The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1986 01 14 Staff Review Board . r . e ~ STAFF REVIEW BOARD MEE1.']R; MINlTl'ES WESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1986 The ~ting was called to order by City P1armer, Peter Cowell. APPLICANT : Wa1 t Dittmer STAFF PRESENl': Peter Cowell, City Planner Jolm Govoruhk, Police Chief Charles Ho12man, Fire Chief Leonard Koz1ov, City Engineer Gilbert Artman, Director of Public Works Sam Smith, Building Official Doug Taylor, Utility Superintendent WINIER SPRINGS CXM1ERCE CENTER: Leonard Koz1ov stated that his questions pertaining to Winter Springs Ccmoorce Center were codified in a letter to Mr. Dittmer. His concerns were: 1. For the final engineering show the 15' easement on the plans. 2. The swale has a steel way and needs details. 3. Letter fran DER (Juanita Quinn) reference swa1e. 4. He wants revised engineering and to formally address each question. S. Detailed final engineering has to be sealed. 6. Portions of the plans suhnitted by A1 Land that needs to be revised. 'Ihere was discussion on water lines. Jolm 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 Cowell 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 Canrercial PUD Mr. Dittmer will have to abide by the Arbor Ordinance for each lot. Peter Cowell stated that what Mr. Dittmer 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 Coomission on January 27, 1986. DISCUSSION ON THE RECONSIDERATION OF IECESSE CORPORATION PROJECT-GREENBRIAR AT TU3:'AWILLt lECESSE CORPORATION PRESENl': Russ Davidson, Miller McCarthy, Bill Hoelbeck Sa1 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 shc:xvn. There were changes to the street section, the width of the pave- roont and the gutter which needs to be changed on the plans. M.llerM:!'.arthy stated that they are suhnitting a plat requesting 1~' of asphalt e 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 now being at 6.8 which would be about 6. 1 if breaking . e e . ~taff Review Board Minutes .Dittmer/LeCesse - January 14, 1986 Pkge 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 deaned appropriate to have that many units for the nurrber of lots. M:illerM:Ca.3tthy 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 number of townhouses, plats or houses per acre. Peter Cowell stated that the zoning density does state lIDder PUD 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 recannend 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. Seccnded by Gilbert Artman Vote: John Govoruhk, aye; Charles Holzman, aye; Leonard Kozlov, aye; Gilbert Artman, aye; Sam Smith, aye; Peter Cowell, nay. Peter Cowell stated that he will take his recoomendation 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 them to the Planning and Zoning Board nenbers. He needs five (5) copies of the infonnation that was distributed to the Staff, so that this infonnation can be distributed to the Planning and Zoning Board nerrDers with the reccmnendation that the Staff has fOlIDd 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, at 7:30 p.m. Miller McCarthy stated that should the Planning and Zoning Board agree with the Staff's recannendation, then they don't need to go before the CaImission on the following Monday. Peter Cowell stated that he would just infom the Coomission that it was deter- mined to be substantially corrplied. At that point building penni.ts can be issued. Miller McCarthy asked about the variance request for putting in curbs, ",drains and miami curbs. . e e 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 recorrmendation 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 mininun width, mininun lane. He has no objection 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 recarmendation 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 accoondated. The original engineering plans showed a 93:z I width which is not in confonnance with the code. Len Kozlov stated that his recamendation 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 function of the curb. Respectfully submitted, Ulct!t[~)LAJ Lb.v Mary Wilfon Secre~_..._. ! /r4f?b . R SPRINGS, FLORIDA 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 e 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. . {te-]cr ,fr~ c l GJlpiJleedJIp €/Ju/pJl f)Jlc. P. O. BOX 695 LONGWOOD. FLORIDA 32750 (305) 699-4500 Jan. 10, 0.986 7 tJv '/Io{g~ ~ - (L - 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), ~d Sam Smith inspected the cone. 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. e rRECEJVED ~.. 31tN 1 n 1986 City of Winter Springs BIdg. Dept ~ e RICHARD I. STEVENS. P.E. STEVENS ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES 124 N. MAGNOLIA, SUITE 12_ ORLANDO, FLORIDA 12101 11011 UHIIO Dec. 3, 198, / Mr. Sam SII1 th, ll1dc. Official 1126 E. State Rd. 434 Winter Sprinp, FL. 32'708 [, ~.. ' , " f , .- (f) Refer: Jacobson'. 10' MasOD17 Wall Dear Mr. Smith, Pursuant to your request I have inspected the work progress at the Jacobson's wall this date. This inspection consisted of a visual observations and a look at some photographs of the work before pouring concrete, which were supplied by the contractor, Bob Sickenger. e From what I can determ1De at this tille, it appeare that the structural reinforcing work, the addition of intermediate concrete pads, and steel reinforcing, an additional concrete pilaster/colwms, have all been accomplished with the eame discrepencies noted in our previ0U8 inspection report of Oct. 11, 1985. As menticmed in ~ letter ot Oct. 7, 1985 111 ren.ew ot EngineeriDs Design IDc. design sketch important detail. in the sketch are not . sufficient. At this date, I do not mow of a~ clAritications or changes to the design by the Jacobson' s engineer which allow or alter the above noted discrepencies. Reportedq, the contractor h1maelf believes that the corrective work accomplished is sufficient to strengthen the DIIlson%7 wall. Until I receive further clarification of the original. design, and some verifica~ion of the changes IIl!lde during conatruction I cannot approve the work and the wall to meet design loads required b;y the code. Yours t~. ) , J, ~cJ~~-.. &lcl: Design 9-24-85 Review 10-7-85 Inspect ltr 10-11-8,5 Richard W. Stevens cc: Mr. Frank Kruppenbacker, Att1 135 W. Central.i_Ste. 1100 Orlando, FL. 32~1 r RECEfVED . t . DEe 0 4 i98S 'CIty of Wln~er S;.r:ngs. SIdg, Dept. ~ . ' IIICUID ':j'no P.E. STEVEIS EIGlIEERII' ASSOCIATES .. N. MAGNOLIA. '-'IT. _ OILANDO. "-ORIDA__ eloa 4IMao Deo."198' Mr. Sa. Sld.tJa, -cia. Offioial ll26 I. State Id. ..,.. WiBter SpriDp, PL. 32?08 Ie 'er a JaooHoD ,.' 10' .....z'J wan Visual field inspection of construction work completed to date with Sam Smith Ltr. report of conclusions 12-3-85 $180 e ; RECEIVED DEe 0 4 i9B5 City of Winter Springs BIde. Dept. .-.. .. .. . / ~1 t ..........\ " . .- ~\NTE~.. '. .~ ~ ':~G)._"'t ',' .U . ' / ' . . :.... /. 't' ,. '- "."~ .-....;' ~.~~ 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 Subj ect: 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. e. . 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 Ene I. cc: Comm/Mayor Attorney e / .'. ~ :,. .~ .lAMES E. ALoDERMAN SILVIA MORELL ALDERMAN ,.REDERICK L. .ATEMAN..IR EDMUND T. .AXA. .IR. DANIEL O. .RADLEY' oIEANELLE G. .RONSON ~L 1'. .RYAN .lAMES A. .URT DWIGHT I. COOL MARGUERITE H. DAVIS CHARLES R. GEORGE m EDWARD E. HADDOCK. .IR. MITCHELL .. HAIGLER .lANE C. HAYMAN RO.ERT A. HENDERSON ELIZA.ETH CRO" .IEWETT ALLAN .I. KATZ CHRISTOPHER K. KAY I'RANK C. KRUPPEN.ACHER EDWARD L. KUTTER THOMAS 1'. LANG .AD...,TTEO IN OHIO AND GEORGIA ONLY PEAVJE P. SWANN C1eeS.I.,,) . ~. ....... J....,.,~~ 9' ~"'1 .I.ni(. L." , , ~ "1I?.."J~ fLJ.,.k SUITE 1100 13S WEST CENTRAL .OULEVARD ~ST OI',.ICE .OX .40 ORLANDO.I'LORIDA U.0.'0.40 130.,42....3. SUITE .00 .ARNEn .ANK .UILDING III SOUTH CALHOUN STREET '.""AHASSEE.I'LORIDA ...01 ..041 .24,..34 TELEX 33'3..7 PETER G. LATHA'" RO.ERT R. "'AKEMSON .IA"'ES H. McCARTY. .IR. .I0SEPH R. PANZL RO.ERT A. SAVILL DAVID N. SOWER.Y RO.ERT P SUMMERS RICHARO R. SWANN THO"'.... R. TItOCASTLE .TEPHEN It. THOMPSON MARTIN .. UNGER MARK S. WALKER .lAMES G. WILLARD .00 SEMINOLE STREET ~ST OI'''ICE .OX ... STUART. "LORIDA .34.. 13011/ ..7..... SUITE .01 III ORANGE AVItNUE ". "IERCE.I'LOR'OA .34.0 '.011I 4....". · "E"LY TO: O"LAN'O November 20, 1985 01' COUNSEL: EDWARD S. .IA,.,.RY DAVID C. LATHAM PATRICK 1'. MARONEY Mr. Richard Rozansky City Manager 1126 East State Road 434 Winter Springs, Florida 32708 Jacobson Wall Dear Dick: RE: . On November 18, 1985, I regeived in my packet the attached letter dated November 15, If.5. The letter does not reflect the conversation I .had with Hr. Smith two days after the.meeting. I advised'Mr. Smith tQ act in accordance with the d-iscussion of the Commission meeting (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~ng 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 ~ith the consultant ASAP. The consultant called me Friday and told me there were major problems. . ' Sin~ely, ~t~/~ Fra~ C. Kruppenbacher Sl(?f~~ 1;.; r, -, ,..... . ,.- _ r-' . _ . ItA. . . '. .. "1-';::-0'5 I')I~~:'~ -: .., o. . .. . I_I \ Ci ty Commission . ....- I.... h ........1 LJ~LA Y FCK/df .. cc: Mr. Sam Smith Winter Springs .._.-