Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 09 02 Planning and Zoning Board Regular Minutes MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARDILP A SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge Of Allegiance The Planning and Zoning Board/LP A meeting was called to order Wednesday, September 2, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Tom Brown in the Commission Chambers of the Municipal Building (City Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708). The Pledge of Allegiance followed. Roll Call Tom Brown, Chairman, present Carl Stephens, Jr., Vice Chairman, present Marc Clinch, present Bill Fernandez, present Rosanne Karr, present (7:01 p.m.) Also Present Charles C. Carrington, AICP, Community Development Director Thomas Grimms, AICP, Comprehensive Planning/Zoning Coordinator Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator Brook Seall, Parks and Recreation Director Approval Of The August 5, 1998 Planning and Zoning BoardlLPA Regular Meeting Minutes Motion by Bill Fernandez. Seconded by Marc Clinch. Board Member Rosanne Karr arrived at 7:01 p.m. Discussion. Board Member Fernandez asked about the reference to the item in the first sentence of the first paragraph, under Item C, on page 4 of the August 5, 1998 minutes. Tom Grimms, AICP, Comprehensive Planning/Zoning Coordinator clarified for the Board, what item was being discussed, and he explained that the Board does have this same material, and that this item is located in Section VI, under "Recommendations", in the Evaluation and Appraisal Report. The Board was satisfied. The motion to adopt the minutes of August 5, 1998 was approved by consensus of the Board. Motion passed. II. REGULAR AGENDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 2 OF 21 A. Golfside Villas - Preliminary Engineering/Final Development Plan. [At the request of several individuals, the following Agenda Item is transcribed verbatim. ] Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Yes Sir, Mr. Chairman, you people have received the plans and the covenants saying the Agenda Item, and the Staff has found this to be in compliance with all Codes, and except that there is a question in the covenants, as the type ownership of the lots, and that is being reviewed by the City Attorney, and that will be settled prior to a presentation of the Final Engineering Plans, and that could make a difference, though on the wall separation, or whatever, have you - it's a building code issue, and the Building Director is the one that, the Building Official that found that, being versed in the Southern Building Code, so that is being settled. But, other than that, Staff recommends that this be recommended for approval to the City Commission, at their next regular meeting. You'll notice, my pat note at the end of the package - that you please let me bring this forward prior to your, prior to the minutes being approved because then we could not do it until October. But, Mr. Sheldon Greene is here.. .the property owner, representative, and either he or myself will attempt to answer any questions you have. Chairman Tom Brown: Mr. Greene, would you like to give us an overview, or.. .of the development? Mr. Sheldon Greene: Sheldon Greene. Sheldon Greene, 3720 Wilder Lane, Orlando, Florida, that's my home. What we're proposing to build is five buildings, consisting of four units in each building. Basically, two of the units will be single story, either two bedroom, two bath; or three bedroom, two bath. Pardon me. The two center units will be two story, three bedroom, two and a half bath. All units will have a one car garage, and a one golf cart garage. We have received permission from the Winter Springs Golf Course, to allow the tenants or owners to use their own private golf carts on the course. Basically, I think that's the overview. Are there any questions? I'll try to answer them. Chairman Tom Brown: Mr. Fernandez. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Thank you Mr. Chair. Not necessarily addressed to Mr. Greene, but, you can have a seat, because I think there's some questions that I do want to go over in this phase. I know that in the paperwork submitted, I guess by Mr. LeBlanc, that there was a chronology of, a sequence of events; and that there was a "Pre-App" meeting in September of 1996, as well as a conce.ptual, and I stress that word conceptual plan, which was presented to P & Z in October of 1996. Then, again in '96, that same conceptual plan was presented to the City Commission, and I do remember it, and I was on the P & Z at that time. And at that time, on the conceptual plan, I do remember voicing concern over the natural vegetation on this site - specifically the trees. I do note in the chronology of the events here on page five, that Preliminary Engineering together MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 3 OF 21 with a Einal, and I stress, Einal Development Plan was submitted in April of '97. Then in February of '98, a revised Preliminary and Einal Development Plan were submitted. And of course, Staff reviewed this on August, the 25th of '98. I use those terms, because in review of the Statutes, or the Zoning Ordinances dealing with this, it talks about the City P & Z Board having a chance to review a Preliminary Plan, and as part of that Preliminary Plan, I believe we are required to see that it meets the site development criteria, and some of those criteria indicate that we should try to attempt to preserve as much of the natural environment as we can. That, we can even make additional modifications or recommendations to the City Commission in so far as a PUD is concerned; and I have, as I have previously expressed some concerns about the removal of, have I counted it correctly on these plans, some forty-three trees. And I do see where there are trees to remain, but I do not see any mitigation or replacement of some forty- three trees. And I did try to find what I thought was existent in the Ordinances of the City of Winter Springs, to wit an Arbor Ordinance, but, I know I'm only an Attorney, and I did have a little difficulty finding any Arbor Ordinance in this big new white book that was supposed to contain everything that we were supposed to have. So I had to fall back on the little black book that I had before I got the big white book, and I did find in the little black book, an Arbor Ordinance in existence, in the City of Winter Springs, in Section 5-1. Now, what I need to know from Mr. LeBlanc, or Mr. Grimms, or Mr. Carrington, is whether or not Section 5.1. in the Arbor Ordinance is still in effect in the City of Winter Springs? Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: That is correct. Board Member Bill Fernandez: All right. Then that Arbor Ordinance specifically requires that a City Forester assist the Site Review Board, and view the site, determine what trees are out there, that the applicants submit, from a Forester or other expert, some sort oflandscape survey saying what is out there, and what is going to stay, and what is going to be removed. And I'd like to know whether or not we have such a surveyor plans submitted by an approved Landscape Engineer? Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: I think we... we have been in turmoil over the City Forester, and the City Forester will definitely be involved, but if you look at what I have there, which is page C3, of your plans. It tells you what trees are to remain, and what trees are to be removed. And of course... Board Member Bill Fernandez: And that's my concern, forty-three going, no new going in. Looking at the Arbor Ordinance, it does indicate that before any tree can be taken out, it has to specifically approved; it also indicates that there is mitigation factors - that there should be replacements. Now, that's just in the Arbor Ordinance. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: I can assure you, Mr. Fernandez - if that is your concern, to keep this process moving, we will.. .providing you approve it with MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 4 OF 21 that caveat, and we will return to you, with the Final Engineering, so you can see what the arbormeister has so deemed to be necessary. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Well, my concern is that we're a little bit premature. When did this body, P&Z/LP A, whatever, consider Preliminary Site Development Plans? Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: This is the first one. Board Member Bill Fernandez: So, it's a Final? Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: No, this is Final Subdivision Plan, it's Preliminary Engineering. Board Member Bill Fernandez: All right, the Engineering's not what I'm going for... Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: The next step, this is Final Subdivision Plan. Board Member Bill Fernandez: All right, you're calling it a Subdivision. Now, as I understand it, this is in the Highlands PUD. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: That is correct. Board Member Bill Fernandez: And the recitation in the materials provided to me, was under Section 20-355., which happens to be... Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Part A. Board Member Bill Fernandez: .. .PUD Zoning Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Part A. Board Member Bill Fernandez: .. . Ordinance. .. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Part A. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Part A. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Which is existing PUD's. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Which is existing PUD's - Planned Unit Developments, not Subdivisions. And, under those specific Ordinances, it still discusses submittal of Preliminary and Final Development Plans. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 5 OF 21 Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Oh well, perhaps... Board Member Bill Fernandez: At 20-352., sub a... Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Okay. The terminology I will, I put Final Subdivision Plan instead of Final Development Plan. That has been used interchangeably, but being an Attorney, I can tell that you have noticed that the word Subdivision was used instead of Development. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Well, I'm having difficulty with the fact that what I'm reading on the Agenda says, Preliminary Engineering/Einal Development flan. Final DevelQpment flan. And I haven't even had a chance to have a Preliminary Development Plan. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: The Preliminary Development Plan was when the PUD was first approved. That is the Preliminary. Just like when you see something from the Tuscawilla PUD? You do not see the Preliminary Development Plan, because that is the plan that we submitted, when the PUD was zoned, and everything else - that was submitted ~ ago. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Well, that's great. What this document, what these Ordinances, what these Codes require me to do, as a Planning and Zoning Board member, is to compare the Final Development Plan with the Preliminary Development Plan, to see whether or not it is in substantial compliance and conformity. And in as much as I do not have in front of me, the Preliminary Development Plan, obviously, I cannot perform my task as assigned to me, under the Ordinances ofthis City. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: I believe you performed your tasks Sir, because this came in as a Comp Plan Amendment. There was going to be a clubhouse on that property, and they changed the conservation easement. This particular property has came in under a Comp Plan Amendment. When was that done Tom? Approximately? Mr. Tom Grimms, AICP, Comprehensive Planning/Zoning Coordinator: Well... Board Member Bill Fernandez: Well, it's an education process, of course, and I'm looking at 20-355. (procedure for approval). And it does indicate under Section (4), that "The Planning and Zoning Board review the... the Planning and Zoning Board shall review the Preliminary Development Plan and the Staff recommendations, and any proposed suggestions or revisions to the plan". Under (7), it talks about the Final Development Plan, and under (11), it talks about City Commission review. At (10), it says Planning and Zoning Board shall review the Final Development Plans, Staff recommendations, which you've quoted in our materials; approve it.. . approve it with modifications or deny it and stating the reasons. In number (11), it indicates that in MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 6 OF 21 reviewing the Final Development Plan, the Planning and Zoning Board, and the City Commission, shall make Findings of Fact upon the following. Number one: "Whether there is substantial compliance with the intent and purposes of the PUD district, and the apJ>roved Preliminary Development Plan. Now, we have to make substantial Findings Qf E.3&1;, that this Final Development Plan". - I repeat, it says, "Substantial compliance with the intent and purpose of the PUD, and the approved Preliminary Development Plan". It continues: under the Preliminary Development Plan, that there shall be a general description of existing vegetation with an indication of which natural areas will be preserved, and which will be altered or eliminated. Then under (14), under 20-356., "In order to protect the public interest, the Planning and Zoning Board or the City Commission may request any additional information deemed necessary, for the decision making process". And, I kind of feel, I need some preliminary to compare it with, to see if this is in substantial compliance with it. Furthermore, under the Final Development Plan, which is quoted in the materials provided to us, there has to... under Section (7), there has to be a general landscaping and tree planting plan, general landscaping and ~ planting Iilim, indicating there is a "Vegetation to be preserved, and the proposed method of preservation, in addition to proposed irrigation systems, and landscaping materials". I don't have anything from the City Forester. I don't see any general landscaping or tree planting plan. I see removal of forty-three trees. I see no replacement or mitigation of those trees. I've got quite a few...a bit more here, but.. . site development standards, under 20-80., as well as, it appears to be a duplicate...I think it's a 20-.. .354. Again, these are the site development standards that we have to judge any such plan by, and the criteria to be used by the Commission, and this Planning and Zoning Board, in establishing residential densities and in reviewing these plans. Number two: The preservation of natural features or the environmental assets of the site. Under (d) of that 20-254., as well as (d) under 20-380.: the following site development standards .shall mandatorily apply unless waived by the City Commission upon a specific finding after receiving recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board. The unique characteristics of the development site in question, make unnecessary the application of one or more of the following. In other words, we've got to follow these, unless we make a specific finding that we have a right to deviate, and the City Commission approves that right to deviate. All right, now this is what we've got to follow. The natural topography, soils, and vegetation shall be preserved and utilized where possible, through careful location, etc. Removal of mature trees, shall be com,pensated through the installation of landscaping materials. And then number (2) says, landscaping consists of trees, shrubs, vines, groundcovers, irrigation systems .shall be installed in common areas of residential development, and in specific areas of commercial and industrial developments. I looked at the common areas, there's four existing trees, that are staying - there's no additional landscaping to wit, additional trees for the forty-three mature trees that are being cut down and mowed down so that we can accommodate these buildings. Yes, we do need to have housing available to people. But, if you go back to our conservation and our policies and our goals prescribed in our plans, under the beginning of this thing, that's in the white book, it's on page 29 under the conservation element. We're supposed to provide adequate landscaping buffering, building setbacks, Stormwater Management, MINUTES PLAImING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 7 OF 21 other site design criteria that will ensure the natural functions of the reservations are protected. And it say's under Objectives C., protects, conserves, and appropriately used the remaining native vegetation communities, wildlife and wildlife habitat, particular species, etcetera. It continues under policies, that there shall be a mapping of the Sand Pines Scrub, the Pine Flatwoods, the Long Leaf Pine Turkey Oak, the Sand Hills, the Scrubby Flatwoods, and it says that, under Number 2., Policies, ensure the following percentages of native vegetation communities are preserved undiminished by development, or replaced on the site through mitigation plans. And, it goes on about ten percent of the identified vegetation - this, that and the other. Now this is under our basic goals, policies, and objectives, and it says we've got to maintain that, and the unique vegetation that is provided therein. Once again, when you go to the data, that supports these policies. On page CE-5, it talks about upland vegetation, and how, that these particular trees that we've got here - the Sugar Gum Maple, and the other trees that are in here, should be maintained. Let's see, the means for protection of the remaining uplands community shall be through the ~ Iilim review process, and the Landscape and Tree Ordinance. Everything I read says that my job says, I got to protect that stuff, make adequate allowance for it, see that there is mitigation and compensation for it. That I have to compare this Final plan, Development Plan, Final Development Plan, that's being submitted to me and asking me to recommend or make modifications to or send back for more information. Says I got to compare that with the Preliminary, which I never gQt! Which was passed years and years ago - well, that's fine. Bring it to me from years and years ago, and I'll review it. But, I got to have something to look back and forward to. And it should be a professional prepared survey if it's an endangered species - I didn't see any professionally prepared survey of endangered species in here either. And of course, under the Townhouse definition in PUD's (planned Unit Developments), it indicates the Townhouse units are to be separated by a, party or a lot line walls which shall have a minimum of two-hour fire rating, and I assume that's the one that's under consideration now by the City Attorney. But, I'm not sure the City Attorney can decide whether or not there is a two-hour, what is it? Chairman Tom Brown: Fire rated wall. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Two hour fire rating. Right! Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Sir, on that one, they are determining what type of ownership will be there, and the type of ownership will determine the wall. Some walls are to be two hour fire rated, some are to be four, and that's what the Building Official is trying to determine. Board Member Bill Fernandez: For Mr. Greene's benefit, when this first came in front of me, I made, whoever the applicant was, and I don't know ifit was you - fully well aware of my strenuous concern about going out there and clear-cutting and knocking out most of the trees, without some sort of mitigation or replacement or buffer or something. Understand, that I'm not upset with you and your proposed plan. I think we need MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 8 OF 21 townhouses - I'm in favor of them. What I'm upset with, for the record, is that I'm placed in an untenable position, of performing a task that is impossible for me to do, based on the information and data that has been presented. And it makes me very uncomfortable, and I think I need more information, or I'm going to have to ask that the plan be modified, or I'm going to have to recommend a denial, unless somebody can convince me where I'm wrong, and what I've read and spent all afternoon, trying to justify this, and not being able to do so under the existing facts. Somebody's going to have to convince me that I am wrong, and here it is, right there and show it to me, pointing me to it. But, right now, I don't think that legally I can do that. And, the City Commission can do whatever they want, but I'm going to try and do my job as the City Commission and the Ordinances ask me to do it. And if they don't care that I do a proper, diligent, and thorough job, then so be it - let the City Commission run it the way they want to run it, but I'm upset, and it's not at you Sir, and it's not at this project. Mr. Sheldon Greene: Mr. Chairman, may I respond? Chairman Tom Brown: Yes, you certainly may. Mr. Sheldon Greene: First of all, the first meeting you referred to, I was not there, so I. .. this is the first I've heard. I was at the original meeting almost two years ago, well approximately.. .the City Council didn't approve this, but they were just advised of it. That was the language. Now, I will agree with you that I am not in favor of cutting any more trees down, that aren't necessary, I'm sorry, can I be heard? Ifthere are more trees that are required, that can be put here - any of them, the vegetation. ..we're perfectly happy and agreeable to do it. This is - what you are saying now, has not been brought to our attention, up until now. While I'm surprised, I'm not objecting to it - I'll be glad to add whatever is required. And our understanding were that these were just Preliminary Plans, that we still have to go to Final Engineering, and I'm assuming that, in the final engineering, you're referring to, and very possibly, many other items will come up. So, you'll have no objections from us, I'll be glad to put trees, anyplace we can, as long they're.. .not in the roadway or something like that, or if it takes bushes, or anything else - there's no objection! Board Member Bill Fernandez: Sir, I appreciate that very much. But, I am also not an expert to determine what can be done to mitigate and what additional plantings can be required. Our Arbor Ordinance specifically says, that a Forester or City Forester will be appointed, and will advise the Site Plan Review Committee, and that type of Landscaping Architect or something, is the type person that says what mitigation factors can or should be required. And I do understand the distinction in terms here, between Preliminary Engineering and Final Engineering. What I am focusing on, is we've been asked to consider and make a recommendation on a Final Development Plan, a Final Development Plan - not the Engineering. And the Final Development Plan and the process that our Ordinances require us to go through, at least the way I read it - says: that I must compare that with the Preliminary approved Development Plan, to see if there's been any MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 9 OF 21 substantial changes, and I can't compare something I haven't ~~. Now, if this is the Preliminary, then you're getting the benefit of my comments at the Preliminary stage, and maybe then the Final Development Plan will come back at a later point. But, I certainly can't recommend waving the minutes, or having this thing shuttled through too fast, where mistakes are made, and the City Commission doesn't get the full, timely consideration, and input, from the insightful and deliberating process, provided through this Planning and Zoning Board. And I just think it's premature to be here at this point, or that it's lacking certain information, and according to what I have read in here, and quoted on the record this evening, we can request that it be sent back to Staff to work with you, to get us the additional information we need. And I think that's where I'm going to go, but I'm going to allow some of my fellow Commissioners to have some input and say into this and tell me where I am wrong. Chairman Tom Brown: This afternoon, I spent a lot of time, and I had mentioned to Mr. LeBlanc about the trees earlier on in the evening - that I spent a lot of time on this, and one of my questions that I had was - do we have a Forestry type Engineer for this replacement of trees, and if so, where is his or her report - or would you have that information. And, I went through and I read the Ordinances, and I went back to the black book also, and bounced around quite a bit, to try and find out. The thing that handicapped me that has not handicapped Mr. Fernandez, and I imagine that's why he is so convinced and strong in his presentation, which is very good. I think he covered a lot of points that I didn't find today, in going through it, is the fact that he was part of some of this, that has started in '96, and has went on, and I was trying to find out, like in October of '96, a conceptual plan was presented to the City Commission. Now, I was going to ask you Mr. LeBlanc, that in April of '97, the Preliminary Engineering - that doesn't say who that was presented to. . . Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Staff. Chairman Tom Brown: Staff, and okay.. . and in February of '98, it says the revised, so it appears that it was the Preliminary Engineering that went to the Staff, and is that the revised engineering, from the Staff - the next one, on February the second? Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Yes. Chairman Tom Brown: That's a Staff also? And then the Staff convened in August, on this information. Yeah, I'm open to any other Board Members - I've made some comments here. I did go through this, and I certainly appreciate what Mr. Fernandez has done, because I only covered twenty to thirty percent, where, he's covered well over one hundred percent, and I appreciate that - that he spent that time. Is there any other comments? Mr... Board Member Marc Clinch: I have three review comments that's I'd like to interject. It does not appear that the Stormwater Management System is adequate for this site. The MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 10 OF 21 site, Parcel G, represents 2.7 acres, and if you look at sheet C-1, of the plans; the westernmost storm inlets, called out as 2x2 yard break inlets, discharging into what 12 inch PVC; that's on sheet C-l. The westernmost storm inlets, those three 12 inch pipes discharge into a FDOT type C grate inlet, and at that inlet, that structure is picked up with a 15 inch RCP. I believe that that pipe is undersized, and I believe it should be more in the lines of an 18 inch RCP. That would be a net gain of about 1.9 cubic feet per second. Mr. Sheldon Greene: You're utterly losing me on that Sir. The engineers work on it and. . .many times they've been revised, but I cannot answer that, because I am not an engineer at all. Richardson Engineering did the work Board Member Marc Clinch: Sure, and I believe Mr. Sheldon Greene: In conjunction with, I believe it was Mr. Mark Jenkins. They've gone back and forth a number of times, but, I plead ignorance on that. Board Member Marc Clinch: I really think that 15 inch RCP at the center of the site, should be looked at. Chairman Tom Brown: Marc, could I interject here? Board Member Marc Clinch: Sure. Chairman Tom Brown: In the presentation that was given us this evening, by Mr. LeBlanc, you're down into Item (11)? Board Member Marc Clinch: That's correct. Chairman Tom Brown: Ok. So we can address Item (11) of the proposal from the City, that it appears that there's some of the things that we have someone who is very knowledgeable of these items, that I am sure that the City is also. But, it looks like we need, we don't have, or we didn't dig into - I guess we need someone from the City that's responsible for this drainage type thing, to be able to fill us in, whether or not the City has given any waivers on this, or if our requirements do not require that. What you (talking to Board Member Clinch) feel is really needed? Board Member Marc Clinch: Yes, I, I really believe that 15 inch pipe really needs to be upsized, and it may behoove the Developer to do that. 15 inch is an odd size, and to upgrade to 18 inch may in fact, be cheaper. And also, you already have 254 feet of 18 inch pipe coming to the site, adding another 86 feet of 18 inch, I believe would be very beneficial. Chairman Tom Brown: Thank you. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2,1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 11 OF 21 Board Member Marc Clinch: That's it on the Stormwater Management System. The second review comment I'd like to address is in the lines of lighting, and that would be under Item (6) d. - which is on the narrative that accompanies the plans, which addresses extemallighting systems. I do not see any call out for site lighting. I don't know if it just was not included in this plan set, or ifit was... Mr. Sheldon Greene: Florida Power had already given us location where they're going to put, I believe, fifteen or sixteen light poles in the road and going around here. Now, I don't know whether the engineer should or should have not have entered that, but, we have made provisions with Florida Power; which frankly, I was very amazed - their price was very reasonable, to come in and put the light standards, matching the ones up and down Sheoah Boulevard. Board Member Marc Clinch: So, it sounds like that will be an as-built condition, that will be built into the project... Mr. Sheldon Greene: Yes, Sir. Board Member Marc Clinch: .. .Rather than included in the plans. Mr. Sheldon Greene: Yes, Sir. . . . sure, on the final plans. Board Member Marc Clinch: Okay. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Sir. Florida Power usually designs it, and then the City will get a lighting plan from Florida Power or the Developer will get it from Florida Power. The lights are not usually shown on. . . Chairman Tom Brown: Sometimes they have been. Does that come to us again on the Final, the lighting plan? Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Well, if... the Final Engineering doesn't come back, unless you request it, that it comes back, unless there are substantial changes made of the Preliminary Engineering. Chairman Tom Brown: Ok. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: And the Stormwater Management, I came in while you were talking about it. The...I assure you. I most doubly assure you, that we have the most thorough Stormwater Management Engineer in Central Florida. I think, I think Mr. Carrington will vouch for that, and everything else. That before he turns a set of plans loose, he has dissected it, bisected it, turned it upside down, inside out, and when he turns it loose, it meets.. .more.. .he's probably more stringent than St. Johns. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 12 OF 21 Board Member Marc Clinch: What I'm saying is, I think that should be looked at again. As I mentioned, fifteen inch is an odd size. It could represent a premium cost to get that size. You have eighteen inch coming to the site, anyway, to run off to the retention pond. I think looking at another 86 feet of 18 inch, in lieu of 15 inch would be very beneficial. During a rain event, I don't believe that three twelve inch pipes will be able to be handled by fifteen inch. I have done some rough calculations based on the area, the impervious area, and it just.. .my calculations appear that it wouldn't work. My last comment is back on 11 of the narrative that came with the plans regarding fire protection. I see there's only one fireplug, positioned on the eastside of the courtyard, and I don't know if these have gone through the Fire Marshall yet? Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Yes they have. The buildings are sprinkled also. Board Member Marc Clinch: You mentioned Sir, that there's five units, five buildings. Mr. Sheldon Greene: Five buildings, correct. Board Member Marc Clinch: And there's four units per building? Mr. Sheldon Greene: Correct. Board Member Marc Clinch: So there's twenty occupancies? Mr. Sheldon Greene: Correct. Board Member Marc Clinch: I don't believe that one fireplug is adequate for twenty occupanCIes. Mr. Sheldon Greene: Glad to put more, that was what the Fire Marshall requested. He spotted it, at the same time he told us we must have fire sprinklers in each building which will be monitored off site. But, if the Fire Marshall says he wants two or three - be very happy to put them in. Board Member Marc Clinch: I'm not trying to scrutinize your plans, I'm just trying to bring out elements that I think will improve this plan. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Perhaps, in Section 7-78., of the Code, the black book - hydrants shall be spaced not more than 750 feet apart in single family residential zoning districts or single family sections of Planned Unit Developments, and not more than 500 feet apart in all other districts. So, usually the way the Fire Department says, if you're 500 feet, or whatever, determination he makes or uses, if one fire hydrant can reach it, everything - then that works. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 13 OF 21 Board Member Marc Clinch: Is that to the front of the structure, or to the rear? Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: The Fire Chief would have to answer that. Board Member Marc Clinch: That's all I have. Chairman Tom Brown: All right, thank you very much. Is there anyone else that has any comments? It certainly looks like we need a little more information, I believe, I don't think that everyone seems satisfied with all the fine details. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Well, then my suggestion, then Sir, is that you make a motion to table, and that you give us a verbatim copy of the minutes so we can see what all your concerns are. Chairman Tom Brown: What our concerns are - that's what I was going to suggest. A lot of this.. .this is not directed at any individuals in the City, or anything. We were reprimanded last year, on some action that we had taken; to be more functional, like you're seeing this evening. And I think what you're saying, and you will see from the Planning and Zoning Board is the high level of interest for the City and working with the City Staff - to, they have a lot to do, they've done a lot here on this issue, and the thing that attracted my attention to it was, was not being knowledgeable of this, from the very beginning, and seeing an issue that's been moved around since 1996, for two years. Again, you know, that raises the concern immediately because a lot of the players are probably, have changed, and information. Also, for the record, I'd like for our minutes of record. . .Mr. LeBlanc has given us a copy of the Planning and Zoning Minutes of October 2nd, when it was presented to the Planning and Zoning Board, as a conceptual plan. So for the record, we have a copy of that in front of us, at this time. And at that time, Mr. Fernandez did comment on his concerns and again, you can see from the minutes, that it was not detailed in any way. It was taken as a conceptual plan, but you can see this evening, that there is a great concern by this Board as to more unique details. And, I'd like to - I think the details that were presented, and I think some were answered. Mr. Clinch presented on the drainage system, I don't know what the City code is. Do you know Mr. LeBlanc, if the drainage and sewer system has met the City requirements? Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: Yes, it has. Chairman Tom Brown: They have, okay. Even though as we feel with our expertise, that the City requirements maybe, should be changed, so, that's something that I would appreciate if you could keep an eye on that one, and then when we go into City Code, we can recommend those things, I imagine to Mr. Grimms who would pursue whatever the proper channels are to see that we could get or adhere to a more strict code. Maybe it was fine three years ago, and maybe it's not fine now. The other item was the fire hydrant which we kind of beat around and that seems to meet the City Code also, even though to MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 14 OF 21 the visual eye it doesn't look to, you know, a fire hydrant at every fifth house or something like we're used to seeing. So, again we can look into that, in a little more detail. I guess the major concern is the Arbor thing, and I did read the Arbor thing, and there is a concern there, and it's difficult to get into fine details. I guess the biggest problem that I'm confronted with is basically I'm saying the same thing Mr. Fernandez is, but I'm saying it a little different is - that I have no, nothing in front of me to show me, what was, what we've changed in these revisions to maintain a proper Arbor to meet the City requirements. It certainly appears like that, that was the very first thing I did today when I sawall the trees being removed, and you actually drew attention to it because you said so many trees were going to remain, and so many are being removed. So right away it wasn't like somebody was trying to do something wrong, it was there, and it drove me right there, and I went to the City Ordinances to look for how many would have to be replaced, how many would have to go back in when you start taking trees out, and that's how I get into that. So I think that if Mr. Fernandez, I'd like to turn it back to you, and if you can come up with the proper request that is needed. I, I don't think I personally am fully satisfied in to what we are trying to change, in detail, and he seems to be a little more apt on this, on the.. .Bill. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Mr. Chair, at this point I would Move, and it's not required for a second on a Motion to Table, this particular.. .let's get the terminology correct, the Golfside Villas Preliminary Engineering Final Development Plan, and send it back to Staff to work with the applicant; so that when it comes back, that this body will have as part of the consideration, before it, whatever preliminary plans were approved for this particular project, Preliminary Development Plans, Section 20-356., which would include a general description of the existing vegetation and any indication of which will be removed and eliminated and what mitigation steps will be taken to replace any such mature trees, which I think at breast height, have to be three inches to be defined by our Ordinances and Codes as a mature tree. And, as far as additional information being necessary, under section (14) of 20-356., information regarding the fire hydrant, specifically through the Fire Chief, as to whether or not they are adequate, and the fire protection is adequate. What.. .Mr. Clinch was their other concerns about the wastewater drainage and fifteen inch pipes and eighteen inch pipes, and possibly any input from Mr. Greene's Engineer, as to the adequacy of the system, and I believe somewhere in here, I believe in PUD's, the City can even as an additional requirement, require a bond. Such that, if there is flooding out on that property, that that bond would then be used if the City has to go in with their pumps as they did out in some of our other subdivisions that have flooded, out by the golf course. And, that that bond monies would then be used if they insist on installing fifteen inch odd pipe. That's my Motion to Table, and request for additional information from Staff. Chairman Tom Brown: Is there a second? Board Member Bill Fernandez: Doesn't need it - Motion to Table. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 15 OF 21 Chairman Tom Brown: Motion has been made by Mr. Fernandez to Table Regular Agenda Item A, of the Golfside Villas, as he has stated for the following information, from the City Staff. Thank you. Board Member Bill Fernandez: We've got to call the question. Mr. Don LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator: You've got to have a vote. Chairman Tom Brown: Got to have a vote? Question on that. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Call the question. Chairman Tom Brown: Call the question. Board Member Bill Fernandez: All those in favor signify by saying aye. Planning and Zoning Board Members: Aye. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Anyopposed? It's unanimous. Chairman Tom Brown: All right. Yes Sir. B. Update on the new Town Center. Mr. Grimms, introduced Mr. Charles C. Carrington, AlCP, Community Development Director, who presented the latest update of information regarding the new Town Center. Mr. Carrington began his discussion by saying that the City Commission has directed Town Center Consultants, Dover, Kohl and Associates to "Begin work on the design standards for the Town Center, which would including Zoning text amendment, the creation of a Town Center District, if you will, and an amendment to the maps, so it's both a text amendment and a map amendment, that will be required". Mr. Carrington further stated that Staffhas reviewed two sets of drafts, and (at the request of the City Commission), a Workshop has been scheduled for September 28, 1998, which will include a presentation by Dover, Kohl and Associates. He then further outlined the forthcoming timeline of other related events, and spoke of the potential breaking up of parcels, and he mentioned several suggestions for the realignment of the Cross Seminole Trail. Mr. Carrington further mentioned the State Road 434 overpass, and the area to be designated as Magnolia Park. Tape l/Side B The subjects involving endorsements; land swaps; property owners; and the related review process was then mentioned by Mr. Carrington. Mr. Carrington then briefly MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 16 OF 21 explained part of the process required to procure a Master Developer to assist the City. Mr. Carrington then spoke of the current interviews and newspaper advertisements regarding the selection of a Master Developer, and the following phases which will involve contracts, followed by the property acquisition phase. The role of the City's involvement in the development of the new Town Center was broached by Mr. Carrington. Mr. Carrington next spoke of the current status of the City's efforts regarding applications with several agencies to enhance our Parks system was mentioned. He elaborated on the involved funds, and what the City would need to contribute to this effort, along with the review process. The related timetable for upcoming presentations was then mentioned. Chairman Brown thanked Mr. Carrington for his update of information. There was discussion about how and when the Planning and Zoning Board might be involved in the design standards for the new Town Center District; the purchase of land; and the related timetable for this effort. Mr. Carrington further mentioned that "Staff is here to help, we are your Staff - and we'll do everything we can to make sure that you understand it." He further elaborated about the comprehensiveness ofthe document, and some ofthe different factors involved. Board Member Fernandez asked if copies of the plan would be available to the public, and Mr. Carrington explained where copies would be accessible. Board Member Rosanne Karr asked about the focal point of the Town Center, and this was discussed by Mr. Carrington. There was further discussion about the potential of "business development"; and the flexibility of the variouspotentialland use designations. Board Member Carl Stephens, Jr. asked about the westward direction of the trail, and this matter was discussed. Board Member Fernandez then said to Mr. Carrington, "How did we do with the previous.. .did we follow your instructions"? Mr. Carrington replied, "I'm sorry"? Board Member Fernandez then said, "How we handled the previous matter on Golfside Villas"? Mr. Carrington replied, "Can I comment on that a little bit? If you're through with this". However, there was brief discussion about Mr. Carrington contacting this Board about a . potential workshop. The Board then decided to listen to Agenda Items C and D; and then they would further listen to comments from Mr. Carrington, pertaining to Agenda Item A. C. Update on the Computerized Land Use/Zoning Map for the Commission Chambers. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPfEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 17 OF 21 Mr. Grimms gave the Board a brief explanation of the new Computerized Land Use/Zoning Map in the Commission Chambers. D. Update on the City Trails System. Mr. Brook Seall, Parks and Recreation Director spoke to the Board about the recent completion of Phase I ofthe (recreational) trail in this area, and he mentioned that it is the only "true" recreational trail currently planned for the City. He further spoke about the Trails Committee, and that their next effort will be concerned with a trail focusing on "transportation", and that such a trail will probably be incorporated into areas that do not have sidewalks. He further referenced another similar project along AlA, in Flagler County, which was reduced from a planned 12 foot wide trail down to a 5 foot "sidewalk" and, he spoke of what was nm incorporated into this project. Mr. Seall suggested that if this Board did in fact have another idea for a trail, that the Board may want to initiate such an effort. There was further discussion about the ownership of a particular easement; getting horse riders to the Trail - and how such interested parties could be involved in upcoming projects. Grizzly Field; adding trees as buffers in certain areas; and the funding of sidewalks was also discussed. A. Golfside Villas - Preliminary Engineering/Final Development Plan (Further comments and discussion). [This portion ofthe meeting was also requested to be transcribed verbatim.] Mr. Charles Carrington, AICP, Community Development Director: Thank you Mr. Chairman, again, Charles Carrington, and yes, Mr. Fernandez, per your question - I would like to respond. I sort of walked in, in the middle of the discussion, so forgive me, but I did not hear it all, but I would like to make a couple of points and observations, if I may. Filling the Arborist position has been difficult. I have interviewed a lot of people, there aren't a lot of people out there qualified. Those that are qualified want a whole lot more money than the City has earmarked for that position. I've had PhD's apply, that wouldn't settle for less than $50,000 a year - certainly, qualified individuals. I've had a lot of people that would be Arborists, but simply do not have the qualifications or the ability to make the kind of decisions that would be necessary. I finally found one person, that.. .I'm going to conduct a second interview, and I'm going to have a test, during that interview process. And, hopefully, if the individual is successful in passing the test, we'll be able to negotiate a salary. I have talked to the City Manager and explained to him the difficulty I'm having in filling this position, and he has agreed to allow me to pay more than, considerably more than the base salary - way up into the salary range. It's necessary, it's an important position. We have not been sitting on it. It's just been a.. .we did hire one person, but frankly, it did not work out. And so I've had a hard time getting someone in that you all will feel comfortable with, and I'll feel comfortable with. But we will prevail, it's just taking more time than any of us anticipated. The other point that I MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2,1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 18 OF 21 want to make is - we're your Staff, and we're here to support you. 1 did come in a little late, and sitting down in the audience, it appeared to me that Staff was being publicly embarrassed. And 1 know you didn't intend it that way, but, I'm sure that that's the way Don LeBlanc felt in his position. And 1 felt a little bit sorry for him, and 1 guess 1 have no problem agreeing with your concern. If 1 were sitting up there, and 1 did not have the data, that 1 felt comfortable to make a decision, 1 wouldn't have hesitated to make the Motion that Mr. Fernandez made to defer the matter and ask Staff for additional data. The only suggestion 1 can make is that - again, we're your Staff; you work with us, we'll work with you all. And, in a situation like that, and this is just a suggestion; it's my suggestion - 1 think a list of deficiencies that you saw in reviewing it and a Motion to defer was really about all that was necessary, and 1 felt sorry for Don, and Don, Don like all of us has his weaknesses, and.. .but he's a iQQd person, and he really works well with the developers, and he tries very hard, and that's generally my feeling. I'm not being critical at all, I'm just saying that as an observer sitting in the audience, 1 sort of felt like, that, you overdid it a little bit, but that's okay, that's certainly your job. Chairman Tom Brown: Let me, let me bring you up to date, on the way we.. . except for Mr. Clinch who is new to the Board - he was not part of our learning curve that we went through. We went through a tremendous learning curve, and we really appreciate it. Mr. Grimms has been more than doing his job and helping us, and you have too, on all the issues. But, the City Manager took the time to come in here one evening, and sort of held, what 1 consider a seminar, to us - as to our job - what he and the City expected of us, in working with you people. As to pulling emotions out of us, so that we weren't. Anyway, we became politically acute that evening, because of the amount of people that were here, and we were more swayed to the public, than we were, to what we really were supposed to do. And 1 don't know if you were here that evening or not, but if you were, 1 certainly hope that you would have felt sorry for us. Because, he really did a beautiful job on us. Mr. Charles Carrington, AICP, Community Development Director: Yes, 1 sat right here beside him. Chairman Tom Brown: Okay, well then you know. And we had no intentions...I am more than pleased. Like 1 said this afternoon, 1 went through the same things, rather than just go through it again, which 1 could have done. 1 didn't. Mr. Fernandez handled it - he went into more detail than 1 did, and, but 1 had a lot of concerns too. And 1 think your point is good too. 1 think that a listing of what we need to do, and just polish our ends a little bit, we could have said, you know, 1 guess we need this, this, and this. Could have got cut off with a Motion earlier, maybe. So, we're learning too, but, 1 think that...1 feel good that we have helped you in this respect. And Mr. Clinch, who is new to our Board, 1 was very much impressed with the fine detail, because, even though we maybe have met City requirements, maybe it's cited something else that brought our attention to the fact that we maybe we have to look at the, like 1 have said, some of the older things in the City - 1 think 1 heard you tell us that one evening here too. On another item; that you had MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 19 OF 21 mentioned something's haven't been mentioned for a while, and we have to look into them, and I think there's a lot can be done, and I think it's being done. I tell you, I've been here in the City, and not actively involved, but I've come to Commission Meetings, and I've watched it for, you know, close to twelve to fifteen years, you know and I am proud of you people. I really am - of the City; and I believe we all are. We've seen a tremendous...I have seen, I am talking for myself - I have seen a tremendous advancement, improvement of the City culture, the way you people are conducting, and we want to work with you, and I think that we can talk back and forth, so I appreciate your comments. I appreciate you coming back to fill in right now for us. And that's going to help me a little more too, and so, well, I think it's great that Mr., Charlie.. .really. Is anybody... Well, I was going to say - does anyone else have any comments on his comments to us. Bill? Board Member Bill Fernandez: Mr. Chair. Bill Fernandez speaking. I do appreciate your comments, Mr. Carrington, and I will have to own up to the fact that I have a very adversarial approach. It's the same way I argue in court. It might have b~en shortened, but I perceived, that I was being, well, I don't want to say that I was being misinformed, but that it was becoming adversarial, which I don't think it should be - adversarial. And, when I am presented with that approach, I tend to dig my heels in, and really go for the gusto! And I did feel that it was becoming adversarial, and I don't think that that is our function. It should be working together, and yes I was here when the City Manager publicly, instructed us on our very functions. And I take it very serious now. And if I've got to know my functions, I feel City Staff should know what I have to go by, and present me the necessary ammunition to go by it. And, I really don't want to spend all afternoon, digging through, all of these books, to find out that I don't have the proper information - it should never get to me. And I shouldn't be asked to go through that process. I'm not the expert in that area, and I assume the City has the appropriate Staff here to know what is needed, and to present it - to me. And, I will take into consideration, your comments. Mr. Charles Carrington, AICP, Community Development Director: Well, thank you. I understand what you are saying, and I appreciate the fact that you bring out these points, because, it makes me, as Chairman of the Development Review Committees; it makes me more astute in receiving comments from the Fire Chief, when he is sitting there. The Chief of Police is there, the Public Works Director, the City Engineer, and we go around the table. First, we have the developer present the application, and then we have each of the affected departments submit their review comments, for open discussion. And, as Don pointed out, certainly Mark Jenkins, the City Engineer, is an Engineer that nit picks everything. He's very detailed, as a matter of fact, he sometimes drives me crazy because he is so detailed, and I get all kinds of phone calls about the requirements. But, that doesn't mean he's always necessarily right - just nit picking is not necessarily accuracy. So, I'll be more conscious now to make sure that the comments that are coming from the Fire Department, and so forth; or at least from my perspective, sitting as the Chair of that committee, seem to be accurate. And, I'll certainly sit down with Don, and make sure that when he brings things before you, that he does have background information, so that MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 20 OF 21 you all feel comfortable. If you don't feel comfortable with it - just tell us; that, hey.. .you guys did not provide us with the Development Plan, or whatever it is that's missing, and that we're unable to take action - I make a Motion we defer it. And then, let us know what the problem is, and I think you'll get a quicker, and a better response from Staff. And, again I don't mean that as criticism, but I just know the people you are working with; and I know what we really want out of this discussion - is accurate information and you want things to go smoothly and you won't be able to make a decision. And, all I am doing is just making an observation, please don't take it wrong. Board Member Bill Fernandez: Please understand too, we were chastised for not putting enough findings of.fa&j; in our decisions. And the way it was being presented to the City Commission, was that we were deficient, and I wanted to make sure that... Chairman Tom Brown: We certainly were... Board Member Bill Fernandez: .. .deficiency. Chairman Tom Brown: Okay, thank you very much Gentlemen. Mr. Charles Carrington, AICP, Community Development Director: Thank you! III. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Before discussing Future Agenda Items, Chairman Brown presented the former Planning and Zoning Board Chairman, Bill Fernandez with a gift (which "is not a plaque"). Mr. Grimms gave the Board a brief overview of a couple of the projects that they are currently involved with. . Final review of the Draft Bylaws with the City Attorney. . The Board asked that the City Manager be invited to attend the next Planning and Zoning Board meeting - to inform the Board of what he sees for 1999, and what he expects of this Board. IV. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Brown adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by: Andrea Lorenzo-Luaces, Deputy City Clerk City of Winter Springs, Florida MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LPA SEPrEMBER 2, 1998 - REGULAR MEETING PAGE 21 OF 21 APPROVED: ~qH~ -- PLANNING and ZONING BOARDILP A DOCSlboards/planning/fy9798/minutes/090298.doc