03-08-1994 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
`kw REGULAR MEETING
HELD TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 1994
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Switzer at 7:30 p.m., followed by a moment of
silent meditation and the pledge of allegiance.
The determination of a quorum was made.
PRESENT: ing Chairman Switzer, Members Landefeld, Miller, and Alternate McKey.
Also present were Administrative Services Director Beamer, Capital
Projects /Concurrency Analyst Resnik, Planning Director Wagner, Deputy Clerk
King, and Clerk/Stenographer Lewis.
ABSENT: Members Bond, Jones, Rhodus, Swickerath, and Alternate Draia.
CONSENT AGENDA
The consent agenda consisted of items A, B, and C. Chairman Switzer corrected item B on
page four (4), under New Business, Case No. CPA- 94 -1 -2 to read "Member Landefeld,
seconded by Member Rhodus, amended the motion to include a recommendation that the City
Commission examine the proposed level of service on each segment individually." Planning
Director Wagner corrected item B on page three (3), New Business, Case No. CPA- 94 -1 -2,
line five (5) to read "...urbanized district, not an urban district." Chairman Switzer asked for
an explanation on item C, the sewer capital charge, and Analyst Resnik said it was $2,865 per
ERU. Administrative Services Director Beamer said the sewer capital charge is for the
construction or any modifications to the treatment plant and any type of lines that the City must
put in but not including any of the developer improvements. Member Landefeld asked whether
the "Prior to approval of final subdivision plan and projects or any portion thereof, the
applicant /owner will need to apply to obtain final certificate of concurrency." meant
grandfathering in or applied to the new changes. Analyst Resnik said Lot 1 was what is current
in Article IX. Alternate McKey asked the location of the Ocoee Industrial Park and Planning
Director Wagner said it was northwest of Story Road in the existing park.
Member Landefeld seconded by Member Miller, moved to approve and accept the consent
agenda as .resented sub'ect to the corrections in item B. Motion carried 4 -0.
A. Minutes of the Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of February 8,
1994.
B. Minutes of the Special Planning and Zoning Commission (Local Planning Agency)
Meeting of February 24, 1994.
C. Ocoee Industrial Park, Phase I (Lot #1) Final Subdivision Plans
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
March 8, 1994
'hr
NEW BUSINESS
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (Public Hearing)
ARTICLE IX: CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT
Chairman Switzer said the Board would be acting as the Local Planning Agency. Capital
Projects /Concurrency Analyst Resnik said the staff had put together a proposed amendment
to Article IX, Concurrency Management which will replace the existing Article IX, Concurrency
Management. There are four (4) major changes and some clean -up items which will make the
process clearer for developers and the procedures easier for the City staff. The major changes
are as follows:
1) Allow for greater flexibility on timing of parks and transportation improvements. Parks
may be dedicated up to one (1) year from the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
Transportation facilities may be in place or under construction up to three (3) years from
the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These future improvements would be either
part of the Capital Improvements Plan of the City or guaranteed through Developer's
Agreements.
2) Allow for a more realistic picture of existing roadway conditions by counting only
existing traffic and traffic from projects that have been issued a Final Certificate of
Concurrency on building permit. This would mean that vested developments would not
be counted for concurrency purposes until they are issued permits.
3) Provide developers the option of obtaining Final Certificates of Concurrency and
Transportation Capacity Reservation Certificates once preliminary plans have been
approved.
This would reduce the up front risks for the developers and enable them to secure the
necessary approvals to obtain financing for their projects. It would enable the City to
receive funds for capacity at an earlier time period, which would help in the planning for
infrastructure improvements.
4) Close a loophole in the current Article IX which permits developers to continuously
renew transportation reservations for 90 -day periods simply by applying for new Final
Certificates of Concurrency at $100 per certificate.
The proposed change would allow only one 90 -day renewal, after which a developer
would have to lock in the reservation by obtaining a transportation capacity reservation
certificate. This would force the payment of a certain portion of road impact fees up
front.
These changes are the result of having lived with loopholes for two (2) years. When Article IX
was originally written the City was in the same position with everyone else. No one had ever
done this before and the people who had written it basically looked at a model code and said this
is what everyone else is going to be using. After working with it staff has seen the changes that
are necessary.
2
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
March 8, 1994
vlr
The public hearing was opened and no one wished to speak. The public hearing was closed.
Member McKey asked for an explanation on pages 18213 - 18214 of Exhibit "A" concerning
traffic counts extracted from the current "reserved vested" counts under the new Article IX.
Analyst Resnik pointed out the State had exempted six (6) items showing they do not impact
the roadway system enough for the City to bother measuring. Annually the staff takes the
amount of the vested projects built turning them into existing trips. They are subtracted out of
the vested portion and counted as existing. For example, the Good Homes Plaza shopping
center shell is built, the traffic generated by that is now considered existing traffic on the road
today. There are two out - parcels that have not been built, but are still in the City system as
vested developments that are presently counted as if they were built. If the new Article IX is
adopted they will not be counted until building permits are pulled. Ms. Resnik explained that
Maguire Road is now on the infrastructure deficiency map as not having enough capacity. If
it were the case tomorrow after all the vested projects were taken out and if the City had it
within the year one, two, or three (1, 2, or 3) of its five (5) year Capital Improvements Program
then that developer could build because it is a planned improvement. It must be planned with
money backing it up and not simply a "pie in the sky" idea that the City has to widen the road.
Impact fee monies or a bond issue must be in place. If a specific improvement is tied to a
development or if a developer wanted to proceed so badly they were willing to take on a larger
improvement, they would enter into a Developers Agreement and could begin pulling Certificates
`'fir. of Occupancy immediately, but within three (3) years some improvements must be made.
Member McKey asked if the City adopts this plan would that allow the City to improve
Maguire Road sooner. Ms. Resnik said in one respect it will help in allowing more growth to
take place immediately. Monies will be collected sooner on impact fees than if the developer
was told to come back after the road was widened. Planning Director Wagner said the City
is not getting any money with the current procedure. The change will allow the City to collect
the fees needed for the improvements.
Chairman Switzer asked if the City was giving up anything on the park lands, the size,
capacity and activities. Analyst Resnik said Article IX will not consider any of the
Comprehensive Plan Amendments that the Board had seen recently on recreation. In order for
this to remain consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as it is today, those things will remain
in Article IX. How the City looks at parks in the future is a planning issue and should be dealt
with in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Planning Director Wagner clarified that what
had previously been transmitted to the state was the actual amendment to the Comprehensive
Plan which changed the standards. This is the Land Development Code and the City had made
those changes it could in order to loosen up concurrency. The Board will review it again once
the amendment has been approved by the State. At that time the City will incorporate the
changes and standards into the Land Development Code. He said the Board was seeing around
90% of the changes now and the rest would follow. The City will ultimately adopt the State
r 3
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
March 8, 1994
'1rr
standard for active park space which is four (4) acres per 1,000 in population. He said this is
a hefty standard compared to other local communities. The City cannot make this change at this
time as it would not be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It is very important for the
Local Planning Agency to find this to be consistent.
Member Miller asked for an explanation on page 18218 of "Exhibit A" and asked about the
discussion of the relationship on the timing of the Capital Improvements Budget process and staff
recommendation to the City Commission. Analyst Resnik explained that it is an on -going
process, that the budget is usually done in the summer and Staff discussion will cover what
needs to be put in to keep the roads, parks, etc. concurrent. If the City Commission chooses
not to pick something it will show on the infrastructure deficiency map and that area will be
closed to development until such time as something is done about the improvement. Ms.
Miller also questioned page 18223 and asked if there was a fee to file an application to shift
capacity. Analyst Resnik said there was a $50 fee to process the application. Staff looks at
why a developer wants to shift, whether or not he had made a good faith effort to use that
capacity in that given year, the circumstances on why they did not use it, and if they want to pay
up another portion of their impact fee to hold it. Member Miller drew attention to the fact that
there is both an Orange County and State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection
so the word Florida should be added on pages 18230 and 18234.
`a. Member Landefeld seconded b Member McKe moved to recommend that the Board of
Cit Commissioners a s • rove the s ro . osed Article IX and that it is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Motion carried 4 -0.
OLD BUSINESS
None
OTHER BUSINESS
MEMBERS /REAPPOINTMENT
(Pat Bond and Darlene Rhodus) reappointed for another term (3 years)
Chairman Switzer announced that Pat Bond and Darlene Rhodus had been reappointed for
another term of three (3) years. He stated they were a great asset to the Commission.
SELECTION OF PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PAC) MEMBERS (2)
Planning Director Wagner explained the Joint Planning Area Agreement with Orange County.
As part of that agreement a Planning Advisory Committee had been established in hopes of
avoiding disputes over land use issues in the future. It was felt that a citizens type group similar
to the City planning boards could mediate and come to an agreement on these issues. Within
that agreement it was established for the City of Ocoee to choose two members and the County
4
Nur
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
March 8, 1994
*t.►
to choose two to serve on that committee. These four members would choose a fifth person.
This group would meet only when there was a dispute over any of the land uses that are
incorporated in the Joint Planning Area Map. Mr. Wagner said the City had gone through
extensive negotiations with the County over the agreement and the map is so significant that
changes are not anticipated. In their March 1 meeting the City Commission had requested the
Planning and Zoning Commission poll their membership for interest in serving on the Planning
Advisory Committee. By consensus the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the
City Commission the appointment of the Chairman and the Vice Chairman of the Plannin' and
Zoning Commission to serve on the Planning Advisory Committee.
STATUS REPORT ON PUBLIC HEARING DATES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF
REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS (CPA'S)
Planning Director Wagner said members had been given copies of formal notices which had
been sent to the Regional Planning Commission regarding the Lake Lotta Mall and the Lake
Lotta Center (DRI). In order to meet legal requirements it is important for members to be in
attendance. Both projects have been given a 30 day extension on their review. The dates for
the public hearings are scheduled from the Region. There will be no formal staff report for the
meeting. In order to meet the letter of the law, the advertising requirements, etc., the City must
hold these public hearings for both the DRI and the CPA. Mr. Wagner said he anticipates that
the public hearings will be opened and then be continued to a date certain. However, there may
Ir be citizens there who wish to speak and the Board will need to hear them. Approximately one
month later when the hearing is continued, the main focus will be the recommendation on the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment, as well as the Board's review and the DRI. There will be
information from the Region included for consideration. A Project Review Committee of the
Regional Planning Commission will have met that day of the scheduled meeting (April 14) so
the Board will hear what staff is recommending to the full Metropolitan Planning Organization
and the Regional Planning Commission. Member McKey asked when the Regional Planning
Council would be meeting and Mr. Wagner said on April 20. Planning Director Wagner said
staff had issued its own report to the Regional Planning Commission and did recommend at that
time to go ahead with the mall, with staff support. The mall covers 1,000,001 sq. ft. and
another 100,000 sq. ft. of out - parcels. Staff has suggested non - support of the Lake Lotta Center
and recommended keeping the underlying PUD in place. Traffic conditions, along with what
would happen to the roads was an important factor. Issues over vested trips had not been
resolved. The City had wanted to be conservative. Administrative Services Director Beamer
said that because of the enormity of vested trips to the mall or the center, either an exclusion
or inclusion of those vested trips really does not matter. There are certain improvements that
are going to be triggered anyway and vesting in or out does not make much difference. In the
number of departments looking at that, from the County and the State, they are not looking at
the City's concurrency system when they suggest at the Regional level what improvements
occur. Planning Director Wagner said it is a local issue. It will be looked at whatever the
'411v 5
Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting
March 8, 1994
'firw
regional impacts are, regardless of outline, or set of conditions, and it will be for staff to
determine what effect, if any, those vested trips have on the roads. This City ultimately writes
the Development Orders and the City must be concerned with the developer, not the Region and
the State. There are other issues such as aggregation, a State issue, which the City is not
involved. There are different levels of review.
COMMENTS
Member McKey said he was concerned with conservation of the trees and the Arbor Ordinance.
Planning Director Wagner said he had met with Commissioner Gleason and City Manager
Shapiro last week and that Commissioner Gleason was presenting the same concerns. In
revisions of the new Land Development Code he has been directed to incorporate the tree survey
system, requiring information up front from the developers. Currently the tree survey is
required only at building permit time. Chairman Switzer said it would be a real tragedy to this
City to continue with the "after the fact" tree surveys. He said he hoped the changes occurred
in the foreseeable future and that the Board would be derelict in its duty to allow these people
to just come in and bulldoze down everything to build. He also said he hoped staff would
prevail in saving as many trees as possible. Planning Director Wagner said the revisions will
come soon but staff did not want to piece -meal the amendments.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
°!
1 AROLD S IT R, Ch. • • an
ELLEN KING, Deputy Cl k
J DIE LEWIS, Clerk/Stenographer
6