Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-09-2016 Minutes Mayor Commissioners Rusty Johnson John Grogan, District 1 Rosemary Wilsen, District 2 \ / City Manager Robert Frank Angel de la Portilla, District 3 Joel F. Keller, District 4 ocoee florida PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTING AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:10 pm A. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call and Determination of Quorum Present: Chairman McKey, Vice-Chairman Marcotte, Member Keethler, Member West, Member Sills, Member Dillard. Also present were City Planner Rumer, Principal Planner Fabre, Planner I Jones, Assistant City Attorney Crosby-Collier and Recording Clerk Heard. Absent: Member Briggs. II. CONSENT AGENDA 7:11 pm A. Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting held December 8, 2015. Motion for Approval of Minutes: Moved by Member Sills, Seconded by Member Dillard; Motion carried unanimously 6-0. 7:12 pm B. Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting held January 12, 2016. Motion for Approval of Minutes: Moved by Member Keethler, Seconded by Member Sills; Motion carried unanimously 6-0. 7:12 pm 1 ( Page } Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 9, 2016 C. Ocoee Landings Planned Unit Development (PUD) Principal Planner Fabre — Final Subdivision Plan Approval 7:13 pm Motion: Move that the Planning and Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, recommend to the Ocoee City Commission Approval of the Final Subdivision Plan for Ocoee Landings Planned Unit Development (PUD), subject to resolution of the remaining staff comments before the City Commission meeting; Moved by Vice-Chairman Marcotte, Seconded by Member Sills. Member Keethler inquired what type of housing will be built in this development. Principal Planner Fabre indicated 50 single-family residential lots. Vote: Motion carried unanimously 6-0 to approve the Final Subdivision Plan for Ocoee Landings Planned Unit Development (PUD), subject to resolution of the remaining staff comments before the City Commission meeting. III. OLD BUSINESS - None IV. NEW BUSINESS 7:14 pm A. Daniel/Ray Property Principal Planner Fabre -Annexation & Rezoning Principal Planner Fabre presented a summary of the Daniel/Ray Property at 11700 West Colonial Drive, which is located on the south side of State Road 50, within the City's CRA District and is currently vacant and undeveloped. The subject property is considered contiguous to the City of Ocoee since it is bordered by property located within the City limits on the northern, eastern and western adjacent boundaries. The applicant has requested a City of Ocoee zoning designation of C-3 (General Commercial), which is consistent with the zoning of the properties to the north, east and west. The C-3 zoning designation is consistent with the adopted Future Land Use designation of Commercial, as shown on the City of Ocoee & Orange County Joint Planning Area Future Land Use map. The proposed annexation of the +/- 6.95 acres parcel of land is a logical extension of the City limits, urban services can be provided, and the annexation meets state and local regulations. The land use and initial zoning are also consistent and compatible with surrounding properties. 2IPage Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 9, 2016 Discussion: 7:17 pm Vice-Chairman Marcotte inquired if the property to the northeast is wetland property, which is protected. Principal Planner Fabre answered that that is correct along with a small portion that is within this said property as well, which will need to be protected along with a 25 foot upland buffer. Vice-Chairman Marcotte mentioned the wetland property is not in good shape enough to conserve it. Principal Planner Fabre indicated such observations are made on a site-by-site basis, and he is awaiting the Environmental Report. Member Keethler asked if there would be traffic access off of State Road 50. Principal Planner Fabre answered the spacing criteria has not been met to warrant access onto and off of State Road 50; and further, explained direct access will be made via Westrun Road. Member Keethler further asked if the uneven land will be address, and Principal Planner Fabre explained that the engineers will address if fill dirt will need to be brought in or what will need to be done, if anything. Discussion ensued regarding the powerlines on the property. Chairman McKey inquired further about access to and from State Road 50. Principal Planner Fabre mentioned it is a divided highway where there will only be a right turn in and right turn out. Discussion ensued regarding traffic going onto and off of Westrun Road. 7:26 pm Motion: Move that the Planning and Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, recommend to the Ocoee City Commission Approval of the Annexation of the +1- 6.95 acres parcel of land known as the Daniel/Ray Property with an Initial Zoning Classification of "C-3" General Commercial; Moved by Member West, Seconded by Member Keethler. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. IV. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) 7:27 pm B. James Passilla - 531 Ocoee Apopka Road Planner I Jones -Annexation Planner I Jones presented a summary of the 531 Ocoee Apopka Road property, which is a small portion of 833 Pine Street and located on the rear eastern portion of the property. No land use change is proposed, and the applicant is requesting no development entitlements. The subject property is considered contiguous to the City of Ocoee since it is bordered by property located within the City limits on the north and south. The proposed annexation of the +1- 0.48 acres parcel of land is a logical extension of the City limits, urban services can be provided, and the annexation meets state and local regulations. 3 ( Page Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 9, 2016 Discussion: 7:29 pm Member West indicated that the ditch is very big and asked what the zoning is. Planner Jones explained that according to Orange County the zoning is agricultural. Member Keethler asked why the entire site is not annexed into the city, because it would benefit the city. Planner I Jones indicated staff has not reached out to that property owner. City Planner Rumer explained the annexation in more detail. 7:35 pm Motion: Move that the Planning and Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, Table the James Passilla Annexation due to further discussions with staff; Moved by Member Keethler. (Motion was deferred to open the public hearing.) The public hearing was opened. 7:36 pm James Passilla, applicant, detailed his property to the Board explaining that Orange County approved a prior application moving the property line; and further, Orange County requested the property be annexed into the City of Ocoee. The public hearing was closed. After discussion, Member Keethler withdrew the prior motion. Chairman McKey inquired about the significance of the ditch. City Planner Rumer emphasized that it is a significant ditch, one of 12 basins that drain into Lake Apopka. 7:43 pm Motion: Move that the Planning and Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, recommend to the Ocoee City Commission Approval of the Annexation of the +1- 0.48 acres parcel of land known as James Passilla Property; Moved by Member Dillard, Seconded by Vice-Chairman Marcotte. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. 4IPage } Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 9, 2016 IV. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) 7:44 pm C. Arbours at Crown Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) City Planner Rumer - Substantial Amendment to the PUD Land Use Plan (LUP) City Planner Rumer presented a summary of the Arbours at Crown Point Planned Unit Development (PUD), which is located on the north side of West Road and west of State Road 429. It is approximately 28.1 acres in size, and Parcel A is currently under site development for 240 multi-family dwelling units (Arbours Apartments). The subject property is located adjacent to the West Orange Trail on the east with a 73 foot power line easement located along the eastern property line. Pedestrian access to the West Orange Trail is being provided on the northern property line with a vehicular crossing located on the eastern property line. The proposed CSUSA Charter School is located on Parcel B of the Arbours at Crown Point PUD. Within the PUD, Parcel B was reserved for 97,000 square feet of commercial use. The subject site is vacant and contains 10.6 acres. The current zoning designation on the property is Planned Unit Development. The existing land use designation for the property is "Light Industrial." City Planner Rumer discussed the proposed CSUSA Charter School, which consists of a one building, two-story, 68,000 square feet, 1,145 student K-8th grade charter school. The campus will consist of a single school building with associated recreational field and tot lot. The recreation field will not be lighted. Access to the site will be provided via one (1) entrance located on West Road. The access will be a right-in/right-out. A secondary emergency access will be provided on Fountain West Boulevard. The proposed K-8 school use does not fail any concurrency standards. The traffic study indicates a need to establish a dedicated U-turn lane at the intersection of West Road and Ocoee Apopka Road. City Planner Rumer discussed three different traffic options, which Orange County will need to approve: 1) Creating a dedicated U-turn only lane from an already existing striped left-turn lane with a signal; 2) Extending an existing turn lane in the event of stacking; and 3) Providing an outlet for exiting on the road such as a blinking light or an alternative that Orange County will approve. { Discussion: 8:04 pm Vice-Chairman Marcotte inquired about several roads in the surrounding area and indicated U-turns are not a good idea and are dangerous. Chairman McKey inquired about the gate. City Planner Rumer indicated the gate is an emergency gate and is on school property, which will be connected to the drop-off loop. Member Keethler asked if a commercial entity was built on this site instead of a school, would they pay property tax. City Planner Rumer replied there are property taxes on commercial properties, but not on school properties. 5iPage { Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 9, 2016 Member Dillard asked for clarification on the number of total trips at the peak hours. City Planner Rumer explained the apartments and the school will be generating less than 5,000 trips total. Member Keethler inquired who provided the traffic study. City Planner Rumer explained the applicant provides the traffic study, and the City's traffic consultant reviews it. Chairman McKey discussed the school's amenities, which includes a tot lot and recreational field. The public hearing was opened. 8:15 pm Chip Cordes, Summit Construction Group, applicant, addressed the Board about their proposed CSUSA Charter School. He presented the school's proposed site, building plans, Traffic Impact Analysis. James Taylor, Leftwich Consulting Engineers, Inc., explained the Traffic Impact Analysis report, which was completed on December 23, 2015. Summit Construction Group hired Leftwich Consulting Engineers, Inc., to perform the traffic study and complete the Traffic Impact Analysis report. The following areas of the study are within the report; existing conditions, trip generations, project trip distribution and assignment, future year analysis and queuing analysis. Mr. Taylor discussed the following conclusions: • The facilities within the study area will operate within an adopted level of service standards after build-out and mitigation. • The site plan showed ample on-site storage to accommodate peak hours without spillover onto West Road. Member Keethler inquired about surrounding growth and development around the area and feels the one to two percent increase in traffic may not capture the entire growth rate. City Planner Rumer explained the Ocoee Pines and Arden Park developments are already preprogrammed in the report. Vice-Chairman Marcotte asked the number of schools that currently use U-turns to get on and off of a school site. Mr. Taylor answered that every school site is different, but indicated that this particular study showed no stacking will occur. Member Keethler inquired whether the high school traffic was factored in the study. Mr. Taylor answered that it was, because they went out to the site and counted a solid two-hour window, 7:00 am to 9:00 am. 6IPage Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 9, 2016 Member Sills questioned the traffic wanting to get back on the 429 after drop-off in the morning, and whether the U-turn will be sufficient enough with the new growth in the surrounding area. Mr. Taylor indicated because the westbound traffic is very light, it will not cause any problems; and further, he discussed the traffic movement with the apartments. Chairman McKey asked if a U-turn can be made presently at the Fountains median and whether that would remain the same. City Planner Rumer answered in the affirmative; and further, stated if the extension of the turn lane is passed by the County, the recommendation would be to put a "No U-turn" sign at the Fountains median. He further explained the PUD processes with the current review and future amendments. Chip Cordes, applicant, indicated that safety is a big concern to them; and if there is a traffic issue, they will place off-duty police officers on site. Allison Turnbull, Attorney with Holland & Knight, clarified for the Board that this substantial amendment brought before them is solely for the use of the property; and further, stated the final site plan with final traffic and engineering studies will be brought back before them. The following spoke in opposition: 8:57 pm Aly Verdasco Joseph Kopelovich Tim Alcuri } Carol McGowin Michelle Greco The public hearing was closed. Discussion: 9:23 pm Chairman McKey opined that he did not believe he had, nor did the members of the Board have, the research, understanding and knowledge to justify or not justify the quality of education in charter schools and further stated it is not the Board's purview. He further stated that the concerns of the Board are land development codes, traffic requirements and similar concerns. Member Keethler disagreed and stated he thinks it could be a factor, but whether the Board has sufficient knowledge is a separate question; and further, he stated whether or not charter schools are a good thing will not be solved here. Allison Turnbull, Attorney with Holland & Knight, advised the Board the 10.8 acres commercially-zoned PD has already been approved along with the charter school and their contract by Orange County Public Schools; and further, explained the charter school is a much less intensive use than what is deemed allowed. She further explained that if this charter is approved, it does not prohibit Orange County Public Schools from building another school nearby. 7IPage Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 9, 2016 Chip Cordes, applicant, further explained the differences between public schools and charter schools. Member Dillard stated his biggest concern is to do the right thing for this particular land use; and further, he states he would like to see more solid information on various aspects of this plan like the traffic plan. He feels a "yes" or "no" vote at this time is not appropriate and more information needs to come forth. Member West pointed out to the Board that the Applicant is on a time schedule to open the school in August. He advised the Board of the Town Hall meeting the night before where there were more residents in favor of the charter school than not. Chairman McKey reminded the Board that they are only a recommending board to the City Commission; and further, stated that the City Commission has the final say. He reminded the Board they are able to add conditions to their motion. Member Keethler addressed the Board indicating that he has studied this plan quite a bit, attended the Town Hall and conversed with City staff at length about the matter and has come to the conclusion to vote against recommending approval for the following reasons: First, removal of the property from the tax base when property nearby has already been zoned and removed from the tax base for an elementary school by Orange County Public Schools. Second, he explained that after examining the traffic study in detail he found the methodology questionable and that the study lacked credibility, because it suggests that 338 U-turns in the span of 30 minutes at the Ocoee Apopka Road/West Road intersection will not completely disrupt traffic; and the traffic study video is deceiving, because it does not reflect real time. Third, he informed the Board the added capacity of a charter school will have to be taken into account by Orange County Public Schools in the decision on whether and when to build the nearby elementary school. Fourth, he mentioned should the charter school fail, the building is unusable as a school by the Orange County Public Schools. Additionally, there would be limitations on the development of businesses that can move into the nearby business plaza due to legal restrictions on distances from schools. He concluded by observing that notwithstanding their presentation, the proponents of the charter school are not motivated by an altruistic desire to help Ocoee. They are pursuing this for one reason only: to make money. Member West agreed that they are doing this to make money. He further read a letter from the Arbours Apartments, who are in support of this substantial amendment and the charter school. 8IPage Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 9, 2016 Vice-Chairman Marcotte expressed his concerns regarding the tax revenue and the traffic patterns and U-turns; and further, stated he supports the plan, but wants to look at the site plans again. Chairman McKey, once again, expressed that the Board is only voting to recommend this to the City Commission. He indicated he likes the charter school, but personally feels it is in the wrong location. 9:45 pm Motion: Move that the Planning and Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, recommend to the Ocoee City Commission Against Approval of a Substantial Amendment to the Arbours at Crown Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the PUD Land Use Plan for Charter School USA (CSUSA); Moved by Member Keethler, None seconded; Motion died for lack of second. Member West Abstained. 9:46 pm Motion: Move that the Planning and Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, recommend to the Ocoee City Commission Approval of a Substantial Amendment to the Arbours at Crown Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the PUD Land Use Plan for Charter School USA (CSUSA) with the, condition that a third traffic study be performed by a different agency; Moved by Member Dillard. (Discussion ensued by the Board.) 9:56 pm After Board discussion, None seconded; Motion died for lack of second. Member West Abstained. 9:57 pm Motion: Move that the Planning and Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, recommend to the Ocoee City Commission Approval of a Substantial Amendment to the Arbours at Crown Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the PUD Land Use Plan for Charter School USA (CSUSA) with the condition that the Board and City Staff review the traffic movement with the Final Site Plan; Moved by Vice-Chairman Marcotte, None seconded; Motion died for lack of second. Member West Abstained. 9IPage Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 9, 2016 9:58 pm Motion: Move that the Planning and Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, submit no recommendation to the Ocoee City Commission regarding the Substantial Amendment to the Arbours at Crown Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the PUD Land Use Plan for Charter School USA (CSUSA); further, advises the City Commission that the Planning and Zoning Commission have great concerns with the traffic study, traffic plans and traffic movements; Moved by Member Keethler, Seconded by Member Dillard; Motion passed 4-1; Abstain 1. Yes: Chairman McKey, Members Keethler, Dillard, Sills. No: Vice-Chairman Marcotte. Abstain: Member West. V. MISCELLANEOUS A. 429 Master Plan Discussion (Tabled until next meeting) B. Project Status Report 10:01 pm City Planner Rumer announced to the Board that they are being invited to the kickoff meeting for the downtown study. C. February Calendar VI. ADJOURNMENT 10:01 pm ATTEST: APPROVED: Kat y He./d, Recording C erk Rob McKey, Chairman( 10IPage FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST NAME— IRST N�^E—MIIDDD}E NAME NAME OF BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY,OR COMMITTEE di —1�'1 • o f�/k5 fl( / i-6 0 PiAlliA1 IA -¢ z o ry 14✓g t3 QA-f-cf MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON ga, (3c1)( /7)07.g WHICHISERVEISAUNITOF: CITY COUNTY CITY ❑COUNTY ❑OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 0c e 0 I�I' l"��� a r NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCC RRED q MY POSITION IS: Aal a ( G 0 ELECTIVE Ar APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board,council, commission, authority,or committee. It applies to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which would inure to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also MUST ABSTAIN from knowingly voting on a measure which would inure to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent, subsidiary,or sibling organization of a principal by which he or she is retained);to the special private gain or loss of a relative;or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies(CRAs)under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law.A"business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner,joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder(where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). • * * * * * * ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above,you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting,who should incorporate the form in the minutes. * * * * * * . * * * * * * * * * APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you are not prohibited by Section 112.3143 from otherwise participating in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: • You must complete and file this form(before making any attempt to influence the decision)with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting,who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on page 2) CE FORM 8B-EFF.11/2013 PAGE 1 Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C. APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) • A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. • You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting,who must incorporate the form in the minutes.A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency,and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. �-� I►.t DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST_ I, 11i. Wer f It /4-6 iv e !� , hereby disclose that on Fe—b q ,20 l : (a)A measure came or will come before my agency which(check one or more) V- inured to my special private gain or loss; inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, • inured to the special gain or loss of , by whom I am retained;or inured to the special gain or loss of ,which is the parent subsidiary,or sibling organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b)The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: y 614)4) +Lte ���.a�,�E-`f y hf.vf GoAm''dc -�cJ If disclosure•of specific information would violate confidentiality or privilege pursuant to law or rules governing attorneys, a public officer, who is also an attorney, may comply with the disclosure requirements of this section by disclosing the nature of the interest in such a way as to provide the public with notice of the conflict. 60191/ / -74tIA Date Filed Signature NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR_MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED$10,000. CE FORM 86-EFF.11/2013 PAGE 2 Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C.