OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

 

CHERYL L. BROWN                                                                                                                     117 WEST DUVAL STREET, SUITE 425

            DIRECTOR                                                                                                                                                                                                 4TH FLOOR, CITY HALL

   OFFICE (904) 630-1452                                                                                                                                                                                  JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA  32202

     FAX (904) 630-2906                                                                                                                                                                                                               

  E-MAIL: CLBROWN@coj.net

 

JOINT LUZ COMMITTEE/PLANNING COMMISSION

MEETING MINUTES

June 17, 2012

4:00 p.m.

 

Location:  City Council Chamber, 1st floor, City Hall – St. James Building; 117 West Duval Street

    

In attendance: 

LUZ Committee Members Lori Boyer (Chair), Bill Gulliford, Don Redman, Matt Schellenberg and Doyle Carter (arr. 4:27)

Planning Commission Members Dow Peters (Chair), Tony Robbins, Lisa King, Pablo Ferrari, Tyler Loehnert, Jerry Friley and Chris Hagan

 

Also: Calvin Burney, Sean Kelly, Folks Huxford and Gary Kresel – Planning and Development Department; Dylan Reingold and Jason Gabriel – Office of General Counsel; Jeff Clements – City Council Research Division; Council Secretary/Director Cheryl Brown; Merriane Lahmeur – Legislative Services Division; James Nealis, Kevin Kuzel and Dan Macdonald – ECAs; Chris Warren – Chamber of Commerce

 

Meeting Convened: 4:00 p.m.

 

LUZ Committee Chair Lori Boyer stated that two primary items would be discussed: administrative modifications and minor modifications to PUD zoning conditions, and the process by which information from the Planning Commission’s deliberations and actions is conveyed to the LUZ Committee.

 

Currently there is some flexibility in the process by which desired conditions to a PUD rezoning are recorded and preserved.  Items that either the Planning Commission or the LUZ Committee wish to have incorporated into a PUD rezoning can be done either by means of a specific stand-alone condition or can be incorporated into the final revised site plan or narrative description.  Items that are incorporated into the site plan or narrative description can in many instances be subsequently changed via administrative modification by the Planning Department staff or by the Planning Commission via a minor modification.  Items that are stand-alone conditions written into the PUD ordinance can only be amended by means of another PUD rezoning.  There are currently no hard and fast rules for determining which items are incorporated into the site plan or narrative and which are kept as stand-alone conditions; the LUZ Committee decides on a case-by-case basis.  Council Member Boyer feels that more formal guidelines would be helpful in making these determinations so that the LUZ Committee does not inadvertently convert a condition which the Planning Commission intended to be inviolable into a site plan or narrative item that can be modified without LUZ or even Planning Commission approval.

 

Dylan Reingold of the General Counsel’s Office suggested that conditions could be worded by the Planning Commission and LUZ Committee to specifically state how they could be modified in the future (administrative modification, minor modification, or full rezoning).  Council Member Boyer suggested that conditions could be imposed with specific required end results, but leaving the method of achieving those end results open to administrative discretion.  Sean Kelly of the Planning Department suggested that criteria could be written into the Zoning Code that describe the circumstances under which different types of modification mechanisms would be permitted.

 

The discussion turned to the question of how Planning Commission reports should be transmitted to the LUZ Committee.  Ms. Boyer explained that the LUZ Committee receives a full packet of information and a recommendation from the Planning Department for each agenda item, but only a brief letter from the Planning Commission announcing its approval or disapproval of an item, without any explanation of the rationale for the recommendation and without a vote tally to indicate if the decision was unanimous or divided.  The timing sequence of the meetings is difficult – the Planning Commission meets on the Thursday afternoons of City Council meeting weeks and the LUZ Committee meets the following Tuesday evening.  The Planning Department already has a quick turnaround to get the Thursday Planning Commission actions recorded and transmitted to the LUZ Committee members on Friday in advance of their Tuesday meeting, and minutes of the Planning Commission meeting take a week or so to prepare, so aren’t available to LUZ.

 

The group discussed how the Planning Commission actions could best be transmitted to LUZ with some discussion of the reasoning behind its decisions and commentary on contentious issues, rationale behind added conditions, especially given that the Planning staff and Planning Commission sometimes disagree in their recommendations.  In response to a question about how often the Planning Department and Planning Commission fundamentally disagree about a zoning or land use application, Mr. Kelly estimated perhaps 10% of cases.  The LUZ Committee felt it would be very helpful to have additional information about the Planning Commission’s deliberations and its vote, if possible.  Sean Kelly suggested that perhaps the meeting sequence needs to be re-thought if LUZ wants more detailed information from the Planning Commission before it acts.  It was suggested that LUZ members could view the video of Planning Commission meetings, but it was unclear if Planning Commission meeting videos are currently being archived and if so, by whom.  In response to a suggestion by Council Member Schellenberg that LUZ members could call Planning Commission members to get detailed information about controversial items or closely split votes, Dylan Reingold confirmed that individual LUZ members may speak with individual Planning Commission members without violating the Government in the Sunshine law.

 

Planning Commissioner Lisa King suggested that it would be helpful both for the commissioners and council members but also for the general public if all materials (agendas, staff reports, meeting minutes, links to meeting videos, etc.) for both bodies were collected, organized and made easily available on a web site.  Council Secretary/Director Cheryl Brown reported that she is working with Planning Director Calvin Burney on archiving the Planning Commission video and making it available to the public on-line.  She did note that merging the City Council and Planning Department files is not feasible, but both departments could post links to the others’ web sites for easy access.  She urged the LUZ Committee members to abandon the thick binders of paper reports and to utilize the online access to view documents electronically.

 

On an unrelated matter, Planning Commissioner Ferrari expressed frustration on the part of the Commission with bills being deferred at the request of the district council member, sometimes for several cycles in a row.  He feels it is unfair to the applicants, agents and members of the general public who take the time and effort to come to Planning Commission meetings in the middle of the work day, only to have items deferred multiple times at the council member’s direction.

 

 

Meeting adjourned:  5:11 p.m.

 

Minutes:           Jeff Clements, Council Research Division

             7.19.12     Posted: 11:30 a.m.

 

Tape:               Joint LUZ Committee/Planning Commission meeting 7.17.12

                        Legislative Services Division