City Commission Workshop Meeting

MINUTES City Commission Workshop 5:30 PM - Thursday, October 14, 2021 - City Hall CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF QUORUM AND PROPER NOTICE PRESENT: Commissioner Nan Cobb, Vice Mayor Emily Lee, Commissioner Willie Hawkins, Commissioner Karen LeHeup-Smith and and Mayor Michael L. Holland Mayor Holland announced that no public input would be allowed during the workshop; however, anything to be voted on would be brought back to a regular Commission meeting and input would be allowed at that time. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF QUORUM AND PROPER NOTICE 1. WORKSHOP ITEMS WITH DISCUSSION, PUBLIC INPUT AND DIRECTION 1.1 Discussion on Proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment (2021-CPT- 02/Ordinance Number 21-22) Lori Barnes, Development Services Director, reviewed recent discussions by the Commission regarding the comprehensive plan text amendment noting that it was continued to the date certain of October 21, 2021. She stated it would be considered by the Commission if transmitted by the Local Planning Agency (LPA). She commented on meetings she had with the individual Commissioners and noted that some requests were not included due to there not being a majority of Commissioners that agreed with the suggestions. Ms. Barnes then reviewed the major areas of concern in common amongst all the Commissioners as follows: 1) Elimination of the Rural Residential (RR) and Agricultural future land use designations; 2) Adding a new residential land use designation; and 3) Elimination of Map #19. She explained the criteria for the Rural Residential designation and the reasons for the recommendation that it be eliminated. She indicated there are currently approximately 30 properties with the RR designation. She stated that the SR (Suburban Residential) designation accommodates the majority of residential development within the City. She cited the need for a minimum amount of residential density in order to make the provision of utilities cost effective noting that one unit per acre would make it difficult to provide City services. Ms. Barnes then presented the Future Land Use Map and noted the locations with RR designation . CONSENSUS: It was a consensus of the Commission for the Rural Residential designation to be eliminated. Eustis City Commission Workshop Page 1 of 7 October 14, 2021  Ms. Barnes then reviewed the Suburban Residential (SR) designation which permits up to five units per acre. She provided an overview of the SR designation and where it is located within the City. She explained that the comprehensive plan states that a property owner may not necessarily obtain the maximum allowed density based on the application of the City's design district standards and other land development regulations (LDR's) as they are applied on a site specific basis. She stated that the City's LDR's are designed to consider each parcel separately. She then discussed how the design district designations interact with the land use designations stating that the City has twelve different design districts. She presented a map showing the various development patterns within the City and the Design District map. The Commission questioned the location of different designations with Ms. Barnes responding there is currently one Suburban district in the Florida Foods area and there are no Rural district designations. She added there is not currently a Suburban or Rural Center designation only an Urban center. She indicated that the Rural, Suburban Center or Rural Center could be applicable in the future depending on the proposed uses. She stated that what is mostly seen on the map is Neighborhoods and Corridors. Ms. Barnes noted recent discussions regarding Randall Arendt. She cited previous workshops in 2015, and as far back as 2004, at which Mr. Arendt gave presentations to the City regarding conservation space, open space and how to preserve those while allowing development. She stated that in 2008 the City contracted with Randall Arendt to assist with the City's revamp of its Land Development Regulations in conjunction with Gladding Jackson to provide the form-based code. She cited a memo which indicated Mr. Arendt was recommending a four-step design process to ensure conservation design in the City's rural design district areas. She stated that the City's regulations provide site design standards for all of the City's districts including the rural design districts that were drafted based on his recommendations and the current City regulations still reflect that. She further stated those standards ensure a site-design process that is based on preservation of wetlands and water bodies, providing open space and planning for developed areas. She explained the four steps outlined by Mr. Arendt and followed by the City. She cited minutes from 2008 and 2009 which state they should focus on overall density rather than lot sizes to help provide the feeling of openness and ruralness and clustering the lots in a concentrated area on the property. She added that, in addition to the Rural site design standards, the City also has standards that require residential compatibility and transitions and cited the ability of developers to have landscape buffers or park space between developments. She noted that Lake County does not require dedicated park space in their subdivisions. Ms. Barnes noted that three Commissioners expressed the desire to create a new land use designation but there was not total agreement on the density limitations. She stated she is recommending a maximum of 3 dwelling units per acre and that it be limited to within a half mile of the existing joint planning area boundaries and only where the City is not contiguous to another city's joint planning area or in our local service boundary agreement. She explained that the City's north side is bounded by Umatilla's ISBA, the southeast is bounded by Mount Dora's JPA and the southwest is bounded by Tavares's ISBA. She stated the new designation would only allow single family and duplex units, would not allow any multi-family and would provide a transition between the City and outlying County area. She Eustis City Commission Workshop Page 2 of 7 October 14, 2021  presented a map showing where the allowed areas would be located, if the designation is approved. The Commission confirmed what the delineating line is to the east with Ms. Barnes indicating the eastern boundary is Thrill Hill Road and the map indicates slightly beyond that. She noted that the JPA does not limit the City to annexing only within the JPA. The Commission discussed what would be allowed and whether or not to create the new designation with Ms. Barnes indicating the criteria is included in the staff report but not in the presentation slides. Commissioner Cobb asked about agricultural/transitional with Ms. Barnes explaining there was not a consensus during the individual meetings to allow agricultural uses by right within City limits. She explained the current regulations allow anyone in any land use district may request a conditional use permit (CUP) and the City Commission can base their decision on the site characteristics and can impose conditions on the conditional uses to insure compatibility with the surrounding area. She further explained that the other Commissioners felt it was important to maintain control. She added that, if a large development wanted to include an agricultural use in their project, they could request that permission through their preliminary plat approval. Commissioner Cobb commented on her desire to allow an agricultural transitional use out to the east. She questioned whether or not property owners would have to keep coming back for permission. Ms. Barnes responded that a developer could request a blanket approval for a new development which would allow specific types of agricultural within the development. She indicated anyone can apply at this time for a CUP. She further explained that, if someone is currently in the County and they are already using their property for an agricultural use at the time they request annexation, their use would be permitted to continue as a pre-existing nonconforming use and they would not have to request a CUP. However, if it was a vacant property that they later built on and wanted to have an agricultural use, they would have to apply for the CUP. Depending on the size of the property and adjoining uses, staff may recommend certain conditions. The Commission further discussed conditional use permits and the affiliated cost with Ms. Barnes stating that staff could bring back the fee schedule for revision. Commissioner LeHeup-Smith recapped what she heard as follows: 1) If they are in the county and the agricultural use is existing and they come into the City the use can continue; 2) If it is vacant and they want to add they have to request a CUP one time; and 3) If they are in the County, the use may continue and if they annex the use can continue. CONSENSUS: It was a consensus to create the new land use designation with three units per acre. Ms. Barnes then cited the next proposal to eliminate the Agricultural future land use designation. She reviewed the criteria for the Agricultural designation noting Eustis City Commission Workshop Page 3 of 7 October 14, 2021  that there are only two properties currently in the City with that designation. She stated that if a property meets the criteria for annexation, it is considered to be suitable for urbanization noting discussion by Gladding Jackson in 2010 when the comprehensive plan was being re-written. She added that agricultural uses can be sometimes detrimental to surrounding residential development. She commented on the existing conditional use permit process which provides the Commission with some control over what may be allowed. She cited a previous application for the Pine Meadows area where the developer wanted to be able to offer equestrian uses. She explained the conditions the Commission placed on that development including that a home had to be built on the lot before the property could be used for horses and no boarding or other commercial activities would be allowed. Ms. Barnes noted the only two properties in the City designated as Agricultural and explained that an agricultural exemption is based solely on the actual agricultural use not the land use designation. Commissioner Cobb indicated she had no problem with getting rid of the Agricultural designation on the two properties. She expressed her concern regarding eliminating agriculture completely. Discussion was held regarding whether or not to eliminate the Agricultural designation with Commissioner LeHeup-Smith noting that if they have an existing agricultural use it could continue. Ms. Barnes confirmed that the next JPA working group meeting is scheduled for October 18th with first reading on the amendment to be held on October 21st. She indicated they could leave in the elimination and then make changes on first reading if they so desired . Further discussion was held regarding the Agricultural designation and the continu ing negotiations with Lake County. Ms. Barnes explained they are eliminating the Agricultural designation but not eliminating the opportunity to continue an agricultural use or to request an agricultural use. She further explained that cities by design are supposed to be urban. She stated that agricultural uses tend to have negative impacts on other properties so most cities do not have an agricultural designation. She added that, if the Commission decides to retain the designation , she would like the opportunity to change the Agricultural definition. Discussion was held regarding including agricultural in the new designation. Ms. Barnes clarified that Commissioner Cobb is proposing that the new designation would be Suburban/Agricultural Transitional and there would be certain agricultural uses allowable in conjunction with the residential uses. She stated certain agricultural uses could be added as allowed uses. She stated the concern is that a developer comes in and requests the Suburban/Agricultural Transitional you have certain residents with an agricultural use that negatively impacts surrounding residents . Ms. Barnes then explained the use of the land development designations and cited the possibility of a legal challenge. She further explained staffs intent to minimize the possibility of legal challenges due to inconsistencies in the plan . Eustis City Commission Workshop Page 4 of 7 October 14, 2021  CONSENSUS: It was a consensus of the Commission to eliminate the Agricultural designation. Ms. Barnes indicated she would put on a future agenda a discussion about the cond itional use permit application fees. Ms. Barnes then discussed the requ ired maps for the Comprehensive Plan and presented a copy of Map #1 - City Future Land Use Map. She then presented Map #19 which shows the County Future Land Use Map. She indicated there has been confusion about the applicability of Map #19 as a regulatory map. She stated its inclusion was not due to conversations with Lake County and it is not required to be included in the comprehensive plan . She indicated the County's FLU Map is inconsistent with the City's Future Land Use Element. She stated that discussions indicated the majority of the Commission supported elimination of Map #19. CONSENSUS: It was a consensus of the Commission to eliminate Map #19. Ms. Barnes then stated there were no further specific concerns regarding the amendments for the purpose of cleaning up language, eliminating redundant language and removing specificity more appropriate for the land development regulations. The Commission thanked Ms . Barnes for meeting with them individually to work out the issues. 1.2 Discussion regarding future vision for the City of Eustis Tom Carrino, Economic Development Director, explained that the presentation will cover the CRA plan as well as affiliated land development regulations. He provided an overview explaining what is a CRA. He emphasized that the CRA funding is 100% local tax dollars funded by the City of Eustis, Lake County, the Water Authority and the Lake County Ambulance MSTU. He stated the CRA is a tool to support and encourage private investment in a designated area to improve the taxable values in the area and increase the taxes paid which are then reinvested in the area. He further explained that the CRA is not federally or state funded nor it is it grant funded. Mr. Carrino then explained how CRA funds may be leveraged as follows: 1) Pay as you go method where someone builds something and the CRA enters into an agreement stipulating that they get no funding until they build what they agreed to and start paying taxes on that and then those taxes get re-invested into the project; and 2) Bonding or borrowing funding which is repaid by tax proceeds from the project. He stated that either method provides for private projects to pay for their own incentives over time. The Commission requested further information regarding the bonding or borrowing methods with Mr. Carrino providing examples of each type of fund ing and how the CRA is protected. Mr. Carrino then reviewed the history of the Eustis CRA and the CRA boundaries. He explained the existence of areas in the City that are not within the CRA due to Eustis City Commission Workshop Page 5 of 7 October 14, 2021  having to go through a specific process in order to be incorporated into the CRA. He then reviewed the goals and objectives from the 1990 Redevelopment Plan and cited projects that have been accomplished under those goals and objectives. He reviewed the 1995 Waterfront Redevelopment Plan which was distributed to the Commission in hard copy. He cited the addition of the Main Street Preservation Plan and Commercial Facade Guidelines in 1998. He noted that the 2002 CRA amendment was discussed but never actually adopted. He cited the following amendments: 1) 2004 resolution to create a Brownfields area; 2) 2008 Eustis Downtown Master Plan; and 3) 2009 East CRA Master Plan. Mr. Carrino discussed the downtown redevelopment plan noting the three identified catalyst sites as the Waterman site, Sharp's Mobile Home Park and Grove Square Shopping Center. He indicated that the East CRA Master Plan marketing piece was the only thing actually adopted in 2009. He reviewed various goals included in the 2009 East CRA plan. He noted that recently residents asked that no more retention ponds be placed in the neighborhood and stated that should not be required as the City has addressed most of the drainage issues. Mr. Carrino then reviewed the 2016 Redevelopment Plan noting that the CRA was extended for another 30 years. He indicated that everything was incorporated into one new plan rather than amending the old plan. He provided an overview of the 2016 plan and cited the individual catalyst sites and various goals and objectives. The Commission commented on the intent of the bypass and questioned how the City can encourage travelers to use the bypass. Comments were made on the need to determine how to get people to stop in Eustis. Mr. Carrino commented on the change in transportation philosophy and the intent of FOOT to slow traffic down and make it safer. Discussion was held regarding rebuilding the downtown to get more people to come there. Mr. Carrino then reviewed the public input from the 2017 community meetings and online survey. He commented on the 2018 CRA boundary expansion including the required finding of necessity and presented a map showing the expansion. He noted that the appointment of residents to the CRA Review Committee will be on the October 21st Commission agenda and stated the staff report includes discussion on the process for moving forward. The Commission discussed the need for more projects to be completed within the CRA with Mr. Carrino citing projects that have been completed. Commissioner Cobb cited drainage projects that were also funded by the Lake County Water Authority and Lake County as well as the CRA. Mr. Carrino commented on the Florida Redevelopment Association website. He cited the following criteria for projects: 1) Is it in the plan; 2) Is it in the CRA district; and 3) Does it meet some criteria within the state statute. Eustis City Commission Workshop Page 6 of 7 October 14, 2021  Discussion was held regarding issues with the extension of Bates Avenue including the higher price tag, wetlands in the way, and some residents not wanting it. Discussion was held regarding the need to insure quality with whatever is done with comments on what was done at Palmetto Park. Ms. Barnes reported on how the City's regulations over time have been amended to address CRA goals and objectives. She stated that the strategic plan does address focusing economic development on all of Eustis, not just on the Central Business District. She added that it also discusses encouraging residential and commercial redevelopment in the CRA as a whole utilizing incentives and other initiatives. It also calls for the City to work constructively with future developers for redevelopment of the catalyst sites . She indicated that the comprehensive plan also has objectives regarding facilitating infill development within older sections of the City and revitalizing east Eustis and the downtown. Ms. Barnes explained how all of the City's regulations work together to guide the urban form which is necessary to create a vibrant downtown or mixed use community as in the east CRA area. She noted the architectural guidelines which were originally adopted only as guidelines and not incorporated into the code so they were not enforceable. She explained that they were finally incorporated into the code in 2014 so they are now enforceable. She cited the adoption of a mandatory mixed use in the downtown core in 2016. She then commented on the City's form-based code citing how the design district insures the compatibility. She provided examples for downtown and the east side of the CRA showing how the design district criteria is applied. The Commission confirmed that the former Waterman lots are just outside the commercial historic district with Ms. Barnes indicating the majority of that historic district is developed . She stated that is a National Historic Landmark register designation not a local landmark designation; therefore, they don't have to come to the City to do certain things unless they are proposing to do something to their exterior facade. 2. ADJOURNMENT: 7:27 P.M. These minutes reflect the actions taken and portions of the discussion during the meeting. To review the entire discussion concerning any agenda item, go to www.eustis.org and click on the video for the meeting in question. A DVD of the entire meeting or CD of the entire audio recording or verbatim transcript of the meeting can be obtained from the office of the City Clerk for a fee . MICHAEL L. HOLLAND City Clerk Mayor/Commissioner Eustis City Commission Workshop Page 7 of 7 October 14, 2021