HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994 10 05 Planning and Zoning Board Regular Minutes
city of winter BDrings. Florida
Plannina and zoning Board
Minutes of the
October 5. 1994 meetina
1. Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order at 7: 00 PM by Chairperson
Glavin.
2. Attendance:
Ms. Anne Glavin, Chairperson
Mr. Art Hoffman, Vice-Chairperson
Mr. Carl Stephens
Mr. Gene Lein
Mr. David Hopkins
Carl Gosline, Community Development Coordinator
3. Consideration Of September 7. 1994 Minutes
Mr. Hopkins made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted.
Mr. Hoffman seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was
unanimous.
-,
4. Consideration Of Various LDC Issues And Policies
Carl explained the City has the total option to prepare whatever
type of land development regulations they wish. The comprehensive
plan does not require the use of performance criteria approach.
The only restriction is that the LDC must adequately address the
minimum requirements of Chapter 163.3202 provided in his memo dated
October 5, 1994.
Mr. Hopkins stated the P&Z agreed to pursue the performance
criteria approach at their September 30, 1992 meeting. He also
said the Plan was prepared with the intent of using a performance
criteria. The performance criteria approach was supported by the
administrative staff at that time.
Carl said the question now is which approach to you feel is
appropriate for the City. We need to decide. The Board has the
statutory responsibility to recommend what they think appropriate.
,~
Dave said he has heard nothing but negatives about the performance
approach in recent times and there appears to be a concerted effort
to steer the City toward a conventional system. When asked to
express his concerns, Carl said his biggest concern was the
administration of the system, not that it would not work. He said
it is his impression that the performance approach requires a more
intense manpower effort than does a conventional one. He said he
is very concerned about the flexible nature of the performance
approach in view of the Supreme Court's decision in the Snyder v
Brevard case. He said he was trying to remain as objective as
possible in this matter.
P&Z Board Meeting Minutes
October 5, 1994
page 2
Mr. Hopkins said he thinks we should pursue the general approach
outline in the H/R draft. Change is always difficult to deal with,
but sometimes you need to do it even if it is uncomfortable. It is
also a real opportunity to become a unique community.
Carl suggested another approach would be to develop a system of
developer agreements for major projects, or projects in the SR 434
corridor. Oviedo uses these agreements as do several other cities.
Developer agreements could be used for either type of code. He
said his recommendation is to have developer agreements for major
projects regardless of which code is used.
Chairman Glavin said that she doesn't care which system is used so
long as the property owners have to have significant input in terms
of how development occurs. She said further that" ...yourself
excepted (speaking to Gosline) I have been very dismayed in terms
of the quality of the professional advice and expertise that has
been tendered by staff and not just planning staff over the past
three years and I really don't trust their judgment in terms of
making deals with the public, making deals with particular
developers or property owners, with providing the kind of
continuity with the staff dealing with us in terms of the products
provided to us..." She also said that until the City Commission
provides some cohesiveness and stability in the staff, she thinks
the system needs to be conventional one. She thinks there needs to
be more rules of procedure regardless of which type of code is
used.
Carl said we need to have a land development regulation system that
is "personality neutral". No matter what system is used there will
always be some variance in the interpretation of the Code. The key
difference between the two systems is the amount of flexibility
available to the whole decision process. He cautioned the Board
not to characterize the performance approach as one in which the
staff has more flexibility per see It is the whole decision
process, including those made by the P&Z and the City Commission,
that has more flexibility.
One of the decisions the Board needs to make is whether they think
the tiered decision process as recommended by H/R and as used in
the City of Oviedo code. In this system, the staff is delegated
final decision authority over certain types of permits. In certain
other types of approvals, final authority is delegated to the LPA.
Major project decisions require approval by both the LPA and the
City commission.
Mr. Stephens expressed concern about throwing out the zoning
because it protects the property owners. Carl said that
performance zoning would also protect property owners, just do it
in a different way than does zoning.
P&Z Board Meeting Minutes
October 5, 1994
page 3
Ms. Glavin asked where the accountability is in the flexible
system. In other words, where are the checks and balances?
Dave said the best example of how a performance system might look
is the Tuscawilla PUD and the Highlands PUD. Both of these
developments are, for the most part, well done. The individual
parts were essentially done through flexible development criteria.
Carl suggested another possible strategy might be to use
performance criteria in the commercial areas and leave zoning in
the residential areas. This strategy would allow us to try
performance regulation out in a relatively small area and see how
it works. He also said he was not comfortable with how a
performance system works for infill development.
Ms. Glavin said that they had spent many hours working on various
sections of the draft and had made decisions about various issues
as they went, but they weren't reflected in the current draft. She
further said that we should incorporate these decisions into the
draft. We shouldn't throw out everything we've done so far. Carl
said that no matter which code is chosen, we will keep the good
c- ideas, issues, approaches, etc and trash the bad ones.
Ms. Glavin said she was uncomfortable not working on the draft and
that she would like to start plugging away again on the draft.
Carl said"... Do you mean the February draft? . ." Her answer, Yes.
Carl "...00 I understand that you want to spend a couple of hours
each month in your meetings going through the code..."
Anne "...Not the old code...Let's go back to this draft we've been
working on and you tell us what is wrong with it and you tell how
we should fix it..."
Carl "...The only draft on the table is the Henigar and Ray draft
dated February..."
Anne .. . . . Why don' t you (Car I) provide us five new copies of
whatever you think is the latest thing that is..."
Carl "...It is going to be awhile...if you want me to go back and
plug in all these changes you have made..."
Dave "...AII what changes? We are going in the same direction
we've been going..."
Carl "...But you just told me the February version did not include
stuff you have been through before...correct..."
Anne "...But you don't know what is wrong with it..."
P&Z Board Meeting Minutes
October 5, 1994
page 4
Carl "...So what you want is a brand new version of the February
draft and you are going to start through it again?.
Anne "...1 don't know how else we can do different if you don't
have the comprehensive set of changes if they weren't kept up with
as we went along. Most of those meetings Fred Goodrow sat here and
billed the City for, I'm sure and if he wasn't professional enough
to keep up with what was happening and keep a comprehensive set of
notes on this, I don't know what to tell you..."
Carl ". . . What you would like to do is for me to go make the
changes that you all made...in the February draft..."
Anne "...Why don't we do this...why don't you give us five clean
copies of the February draft and why don't we start again and we
can meet every two weeks or every week or whatever we need to
do..."
Art "...That is crazy..."
Carl ". . That is not true. We are working on it... we have set up
these technical committees to give you advice of the approach they
have recommended... and you have voted on their recommendation and
chosen not to take their advice... and that is fine..."
Dave "... Going through all of this allover again is redundant and
I don't think it is this Board's place to be wordsmithing this
document this thing and that is what happens..."
Carl "...That is not true..."
Anne "...How is that not true..."
Carl "...That is why we have the Technical Committee and that is
what they are trying to do... I set up this Committee to be
technical in nature and its members are people who do business with
this city and have done business with this city for a long time...
It is not a citizens committee. It is a technical committee..."
Carl "...My professional approach to doing this code is the way we
are doing. If you want to do something else, that is your
privilege...Just tell me what you want me to do. I'm just trying
to get the code done...I've presented you (the Board) with some
options about how to proceed and I need your direction ...so tell
me what you want to do..."
Anne "...The February draft is not a lot of performance standards
stuff. There are a lot of specific stuff that we need to know what
we are doing when we pass it..."
Art "...Having all those details in there is not necessarily the
correct approach. That is what he (Gosline) is trying to tell
you. . . II
.
"
P&Z Board Meeting Minutes
October 5, 1994
page 5
Carl ". . . We have got to get the code done whichever way we
go...What I need to know from you is Do you want to pursue the
draft that is on the table, or do you want to develop something
else?.."
Considerable discussion among the members ensued.
Anne "...I think we should go back to working on it (the February
draft) so that we can proceed..."
Art "...I think we should go to option one or two ... at least
make a decision there so Carl can move ahead...
Anne "...H/R draft is wrong. It is incorrect. It is grammatically
poor and it absolutely very little to do...Fred Goodrow has spent
very little time on any original thinking in putting any new
language into that thing as of February 23..."
Anne "...I have a preference for option four.. .we go back to
meeting every two weeks for approximately two hours every time and
that we go back to our draft and go back to work..."
Carl ". . . It is my understanding that you want to proceed with
option four (modify the H/R draft to include better definitions, a
revised project review process, etc). Is that correct?.."
Anne " . . . That is what I want to do..." None of the Board members
objected to that statement.
5. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 PM.
Respectfully Submitted,
shir~J2n~ ~
Prepared October 21, 1994
THERE WILL BE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING
BOARD WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 19, 1994 AT 7:00 PM.
This document is a summary of the Planning and Zoning Board actions
at this meeting. The audiotapes of all meetings are maintained in
the permanent records of the city of winter springs.