MEMORANDUM

TO: Local Planning Agency

FROM: Bill Spikowski

DATE: September 25, 1996

SUBJECT: Follow-Up on Your September 24^th Meeting on Development Regulations

Last evening we discussed four types of interim changes to your development regulations: maximum building heights, signs, commercial development, and seasonal parking shortages.

This memorandum attempts to summarize your consensus position on how to proceed. At your next meeting, please review this listing and identify any areas where this memorandum does not accurately characterize your direction.

You would be producing in the very near future a single ordinance amending the existing Land Development Code. This ordinance would include the following amendments:

• Revisions to Section 34-2175, the building height limitations on Estero Island. These revisions would create two or more districts (encompassing all of the island) which would have distinct height limits. The purpose of creating these districts is to ensure that new buildings on most of the island will not be high-rises, but to allow somewhat taller buildings in delineated areas where a high-rise pattern has been firmly established. The level of vesting would be made explicit.
• Revisions to Section 30 regulating signs. These revisions would eliminate the hardships caused by the "non-conforming" status of many older business signs, by reducing the required 15-foot setback from a right-of-way; decrease the maximum allowable size of business signs; and eliminate new billboards anywhere on the island. An amortization period would be provided for existing larger signs.
• Revisions to Section 34 regarding new commercial development. As an interim measure while the town evaluates its policy on expansion of commercial expansion, new commercial developments would be required to be rezoned to CPD (Commercial Planned Development). Exempted from this requirement would be any development that complies with the Times Square Redevelopment Overlay District, and also minor improvements that do not require a development order. This interim regulation would be reexamined in the spring of 1997 after the comprehensive planning process (through a community design workshop) has examined alternative patterns for future commercial expansion.
• Revisions to Section 34 regarding parking. To allow the private sector to provide additional parking during the peak season, the "shared parking" provisions of the code would be changed to delete the requirement for a special exception; to loosen the proximity requirements; and to ensure a reasonable measure of buffering to adjoining residential areas. Also, the dates during which temporary parking lots can be used would be extended.

The most time-consuming amendment to prepare and agree upon will be the delineation of the height districts. The reasoning behind these districts must be clear; spot-zoning must be avoided; and the proposed maximum heights must be related to a clearly articulated public policy.

The first attempt at creating the districts and their height caps should probably be delegated. An initial delineation of which district(s) should be allowed to have taller buildings should be prepared; the LPA may wish to assign one of its members to prepare this (or appoint a subcommittee, although its meetings would have to be properly noticed). This approach would reduce your consulting expenses and take maximum advantage of local knowledge. I have extra copies of some early drafts of the large parcel-level maps for you to use in this process.