HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986 01 13 Regular
--;:-
~ 7 "':~\~TE-~;lt l
."cj ... '"T ~',
"1::8."" ~'.,
~ ,:u . .'(f,~~
~ .
" .~~.,. ,
y...'" -.
. "
..(, -~".-
-;, ...., ~n'n" ''';'
l~: _-'onE 'J:"."'" _'~
't.$'"~:l'."'l:" ... - .
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
1126 STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (305) 327.1800
MEM):
January 8, 1986
TO: City Hanager, Mayor and Ccmnission
,'-'-, )
F'RCM: City Plarmer, Peter Cowell --t!..' ~/
,\~
RE: Mosley Plat
On April 8, 1985, the City Ccmnission allowed Tem Binford to sell
approximately 30 acres of the area known as Horse Shoe Acres in what
was defined as a lot split.
This was against staffs recorrmendation as the problem has been
shown in such cases as Bahama Ranches and other resales of unplatted
parcels of land.
Without platting the property no addres may be given 14-47 and no
structure may be developed or given electrical service 14-111 (A) .
Dr. Mosley intends to create Brookshire Fanns on the 30 acres he
purchased in the orginal transaction and, therefore, has chosen to
plat the property in accordance with the code.
Attached is a copy of the minutes of the April 8, 1985, meeting
and a copy of the proposed plat. Staff is awaiting the approval in
order to review the proposed site plan for the development.
PC/nw
Attachments
Regular Meeting, City Commission, April 8, 1985
Page 2
84-85-15
~
Request of Tom A. Binford, Authorized Agent, for Lot Split:
There was discussion of this request. Mr. Tom Binford explained there would be
access to Fisher Road.
Motion was made by Commissioner Hartman that we approve the applicant's request to
divide two parcels out of the 155 acres. Seconded byCommissioner Jacobs. Discussion.
Vote on the motion: Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner
Hartman, aye; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins, aye; motion carried.
Request of Maxine S. Hildebran for Lot Split, Lot 2, Block 2, North Orlando Ranches
Sec.5:
Motion was made by Commissioner Adkins, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to approve
the lot split of Maxine S. Hildebran. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner
Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, aye; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins,
aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye; motion carried.
Final Plat approval of Tuscawilla Unit l4A:
Staff recommended approval.
Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs to approve Final Plat of Tuscawilla Unit l4A.
Seconded by Commissioner Adkins. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Hartman,
aye; Commissioner HOffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins, aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye;
Commissioner Grove, aye; motion carried.
...J
Planning & Zoning Board Recommendation of March 27, 1985:
Winter Springs Plaza approval of preliminary plan:
The City Planner explained the property is between S. Devon Avenue and S. Fairfax Ave.
The six lots are being divided into four lots for four buildings for office-profession-
al use. They were granted the Variance by the Board of Adjustment for the 9x20
parking spaces. Staff has recommended approval.
~
Motion was made by Commissioner Hartman to approve the preliminary plan of Winter
Springs Plaza subject to the 10 foot wide parking spaces. Motion died due to lack of
a second.
Motion was made by Commissioner Grove for approval of the preliminary plan of Winter
Springs Plaza subject to the Staff recommendations and Planning & Zoning Board
recommendations. Seconded by Commissioner Jacobs. Discussion. Vote on the motion:
Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins, aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye;
Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, no; motion carried.
First Reading of Ord. NO. 317, rezoning Lots 1 & 2, 18 & 19, Blk. D, D.R.Mitchell's
Survey, etc. from R-U to C-l (Parker property):
Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs to read Ord. No. 317 by title only on' first
reading. Seconded by Commissioner Grove. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner
Adkins, aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman,
aye; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; motion carried.
Attorney Kruppenbacher read Ordinance No. 317 by title only on first reading.
First Reading of Ord. No. 318, rezoning east 213.42 ft. of Lot 20, BIk. D. D.R.
Mitchell's Survey, etc. from R-U to C-2 (Hanratty property):
})
Kegular Meeting, City Commission, May 13. 1985
Page 4
84-85-17
o
Commissioner Hartman, abstain; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins,
aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye; .Commissioner Grove, aye; motion carried.
'"""'-
Request of Shop & Go - Renovation:
Mr. Jim Robinson with Shop and Go was present. He said they would like to enhance
the appearance of the Shop and Go. put in a sidewalk and shrubbery. and replace
the old tanks with new glass steel tanks, the most approved tanks they have.
Motion was made by Commissioner Adkins for approval of the request of Mr. Robinson
as a renovation and not an improvement, based upon the safety, health and welfare
of the citizens and based upon a safety necessity, and that the City Commission
does not construe it to be ~ structural alteration or extension. Seconded by
Commissioner Grove. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Hoffmann, aye;
Commissioner Adkins, aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye;
Commissioner Hartman, aye; motion carried.
Greenbriar - Approval of Engineering Phases 1, 2 and 3:
Motion was made by Commissioner Hartman to approve engineering of Greenbriar Phases
I, 2 and 3 as presented last meeting. Seconded by Commissioner Jacobs for discussion.
Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Adkins, aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye;
Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, aye; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye;
motion carried.
Greenbriar - Approval of Final Plat Phase I:
Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs for approval of final plat phase I. Seconded
by Commissioner Grove. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Adkins, aye;
Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Co~issioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, aye;
Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; motion carried.
Resolution No. 488, establishing a time and place at which the owners of property
to be assessed pursuant to Res. No. 486, or any other persons interested in said
assessment may appear before the City Commission, etc.:
Attorney Kruppenbacher read Resolution No. 488 by title only.
Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Hoffmann to adopt
Resolution No. 488 subject to the City Clerk complying with F.S. Chapter 170.07 with
regard to notice to the affected property owners. Discussion. Vote on the motion:
Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, aye;
Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins,aye;motion carried.
Resolution No. 489, providing for the division of lots hereinafter described as
approved by the City Commission on April 8, 1985:
Attorney Kruppenbacher read Resolution No. 489 by title only.
Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs to adopt Resolution No. 489. Seconded by
Commissioner Grove. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Grove, aye;
Commissioner Hartman, aye; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins, aye;
Commissioner Jacobs, aye; motion carried.
City Manager - Richard Rozansky:
Resolution No. 490, reaffirming the time necessary for review of development plans,etc:
Attorney Kruppenbacher read Resolution No. 490 by title only.
Motion was made by Commissioner Hoffmann to adopt Resolution No. 490. Seconded by
Commissioner Jacobs. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Hartman,a ye;
Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins, aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye;
Commissioner Grove, aye; motion carried.
__ ~~~'l.:-
4 ~\"'TE,q 'S"
:'.1::8."" ~ '.'
~u . ~:
.. .
y. ,,,;,,'
f.J. . ~,. . :
't ~
"'-t..~". ,".:'
,,~""':--' r>>~... :-;-r
"'~-S':::l..::>--..
SUBJECT:
FROM:
('1~~ /110 J ~G
l./
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
1126 STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (305) 327.1800
,,/
(
,
,
January 9, 1986
TO: Commission
Bid Recommendations (1) Mini Pumper (2)
Murphy Be~~'6)
City Manage~
On December 12, 1985 the City received bids on the above
referenced items. The bids were turned over to the Fire Chief for
department review and recommendation. The Chief recommends we accept
the following bids. I concur.
encs.
1. Mini Pumper
Pierce Manufacturing Company - $42,558.50 (Ford)
2. Murphy Beds
Thomas W. Ruff Co. - $12,441.00
BID OPENING
MINI PUMPER FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT
FOLD UP BEDS FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT
THURSDAY, DEC. 12, 1985
The Bid Opening was called to order by Mayor
JOhWCO, Torcaso ar 2:30 P. M.
m;:
Present:
Mayor John V. Torcaso
Fire Chief Charles Holzman
Clerk Mary Norton
3 Bids were received as follows:
CITY of ',\:.
Cir~' ;';/,i~.'.'.;:",-"
First Bid opened was from Thomas W. Ruff Co., 911 S. Orlando Ave., Maitland,
Florida 32751, Bid - $12,441.00.
Second Bid was from The Sico Space Makers, 1601 S. 30 Avenue, Hollywood, FL. 33020 -
Bid - $23,376.00
Third Bid was from Space Economy Products, 5145 Rio Vista Ave., Tampa, FL 33614,
Bid -$13,491.60
Bids were then opened for a Mini-Pumper for the Fire Department as follows:
Five Bids were received as follows:
-- First Bid opened was from Indiana Fire Apparatus Co., Inc., P. O. Box.156,
Mays, Indiana 46155 - Bid $45,005.75
Second Bid was from Harold's Sales & Service Co.,Inc., 978 Industrial Park Dr.,N.E.,
P.O. Box 6505, Marietta, Georgia 30065 Bid $40,355.00.
Third Bid was from Dowling Fire Equipment, Inc., P. O. Box 1170, Silver Springs,
Fl 32688-1170 Bid - $39,995.00.
Fourth Bid was from Municipal Equipment Co., 1124 S. Woods Ave., P. O. Box 5057,
Orlando, FL 32855 Bid - $47,500.00.
Fifth
Bid -
roducts Corp., 708 Industry Road, Longwood, Florida 32750
Bid #2 $41,108.50 Chevrolet.
The Bids will be turned over to Fire Chief Charles Holzman for a recommendation to
the City Manager.
Mary T. Norton,
City Clerk
(DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE)
=1_ Richard Rozansky
FRDM Charles L. Holzman
DEP'T
City Manager
DEP'T
Fire
SUBJECT Mini Pumper Bids
DATE December 13, 1985
Five sealed bids were received quoting prices of mini pumpers in
response to our advertised specifications. They were as follows:
Grumman Emergency Products
Indiana Fire Apparatus Co., Inc.
Marion Body Works, Inc.
Dowling Fire Equipment, Inc.
pierce Manufacturing, Inc.
$ 4 7 , 9 6 0 . 0 01;" .': .,' '.-
1 ~_ I
$ 4 5 , 515 . 7 $'" / . - '. '/ ';
:: ,J x,~:
$40,355.0cY'- D;~( B.;;:..
$41,995.00
$42,558.50 CITTR1bWltf=" ':":~::"-'~T
$41,529. 50 (cri~\ry1'AG:'2
;
: ';:
After a thorough review of the submitted bids it was noted that
only Grumman and Pierce met the pump specifications as well as met or
exceeded all other details of the specifications.
The lessor of the amounts received which met specifications were
.
two from Pierce Manufacturing,Inc. They were $42,558.50 for a Ford
350 with a diesel engine and automatic transmission and $41,529.50
for a Chevrolet C-30, also with diesel engine and automatic trans-
mission. Because of technical differences in the vehicles and per-
formance characteristics relating to their use as fire apparatus it
has been determined that the bid from Pierce in the amount of $42,558.50
for the Ford 350 is the most appropriate to meet the needs of the
Fire Department.
Therefore it is respectfully requested that the Fire Department
be permitted to purchase that vehicle through Aero Products Corporation
in Longwood. Delivery time is quoted as six months.
-
(DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE)
Richard Rozansky
DEP'T
City Manager
FROM Charles L. Holzman
DEP'T
Fire
SUBJECT Fold-up Beds Bids
DATE December 13. 1985
Three sealed bids were received quoting prices of fold-up beds in
response to our advertisied specifications. They were as follows:
~::::s E:~n::: f P~:~ucts : ~: : :: ~ : ~~~@ [":""~ l ~l
SICa Space Makers $23,376.00 DEe., ;,~
I'ITV ~ . ....~\..
.,.t I t::
All bidders appear to meet our specificatione~-.-!thel"\G.ore it is
respectfully requested that the fire department be permitted to
proceed with the purchase of twelve fold up beds from the lowest
bidder, Thomas W. Ruff Co. in Maitland. Delivery time is quoted as
12 weeks.
R/}~f1=~
~~ Holzman
Fire Chief
.-
~cj- ~;~TEk I J f
.'L]"
:t: .. "
.....' ~'< \:,
: tJ . )':
~ . '
.,. .... ~
"; .. ..tf' ~....'
;<I........~:.D;~~. . .,"
......:~ 1...l.. t ...... ~ .
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
1126 STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (305) 327,1800
~:
January 9, 1986
FR)M:
City Manager, Mayor and O:mnis~~n
City plarmer, Peter CcMell~
St. Stephens Catholic Church
TO:
RE:
en January 8, 1986, the Plarming and Zoning Board made reOOItlIEIldation to
awrove st. Stephens Catlx>lic Church. qxm approval this will be the tallest
building in Winter Springs.
< .
Attached are the Plarming and Zoning minutes of that neeting with three
pages of signatures of residents of Tuscawilla Urit 6 approving the height
and the proposed net:b:>d of buffering. 'lb date I have received no indication
of objection from the conmunity, this may be subject to change.
Also attached are the Staff review minutes of ~cember 24, 1985, the
City Engineers letter of ~oenber 13, 198~ and correspondence from Mr. SWisher
~oenber 27, 1985 and the revision to the plan January 3, 1986.
Also attached is the revised engineering and architectural plans for the
site. Should you have any ~stions of this departnent prior to the neeting,
please do not hesitate to contact ne.
~
/'~
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
CITY MANAGER
RICHARD ROZANSKY
1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (305) 327-1800
December 30, 1985
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COMMISSION/MAYOR
FROM: CITY MANAGEY
SUBJECT: Mrs. Emily Powell, 260 Bahama Rd-Possible violation of
Commission Action, of September 11, 1984
Attached please find a memo from the Police Department regarding
a possible violation of a commission action.
On September 11, 1984 the Commission approved a waiver of
Section 44.24.19 " to have one more non-related person than the
code allows and if that one person leaves, she then would have
to come back and get an additional waiver to replace that individual
and that providing that these individuals are handicapped, mentally
retarded under the laws of Florida, and violations shall be grounds
for revocation."
There is now present a possible violation of the above approval.
I believe it is a matter of interpretation and will place the item
on the January 13, 1986 Commission agenda.
I have attached a copy of background information for your
review.
Ut-.('
- -...
ATTACHMENTS:
- !'-' w~g~~~~ill
,tI.......- ~ ~
t?"'- /1- ~ -l~
Subject: Violation of Ci ty Variance in Zonina (Sinal. '.-111e.) _ #
'~..' .' ....... '. ~jte,M. ~-.u! 210...... ...... --1iPdaII. Fla. ~
~~;.,,~~!'~g 'I'; . .' ., .~ "", __ ~.
'.'~..' .~( ",~ '1Ipt~ 25, 1915, tt. .....1ped offt~ canucted * .., rwnoff
~,. ~ .avu.s that .. belt.... that !In. Pawll 18 in v101att;'' of P-
, ~ ar-ted her for bep1na bmd1cap ch1ldnn in ... ..... .'
... r.aoff. who n8idea Kl'OU the .treet fEaD Mr.. ~ funilhad
tba follolrin& 1nf~tian which ia quoted below: ·
"'DIe whole ....r w've seen Mra. Powell'. arandch1ldnn at her
bowie. Ifer eon is al80 there frequently. We 8U8peCted they II1pt
be living with Mrs. Powell. '1hree or four weeks aao lAonard, who
lives on Panama stopped us and told us Mrs. Powell h8d rented bar
house on Glatree, where her SOIl and children had been living, to
someone else, and she had moved her son and grandchildren in with
her. We went to the house on Guntree and go tag m.Jnbers from the
vehicles in front of the house as per the Chief's instructions.
We also called Mrs. Helen Tosker of HRS and informed her of the
events and she suggested we call Winter Springs Zoning as the home
is suppose to be single family dwelling and therefore Mrs. Powell
would not be meeting zoning regulations.
1
.' . .
.
-
Since opening of school we have noted one of the grandchildren
is picked up in front of Mrs. Powell's house by bus runber 304
every morning at 8:05 A.M. Two of three other grandchildren
leave at the same time walking down Bahama. '!be grandchildren
are there 7 days a week and to our knowledge the son also is there
most of the time and also another woman or girl. We drove by the
house on Guntree 10/8/85 'and there is still a car and a PIU in the
driveway. "
Additionally, Mrs. Fenoff advised that Mrs. Powell's husband has lived
in the bane all 8\ElDer.
Following contact with Mr. ,enoff, a vehicle license plate check was
conducted on the plate mnbers furnished by Mr. Fenoff.
Florida license No. 981 DAB is registered to one Courtney D. Williamson,
1 Guntree Court, Winter Springs, Florida. The other plate nunber, WEF 441, '
is registered to one Annette Williamson, 311 Teakwood Lane, Altamonte
Springs, Florida.
. .
Records of the Winter Springs Utilities (Water Department) reflect that
the water bill for 1 (bntree Court was transferred on July 1, 1985; frail
Mrs. Powell to Courtney D. Williamson.
Mr. Gary Bass, who resides next door to Mrs. Powell, advised that he sees
the grandchildren at the Powell home all the time, and the son is there 011
the weekend. He is unaware if the son lives there all the time. Bass
agreed to come to the next meeting of the Zoning Board if i~ is necessary.
In an interview with Mrs. Jtme Barry, 280 ~ Road. Winter Springs, the
latter ccmnented that she is seldom home and is unaware if Mrs. Powell's
grandchildren are residing in the Powell home.
Page 2
Hrs Emily Powell
..." .,...... ~ Interview of Mr. Harry Reid resulted in his stating that he has seen "some kids"
" .' to' walkins down Bahama who he believed to be Mrs. Powell's grandchildren, but he
., :..~. :J 1. mwure. He could furnish no other relevant information.
t
Records of the Winter Springs Elementary School, reviewed on October 17, 1985,
reflect three children believed to be Mrs. Powell's grandchildren and/or children
under her care as follows:
1. Sherisa Powell, 1 GlIntree Court, Winter Springs
2. Simone Powell, 1 Gtlntree Court, WinterSprings
3. Anthony Harvey, 1 Guntree Court, Winter Springs
Records of the Keith Elementary School reflect the following:
1. Carlton Powell, 1 Gtlntree Court, Winter Springs.
If Mrs. Powell is caring for at least four handicap children, in addition to
those listed above, it would appear that eight children and three adults are
residing in the Powell home,' which may be in violation of her zoning variance.
-
Sulxnitted:
.6~~~
/~ley ~
Police Officer
Winter Springs Police Departmen
7
J/Lvk ~r '
f
(-'~
c-
{ ".
Art. I, S 44.231
APP. A---ZONING
Art. I, S 44.24
(16) Dwelling, one-famil~ A building designed for or oc-
cupied exclusively by one famITy. ,
(11) Dwelling, ~o-family~ A building designed for or oc-
cupied exclusively by two famITies.
(18) Dwellin~, multiple: A building designed for or occu-
pied exclusively Y three or more families.
(19) Family: An individual or two or more persons related
by blood or marriage, or a group of not more than five persons
living together as a single houlJekeeping unit in a dwelling,
who need not be related by blood or marriage.
(20) Filling station: See Service station.
(21) Garage apartment: An accessory building with storage
capacity for not less than two automobiles, the second floor of
which is designed as a residence for not more than one family.
(22) Garage, srivate: An accessory building or a portion of
the principal utI ing used for the storage of automobiles of
the occupants of the building. A carport is a private garage.
(23) Garage, public: .A building or portion thereof, other
than a private garage or storage garage, designed or used for
the sale, storage, servicing, repairing, equipping and hiring of
motor-driven vehicles.
.I
(24) Garage, storage: A building or portion thereof de-
signed or used exclusively for the storage or parking of automo-
biles. Services, othe~ than storage at such storage garage,
shall be limited to refueling, lubrication, washing, waxing and
polishing.
(25) Guest cottage: Living quarters within the detached
accessory building located on the same lot or parcel of land as
the principal building, to be used exclusively for housing mem-
bers of the family occupying the principal building and their
nonpaying guestsJ such quarters shail not be rented or otherwise
used as a separate dwelling.
.
(26) Guest (tourist) home: A private ,dwelling in which
transient sleeping accommodations are provided for compensation,
especially for motor tourists or travelers.
(21) Rome occuJation: Any use conduct.ed entirely within a
cJwelling and carr! on by an occupant thereof, which use i.
951
_.r....,
", '.;~..... 'f,.:'I- "-
1/~U-~''''~\I'lT!:''?'~~' ,
',t: /""'.) .'9';..:,
~u .~' .'tP:
1'", T
~ .,0.... .'
f- . . :
"
':~.J' ~4tr'~1 V;;AJ4'", ~~..:,-
-4.:1.._:1..:-5~'_""_ ,",4
o~
11 r7jYb
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
1126 STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (305) 327,1800
MEM):
January 8, 1986
TO: City Manager, Mayor and Ccmnission
FRCM: City Plarmer, Peter Cowell ~
RE : bot Sp li t in a PlID
~1~~
Pursuant to 14-3.1 of the Winter Springs City Code, a lot split in a
PUD TID.1St be replatted. The developers of Greenspointe have requested the
same for lots 5 and 6 of this subdivision.
Staff has reviewed the issue and has no objection to the request.
Attached you will find a proposed plat for the redivision of this
land. The purpose for the request is to save trees in the develC>'plrent.
PC/nw
Attachment
(f'fl~N~,<
u"'~'
"'" I:: ~"" ';;:,'t,f,
i3 . y;, ,_
19!1!;'''-
. .. ,;'
~ r
. ~'- ,;.
..'..... """'.'. ~;/
........~.
r 7., ~ r
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
1126 STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (305) 327-1800
MEMO:
January 10, 1986
TO: City Manager, Mayor and Conunission
Cowell ~ l\IAJ
FROM: City Planner, Peter
RE: Greenbriar at Tuscawilla ~t 00 the Final Development Plan
I was apprised by Mr. Jay Alpert that Le Cesse Corporation intends
to bring the question of the alteration of their final development plan
to the Conunissions attention at the meeting of January 13, 1986 contrary
to the Winter Springs City Code.
In review of 44.85.9, the alteration to a Final Development Plan"
the project is to first reviewed by the Staff and those reconunendations
are taken to the Planning and Zoning Board to determine if the amendment
is or is not in compliance with the approved final development plan.
Le Cesse Corporation is presently approved for the construction of
town houses at a density of 7.5 units per acre. The maximum allowable
for this type of dwelling unit is 9 per acre. The proposed amendment
is to construct patio houses with a density of 7.5 units per acre. The
maximum allowable density for this type of unit is 7 units per acre,
thus placing the project over density. .
The second question is in regard to Phase I of the project which
was approved for plat along with the final engineering of the entire
project on May 13, 1985.
The size of this Phase if 12.647 acres. The developer contends
he should be allowed to develop this Phase as his density is 6.8 for
the phase, however, his recreation and retention areas utilize 1.75+
acres of the first phase of the development, lo~ering the actual land
available for building and causing the spacing between some of the
units to be as little as 3 feet. The concern is for a finished product
that may possibly look something between Highlands Village I and Rustic
Woods.
Staff has not had a chance to review the project and can give no
futher opinion at this time. However, the DeCR's will need to be amended
to provide for acceptab13 set backs as none have been provided for presently.
f'
,'~ Also attached are the minutes of the Commission meetings on Casa
'~'~',:'t'ark where waiver after waiver of the code was given with less than
satisfactory results. It in light of this condition and until further
"~view of this pr~ject can be completed to request the Commission to
make a decision on this amendment with little chance for review may
not be in the best interests of the citizens of Winter Springs.
o
,,..,..
"
Regular Meeting, City Commission, Oct. 25, 1983
Page 2
83-84-2
~)
By the Land Development Ordinance that was passed in 1981 there are two waivers
required. One is that the private roads designed do not meet the public road
standards in right-of-ways, sidewalks, and cul-de-sacs and another is that trees
shall be removed from right-of-ways. The Staff recommends that each of these be
waived in this instance to allow a 40 foot right-of-way with no sidewalks to allow
trees to remain in the right-of-way including some islands in the middle of the
paving and cul-de-sacs have a shorter turn around radius than would be required on
a public street. There is only one additional condition that we put on this
recommendation. There is a street going west which ends in multiple cul-de-sac,
which did have some one way traffic and some two way traffic. The Police Chief
would prefer that that all be one way and the Developers have agreed with that.
Motion was made by Commissioner Hartman, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs that we re-
approve final engineering for Hawk's Landing subject to the City Engineer's recommendation
and the City Planner's memo. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Linville,
aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, aye;
Commissioner Adkins, aye; motion carried.
Planning & Zoning Board recommendations of Oct. 12, 1983: Preliminary Plan for Casa
Park Villas in Tuscawilla:
The City Planner explained the property is to the west and north of Phase I of
Tuscany Place. This property originally was to be future phases of Tuscany Place but
has been acquired by a new developer and the preliminary plan submitted is to be
Phases I and II of Casa Park Villas. The development differs from Tuscany Place in
that it will be rather than garden apartments as a condominium, it will be fee-simple
~I townhouses with common areas and private roads controlled by a homeowners assoc1ation.
Mr. Allen Ginsbutg, speaking for Casa Park Villas, the proposed development, said they
are setting up a $10,000 opening bpdget. If the homeowners themselves decide that a
tot lot is necessary or desirable by a majority vote, they can vote to do so, and
there will be money available to build it.
Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Hartman, to approve
the preliminary plan for Casa Park Villas as presented with a waiver of road ease-
.ments as allowed under Sec. 14.95 allowing 30 foot easements with a minimum of 20 foot
setbacks from the paving line and subject to the Engineer's memo of 10/25/83 and the
condition the developer set up a $10,000.00 opening budget (as he so stated he would)
to be governed by the homeowners association. Discussion. Vote on the motion:
Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, aye;
Commissioner Adkins, aye; Commissioner Linville, aye; motion carried.
Approval to record plats of Tuscawilla Units 12 and 13 and Streets Lights was tabled
for two weeks.
Public Property-Moss Road Site:
Commissioner Adkins said that by putting the retention area in there we are giving
away city property which could and should be used for something else, either sold
or developed as City property in the future when it is feasible and financially
equitable to do so. Bill Holmes, Conklin, Porter and Holmes, explained that the
City is going to be required to put in this retention area by DER and the St. John's
River Management District. After discussion, it was decided to leave the plans as
they are.
)J
,
.~)o s . \"
.( . ......;:.~!'irl.&'l....
0(' '1 ...-..., \')>.'.
-';-..t' .,..........)~ .
....... ",~.
,{Ii . :'1....
, " .
.,... ". , !
~. . \, .'~ :;
t. . \ .'::'-......-: 'v .:'
", 14", .~.1' ;:t...
\,.......:p
ID1~/~j ~
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA ~
400 NORTH EDGEMON AVENUE
WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708
. Telephone (305) 327.1800
Oc tober 2l.) 1983
To:
Ci ty }1anager
Subject:
Preliminary Plan for Casa Park Villas in Tuscawilla
Urban of Tuscawilla requests approval of the preliminary plan for Casa Park
Villas on Trotwood Blvd. in Tuscawilla.
This development would comprise 324 units on 28 acres, a density of 11.6 units
per acre. All units will be attached townhouses constructed on fee-simple
lots. Lots will range in size from 858 to 1976 sq. ft.
.
Access to lots will be over a private roadway system consisting of a primary
circle drive throughout the property, with individual drives into parking courts
between units perpendicular to the main road. The primary circle road serving
the development will have 24 feet of pavement tvithin a 30 foot right-of-way.
The developers ask a waiver according to Section 14-95 to approve the 30 foot
right-of-way.
--
Around the perimeter of the property, buildings will be set back at least
40 feet from any single-family development. In addition, a buffer of existing
orange groves will remain for at least 25 feet adjacent to single-fanily hones.
The developers amended the original plan to create double, entrances on Trottvood
rather than a single entry road, to inprove accessibility. Also, an emergency
interconnection with Tuscany Place will exist in the forD of a stabilized sod
passageway between a partial street in Tuscany Place and one of the parking
courts in Casa Park. The Police Chief approves the traffic circulation design
and location of parking spaces along.the private road.
The Fire Chief approves the location of hydrants and size of water lines. Public
Works will accrue no additional work as result of this develop~ent, in that all
roads and storm drainage will be maintained by a homeowners association.
In the center of the development will be an artificial lake. Section 44.85.4)
paragraph 4g, of the Code requires all b~ildings be set back 50 feet from the
mean high water level of a body of water. In similnr situ~tions in Fairway Oaks
and the Tennis Villas, the consulting engineer required this distance be met.
The plan for Casa Park Villas indicates fifteen buildings closer than 50 feet
to the edge of the lake. Final engineering should address this Code requirement.
SL.tbacks of buildings from paving vary. Parking rot.:s parallel each building,
\vith a grass nrea about 9 feet deep separatio6 the building fr~m the sidewalk
adjacent to the parking lut. wn('re buildi.ngs Zlre perpendicular to thE.! roadHay,
a distance of 20 feet is proposed bett.:een the building nod the ~dge of the
paved road.
J
--)
--
)
.1
This is one of two concerns of the Planning and Zoning Board. ~fuile they acce~t
the overall concept of the development, they expressed concern that the den~ity
utilized results in inad!'quate building setbacks. This plan \o/as compared to
the case with a standard rigpt-of-way of 50 feet, with ~hich there is 13 feet of
grassed area in the right-of-way along the road, in addition to a setback on the
lot adjacent. Using 15 feet as a ~inimu~ setback, a distance of 28 fe~t would
exist between building and paving. Comparisons were made with Lori Anne Acres,
where buildings are 38 feet from the edge of paving, and the Tennis Villas,
~hich I indicated were 28 feet. Although the engin~ering records indicate this
figure>> measurement of the Tennis Villas as built demonstrates the houses set
back much less.
The issue of building setbacks and the matter of whether maximum allowable
density can be attained in any particular development, when reviewed with
respect to the comments of the residents of Units 8 and 9 of Tuscawilla in
hearings last year on redesignating tIle commercial area on Trotwood to multi-
family>> raise the question of whether this preliminary plan convincingly
demonstrates that this proposal satisfies the intangible factor of con~unity
preferences.
The discussion at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting centered around this
question. I believe it is accurate to say the Board favors approval of the
preliminary plan under the condition that the development be "opened up" \.Jith
greater setbacks. They also suggest addition of a playground for toddlers,
since the individual fee-sinple lots \olill have very small yards--about 10 feet
behind each to\vnhouse.
o
a~/pd..4JX o-d-
~acq eline Koch
Ci t Planner
~
-
)
..
)
a. "",:'.~tf:.q eo.
~:,:' ~.~~.~\.
.. ;:..: ...r ~. '_..:.:,. "\'t~'"
~<";:'. ...... t'\~
::; . 1 .. ..
1 \ .." I ~
'" . \ ~ . ;'
t. ....... ..-
r. ".. .___ ...:.
,'.. .~
',. .. 'nt. .,
".. ....:: t '
erne OF \n:,TEI< SPRI;XGS. l'LO~UDA
----.--.-----...---- -.-. --... --- ---- - - --_. ._----- -------
(C-J NO~TH EOGEr.1~~.: A\'ENU=.
\.i!NTE.Fl s~';n-::)s. flO;:(!::>'; 32/"'::3
Te.le~-'1:>:i~ (3~5~ J27,1S:::>
/~ /YJ /CJ
Kr~?:O TO: Je.cClueline r:och, Director of Ad!::.inistra~h'e Sen-ices
FRO:,~afp,. Hassler, PeE., Director Of Public ~'Io:-k5
SlfSJEGT: Review of Ce.sa Park VilluG, Prelirdnary (Tu3can:; Place II & III)
I ltave reviewed the subject project and find it is not ip- co~pliance vith
the follo"."inE; listed subsectio:1s of Article II, Divisio::l 2, Section 14-31)
of the City Code.
/:
l':o
;; '" 1
....1:~IVO--. .
{a)(2)b.3.
Legal descriptio~ of tract to be subdi~ic~d not sub~itted.
2. (a)(2)b.5. Required information for existin~ stree~3 is not sho~~.
3. (a)(2)b.6. Proposed streets, itl~o::.-matioa not sho'.,;:-_.
4. (a)(2)b."(. Pr('po5~,dens~L;,ents inforr.!o.tion not Sh,'::':-7__
5.
(a)(2)b.8e
.
Building setb[~c}: lines are not clear. Ex. ,:L.~~ I;O's 47 & 48
a:-e s~t back 20' 0:1 Orle dra'.dnz; frQ~;. e:.~e of puc:e~ent. and
on an(;.ther drc>.~,ri=:~ as 22' from c2ntel'::'i,.t.: oT.~ rO=.'i-..ray.
6. (~)(2)b.9. Pla:r,syouro,ds, public ayeas, is t!'-:~LS an ?,':';llt 031y area?
~(. (a) (2)b.11. Size of edstin,f; water Ir,,1.in to 'be conr-,~':~e~ is I!.:)t shO'.m.
8. (e,)(2)b.12. State;:.ent on proposed utilities not s'...io::itte,i.
9.
{c<)(2)b.18. Z0:11n.; or abutting prC'perty.
c......' ,I" 10
;~-, I t'A/'-. - .
/
(a){2)b.20. Dyaft of restrictive covena."'1ts if ap~lica-ole has not been pro'
11. 'l'i\e total detention pond. s~'ste:n viIl be rec..:'lired 2~ its entirety for
consb.uction of either Pha~.;e I or Ftc-.se II.
12. The t~rpical road......s.y section does not ShO,'f side\:~~lk5.
The preliminary engineering is arproved sub:~..:to the add.itional information
l1.s~ed. above being added to the plan. ~rC"""-J
Cf.:n/ p~~l
.~
-
~. ~';\HTE.q' '\\' .
.:'r1'"
,~ It P""""~, '::
~a . I "
II ,I ,
, ...... I' ,
" '., ,
. 'I ti' ,/
, , ':~~<~;':;~~J/
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA
4O(j'NORTH EDGEMON AVENUE
WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (305) 327-1800
October 7~ 1983
To:
Planning and Zoning Board
Subject:
Preliminary Plan for Casa Park Villas in Tuscawilla
A Staff Review was held Friday~ October 7~ 1983, at 9:00 AM to review the
preliminary plan for Casa Park Villas~ a fee-simple townhouse development
in Tuscawilla on Trotwood Blvd. The property is adjacent to Phase 1 of
Tuscany Place and is the area which originally was to have been Phases 2
and 3 of Tuscany. '
The property is 28 acres. The developers propose to construct 328 units,
a density of 11.71 units per acre. All units will be townhouses, with a
ground floor and second floor each, which creates a greater ground coverage
than with upper and lower garden apartments of the same density. Paving
requirements are similar~ so that the net loss in a townhouse development
of this density is in less greenspace.
Each townhouse will be erected on a lot platted fee-simple, with lot lines
along the common walls between units.
Entrance roads and the circle road through the development will be private.
Each townhouse complex (generally six or eight attached units) will have
its own parking court with an access drive off the private road. All the roads
and parking areas will be private and maintained by a homeowners association.
There will be two parking spaces per unit. A reduction in the area of each
parking space from 200 to 180 square feet was approved by the Board of
Adjustment on October 6, 1983. Some additional parking on stabilized sod
will be provided along the roadway~ between complexes.
The plan defines the actual paving of the road (24 feet wide) rather than
a right-of-way (usually 50 feet). Therefore, the 20-foot setbacks shown
for buildings are actually the distance of the townhouse from the paved road
itself. As more commonly presented, setbacks are in addition to an unpaved
l3-foot strip of right-of-way along the paved road. By this standard, the
setback provided here is small~ a net of 7 feet.
A pool and bathhouse will provide recreational facilities for the residents.
All grounds not platted into lots will be common areas maintained by the
association.
Along the perimeter of the property~ the developer plans to leave part of
the existing groves as buffer strips. Buildings will be set back from the
perimeter a minimum of 40 feet, with a one-story townhouse at the end of each
complex rather than a two-story on~ being the nearest townhouse to the common
boundary with any single-family area.
.,
"
The City Engineer recommends approval of the engineering design subject
to the addition to the plan of the information required in his memo of
October 7, 1983.
The Fire Chief approves the plan for water distribution and location of hydrants.
The Police Chief approves the traffic design of the entrances, circle road, and
parking areas. Regarding an emergency interconnection with Phase 1 of
Tuscany Place (which had been constructed with a stubbed-out road intended
to extend into future phases), the developers of Casa Park Villas propose
to stabilize the grass area between the end of the stubbed-out road in Tuscany
and the nearest paving in Casa Park, so that public vehicles only could have
direct access from one development to the other if needed.
The Building Official said the structures looked good from his perspective.
Public Works will accrue no additional regular maintenance responsibilities,
since all roads and drainage areas remain privately owned. The City will
require an easement on the plat, however, for emergency maintenance.
The engineering and technical aspects of this preliminary plan are found
satisfactory by-.the Staff, subject to the Board's analysis.
i::z:::::X-L
City Planner
ft r .
Regular Meeting, City Commission, May 13, 1985
Page 4
84-85-17
,
~
Commissioner Hartman, abstain; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins,
aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye;, Commissioner Grove, aye; motion carried.
Request of Shop & Go - Renovation:
Mr. Jim Robinson with Shop and Go was present. He said they would like to enhance
the appearance of the Shop and Go. put in a sidewalk and shrubbery. and replace
the old tanks with new glass steel tanks, the most approved tanks they have.
Motion was made by Commissioner Adkins for approval of the request of Mr. Robinson
as a renovation and not an improvement, based upon the safety, health and welfare
of the citizens and based upon a safety necessity, and that the City Commission
does not construe it to be a structural ~lteration or extension. Seconded by
Commissioner Grove. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Hoffmann, aye;
Commissioner Adkins, aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye;
Commissioner Hartman, aye; motion carried.
Greenbriar - Approval of Engineering Phases 1, 2 and 3:
Motion was made by Commissioner Hartman to approve engineering of Greenbriar Phases
1, 2 and 3 as presented last meeting. Seconded by Commissioner Jacobs for discussion.
Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Adkins, aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye;
Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, aye; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye;
motion carried.
)
Greenbriar - Approval of Final Plat Phase I:
Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs for approval of final plat phase I. Seconded
by Commissioner Grove. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Adkins, aye;
Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, aye;
Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; motion carried.
Resolution No. 488, establishing a time and place at which the owners of property
to be assessed pursuant to Res. No. 486, or any other persons interested in said
assessment may appear before the City Commission, etc.:
Attorney Kruppenbacher read Resolution No. 488 by title only.
Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Hoffmann to adopt
Resolution No. 488 subject to the City Clerk complying with F.S. Chapter 170.07 with
regard to notice to the affected property owners. Discussion. Vote on the motion:
Commissioner Jacobs, aye; Commissioner Grove, aye; Commissioner Hartman, aye;
Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins,aye;motion carried.
.
Resolution No. 489, providing for the division of lots hereinafter described as
approved by the City Commission on April 8, 1985:
Attorney Kruppenbacher read Resolution No. 489 by title only.
Motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs to adopt Resolution No. 489. Seconded by
Commissioner Grove. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Grove, aye;
Commissioner Hartman, aye; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins, aye;
Commissioner Jacobs, aye; motion carried.
City Manager - Richard Rozansky:
Resolution No. 490, reaffirming the time necessary for review of development plans,etc:
Attorney Kruppenbacher read Resolution No. 490 by title only.
Motion was made by Commissioner Hoffmann to adopt Resolution No. 490. Seconded by
) Commissioner Jacobs. Discussion. Vote 9n the motion: Commissioner Hartman,a ye;
Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Adkins, aye; Commissioner Jacobs, aye;
Commissioner Grove, aye; motion carried.
-'I
.. - ~~\~TE~' l ,
,-(j ~"
;i::t:"""""... \,"-'.
:U ". . ""
. ,
. ,
"',. . ....~.~ ~'" ~
*I~,... ./. .
.,)-.." ..-....~... ~
.I~.:. '-'"10'-'"
,-) /~ -LjS'::
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
400 NORTH EDGEMON AVENUE
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (305) 327-1800
TO:
City
Manager, Mayor
PlannerW
and Commission
FROM:
City
RE:
Greenbriar at Tuscawilla/Final Engineering and Plat
DATE:
April 16, 1985
LeCesse Corporation is requesting City Commission approval
of the final engineering for all three phases of Greenbriar. The project
is 31.5 acres with a density of 7.5 units per acre. The project is of
townhouses on fee simple lots.
\..
All the engineering needs to be accepted at one time to save
both the developer and the City time in resolutions regarding easements
that would have to be granted and then vacated to loop this specific
storm drainage system. The City Engineer has reviewed the calculations
and has found the system acceptable.
The Fire Chief and Police Chief have also found that both
the traffic system and fire system are acceptable.
As Seminole Utilities has the capacity for the project, Winter
Springs Water and Sewer will not be involved.
LeCesse Corporation is also requesting the plat for Phase I
of Greenbriar.
The City Engineer will need to review and accept the contractors
bid for Phase I so that an Irrevocable Letter of Credit or bond may be
developed.
Further, a check for the street signs will need to be delivered
to the City for street and stop signs.
The DCCR and plat for this section are with the City Attorney.
To date, I have not received an opinion. With these as the final issues
to be resolved, the Staff recommends the approval for both the final
engineering of all three phases and the plat for Phase I of Greenbriar
at Tuscawilla.
~,
/db
Attachment
STAFF REVIEW BOARD MEE'I'JID MINUI'ES
lUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1986
The !meting was called to order by City Planner, Peter Cowell.
STAFF PRESENT:
Peter Cowell, City Plarmer
John Govoruhk, Police Chief
Charles Hol2JIlaIl, Fire Chief
Leonard Kozlov, City Engineer
Gilbert Arttnan, Director of Public Works
Sam Smith, Building Official
Doug Taylor, Utility Superintendent
WINIER SPRINGS CXM1ERCE CENI'ER:
Leonard Kozlov stated that his questions pertaining to Winter Springs Carmerce
Center were codified in a letter to Mr. Dittmer. His concerns were:
APPLICANI' :
Wal t Dittmer
1. For the final engineering shCM the 15' easement on the plans.
2. The swale has a steel way and needs details.
3. Letter fran DER (Juanita Quinn) reference swale.
4. He wants revised engineering and to fonnal1y address each question.
5. Detailed final engineering has to be sealed.
6. Portions of the plans sulmitted by A1 Land that needs to be revised.
There was discussion on water lines.
John Govoruhk stated that there will be three (3) paved lanes instead of four (4),
and Mr. Dittmer needs to get with D.O. T. on their requirements.
Peter CCMell stated that the only other concern that needs to be taken into account
is the size of the lots. Even though it is in a Coomercial PUD Mr. Di tt::IIer will
have to abide by the Arbor Ordinance for each lot.
Peter Cowell stated that what Mr. Ditt::IIer is looking at is correcting and roodifying
the engineering and subject to the minutes of this meeting and the engineer's
letter, the Staff will reccmnend approval. This will go before the Carmission on
January 27, 1986.
DISCUSSION ON THE RECONSIDERATION OF lECESSE CORPORATION PROJECT-GREENBRIAR AT 'IUSJ\WIIl
LECESSE CORPORATION PRESENT: Russ Davidson, Miller McCarthy, Bill Hoelbeck
Sal LeCesse
Peter Cowell asked if there was a change in the architect that designed this plan
over the architect that designed the other project. There was a change which
needs to be clarified and stated on the engineering. Because of all of the con-
sultants involved in the preparation of the final development plans, they need
to be shown. There were changes to the street section, the width of the pave-
ment and the gutter which needs to be changed on the plans.
MillerM:!'.arthy stated that they are sulmitting a plat requesting l~' of asphalt
and 3' of curb canbined to make it 21.\', originally there were 20'.
Peter Cowell stated that there is a question on the density and the issue of seven
(7) units per acre, if going back to the original plan, based on the percentage
of land in Phase I. LeCesse has utilized in recreation and retention the per-
centage for those lots nCM being at 6.8 which would be about 6.1 if breaking
Staff Review Board Minutes
.Dittrner/LeCesse - January 14, 1986
Piige 2 '
dcMn the phasing evenly.
Russ Davidson stated that they have only platted Phase I. They had to put the
retention and recreation area in. If he didn't build any more lots and left the
rest vacant, he would still have to put in the retention and recreation area.
Peter Cowell stated he mayor may not have at that time been deemed appropriate
to have that many units for the rn.mber of lots.
Miller Mi'.a.l!',thy stated that it is only 12 units per acre.
Peter Cowell stated that was fine for a different type of unit.
MillerM:Carthy stated that zoning density doesn't say what type of unit. Zoning
density is number of units per acre. It doesn't say nunber of townhouses, plats
or houses per acre.
Peter Cowell stated that the zoning density does state under PUn it is estab-
lished as to the number and type of unit that is allowed.
Russ Davidson stated that the only thing they are doing is moving the buildings
about 6' apart.
Charles Holzman made the motion to recarmend that the Staff Review Board accept
the new final as submitted. he stated that to him it does not constitute a
substantial change fran the original submission plan. Secdnded by Gilbert Artman
Vote: John Govorohk., aye; Charles Holzman, aye; Leonard Kozlov, aye; Gilbert
Artman, aye; Sam Smith, aye; Peter Cavell, nay.
Peter Cowell stated that he will take his reconmendation to the Planning and
Zoning Board, and if they also find this to be the case; they can also over
turn the Staff's decision.
Leonard Kozlov stated that this issue does not deal with the roads.
Peter Cowell stated that LeCesse will get a copy of the Staff Review Minutes,
and he will send a copy of than to the Planning and Zoning Board nenbers. He
needs five (5) copies of the infonnation that was distributed to the Staff, so
that this information can be distributed to the Planning and Zoning Board nEIbers
with the reccmnendation that the Staff has found it to be consistent. The Board
will have their choice to make their detennination at that time. The Planning and
Zoning Board meeting will be Wednesday, January 22, 1986 t at 7: 30 p.m.
Miller McCarthy stated that should the Planning and Zoning Board agree with the
Staff's recarmendation, then they don't need to go before the Cannission on the
following Monday.
Peter Cowell stated that he would just infonn the Coomission that it was deter-
mined to be substantially COIll>lied. At that point building pennits can be issued.
Miller McCarthy asked about the variance request for putting in curbs ,",drains and
miami curbs.
Staff Review Board Minutes
~Dittmer/LeCesse - January 14, 1986
Page 3
Peter Cowell stated that this can not be resolved until the first meeting of the
Board of Adjustment which is the first Thursday of February 1986. He also stated
that the Staff will be making a recomnendation on this matter to the Board.
Leonard Kozlov stated that the code, which is specific, and this is why LeCesse
Corporation is going before the Board of Adjustment because a request requires
a paved 10' wide lane, this is the min:i.n:n.ml width, mininn.m lane. He has no
obj ection to reducing a miami curb from a 24 to 18", but the miami curb is in
addition to the 10' width of the lane. He also stated that LeCesse' s position
is that they want to include the curb and his reccmnendation on this is no.
The code specifies that the width of the curb is in addition to the lane width
or roadway that will be accamdated. The original engineering plans showed a
93:2' width which is not in confonnance with the code.
Len Kozlov stated that his reccmrendation is to meet code for the land and he
is accepting a reduction of 24 to 18" curb. He stated:
1. The code does not accept the lane width including the curb.
2. If resurfacing the area, you do not put asphalt into the curb area because
you eliminate or reduce considerably the ftmction of the curb.
Respectfully submitted,
cJlcLft, ~~,:-)L{) L~
Mary Wilfon
Secre~,_,_
I(/?/rt-
II SPRINGS, FLOllIDA
400 NORTH EDGEMON AVENUE
WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (305) 327.1800
January 13, 1986
MEMO
TO: Richard Rozansky, City Manager
FROM: Sam F. Smith, Building Official
On December 18, 1985 I made an inspection of the wall located
in Dunmar Estate behi~ Sam Jacobson house, at which time I
found the wall to be erected to comply with the intent of the
Standard Building Code.
I
With all the reinforcing steel placed in the columns and down
~ into the additional footer slabs and tie beam poured across the
top tieing all section of the wall together, from top to the
footer below ground.
The additional ground corner of 30" or more of fill, in my
opinion this wall will withstand all wind storms thru Central
Floride area.
I don't know on any "gut wall"-free standing wall erected equal
to this one.
(I..ej( r-
,fr~ c
l
eJlpiNeeeiNp f/Je4IpJl 9J1c.
P. O. BOX 695 LONGWOOD. FLORIDA 32750
(305) 699-4500
-
Jan. 10, 1.986
7
~ \/lo/g~
~-
fL
/
Sam F. Smith
Building Offical
City of Winter Springs
1624 SR 434
Winter Springs, Fla.
RE: Sam Jacobson's block wall
Dear Sam,
On December 18, 1985 Harry Reynolds (Engineering Design),
dnd Sam Smith inspected the conca block wall. We felt that
the additional concrete footers (6'x 4' x 15") with reinforcing
steel rods and additional fill on top of the footers (30" to 36")
should meet the intent of Winter Springs building code.
rRECflVED
~..
~N 1 n 198$
City of Winler Springs
BIdg. Dept
"'"
RICHARD I. STEVENS. P.E.
STEVENS ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES
.24 N. MAGNOLIA, SUITE U.
ORLANDO, trLORIDA IaOI
(lOll UHIJO
Dec."198'
/
Mr. Sam SlIith, ll1da. Official
1126 E. State Rd. 434
Winter Sprinp, n.. 32'708
["., ..
, '
~ ,
...
@
Refer: Jacobson '. 10' MasOJll'1 Wall
Dear Mr. Smith,
Pursuant to your request I bave inspected the work progress at the
Jacobson's wall this date. This inspection cODsisted of a visual
observations and a look at some photographs of the work before pouring
concrete, which were supplied by the contractor, Bob Sickenger.
FrOll what I can detenaille at this tille, it appeare that the structural
reinforcing work, the addition of intermediate concrete pads, and steel
reinforCing, IU1 additiozaal concrete pilaster/colwme, bave all been accomplished
with the same discrepencies noted in our previ0U8 inspection report of
Oct. 11. 1985.
As menticmed in "1 letter ot Oct. 1. 198' in renew ot Engineering
Design IDc. design sketch i.IIlportant detail. 1D the sketch are not
sufficient. At this date, I do not know of a~ claritications or changes
to the de.ip by the Jacobson's elllineer which allow or alter the above
noted discrepencie.. Reportedq. the contractor himself believes that the
corrective work accomplished is sufficient to strengthen the masODl7 wall.
Until I receive further clarification ot the origiDal design, and some
veritica"ion of the changes -.de during construction I cannot approve
the work and the wall to meet design loads required bl the code.
Yours t~. )
, J.. ~rJ~-~
&lcl: De.ip 9-24-8,
Review 10-7-85
Inspect Itr 10-11-85
Richard W. Stevens
cc: Mr. Frank KruPP8nbacker. Attl
13' W. Central.! ~ Ste. 1100
Orlando. FL. 32~1
r RECEIVED
f 'DEe 0 4 ;985
'CIty of Wln~er S;.(ngs.
Bldg. Dept. ~
, '
. .' ~.:;. . ...: "
IICIWlD .. no P.I.
STEV.IS .IGlI.."'I' ASSOCIATES
.. N. MAGNOLIA, --"ITa _
OILMDO. PLOtIIDA _I
CIDIt .....0
!)eo. " 198'
I'
Mr. Sa. SIIltla. -eta. Offioial
1126 E. State Ill. ..,..
Winter Spriap, FL. 32?08
..rerl JaooHoa'.lO' Mu.z'l Wau
Visual field inspection of construction work completed
to date with Sam Smith
Ltr. report of conclusions 12-3-85
$180
I
i
RECEIVED
OEe 0 4 i98S
City of Winter Springs
Bide. Dept.
..... .
,- ..
/
/
A' ~Y""..,
- - ~iNTEJi' .
'6 ~
:~n'-".l.. ','
. () . '
:.... J
. .
't' .
'".~ "';
....._~:DJ1I'.......
..'~-_:--
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
1126 STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (305) 327.1800
November 27. 1985
MEMO
To:
Sam Smith. Building Official
Subject:
Jacobson Wall
Attached for your information and immediate action is a copy
of a letter dated November 20, 1985 from the City Attorney. He indicates
that you did not take the action he instructed you to take regarding in-
spection of the wall.
I did not receive the original letter dated November 20,
1985 but rather only 7 copies of it at the November 25, 1985 Commission
. Meeting. Via this letter I am instructing you to take immediate action
as recommended by the City Attorney. The action required is as follows:
1. Have the outside consultant determine if the wall
complies with ,our Code and the Southern Standard
Building Code as to whether or not it is dangerous
or unsafe - obtain a report from him.
2. If necessary, exercise your responsibility under Section
5-89 of the City Code and ue appropriate notice.
3. Furnish me with a complet
Enc!.
cc: Comm/Mayor
Attorney
/'
.~i "
J..UI/...-uI ~
9J. ,.. 'lJ.t.n(. L~ .
,
~
_I~-J~M' f.J_~
./
JAMES E. Au)ERMAN
.ILVIA MORELL ALOERMAN
""EOER'CK L, .ATEMAN. JR
EDMUND T, .AXA, JR.
DANIEL O. .RADLE".
JItANELLE G. .RONSON
~L 1', .R"AN
..lAME. A, .UtltT
DWIGHT I, COOL
MA"GUERITE H,DAVI.
CHA"LE. ", GEO"GE m
EOWARO E, H"'DDOCK.JR,
MITCHELL ., H...IGLER
JANE C. H.....M...N
RD.E"T ..., HENDERSON
ELIZ....ETH CRO" JEWETT
"'LL"'N J, K"'TZ
CH"ISTOPHER K, K.....
I'RANK C. KRUPPEN....CHER
ED_RD L. KUTTER
THO"'AS 1'. LANG
_ADMITTED IN OHIO AND OIE.O"'GIA ONLY ~EAVIE P. SWANN 0..5.1.,,)
SUITE 1100
131& WEST CENT""'L .0ULItV"'''D
POST Ol',.ICE .OX 840
ORLANDO. I'LORIDA u.Oa'0.40
I3IOS142S-31.31.
.00 SE...INOLE .T"EET
POST Ol'I'ICE .OX .31.
.TUART. I'LORIDA u...
1310., a.7-....
.UITE .00
III"NETT .ANK .UILDING
". SOUTH CALHOUN .T"EET
'...IIMAS.EE. I'LO"IDA 31.3101
..041..4,.._
TELEX 3131'31..7
.UITE 3101
'II O""'NGE "'VENUE
", "'E"CE. I'LO"IDA 334S0
1310&14....... ·
PCTER G, LATH......
ItO.ERT ", M...KE....ON
JAMES H. McCA"T". J",
JOSEPH ", MNZL
"O.EM .... .""ILL
D...VID N. .OWER."
"O.EM P. .UMME"S
"ICH"'RD ft. .W"'NN
THOMAa ", TEDCA.TLE
STEPHEN E. THO"'P.ON
M...RTIN .. UNGER
M"'''K S, W"'LKER
JA"'E. G. WILLA"D
..e....., TO: 0.....l1li.0
November 20, 1985
Ol'COUNSEL:
EDWA"D S, JA"I'''''
D...VID C. LATH......
P...TRICK ,., M..."ONE"
Mr. Richard Rozansky
City Manager
1126 East State Road 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708
Jacobson Wall
RE:
I
Dear Dick:
On November 18, 1985, I re~ived in my packet the
attached letter dated November 15, 1"5. The letter does not
reflect the conversation I ,had with Hr. Smith two days after
the.meeting. I advised'Mr. Smith to act in accordance with
the d~scussion of the Commission me~ing (see attached minutes
of meeting). That is, I advised Mr, Smith of the need to have
the outside consultant determine if the wall complies with our
Code and the Southern Standard Build~Ag Code as to whether or
not it is dangerous or unsafe. Then, if necessary, Mr. Smith
should exercise his responsibility ~er Section 5-89 of the
City Code and issue the appropriate ~tice.
Please assure Mr. Smith ~. these steps as the City
Commission was quite emphatic that '~ get this done. More im-
portantly, I recommend Mr. Smith get with the consultant ASAP.
The consultant called me Friday and ~ld me there were major
problems.
" '
FCR/df
cc: Mr. Sam Smith
Winter Springs
Sin~ely,
~t~/~
Fra~ C. Rruppenbacher
SfQf~~ I;'; r,..., ",_. /.' _ ~. . _ .
~ . , . ..' "'I-'~O'S
.... ", . ........ l....'\
It> ~~.~ : .., o. . .. .
City Commission ' .....- I..... 1-.........1 &Jo.;,LAY
.,-~~, I..~",