HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 01 26 Public Hearings 403
012604_ COMM _ Public_ HearinL 403_ Temporary_Ordinance _Town_Center
C()MMISSION AGENDA
ITEM 403
Consent
Information
Public Hearin X
Re ular
January 26, 2004
Meeting
MGR.P-. /Dept.
REQUEST: City Manager requests that the City Commission to adopt First Reading of
Tempo:rary Ordinance Number 2004-10 regulating demising walls and interior
partitions within Town Center buildings. This Ordinance is intended to maintain
transparency, in a manner that encourages pedestrian traffic.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the City Commission to adopt a temporary
ordinance regulating demising walls and interior partitions within Town Center
buildings until such time that the Commission receives, reviews, and adopts
regulations resulting from its consultant's study of tenant related space
regulations.
CONSIDERA TION:
Some businesses at the JDC Town Center have constructed interior modifications
that place partitions and even rest rooms in close proximity to the front door.
This, especially in restaurants, can have the effect of switching the actual front of
the building from the street frontage onto the parking lot - as in a shopping center
(not a town center). One business applied a dark film over their street-front
windows, in an effort to create their business frontage onto the parking lot.
Window film can easily be removed, but plumbing and permanent partitions are
much more expensive and difficult to remedy. Interior partition walls have been
built in the middle of windows.
These actions are fully inconsistent with Town Center design concepts. However,
the current Town Center Code does not provide adequate regulations to officially
address these issues.
012604_ COMM _Public _ Hearing_ 403 _Temporary_Ordinance _Town_Center
Page 20[2
Since development is on going, regulations are needed until such time that the
Commission is able to adopt new regulations from the consultant's report.
The City Commission has approved employment of Street Sense Retail Advisors,
a firm specializing in Town Center Development to update the Town Center Code
to provide adequate regulation of interior spaces to preserve window
transparency.
APPLICABLE CODE:
Section 20 - 327. Architectural guidelines.
ATTACHMENTS:
Ordinance Number 2004-10
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Commission approve the First Reading of Temporary
Ordinance Number 2004-10, and schedule a Second Reading of the Ordinance for
February 9, 2004.
CITY COMMISSION ACTION:
Sent By: BROWN,SALZMAN,WEISS&GARGANESE; 407 425 9596;
Jan-23-04 4:55PM;
Page 2/6
Draft 1/23/2004
ORDINANCE NO. 2004-10
AN ORDINANCE OF TUE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, SEMINOIJE COUNTY,
FLORIDA., AMENDING SECTION 20-327(d) OF THE TOWN
Ct;NTER DISTRICT CODE REGULATING DEMISING
WALLS, INTERIOR PARTITIONS, AND WINDOW
TRANSPARENCY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF PRIOR
INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, NO
INCORPORA TION INTO THE CODE, SEVERABILITY,
SUNSET, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Commission is granted the authority, under Section 2(b). Article VITI,
of the State Constitution. \0 ~x~rdsc any power for municipal pUlposes, except when expressly
prohibited by law; and
WHEREAS, the City of Winter Springs and itl;; citizens have substantial amounts of time
and public money invested in the Winter Springs Towne Center; and
WHEREAS, the success of the Towne Center is vital to the Winter Springs Community; arid
WllEREAS, the City has experienced considerable conflict within the Towne Center
regarding the issue of window transparency, demising walls (tenant partition walls), and interior
partitions; and
WHEREAS, this conflict could seriously undermine the future success of, and the City's
substantial public investm~ml in, the Towne Center project; and
WHEREAS, the City has retained the professional services of'two renowned town center
consultants to conduct an extensive review of the current Town Center District Code and to provide
recommendations for enhancing and clarifying t)aid Code in order to increase the likelihood that the
Town Center project will be successful; and
WHEREAS, while: this review is being conducted, it is paramount to the public's interest
that the City impose temporary regulations regarding demising walls, interior partitions, and window
transparency in order to pmse1\lc the integrity and success ofthe Towne Center project; and
WHEREAS, based on previous conflicts on these i~sues, the City Commission, after being
duly advised by its consultants and staff, hereby finds that without these temporary regulations, there
is a substantial risk that the Towne Center project will proceed in a direction contrary to the
fundamental principles whieh are required to develop a successful and vibrant town center; and
City of Winter Springs
OrdinaD.ce No. 2004-10
Page 1 of 5
Sent By: BROWN,SALZMAN,WEISS&GARGANESE; 407 425 9596;
Jan-23-04 4:55PM;
Page 3/6
WHEREAS, a vibrant and successfullown center requires a sense of place and substantial
interaction bctween pedestrian consumers walking the streets and sidewalks and the business
merchants operating within the town center; and
WHEREAS, this seTIse of place and interaction between business merchants and consumers
will occur and be maxilniz<Jd only through greater window transparency; and
WHEREAS, window transparency is a fundamental principle in town center development
projects and w1l1 connect the internal space of business merchants and the outside space which
consumers traverse such as sidewalks and streets; and
WHEREAS, window transparency within the Winter Springs Towne Center will hetp create
a sense of commercial vibrancy and excitement which a consumer expects from a sllccessful
commercial town center e.nvironment such as Park Avenue in Winter Park. Celebration and
Downtown Disney; and
WHEREAS, window transparency creates better vi sihi Ii ty bel ween business merchants and
consumers and this visibility should generate beller ~ales and more income for merchants and higher
rcvcnucs for the City of Winter Springs~ and
WHEREAS, window transparency is necessary to ensure that bu siness merchants orient their
businesses to the public streets and sidewalks; and
WlfEREAS, the City Commission finds that the City has a compelling government interest
to generate higher revenues from the Towne Center to secure an adequate return on the citizens of
Winter Springs' investment in the Towne Center; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, deems that it is
in Lhc btlst interests ofthe public health, safety and general welfare ofthe citizens of Winter Springs
to adopt this ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WINTER
SPRINGS HEREBY ORJ)AlNS~ AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals arc troc and correct and arc fully
incorporated herein by this reference as legislative findings of the City Commission of Winter
Springs.
Section 2. COdf: Amendment. The City of Winter Springs Code, Section 20-327(d),
IS hereby amended as follows (underlined type indicates additions and sbikc;out type indicates
deletions):
City of Winter Springs
OrdinlUtce No. 2004.10
Page 2 of 5
Sent By: BROWN,SALZMAN,WEISS&GAHGANESE; 407 425 9596;
Jan-23-04 4:55PM;
Page 4/6
Sec. 20-327. Architectural guidelines.
(d) Opaci~y and facades:
ill Each floor of any building facade facing a park, !';quare or street shall contain
transparent windows covering from fifteen (15) percent to seventy (70) percent ofthc
wall area.
Retail Commercial storefront areas only:
ill order to IProvide clear views of merchandise in stores and to provide natural
surveillance of exterior street spaces, the ground-floor along the building frontage
shall have transparent storefront windows covering no less than lifty (50) percent of
the wall ar(~a. Storefronts facing Main Strcet, parks and squares shall remain
unshuttered at night and shall utilize transparent glazing material, and shall provide
view ofinteljor spaces lit from within. Doors or entrances with public access shall
be provided ;at intervals no greater than fifty (50) feet, unless otherwise approved by
the development review committee,
ill No interior demising wall (tenant sCJlaration waln shall intersect or connect to a
window.
m No interior demising wall or partition shall he constructed or installed within fifteen
(15) feet of any window so that an unobstructed view of a minimum of fifteen 0.5)
fect through the window from the sidewalk or street is preserved. This Subsection
(d)(3) shall only apply to nonresidential uses and to first floor windows.
@ The City Commission may grant a special exception to the requirement!5 contained
in Subsection (d)(3) provided the special exception satisfies the special exception
criteria and procedure set forth in Section 20-321 and the following special
conditions:
a. The special exception is needed to accommodate the needs of a particular
business merchant and is the minimum exception required to meet those
necd~
b. The proposed demising wall or partition does not significantly diminish the
visib ility between the ints;mal space o[tlle merchant business and the outslde
sidewalk or street.
~ The proposed demising wall or interior oartition shall not be constructed or
instaUed closer than ten (10) feet of any window.
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2004.10
Page 3 of 5
Sent By: BROWN,SALZMAN,WEISS&GARGANESE; 407 425 9596;
Jan-23-04 4:56PM;
Page 5/6
c.l. Illiu)roposed demising wall or interior partition is consistent with the intent
and purpose of Ordinance 2004-10.
ill Temporary freestanding movable partitions. hI ind display cases. and backdrops 'Used
as part of a bonafige window display may be utilized by a merchant business to
promote their merchandise and selViees provided said partition docs not obstruct
more than fiftypercenl (50%) of any window area. In no event shall any temDorary
freestandinl1 movable partition. blind disolav case. or hackdrop be installed closer
than five (5) feet from any window.
Section 3. Repflal of Prior Inconsistent O..din8nces and Resolutions. All prior
inconsistent ordinances and resolutions adopted by the City Commission, or parts of prior ordinances
and resolutions in conflict herewith, arc hereby repealed lo the extent of the conflict.
Section 4. No Iucorporation Into Code. This Ordinance shall !!91 be incorporated into
the Winter Springs City Code.
Section 5. Sevclrability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or
pTUvi::;ion of this Ordinanc,e is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of
competent jurisdiction, whelher for substantive, procedural, or any other reason. such portion shall
be deenled a separate, distinct and indepenc.lenl provision, and such holding shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance.
Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shalt become effective immcdiately upon
adoption by the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, and pursuant to City
Charter.
Section 7. Sunslet Provision. This Ordinance shall automatically expire and be repealed
one hundred twenty (120) d-ays from the effective date of this Ordinance.
ADO PTED by the City Commission 0 r the City of Winter Springs, Florida, in a regular
meeting assembled on the __ duy of , 2004.
ATTEST:
ANDREA l"ORENZO-LUACES, City Clerk
JOHN F. BUSH, Mayor
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2004-tO
Page 4 of 5
Sent By: BROWN ,SALZMAN ,WEISS&GARGANESE;
407 425 9596;
Approved as to legal form and sufficiency for
the City of Winter Spring!~ only:
ANTHONY A. GARGAN ESE, City Attorney
Erst Reading:
Second Reading:
Effective Date:
G:\Docs\Cily of Winter Spliogs\OrdinanecsIToWD_ Center _PUlitioll. wpJ
City of Winter Spt'jng~
Ordinance No. 2004-10
Page 5 of 5
Jan-23-04 4:56PM;
Page 6/6
.~
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708.2799
Telephone (407) 327-1800
Ronald W. McLemore
City Manager
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and Commission
Ronald W. McLemore, City Manager fL----'
FROM:
DATE:
January 26,2004
SUBJ:
Agenda. Item 403 - Town Center Ordinance Number 2004-10
The proposed ordinance needs to be amended to include language prohibiting structural
member, HV A systems and electrical systems other than room lighting from intersecting
with windows. . .
/jp
Attachment
a) Victor Dover E-mail of December 30, 2003.
b) Jon Eisen Letter of January 12,2004.
U:\Docs\Word\Town Center\James Doran\2004\Agenda Item 403 Ordinance 2004-10 Memo.doc
-;
ra~1;; 1 Vi k,
-------0-
j
Jan Palladino
From: Victor Dover [vdover@doverkohl.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 30,200312:06 PM
To: Eloise Sahlstrom; James Dougherty; Victor Dover; Ron McLemore; Ron McLemore
Cc: Kristen Thomas; Marice Chael
Subject: RE: Bldg 1 issues - response from Victor Dover
Importance: High
I am on vacation in North Carolina but I have reviewed the pictures Eloise sent me. This is fairly disappointing stuff, I agree. I see
why Ron has found this infuriating.
The stud partition coming down right in the middle of a storefront and an upstairs window: this is totally unacceptable--- sheer
incompetence, and it needs to be changed. This is just more evidence of a strip shopping center developer & architects failing to
adapt to a Main Street condition where they lack experience, and left unchanged it will just lead to snickers about the developer,
City, and everybody else involved. In Main Street bUildingStPartitions are matched to the bays of windows: if the demisinQ wall
between tenant s aces needs to occur in an alignment tha aligns within a window, it should jog to one side or the other no closer
t an five eet a way WI rom e wlriaow. Une tenant or me otner gets me wmaow.
The slab that is not matched to the elevat.ion of the sidewalk: this is also an inexplicable condition. Since this situation was
discussed ad nauseum before construction on the building walls commenced I am assuming the developer and contractor were
completely aware of this and installed the slab improperly anyway at their own risk and expense. The slab should be torn out to
the extent necessary and repoured correctly, with the interior slab matched in elevation to the sidewalk on the FRONT side of the
building, to keep the street-side entrances functional. Transitions (steps, ramps etc) can be installed within the building if
necessary to match the grade of the parking lot area. Abandoning the sidewalk entrances to the building will effectively turn its
back on the Main Street. Even though everyone understands that many patrons will enter from the parking lot side. this is not the
point-- the building at the comer MUST communicate that the City is building a street-oriented town center, not a strip shopping
center that is oriented only to its parking lots. Otherwise the step-by-step unraveling of the Town Center plan by the strip shopping
center developer into a worst-of-both-worlds, incomprehensible and dysfunctional mush will be finalized.
Now that I have seen the pictures! do no.l recommend the creation of an elevated sidewalk / outdoor dining patio area facing
Market Square instead of fixing the slab problem. Elevated dining patios are most practical when provided in addition to a properly
graded sidewalk, not instead of one. Replacing the sidewalk with an elevated patio will create ADA problems, will aggravate
pedestrian accessibility issues, and will make this FRONT side more like a back porch. This, of course, is exactly what the
developer probably intends; strip center mstaurants usually have just one door, and they probably want it on the parking lot side.
On Main Street the street-side entry is REQUIRED while the second entry on the parking lot side is encouraged, permitted, but
optional.
For this same reason I recommend retaining at least some of the on street parking on the Market Square side. It may be possible
to remove one or two spaces, to increase the sidewalk area for outdoor dining, but removing all the parking will seal off the front
and discourage entry from that side-exactly what the city should NOT want (see the small north-south road in the middle of the
Doran parcel, where onstreet parking was eliminated from the design and merchants effectively walled off that side in response.
Outdoor dining service could also be expanded into Market Square itself, in the manner of a European plaza.
Victor Dover
-----Original Message-----
From: Eloise Sahlstrom [mailto:esahlstrom@wintersprlngsfl.org]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23,2003 1:57 PM
To: James Dougherty; Victor Dovl:!r
Subject: Bldg 1 issues
Attached are some photos (File 1} taken showing a doorway grading problem. The contractor indicated that the city had
agreed on a fake doorway- not so! But now we have a problem with the 30" grade difference. I gues Ron will be calling
to get your input if he hasn't talked with you already.
12/30/2003
January 12,2004
Mr. Ronald McLemore
City of Winter Springs
1126 East State Road 434
Winter Springs, FL 37208
Re: Town Center
Dear Ron,
As per our conversation today and my recent visit to your municipality the following
shall serve as the basis of our conversations. After visiting the town Center in Winter
Springs, Florida I have the following observations:
1. Many ofthe storefronts in Town Center have demising partitions placed up against the
storefront windows. This is both an unobtrusive, as well as an unsophisticated solution to
demising retail tenant ~;paces. Having worked on many mixed-use Town Center projects
around the country I have never seen condItions of thIS nature. As you move forward, It
is our recommendatIOn that both the developer as weB as a municipality enforce a
guideline that stipulates the location and position of all demising partitions.
On a project such as Town Center, exterior wall partitions that demise between retailer
spaces shall always be positioned off of the exterior colunm. The purpose for starting
demising walls off of the outside wall, versus a storefront is primarily for a visual and
aesthetic purpose. The end of the demising wall stud's are always exposed to the
consumer as they walk by the storefront. This is both awkward, as well as unnecessary.
Not only does it provid.e a negative visual, but it also potentially cancels out the warranty
of the storefront. When you fasten a stud wall to the vertical mullion system of the
storefront you alter the effect of the storefront system.
2. I realize you also have a situation regarding the transition area within the first five to
10 ft. of a retailer's space within Town Center. It is my opinion that you need to update
your Town Center guid.elines to deal with this issue of transparency, as it relates to all of
your existing and new retail tenants. The principal interaction between retail goods and
the consumer is what defines retailing. When your retail storefronts block the consumer's
ability to engage with the retail products at your Town Center it hurts not only that
tenant, but the other tenants as well, because those specific tenants are not good co-
tenants. At every juncture of a retail development and were mixed use project, promote
retail you need to be able to incorporate retail design guidelines that not only support the
individual retailers, but their neighbors the co-tenants as well.
I realize that this is only two of the items that we look that while we were together in
Winter Springs this past December. We certainly hope that we can support you and your
developer's needs by assisting you through a process that educates both parties involved.
If you have any questions regarding this or any other issue pleased not hesitate to contact
me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Jonathan B. Eisen
Managing Principal
Street Sense