Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-11-14MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTING AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MEETING HELD TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2014 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Campbell called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m silent meditation and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, present. Following a moment of a quorum was declared PRESENT: Chairman Campbell, Vice - Chairman McKey, Members de la Portilla, Dunn, Marcotte, Sills, and West. Also present were City Planner Rumer, Assistant City Attorney Drage and Recording Clerk Turner ABSENT: Member(s): Dillard (A /E) and Keethler (A /E) ELECTION The board election for chairman and vice - chairman was held at the February 11, 2014, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. CONSENT AGENDA Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting held on Tuesday, February 11, 2014. Vice - Chairman McKey, seconded bV Member West, moved to accept the amended minutes of the February 11, 2014, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Motion carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS - none NEW BUSINESS Park Place PUD — Preliminary /Final Subdivision Plan & Preliminary /Final Site Plan — Public Hearing City Planner Rumer gave a brief presentation with exhibits of the proposed project. The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Maguire Road and Tomyn Boulevard. The parcel is 14.11 acres. The Park Place Planned Unit Development (PUD) is comprised of 242 multi - family units and a 2 '/2 acre commercial outparcel. The subject property consists of a vacant and undeveloped land. The Future Land Use designation for the subject site is "Commercial ". The preliminary /final subdivision plan is to create the three lots. Lot 1 will consist of the 242 multi - family units and Lots 2 and 3 are commercial out - parcels. The preliminary/final site plan is for the construction of Lot 1. The Preliminary /Final Large Scale Site Plan will consist of 242 multi - family units on 11.35 acres. The parcel is adjacent to the Florida Turnpike on the north, R -3 multi - family to the south, vacant C -3 on the west, and a stormwater pond on the east. The minimum front setback to Maguire Road is 50 feet. The closest unit is setback more than 90 feet from Maguire Road. The site will be accessed via a right in /out on Maguire Road, and an additional access on Tomyn Boulevard is provided. All entrances will be gated. A 25 foot landscape buffer provided along Maguire Road, and Tomyn Boulevard will consist of a Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting March 11, 2014 brick wall with landscaping. The overall development will include a clubhouse, fitness center, pool, and other recreation and open space amenities. The Preliminary/Final Subdivision Plan will consist of three lots. No stormwater ponds are proposed as there is an existing master stormwater facility. The final development of all three lots is scheduled to be under the maximum impervious allotted to the overall property, so no issues are expected with the water management district. The subdivision has received school capacity and concurrency approval and the applicant has already pre- paid some of the school impact fees ($94,880). This payment reserves the development's capacity. Several off -site improvements will be constructed or mitigated through payments based on the proposed development and previous development agreement commitments. The first improvement is a right turn lane northbound on Maguire Road to eastbound on Old Winter Garden Road. The applicant will either construct the improvement or pay the City $400,000 to construct the improvement. The second improvement is a mitigation payment of $20,000 toward landscaping the medians on Maguire Road. The third improvement is a 50 -foot extension of the left turn lane from Maguire Road on to Tomyn Boulevard. The last improvement is the construction of a right turn lane on Tomyn Boulevard to northbound on Maguire Road; however, this improvement is proposed to be removed. Upon review of the final subdivision plan, the City's Engineer and Public Works Director found conflict associated with widening the road to accommodate the turn lane. There is a mast arm and two storm inlets in that location that cannot be moved due to settling issues in the area. The applicant was instructed to conduct an updated traffic analysis to see if the turn lane was warranted. The updated traffic count concluded that the right turn lane is not warranted. At the time the original project, Lake Butler Professional Campus, was approved, staff was not interested in revising all the conditions. The only concurrency issue at the time was dealing with traffic flow on State Road 50; however, that was mitigated through the improvement of the right turn lane northbound on Maguire Road to eastbound on Old Winter Garden Road. Staff is agreeable to removing the requirement for the right turn lane on Tomyn Boulevard to northbound on Maguire Road. The next step of the project is to present the Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plan, and the Preliminary and Final Site Plan to the City Commission for approval. Discussion Member de la Portilla inquired which high school the development will be zoned for. Mr. Rumer answered, "West Orange ". 2 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting March 11, 2014 Member Marcotte inquired the distance of the right turn lane onto Old Winter Garden Road. Mr. Rumer explained that the lane is the maximum size that will fit in order to be considered safe, however, he did not have the exact distance of the turn lane. Vice - Chairman McKey inquired if the waiver is to reduce the setback between the buildings was from 15 feet to 5 feet, and if the waiver was approved by the fire department. Mr. Rumer stated that all waivers were approved under the original PD and there are no new waivers requested. He confirmed that the fire department did approve the waiver. Vice - Chairman McKey inquired if garages are included in the development. Mr. Rumer confirmed that they are. Member Dunn inquired if the right turn lane on Tomyn Boulevard to northbound on Maguire Road is removed from consideration, if needed in the future, how will that be addressed. Mr. Rumer responded that the updated study provided for the maximum development and assumes all traveled trips; the study concluded that there is not a need for that lane. Member Sills asked if traffic volume is dictated by the type of commercial businesses in the development. Mr. Rumer stated the analysis was conducted based on the two highest commercial uses, a restaurant and daycare. The public hearing was opened. Kelly Morphy, Safe Streets West Orange, Inc., attended the meeting to speak on behalf of the coalition. She spoke of the benefits of mixed -use developments, and offered suggestions and site plan changes that would benefit the community. • Create a strong pedestrian connectivity throughout the entire area • Reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians by making the ingress /egress as tight and narrow as possible (12 -14 feet). • Internal pedestrian connectivity should be maximized to get from point A to point B • Add additional pedestrian gates • Provide sidewalks that are at least 6 feet wide • Install pedestrian gates without the need for physical manipulation Ms. Morphy expressed her concern regarding the crosswalk from the southeast side of the development towards the residential area as there is no pedestrian signal for the school children to use. To mitigate, she suggested the installation of an elliptical shaped, single- lane roundabout that would connect the ingress /egress of the proposed development to the existing residential development. If the roundabout is not an option, she suggested to either extend the median so that the crosswalk goes through the median, or to install a pedestrian signal. 3 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting March 11, 2014 The public hearing was closed. Vice - Chairman McKey asked the developer and City Staff to address Ms. Morphy's suggestions and concerns. Mark Stelli, engineer for the Park Place development, addressed the internal connectivity concern by saying that sidewalks were placed internal to the subdivision to keep pedestrians away from traffic, and therefore safe. The width of the driveway on Maguire Road is 17 feet; this allows emergency vehicles to get through even if there is a vehicle obstructing the driveway. Additionally, the width of the driveway is the minimum width requirement set by the fire department. The width of the ingresses /egresses is 25 feet; this is the minimum requirement by City code and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). Regarding the crosswalk on Tomyn Boulevard, he opined that extending the median will not work because of the minimum traffic radius for the outbound turning movement from the Wesmere development. Adding a traffic signal will cause potential stacking issues. He suggested to direct children to cross at Tomyn Boulevard and Maguire Road intersection where there is a pedestrian signal. Mr. Stelli addressed the waiver for the reduction in the setback by explaining that the setback reduction is in front of the buildings. There still is a separation between the buildings that allows access. Board discussion ensued regarding the access points into the development and pedestrian crossings. Vice - Chairman McKey inquired about the crosswalk on the southeast corner of the development. Mr. Rumer explained that the students would most likely use the gate to the back of the development, and then cross on Maguire Road. Permission has been granted to allow the students to enter through a rear gate of the school. Vice - Chairman McKey suggested adding a raised table at the crosswalk to slow down traffic. Member Marcotte inquired if the crosswalk shown on the site plan is currently non- existent. Mr. Rumer confirmed, and explained that the developer will provide a sidewalk. Member Marcotte inquired regarding the restriction on the north side of Tomyn Boulevard. Mr. Rumer explained that there is an existing stormwater pond, therefore, there is not enough room to provide a sidewalk. Board discussion ensued regarding the physical limitations of that area. Chairman Campbell inquired if the City owns the stormwater pond. Mr. Rumer answered that it is a private pond. Member West, seconded by Member Sills, moved that the Plannin_g and Zonin_g Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, recommend to the Ocoee City Commission approval of the Preliminary /Final Large Scale Site Plan and Preliminary /Final Subdivision Plan for Park Place at Maguire located in the Park Place PUD (Project No. LS- 2013 -004). Motion carried unanimously. 4 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting March 11, 2014 MISCELLANEOUS Attorney Review Of The Sunshine Law For Board Members Assistant City Attorney Drage provided the Planning and Zoning Commission with a review of the Florida Sunshine Law, ex parte communications, and voting conflicts. (Exhibit A) Discussion Member West inquired if members of the Planning and Zoning Commission can communicate with members of the City Commission regarding upcoming projects. Ms. Drage explained that if the Planning and Zoning Commission voted on the project, and the City Commission will vote on the project, then discussion should not ensue. She further explained that projects will come before each commission for the different phases of development. She continued by saying that such a discussion is not subject to the Sunshine Law as the members serve on two different commissions; however, it is subject to the ex parte communication laws. Vice - Chairman McKey inquired which "parties" are included in ex parte communications. Ms. Drage responded that a "party" is anyone that has an interest in the project; therefore, anyone that lives within the City of Ocoee. She continued by saying that communication regarding a project prior to the hearing should be disclosed on the record at the hearing. This allows the developer the opportunity to address the concerns. She continued by saying that discussions and conversations should be disclosed; however, it does pertain to general comments or opinions made in the member's presence. Member Marcotte inquired if ex parte communications can be disclosed in summary, or must all persons involved in the discussion be named. Ms. Drage responded that a disclosure in summary form is acceptable. The cure to ex parte communication is to base one's vote upon consideration of all the information provided at the hearing. Chairman Campbell thanked Ms. Drage for the informative review. Project Status Report Mr. Rumer informed the board that there are no upcoming projects to warrant a Planning and Zoning Commission meeting in April. Vice - Chairman McKey inquired regarding the status of the Colony Plaza area. Mr. Rumer explained that air -right issues remain; however, he has seen documentation to dissolve the condominium. He continued by stating that recent legislation should help facilitate the dissolution. Board discussion ensued regarding the proposed plans for the area. 5 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting March 11, 2014 Member Marcotte inquired if a meeting or workshop could be scheduled with the board members to learn their way of thinking. Mr. Rumer informed the board that there will be Comprehensive Plan Amendments that will allow for creativity for community design. This offers the opportunity to listen to and express different thoughts on development. He also invited the Planning and Zoning Commission members to the Strategic Plan Meeting on April 12, 2014. Member de la Portilla stated that Orange County Public Schools (OCPS) recently rejected two Capacity Enhancement Agreements (CEA) for students at West Orange High School. He inquired if there are pending projects that potentially could be impacted if the relief site issue is prolonged. Mr. Rumer stated that the development of the additional 60 units at Casa Mirella at Belmere PD is on hold because of this issue. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:18 p.m. ATTEST: iana Turner, Recording Clerk APP VED: i Bradley Campbell, Chairman r� Exhibit A The Sunshine Law, Ex Parte Communications, and Voting Conflicts Review Nil 1001 1111111111MIf M-ir NEW A-IMM What is the Sunshine Law? Florida Statutes Section 286.011 (1) provides that: "All meetings of any board or commission of any state agency or authority or of any agency or authority of any county, municipal corporation, or political subdivision, except as otherwise provided in the Constitution, at which official acts are to be taken are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times, and no resolution, rule, or formal action shall be considered binding except as taken or made at such meeting." What constitutes a "board or commission"? A. All governing bodies and decision making committees. B. Advisory boards that are more than mere fact-finders. A public body cannot escape the application of the Sunsine Law by delegating a job to an "alter ego". Advisory boards with "decision-making" functions (i.e. screening applicants for an appointed position) are subject to the Sunshine Law. The courts focus on the nature of the act performed in determining whether a board is decision-making or merely fact-finding. What constitutes a "meeting"? C. An occasion where two or more members of the same board are present (includes presence physically, by telephone, by e-mail, by text, or even when conferring by written documents, including documents transmitted by FAX), and D. Discussion ensues on a matter on which "foreseeable action" will be taken (encompasses entire decision-making process, including briefings, workshops, seminars, etc.). E. Board members may not use e-mail or telephone to conduct a private discussion about board business. Board members may send a "one-way" communication to each other as long as the communication is kept as a public record and there is no response to the communication except at an open public meeting. Accordingly, any "one-way" communications (for example, one board member wants to forward an article to the board members for information) should be distributed by the Board Clerk so that they can be preserved as public records and ensure that any response to the communication is made only at a public meeting. F. While a board member is not prohibited from discussing board business with staff or a non-board member, these individuals cannot be used as a liaison to communicate information between board members. For example, a board member cannot ask staff to poll the other board members to determine their views on a board issue. What are the requirements for a public meeting? G. Location 1. No public meetings may be held at any facility that discriminates on the basis of sex, age, creed, color, origin, or economic status. 2. Accommodations to be made, upon written request received at least 43 hours in advance, for physically handicapped individuals. H. Notice 1. The Statute does not contain any particular notice requirements. 2. The courts have interpreted the intent of the statutes to require "reasonable notice". 3. Except in cases of emergency, special meetings should have at least 24 hours reasonable notice. 4. The notice must include the advice that if a person(s) decides to appeal any decision, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. 1. Minutes 1. Minutes be kept of each public meeting and that they be open to public inspection. 2. Meetings may be tape recorded or video taped, but minutes must still be kept in addition to the recordings. 1. All members present at a meeting vote on official actions or decisions unless they comply with the conflict of interest provisions of Chapter 112, Florida Statutes. 2. Roll call votes on all matters are not necessary. 3. Secret ballots are prohibited. What is the effect of a Sunshine Lave Violation? K. Sanctions 1. Criminal ® Knowing violation of the Sunshine law is a second degree misdemeanor, with penalties of up to $500 in fines and up to 60 days in jail or both. 2. Civil — Inadvertent violations are civil infractions with penalties not to exceed a $500 fine. L. Validity of actions taken in violation of the Sunshine Lave. 1. Actions which have been taken are void ab initio. 2. Members of the general public have standing to sue. 3. Initial action taken in violation of the Sunshine Law can be cured by an independent final action take in the Sunshine; in other words, start over but in the Sunshine. IM 0 What are ex parte communications? 0 Ex parte is a Latin term for "from one party" or "by one party". ® It's a legal term generally used when the trier of fact (examples: the Judge, City Commission, Code Enforcement Board, Violations Board) hears from only one side of a matter. What types of communications constitute ex parte communications? In practice, ex parte communications occur when one of the parties contacts or "lobbies" a member of a Board outside of the quasi-judicial hearing where the matter will be heard. It may be in the form of a letter or an e-mail. It may be a face-to-face meeting or a phone call. Ex parte communications violate due process requirements. The opposing party is not aware of the content of the communication and is unable to rebut it or present counterbalancing evidence. Ex parte communications are deemed prejudicial and are inherently improper. All information to be considered should be presented only at the hearing, out in the "Sunshine" where all parties can hear and see the information at the same time. What is your responsibility when it comes to ex parte communications? Seek to avoid them. "Avoid the appearance of evil." If you have engaged in an ex parte communication, disclose it. The party involved, the circumstances surrounding and the substance of the communication should be disclosed on the record at the hearing. Upon disclosure, the opposing party should have an opportunity to respond. What are the potential consequences? ® Decision may be overturned on a failure to afford due process basis. ® Willful violation of the Sunshine Law is a second degree misdemeanor (60 days in jail and a fine of up to $500). ® Removal from office. Noncriminal infraction ($500 fine). Attorney's fees. VOTING CONFLICTS What is a voting conflict? ® A voting conflict arises when the public official is called upon to vote on: Any measure which would inure to the public officer's special private gain or loss; which he or she knows would inure to the special private gain or loss of any principal by whom the officer is retained or to the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which the officer is retained; or which the officer knows would inure to the special private gain or loss of a relative or business associate of the public officer. a Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes Who are "public officers"? Any person elected or appointed to hold office in an agency, including persons serving on an advisory body. What constitutes "special private gain or loss"? Depends on the size of the class who stand to benefit. Bigger - less likely. Smaller ® more likely. Consideration is made as to whether the potential gain or loss is remote or speculative. Consideration is made as to whether the matter is procedural or a preliminary issue What constitutes a "principal by whom the officer is retained"? Yes: The employer of the officer. A client of the officer. The corporation on which the officer serves as a paid director. No: The officer's church. The officer's, landlord. The officer's homeowner's association. A non-profit corporation on which the officer serves as a non-paid director. A customer of an officer's retail store. Which relatives constitute "relatives" under the statute? The officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. What constitutes a "business associate"? Any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with a public officer as a partner, joint venturer, corporate shareholder where shares are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange, or a co- owner of property. What are the voting conflict duties of public officers? Elected officers: Abstain from voting on the measure. Before the vote, publicly state the nature of his or'her interest in the matter, Within 15 days file a memorandum of voting conflict (Commission Form 8B) with the clerk of the body. Elected officers may participate in the discussion of the matter. Appointed ®ificers: If an officer chooses not to participate, they roust abstain from voting, publicly state the nature of his or her interest in the matter and follow -up with the filing of the memorandum of voting conflict (Commission Form 8B) with the clerk of the body within 15 days. If an officer chooses to participate, they must still abstain but roust make the disclosure before they participate (as opposed to before the vote). The officer can file the memorandum of voting conflict before the meeting or after the meeting.