P & Z - 02/27/2002 THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING HELD WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2002
AS LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Bond called the meeting to order at 7:14 p.m. Following a moment of silent
meditation and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, a quorum was declared present.
PRESENT: Chairman Bond, Members Golden, Matthys, McKey, Miller (left the
meeting at 8:47 p.m.), Riffe (formerly Patterson), and West. Also present
were EAR Committee Members Ruth Grafton, Joel Keller, Martha Lopez -
Anderson, and John Robinson. Also present were Planning Director
Wagner, Senior Planner McGinnis, Principal Transportation Planner Foltz,
Chief Assistant City Attorney Cookson, and Deputy City Clerk Green.
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Landefeld and Member Rhodus.
EAR Committee Members Ms. Jimmie Hargrove, John Linebarier, John
Lomberk, and John Pryor.
CONSENT AGENDA
The consent agenda consisted of approval of Item A:
A. Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting held on
Tuesday, December 11, 2001.
M•ms•r • - en,-. I M•m,•rMcK• mov-s s . -.t h- on -ntA.-n,. a
presented. Motion carried 7 -0.
Responding to a question by Member McKey about the Prairie Lake project, Planning
Director Wagner said City Commission approved the project subject to conditions, one
of which was the developer will provide a limited number of recreational facilities in the
new City park. He said they were ultimately able to design the project without using the
existing park or the new park for any of their stormwater management.
NEW BUSINESS
OCOEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSMITTAL PUBLIC HEARING
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) BASED AMENDMENTS
(AS LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY)
Planning Director Wagner said it has been ten years since the City updated the
Comprehensive Plan and the document under consideration was the result of a year's
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
work. He said it is a work in process and they are looking for input from the Board and
the City Commission prior to transmittal to the State. The State will have 90 to 120 days
to review the document. It can be changed and modified until it is actually adopted. The
City Commission public hearing will be March 19, and up to that time, Staff can place
anything on the record that members want. He said Staff will explain it and give insight
into what they did. In general, they tried not to change most of the document. It is an
update. There are new facts and figures and population projections, but they have
proposed very few new policies. The old plan had structural problems, conflicts and
inconsistencies. The basic components of the Comprehensive Plan have served the City
fairly well. The very detailed Land Development Code (LDC) is what Staff primarily
relies on. As soon as the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) has been sent to the
State, the focus will shift to revising the LDC. Mr. Wagner said everything members
see and hear will be elaborated on in the LDC, which will also come before the them. He
said each element will be presented by the Staff member who has primarily worked on it,
and then that portion will be opened for discussion.
Future Land Use Element (FLUE)
Senior Planner McGinnis highlighted the changes for this Element. She explained the
changes in population projections since 1990. She said by 2020 we anticipate having
78,000 people in the Joint Planning Area (JPA). The City is currently about 13.4 square
miles and the JPA is about 19 square miles. By 2020, employment projections of almost
32,000 are expected within the JPA. She said the population projection was based on the
new census data. The persons per household for multi - family changed from 1.72 per unit
and the census data showed an increase to 2.96. Single family changed from 3.03 to 3.0
persons per household.
Ms. McGinnis said working with GIS enabled them to have "Smart Maps" which show
all the developable land within the JPA. She explained how this enabled them to provide
a more accurate projection which forms the foundation for the rest of the Plan.
Planning Director Wagner pointed out that Ocoee is becoming the employment center
of this area because of the land uses in the SR 50 corridor and the transportation system
here. He said, over time, Ocoee will benefit economically.
Member McKey asked if there had been a significant change other than statistics. Ms.
McGinnis said updating the methodology is the biggest change. Staff was striving to
ensure that none of the policies conflict with other elements. Mr. Wagner said Ocoee
has a land use driven projection of population and employment, and that is the
methodology to which Ms. McGinnis refers.
2
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
Ms. McGinnis directed attention to Land Use Map Amendments in Section 12. She said
the changes are proposed because of the four amendments to the JPA and to correct
scrivener's errors.
Chairman Bond had concerns about some of the proposed changes.
• CPA 2002 -1 -D (North of SR 50, west of Maguire Road, east of Marshall Farms
Road) Commercial to Industrial
Chairman Bond noted that Janet Rohe of Sunspot Realties, owner of the old WGTO
building, had called from out of state and asked to go on record that she is opposed to this
proposed change from Commercial to Industrial. Ms. McGinnis explained this change
was to implement changes adopted with the Third Amendment to the Ocoee - Orange
County JPA Agreement.
Mr. Wagner pointed out that, while most of the proposed changes were reflections of
previous actions, some were new, and he encouraged members to look closely at those
(i.e. the Coca -Cola Property).
• CPA 2002 -1 -A (North of Franklin, west of Taylor Street) Residential to Commercial
Chairman Bond said there had been no rezoning on that property. Mr. Wagner said the
owner is planning to ask for rezoning for that area and they cannot rezone it until they
have the underlying commercial land use. He said Staff felt it would be a logical change
for the area. He said Planning and Zoning Commission can choose to recommend the
land use change or not, as Staff is attempting to respond to the owner's request. Ms.
McGinnis said some of the properties here were zoned commercial (back in 1982) but
still have an underlying land use of Low Density Residential.
Chairman Bond said she agrees with what the owners are trying to do, but she would
prefer professional office use for the area. She supported PS rather than commercial
zoning as a more logical land use. She said, if it is incorporated in the Downtown
Redevelopment Area, parking restrictions could be eased.
Mr. Wagner said in that element one of our policies is to encourage the assemblage of
smaller parcels into larger parcels for redevelopment. He said they did not respond to
just this owner but looked at the whole area, and it seemed to be a logical extension. He
said he did not disagree with her comments, but observed that commercial is the
predominant zoning in the area.
• CPA 2002 -1 -H (North of Palm Drive, west of Ocoee - Apopka Road) Low Density
Residential to Commercial
3
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
Mr. Wagner said this change was requested by a City Commissioner. He said this is
City owned property which adjoins another commercial area, and it was formerly a
sewage treatment pond. It was hoped that the City might sell that property to have funds
which might be used to help out in the trailer parks or to provide some lower cost
housing.
Chairman Bond commended Ms. McGinnis for an excellent job on this section and said
she had found it interesting.
Mr. Wagner distributed additional information which had been provided by Mr. Scott
Henderson, who was present, which related to some potential changes to the City's
wetland and 100 year flood plain policies. He also directed attention to the Errata Sheets
distributed in the meeting for the FLUE and the Conservation Element (CE). He said
they are items largely concerning changes to those kinds of policies. Other changes
include efforts toward consistency, clarification, naming things properly, titling things
properly, correcting grammatical errors, and also addressing mixed use and multi -use
developments within FLUE. Mr. Wagner said the trend is to encourage mixed and
multi -use developments because they limit trips. He said they have added some policies
so the LDC can be developed to encourage those kinds of projects in the City. He said
the Coca -Cola property is a good example of that.
Mr. Wagner said, in the past, Ocoee's Code has basically provided for no development
within 25' of the 100 year flood plan. In the LDC, development is defined as virtually
anything, i.e. "turning dirt" is defined as development. That has meant the 100 year flood
plain nor 25' upland from it could be touched. As to wetlands, the Code provides that if
it was unavoidable for a street crossing or if a tip of land was a wetland that ruined the
whole developability of a section of ground, modifying or moving (the wetland) would
be allowed if there was a three or four to one ratio of mitigation. He said that same basic
concept would be retained, but they are proposing to allow a little more flexibility. He
cited the example of the Avanti Subdivision. The concept is as long as it is wetlands at
the beginning and at the end of the development project, then wetlands have not been
destroyed. He said in these policies they have tried to better define that and give the
parameters under which that can happen. He said he does not think those proposals differ
greatly from what has been done in the last year or so.
The 100 year flood plain policies included here provide for a potential of a limited
incursion into the 100 year flood plain. Most communities are not as restrictive as Ocoee
is concerning 100 year flood plains. For instance, Orange County does allow stormwater
management ponds to be built within 100 year flood plains in conjunction with
"compensating storage." If a yard of dirt is placed in the flood plain, then a yard must be
removed elsewhere. He said many retention ponds in 100 year flood plains can be rather
4
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
unsightly and sometimes they do not work. He said it is common for that to happen, but
it has never happened Ocoee.
Mr. Wagner said what he proposes is some limited language that definitely allows low
impact, passive type of recreational facilities to be built in the 100 year flood plain. This
may be facilities such as pathways, open play areas, benches, exercise trails, boardwalks,
and docks. The low impact development is not defined, with the expectation that the
details will be addressed in the LDC. He said it may include stormwater ponds of some
type, or it may not. The community pulse has been to stay out of those areas, so he is
being cautious about what was included.
Mr. Wagner said the handout from Mr. Henderson which he had distributed was one he
had received a few weeks ago. He said Mr. Henderson has an additional handout that
deals more directly with the potential for stormwater management to be placed in the 100
year flood plain.
Mr. Wagner said he wanted members reactions to what Staff is proposing. He said not
providing for recreation in these areas has been a real problem. As will be noted when
Mr. Foltz presents the Transportation Element, there are many bikeways and pathways
we would like to place around some of the lakes and along the wetlands. If that kind of
policy is not adopted, theoretically, those kinds of facilities could never be built. He said
he believes the recreation facilities should be allowed for all the spin off benefits. It is
really the stormwater management that the Board would probably want to think about.
Member McKey asked if Staff was combining these two functions. Mr. Wagner said
staff is recommending that the recreational facilities could be built in the 100 year flood
plain. The further incursion would be if the stormwater management aspect were
allowed. Mr. McKey asked if he was addressing the question of the double use of these
retention ponds to be built in a manner that can be used for open fields, or perhaps
suitable for soccer fields. Mr. Wagner said the proposal from the developer of Prairie
Lakes had been just that, and he was grandfathered from the 80's. Mr. McKey asked if
this use would be required to be included in Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions of
a developed property. Mr. Wagner said it would either be directly in the LDC or there
could be room to negotiate it on individual developments.
Member Matthys had no comments at this time.
Member Golden said he thought it was a good idea to have limited low impact
recreational uses in these areas, but he does not want them to impact in a conservation
area. He said many times the flood plain is directly related to a conservation area, that it
is often the same line. He asked if Mr. Wagner planned to include a definition of what is
5
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
considered low impact recreation. Mr. Wagner said he had purposely kept it a little
vague to allow room to define it in the LDC. Member Golden agreed it was probably a
good idea to keep it somewhat vague if it will be further defined in the LDC. He does
not support stormwater ponds in flood plain areas, unless a project requests a special
waiver such as in the Avanti project. He thinks it should be considered on a case by case
basis. He said he does not want Ocoee to look like Orange County, and he would not
support the Orange County policy.
Member McKey asked Mr. Golden the reason for his views. Mr. Golden responded he
thought it would promote impacts in the conservation areas. He said the natural areas
support the flora and fauna in the City. He said stormwater ponds are really development
in these areas. They are not natural features, they are excavations, they have to be
mowed and maintained, and they are fairly sterile. He said if there are walkways and
bikeways through these areas, they need to appreciate the natural setting. Stormwater
ponds do not give that unless they are fairly elaborate such as with the Avanti project in
which they put a lot of effort into recreating a wetland.
Member Miller said she had no comments as she thought staff had done an excellent job
in this section.
Member West said he agreed with Mr. Wagner that this would provide additional
recreational land for the City and it does impact conservation in some areas but not in
others. He said he thinks this is a good idea, and that we need the flexibility to deal with
each property on an individual basis within certain guidelines.
The public hearing was opened.
Scott Henderson, with Henderson Planning Group, 112 South Lake Avenue, Orlando,
spoke in regard to the Conservation Element - Goals, Objectives, and Policies. He
directed attention to Policy 3.3 on page 34 of the Errata Sheets for the Element
concerning low- impact and passive recreation areas. He also referred to his item
distributed earlier in the meeting. He explained their need to understand what is
acceptable to the City and what is not. He said he has done a fair amount of research and
talked to a number of other communities that have some very restrictive uses within the
100 year flood plain area. He said he wants to make it clear that he is not proposing that
there be permission to place stormwater retention ponds in the 100 year flood plain. He
said they have been attempting to identify specifically a list of items that would be
permitted and set some specific criteria. He said one of the things Mr. Golden is
concerned about is conservation areas. One of the ways that they looked at restricting
that was dealing with placing these facilities upland of the 25 year flood hazard area. In
general terms, that would be outside of the wetland area. So that helps restrict how far
6
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
down that slope you could do any grading or work to create a ballfield. But in order to be
able to create a ball field you would have to terrace that area out. He said their project is
located around Lake Sims, north of Clarcona -Ocoee Road in the Trout Lake area. He
said they have a massive 100 year flood plain area that is just a prairie at this point. The
lake, although shown on the map as being fairly large, is now probably only 5% to 10%
of the area originally designated as a lake. They are not proposing to develop within the
lake area. They want to create a path system around the lake, place benches, ball fields,
shelters, gazebo, a dock out into the lake, picnic tables, lighting. These are not
necessarily low impact, so it is important to define what those are. He said they have put
together a very extensive and detailed list about what would be acceptable.
In addition, Mr. Henderson said they are proposing tree planting, landscaping, and a
community garden. He said they wish to re- contour a portion of the flood plain area
which has been devastated by a four -wheel drive group who uses it on the weekends. He
said recontouring of the land, including soil export, would increase flood storage capacity
and enhance the public use and appearance of the area. He said that they are not
proposing to encroach within the 100 year flood plain for any development.
Member West asked Mr. Henderson about the elevation of the lake. Mr. Henderson
said there is a significant portion of the lake that is within the 100 year flood plain, but
portion of the land from the 100 year flood line down to the normal high water line is a
massive area. They want to put the trail around the outside where the lake would have
been before. He said the lake is definitely groundwater fed, so it fluctuates with the
groundwater. He said they are clearly intending to make certain they are not decreasing
the flood storage capacity.
Member Golden said he appreciates the work that Mr. Henderson had put in to help us
define what passive uses may be in the later LDC. He asked why these changes need to
be made in the Comprehensive Plan when they could deal with his project with waivers.
Mr. Henderson said he has been dealing with this property for three years, and he
cannot come forward with his plans now being prepared unless the uses are addressed in
the Comprehensive Plan. He said if he has to wait for the LDC, he is dead, he cannot do
anything at all in that 100 year flood zone.
Chairman Bond asked Mr. Wagner how he felt about that. Mr. Wagner said if the
group would like to try to define, at least in general terms, what they think would be
suitable for recreational facilities, if this list that has been provided, if all those things are
things that members think are along the lines of what they think low impact and/or
passive types of recreation are, then they could endorse that and Staff could carry that
forward to the City Commission and let them finalize that. He said he has no problems
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
with the items on the list received from Mr. Henderson on 1- 29 -02. He said it is really up
to the Board. He thinks the best thing the Board could do is indicate this is along the
lines of what they think, and maybe leave it at that. He thinks what Mr. Henderson is
looking for is some flexibility that within four or five months, if he knew the City
Commission was going to adopt it and go in that direction, he could design his project
that way. By the time his project actually was approved, the CPA, theoretically, would
also have been adopted by the City.
Chairman Bond asked about the maintenance of ball fields. Mr. Henderson said their
intent would be sandlot type fields, with clay for pitchers mounds and in field and base
lines, but not formal fields with dugouts as would be required for Little League style
fields.
Member Golden asked if the policy proposed by Staff would give Mr. Henderson
enough flexibility so that he could go forward. Mr. Henderson said no, because he
could not define it. He said if Staff and the Board would endorse this list, then he will be
able to come forward with his plan and know that we are all on the same page, then he is
more than happy. He said he does not want to be in violation of regulations that he
cannot define.
Member McKey said he would like to strike the word baseball and define it as "sand
lot" or something different from Little League. He wanted to be sure the list would not
allow too much or too little latitude. He said he would like to see the land utilized, but
they need to be good stewards.
Mr. Wagner said this is not an incursion into any wetland areas. He said these would be
the areas above the wetland between the wetland line and the 100 year line. Sometimes
the lakes and the wetlands are pretty close. In other areas there can be a long distance
between the wetland area and the 100 year and those might be the areas in which to place
some of these open fields. Where it is close to the wetland, probably only a path or a
boardwalk would be appropriate.
Mr. Wagner said the Board could show an intent and defer debate about the specifics to
the City Commission. Staff can look at it more closely and work on it before that
meeting. He said if members feel that these are largely along the lines of what you would
permit, then Staff can move ahead with it to the City Commission. Mr. Wagner said the
Board can vote on all changes with one motion at the end of the discussion of the land
use section. Mr. Henderson said he would be happy to work with Mr. Wagner between
now and the time of the Commission meeting to come up with words that would make
this Board happy.
8
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
Mr. Henderson then distributed his Stormwater Management Criteria definition. He
said this is something Mr. Shira can accept as part of the Comprehensive Plan. He
stressed again that they are not proposing any stormwater retention ponds inside the 100
year flood area. He said one of the things they have a significant problem with is a lack
of water going in to this lake. He said the City criteria require 100 year stormwater
ponds to hold all the water outside the lake 100 year flood area. The water would be
percolated into the ground and then eventually down to the lake. He said the WMD
recognizes desperate problems with certain types of lakes. It is a significant problem in a
ground water fed lake such as Lake Sims. He said the WMD regulations require a certain
amount of stormwater pond outside the 100 year flood that deals with pollution
abatement and then the water can be discharged into the lake.
Mr. Henderson then reviewed the Stormwater Management Criteria which he is
suggesting and had distributed. The criteria are as follows:
"When a development plan encompasses a land locked lake or drainage basin which is
wholly owned or a comprehensive drainage basin plan is presented on behalf of 100% of
the land ownership of the 100 year flood hazard area, a master storm water management
plan shall be permitted subject to compliance with the WMD criteria.
The City criteria shall include (but shall not supersede any WMD rules):
1. Storm attenuation may be accomplished within the lake or the 100 year flood hazard
area.
2. Storm water pollution abatement ponds must be located above the 100 year flood
elevation.
3. Storm water discharge facilities from the pollution abatement ponds may be located
within the 100 year flood hazard area for discharge into the lake.
4. Establishment of the new 100 year flood hazard area elevation shall be above the
current 100 year flood elevation and subject to FEMA approval."
Mr. Henderson said it is his understanding that this is exactly what Mr. Shira has been
telling them is acceptable to him.
Chairman Bond said she personally is not in favor of using lakes as stormwater
retention even when the runoff has been cleaned. She would rather see retention ponds
hold the runoff.
Mr. Henderson said the problem they are having is that under the City's criteria, holding
the water uphill depletes the natural water that would go into the lake.
9
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
Mr. Henderson said what he is proposing is totally in compliance with the WMD
criteria. It is far more restrictive than what they could do in almost every community in
the central Florida.
RECESS: 8:30 P.M. - 8:40 P.M.
Members agreed to move Election of Officers under OTHER BUSINESS to this point in
the meeting.
Clerk's Note: Officers are normally elected in January each year, but the Board did not
meet in January 2002.
OTHER BUSINESS
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Member Matthys nominated Pat Bond as Chairman and James Golden as Vice
Chairman. Member McKey nominated Pat Bond as Chairman and Lou Landefeld as
Vice Chairman. There were no other nominations.
Chairman Bond was re- elected as Chairman (7 -0) and James Golden was elected Vice
Chairman (6 -1, with Member McKey voting No.)
NEW BUSINESS (resumed)
Discussion of Stormwater Management Criteria resumed.
Member McKey said the difference between retention and detention ponds needs to be
clarified for the Board at a later time.
Mr. Wagner said that in this case Mr. Henderson wanted to use the lake bottom itself as
storage as if it were a retention pond. Conversely, typically 100% of the water would be
held above the natural lake in a situation as Mr. Henderson has explained. The ponds
above this water body would be huge, because they would have to capture all of that. He
said the argument was that not only would a lot of land be used, but none of that water
would get down to the lake. He said this is a fairly complex engineering issue. He
suggested that the Board consider making some kind of general policy statement that
gives some flexibility throughout the City, so the Commission has the ability to look at
different approaches.
10
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
Member McKey said we definitely do not want our lakes to be polluted by rain or
storms, so we need to come up with some minimum requirement that would satisfy that,
and whatever that technical requirement amounts to being is what our minimum standard
would be.
Member Miller left the meeting at 8:47 p.m.
Member Riffe suggested a possible change to line 4 of the first paragraph of the Criteria
in Mr. Henderson's handout to "shall authorize the Commission to waive the
requirements."
Member McKey suggested that the provision be on a case by case situation.
Mr. Wagner said the Board could take what Mr. Henderson has provided and perhaps
add some language providing that it may be permitted at the discretion of the City
Commission, with controls, or the Board might offer a general policy that gives them
some flexibility in unique situations. Mr. Wagner said he thought Mr. Henderson's
problem is the City's lack of flexibility. If the Code is changed so that the Commission
has some flexibility in unique cases and where it could be demonstrated they are not
going to create any adverse environmental impact. Mr. Wagner said he thought the best
approach would be to have a general policy that gives the City Commission latitude.
Mr. McKey said he thought the Board has significant faith and confidence in the Staff to
give them latitude to make the decision about when the threshold is crossed that we need
to go in a certain direction.
Member Matthys agreed with the views others were expressing.
Vice Chairman Golden supported a general wording in order to deal with these on a
case by case basis. He said he would provide text that he would recommend to Staff at
the end of the meeting. Then he suggested "when a development encompasses a
landlocked lake, a master stormwater management plan that allows for discharge to the
lake may be considered by the Commission on a case by case basis, if found to have no
adverse environmental impacts."
No members disagreed with Mr. Golden's suggestion.
Member West said he agreed with the need for flexibility.
Carla Baker, 6724 Broken Arrow Trail South, Lakeland, representing Chevron, the
current owner of the former Grafton property, the 98 acres located at the southeast corner
11
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
of Ocoee - Apopka and Fuller Cross Road, directly diagonal from the Coke Property,
spoke concerning the FLUE. She said they want their property to be rezoned light
industrial with restrictions for mixed use development. She said, as to the Future Land
Use Map, she had heard about an awful lot of updating and not a whole lot of future
looking, and they would like a little consideration to look to the future. She pointed out
the property on the map noting that it includes a conservation area and said they have no
intent to change it.
Member West asked if they would not be submitting a Large Scale Comprehensive Plan
Amendment with the EAR report. Mr. Wagner said this property has been the subject of
a formal Large Scale Plan Amendment review. The City Commission is utilizing one of
the City's planning consultants to help with the review. It is a rather involved land use
change. He said their schedule is behind the EAR update. The CPA will be submitted
before the Chevron Plan Amendment is ready for their formal public hearing. They will
track separately from the CPA, but it is underway. There is another meeting scheduled
shortly to go over a re- submittal of information. Planning and Zoning Commission will
see this one separately in another month or so.
Member McKey asked what use they intend for the property. Ms. Baker responded that
they are looking at a mixed use development, seeking light industrial with a developer's
agreement that restricts what they have been told are the noxious uses to the City. She
said it is now continuing as a grove operation. She explained what she thinks they will
be envisioning.
Mr. Wagner said because there is an actual formal amendment underway and Staff
review that the Board has not seen and that Staff has not presented, he recommended that
the Board hold discussion for the quasijudicial hearing in which they will hear the entire
presentation on the project.
Mr. Henderson returned for comment on the Errata Sheet for FLUE, Goals, Objectives
and Policies, Page 9, Policy 5.8. He said he was very concerned about the inclusion of
"natural" (habitats). He said this was a jump from wetlands to uplands. He said the
addition of "shall only be permitted in limited instances where development would be
severely restricted" would severely restrict any natural piece of property. He said he
would be very concerned about including that type of language that would step into the
upland areas of the community.
Mr. Wagner said this was not a new policy. Natural habitats were generally defined as
areas that were sensitive environmental areas and not just natural in a general sense but
they were defined as wetlands, lakes, and areas where there were rare flora or fauna. He
said we could add "unique or sensitive environmental areas" in order to change that word
12
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
so it is not so arguable. He said the intent is to prevent moves into or destruction of the
wetlands. Mr. Wagner said the intent is to avoid it where at all practical, so he does not
mind changing the language to make it clearer.
Mr. Henderson suggested removing "or" so it would read "function of wetlands natural
habitats." He said unless a natural habitat is defined, he thought the objective stepped
from the wetlands up to the uplands.
Mr. Wagner said he will look at it further and has no problem with making the change.
It was never the intent to include upland areas or developable areas. He will also need to
look at unique wildlife preservation areas. He said rare and endangered species may
have also been defined under natural areas, so he will have to check back to see exactly
how that is defined.
Member Riffe said she thought "sensitive" should be added and "or" should remain, as
the meaning is changed if it is removed.
Member West suggested placing wetland between natural and habitats. Mr. Wagner
responded that it does include more than wetlands so he will better define it.
The public hearing was closed.
Mr. Wagner said the only issue discussed but not resolved was the proposed land use
change to PS instead of Commercial which Chairman Bond had recommended. Mr.
Wagner said the change to PS will cause inconsistent zoning on the C -1 pieces, and will
automatically create an inconsistency in the Comprehensive Plan. After discussion of the
history of zoning confusion in the area, Mr. Wagner recommended the change to
commercial or to make no change at all.
Chairman Bond said what she would like to see what the Downtown Redevelopment
Group are envisioning for that area. Mr. Wagner said this could be postponed to be
considered as part of the downtown redevelopment.
Member West and Vice Chairman Golden supported commercial use (C -1) for the
area.
Mr. Wagner said if the Planning and Zoning Commission was not going to change the
staff recommendation, the Board did not need to do anything. To summarize, Mr.
Wagner said that lacking a vote to the contrary, the Staff position for commercial land
use remained.
13
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
Staff knows what the Board's feelings are about the recreation and the special lake issue.
Mr. Wagner said they would highlight the remaining elements. The only thing new in
the Transportation Element is the paths and trails drawing.
Transportation Element (TE)
Principal Transportation Planner Foltz present highlights for the TE. He said for a
City its size, the City of Ocoee has the most sophisticated transportation planning
program he has seen. He said the City's traffic analysis zones, which are more defined
than the regional zones, are now being accepted into the Metroplan Transportation
Planning process. He said this is a totally new Element. It was last updated March of
1997, and has been amended to make it consistent with the conditions and findings of the
Master Transportation Plan (MTP) which was adopted in 1998.
Mr. Foltz said the Goals, Objectives and Policies (GOP) were totally changed to
incorporate the GOPs from the MTP. He said they have included updated traffic counts,
data from Lynx, and some of the construction status on major facilities around the area..
A major change is new information on the Bike -Ped System (Figure 12). This Element
will be used for the update of the MTP scheduled for next year. He said the updates are
being related increasingly to land use and to amenities in the community.
Mr. Foltz said they did make an effort to identify all future signalized intersections.
Vice Chairman Golden said he thinks it is an excellent Element, with a lot of details, a
real working plan with specific goals that can be seen on the maps. He said he really
liked the pedestrian and bike trail addition, and said he thinks it is a really good plan for
the City.
Housing Element (HE)
Principal Transportation Planner Foltz presented highlights for the HE. He said they
had utilized the 2000 census data where available, and Shimberg data from the state. He
said the Shimberg data is only for the City while the Element includes the Joint Planning
Area. The census had some significant information. On multi - family housing, the
occupancy of persons per household was 1.74 in 1990 and 2.96 in 2000, reflecting that
Ocoee is becoming established as a family community. They expect in the future a
greater proportion of the housing will be multi- family. He said the Element also firmly
establishes that Ocoee's housing market is not the City, it is the JPA. He said a higher
proportion of the City's housing is new all the time. He said if the City is considered
apart from the JPA, it would appear that there is a shortage of affordable housing
14
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
available in this housing market. When the JPA is considered in the housing market,
there is a pretty good balance.
Mr. Foltz said it is significant that higher and lower housing values are not clustered in
one quarter of the City's JPA. He said if there will be a problem, it will be in meeting the
middle income housing availability.
Chairman Bond said she thought this was a great section and has some really good
information in it. She said omitted from the mobile home parks listed on page 8 was the
one on Lakeshore Drive near City Hall and one in the JPA on Whittier.
Mr. Foltz said not having the 2000 census information for housing made this extremely
difficult. Mr. Wagner explained the census comes out with the population data within
the year after the census, but the housing data will not be available for a couple years.
Member McKey said he thought the Element was well done. He said it is important to
for the Board to keep in mind the fact that affordable housing is not an issue in the City,
as Orange County has affordable housing all around us. It is important to consider the
need for housing in the $60,000 to $90,000 range. He said he would like to see criteria
for upscale condominiums either in this Plan or the LDC.
Infrastructure Element (IE)
Sub - Elements: Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water, Aquifer
Recharge
Senior Transportation Planner Foltz presented the highlights for this Element, which
was last updated in 1991. He said he had prepared the Solid Waste Sub - Element with the
assistance of Public Works and Assistant City Engineer David Wheeler had prepared the
other sub - elements. Included in each sub - element is an inventory of existing facilities,
needs assessments, conclusion, goals, objectives and policies.
Mr. Foltz pointed out the difference between the Joint Planning Area and the Water and
Sewer Service Areas. He said there were Agreements with Winter Garden and Conserve
for re -use water, and Agreements with Orange County for water and sewer service inside
and outside the City. He said the level of service for wastewater is 270 gallons per day
per ERU, and for water it is 300 gallons per day per ERU. The City is diligently
pursuing ways to maximize use of the present water system, expand re -use, and to
encourage conservation.
Vice Chairman Golden said he had quite a few comments on the Solid Waste, Drainage
and Aquifer Recharge sections, but he will submit them to Planning Staff He said he felt
15
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
there were some inconsistencies between the Drainage and Aquifer Recharge Sub -
Elements. He asked when the protection plan would be developed for the City's high
recharge areas and said he will contact Mr. Wheeler about that.
Capital Improvements (CE)
Principal Transportation Planner Foltz presented the highlights for this Element,
which was last updated in June of 1994. He said he was working with the Finance
Department on this Element. He said this was updated to reflect the concurrency
management system and updated goals, objectives and policies to reflect changes in
financial practices. He said when the state law was originally written in 1985, it had
been one of the driving elements for the whole growth management act. Having an up to
date plan will be a great help in addressing this element in a more comprehensive format
in placing the Capital program in a more prominent role in terms of relating to the
Comprehensive Plan. He said this is not the five year CIP but it does include it. It is not
a 20 year CIP, it is more a context for that process.
Mr. Wagner said a recent look at capital improvements revealed $70,000,000 would be
needed for roads just in the northern area of the community. In a brief overview, he
explained which improvements the state and county may help to fund. He said this is a
recognition that there are significant capital improvements that the City will have to
determine how to pay for over the next 20 years.
Chairman Bond said it was a wonderful job.
Conservation Element (CE)
Senior Planner McGinnis presented the highlights for this Element. She said the CE
included the data and analysis for those portions that were not included as part of the
JPA. She said this element had not been updated since the inception of the Plan in 1991.
She said they had also tried to make policies consistent and eliminate any conflicts it
would have with the FLUE.
Mr. Wagner directed attention to the Plate that identifies all the lakes and wetland areas,
etc. He said those maps were taken from actual aerial photos and cross checked against
maps from other sources. The data is very accurate and up to date and will be a very
helpful tool as other projects come in.
Vice Chairman Golden said he likes the detail in this section and asked if it included
habitat. Ms. McGinnis said it does not include habitat detail, as it is difficult to get that
16
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
kind of detail just for the City, though it is fairly easily attainable for the County. She
said there are no areas of critical state concern within the City.
Mr. Golden referring to page 25 of the Conservation Element concerning hazardous
waste and landfills, said there is an old landfill in the City, and it would be good to know
exactly where that is. Ms. McGinnis said she will check landfill sites.
Mr. Golden said the language should be softened in Objective 9, Policy 9.1, as he
believes the City does not have the authority to regulate small quantity generators. Ms.
McGinnis said the City would collect it, and then give it to the County. He said he
thought the City did not have the staff to do it, and Mr. Wagner said the City's fire
inspectors do regulate some of that. He said this is similar to the rare and endangered
species, while the City has some ability to recognize that, the City actually has no
authority to regulate them, that is left to the state and the federal government.
Mr. Golden suggested it would be well to include an inventory of private and public
hazardous waste storage locations in the City in this Element.
Member West commented that the abandoned Lake Fuller site is in Apopka.
Recreation and Open Space (ROSE)
Senior Planner McGinnis said they had removed the old existing element and had
incorporated the goals, objectives, policies, data and analysis that were adopted
September 2001 in the Parks and Open Space Master Plan.
Member McKey said he would like to see a notation under the golf, that until it is free
for Ocoee residents to play there (the Forest Lake Golf Club of Ocoee), he did not think it
should be included as part of the Element total for recreation. Mr. Wagner said only a
portion of the golf course acreage is included in the calculation, and that is only for
concurrency management purposes. He said the actual analysis of future park and
recreation needs reveals that, even though we meet the criteria of so many acres per
thousand, we need to buy more land than what our concurrency management system
would require.
Mr. McKey asked why even a portion was included. Mr. Wagner explained it was a
way to ensure that park and recreation concurrency was not going to be a problem. He
explained the ebb and flow of actual needs and concurrency calculations. Mr. Wagner
said they are well aware of the actual needs. He said it is City owned land and it is open
space.
17
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
Vice Chairman Golden asked about undeveloped parks and proposed parks. Ms.
McGinnis said the undeveloped parks would be South Park and Hackney Prairie Park
where the City owns and has identified the land area, but has not yet had the opportunity
to install the facilities.
Member McKey asked if that included the area off the Beech Center, and Ms.
McGinnis confirmed that it is included. Mr. Wagner said approximately half of the
usable acres in that area have been developed.
EAR Committee Member Martha Lopez- Anderson asked if the number of acres
shown in the Element are what can be developed or are the wetlands part of the total.
Mr. Wagner said that is probably total usable area.
Intergovernmental Coordination Element (ICE)
Senior Planner McGinnis said the ICE had been amended in May 2000 as part of the
state requirement to confirm the City's Joint Planning Area Agreement with the County.
She said the Joint Planning Area Agreement with Orange County, as well as the First,
Second, Third and Fourth Amendments to the Agreement, had been incorporated into the
Element. It includes an updated list of inter - governmental contracts which the City has
with various agencies. The GOPs were amended to reflect current conditions and
practices and to eliminate obsolete GOPs.
Planning Director Wagner pointed out there are also changes to definitions in front of
book.
Mr. Wagner said they will take this forward to the City Commission with a complete
staff report of all the items that have been discussed. They will include changes,
including those Mr. Golden will submit, before the Amendment goes to City
Commission. He said if members have any additional suggestions in the next week or so,
and Staff can make those changes before they go to City Commission, they will.
Mr. Wagner again reviewed the transmittal process. He said at the conclusion of the
process, members will all receive the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
Member McKey, seconded by Member Matthys, moved that the Planning and Zoning
Commission as the Local Planning Agency recommend transmittal of the EAR Based
Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan as presented in the draft document issued
F-brua 8 2102 inco 'gratin! members' comments in the -venin 's discussion.
Motion carried 6 -0.
18
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
February 27, 2002
Chairman Bond commended Mr. Wagner and Planning staff for a great job.
OLD BUSINESS - None.
OTHER BUSINESS (resumed)
Member Matthys thanked the Staff for having done a great job on the document. He
said he had enjoyed working with Staff and the Board, and then announced that he is
resigning effective February 28, 2002, as he will be moving outside of Ocoee.
Vice Chairman Golden said he was sorry to see Member Matthys go, as it has been
good working with him and he had given some great input. Chairman Bond concurred
and said he will be missed.
Chairman Bond thanked the EAR Committee members for their participation. Mr.
Wagner explained the EAR Committee had been more involved in the preparation of the
original Comprehensive Plan. He said, as this was an update, it was primarily a Staff
exercise. He said they have had a lot of good input from the EAR Committee in the past
on other issues. He said replacements on the Planning and Zoning Commission often
come from those who have served on this Committee.
EAR Committee Members Joel Keller, Ruth Grafton, John Robinson, and Martha Lopez -
Anderson introduced themselves. And Mr. Wagner said we are very happy that the
EAR members could attend.
COMMENTS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
Attest: APPROVED:
-
k J) L22■1&-) 1 tO Pit-)
Marian Green, Deputy City Clerk Pat -Bo ' • , Chairman
19