August 23, 2012 Economic Development
»
Item 6 (Part 1 of 3) - "DUE TO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES THIS MEETING IS JOINED IN PROGRESS"
Discussion Regarding Digital Billboards Attached for your consideration is a draft ordinance providing regulations to govern digital billboards. The ordinance proposes to allow digital billboards provided certain conditions are met. These conditions include distance requirements (from other billboards), height and setback requirements, the requirement of dimming technology and a swap-down ratio. The following documents are also attached for your review: 1) A draft ordinance submitted by Clear Channel 2) Comments from Jim Hogan, a representative of ENDEVCO 3) Comments from Luke Stephens, General Manager of WAY Radio
Item 6 (Part 1 of 3)
"DUE TO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES THIS MEETING IS JOINED IN PROGRESS"Discussion Regarding Digital Billboards Attached for your consideration is a draft ordinance providing regulations to govern digital billboards. The ordinance proposes to allow digital billboards provided certain conditions are met. These conditions include distance requirements (from other billboards), height and setback requirements, the requirement of dimming technology and a swap-down ratio. The following documents are also attached for your review: 1) A draft ordinance submitted by Clear Channel 2) Comments from Jim Hogan, a representative of ENDEVCO 3) Comments from Luke Stephens, General Manager of WAY Radio
»
Item 6 (Part 2 of 3) - Discussion Regarding Digital Billboards Attached for your consideration is a draft ordinance providing regulations to govern digital billboards. The ordinance proposes to allow digital billboards provided certain conditions are met. These conditions include distance requirements (from other billboards), height and setback requirements, the requirement of dimming technology and a swap-down ratio. The following documents are also attached for your review: 1) A draft ordinance submitted by Clear Channel 2) Comments from Jim Hogan, a representative of ENDEVCO 3) Comments from Luke Stephens, General Manager of WAY Radio
Item 6 (Part 2 of 3)
Discussion Regarding Digital Billboards Attached for your consideration is a draft ordinance providing regulations to govern digital billboards. The ordinance proposes to allow digital billboards provided certain conditions are met. These conditions include distance requirements (from other billboards), height and setback requirements, the requirement of dimming technology and a swap-down ratio. The following documents are also attached for your review: 1) A draft ordinance submitted by Clear Channel 2) Comments from Jim Hogan, a representative of ENDEVCO 3) Comments from Luke Stephens, General Manager of WAY Radio»
Item 6 (Part 3 of 3) - Discussion Regarding Digital Billboards Attached for your consideration is a draft ordinance providing regulations to govern digital billboards. The ordinance proposes to allow digital billboards provided certain conditions are met. These conditions include distance requirements (from other billboards), height and setback requirements, the requirement of dimming technology and a swap-down ratio. The following documents are also attached for your review: 1) A draft ordinance submitted by Clear Channel 2) Comments from Jim Hogan, a representative of ENDEVCO 3) Comments from Luke Stephens, General Manager of WAY Radio
Item 6 (Part 3 of 3)
Discussion Regarding Digital Billboards Attached for your consideration is a draft ordinance providing regulations to govern digital billboards. The ordinance proposes to allow digital billboards provided certain conditions are met. These conditions include distance requirements (from other billboards), height and setback requirements, the requirement of dimming technology and a swap-down ratio. The following documents are also attached for your review: 1) A draft ordinance submitted by Clear Channel 2) Comments from Jim Hogan, a representative of ENDEVCO 3) Comments from Luke Stephens, General Manager of WAY Radio»
Item 1 - Discussion Regarding Revisions to the Development Services Fee Schedule Staff is proposing the following changes to the Development Services Fee Schedule: 1) The Board recently approved a policy that would require applicants to pay for Code text amendments. These text amendments would be at the direction of the Board, at the request of a third party. Text Amendment to Code: $250.00 2) Staff routinely receives requests for PUD rezonings. These requests involve not only changes to the written statement, but changes to the site plan as well. The fee for a PUD rezoning is based on the acreage of the site. For DRI PUD rezonings, only the size of the parcel within the DRI that is proposed for amendment is considered in the fee calculation. Staff recently received a request to amend only the written statement of a DRI PUD. Because we currently do not have a fee for amending the written statement, the fee would be based on the acreage of the entire DRI (approximately $29,000). Staff is proposing that a fee be established for PUD rezonings that include text amendments only. The proposed fee is consistent with the fee for a conventional rezoning. PUD Rezoning (Text Amendment Only): $750.00 3) Similar to letters prepared to verify zoning designations on parcels of land, staff receives requests for verification of flood map determinations. This process, like the verification of zoning, requires time and research. This would not include informal verbal verifications associated with the recent FEMA map changes. FEMA Flood Map Determinations Letters: $ 25.00
Item 1
Discussion Regarding Revisions to the Development Services Fee Schedule Staff is proposing the following changes to the Development Services Fee Schedule: 1) The Board recently approved a policy that would require applicants to pay for Code text amendments. These text amendments would be at the direction of the Board, at the request of a third party. Text Amendment to Code: $250.00 2) Staff routinely receives requests for PUD rezonings. These requests involve not only changes to the written statement, but changes to the site plan as well. The fee for a PUD rezoning is based on the acreage of the site. For DRI PUD rezonings, only the size of the parcel within the DRI that is proposed for amendment is considered in the fee calculation. Staff recently received a request to amend only the written statement of a DRI PUD. Because we currently do not have a fee for amending the written statement, the fee would be based on the acreage of the entire DRI (approximately $29,000). Staff is proposing that a fee be established for PUD rezonings that include text amendments only. The proposed fee is consistent with the fee for a conventional rezoning. PUD Rezoning (Text Amendment Only): $750.00 3) Similar to letters prepared to verify zoning designations on parcels of land, staff receives requests for verification of flood map determinations. This process, like the verification of zoning, requires time and research. This would not include informal verbal verifications associated with the recent FEMA map changes. FEMA Flood Map Determinations Letters: $ 25.00»
Items 2 & 3 » - Item 2 2. Discussion Regarding Growth Management Workshop The Board recently hosted a growth management workshop to receive input and recommendations regarding the County’s concurrency management system and the potential replacement of concurrency as one of the County’s primary growth management tools. Following is a summary of the presentations given by the technical panelists: Cari Roth, an attorney with Bryant Miller and Olive, provided a historical perspective of transportation funding and the flexibility of options local governments have in the decision making process. She provided the attached chart which shows available revenue sources. Bill Killingsworth, an urban planner, presented the City of Jacksonville’s 2030 Mobility Plan and spoke about incentivizing quality growth in areas where facilities and services are available, where multimodal services are provided, and where Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) are significantly less than outlying areas. Jeffrey L. Hays, Transportation Planning Manager, Alachua County, presented Alachua County’s Mobility Plan which utilizes Traditional Neighborhood and Transit Oriented Development design principles, and incentives and mitigations strategies for multi-modal transportation. Bob Wallace, Vice President, Tindale Oliver Associates, provided a presentation regarding mobility fees, smart growth and funding. He spoke about creating jobs and incentive tools and taking advantage of potential revenue sources. Staff is looking for direction from the Board on how to proceed. The Board has three options: 1) Retain the existing concurrency management system. 2) Retain a consultant to prepare a new impact fee study and implement impact fees consistent with the results of the study. 3) Retain a consultant to develop and implement an alternative program to address growth management and transportation funding issues. Item 3 3. Discussion Regarding Health Department WIC Space The lease for the Health Department space at 2141 Loch Rane Boulevard expires on February 1, 2013. This space currently houses the WIC and Healthy Start offices. Healthy Start will be relocated to the Environmental Health Building in Green Cove Springs. (Environmental Health will be housed in the County Administration Building.) The Health Department, in conjunction with County staff, has narrowed its search for the WIC facility to three sites. A comparison of each is attached.
Items 2 & 3 »
Item 22. Discussion Regarding Growth Management Workshop The Board recently hosted a growth management workshop to receive input and recommendations regarding the County’s concurrency management system and the potential replacement of concurrency as one of the County’s primary growth management tools. Following is a summary of the presentations given by the technical panelists: Cari Roth, an attorney with Bryant Miller and Olive, provided a historical perspective of transportation funding and the flexibility of options local governments have in the decision making process. She provided the attached chart which shows available revenue sources. Bill Killingsworth, an urban planner, presented the City of Jacksonville’s 2030 Mobility Plan and spoke about incentivizing quality growth in areas where facilities and services are available, where multimodal services are provided, and where Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) are significantly less than outlying areas. Jeffrey L. Hays, Transportation Planning Manager, Alachua County, presented Alachua County’s Mobility Plan which utilizes Traditional Neighborhood and Transit Oriented Development design principles, and incentives and mitigations strategies for multi-modal transportation. Bob Wallace, Vice President, Tindale Oliver Associates, provided a presentation regarding mobility fees, smart growth and funding. He spoke about creating jobs and incentive tools and taking advantage of potential revenue sources. Staff is looking for direction from the Board on how to proceed. The Board has three options: 1) Retain the existing concurrency management system. 2) Retain a consultant to prepare a new impact fee study and implement impact fees consistent with the results of the study. 3) Retain a consultant to develop and implement an alternative program to address growth management and transportation funding issues.
Item 3
3. Discussion Regarding Health Department WIC Space The lease for the Health Department space at 2141 Loch Rane Boulevard expires on February 1, 2013. This space currently houses the WIC and Healthy Start offices. Healthy Start will be relocated to the Environmental Health Building in Green Cove Springs. (Environmental Health will be housed in the County Administration Building.) The Health Department, in conjunction with County staff, has narrowed its search for the WIC facility to three sites. A comparison of each is attached.
»
Item 4 - Discussion Regarding Revisions to the Lake Asbury Land Development Regulations Staff is proposing several changes to the Lake Asbury LDRs. A summary of each change is provided in the attached memo.
Item 4
Discussion Regarding Revisions to the Lake Asbury Land Development Regulations Staff is proposing several changes to the Lake Asbury LDRs. A summary of each change is provided in the attached memo.»
Item 5 - Discussion regarding amending Side Yard Setbacks for the AG and AR Zoning Districts Provisions have been made to specifically define front and rear setbacks for accessory structures but side setbacks were not addressed. Historically, staff has permitted accessory structures with a 7.5’ setback which is the same as the established rear. For clarification, staff is recommending to amend the two zoning districts to specify all setbacks relative to accessory structures so as to avoid any ambiguity that this may create when permitting.
Item 5
Discussion regarding amending Side Yard Setbacks for the AG and AR Zoning Districts Provisions have been made to specifically define front and rear setbacks for accessory structures but side setbacks were not addressed. Historically, staff has permitted accessory structures with a 7.5’ setback which is the same as the established rear. For clarification, staff is recommending to amend the two zoning districts to specify all setbacks relative to accessory structures so as to avoid any ambiguity that this may create when permitting.»
Item 7 - Discussion regarding construction of recreational sports facility
Item 7
Discussion regarding construction of recreational sports facility»
Items 8 & 9 » - Item 8 Discussion Regarding MSBU Policy Attached for your consideration is a proposed revision of the MSBU policy for privately-owned roads. Item 9 PUBLIC COMMENTS
Items 8 & 9 »
Item 8Discussion Regarding MSBU Policy Attached for your consideration is a proposed revision of the MSBU policy for privately-owned roads.
Item 9
PUBLIC COMMENTS
© 2024 Swagit Productions, LLC