1 / 32

2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS

2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS. MEETING OF THE Town Council September 10, 2008. REMAINING TEN ISSUES. FLUE: RESIDENTIAL DENSITY (DCA) PWD HARBOR VILLAGE/PUD COASTAL MANAGEMENT GOALS OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES (DCA) POLICY 1.2.2 REGARDING WETLAND BUFFERS. REMAINING ISSUES.

dolf
Télécharger la présentation

2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLANAMENDMENTS MEETING OF THE Town Council September 10, 2008

  2. REMAINING TEN ISSUES • FLUE: RESIDENTIAL DENSITY (DCA) • PWD • HARBOR VILLAGE/PUD • COASTAL MANAGEMENT GOALS OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES (DCA) • POLICY 1.2.2 REGARDING WETLAND BUFFERS

  3. REMAINING ISSUES • CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT GOALS OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES • FLOOD PLAIN CLARIFICATION (DCA) • FLUE PWD MIXED USE STANDARDS • FLUE BOATEL USAGE • FLUE RE: CLARIFYING BOAT STORAGE AS SEPARATE FROM MARINA

  4. REMAINING ISSUES • DEFINITION OF FAR • OTHER MINOR CORRECTIONS • CLARIFYING HURRICANE EVACUATION DATA AND POLICY • PWD BUILDING SIZE ANALYSIS

  5. FLUE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY “1.2.2.g(2) Residential densities not exceeding 6.7 units/acre, outside the Coastal High Hazard Area through a distribution of existing residential density rights in an aggregated development…. Intended to allow 6.7 units/acre over entire PWD, but unit locations only outside CCHA.

  6. PWD DENSITY • Policy options: • Allow PWD density to be calculated over entire PWD boundary • Allow density to be calculated only on lands outside the CHHA.

  7. PWD DENSITY ASSUME PWD = +/-15 acres, and Non-CHHA = +/-8 acres • OPTION A: 6.7 u/a over all PWD land = +/- 100 UNITS • OPTION B: 6.7 u/a only on 8 acres = +/- 53 UNITS IF NO PWD: • +/- 2 ACRES @ 40 UNITS/ACRE = 80 UNITS • +/- 6 ACRES @ 2.9 U/A = 17.4 UNITS • TOTAL: 97 units Maximum

  8. PROPOSAL • 1.2.2.g(2) Residential densities not exceeding 6.7 units/acre averaged over the entire PWD, provided all units are placed outside the Coastal High Hazard Area and onlythrough a distribution of existing residential density rights in an aggregated development….(EMPHASIS ADDED)

  9. HARBOR VILLAGE PUD Pg. 2 of Staff Memorandum • Parcels denoted on the Future Land Use Map as being subject to the Ponce Marina/Harbor Village PUD are limited to the densities and intensities provided for in the development agreements, as amended in 2002, not to exceed a total of 988 dwelling units and 17,000 square feet of commercial development (excluding residential common facilities such as clubhouses). Some of these sites that are located west of South Peninsula Drive are completely or partially within the Coastal High Hazard Area. The maximum residential cap west of South Peninsula Drive is 334 dwelling units. In no event shall the development density or intensity exceed the underlying land use categories. The following parcel identification numbers are affected by this policy:

  10. HV DEVELOPMENT • Existing Residential : 929 Units • Includes 15 acres on ocean commonly not thought of as Harbor Village • West of South Peninsula unit count is 294 units (vs. 334 permitted in DA) • Vacant Residential: Brady Site and Fisherman’s Harbour 2.75 acres • Likely maximum build out is 963 units (929 + 33+1)

  11. COASTAL MANAGEMENT GOALS OBJECTIVES AND POLICIESPg 3 of Staff Memo • Policy 1.2.2 The Town shall ensure maintenance and protection of the natural functions of the wetland areas by ensuring avoidance of wetland impacts wherever practical, and maintain mitigation standards for wetland impacts. Development adjacent to riverine shoreline areas shall maintain a habitat buffer zone to protect or conserve the canopy, understory and ground cover of native upland vegetation and wetlands. Buffers not less than 25 feet in width shall be established adjacent to and surrounding all wetlands. Wetland buffers greater than 25 feet in width may be required if the upland activity adversely impacts the wetlands’ beneficial functions.

  12. CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT GOP’sPg. 3 and 4 of Memo • Policy 1.1.2 Proposed development and structures located within the 100 year floodplain shall utilize building methods and assess impacts to the floodplain areas as provided in land development regulations including but not limited to minimum standards for finished floor elevations. Fill material required for construction or other impervious surfaces shall not reduce the ability of the floodplains to store and convey floodwaters, or degrade the natural physical and biological functions of protected habitat without approved mitigation.

  13. FLUE PWD MIXED USE STANDARDSLot Area vs. Floor AreaPg. 4 of Staff Memo ….For lot area, the Town shall calculate those upland land areas utilized for each use, excluding roadways, public and private streets, and dedicated utility easements. For mixed use structures and support areas (such as parking lots), the lot area shall be pro-rated on a reasonable basis. For example, shared mix use parking areas may be apportioned based on the parking generation of each use, and mixed use structures may be apportioned on the pro-rated floor area for each use. • Recreational and Commercial Working Waterfronts: 3510% - 100% of floor area the lot area including a reasonable allotment of floor area for marinas, wet boat slips, and other over-water uses.. • Residential uses: 0% - 60% of the lot area. floor area • Water enhanced and general retail uses: 0% - 60% of the lot area. floor area

  14. FLUE: BOATEL USAGEPg. 4/5 of Staff Memo • Per LUDC: “Boatel:  A facility that may be located on land and/or water that is accessible by boat and provides transient lodging accommodations, normally at a daily rate for boat travelers. Boatels shall include sleeping accommodations and provisions for sanitation service and may include cooking facilities. Boatels shall be combined with a marina and its accessory uses, such as a restaurant. 

  15. FLUE: BOATEL USAGEPg. 4/5 of Staff Memo • Boatel currently listed as a use permitted by Special Exception in the B-2 district; • Propose to add Boatel to FLUE list of representative uses on Line 112: “ …Representative uses within the Riverfront Commercial designation are wet boat storage (e.g.,marinas, boat basins, etc.) and dry boat storage, boat sales and services, fishing charter boat dockage, fishing and boating equipment and supplies, sailing equipment and lessons,bicycle and boat rentals, chandleries, seafood markets, restaurants, boatels, and boat construction and repairs. …

  16. FLUE RE: CLARIFYING BOAT STORAGE AS SEPARATE FROM MARINAPg. 5 of Staff Memo • The description of recreation and working waterfront uses starting on line 140 was unclear regarding wet and dry boat storage, as opposed to marina uses. • These uses should be listed separately. The addition of the words “boat storage,” is proposed to clarify this definition: “…These facilities include docks, wharfs, lifts, wet and dry boat storage, marinas, boat ramps, boat hauling and repair facilities, commercial fishing facilities, ….”

  17. DEFINITION OF FARPg. 5/6 of Staff Memo • The vast majority of Comprehensive Plans use the term “Floor Area Ratio” without definition. • Those Plans that do elect to define the term in the Comprehensive Plan do so in general terms. • If it is the desire of the Council, the following addition to Policy 1.2.2 could be included, beginning on line 294. Policy 1.2.2: ……Floor area ratio is determined by dividing the gross floor area of all buildings on a lot by the upland area of that lot.

  18. DEFINITION OF FARPg. 5/6 of Staff Memo • Regardless of whether this language is added, further refined and detailed definitions are appropriate for implementing the Land Use and Development Code. • A detailed definition of floor area for residential buildings is already in the LUDC. • A similar definition for commercial floor area will need to be defined.

  19. OTHER MINOR CORRECTIONSPg. 6 • Clarifying language was added to FLUE Policy 1.4.1 (line 420/421) regarding the burden of an evacuation study to be borne by an applicant. • Former Objective 2.4 and Policy 2.4.1 were relocated and now appear as Policy Objective 5.2 and Policies 5.2.1 through 5.2.4. This had correctly shown in strike out in early versions of the FLUE.

  20. CLARIFYING HURRICANE EVACUATION DATA AND POLICYPgs. 6 and 7 of Memo • 1990 Comp Plan standard of 4.5 hours was based on the evacuation of the Town across the Dunlawton Bridge to the mainland. • Current statutes require times to be based on clearance times, which include evacuees reaching their final point of destination, which may include shelters, homes, hotels and/or out of County locations.

  21. CLARIFYING HURRICANE EVACUATION DATA AND POLICYPgs. 6 and 7 of Memo • The Town’s Plan has been written to be consistent with state statutes, which now require communities to set a maximum clearance time of 16 hours if no other level of service has been set.

  22. CLARIFYING HURRICANE EVACUATION DATA AND POLICYPgs. 6 and 7 of Memo • Two sources cited in Support Document: • 2000 study published by the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council; and • Volusia County EAR adopted in 2006 based on 2005 DCA report • Two studies have variance in Cat 4/5 times (11 vs. 19 hours)

  23. CLARIFYING HURRICANE EVACUATION DATA AND POLICYPgs. 6 and 7 of Memo • Statute suggests maximum time in Comp Plan should be 16 hours, our policy complies with statute. • New study underway, results available early 2009. May dictate changes to policies or statute.

  24. MOST IMPORTANT • County Emergency Management Department will enact evacuation procedures and mandates as they believe are appropriate based on each storm’s characteristics. • Evacuations may begin much earlier than 19 or 16 hours, to ensure a safe and orderly evacuation can occur before winds approach speeds where driving is unsafe. • The County urges residents to make plans for such events in advance.

  25. PWD POLICY 4.2.4 • Have been asked to reiterate presentation from July 30, 2008 regarding proposed change to FLUE Policy 4.2.4 (lines 628 – 641). • This policy covers PWD design standard requirements, and offers ability to increase 5,000 sf cap only in PWD. • Introduced maximum proposed cap of 10,000 sf. although cap may be less in LUDC.

  26. FLUE Policy 4.2.4 • Policy 4.2.4 In developing the standards for the Planned Waterfront Development District, the town shall use design modeling programs and other planning tools to determine standards for the district, including if limited exceptions to the building floor area cap of 5,000 square feet may be permitted. The criteria for assessing such building design and size standards shall include, but are not limited to, the placement of buildings, public and private viewsheds and view corridors, setbacks from residential properties, and whether increased building sizes provide a direct community benefit. For the purposes of this policy, community benefit may include the reduction of noise impacts on adjacent properties, improved safety, and/or the clustering of buildings in such a manner that provides enhanced open areas, tree preservation and/or view corridors, or other acceptable public benefits as negotiated in the development agreement. Although design standards may impose more limiting size standards, in no event shall buildings greater than 10,000 square feet be allowed.

  27. JUSTIFICATION FOR INCREASE ABOVE 5,000 SF • Desire to promote community sensitive designs and possibly mitigate nuisance impacts, such as noise. • For example, if 5,000 sf boat storage building is allowed in Riverfront Commercial, likely to result in long rectangular building, e.g. Inlet Harbor.

  28. PWD BUILDING SIZE ISSUE • Long rectangular boat storage does not enclose area used to remove boats from racks (maneuverability areas). • To allow maneuverability areas to be enclosed would reduce noise impacts, fumes etc. • Needs to be adequate width to allow forklift to back up and turn.

  29. PWD BUILDING SIZE ISSUE • Determined that maneuverability areas need to be of equal width as structure to safely direct equipment, thus doubling width of building. • Thus 5,000 sf would need to increase to 10,000 to allow equal boat storage in enclosed areas.

  30. PWD BUILDING SIZE ISSUE • Presumed other uses: Commercial, residential, office can be customized to any size based on design guidelines. • Desire to set upward limit since increase over 5,000 SF is offered as PWD incentive, and need to balance neighborhood compatibility and character concerns.

  31. Final ClarificationPolicy 4.2.1 • Policy 4.2.1 Provide the opportunity for creativity in regulations to allow site plan solutions that enhance the character of the existing fabric of the immediate surroundings. This shall be accomplished through amendments to the Town’s Land Use and Development Code to be completed in 2003. The Planned Waterfront Developmentdistrict shall provide for flexible design approaches and a mix of commercial and residential uses. Planned Waterfront Developments may be considered as an appropriate zone district within riverfront commercial areas and only the high density, multi-family residential area located at the southern terminus of Front Street. Site eligibility shall be limited to unified ownership properties of 5 contiguous upland acres or larger that create unity of title, and shall include preservation and/or enhanced elements of public open space, passive parks, trails and boardwalks along and to the river.

  32. RECOMMENDATION • Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance 2008-01 on second reading

More Related