HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989 06 12 Regular
May 18, 1989
TO:
City Manager
coordinato~
FROM:
Land Development
RE: Agenda Item, Parcel 51
The Preliminary Engineering was before the Commission on June 13, 1988, and was put
off to the next meeting because the condominium documents were not submitted and
there were a few items that some of the Commissioners had problems with. The
documents never arrived and the project was put on hold.
In the interim, the management team was replaced. The documents were recently
and sent to the City Attorney for his review. A traffic study was conducted.
changes to the original plan were made and the Staff reviewed these on May 17,
submitted
Minor
1989.
The developer is seeking two variances from the Code. These are discussed in the
minutes of May 17, 1989.
Attached are the Engineering Plan, the traffic study, minutes of the June 13, 1988
Commission meeting, minutes of the May 17, 1989, Staff Review and the City Engineer's
memo dated May 12, 1989.
Attachment
Imh
cc: Nayor
City Commission
City Attorney
City Clerk
Regular Meeting, City Commission, June 13, 1988
Page 2
87-88-17
Motion was made by Commissioner Kulbes to adopt Ord. No. 420. Seconded by
Commissioner Trencher. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Hoffmann, aye;
Commissioner Kulbes, aye; Commissioner Trencher, aye; Commissioner Kaehler, aye;
motion carried.
Public Hearing for Ord. No. 421 providing for procedures for the disposal of
surplus tanli!ihle personal property owned by the City, etc. Second Reading:
Attorney Kruppenbacher read Ord. No. 421 by title only on second reading. Mayor
Grove recessed the Commission Meeting and opened the Public Hearing. No one spoke
for or against the Ordinance. Mayor Grove closed the Public Hearing and reconvened
the Commission Meeting.
Motion was made by Commissioner Hoffmann to adopt Ord. No. 421. Seconded by Commissioner
Kulbes. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Kulbes, aye; Commissioner Trencher,
aye; Commissioner Kaehler, aye; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; motion carried.
Planning and Zoning Board Recomm0ndations of 5/25/88:
1. Request of Mr. C.E. Rowell to rezone Lot 9, Blk. 27, N. Orl.Eighth Addn., from
R-IA to C-l, at 5 Algiers Ave.:
The property is on Algiers Ave. the third lot from SR 434. On the future land
use map the property is shown as commercial. The Planning & Zoning Board denied
this request because Lot 10 (second lot from SR 434) would be surrounded by commercial
zoning. Mr. Rowell was present and spoke for the request. Mrs. Perlangeli and Mrs.
Reid spoke against the request.
Motion was made by Commissioner Kulbes for the denial of the change of zoning from
R-1A to C-l for Mr. Rowell's property. Seconded by Commissioner Hoffmann. Discussion.
Vote on the motion: Commissioner Kulbes, aye; Commissioner Trencher, aye; Commissioner
Kaehler, aye; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; motion carried.
2. Tuscawilla PUD Amendment-change Land Use (18.5 acre site N.E. corner of Northern
Way and Greenbriar Blvd.) from Multi-family to Single Family Houseing:
This was approved by the Planning & Zoning Board and no further action was necessary.
3. Annual Certification of Official Zoning Map:
Motion was made by Commissioner Trencher for certification of the Official Zoning
Map. Seconded by Commissioner Hoffmann. Discussion. Vote on the motion: Commissioner
Kaehler, aye; Commissioner Hoffmann, aye; Commissioner Kulbes, aye; Commissioner
Trencher, aye; motion carried.
Planning i1nd Zoning Board Recommendations of 6/8/88:
I. Tuscawilla Parcel Sl-Final Development Plan/Preliminary Engineering:
This item will be brought back on the Agenda for the next meeting as the Commission
had a problem with the parking, the parking near the tennis courts, the lighting at
the tennis courts, the walkway and the condominium documents.
\~\~C\
1) . \) f\ ~ S ~{
N\.. ,\-\I\\)."''\vN
c.. T\'"1-\..1':::'
(:"''"'\f\ n::
^~~\YV\:\ N
G ..;-J d\..'-'\-\ \<:
't-\ \.l ~_', i-\
V':"'vc't\
\( <:;t \.. U \!
.L1''6\.. C\~_.
\2. At. ~ \t..
SG,x\U~
May 17, 1989
TO:
CITY MANAGER
COORDINATO~
FROM:
LAND DEVELOPMENT
RE:
PARCEL 51, STAFF REVIEW
This project had undergone Staff Rl!view on May 24, 1988, but the Commission
put this off on June 13, 1988 because all documentation was not submitted.
The Commission also had questions about the project.
The particular concerns that the Commission had, and the developer's response,
are:
1) Condominium Documents - these are in-house and were sent to
the City Attorney for review on May 3, 1989.
2) Parking slot sizes - these now meet code requirements
3) Parking near tennis courts - 4 slots have been added (Condomin-
ium Association will decide whether or not these are to be
reserved)
4) Lighting at tennis courts - a timer will be installed to turn
the lights out at 10:00 p.m.
Dumpsters are to be screened.
There was concern over the parking slots. The present layout may cause
some inconvenience. Is each unit going to have assigned parking (the Condo
Association would decide this).
The question was asked that if the developer leases the unoccupied condos
does this project become apartments. This is a question for the City Attorney
to answer.
The developer has requested that the interior sidewalk and landscaping
plans not be submitted until after final engineering approval. This would
give the developer an opportunity to stake out the building and then plan
the sidewalks to avoid cutting trees.
The developer is requesting a waiver to Section 20-354(d)(7) of the Code,
if needed, to allow the recreation building be allowed to be less than
50' from a body of water. It is unknown at this time if the building will
be 50' from the pond. There will be a pool and patio between the pond
and the building.
The developer is also requesting a waiver to Section 9-296, Inverted Roadway
for Private Subdivisions, if needed. The Code calls for a 30' Right-of-Way
with 20' paved. The developer has the 20' paved and 20' parking slots
on each side. The City Engineer has no problem with the streets as designed.
cc: Staff
May 12, 1989
TO: Land Development Coordinat9r
FROM: City Engineer Xt~
RE: Tuscawilla - Parcel 51, Preliminary Engineering
This memo is to inform that no comments remain from this department regarding
the preliminary engineering plan of Tuscawilla - Parcel 51.
Therefore, all preliminary engineering code criteria for the above noted
project has been accomplished and the preliminary engineering has been found
to be satisfactory.
PH/gh
cc: City Manager
June 7, 1989
TO: City Manager
CDDrdinatD~
FROM: Land Development
RE: Agenda Item, Woodstream Addition
This is Preliminary Engineering/Final Development Plan for Commission action. The
P & Z Board recommended approval at the meeting of May 24, 1989. Please see attached
Staff Review minutes and Department Head comments.
The developer is seeking a waiver to the right-of-way widths for Streets B, C, D, E
and Richard Road according to Section 9-157 of the Code.
The developer is also seeking a waiver to Section 9-221 (b) to eliminate sidewalks
within this development.
DRL/gh
cc: Mayor
Commission
City Clerk
City Attorney
Nay 5, 1989
TO:
City Manager
~?J
Land Development Coordinator@':':-
FROM:
RE:
Woodstream Addition, Staff Review
The above referenced was held on May 2, 1989. R. White represented the project.
Staff members present were Archer, Artman, Govoruhk, Holzman, Hursh, Koch, Kozlov
and LeBlanc.
There was discussion of the Arbor Ordinance, signage, standard fire hydrants.
The major concern was the size of the lots and what amenities could be built
on them.
Lots 1 thru 8 have the 100 year flood plain as their back yard. Nothing can
be built in this area.
All lots on the golf course have a 40' setback from the rear property line. No
structures are allowed in this area. A pool can be built, but it cannot have
a screen enclosure.
There was discussion about the COmmon areas, or lack of them.
The City must review the documents which govern the agreement reached with the
golf course which allows use of their property for stormwater detention.
See attached Department Head comments.
DRL/gh
cc: Staff
April 25, 1989
TO:
Land Developm~n~idina~
City Engineerl.~
Woodstream Adaition - Preliminary Engineering Review
FROM:
RE:
In the revie:w of the Woodstream Addition, it was noted that lot 9, Block "G",
may not be able to contain a pool or an additional structure other than a home,
due to the location of a twenty (20) foot utility easement which crosses this
property. This information should be noted on a deed or plat and should also
be provided to any new purchaser of the lot.
Wi th regard to satisfying the preliminary engineering requirements, all
conditions have been completed. Therefore, this project meets the Code with
regard to the Engineering Department.
PH/mh
cc: City Manager
MEMO:
4/27/89
FROM:
LAND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
-";'-'/1
BUILDING OFFICIAL $:~~-----
STAFF REVIEW OF WOODSTREAM ADDITION
TO:
RE:
1. I still have problem with size of building area left after setbacks
on all Lots adjoining Golf Course--no room for pools.
2. Lot 3, Block A, appears to be too small for a house to fit.
3. I feel Lot 2, Block B, would have the house encroach into lOa year
flood plain. Compensating storage should be shown on this plan,
not building plan.
4. Since streets are private, there is no need to submit lighting plan
to the City.
May 1, 1989
TO: Land Development Coordinator
SUBJECT: Wbodstream Addition
Building setbacks should be noted on plan or a copy of the proposed amendment
to the existing deed restrictions provided to the Boards.
Land Development Coordinator indicates those proposed setbacks are 25 ft.
front, 20 ft. rear, and 7 1/2 ft. side. Most lots along Howell Branch which
have conservation areas within the rear lot, numerous interior lots of only 110
feet depth, and lots fronting the golf course subject to a 40 foot rear setback
will have very limited buildable rear yards.
Has the existing homeowners association provided comments on the plan? Since
the typical lot size of the addition is much smaller than that in Phase I,
their position should be referenced.
This plan practically eliminates the cormnon areas that had been part of the
original Woodstream concept. Also, even retention areas are "off-site".
Therefore, there would be no internal open space to mention in this
development, the entire tract developed with lots and roads.
Accesses to the only remaining cormnon area are narrow foot paths cutting
between houses. No provision is made for parking near this site for residents
to utilize this cormnon area. Are any passive facilities to be built for the
residents to enjoy the cormnon area?
;K~
J. Koch
Director of Administrative Services/
Comprehensive Planning
:<~~iE~;"';:,
/c, /' /"-..." ,,,:~
~(';':,'r'.","'..<;7,' "'?,""'}<;;"\
;:, / f ~;';,,;/ 'i )\ ~i\)
1- /'" " (',
_ ,. ,f :\'
".11..,.,,\. ., ". (,'1
\" \ \ '.
, \ I /) "A /
' V/ \'"
. t_ r r ~- ... /
\ .. -:::---......:-::>
''''~~_ .l:, ',....-.-..- ;~~:
",' OR\\,.' ./
,-----~
FIRE DEPARTMENT
102 NORTH MOSS ROAD
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708
TELEPHONE (305) 327.2332
FIRE AND
RESCUE
SERVICES
May I, 1989
MEMO
TO:
Land Development Coordinator
FROM:
Fire Chief ~
SUBJECT: Staff Review - Woodstream Addition
There are no comments to offer on this project.
The project appears to meet code requirements regarding fire protection.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJ:
DON LEBLANC, LAND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
John Govoruhk, Chief of Police
May 1, 1989
REVIEW - WOODSTREAM ADDITION
17-89
After viewing the plans on Woodstream the following are not indicated:
JG/eds
1. Richard Road
Golf Cart Crossing Signs
2. Striping for Crossing (To Be Thermoplactic)
3. Street Name Signs
To Be Installed By Public Works
l._ -7
-,
"
~(< ('.., r:--;.. , /
. '1,./. "(.,---'.,,..\....~ t ~
- '.lTo_hrlCi6voruhk '
Chief of Police
May 3, 1989
TO: Land Development Coordinator
FROM: Public Works Director ~ ~
SUBJ: Woodstream Addition
Since the roads and storm water system are private, the primary
concern is compliance with the Arbor ordinance, both in installation of the
infrastructure and individual lot construction.
Street signage will be provided for and installed by the City,
with re-imbursement of costs by the developer.
June 7, 1989
FROM: Land Development
coordiuatoi}
TO: City Manager
RE: Agenda Item, Parcel 51
This item was tabled at the last commission meeting because the applicant was not
present. The Commission already has the package.
DRL/gh
cc: Mayor
Commission
City Attorney
City Clerk
---..-..--.-------.- -------~_.-'.-,.-,.,.-.-
4~--':' ~
June 12, 1989
SUBJECT:
Ci ty Manager, /; ./'
City Er>;Jireer'1lV
FoxlIloor East - Lemieux Property (Panama Road near Edgemon Avenue)
TO:
FROM:
As per the request of the City Commission regarding Foxmoor East, from the
meeting of May 22, 1989, the following events occurred and information
acquired.
At the request of Mr. Keith Lemieux, a field inspection was made on June 1,
1989, of Mr. Lemieux's property and the adjacent wetland swamp. His major
concern has to do with water ponding on the lower northwest section of his
property. The section of this property must have been part of the wetland
swamp that adjoins the I.eJnieux property. Mr. Lemieux wants the City to dig a
ditch or water conveyance in the wetland swamp so that the water can be drained
fran his property.
There are several issues at hand for consideration. The first is that the St.
JOfm's Water Management District generally disapproves permits to drain SW"'dffips.
If such an event did occur, many of the wetland plant species, namel y the
existing trees, would perish over time. In addition, the installation of this
ditch would serve to improve Mr. Lemieux's property.
Next, there is a degree of stormwater runoff fran the front portion of Mr.
Lemieux's property by virtue of the large paved area that slopes to the rear of
his property.
If the ditch were installed, it could possibly increase a rapid flow of water
to "Donut Lake" during a stormevent allowing for a rapid rise in the lake I S
level. The swamp (wetland) as it exists acts as a natural staging basin before
allowing water to flow to "Donut Lake".
The runoff from Moss Road has been historically entering this wetland ever
since this dirt road was constructed. The point of entry is the low point of a
section of this road through the wetland region.
Mr. I.eJnieux accused the City of digging a ditch in the wetland at the low point
of where stormwater runs off of Moss Road. Investigation of this location
appeared that some kind of swale may have been dug, but it was difficult to
discern. There was a great deal of vegetation. Upon making an inquiry to the
Public Works Director, he stated since he has been working for the City, the
City never dug a ditch in that wetland.
Memo
City Manager
June 12, 1989
Page 2
Another inspection was made on June 8, 1989, after a heavy afternoon rain
storm. A photo was taken of wdter entering the wetland from Moss Road, but no
water was leaving the wetland via Edgemon Avenue to "Donut Lake". Also looking
from the road onto the Lemieu.x property there appeared to be no water on the
property.
The St. John I s Water Management District was contacted about this matter and
the prospect of draining this wetland. A letter WdS received dated June 5,
1989, detailing numerous criteria that would have to be met before a permit
could be issued. The permittee (in this case the City) would have to provide
reasonable assurance that the criteria is met.
As a closing comment by Mr. Patrick Frost, Orlando Field Office Director, he
stated that "It lIlay be difficult to demonstrate that draining a wetland would
meet the standards described above".
In light of the preceding information, it is recorrunended that the City not
excavate a drainage conveY-drlce in the wetland (swamp) for the purpose of
draining same.
Imh
.,---'... ~-.;;,}
('l' Y frl'~ll,-c.. L..j " t
"T. .Jp~NU R''''''R
\NATER
~l I~I..I,,/MANAGEMENT
_'.. ..".. ......_. I ~__...u.'"
1, "~'i"'",~-"";;,' OISTRIC.
June 5, 1989
Henry Dean. Executive Director
Mildred G. Horton. Assistant Exucutivu Director
John A. Wuhle. As"i"tanl Executive D'leCIOI
POST OFFICE BOX 1429 . PALATKA. FLORIDA 3207U'1429
904/328-8321
Mr. Len Koslov, City Engineer
City of winter Springs
1126 East State Road 434
winter Springs, Florida 32708
02133 N,Wlckham Rd. 07775 Baymeadows Way')d"618 E. South SI.
MdboUlIH.. FL l' ~":J~199"-"" ,. , ~UIW 201 , Orlando, FL 32&01
(407) 254 \,'?H ~ 'y l ;Jr~k'"oHI/\4: .ft.' ~~'~':W:-711 (407) d94.50123
V/ I.~. ~J ^ A~.oW~~l'21~.i 1 \ 'I. ~
::~ ..,:) ~,,"_.-' i.... -.. t...l j I U
~~ (.
...
iJUU G 1989
Dear Mr. Koslov: CITY Of WIIHER ~el~IN~'S
elf( EI'JCINlW
This letter is a result of recent phone conversations with
District staff concerning obtaining District permits to drain a
wetland. In order for District staff to recommend approval for an
activity, it must meet the District's standards and criteria for
evaluation, and be consistent with the overall objectives of the
District. Sections 10.1.1 and 10.1.2 of the District's
Applicant's Handbook state that:
The Governing Board has delineated standards and related
criteria which must be met to demonstrate that the proposed
activity will not be harmful to water resources of the
District. These standards and criteria have been developed
to provide protection to the water resources of the District
while also providing for responsible development of those
resources.
To obtain a permit for the construction, alteration,
operation or maintenance of a system, each applicant must
give reasonable assurance that such activity meets the
following standards:
(a) Adverse water quantity impacts will not be caused to
receiving waters and adjacent lands.
(b) Surface and ground water levels and surface water flows
will not be adversely affected.
(c) Existing surface water storage and conveyance
capabilities will not be adversely affected.
(d) The system must be capable of being effectively
operated.
(e) The activity must not result in adverse impacts to the
operation of works of the District established pursuant
to Section 373.086, F.S.
(f) Hydrologically related environmental functions will. not
be adversely affected.
JOI-IN L MINTON
ChJIIIIl;llI . Vcro th::iJ,Cll
KELLEY 11, SMITH. JI1.
Vicu CIi.:JlIlI1~Ul . PiJla'~;J
SAUNDflA Ii, GRAY
Sccu:l.JIY. UuU....ly
RALPti E, SIMMONS
Truj,j~ul'-=l . fUllwm.hna Uuut.:h
JIM T S\'IANN
THOMAS L. DURRANCE
JOE E. Iii LL
SAM L. SWETT
ALICE J, WEINu[ RG
I T.fl(,..",n.ul
.. Len Koslov
June 5, 1989
Page 2
(g) The activity is not otherwise harmful to the '.'/ater
resources of the District.
It may be difficult to demonstrate that draining a wetland
would meet the standards ,described above.
contact this office if you have any question.
Frost, Orlando Field Office Director
of Resource Management
PMF : db
cc: Records
Naomi s. Whitney
David A. Dewey
Kym Rouse Demora
Lono"'oou
-'
-.
November 8, 1989
TO:
City Manager ~
Land Development Coordinator
FROM:
RE:
Agenda Item, Resolution 624
This is a request of Land Engineering Company, on behalf of Mindich Construction, Inc.,
to vacate 1, feet of a drainage easement located at 320 Dornoch Court, Lot 100 of
Highland Village Two.
Please see attached Land Engineering Company letter dated October 31, 1989, City
Engineer memo dated October 31, 1989 and plats depicting present easement and future
~. easement.
DRL/gh
cc: Mayor
Commission
City Attorney
City Clerk
- cl1and 0ngineering @ompany
@on3ulling cBngineen
J1 and ef urve5l0r3
848 COUNTY ROAD 427 SOUTH
LONGWOOD, FLORIDA 32750 -
Tel. 407/831.3633
October. 31, 1989
City Commissioners
City of Winter Springs
1126 S.R. 434
vJinter Springs, Fl. 32708
Re: Highland Village
Dear Commissioners:
This letter is to request a partial abandonment of a 15' drainage easement in
Highland Village Subdivision on lot 100. The house was inadvertently constructed
1.11 into the drainage easement. Our request is for a 1.5 foot abandonment
of the easement on lot 100.
-
Enclosed herewith is a drawing and legal description of the 1.51 to be
abandoned and a check for $256.00.
We respectfully request approval of this abandonment.
Very truly ;/ /
4iY~d~
ALL/dh
-'~
-- October 31, 1989
TO:
:::: ::::::::~~
Highland Village II, Drainage Easement Vacation, Lot 100
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Attached are copies of a proposed vacation of 1.5 feet of a drainage easement on
Lot 100 of North Orlando Ranches Section 11.
I agree to this adjustment because construction of a house on this lot began
invertently on the easement.
,-..
Attachments
/mh
cc: City Manager
Public Works Director
Building Department
~-
[".PLAT OF BOUNDARY SURVI;Y for:
DESCRIPTION: .
N '
,
MINDICH HOMES
LOT 100 HIGHLAND VILLAGE TWO
, RECORDED IN PLATBOOK 40 PAGE (S) 40 B 41
PUBLIC RECORDS OF'SEMINOLE
COUNTY, FLORIDA.
~ '
Sc ~'
I'''..~: ,--::_ ~
~ <0'
LEGEND
NORTH ORLANDO RANCHES /SEC. "
p.B-:- 13, PGS. 22 EX 23
,..: I ..... .... I.' I ..... "-....... .....:.- /
:-u.: ~.: :... ,.... ,,', . I
............ ........ . '0' Z / ....;.";
S 20030137 liE - 45.0....01 ."
a=.
o
r)' , ill n{~w~illC)
~ . r ./'> ~~ k I \
~'I :;.l 'v,. d, ' , ~ ~ ~,'
f',;l~' .",~....,- ' ~ ~~
l~ '-'
~ .
OCT 2 G 1989 ~,
~
~\
~~
\\ l
"S'
./6"
100
G - J.P. WITH CAP NO. II1I
o - .I. P., WITH CAP NO. E.O. 096
lSl - REBAR NO. LO' 2.100
o - I.P. WITH CAP NO. 2.005
IW - CONC. MON. NO. 2.00:j
6.47'
-
o
o
L()
o
"
~ 0
~ 0
VI
10
o
:....,..-:.,
....: .....
.... .....
!()1
FLOOD CERTIFICATION:
~HE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON
, <::S IN ZONE "C"ACCORDING TO
,IE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE
RATE MAP COMMUNITY PANEL
NO. 12.02.95 0005C. .
30.00'
w
..
f{)
N
Q)
N
"
Q)
lD
Z
w
.
(1)
N
(J)
N
"
(J)
z
o
<1:
o
0::
S2003013711E- 45_001
I I
~
~
01
o
1lI
N
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
CITY ENGINEER
o
o
II) (320 OORNOCH CT.)
N
-
NOTES:
I) SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS,
RIGHTS-OF-WAY. AND RESTRICTIONS
OF RECORD.
(2.) BEARINGS BASED ON RECORD PLAl,:
S 200 30 I 37 II E
DORNOCH COURT
CERTIFIED TO:
(3) ALL DRAINAGE EASEMENTS, UTILITY
EASEMENTS. AND OTHER EASEMENlS
SUBJECT TO THE RECORDED DECLARATION
AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
I I) DARNCTT DANK OF CENTIlAl. Fl.ORIDA, !'l.A.
I 2) C;OMMONWCAl.TU l.AND II T1Tl.C CO.
(3) WINDE;RWEI:Ol.E, "AINES, WARO II WOODMAN, I~A.
,-
IE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE SURVEY SHOWN HEREON,
IS CORRECT TO THE OEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE AND MEETS
OR EXCEEDS THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS SET
FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF LAND SURVEYORS.
PURSUANT TO SECTION 472.027 F. S.
SCALE, I" = 20'
UPDATE:
FINAL:
FOUNDATION:
BOUNDARY: LE89-272S
OCT. 4. 190<)
LAND ENGINEERING CO.
L.B. 5090
LAND ENGINEERING CO.
848 COUNTY ROAD 427 SOUTH
LONGWOOD, FLORIDA 32750 - 5499
By:
J. Howard Oliver
Florida Professional Land Surveyor No. I J II
NOT VALID UNLESS EMBOSSED WITH SURVEYORS SEAL
TELEPHONE: (407) 831 - 3633
'. Pl:AT OF BOUNDARY SURVEY for:
DESeRI PTION:
MINDICH HOMES
LOT 100 HIGHLAND VILLAGE TWO
''''.-.'
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 40 PAGE(S) 40 8 41
PUBLIC RECORDS OF SEMI NOLE
COUNTY, FLORIDA.
~ '
Sc ~'
-41.€,: 1:-_ ~
~ <0'
NORTH ORLANDO RANCHES /SEC. II
p.8-:- 13, PGS. 22 8 23
D LC(.: l< l ~::: " ,,/t. II /,.,
......... ....
S 20030'3711E - 45.00' ~.
"
I~
(~U m
I 'I~ r
. I ... I
I
I~
1"1
\)
I~
I()
I~
I)
I ~
I~
I Iii
I ",
<(
I z
I, 4
I (t
I 0
I~
r
<D.~O:; L
I,
, I
I
--r-----l'
(,0' (/,r/(.,ry 6'~"',O'- ,I; I
15,.1<0' 0.70',
'0 'lr
~
01
o
LEGEND
100
o - I.P. WITH CAP NO. II11
o - LP. WITH CAP NO. E.O. 098
G - REBAR NO. LO-2100
@ - I.P. WITH CAP NO. 2005
III - CONC. MON. NO. 200:)
6.47'
-
o
o
.
lO
o
:.... ,......
....: .....
.... .....
FLOOD CERTIFICATION:
THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON
LIES IN ZONE "c" ACCORDING TO
THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE
RATE MAP COMMUNITY PANEL
NO. 120295 0005C. .
30.00'
W
:1
r<)
C\J
(j)
C\J
o
(j)
lO
Z
o
<t
o
~
o
o
III (320 OORNOCH CT)
I\l
~ ~-~' '--It':;TI,\'il'~'r'''
',I{." ~ -L' ~\Vrl'}\"I:I'j,
, r'~... .Io~} ;...\" :'Of", ~~~ r, ,t
.. \ --.. <1';,..,.-' .... "- I'
'\ l ..",~ ""e.:: '
~.~" .. "\ i
~ "~'
OCT 2 6 1989
~
o
C)
W\
~
C)
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
CITY ENGINEER
~\
~~
\ '\.Cf.
S 20030137"E
DORNOCH COURT
NOTES:
(I) SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS,
RIGHTS-Of-WAY AND RESTRICTIONS
OF RECORD.
(2) BEARINGS BASED ON RECORD PLA-r::
CERTIFIED TO:
~
"2C
:>0
r~
:d:
,U1
'OJ
llJ
<('
J},
o
o
lO
o
j () i
w
.
r<)
C\J
(j)
C\J
o
Q)
z
III
N
(~) ALL DRAINAGE EASEMENTS, UTILITY
EASEMENTS. AND OTHER EASEMENTS
SUOJECT , TO THE RECORDED DECLARATION
AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
(II DARNETT DANK. Of CENTIlAL FLORIDA. N.A.
( Z I COMMONWEALTH LAND U TITLE co.
( 3) WINDE;RWEEDLE. IlAINES, WAnD 0 WOODMAN. I~A,
SCALE. I" = 20'
LAND ENGINEERING CO.
848 COUNTY ROAD 427 SOUTH
LONGWOOD, FLORIDA 32750 - 5499
WE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE SURVEY SHOWN HEREON,
IS CORRECT TO THE OEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE AND MEETS
OR EXCEEDS THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS SET
FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF LAND SURVEYORS,
PURSUANT TO SECTION 472.027 F. S.
UPDATE:
FINAL:
FOUNDATION:
BOUNDARY: LE89-272S
LAND ENGINEERING CO.
L. 8. 5090
By:
J. Howard Oliver
Florida Professional Land Surveyor No. IIII
NOT VALID UNLESS EMBOSSED WITH SURVEYORS SEAL
TELEPHONE: (407) 83/ - 3633
OCT, 'I. 190a
DESCRIPTION FOR VACATING PART OF A
7.5 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT
. 'Il1AT PART OF llJr 100 OF HIGHLAND VILlAGE 'lID AS REXX>RDED IN PIAT I3(X)K 40 PAGES 40 AND 41 OF THE PUBLIC
REXX>RDS OF SEMIOOLE COUNI'Y, FIDRIDA, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLCWS: CXM>1ENCE lIT THE SOllI'HWESTERLY roRNER
OF SAID llJr 100 AND RUN N20030' 37"W, AI..ONG 'l'HE OOiIDIEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF [)()RNX:H COURT, A DISl'ANCE
OF 6.00, FEET 'IO THE POINl' OF BEGINNING; 'llfENCE CXlNl'INUING N20030' 37"W, AI..ONG SAID OORTHE1\STERLY RIGlfr-
,OF-WAY OF OORNCX:H COURT, A DISl'ANCE OF 1.50 FEET; 'IllEOCE N69029'23"E, PARALLEL WITH THE scxn'HFASTERLY
SIDE OF SAID llJr. 100, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET 'IO AN- INTERSEX:TION WI'lli THE OOiIDIEASTERLY SIDE OF SAID
llJr 100; 'llfENCE S20030'37''E, AI..ONG THE SAID OOR'I'HEASTERLY SIDE OF llJr 100, A DISTANCE OF 1.50 FEET;
THENCE S69029'23"W, PARALLEL WI'lli THE SOU'lliF.ASTERLY SIDE OF SAID llJr 100, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEE."l' 'IO
THE POINl' OF BEGINNING; BEING THE OORTHWESTERLY 1.50 FEET OF THE 7.50 FCXJl' DRAINAGE EASEMENf LYING
<XlNTIGUOUS 'IO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID llJr 100 AND <XlNTAINING 157.50 SQUARE FEET.
t".E C.:: F~~"r f'1 () F':~ L.....::::.. ~..i [) () F~~.::~\ i\~ c: ~...~ E:: ::3
F.:: f3.
! .7::
........ 1:.";;":: -:::
,. ..'....
"-...
;3 L..()(: r:::
:.....
i:.....
1'S 20030'37"E
(::E(~
..... .....
100
-
o
o
10
o
......
~
~
(.j
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ 8
ll:i ~
~ ......
...... ~
~ 6:
~.
~
o
(')
G)
::0
rn
G)
o
::0
?J
o
~
1LI
fl)
(\J
m
(\J
o
m
~
z
....(()
J/i
h}
" .
.,. 1~7_I(o
,
~::;EC:. ..
.::-.:)....:;;.::!. /
......... ..........'
;1:;
"-... ,~.
45.00'
( ~~t
,I"
18
I~',';,I lD
~(I
t:1\;~
'0 1*:1\
LO .~~
. '~...
-L-I~\\L,
'~~I
'~"'I
li1
1'~',1,'.1
li~~
I~
.M\
11'" h.
:,;41 ~
rtr,;;lo~ "\
~.,:\ C! V)
lhil~~
~'/ I
W'"
',:Pj~
"0 u-;.,llJ
~ Ittl~ ~
o ,~~' "'~
:-I~~l~;q
ItJ j;~) cnCl;:
~1~'~1 ~
~Ilf.;~\.',l ~
. ~\,: ,,, -->
(ll 'j'li '.
~'li' ~ ~
It~1 ~
11&..:1 m
i'l ~
~fL _ (/)
1,%1
S20"30'37"E -1.50'
I ..-... !
i :...l ;
"'0.,.
"'0
SeA
'"fl..~
-
o
o
10
o
en
w
en
0
a.
0::
::>
a.
z ~
<t
0 ...J
~ a.
a.
0:: . 0
u>- 0::
(/)w 0
w> U
00:: W
::> 0::
en
0:: z
o<t
lL. 0
~
enO 0
-z w
en
:::I: en <t
u- ro
~
wo en
::x:z
en<t (.:)
z
.. ~?:i 0::
(/) <t
:::I:Z W
W ~O ro
.... ~
0 C\l
Z
"
10' UTILITY
EASEMENT ~
'N20030'37"W 45.00
N 20.30' 37"W - 6.00'
DORNOCH COURT
S 20030' 31" E
WE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE DESCRIPTION SHOWN HEREON
IS CORRECT TO THE eEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE AND MEETS
OR EXCEEDS THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS SET
FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF LAND SURVEYORS.
PURSUANT TO SECTION 472.027 F. S.
OCTOBER 31" 1989
LE89-294S
LAND ENGINEERING CO. L.B. 5090
By: ~~/~/~I /c/-3/-t5.:3
Alorid ~ward Oliver \
NOT VALID u~::;~e~~~n;~~and Surveyor No. IIII
ED WITH SURVEYORS SEAL
LAND ENG.INEERINGCO.
848 COUNTY ROAD 427 SOUTH
LONGWOOD, FLORIDA 32750 - 5499
TELEPHONE: (407) 83/ - 3633
November 8, 1989
TO: City Manager ~
FROM: Land Development coordinat~
RE: Agenda Item K. D. Edelen letter dated October 26, 1989
/
Attached is the above referenced for Commission Review. This is on the Agenda under
the City Manager's seat.
DRL/gh
,,~
cc: Mayor
Commission
City Attorney
City Clerk
-,
~~<<; ,-
OCT 27
'I/ ~~
' ..i:'
"'~.:)
1989
Dc: t o t:H0 !" 26 'I 1. 989
CllY of WII~ IU< ~r)HING::;
CITY I,'.ANAGER
Mr. Richard Rozanskv
Ci tv !"1,,:i.r'lC':iqel'"
City of Winter Springs
1126 East State Road 434
Winter Springs, FL 32708
~~
t4
,
i"1r". F\o;:~ ,:::in ~:; k V ,
I do not believe my request for a permit to park my recreation
vehicle on my residential property was given adequate consideration by
some Commissioners at the meeting, October 23, 1989, prior to deciding
against my request. Therefore, I hereby request reconsideration of my
original request for a permit.
The main concerns seemed to be with the fact that my RV was
visible over the top of a six foot privacy fence when looking into my
back yard and that there is a restriction established in the city code
of 28 feet without obtaining a permit. Due consideration was not
qiven to the fact that my RV is contained completely in my back yard,
does not degrade the neighborhood and is not objectionable to my
nei qhbor' s;.
-.
It is difficult to determine why the 28 feet restriction was
placed in the Code, but it can be assumed that 28 feet was the average
length in 1978, when the restriction was included. Today~ according
to the Recreation Vehicle Industry Association, 75 percent of all
Class A motor homes are 30 to 34 feet in length. The City Code should
again be modified or ammended to keep current and up-to-date with
today's requirements.
In support of my request for reconsideration, please find
attached a statement from my immediate neighbors across the street,
next door to the north, and directly behind who have no objection to me
parking my motor home in my back yard. (My neighbor on the south is
somewhat of a recluse and has nothing to do with others in the
neighborhood. He recently stated to me that he had no objection but
refused to sign any statement saying "he would not sign anything for
<:\nyboc:ly" . )
Additionally, I would like to reiterate that:
My motor home is not readily visible from the front of the house
D (' ~:> t, i.... (,: t-:! t ;
Does not degrade the neighborhood or block any view down the
~:;tl~f2(~t ~
Does not interfere with any neighbor's view, property or privacy;
_._'''':'1_
....
Is not any larger in height and width than a motor home that is
28 feet in length and;
Is contained in my back yard which is enclosed on all sides with
a six foot privacy fence.
Also, please find enclosed photographs of my house from the front
with a south view, north view, and perpendicular view that looks into
my back yard. The motor home is barely visible only in the
perpendicular view that looks into my back yard.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
. EDELEN
307 Birch Terrace
Winter Springs, FL 32708
-,
Phone:
~527--~j942
-,
:'~:j CJc:t.(Jber- 1. 98cl
To Whom It May Concern;
We, the undersigned, find and have no objection to K. D. Edelen parking
his 32 foot Elandan recreation vehicle on his residential property at 307
Birch Terrace. The recreation vehicle is parked in the back yard, behind
a privacy fence, is not obviously visible from the street and does not
degrade the appearance of the neighborhood.
_..~~----~--------_._--
(NamE'" )
'm~J~~ID..~~:'.____._.___
( Name) \l
.-
----," ~~
. - ,- -
'(t~lc:\iTI~')"-'- - -.-'- .- .--..--,-,---,--.----.- -'---
I' .
L/z '
,-.:-L~_~...,_,
~ NC':\rnf "
-
._)~--~..~_.
(Addres~..)
~~LlB~.--~J?~_.__._._____._
(?-)c1drE~~..s)
_...'.:l.o..2~~ Q ~~'.:-() .______.___
U~ddress)
_-2~_lA~L-
(Addr"ess) 4-
-
-
~~
e:U:>
I;..
i-,",;
~h\,~/
l F1
(L,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTHENT
T.~ :
C it Y Uan6.ger"
J: 1- ,::n!l :
..:;. .2. AI" t ma n
#,g rr:l
Date:
(Ie; t Of.;er' ..:.,., 1 Sl39
.suQJect:
Mt. Greenwood Arbor VlolatlOn
=================================================================
I nave ~evlewed 3eCtlOn 5-5 or the Clty Arbor 0ralnance and It IS
llil' Incerpr<::tatlCon l[):it rerore.stallon 13 basi:d on 2~J pCHnt::J [Ji:L
~cre. An acre 1S approxlmately 44,000 square feet. The area In
'-1u.::s~ 101, encompasses 2';, ,40v sql..lare Ti:(::[ WhlCh equates tG 5.~;)Q ,:.Jr
all aCL:e or' 13 1/: pOlnts.
-.
it 1~3 [HI' recommendation eliat sm,alLnOll)UVenlle
,I. c611peri Le jJianted 6.long the iJaclr. or Lh.::
These (r"ees nave a one pOll'lt value eacn.
trees lb' nlgn and
lets In question.
lr lhlS meets WilD your approval, 1 Will deterllilne the mest
sUlt~Dle specie of tree ior thlS SOLI condition and present these
rlll':.tlrli~S LC.o tIlt: ueveloper.
~~~~uwrr~
OCT 27 1989
CITY of WI Ii I ttl ~r'RINGS
CITY MANAGER
- .,' '&;: ',~
'~'"
f~CG[tnWI[@
NOV 1 1989
CITY of WINTER ~PRINGS
CITY MANAGER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
~ '. el t!.- #, eu~
IO!/3/Yj
l
Vla:
Cltj' COlllilllSSlon
(:.I.(/' Manager
G. E. Artman,.t~
.r...,,) :
from:
wace: November 1,1989
Subject: Nt. GreE:wood ArDor Vlolatloo
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1 computed the pOlnt va1uatloo ror rerc~rE:station dF.::aling Wlth Ht.
Greenwood ArDor Vlolation ~2E:e attached) . After conversation
wlth thF.:: eltj Hanager:, I contacted Hr. f'flll W6.1lis Or AmetlrlI:S1.
Corporatlon dOU he agreed with the ~lnalngs.
/~
Amerlrlrst CorporatlOn wl11 plant 13 smal1;ncoJuvenlle trees
along the oack rence llne of lots in questlon. It was determined
tLat tfle most sUltar:;le tree ror thiS seil condltlon would be
Laurel Oaks. These trees wlll be planted as these lots are
dellt:'loped, this ,nil ensure survlval.
---