HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-10-2000 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
visro REGULAR MEETING HELD TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2000
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Landefeld at 7:30 p.m. A moment of
silent meditation was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. A quorum was
declared present.
PRESENT: Vice Chairman Landefeld, Members Christoefl, Golden, Matthys, McKey,
Rhodus and West. Also present were Planning Director Wagner, Principal Planner
Lewis, Senior Planner McGinnis, Senior Planner Dyson, Assistant City Attorney
Formella, and Deputy City Clerk Green.
Mayor Vandergrift was also present.
ABSENT: Chairman Bond and Member Miller.
CONSENT AGENDA
The consent agenda consisted of approval of Items A and B:
A. Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting held on
Tuesday, September 12, 2000.
B. Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting held on
Wednesday, September 27, 2000.
M•mbe M - •n.-. • •ms • hri to • m•v • a -. - o -n
Agenda as presented. Motion carried 7 -0.
NEW BUSINESS
PRAIRIE LAKES PUD - TRACT E PUBLIC HEARING
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN, PROJECT No. LS -99 -008
Planning Director Wagner presented the Staff Report for the proposed Preliminary
Subdivision Plan for Tract E. The project will include 66 single family residential lots
and 106 townhouse lots for a total of 172 units. The property is part of the Prairie Lake
PUD which was originally approved for 243 units at an overall density not -to- exceed 7
dwelling units per acre. The site is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of
Clarke Road and Hackney Prairie Road. Currently vacant, the site is heavily wooded
except at the south end where much of the land is below the 100 year flood plain.
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
October 10, 2000
Principle Planner Lewis displayed pictures of the site and pointed out features of the
project including access points and recreation areas.
Mr. Wagner said the DRC reviewed the Plan on September 19, 2000 and had voted 7 -1
to recommend approval of the Preliminary Subdivision Plan subject to changes discussed
during the meeting. There was unanimous vote not to support two of the three requested
waivers: Waiver #1 - to reduce the side yard set back from 7.5' to 5' and Waiver #2 - to
increase the maximum impervious surface coverage in the single family portion from
50% to 60 %. He said the plans have been revised since the DRC meeting but there were
still numerous issues which have not been resolved. The issues were listed in memos
attached to the Staff Report. Mr. Wagner said most of the issues are minor and can be
addressed with additional changes to the Plan. He said the DRC voted 5 -2 to utilize the
entire site to compute net density and not to consider clustering as a departure from the
permitted density within the approved PUD Land Use Plan.
Mr. Wagner said other issues concern whether or not there is going to be a wall and
what is going to happen to the lakefront if the City is taking ownership of that land. He
said Plans as shown to date show a landscaped berm around at least the single family
portion of the project.
Mr. Wagner said the developer is here to make a presentation and staff is available to
answer questions.
Ray Braddock, president of Bowyer Singleton and Associates, Incorporated, the
consulting engineers and planners for the project, introduced Nick Gargasz, the project
manager, and Larry Nicholson, with Ryland Homes, who will be the developer/builder of
the project.
Mr. Braddock said they were here to present a plan which they believe meets the
original Land Use Plan that was approved for the Prairie Lakes PUD in its last revised
stage in May, 1996. It was approved as a townhome project with townhome, patio home,
and villa home concept with 243 units on approximately 42 acres. As part of that project
approval, the developer, Silvestri Properties, constructed Clarke Road with an agreement
to have impact fee credits for repayment for the construction of the road based on the unit
yield. He then presented an enlargement of the Plan and explained the various elements
in detail. He said Ryland intends the recreation area to be constructed in the townhouse
area to be used primarily by the townhouse residents.
Addressing access to the lakefront area, Mr. Braddock said the normal water elevation
for Prairie Lake is 81 and they are proposing to excavate to level 83. He said during high
r. 2
•
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
+gro, October 10, 2000
water conditions there would be water up to elevation 83, but the majority of the time it
would be usable as the City would want it to be utilized.
Addressing side yard setback, Mr. Braddock said City code allows for single family in
multifamily zonings and when there is a single family lot in multifamily zoning it allows
for side setback of 6 feet. He said they contend that they are asking for a side yard
variance from 6' to 5' not 7.5' to 5'. (Later in the meeting Mr. Wagner said DRC does
not agree with that interpretation.)
Mr. Braddock said their concept on Clarke and Hackney Prairie is to utilize the trees as a
buffer, berm it and augment with hedge material providing a natural and visual buffer
with most of the houses a minimum of 75 feet from the road. He said it is Ryland's intent
to retain as many trees as possible on the site.
Mr. Braddock said they were asking for the waiver from 50% to 60% to allow more
flexibility on house planning and to avoid the necessity for the homes to be two -story.
Mr. Braddock said he felt the issues included in Staff comments are minor and can be
worked out.
`k' The public hearing was opened.
Xiomara Solano, 2106 Date Palm Court, speaking for many of her neighbors in Prairie
Lake, said they wish to keep as many trees as possible and prefer to have a wall. She
expressed safety concerns about ingress into the site from Clarke Road.
Responding to Member McKey's question about a wall, Mr. Braddock said the original
Development Agreement approved with the Land Use Plan gave the option for either the
landscape buffer with berm and trees or a wall and they have elected to do the buffer. He
said they want to meander the berm (3 feet wide plus planting) around the trees and
extend all the way south along Clarke Road. He said walls are planned at each entry to
create entry monuments.
Mr. Braddock said the City has required right -turn lanes at both entrances on Clarke
Road, but this was not required on Hackney Prairie because it is not as heavily traveled.
Member McKey asked that streets and infrastructure would be built with minimum
impact on building lots. Mr. Braddock said they plan to clear streets, rough stake
building pads, adjust driveways and walkways to retain what they can within the front and
rear setbacks, and then determine what trees can be saved.
3
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
October 10, 2000
Member Christoefl supported 7.5' side yard setbacks, providing a brick wall between
the townhomes and the single family residences, and providing a document to the
potential buyers of the single family homes notifying them about the adjacent
townhouses.
Member Christoefl asked if the townhouses (valued at $90,000 plus) could be purchased
and used as rental units. Responding for Ryland, Larry Nicholson said they would have
to consult with counsel. Assistant City Attorney Formella advised that there is a
limitation to restrictions which can be imposed in terms of rentals and said the issue
would need to be researched.
Mr. Braddock said they will be providing 5 acres for a City park which will be available
to residents of single family homes.
Member Matthys asked about an estimate on the percentage of trees that they will be
saving or planting and asked if stormwater calculations support the ability to handle the
60% impervious surface they are requesting. Mr. Braddock said they would need full
engineering plans to grade the entire site to determine an accurate count of the trees to be
saved. He said they will meet the requirements of the City's landscape ordinance. Mr.
Braddock said there should be no problem with stormwater.
Member Matthys asked if the setbacks and the impervious surface requests were the
only outstanding issues that could not be corrected on the site plan. Mr. Wagner said
that is generally correct, except for the access around the lake issue. He said Staff has not
seen plans for that area to know exactly what they are going to do.
Responding to questions by Member Matthys, Mr. Wagner said 5' side setbacks had
been approved in two sections of Wesmere and he knew of no approval of developments
of single family residences with more than 50% impervious surface in Ocoee. He said the
applicant's argument for less vertical development was a product decision on their part.
Member Matthys asked if Staff could support a compromise on the impervious surface
or setbacks, i.e. 55% instead of 50% impervious area. Mr. Wagner responded that he
could only speak for what the DRC did at this point.
Member West asked if Planning and Zoning members are considering all 22 points or
only the two points. Mr. Wagner said they are considering a DRC recommendation that
approves the project assuming that a long list of things would be approved, but that they
did not support the two waivers. While the applicant corrected many things that were on
the original list, the list of unresolved items in the Staff Report are items that remain for
4
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
Nifty October 10, 2000
them to correct on the drawing. Assuming those corrections, then the two main points are
the unresolved items of the impervious area and side setback. He said some items on the
list are items that Staff has asked for a number of times.
Responding to Member West, Mr. Wagner explained the density issue. He said the
DRC voted to allocate or compute the density over the entire site. There was some
argument about whether to include the sinkhole or not. With or without the sinkhole the
project still falls under the 7 du/ac. The issue that the Planning Department brought up
was the net density of the townhouse area which falls in the area of 9 or 10 du/ac. He
said this was more of a policy issue as to what Commission originally intended for the
character of the area.
Assistant City Attorney Formella asked if the applicant is in agreement on other items
that have been identified other than the two waivers. Mr. Braddock said they had no
problem with the other items.
Ms. Formella explained that DRC approved the Plan subject to the changes that are set
out in these pages and subject to approval of Waiver #3 and denial of Waivers #1 and #2.
If the board is in agreement with the DRC recommendation, then it is not necessary to go
through all the individual items that are attached. What is on the table is a
`''o recommendation on the subdivision plan and then the board needs to make a
recommendation as to the three waivers that have been presented.
Member Matthys asked why DRC recommended approval when they had so much
reservation about the two waivers. Noting it was originally approved for 243 units and
they are proposing 172 (71 less), Mr. Matthys asked if it is better to have the increased
impervious surface as opposed to the extra 71 units that was approved. Mr. Wagner said
the approved number of units is a theoretical maximum and there are no guarantees in the
Developer Agreement that the developer can build that number of units.
Member Golden said he was frustrated by the high number of unresolved items. He
asked the reason for a berm versus a wall. Mr. Nicholson said the reasons were
economic and the ability to preserve trees. He said they think they can create a buffer that
would serve the residents as well as a wall. Mr. Braddock said a berm is more flexible
than a wall.
Vice Chairman Landefeld asked who would be responsible for maintaining the berm.
Mr. Braddock said the master homeowners association would be responsible. Mr.
Landefeld said he thought the berm instead of a wall would downgrade the project.
5
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
October 10, 2000
Member Golden noted there were 102 protected trees on the project and asked about
their tree removal plan. Mr. Braddock said a plan would be submitted to the City.
Mr. Wagner explained the complexities of trees issue. He said the City does not allow
mass grading on a site like this. He said it allows streets to be cut in and then every lot is
individually cleared as each house is designed and sold.
Member Golden said he thought the trees were an important issue and agreed with DRC
and could not support Waivers 1 and 2.
Member Rhodus asked if the reduced side setback posed a safety issue. Mr. Braddock
said the Southern Standard Building Code allows 10 foot building separation so it was
not a life safety issue. She supported having a fence or wall as better for the safety of the
children and consistent with the community. She supported conserving trees as much as
possible.
Principle Planner Lewis said Condition #29 on the PUD allows the developer the option
to provide a buffer or a wall.
Member West said he would also prefer a wall and supported saving trees. He said he
Noir does not have problem with 5' setback but is concerned about increasing the impervious
surface.
Recess: 8:55 p.m. - 9:05 p.m.
Vice Chairman Landefeld said he was concerned about approving packages with
unresolved issues. He recommended not approving the project but returning it to
Planning for the issues to be resolved.
Mr. Braddock said they had submitted the project in May, 1999 and have been to eight
to ten meetings and have received and addressed many comments. He said the remaining
comments did not have significant impact on the Plan, and that when they left DRC they
had agreed to disagree on the two waivers.
Attorney Formella explained the board's options to recommend approval, denial, or
continuance to another hearing.
Mr. Wagner explained that the DRC is made up of the City Manager, Department
Directors and the Transportation/Concurrency Coordinator. He said 95% of the time
6
•
•
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
October 10, 2000
DRC recommendations are unanimous. If the submittal is complete, there are usually
very few items remaining.
Member Christoefl said she agreed with Vice Chairman Landefeld that there were too
many unresolved issues.
Mr. Braddock said he could agree with everything on the list except for the two waivers.
Member McKey asked about the projected purchase price for single family homes
($130,000 plus), and what open space is included in calculation for density. Mr. Wagner
explained that the area below the 100 year flood plain could not be used in density
calculation, and that the issue for Planning Staff is net density in townhouses area.
Member McKey supported 7.5' setback, minimum 70 foot width lots, and no more than
50% impervious area. He said there needed to be detailed plans for the berm.
The public hearing was closed.
M•m• • • - •,s • u • b•r M.tth • - • that Pla * an• • in
Commission recommend approval of the Preliminary Subdivision Plan for Prairie Lakes
PUD Tract E (Pro_ect No. L -99 -008 subject to chan ' es discus ed durin • the DRC
meeting on September 19, 2000 and the attached unresolved Staff Comments with denials
of Waivers 1 and 2 consistent with the DRC recommendation. Motion carried 4 -3 with
Vice Chairman Landefeld and Members Christoefl and Golden voting "No."
FOREST LAKE ESTATES: PUBLIC HEARING
ANNEXATION - CASE NO. AR- 2000 -05 -01
REZONING - CASE NO. AR- 2000 -05 -01
Senior Planner McGinnis presented a combined staff report for the applications to
annex and rezone the 33.67 acre parcel located south of Ocoee - Clarcona Road and west
of Lauren Beth Avenue. The subject property is proposed to be developed as a single
family subdivision. An Annexation Agreement will be required for the dedication of
additional right -of -way along Clarcona -Ocoee Road as needed. Ms. McGinnis said Staff
found the proposed annexation petition to be consistent with the JPA Agreement, state
annexation criteria, and the standards established by the City. On September 20, 2000,
the DRC considered the annexation request and Staff unanimously recommends approval
of the annexation request subject to execution of an Annexation Agreement which
identifies access points and right -of -way dedications.
`o.. 7
•
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
October 10, 2000
The applicant requests rezoning from Orange County A -1, Citrus Rural District to Ocoee
R -1A, Single Family Dwelling District. Ms. McGinnis said, while the requested zoning
classification would be consistent with the Low Density Residential designation on the
City Future Land Use Map and Joint Planning Area Map, it is Staff's opinion that an
Ocoee zoning classification of R -1AAA, Single Family Dwelling District, would be more
appropriate as a transition between the existing rural zoning to the north and east and the
existing R -1 zoning to the south and west. Finding that the R -1AAA zoning
classification is consistent with Ocoee's (1) Comprehensive Plan; (2) Future Land Use
Map; (3) Land Development Code; (4) Joint Planning Area Agreement with Orange
County; and (5) Surrounding land uses and zoning classifications, Staff recommends
approval of the R -1 AAA zoning.
Ms. McGinnis said the R -1AAA zoning requires minimum lot widths of 85' with lot size
of about 10,000 square feet and house size of 1600 square feet. The applicant does not
object to providing the larger lots but would request a smaller house size.
Ms. McGinnis said they have received a number of phone calls from surrounding
property owners. The callers were concerned about the size of the lots, preferring one
acre lots, and concerned about drainage from the property since some portions of the
property are low - lying.
The public hearing was opened.
Debra Oliver, 10074 Clarcona -Ocoee Road, Apopka, said her concerns were about
school capacity and traffic safety on Clarcona -Ocoee Road. She was concerned about
drainage as lake has risen to take 10 acres of their property.
Mr. Wagner responded that Staff is asking the developer to consider providing a turn
lane and access directly off Clarcona -Ocoee Road. In time that area will become a sub -
collector road and the drainage would be a subject of the Plan review. Mrs. Oliver would
be notified about the actual Development Plan.
Stanley Oliver, 10062 Clarcona -Ocoee Road, spoke in opposition to the proposed
project. He said his property floods at 93.4 feet, and more than half of the subject
property has been under water. He said it should be determined what will be done with
Clarcona -Ocoee Road before proceeding.
The public hearing was closed.
Now 8
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
October 10, 2000
Responding to Member McKey, Mr. Wagner said all we know is preliminary
information that was supplied by the developer. We have no information from a detailed
soil investigation. He said much of the site is wet and probably almost half of the site is
within the 100 year flood plain. He said the conceptual plan may be optimistic and the
project would come to Planning and Zoning again with a subdivision plan.
Member McKey said he agrees with R -1 AAA zoning.
Member Matthys said he has no problem with the annexation and rezoning, but was
concerned about causing an enclave on the western side. Ms. McGinnis said it would be
creating an enclave only if the property was developed.
Member Golden said he likes the transitional lot sizes.
Ms. McGinnis said, after several efforts to contact Orange County about the annexation,
she had received a verbal response this week that they had no problem with the proposed
annexation.
Member West said about 90% of the homes in the area R -1A. He suggested considering
R -1 AA, as he was not sure the area can support R -1 AAA.
" err
Member Rhodus asked what portion of the 33.67 acres could actually be developed.
Ms. McGinnis said it had not been determined at this time.
Randy June, June Engineering Consultants, 71 East Church Street, addressed the
stormwater issue. He said this is in a closed basin and they will be providing stormwater
retention ponds to accommodate all the stormwater that falls on the site. With respect to
Clarcona -Ocoee Road, they have met several times with the County and there is a
proposed realignment which they think is going to assist this area because it does divert a
lot of the traffic.
Mr. June said they would like the board to consider a compromise to R -1AA zoning with
a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet to allow more flexibility in the design.
Mr. Wagner said the City has received 30% plans on the Clarcona alignment. He asked
Mr. June if they are voluntarily agreeing to build the 10,000 square foot lots as part of the
Annexation Agreement and Mr. June said that was correct.
Member Golden asked what flexibility R -1AA would give. Mr. June said the primary
gain would be to reduce size by 200 square feet to a 1400 square foot minimum.
'�► 9
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
October 10, 2000
Member McKey supported R -1AAA zoning as recommended by Staff due to concerns
about parking problems and frontage on streets.
Mr. Oliver said that as of last Thursday, Orange County does not know which berm they
are going to channel for the road.
Steven Boucher, 10140 Clarcona -Ocoee Road, whose property is located on the western
side of the subject property, said ingress /egress to his property would not be part of the
City zoning but would remain agricultural and Staff concurred.
The public hearing was closed.
As had been recommended by Staff, Member Christoefl, seconded by Member
Rhodus, moved to recommend approval of the Forest Lake Estates Annexation Petition
in Case No. AR- 2000 -05 -01 sub' - ct to exec ti on of an Annexation A • eement which
identifies access points and right -of -way dedications. Motion carried 7 -0.
As had been recommended by staff, Member McKey, seconde by Member Golden,
moved to recommend approval of the Forest Lake Estates Rezoning Petition in Case No.
AR- 2000 -05 -01 from Oran! - ount A -1 itrus Rural District to Ocoee R -1AAA
r Sin ' le Famil Dwellin ' Distri t. Motion carried 4 -3 with Members Christoefl Matth s
and West voting "No."
Recess: 10:05 p.m. - 10:10 p.m.
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE JOINT PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT WITH ORANGE
COUNTY
(Acting as Local Planning Agency)
Senior Planner McGinnis presented the Staff Report recommending approval for the
proposed land use and boundary change to the JPA Map for the "Coke Property." The
subject property is 358 acres in size and is located both east and west of Ocoee - Apopka
Road, north of Fullers Cross Road, east of Lake Apopka, and south of West Groves. The
Amendment proposes to change the land use designations for approximately 1/3 of the
subject property from Low Density Residential to a mixture of Institutional (48 acres),
Commercial (25 acres), and Professional Services (12 acres). The Amendment includes a
change to the JPA boundary and land use to include a 20 acre portion of the Coke
property not originally included in the JPA Map. Ms. McGinnis explained that this
change was needed before the City buys the Coke property.
10
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
October 10, 2000
Mr. Wagner said a formal amendment to Ocoee's Land Use Map will come back to
Planning and Zoning in the future.
Ms. McGinnis announced a Community Meeting on the Amendment on October 23,
2000. It is tentatively scheduled for Ocoee City Commission on November 7, before
Orange County Local Planning Agency on October 19, and the Orange County Board of
County Commissioners on November 14.
M • m s • r M K • - •n• • 11,1 Lan! : f • 1 s m • ved t a P
Zonin ommissi • n actin. as the L • cal Plannin' A enc _ recommend a. • roval of the
Fourth Amendment to the Ocoee - Orange County Joint Planning Area Agreement to
amend the JPA Ma • for the Coke Pro • e as de • icted in Exhibit `B" to the Staff Re • ort.
Motion carried 7 -0.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
OTHER BUSINESS
None.
COMMENTS
Planning Director Wagner directed attention to the Planning Department's latest Work
in Progress Report.
Mayor Vandergrift spoke about Charter Schools.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
Attest: APPROVED:
QJt.[J (24A IA— amt ,LYl� i
Ma 'an Green, Deputy City Clerk Lou Lan efeld ice Chairman
'`.- 11
•
•