Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009 08 10 Regular 602 Residential Compatibility RegulationsCOMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 602 August 10, 2009 Regular Meeting Consent Information Public Hearin Re ular X Mgr./Dept. REQUEST: The Community Development Department-Customer Service Division wishes to provide the City Commission with updated information on the administration of the Residential Compatibility Regulations. PURPOSE: To provide updated information on the administration of the Residential Compatibility and Harmony regulations and the effects of these regulations on the issuance of permits in sufficient detail to allow the Commission to discuss the effectiveness of the ordinance as currently written and whether the ordinance should remain the same or be modified or repealed. APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY: City Code Section 9-607 Ordinance 2006-08 Ordinance 2006-22 Ordinance 2007-19 Ordinance 2007-21 BACKGROUND: In response to several permits issued according to code but contextually incompatible with the surrounding community, emergency Ordinance 2006-08 was adopted on May 22, 2006 to address the need to protect and preserve the residential character of neighborhoods where private deed restrictions had expired. The Sunset Provision of this ordinance was extended on two separate occasions (Ordinance 2006-22 and Ordinance 2007-19) for a total of nine (9) months. Ordinance 2007-21 became effective July 9, 2007. This ordinance expanded the City's Minimum Community Appearance and Aesthetic Review regulations, on a limited basis, to include single-family residences and formally authorized the code text change. During discussions at the Commission's April 13, 2009 meeting, staff was directed to bring the aesthetic review regulations back with information to facilitate discussion and a decision by the Commission as to whether the regulations "make sense" the way they are written. August 10, 2009 Regular Agenda Item 602 CONSIDERATIONS: Many permits, including fence and shed permits were previously issued over-the-counter. The review regulations have impacted the time and resources necessary to issue these permits, in some cases by as much as one week. Fences, sheds, additions to single family residences, and associated accessory structures are the permits most affected by the residential aesthetic review standards. Permit applications now include reviewing aerial photos of the property and surrounding area, plats, Home Owner Association documentation, and deed restrictions. While staff attempts to determine compatibility with existing structures on site as well as in the neighborhood by examining aerial photographs, many times a field visit to obtain astreet-level perspective is necessary to make a definitive decision as to whether or not the proposed construction could be considered contextually compatible. Recently, staff has been seeing more permits for the resurfacing of residential driveways and sidewalks. These permits, under the current regulations, must be reviewed for compatibility. Historically, these permits have also been issued over-the-counter. In addition to the extended time frames necessary for review, the applicant must now provide a greater level of detailed information than was previously required to facilitate these reviews (i.e. the color and pattern of pavers, the type and color of fencing material). Since May 2006, the Customer Service Division has processed the following permits that have required review pursuant to the provisions of the Residential Compatibility Regulations: Permit T e Quanti Fences 424 Garage Door 67 Screen Enclosures 259 Sheds 48 Sin le Famil Houses 14 Single Family/Additions 196 Miscellaneous 275 Right of Way 101 Walls 32 Total 1,417 Staff has spent approximately 2,336 hours administering the Residential Compatibility Regulations since May 22, 2006. These hours represent time over and above the time required to issue these permits before the Residential Compatibility Regulations went into effect. Staff surveys have indicated that contactors and some residents find the additional time required to issue their permits, as a result of the additional review time necessitated to address the compatibility regulations, to be a hindrance in doing business with the City of Winter Springs. This concern applies primarily to permits which, before the compatibility regulations, were over-the-counter permits. While these concerns from homeowners have lessened as staff has communicated the intent of the ordinance and the protection is affords them as well s their neighbors, the contractors still find these regulations as a hindrance to their ability to do business as timely as they would prefer. As staff continues to work with the compatibility ordinance, they have initiated various process changes to facilitate a more expeditious issuance of these permits. Applicants can now FAX or e-mail their permit applications for several of the less complicated permits. Increased permit tracking ability afforded by upgrades/more utilization of the KIVA system and additional staff training have also served to reduce review times. -2- August 10, 2009 Regular Agenda Item 602 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Commission consider the information provided herein and determine whether the provisions of Ordinance 2007-21 should remain the same, be modified, or repealed. ATTACHMENTS: A -Section 9-600-607 of the City's Code of Ordinances CITY COMMISSION ACTION: -3- ATTACHMENT A ARTICLE XII. MINIMUM COMMUNITY APPEARANCE AND AESTHETIC REVIEW STANDARDS. Sec. 9-600. Statement of findings and purpose. (a) The City of Winter Springs has evolved into a unique family-oriented community with extraordinary cultural character and beauty. Indicative of Winter Springs' uniqueness is its reputation as primarily a residential community with beautiful mature trees, award-winning parks, scenic lakefront vistas, and innovative development projects such as the Tuscawilla PUD, Village Walk, Cross-Seminole Trail, and the Towne Center--within close proximity to several internationally-renowned tourist destinations including Walt Disney World, Universal Studios, Kennedy Space Center and several major cruise ship terminals. (b) In recognition of Winter Springs' uniqueness, the city commission has determined that a deliberate and conscientious effort must be made by community leaders, in partnership with architects, planners, realtors, builders, and the citizenry of Winter Springs, to protect the general welfare of the community by preserving and improving Winter Springs' aesthetic appearance, beauty, and character--so as to ultimately enhance the quality of life and civic pride of all people who reside, work, vacation, or spend time in Winter Springs. (c) The facilitator of this effort shall be the city commission, whose primary purpose shall be to encourage creative, effective, and flexible architectural standards and cohesive community development consistent with the intent and purpose of this article. (d) The cultural character and beauty of Winter Springs involves, among other things, the aesthetic quality of all one sees in moving about the entire community. Consequently, the ultimate designers and developers of buildings and structures must be informed of the larger context in which their particular works will be viewed within the community. The task of the city commission shall be to provide a mechanism by which proposed new development and modifications or rehabilitations of buildings and structures can be reviewed and approved, in a uniform manner, so as to be in harmony with the comprehensive architecturally related policies, objectives and standards adopted by Winter Springs for the overall betterment of the community. (e) It is recognized by the Florida Supreme Court that zoning solely for aesthetic purposes is not outside the scope of the police power of municipal governments--like Winter Springs. It has also been judicially recognized in Florida (and in other jurisdictions) that the promotion of aesthetic beauty also protects property values, tourism, and other economic interests which Winter Springs deems vital to the community. (f) Zoning is the single most powerful legal enforcement of an overall urban concept, but alone it does not create beauty, aesthetic order, or amenity. The task of the city commission shall be to preserve various elements of urban beauty and require that new and redevelopment projects being developed enhance existing development and the landscape of the community. (g) The essential foundation of beauty in communities is harmony. The plan for achieving beauty must grow out of special local characteristics of site, development and redevelopment potential. Some local areas of natural beauty are Lake Jessup, city parks, Cross-Seminole Trail, and conservation areas designated in the city's comprehensive plan. The vistas and visual delight of these should only be enhanced. (h) It is the intent and purpose of this article to apply to all new commercial, industrial, institutional, multi-family, and residential subdivision development projects and major alterations thereto. It is not intended to apply to individual single-family residences, except as specified in section 9-607. (Ord. No. 2003-43, § 2, 1-26-04; Ord. No. 2007-21, § 2, 7-9-07) Sec. 9-601. Approval prerequisite for permits. (a) Except as provided in subparagraph (b) of this section, all new building elevations and accessory structures, and proposed permanent signs for buildings or structures, or major alterations thereto, shall be approved by the city commission before a permit is issued for any such building, structure, or sign, which has an exterior visual impact or effect on the community. (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, if the city manager determines that a building permit application is minor or insignificant, the city manager may grant the permit without submitting the application to the city commission for approval, providing the permit is consistent with the intent and purpose of this article. For purposes of this paragraph, the phrase "minor or insignificant" shall mean a small scale renovation or modification project affecting a small site and having a nominal exterior visual impact and effect on the community. Any party or person adversely affected by a decision made by the city manager may appeal said decision to the city commission. (Ord. No. 2003-43, § 2, 1-26-04) Sec. 9-602. Minimum standards; compliance with other code provisions. The requirements of this article shall be considered minimum standards. Further, they shall be deemed supplemental of, and in addition to, all other applicable codes adopted by the city including, but not limited to, the Land Development Regulations, and all fire and building regulations. (Ord. No. 2003-43, § 2, 1-26-04) Sec.9-603. Procedure. (a) Submission of application. As part of the site plan or subdivision review process, or upon separate application created by the city manager, all applicants for development approval subject to the provisions of this article shall submit to the city manager or his designee the application and documents prescribed in section 9-605. (b) Scheduling and notice of hearing. Upon receipt of the required documents, the city manager shall forthwith schedule a hearing on the application before the city commission. Said hearing shall run concurrently with the site plan or subdivision review process to the extent feasible and practicable. Public notice of the time and place of the public meeting shall be posted at places within the city deemed reasonably appropriate for providing such notice. (c) Conduct of hearing; approval or denial. At the designated public hearing, the city commission shall hear the applicant on the proposed application, and shall hear from members of the general public in accordance with the rules and procedures adopted by the city commission. During the public hearing, the applicant may be present in person or by counsel, and the applicant has the right to present evidence in support of the application and cross examine adverse witnesses whose testimony is offered at the hearing. The city commission may approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application only after consideration of whether the following criteria have been satisfied: (1) The plans and specifications of the proposed project indicate that the setting, landscaping, proportions, materials, colors, texture, scale, unity, balance, rhythm, contrast, and simplicity are coordinated in a harmonious manner relevant to the particular proposal, surrounding area and cultural character of the community. (2) The plans for the proposed project are in harmony with any future development which has been formally approved by the city within the surrounding area. (3) The plans for the proposed project are not excessively similar or dissimilar to any other building, structure or sign which is either fully constructed, permitted but not fully constructed, or included on the same permit application, and facing upon the same or intersecting street within five hundred (500) feet of the proposed site, with respect to one or more of the following features of exterior design and appearance: a. Front or side elevations; b. Size and arrangement of elevation facing the street, including reverse arrangement; or c. Other significant features of design such as, but not limited to: materials, roof line, hardscape improvements, and height or design elements. (4) The plans for the proposed project are in harmony with, or significantly enhance, the established character of other buildings, structures or signs in the surrounding area with respect to architectural specifications and design features deemed significant based upon commonly accepted architectural principles of the local community. (5) The proposed project is consistent and compatible with the intent and purpose of this article, the Comprehensive Plan for Winter Springs, design criteria adopted by the city (e.g. Towne Center guidelines, SR 434 design specifications) and other applicable federal, state or local laws. (6) The proposed project has incorporated significant architectural enhancements such as concrete masonry units with stucco, marble, termite-resistant wood, wrought iron, brick, columns and piers, porches, arches, fountains, planting areas, display windows, and other distinctive design detailing and promoting the character of the community. (Ord. No. 2003-43, § 2, 1-26-04) Sec. 9-604. Duration of approval. Approvals by the city commission under this article shall be valid for a maximum of eighteen (18) months from the date the city commission renders its approval at a public meeting. If the applicant fails to obtain a building permit within the eighteen (18) month period, the city commission's approval shall expire at the end of the period. However, once a building permit is issued, the approval shall be valid for a time period equal to the permit and shall expire only if the building permit expires. Reasonable extensions may be granted by the city commission upon good cause shown by the applicant, provided substantial changes have not occurred in the surrounding area that would make the prior approval inconsistent with the criteria set forth in section 9-603. (Ord. No. 2003-43, § 2, 1-26-04) Sec. 9-605. Application criteria. An applicant shall submit the following application information to the city manager or his designee for consideration by the city commission: (1) A site plan in accordance with other provisions of the city code. (2) Elevations illustrating all sides of structures facing public streets or spaces. (3) Illustration of all walls, fences, and other accessory structures and the indication of their height and the materials of their construction. (4) Elevation of proposed exterior permanent signs, outdoor advertising or other constructed elements other than habitable space, if any. (5) Illustration of materials, texture, and colors to be used on all buildings, accessory structures, exterior signs, and other constructed elements. (6) Such other architectural and engineering data as may be requested to clarify the application. (Ord. No. 2003-43, § 2, 1-26-04) Sec. 9-606. Building permits; enforcement. Unless otherwise provided by this article, no building permit shall be issued until the city commission has approved the proposed building's or structure's architectural specifications and design features, pursuant to this article. Any final plans and specifications that differ substantially, in the opinion of the city manager, from the approved application by the city commission shall be resubmitted prior to the issuance of the building permit. All approved specifications and design features shall become a binding condition of, and made a part of, the building permit(s) secured for the building or structure associated therewith. The building permit shall be enforced in a manner similar to all other building permits issued by the city. (Ord. No. 2003-43, § 2, 1-26-04) Sec. 9-607. Residential compatibility and harmony regulations. (a) It is the intent of this section to promote and protect existing residential developments by prohibiting additions, modifications and expansions of structures and buildings that are incompatible and not in harmony with the subject property and the surrounding neighborhood. These regulations shall apply to existing residential land uses and residential principal and accessory buildings and structures located thereon or infill residential development projects on vacant lots within established residential developments. (b) Before any building permit is issued for the addition, modification or expansion of any building or structure on a residential lot, the city manager or designee shall consider and review the plans and specifications to determine whether or not the proposed addition, modification or expansion is compatible and in harmony with existing buildings and structures on the subject property and with the surrounding neighborhood. Compatibility and harmony shall be determined based on a review of the setting, landscaping, proportions, materials, colors, texture, scale, unity, balance, rhythm, contrast and simplicity of the proposed addition, modification or expansion. Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit a proposed addition, modification or expansion that significantly enhances the established character of other buildings and structures on the subject property and within the surrounding neighborhood in accordance with the review criteria stated above and commonly accepted architectural principles of the local community. The city manager is authorized to retain the services of a technical advisor on an as-needed basis. (c) If the city manager or designee determines that the addition, modification or expansion is not compatible and in harmony, the building permit application shall be denied on that basis. The applicant shall have the right to appeal the denial to the city commission. Said appeal shall be filed with the city manager in writing within five (5) calendar days of denial along with a filing fee established by the city commission, Upon review of the appeal the city commission shall render a final decision on the issue of residential compatibility and harmony. All decisions of the city commission shall be considered final and shall be subject to appeal to a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to law. (d) These regulations are supplemental and in addition to all other applicable provisions of the City Code. To the extent that these regulations conflict with any other provision of the City Code, these regulations shall prevail and apply. (Ord. No. 2007-21, § 2, 7-9-07)