewer service and most of their constituents have sewer.
Chairman Swickerath said he wanted to he sure that the City
had enough capacity to meet the needs of Its citizens,
present and future, before the City promised outside
developments that it would serve them. He said this was one
of the ways to ensure that Ocoee would have the highest
quality of growth possible. City Manager Shapiro said the
City would review the capacity outlook annually.
Board member Linebarier said he thought it would not be too
far down the line before septic tanks were outlawed entirely.
City Manager Shapiro said they were already outlawed in some
coastal regions. Board member Linebarier said the element
should take into consideration those people who cannot
financially afford to hook up to the system in the future.
Nie
11
Page 12
Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
May 9, 1989
Sher
Board member Linebarier also questioned whether this element
took into consideration the separation of garbage and
recycling. Director of Planning Behrens said it did not
consider those things at this point. City Manager Shapiro
said the recycling issue would be decided by the City
Commission within the next few months. He said he thought
the state would also require certain things and that
something may eventually have to be included in the element.
Board member Linebarier moved to approve the work product as
presented, Board member Weeks seconded, and approval was
unanimous.
Chairman Swickerath asked if these elements that were being
approved were being placed in public places such as City
Hall, libraries, schools, etc. in order for the public to
have access to them. He said the Board had asked that this
be done a few meetings ago. Director of Planning Behrens
said it had not been done yet but that staff was working on
putting them together. Chairman Swickerath said there were
now four elements. Director of Planning Behrens said they
would eventually have a display. Chairman Swickerath said to
err make it a priority. Board member Linebarier said public
participation would be done before the City adopts the
elements. Director Behrens said there would be public
participation before the final documents were prepared. He
said he would get the elements set up at the various
locations that Chairman Swickerath had mentioned.
Board member Bello motioned to adjourn, Board member Weeks
seconded, and approval was unanimous.
ADJOURNMENT: 10:10 p.m.
•
�•
CHAI MAN SWIC E'ATH
ATTEST:
1 64,
41 'UTY CLERK RESNIK
I mre
12