3492 ORDINANCE NO. 3492
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN FORD, FLORIDA, AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 3079 OF SAID CITY, SAID ORDINANCE BEING THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SAID AMENDMENT BEING THE FIRST
ANNUAL AMENDMENT; AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF
THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT; ADDING PROPERTY
ANNEXED INTO THE CITY TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN;
ADDING A SCHOOL SITING OBJECTIVE AND POLICIES; PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY, CONFLICTS AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Sanfords Planning and Zoning Commission, as the City's
local planning agency, held a public hearing on June 3, 1999, to consider amending the
Future Land Use Map of the Future Land Use Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan,
Sanford, Florida and adding a School Siting Objective and Policies as required by Fla.
'Stat. §163.3177; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission, as the City's governing body, held a public
hearing on June 14, 1999, to consider amending the Future Land Use Map of the Future
Land Use Plan Element and adding a School Siting Objective and Policies to the
Comprehensive Plan, Sanford, Florida; and
WHEREAS, the City of Sanford has complied with requirements and procedures
for its first annual amendment to its adopted comprehensive plan, as set forth in Florida
Statutes.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF
SAN FORD, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1: That portion of the Future Land Use Plan Element referenced as the
Future Land Use Map be amended by including certain lands incorporated into the City
of Sanford, Florida. A copy of additions to the Future Land Use Map and respective land
use classifications for such lands is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this reference
incorporated herein and hereby adopted pursuant to Florida Statutes.
SECTION 2: That a School Siting Objective and Policies be added to the
Comprehensive Plan, as required by Fla. Stat. §163.3177. A copy of the School Siting
Objective and Policies is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and by this reference included
herein and hereby adopted pursuant to Florida Statute.
SECTION 3: SEVERABILITY. If any section or portion of a section of this
Ordinance proves to be invalid, unlawful or unconstitutional, it shall not be held to impair
the validity, force or effect of any other action or part of this Ordinance.
SECTION 4: CONFLICTS. That all Ordinances or parts of Ordinances in conflict
herewith be and the same are hereby revoked.
SECTION 5: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall become effective
immediately when the state land planning agency issues a final order determining the
adopted amendment to be in compliance in accordance with §163.3184(9), or when the
Administration Commission issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to be
in compliance in accordance with §163.3184(10),whichever occurs first.
Ordinance No. 3492
Page 2
PASSED and ADOPTED this//~
ATTEST:
day of
,1999.
~e, ayor
As the City Commission of the
City of Sanford, Florida
CERTIFICATE
Janet R. Dougherty, City Clerk of the City of Sanford, Florida, do hereby certify
~z~~ , 1999 as posted a he front do~r of the 'City Hall in the City of
OF SANFORD, FLORIDA
i:\cdr\cities~sanford\ords\school-sit-o&p:drl ,
Ordinance No. 3492
Page 3
Exhibit "A"
(Part 1 of 2, Ordinance No. 3492)
FIRST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT OF 1999
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT AMENDMENTS
BY CITY OF SANFORD, FLORIDA
October 12, 1999
Proposed Plan Amendments: The City of Sanford proposes to amend the Future Land Use
Element of the Comprehensive Plan in two ways. First, a total of sixteen sites are proposed to
amend the Future Land Use Plan Map as set forth in Exhibit "A" of Ordinance No. 3492. These
sites are primarily due to annexations. Table 1 summarizes the sites and land use designations.
The attached maps depict site location, existing land use and Future Land Use Plan Map
designations. Secondly, the City seeks to comply with the new statutory requirement to adopt an
objective and supporting policies for public school siting. These policies are also attached as
Exhibit "B" of Ordinance No. 3492.
General Comment on Public Facilities: In general, the public facilities of water and sewer are
all within the City of Sanford Service Area per interlocal agreement with Seminole County.
Therefore, all of the City's water and sewer facilities planning as well as the Seminole County
Plan are based on similar data, inventory and analysis upon these facilities with the underlying
assumption that the facilities will be served by the City of Sanford in the Sanford Urban Planning
Area. This has been in effect since the Joint Planning Agreement of 1991 which was
incorporated in the City and County plans and has been previously attached to these Plan
Amendments. The City-County Utilities Service Agreement as updated in 1993 is also attached.
Transportation: The City of Sanford provides fimding to and participates in the regional
transportation modeling process by Metroplan Orlando (the MPO for Orange, Osceola and
Seminole Counties). Seminole County performs transportation modeling for the area that
includes Sanford. As such, the City has no need to conduct independent traffic analyses. Our
traffic impact review of specific plan amendment sites is based upon data, inventory and analysis
that is compiled through the Metroplan Orlando transportation modeling. The future land use
data upon which the Metroplan analysis is based reflects existing and future land use planning
data from the City of Sanford. That information is compiled by Seminole County with input from
the seven cities within the county. In essence, Sanford's Traffic Circulation Plan Element and the
City's analysis of individual sites incorporates traffic analysis that reflects future development
for the entire Sanford area including the unincorporated areas around the City, much of which are
subject to annexation. Traffic projections are based on modeling by Seminole County and
Metroplan Orlando. Therefore, with regards to the future land use plan map amendment sites,
unless the proposed future land use designation is different than the Seminole County Future
Land Use Plan Map Designation, there would be no significant change to traffic impact. The
Future Land Use Equivalency table is found in the Joint Planning Agreement which has been
provided. Further, traffic analysis for most of the Future Land Use Plan Map Amendment sites is
not necessary due to there being absolutely no change upon roadways, the only change being the
change from one jurisdiction to another. Traffic analysis and impact stays the same.
Three (3) sites of the sixteen (16) total are proposed to change future land use designations that
will increase development intensities and will therefore have an impact upon facilities and
services. The impact upon facilities and services for those three sites is identified in Table 2,
attached.
Site No. 5. This is a very small site that is adjacent to a funeral home. It is owned by the funeral
home owner and is being land-banked for eventual expansion of the funeral home. It is separated
from existing single family residential development by a street to the south and an alley to the
east. The use immediately west of the site is a windowless building that houses telephone
equipment with a tower on the roof. The City's police station is located northwest of the site.
French Avenue is a heavily traveled major arterial also known as U.S. Highway 17 & 92.
Site No. 13. This property is immediately adjacent to the Orlando-Sanford Airport. In 1997
Seminole County changed lands south of and adjacent to this site from Suburban Estates to
Industrial. The property is basically vacant. There is sufficient land area to provide for sufficient
landscape buffers and building setbacks from adjacent properties. The proposed Airport Industry
and Commerce designation requires PD, Planned Development rezoning which will provide the
ability to include stipulations and conditions upon future development to insure adequate
facilities and services as well as compatibility requirements applicable to adjacent properties.
Approximately 9 acres of this site which is part of Golden Lake is designated Conservation by
Seminole County and will be designated Resource Protection in the City's Future Land Use Plan
Map.
The Department of Community Affairs Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC)
report regarding this site are addressed in the attached report entitled City of Sanford Response to
Florida Department of Community Affairs Objections, Recommendations and Comments Upon
the 1999 Future Land Use Plan Map Amendments. Additionally, an environmental survey of this
site prepared by Coleman Holt, M.F.S., is attached.
Site No. 15. This property is adjacent to and south of High Intensity Planned Development
designations in unincorporated Seminole County. It is adjacent to and west of Medium Density
Residential - 10 DU/A in the City. The property is adjacent to and east of Low Density
Residential that is presently undergoing a change to High Density Residential in Seminole
Cotmty after which that property will annex and be developed in Sanford. The LDR to HDR
property east of the site, Site No. 15 and Site No. 16 are being developed by the same developer
who is currently constructing apartments adjacent to and west of the LDR to HDR site. This is a
transitional area near Seminole Towne Center Mall as well as the County Road 46A/Interstate 4
Interchange to be completed in November 1999 and the Rinehart Road/Greeneway Interchange
to be completed by 2003. The portions of Oregon Avenue adjacent to the site are unimproved
and will need to be improved prior to the impact of any proposed development. Part of Twin
Lake, designated Conservation by Seminole County, encompasses approximately 2 acres on site
No. 15 and 3.5 acres on Site No. 16 which will be designated Resource Protection in the City's
Future Land Use Plan Map.
The Department of Community Affairs Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC)
report regarding this site are addressed in the attached report entitled City of Sanford Response to
Florida Department of Community Affairs Objections, Recommendations and Comments Upon
the 1999 Future Land Use Plan Map Amendments. Additionally, a Preliminary
Assessment/Wildlife-Protected Species Survey, Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration Report
and a Wetland Delineation map are included in Attachment E.
Exhibit "A"
(Part 2 of 2, Ordinance No. 3492)
CITY OF SANFORD RESPONSE TO FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS
UPON THE 1999 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN MAP AMENDMENTS
October 6, 1999
This response is incorporated and made part of the City of Sanford ~ First Comprehensive Plan
Amendment of 1999. This Document is part of Exhibit "A " referenced in Ordinance No. 3492.
The City of Sanford's response to the Florida Department of Community Affairs' Objections,
Recommendations and Comments (ORC) is as follows:
DCA OBJECTION #1
I. FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS
A. 1. The following Objection is raised to Amendment sites 13 and 15
The amendment site has not been demonstrated to be suitable for the proposed land uses and the
allowable densities and intensities of use. Adequate data and analysis has not been provided
assessing the site's suitability for development considering on-site wetlands. Absent this data and
analysis the amendment fails to direct incompatible land uses away ~'om wetlands and is
inconsistent with the City of Sanford Conservation Element Objectives 5-1.4, 5-1.7, 5-1.8 and 5-
1.9, and Policies 5-1.4.1, 5-1.7.1, 5-1.8.1 and 5-1.9.1 which address protection ofwetlands.
Recommendation-Do not adopt the amendment. Alternately, provide analyses which identify and
evaluate the suitability of the site for development considering wetlands on site.
CITY OF SANFORD RESPONSE
The following information is a supplement to the original First Comprehensive Plan Amendment
of 1999 dated June, 1999. This response relates to Sites 13 and 15 and has been revised as a
direct response to the Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report received
from the Department of Commtmity Affairs. This supplemental information is intended to
provide data and analysis consistent with the recommendations in the ORC Report for Proposed
Amendment 99-1.
Data and analysis assessing the suitability of the sites for development considering on site
wetlands is provided in the attached environmental report for Site 13 (Attachment D) and the
attached Preliminary AssessmentfWildlife-Protected Species Survey, Preliminary Geotechnical
Exploration Report and Wetland Delineation Map for Site 15 (Attachment E). Additional Data
and Analysis from the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan Conservation Element Wetland
Buffer Regulations compares the City's required wetland buffer requirements contained in the
City's Land Development Regulations to other regulatory entities. The City of Sanford's buffer
ORC Response, Page 2
width regulation for isolated wetlands is more restrictive than any of the entities analyzed for
wetlands of 5 acres or less while the City's buffer width regulation for wetlands greater than 5
acres is either equally or more restrictive than the other agencies listed.
Notwithstanding the attached data and analysis, the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan Policy
5-1.4.1: Wetland Development Restrictions, directs incompatible land uses away from wetlands
by requiring a restricted wetland buffer of fifty (50) feet in width to be provided adjacent to
wetlands greater than five (5) acres. Additionally, Schedule M, Environmentally Sensitive Lands,
Section 3.1 Wetland Design and Performance Criteria of the Sanford Land Development
Regulations directs incompatible land uses away from wetlands by the required fifty (50) feet
buffer (Attachment C).
RESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS
Portions of Sites 13 and 15 include water bodies known as Lake Golden and Twin Lake,
respectively, with associated wetlands. Such areas are proposed to change from a Conservation
designation in the Seminole County Future Land Use Plan Map to the Resource Protection
designation on the City of Sanford's Future Land Use Plan Map. The City's Resource Protection
designation prohibits these areas from development pursuant to Policies 5.1.4.1, 5-1.2.1 and 5-
1.2.5.
There is no significant change in the status of the wetlands and adjacent water bodies between
the existing Seminole County and the proposed City of Sanford goals, objectives and policies
that effect the environmentally sensitive areas associated with these sites. The only difference is
nomenclature with Seminole County utilizing the designation of "Conservation" and the City of
Sanford utilizing the designation of "Resource Protection." Differences between City and County
objectives and policies protecting such environmentally sensitive lands is not considered
significant. Notwithstanding this conclusion, an expanded explanation of how the City of
Sanford's policies is provided.
SOILS
Site No. 15. According to the Seminole County Soils Survey, the soils on the portion of Site No.
15 to be designated Medium Density Residential include Astatula and Tavares. These two well-
drained soil types have no significant constraints for urban development (building sites);
flooding frequency is listed as "none." See Attachment E, Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration
Report for specific soil conditions on site.
Site No. 13. According to the Seminole County Soils Survey, the soils on the portion of Site No.
13 to be designated Airport Industry and Commerce include Paola and Immokalee. The majority
of the site is Paola soils which are well-drained and have no significant constraints for urban
development (building sites). The smaller portion of the AIC-designated portion of the site with
Immokalee soils is poorly drained and will require standard methods to prepare the site for any
urban development. Much of the Immokalee area is anticipated to become drainage retention
facilities and wetlands buffer area. Flooding frequency for both Paola and Immokalee soils is
ORC Response, Page 3
listed as "none."
In addition, the areas of the sites within the 100 year floodplain, well field protection areas and
prime aquifer recharge areas are delineated on Maps I-1 and 1-2. These areas are within a
Resource Protection (RP) overlay district with the underlying residential land use designations
per the Future Land Use Map Densities/Intensities chart on page 1-13 of the Comprehensive
Plan. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the RP overlay district will be restricted subject to
performance criteria pursuant to Policy 5-2.6.1 and 5-1.3.1. The FAR is also restricted to the
underlying Comprehensive Future Land Use designation in the Resource Protection (RP) overlay
district.
WETLANDS
Wetlands are proposed to be designated Resource Protection on the Future Land Use Map, as
shown on the site location maps for sites 13 and 15, consistent with Policy 1-2.7.1 of the City's
Comprehensive Plan. Development within the wetlands will be restricted and buffered based
upon performance criteria in Policies 5-1.4.1, 5-1.7.1 and 5-1.8.1 and Schedule M,
Environmentally Sensitive Lands of the Land Development Regulations. These wetlands are
associated with adjacent small lakes. No other wetlands were determined to be present on-site
that would prohibit use of the properties. In the attached wetland survey for site 15, the wetland
borders have been delineated in the field by Environmental Resources, Inc. based on the
methodology utilized by the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and the
Army Corp of Engineers.
FLOODPLAIN
The 100 year floodplain will be subject to the Resource Protection overlay district. The natural
functions of the floodplain will be maintained in accordance with Objective 5-1.3 (Maintenance
of Floodplains) of the Sanford Comprehensive Plan, Conservation Element. Development within
the floodplain will be subject to performance criteria in Policies 5-1.2.1 and 5-1.2.5.
AQUIFER RECHARGE
Site 15, as well as the 1-4 corridor and Seminole Towne Center Mall, is identified in an area of
aquifer recharge. The site will be subject to the Resource Protection overlay district. The uses
prohibited by the Sanford Comprehensive Plan in aquifer recharge areas include mining, resource
extraction, junkyards, outdoor storage of hazardous material and waste. With the exceptions
noted, residential and nonresidential uses are allowed in recharge areas subject to the regulations
of Policy 5-1.2.6.
SUITABILITY FOR SITE 13
Site 13 is located directly opposite of the southerly entrance to the Orlando Sanford Airport
(OSA). OSA is an expanding facility that is currently undergoing a $25M terminal expansion.
Over 1M passengers already fly into the facility each year. The Airport and the surrotmding area
ORC Response, Page 4
have been studied extensively including The Orlando Sanford Airport Economic Development
Master Plan, Ivey Harris & Walls, Inc., March 1997 and the Orlando Sanford Airport Master
Plan, Boyer-Singleton and Associates, April 1999. These plans underscore the need for
additional commercial development and in particular consider the need for hotel development in
the airport environs. The studies consider the airport environ's infrastructure needs as well as
other environmental constraints and opportunities including stormwater management and
development suitability. The area proposed to be designated Airport Industry and Commerce on
Site 13 is typical of lands surrounding the airport that are planned for commercial and industrial
development. Again, as noted in the above Part 1 analysis, the City is planning a new wastewater
treatment plant just east of the site at the comer of Beardall Avenue and Marquette Avenue.
In addition, this plan amendment represents an appropriate transition to more intensive
commercial and industrial urban development from suburban estates due to the increased noise
generated by expanded airport operations. Specifically, the site is directly in line with a recently
opened "Touch and Go" Runway 9R-27L for general aviation and pilot training. That runway is
slated for future expansion for major carriers. OSA has even more take-off's and landings than
Orlando International Airport due primarily to the flight training activities. The final draft of the
Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Study, June 1999, HNTB, clearly indicates that the site
will be within the 65 decibel exposure contour. Areas within the 65 decibel contour are clearly
not well suited for suburban type residential development or residential development in general.
Such areas should generally be utilized for nonresidential uses such as commercial and industrial
activities or other institutional or recreational uses that would not be sensitive to noise impacts.
Attachment G depicts the 2004 Noise Exposure Map from the Part 150 Study. Airport Industry
and Commerce is specifically designed for mixed use commercial and industrial activities in
immediate proximity to the airport. Residential land use is not permitted based on anticipated
adverse noise impact upon such uses in such areas.
Attachment F depicts the proposed zoning master plan for Site 13 and is provided for
information purposes. The 50 foot buffer from wetland areas should be noted.
In summary, the land uses, densities and intensities associated with the Airport Industry and
Commerce designation for that portion of Site 13 so designated are highly suitable and
compatible and are based on:
Similarity and consistency with expanding development of the international
transportation facility known as the Orlando Sanford Airport and associated plans for the
airport's immediate environs;
Suitable environmental characteristics of that portion of Site 13 proposed for urban
development activities as based on soils data and analysis;
Separation and buffers between wetlands designated as Resource Protection Area and
proposed development area designated as Airport Industry and Commerce;
Public infrastructure and investment being developed in the immediate area exemplified
by Sanford's planned second wastewater treatment facility;
Ability of the existing transportation infrastructure to handle proposed development
based on information submitted and attached (Attachment H), and;
ORC Response. Page 5
Changing and expanding noise impact area associated with the adjacent recently
constructed runway facility at O~ando Sanford Airport and the associated desirability of
preventing residential development in airport noise impact areas.
SUITABILITY FOR SITE 15
The following supplementary information regarding suitability for Site 15 is provided. Prior to
the issuance of any final development order that permits the construction of the project, the
applicant anticipates that it will be required to make assessments of the subject site in order to
identify natural resources including soils conditions, vegetation, wildlife and wildlife habitat,
wetlands and floodplains. Preliminary assessments have been completed and are contained in
Attachment E. However, based upon the information contained in the Future Land Use Element
Data, Inventory and Analysis, it does not appear that any soil types, topography or vegetative
communities exist in Sanford which are unique to that which is commonly encountered
throughout Central Florida or which would make the subject site unsuitable for the type and
density of uses permitted under the Medium Density Residential-15 land use designation.
Additionally, the applicant has conducted soils, vegetative communities, wildlife habitat and
wetlands studies for lands located just west of the subject site and, except for gopher tortoises,
nothing requiring special attention was found to exist. With respect to gopher tortoises, the
applicant acknowledges that coordination with the Florida Game Fresh Water Fish Commission
for any impact to wildlife and wildlife habitat are required consistent with Objective 5-1.8 of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Although, as explained in greater detail above, the 100-year floodplain is not mapped on the Map
as Resource Protection (RP), development impacting any portion of the 100-year floodplain will
be subject to the applicable RPpolicies. For example, the natural functions of the 100-year
floodplain will be maintained in accordance with Objective 5-1.3, Maintenance of Floodplain.
Further, development within the floodplain will be subject to the performance criteria set forth in
Policies 5-1.4.1, 5-1.7.1 and 5-1.8.1.
Soil erosion during development adjacent to Twin Lakes and the wetlands will be minimized
pursuant to Policy 5-1.5.1, Implementing Erosion and Sediment Controls. The City will protect
any aquatic habitats that may be found to exist on-site pursuant to Policy 5-1.7.1. Development
of wetlands will be restricted and buffered based upon performance criteria contained in Policies
5-1.4.1, 5-1.7.1 and 5-1.8.1.
The 1-4 corridor and Seminole Towne Center Mall are identified as being in an area of aquifer
recharge. Site 15 would appear to be in this same area. Aquifer recharge areas will be subject to
the RP overlay district. The uses prohibited by the Comprehensive Plan in aquifer recharge areas
include mining, resource extraction, junkyards, outdoor storage of hazardous material and waste.
Residential uses are allowed in recharge areas subject to the regulations of Policy 5-1.2.6.
COMPATIBILITY
The following supplementary information regarding compatibility for Site 15 is provided. By
ORC Response, Page 6
1991, the City of Sanford, the City of Lake Mary and Seminole Cotmty had updated their
comprehensive plans to permit a wide range of uses along the I-4 corridor to target industry.
Seminole County, for example, designated as High Intensity Planned Development a majority of
the unincorporated lands in this area. Similarly, the City of Sanford designated as 1-4 High
Intensity much of the lands within the City's jurisdiction, extending north from CR 46A/Paola
Road to the area that is now the location of Seminole Town Center Mall.
At about this time, Seminole County and the City of Sanford executed a Joint Planning
Agreement date November 21, 1991 (JPA). Although the JPA was executed prior to the
permitting and construction of Seminole Towne Center Mall, it nevertheless reflects the forecast
by these two governmental agencies of rapid and intense urbanization of the 1-4 corridor.
Today, existing and proposed governmental funding of roadways, interchanges and utilities
extensions in this general area will be approximately $300 million. The I-4/CR 46A/Paola Road
interchange currently under construction is located approximately on mile to the west of the
subject site. Rinehart Road to the west of the subject site has recently been 4-1aned. The existing
CR 46A/Paola Road fight-of-way is over one hundred (100) feet in width. The road expansion,
as proposed and funded by Seminole County, will make this road a four (4) lane divided highway
with a median. An interchange connecting the Greeneway with Rinehart Road has been proposed
and is funded. The Interchange will be located approximately 1,000 feet from the northern
boundary of the subject property.
The subject property is located next to other properties with land use designations and
development which is compatible to the MDR-15 designation proposed for the subject site. In its
transmittal package to DCA, the City has included existing and future land use maps which
depict the subject property and the other lands adjacent to the subject property. The land located
immediately to the west of the northern portion of the subject site is an undeveloped tract located
in unincorporated Seminole County. On March 23, 1999, Seminole County voted unanimously
to transmit a map amendment changing the land use designation of this tract to Planned
Development (PD). The applicant to the amendment simultaneously submitted a Planned Unit
Development zoning application indicating that the site will be developed as a multi-family
project at a density of 15 unit per net acre.
The proposed land use designation for the site provides a natural transition of land uses from the
high intensity land uses to the north and northeast of the subject site to the medium and low
intensity land uses and development to the south and east. It would allow medium density
residential adjacent to the medium density residential and low density residential existing or
proposed to the west, south and east of the subject site. All existing and proposed uses adjacent
to the site are compatible with the land uses proposed for the site. Furthermore, Policy 1-1.1.1
requires landscape buffering and screening between existing single family home sites from
residential development having differing structure types and density. The Comprehensive Plan
further identifies the types of landscape buffers that shall be implemented through site plan
review. These policies are implemented through the City's Land Development Regulations as
Land Use Compatibility criteria and will be complied with by the applicant.
ORC Response, Page 7
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES
The following information is intended to address the internal consistency of the proposed land
uses with the City of Sanford's Comprehensive Plan. More specifically, the Objectives and
Policies identified in the ORC report for consistency plus additional resource protection
objectives and policies contained the Sanford Comprehensive Plan are summarized and
addressed below:
Objective 1-2.7
RESOURCE PROTECTION (RP)
This designation is established to direct the preservation of natural systems
including environmentally fragile wetlands which the City has committed
to retain, preserve and/or conserve as open space systems.
Policy 1-2.7.1
Implementing Resource Protection
Resource protection areas will be designated on the site for water bodies
and perimeter wetlands. A Resource Protection overlay district will be
identified by Map I-1 and I-2 for floodplains, wellfield protection, and
aquifer recharge areas. All resource protection areas will be subject to the
performance criteria identified in following policies:
Protection Area
Map Series: Mao #
Protected by Performance
Criteria in Policy #
Wetlands, including Aquatic
Habitats
Water Resources Map I-1
5-1.4.1; 5-1.7.1; 5-1.8.1
Floodways and Drainageways Water Resources Map I-1
5-1.2.1; 5-1.2.5
Aquifer Recharge Areas
Water Resources Map I-1
5-1.2.6
Wellfield Protection Areas Potable Water Service Areas
and Well field Cones of
Influence Map 1-2
5-1.2.6
Upland Wildlife Habitats
Vegetative Communities
Map 1-9("
5-1.7.1; 5-1.8.2
Floodplains Water Resources Map I-1 5-1.3.1
Environmentally sensitive lands such as wetlands are protected through this and related policies
that are implemented through Schedule M, Environmentally Sensitive Lands, Section 3. 1-
Wetland Design Criteria.
OBJECTIVE 5-1.3
MAINTENANCE OF FLOODPLAIN
The City shall protect the natural functions of the 100 year floodplain.
Policy 5-1.3.1 Maintenance of Floodplain
Consistent with this policy no development shall occur in the 100 year
ORC Response, Page 8
floodway. The 100 year floodplain is designated as a Resource Protection
overlay district and subject to the development restrictions contained in
this policy.
Floodplain maintenance policies are implemented through Schedule M, Environmentally
Sensitive Lands, Section 3.2-Flood-Prone Design and Performance Criteria and Section. 2.0(C)-
Flood Prone Areas. As noted above in the soils analysis, the land areas proposed for
development on sites 13 and 15 are not subject to ~ooding. All necessary stormwater permitting
will be required according to local regional, state and federal requirements.
OBJECTIVE 5-1.4
PROTECT AND PRESERVE WETLANDS
The City's wetlands shall be protected from physical and hydrological
alterations.
Policy 5-1.4.1
Wetland Development Restrictions
Twin Lake and Lake Golden are designated as Resource Protection. The
wetlands areas will be protected from physical or hydrologic alterations
consistent with the regulations contained in this policy. For example,
wetlands greater than 5 acres shall be protected by a 50' wetland buffer.
Again wetlands protection is implemented through Schedule M, Environmentally Sensitive
Lands, Section 3.1. Wetland Design and Performance Criteria, Section 3.4-Protecting
Environmentally Sensitive Lands During Construction and Section 8. O-Land Unsuitable for
Development. There is no proposed urban development activity in areas identified as wetlands
regarding sites 13 and 15.
Policy 5 - 1.4.2
Required Dedication of Conservation Easements or Reservations
The City enforces its stormwater management and wetland preservation
regulations to provide for dedication of easements where reasonable.
This policy is implemented through Schedule O, Drainage, Easements and Site
Preparation/Excavation Requirements, Section 1. O-General Criteria.
OBJECTIVE 5-1.7
PROTECT NATIVE VEGETATION AND AQUATIC HABITATS
The City shall protect and retain major vegetative communities and
aquatic habitats.
Policy 5-1.7
Implementing Protection of Vegetative Communities and Aquatic Habitats
This policy includes programs to protect and retain these areas as well as ·
shoreline protection measures which include required 50' wetland buffers.
This policy is implemented through Schedule M, Environmentally Sensitive Lands, Section 3'3-
Wildlife Habitat Preservation and Protection of Upland Vegetative Communities and
Endangered of Threatened Flora and Fauna, Section 3.5-Soil Erosion, Sedimentation Control
and Shoreline Protection and Section 3.6-Lake Shore Protection.
OBJECTIVE 5-1.8 PROTECTING WILDLIFE AND WILDLIFE HABITATS
ORC Response, Page 9
The City shall coordinate with the SJRWMD and the State in protecting
wildlife habitats.
Policy 5-1.8.1
Manage Impacts of Development on Aquatic Habitats
The City shall incorporate procedures with appropriate regulatory agencies
and prohibit degradation of habitats. Additional criteria and techniques
included in this policy encourage clustering development on upland
portions of sites and retaining the natural function of floodplains.
This policy is implemented through Schedule M, Environmentally Sensitive Lands, Section 3.3-
Wildlife Habitat Preservation and Protection of Upland Vegetative Communities and
Endangered of Threatened Flora and Fauna.
Policy5-1.8.2
Protect Wildlife and Wildlife Habitats
Wetlands are designated "Resource Protection" and constitute wildlife
habitat areas. No development shall be permitted in wetlands. Site plan
review process shall restrict development known to adversely affect
protected wildlife.
This policy is implemented through Schedule M, Environmentally Sensitive Lands, Section 3.3-
Wildlife Habitat Preservation and Protection of Upland Vegetative Communities and
Endangered of Threatened Flora and Fauna.
OBJECTIVE 5-1.9
PROTECT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS
The City has developed policies and criteria for protecting
environmentally sensitive lands.
Policy 5-1.9.1
Designation of Environmentally Sensitive Areas
The City's Land Development Regulations shall include performance
standards and/or criteria for preserving wetlands (cross reference Policy 5-
1.4.1), managing surface waters (cross reference Policy 5-1.2.1-5),
maintaining storage functions of the floodplain (cross reference Policy 5-
1.3.1), protecting wildlife and wildlife habitats (cross reference Policy 5-
1.8.2), and promoting water quality (cross reference Policy 5-1.2.6). The
City shall protect the natural function of soils by protecting against soil
erosion pursuant to Policy 5-1.1.2; by protecting against development in
areas with hydric soils pursuant to Policy 5-1.4.1 and restricting mining
and excavation pursuant to Policy 5-1.6.1, as well as adopted land
development regulations; by protecting recharge areas including soils and
topography pursuant to Policy 5-1.2.6 and adopted land development
regulations. Lakes and fishcries shall be protected by managing aquatic
habitats pursuant to Policy 5-1.8.1. These policies shall be applied in
implementing land use policies directed toward preserving
environmentally sensitive areas.
In general this policy is implemented through the Sanford Land Development Regulations.
ORC Response. Page 10
IMPLEMENTATION
In addition to the Comprehensive Plan Objectives and Polices, Schedule M-Environmentally
Sensitive Lands of the Sanford Land Development Regulations primarily implements the
Comprehensive Plan policies in regards to resource protection and wetland criteria (attachment
C). The purpose and intent of Schedule M is to protect and conserve the beneficial functions of
environmentally sensitive lands in a manner that implements applicable goals, objectives and
policies and standards in the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan, especially as set forth in the
Future Land Use Plan and the Conservation Plan elements. These regulations require soil
analysis, wetland buffers, floodplain design and performance criteria, wildlife and upland
vegetative community protections plans, shoreline protection and other provisions.
DCA OBJECTION #2
II. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Objection - The proposed amendment is inconsistent with the following goals and policies of the
State Comprehensive Plan:
Goal 8-Water Resources: Policies 8, 10, & 12;
Goal 10-Natural Systems and Recreational Lands: Policies 1, 3, & 10
Goal 16-Land Use: Policies 2 & 6.
Recommendation-Revise the plan amendments, based on data and analysis, to be consistent with
the above referenced goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan, in accordance with the
objectives and recommendations contained elsewhere in this report.
CITY OF SANFORD RESPONSE
The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan contains objectives and policies to protect
environmentally sensitive lands as outlined in response to DCA's Objection #1. The
Comprehensive Plan is also consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan in regards to water
resources, natural systems and recreational lands and land use. The following information table is
intended to serve as a reference to Sanford's Comprehensive Plan policy consistency with the
State Comprehensive Plan.
State Comprehensive Plan
Goal 8-Water Resources: Policy 8
Floodplain Management program, preserve
hydrological significant weftands and other natural
floodplain features
City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan
Objective 5-1.3: Maintenance of Floodplain
Policy 5-1.3.1: Enforce Policies to Maintain
Floodplain
Objective 5-1.4: Protect and Preserve Weftands
Policy 5-1.4.1: Wetland Development Restrictions
Policy 5-1.2.5 Preserve the Shoreline of Major
Floodways
ORC Response, Page 11
State Comprehensive Plan
Goal 8~Water Resources: Policy 10
Protect surface groundwater quality and quantity in the
state
Goal 8-Water Resources: Policy 12
Eliminate Discharge of inadequately treated
wastewater and stormwater runoff
Goal 10-Natural Systems and Recreational Lands:
Policy 1
Conserve forests, wetlands, fish, marinelife, and
wildlife to maintain their environmental, economic,
aesthetic and recreational values
Goal 10-Natural Systems and Recreational Lands:
Policy 3
Prohibit the destruction of endangered species and
protect their habitats
Goal 10~Natural Systems and Recreational Lands:
Policy 7
Protect and Restore the ecological functions of
wetlands systems to ensure their long-term
environmental, economic and recreational value
City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan
Objective 5-1.2.1: Water Quality and Quantity
Policy 5-1.2.1: Water Quality, Surface Management
and Land Use
Policy 5-1.2.6: Protect Floridian and Surficial Aquifer
Recharge Areas and Public Wellfields
Policy 5-1.2.8: Conservation of Potable Water Supply
Policy 5-1.2.1: Water Quality, Surface Water
Management and Land Use
Policy 5-1.2.2: Areawide Documentation and
Monitoring of Stormwater Issues
Policy 5-1.2.3: Regulate Agricultural Activities to
Preserve Water Quality
Policy 5-1.2.4: Regulate Waste~vater Treatment
Discharge to Preserve Water Quality
Objective 5-1.4: Protect and Preserve Wetlands
Policy 5-1.4.1: Wetland Development Restrictions
Objective 5-1.7: Protect Native Vegetation and
Aquatic Habitats
Policy 5-1.7.1: Implementing Protection of Vegetative
Communities and Aquatic Habitats
Objective 5-1.8: Protecting Wildlife and Wildlife
Habitats
Policy 5-1.8.1: Manage the Impacts of Development
on Aquatic Habitats
Policy 5~ 1.8.2: Protect Wildlife and Wildlife Habitats
Objective 5-1.9: Protect Environmentally Semifive
Lands
Policy 5-1.9.1: Designation of Environmentally
Sensitive Areas
Objective 5-1.8: Protecting Wildlife and Wildlife
Habitats
Policy 5-1.8.1: Manage the Impacts of Development
on Aquatic Habitats
Policy 5~ 1.8.2: Protect Wildlife and Wildlife Habitats
Objective 1-2.7: Resource Protection
Policy 1-2.7.1: Implementing Resource Protection
Policy 5-1.2.5(2): Preserve the Shoreline of Major
Floodways-Open Space and Recreational Uses
Objective 5-1.4: Protect and Preserve Weftands
Policy 5-1.4.1: Wetland Development Restfictions
Objective 5-1.9: Protect Environmentally Sensitive
Lands
Policy 5-1.9.1: Designation of Environmentally
Sensitive Areas
ORC Response, Page 12
State Comprehensive Plan
Goal 10-Natural Systems and Recreational Lands:
Policy 10
Emphasize the acquisition and maintenance of
ecologically intact systems in all land and water
planning, management and regulation
Goal 16-Land Use: Policy 2
Develop a system of incentives and disincentives
which encourages a separation of urban and rural land
uses while protecting water supplies, resource
development and fish and wildlife habitats
City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan
Objective 1-2.7: Resource Protection
Policy 1-2.7.1: Implementing Resource Protection
Objective 4-2.1 d: Reconcile Existing Drainage
Deficiencies
Objective 4-3.1: Protect Natural Drainage Features
Policy 4-3.1.1: Coordinating and Implementing
Drainage Policy
Policy 4-3-1.2: Provide Adequate On-Site Retention
and Ground Water Recharge ....
Policy 4-3.1.4: Coordinate Watershed Management
Plans and Policies with Appropriate Public Agencies
Policy 4-3.1.6: Continuing Inspection and
Maintenance of Drainage Systems
Objective 5-1.4: Protect and Preserve Wetlands
Policy 5-1.4.1: Wetland Development Restrictions
Policy 1-1.1.5: Encourage Separation of Urban and
Rural Land Uses
Objective 1-2.7: Resource Protection
Policy 1-2.7.1: Implementing Resource Protection
Objective 1-3.6: Protection of Natural Resources
Policy 1-3.6.1: Future Land Use Policies for Managing
Environmentally Sensitive Lands
Objective 5-1.2.1: Water Quality and Quantity
Policy 5-1.2.1: Water Quality, Surface Management
and Land Use
Policy 5-1.2.6: Protect Floridian and Surficial Aquifer
Recharge Areas and Public Well fields
Policy 5-1.2.8: Conservation of Potable Water Supply
Objective 5-1.8: Protecting Wildlife and Wildlife
Habitats
Policy 5-1.8.1: Manage the Impacts of Development
on Aquatic Habitats
Policy 5-1.8.2: Protect Wildlife and Wildlife Habitats
ORC Response. Page 13
State Comprehensive Plan
Goal 16-Land Use: Policy 6
Consider, in land use planning and regulation, the
impact of land use on water quality and quantity;
availability of land, water and other natural resources
to meet demands; and the potential for flooding
City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan
Goal 1.1: Land Use
Objective 1-1.6: Coordinate Future Land Use with Soil
and Topographic Conditions and Ensure Availability
of Facilities and Services
Policy 1 - 1.6.1: Implementing Coordinated Land Use
Planning
Policy 1-2.1.1: Density Defined
Objective 1-2.7: Resource Protection
Policy 1-2.7.1: Implementing Resource Protection
Objective 1-3.2: Manage and Coordinate Future Land
Use Decisions
Policy 1-3.2.2: Land Development Regulations
Policy 1-3.2.5: Performance Criteria
Objective 1-3.6: Protection of Natural Resources
Policy 1-3.6.1: Future Land Use Policies for Managing
Environmentally Sensitive Lands
Objective 5-1.2.1: Water Quality and Quantity
Policy 5-1.2.1: Water Quality, Surface Management
and Land Use
Objective 5-1.3: Maintenance of Floodplain
Policy 5-1.3.1: Enforce Policies to Maintain
Floodplain
Policy 5-1.2.5 Preserve the Shoreline of Major
Floodways
Exhibit "B"
Ordinance No. 3492
Proposed School Siting Objective and Policies
Future Land Use Element
City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan
October 5, 1999
Add the following objective and policy to ensure sufficient land to meet future School Board
needs.
Objective 1-2.10: Planning for Public Schools Within Sanford. In order to provide proper
planning for new public school facilities in Sanford, the City shall implement the following policies
addressing public schools as an allowable land use, criteria for locating schools, and collocation of
schools and community facilities.
Policy 1-2,10.1: Future Land Use Map Designations for Public Schools; The City of
Sanford shall allow elementary, middle and other similar low-intensity schools to be located
within the Public/Semi-Public, Suburban Estates, Low Density Residential - Single Family,
Low Density Residential - Mobile Home, Medium Density Residential -- 10, Medium
Density Residential - 15, High Density Residential - 20. Neighborhood Office Commercial,
and Residential/Office/Institutional Land Use categories shown on the Future Land Use Map
(FLUM). High schools and similar high-intensity schools shall be allowed in Public/Semi-
Public, Medium Density Residential -10, Medium Density Residential -15, High Density
Residential-20, Neighborhood Office Commercial, and Residential/Office/Institutional Land
Use categories shown on the FLUM.
Policy 1-2,10,2: Coordination with Seminole County School Board. By December 2000,
the City shall have met with the Seminole County School Board and established an interlocal
agreement to govern the process for locating new schools and/or expanding existing schools
within Sanford. The interlocal agreement shall include the minimum criteria for locating a
new school as well as a method for resolving conflicts.
Policy 1-2.10.3: Interim Public School Siting Criteria. The following criteria shall be used
in locating public schools within Sanford until an interlocal agreement between the School
Board and the City is adopted:
I_. General Guidelines.
A._:.Prol~osed school sites shall be located away from industrial uses, limited access roadways, railroads, and
similar land uses to avoid noise, odors, dust, and traffic impacts and hazards.
B____:..Disrupting influences caused by school yard noise and traffic require that schools be located sufficient
distances from adult communities, nursing homes and similar land uses or buffered from these areas.
C__. New school sites shall be located within the Countv's urban ~rowth boundary or be compatible with compact
urban ~rowth patterns.
D__:. Schools shall be designed to minimize the impacts to adiacent neighborhoods through control of site aspects
including traffic access, landscaping, buffers, and site design and layout.
II. Site Acceptability
A_~. School size and land area requirements for elementary, middle and high schools shall meet the minimum
standards established by the Seminole County School Board.
B.~. Schools should be centrally located within their intended attendance zones, to the maximum extent possible,
and be consistent with walking and bus travel time standards. High schools shall be exempted from this
provision due the large land area requirement.
C.~. The site should be of sufficient size to ensure that buildings and ancillary facilities, and future expansions
can be located away from floodplains, flood prone areas, wetlands and other environmentalIv sensitive areas,
coastal high hazard areas and will not interfere with historic or archaeological resources.
D_..:.PUblic utilities (e.~., water, sewer, stormwater) must be available to the site.
E_. Access to the site should be from a collector road (local roads for elementary schools) and avoid the need for
slow down zones, if possible.
F. Ingress and e~ress should not create detrimental imt~acts on roads adjacent to the site.
G_____:.Approaches to the site should be safe for pedestrians, bicycles, cars and buses.
H__~.A mass transit or bus stop should be located near the site.
lI!., School Specific Site Location Recommendations
A____..Elementary Schools. Elementary schools serve a neighborhood or Rroup of neighborhoods where students
have a short distance to walk. Land uses should be predominateIv residential and include housing tVl~es and
densities sufficient to meet the school's enrollment capacity with students that are predominateIv within
walkinn distance of the school.
B_.:. Middle Schools. Middle schools have a community orientation and the mix of land uses can include more
commercial uses than would be allowed in a neighborhood. Enrollment comes from two or more elementary
schools.
C_.:. Hiffh Schools, High schools should be buffered from residential areas. Enrollment for high schools comes
from two or more middle schools. The campus should be large enough to encourage students to remain onsite
and to ensure sufficient parking or parkin~ controls to avoid disruptive offsite parking.
Policy 1-2.10.4: Collocation of Facilities. The City of Sanford shall seek to collocate public
facilities, such as parks. libraries. and community centers, with schools to greatest extent
possible. In collocating facilities, the City shall use the following guidelines:
· Elementary Schools. Playgrounds can be collocated with elementary schools. In areas with densities high
enough to support them, a neighborhood park with facilities for the elderly, a neighborhood recreation center, and
a library sub-branch can be included.
· Middle Schools, A community park and athletic fields are appropriate to locate with middle schools. A
community center, if the school will not be used for this purpose, and a library sub-branch or branch can be
included depending on the school's location and the population served.
High School, Community parks with a community center, if the school will not be used for this purpose, and
athletic field can be collocated with high schools. A main or branch library is also appropriate. If justified by the
population to be served, a district park could be collocated with the school.
ol Sanford.
P.O. Box 1788 · 32772-1788
Telephone (407) 330-5673
Fax (407) 330-5679
Department of Engineering, Planning and Zoning
October 18, 1999
Department of Community Affairs
Attn: Ray Eubanks
2555 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
Re: City of Sanford First Comprehensive Plan Amendment of 1999
Dear Mr. Eubanks:
The City of Sanford transmitted the First Comprehensive Plan Amendment of 1999 on
October 12, 1999 to the Department of Community Affairs. Table 2: Summary of Future Land
Use Plan Map Amendments-Evaluation of Senrice and Facility Impacts was not included in the
transmittal package.
Please insert the attached Table 2: Summary of Future Land Use Plan Map Amendments-
Evaluation of Service and Facility Impacts into the City of Sanford's First Comprehensive Plan
Amendment of 1999 package immediately following Table 1: Summary of Future Land Use Plan
Amendments dated June 11, 1999.
Thank you for your assistance.
Andrew Van Gaale, AICP
Associate Planner
Enclosure:
Three (3) copies of Table 2: Summary of Future Land Use Plan Map
Amendments-Evaluation of Service and Facility Impacts
cc.
Lynn Griffin, Department of Environmental Protection
Carolyn Hyland-Ismart, Florida Department of Transportation, District 5
Greg Golgowski, East Central Florida Regional Planning Council
Margaret Spontak, St. Johns River Water Management District
Frances Chandler, Seminole County Planning and Development
John Litton, City of Lake Mary
Jay Marder, City of Sanford Director of Engineering and Planning
Jan Dougherty, City of Sanford City Clerk
"The Friendly City"
Table 2: Summary of Future Land Use Plan Map Amendments
Evaluation of Service and Facility Impacts
Map Acres Existing Use
No.
5 0.2 Single Family
13 24.0 Vacant
15 28.2 Vacant
GPD: Gallons Per day
PPD: Pounds Per Day
ADT: Average Daily Traffic
Proposed Cib/
Ex|sltng Future Land Future Land Use Potable Water Sewer Demand Solid Waste Recreation
Use Plan Map Plan Map Demand (GPD) (GPD) Drainage (PPD) (Acres)
Designation Designation
LDR GC No Change No Change No Change No Change N/A
Adheres to 25
SE AIC 176,617 161,259 year, 96 hour 2,391 N/A
LOS
Adheres to 25
LDR MDR-I 5 126,868 115,836 year, 96 hour 1,938 3.15
LOS
TOTAL: 303,485 277,095 No Change 4,329 3.15
Traffic
(ADT)
40
2,550
6,304
8894
Assigned Street
U.S. 17&92
East Lake Mary
Boulevard
C.R. 46 A
ADJUSTED AVAILABLE CAPACITY
POTABLE WATER
Total Permitted Capadty
Current Flow
Available Capacity
Projected Demand Per Plan Amendments
Adjusted Available Capacity
16.5 Million Gallons Per Day (MGD)
7,5
3.4
0.3
3.1
SANITARY SEWER
Total Permitted Capacity
Current Flow
Available Capadty
Projected Demand Per Ran Amendments
Adjusted Available Capacity
7.3 Million Gallons Per Day
4.5
2.8
0.275
2.525
SOLID WASTE
Available Capadty
Current Demand
Projected Demand Per Plan Amendments
Adjusted Available Capacity
358,333 TonsPer Year
263,000
770
94,563
RECREATION
Existing Park Land
Available Park Land
Projected Demand Per Ran Amendments
Surplus
231.72 Acres
80.61
3.15
77.46
0 0
~O o
O~' ~ ~ co
n,,~ c~ c~
I-
Z
:::) z
(.) ~--
LU Z ~ ~ C~