Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 02 11 Regular 600.1 West End Professional Center One - First ModificationCOMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 600.1 Consent Information Public Hearin Re ular X February 11, 2008 MGR. /Dept. Meeting REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the City Commission consider a request from the owners of the West End Professional Center One to further modify the First Modification to the Binding Development Agreement for West End Professional Center One to remove the requirement for a significant sculpture or fountain in exchange for eliminating the seat walls on the two central planters in front of the building. PURPOSE: The purpose of this Agenda Item is to request the City Commission consider a request from the owners of the West End Professional Center - Phase I to remove the requirement for a significant fountain or sculpture to be placed at the building entrance in exchange for the elimination of two seat walls located around the two center planters in the plaza along the north side of the building and to allow the building to receive final site acceptance without the provision of the fountain or sculpture. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Chapter 166, Florida Statutes Development Agreement (DA) & Modifications Chapter 5, City Code Chapter 9, City Code. Town Center District Code (sections 20-320 thru 20-327). CHRONOLOGY: • February 27, 2006 -City Commission approval of the conceptual development plan for the West End Center. • June 26, 2006 -City Commission Aesthetic Review Approval (subject to Staff's findings) • August 14, 2006 -City Commission approved final engineering for Phase I 021108_COMM_Regular_600 1_West End Center DA Modification February 11, 2008 Regular Agenda Item #600.1 Page 2 • December 11, 2006 -City Commission approved the Development Agreement for West End Professional Center One, LLP. • January 8, 2007 -City Commission approved the First Modification to the Development Agreement for West End Professional Center One, LLP. CONSIDERATIONS: The site is located on the south side of S.R. 434, west of McLeod's Way, immediately west of Jesup's Reserve. West End Center Phase I consists of a new 24,390 SF office building and related site infrastructure and landscaping improvements. The December 11, 2006 Developer's Agreement required the developer to construct a total of six seat walls around the trees located in the front plaza area. The January 8, 2007 Modification to the Developer's Agreement provided the developer an option to substitute the middle two seat walls with a "significant sculpture or fountain at the front entrance of the building" for the two middle seat walls. To date, the middle two seat walls have not been constructed, and a sculpture or fountain has not been substituted. This issue must be resolved prior to the acceptance of the Phase I site work that is the subject of Agenda Item 600.2, also on tonight's agenda. FINDINGS: 1.) The proposed development is located within the City of Winter Springs Town Center. 2.) Deviations from the Code have been addressed in the Development Agreement and the First Modification to the Development Agreement 3.) The Owner wishes to modify the First Modification to the Development Agreement to delete the requirement for the installation of a significant fountain or sculpture at the front entrance of the building in exchange for the elimination of the middle two (2) seat walls in the plaza area. 4.) This issue must be resolved prior to the acceptance of the Phase I site work that is the subject of Agenda Item 600.2, also on tonight's agenda. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Commission consider the request of the Owners of the West End Professional Center One, LLP to eliminate the requirement for the installation of a significant fountain or sculpture at the front entrance of the building in exchange for the elimination of the middle two (2) seat walls in the plaza area. 021108_COMM_Regular_600 1_West End Center DA Modification February 11, 2008 Regular Agenda Item #600.1 Page 2 ATTACHMENTS: A Excerpt from the Original DA for West End Professional Center One, LLP, dated December 11, 2007 B First Modification of the DA for West End Professional Center One, LLP dated January 8, 2007. C Agenda Item 204 from the June 26, 2006 City Commission meeting with meeting minutes. D Agenda Item 306 from the December 11, 2006 City Commission meeting with meeting minutes. E Agenda Item 415 from the January 8, 2007 City Commission meeting with meeting minutes. CITY COMMISSION ACTION: 021108_COMM_Regular_600 1_West End Center DA Modification ATTACHMENT A PREPARED BY AND RETURN TO: Anthony A. Gazganese City Attorney Brown, Garganese, Weiss & D'Agresta, P.A. 225 East Robinson Street, Suite 660 Orlando, FL 32801 (407)425-9566 91lilllil#Ii~lllll~llitl#Ii~Bl~llilt~li~~~l~~l >~Ai'CYANNE lam; CLE(~ L~ L'Ii~tllT T INOLE CITY A8 X545 Pg~ 13th? - 1sl~; til~sl CLERK'S # 29~t7~~3~77 REGt7RDED ~1/&~5/~~d7 ~,°:2~:~1 1~ RE~RDitJQ FE.EB 9a.l~ REGt1RDED BY t holden BINDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS BINDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, made and executed this 11`'' day of December, 2006, by and between the CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, a Florida municipal corporation ("City") whose address is 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, FL 32708, and WEST END PROFESSIONAL CENTER ONE, LLP, a Florida limited liability partnership ("WEPCO") and CHRISTOPHER F. REGAN ("Regan"), whose address is 225 S. Orange Avenue, Suite 1401 Orlando, Florida 32801. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, WEPCO and Regan (collectively "Developer") are constructing an office pazk development on real property located within the City of Winter Springs, Florida; WHEREAS, the real property is currently located within the City of Winter Springs and is currently part of the Winter Springs Town Center; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to memorialize their mutual understanding that the real property will be developed as West End Professional Center project in accordance with the Town Center Zoning District requirements adopted by the City (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the City Commission has recommended entering into_a B.indirtg~Development Agreement ("Agreement") with Developer for the development of the Project;-and - it _ i_. 5 .. ..... ~. %am~.i _ - ~ :. ~ ~ . Y : '. WHEREAS, in addition to Developer compliance with all City Codes, permitting and construction not in conflict herein, the City and .Developer desire to set forth the following special terms and conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the parties mutually agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Authori This Agreement is entered into pursuant to the Florida Municipal Home Rule Powers Act as provided in §2(b), Article WIII of the Florida Constitution, Florida Statutes § 166.021, and the Code of Ordinances of the City of Winter Springs (the "City Code") 3. Subject Property. The real property ("Property") which is subject to and bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement is legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference. 4. Representations of Developer. Developer hereby represents and warrants to City that Developer has the power and authority to execute, deliver and perform the terms and provisions of this Agreement and has taken all necessary action to authorize the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement. This Agreement will, when duty executed and delivered by Developer and recorded in the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida, constitute a legal, valid and binding obligation enforceable against Developer and the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Developer represents it has voluntarily and willfully executed this Agreement for purposes of binding the Property to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. 5. AEreements. In consideration of the City entering into this Agreement with Developer, Developer and the City agree as follows: A. Developer shall construct improvements on the Property in substantial compliance with the final engineering site plan approved by the City on August 14, 2006 (the "Approved Plan") B. The proposed building is located approximately 45 feet from the S.R. 434 right-of--way line with a public pedestrian plaza which shall be maintained in good condition in perpetuity by the Developer and be located between the building and the right-of--way. The City waives the requirement for a frontage road and agrees to this deviation from City Code §20- 325(c)(8), which requires the typical build-to line to be at the right-of--way of a frontage road parallel to S.R. 434. C. The public sidewalk along the Property frontage shall be located onsite, in the plaza area, with sidewalk connections to the existing sidewalks at both ends of the Property. The sidewalk and plaza area shall be maintained in good condition in perpetuity by Developer or its successor owner of the Property as fully accessible to the general public. Pursuant to Florida Department of Transportation requirements, the Developer shall grant to City a 10-foot wide sidewalk easement along SR 434 in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney. D. Developer shall construct six (6) seat walls around the trees located in the plaza at the entrance of the property. The design of seat walls are intended to be comfortable for sitting leisurely for extended periods of time, and as such will be maintained in good condition in perpetuity by the Developer for these public purposes. E. The wall at the northeast corner shall connect to and be coordinated with the proposed wall at Jesup's Reserve development. If the proposed wall connection differs from that shown on the Approved Plan, Developer shall submit shop drawings of the proposed wall connection for review and approval by the City. pry-QQYed by and 1--.burn ~ ; ~-1~'hony ~. ~a-- anise ATTACHMENT B Gi~y A-t}-orv-~ :s ~ -~` k~r{sue, P~ ~ ~~~ ~ 6u nes vJe~ S Sui-~ 4 c~D ~.S c. r~obins-a ~ St~-tifi ~ prtCir~dQ~i9.3a~i <yo7)~f~'-a5'I~b FIRST MODIFICATION OF BINDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS FIRST MODIFICATION OF BINDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, ated December 11, 2006 ("First Modification") is made and executed this ~,~_ day of ~~ ~ , 2007, by and between the CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, a Flonda Municipal Corporation (th "City"), whose address is 1126 East S.R. 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708, and WEST END PROFESSIONAL CENTER ONE, LLP, a Florida limited liability company ("West End"), and CHRISTOPHER F. REGAN ("Regan"), whose address is 225 S. Orange Avenue, Suite 1401, Florida 32801. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developer and City previously entered into a Binding Development Agreement, dated December 11, 2006 ("Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement as provided hereunder. 1. Paragraph 5(D) is hereby amended to add the following second sentence: However, at the Developer's option, the Developer may substitute the middle two (2) seat walls with a significant sculpture or fountain at the front entrance of the building. 2. All other provisions of the Agreement not amended by this First Modification shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have hereunto set their hands and seal on the date first above 0 ~' ~- ~ ~ 1 ~~ ~ d a M written. Signed, sealed and delEVered in the presence of• Witness By: Print: By: Print: STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ~~ ~ ~''~ `-~' '_ ~j:ti ~?~- :, p ct ,~ CITY OF WINTL~t SP 1~~5~ a -g:~"oY`ic~a ~~. ~- ti~ .~ icipal corp~atio~ ~ ~ .,r ~ &, : ~. ' ~, ~. ~„ s _ o nF.Bsh ~ ,~ ,, .k ©~. , -' ` ., _.: ~...>. ~~ _ ii ~" da ofv~=~ 2007 b The foregoing instrument was aclrnowledged before me this y _~___~..-> Y k ~,, as of the City of,Winter Springs, wh ~ personally-lcho %to me, or has produced the following identification: NOTAg,~tpUBLIC, State of Florida "~ li . ~~ Y ~ i~1RSE, CLERK ~ CIRC!!IT Gtk1RT c ~dINQLE trrv G~€65 Ags ~81~6 - 1E4; t4pgs) ~ F I t_E €~lUM 2~~7~~'~1~E,~i RI~Q ~I~32~T ~:~4:~6 ~ gy~ ;~---~-- ~~ My cortxnissior+ oo2osaro ""+~, w~ E,m,~es ~ os. 2oor IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have hereunto set their hands and seal on the date first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of Witness ~: ~~ By: Print: P~~ v ~ • Pia t~ WEST END PROFESSIONAL CENTER ONE, LLP., a Flo limited liability ship By: Print: _ Christoyer F. Regan Title: Managing Partner By: ~' r Print: ra d •~ STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF - ~'~~ The foregoing instrument was aclrnowledged before me this ~~ day of 2~ by Christopher F. Regan as Managing Partner of WEST END PROFESSIONAL CENTER ONE, LLP, who is personally Irnown to me, or has produced the following identification: NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida By: Print My Commission Expires: ~ Z Attachments ~,,,,,,,, Exhibit A -Property t;~' SUZANNEYENSER .; ~ ,,: MY COMMISSION # DD 475185 "~„•'.r~ IXPIRES:January 1,2010 "'f~~14¢ ea,eeatm~rw~r~u~s IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have hereunto set their hands and seal on the date first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered to the presence of Witness By: Print: ~f4~l~ A• P By: Print: r ~~ n opher F. Regan STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF - z00<..U ~~ da of The foregoing instrument was aclmowledged before me this y by CHRISTOPHER F. BEGAN, who is personally known to me, or has produced the following identification: NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida ss~~ ~~ gy; ~ C~h-. Print: ~ My Commission Expires: ~Q ~;~~ Sy~IEYENSER . ,~ "~ ti(Y COMMISSION # DD 475185 ~`,~.,~= EXPIRES: JanuuY 1,2010 ~` BaidedTMuNaaryP~biClkM~~ ~%PTufi` EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: P3RCEL ID :30-20-3o-50--0000-ooL4 (PERO.RB. osot4, PAGE 1$97) BEGTNNTNC 20.1.03 FEEL' SOIfTH z2 DEGREES U :4I[NU'CES EAST OF THE NORTH4VESf CORNER OF LO'f t, JOE E. JOEL`I51'ON'S SURVEY, ACCORDING TO PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED LN DEED BOOK t47, PAGE z2t, OF THE PLBLIC RECORDS OF SEh1INOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA. RUN'CH~ICE SOLTH 2a DF.GREFS tS 3TINU1'ES L4ST tg8.97 FEET, THENCE NORTH gt DEGREES tS ~IIW CFS F2SC zyt 3 FEEC, THRICE NORTH 38 DEGREES 40 `TINGTES tVE57' zoo FEET, TIiENCE SOUTH y1 DEGREES 17 `II\LTES 18 SECONDS 4YFSTTO BEGINNLVG, LESS ROAD ON EAs'T AN'D P:IRCEL ID ~ 36-2o-3o-roe-0000-0010 (PER O.R.B. og962, PAGE 08181 COi4ihiENGTNG AT THE MOST EA.S'fERLY CORNER OF THAT PART OF BLOCK'B" OF D.R. hITTCHELL'S SURVEY OFTHF. LEVY GRANT, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOT{ t, PAGES, Lti THE OFFICE OFTHE CLERK OF'fHF. CIRCLTT COURT OF SEhi[NOLE COUlv'fY, FI.ORIll4, LYING SOUTH ARIA WEST OFTHE PAVED KOAD LEADCNG FROM SaNFORD TO OVE1D0; THENCE ALONGTIiE SOUCEI4VESCERLY SIDE OP THE PAVED ROAD NORTH 38 DEGREES ~ tNFS7' tS86.oo FEET TO A CONCRETE h3UNti.RT&YC FOR A POINT OF BEGL~INING: THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 38 DEGREES q5' WEST 2oc.oo FEET; TH~CE SUUT}l St DEGREES t~ 4Vi'.ST zgt,3o b'lihT'CO 7'11 F. SOUTIiF_3STIiRI.Y SIDE. OF A UiR'1' ROAD;'I'H[•:NCIi SOUTH 22 DEGREES t~ E45T 208.80 FEET; THE*ICE NORTH 5t UEGKEES ~,' EAST 3;1.10 FEETTO 7'HF. POINCOir BEGi.NN1NG. I.L•SS AND F.X(:1?P7' FRUht'f11F. ABUVli IANT>,S TIIA'C PORTION TAKE.,'`i FOR ROAD R1.GIC1-0F-WAY FOR STATE ROAD q3q, B5'T11E STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARThICNT OFTRrLVSPORT.9TION, 6Y 41RTUF. OF TICAT CERT.~LN ORDER OFTAKiNG RECORDED JULY 2'7,1994, IN OFFTCIaL RECORDS BOOK 2803, PAGE 1023, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SEa1INOLE COUP fIY, FLORIDA, BEL`TG MORE PARTICI'LARLY DESCRIBED AS FOI,LUWS: :1 P71R'1' OF LOT t OF JOE E. JOHNSTON'5 SURVEYAS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 1q7, PAGE 22t, OF TIC PLBLIC RECORDS OF SEyIINOLE COLiYTY.FLORIDA, ALSO BEI~iiG A P_4RT OF THE UNN[JhiBrnrn L07' IN BLOCK B, D.R. A{ITCIIEI.L'S SURVEY OFTi{E I.GVY GRAr`7'f,?.CCURDINC'f0 T}IF. PTA'f TIIRRIiOF, AS RECORDED TN PLAT BOOK t, PAGE S, OF TEIE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SEddINOLE COL`N'IY, FLORIDA, BEING h10RE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOtiYS; CO_~IENCE AT THE NORTHE45f CORNER OF SAID UNIVI:JiBERED LOT IN BLOCK B, BEINGTF[E POIIv C OF [I~fERSECTION OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OP-WAY LLYE OF FIRST STREET, A 3o FOOTT WIDE UNOPENEDRIGHT-0F--WAY AND THE NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-4VAY L[lv'E OF BR.A,~FTLEY AVFaNI;E, r So FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF 1~VAY; THE.\CE RLTN>rORTH 71 DEGREES a:'4o" tiYEST ALO~CG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT'-0F WAY LC1vB OF FIRST STREET AND THE NORTH LINE OF S:SID UWl;:4i8ERED L01 TN BLOCK B, A DI.S'I'ANCE OF 1823. ~ FEET TO A POINT ON'PHE BASELINE OF SURVEY OF SR 43q ACCORDING TO FDOTRTGHT-OF-4VAY ~1.4P SECTION T/o7ct-2yt6; THFatiCE RUN SUVfH 38 DEGREES 32 22" EAST ALONG SAID BASELINE OF SURVEY OF SR 434, A DISTANCE OF 0.33 FL• ET; THENCE DEPAR'T'ING S.\ID Br1SELTaiE OF SURVEY S.R q34 RUN NORTH 71 DECiREFS 2~ z3" 1VTsS'1', A 17151'ANCE OF Sj .6 FELT TU TI1L• PUII~T OF 1NTER$L'C1'lON OF 1'IIE SULTHERLY RIGHT-0F-WAY LIME OF SAID FIItSt STREET A'D`D THE SOL"fEIW-L• STF.RLY ILIGHT-0F 4VAY LShTE OF SAID SR 434; THENCE RUIv SOLTFI 38 DEGREES 32 ~az" EASTAI,UNG SAID SUL~['HWESTE.RI.Y RIGHT-OF-4VAY L1NF. A DiSCANCl:OF iyu.84 FEET FOR A POl~7C OF BEGIIQNI?~G; THENCE CON'T'INUE SOUTH 38 DEGREES 32'22" E9.STALONG SAIU SOU'1'F11VF.51'I:RLY Ii1GHT-0F'-IVAY IdN F. OF SR q34. A nISTaNC>:, of ztx,.no ErET To'CHI: EASfEILv:t905f CO7•IER OF SAID I.,O'T t; THEtiCE DEPARI7VG SAID SOUfH4VFS1'ERC.Y RIGtIT-Or IVAY LINE OF SR q34 RUN SOUTH St DEGREES 2? 38"WEST ALONG 1'HE SOUTHE_A:STERLYLIhB OF LOT t A D151'ANCE OF 22.70 FEET; THE,~CE DEPAItTiNG SAID SOLTHF115TERLY LINE OF LOT t RUN NORTH 38 DL• GREES 43'10' 4VL• ST, A DISTANCE OF 2on.oo TEL•T;'f13ENCE RG"N `iORTH 51 DEGREES 2y38° EAST, A DISTANCE OF 23.33 FEET TO THE POIb'f OF EEGIN`II?dG. ALSO LESS AND.EXCF:}''I' FR031'THE ABOVR I_4NDS'fHA1' PORTION TAKEN FOR ROAD KIGMI'-ON-WAY FOR STATE RO.aD q3q BYTHE STr1TE' OF FLORCDr1, DEFARTtiC1INT OFTRA23SFURTATION, BY V[ RTU E OF THAT CERTAIN ORDER OF TAKING RECORDED OCl'OBER 3,t99q IV OFFICL0.1. RECORDS AOOR 2831, PAGE, to2q, OFTHS PUBLIC RF..CORDfi OR SF.JiINOLE CO[7?,'TY, FLOP.IDr1, BEING ONLY DL:SCRIRI•a A.4. A PAIt'C OF LO'C I OF JOE E..IOHNSTON'S SURVEY AS RECO[DED In DEED BOOK 147, PAGE 2?t, OF 'f1lE PLB I.IC 1:ECORDS OF SP.'t~ll\O1.F, L'OLiN'lY, FLORIDA, ALSO BI:IDIG A } :A1:1' OF'1'H E UNNU\1BE1:Ell LOT Iti I;LOCF ?:, I).i.. bIITCIIF,L[; S SURETY O!~ Ti IF LL•4'Y GR:'1:~T, ACCORDING TO THE FL1TTliERF.OF, tS v~rnyhL[I I'4 PLAT BC10K t, 1' GE ;. OF TiTE PLiBL1C REGOT.DS C1: SE~l1\OLE COi1~', FLOP.IU.!. LL! .~194et ATTACHMENT C COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 204 June 26, 2006 Meeting ~~ /DEPT Authorizatic REQUEST: The Community Development Department- Planning Division requests the City Commission hold a Public Hearing for the Aesthetic Review for West End OfEcxs located on SR 434 in the Town Center. PURPOSE: To encourage creative, effective, and flexible architectural standards and cohesive community development consistent with the intent and purpose ofArticle XI - Minimum Community Appearance and Aesthetic Review Standards. APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY: Ordinance 2003-43, Aesthetic Review Standards, City of Winter Springs Section 9-601. Approval prerequisite for permits. Section 9-605. Submittal requirements. RECOMMENDED RESOURCE: William H. Whyte is widely recognaed for his seminal work in the study of human behavior in urban settings. While working with the New York City Planning Commission in 1968, Whyte began to wonder how newly planned city spaces were actually working out -something that no one had previously researched. This curiosity led to his pioneering research in the study of pedestrian behavior and city dynamics. Whyte's analysis found that plaza use is based on the amount of slttable space and that people tend to sit where there are places to sit. Whyte wrote that the social life in public spaces contributes fundamentally to the quality of life of individuals and society. He suggested that we have a moral responsibility to create physical places that facilitate civk engagement and community interaction. Many of Whyte's recommendations are common sense, such as "people use spaces that are easy to use, that are comfortable. They don't use tlw spaces that are not.° Whyte recommended 1 LF of sitting space for every 30 SF of open space. Although private plazas for public use may be legaly requirod to bs accessible by the public, many have been effectively privatized or are so uninviting that no one wants to use them. Included as a Supplement within your Agenda Packet from httc:/IM~ww.ncs.om are: 10 Principles for Creating SuccessfulSquanes; WhatMakesA GieatP/ace1; and The Benefits of Place. These documents are intended as resource for the Commission as the Town Center DRC. I Consent I I I Informational I I Public Hearing X Regular CHRONOLOGY: Feb. 27.2006- Commission Review of the Conceptual Plan June 26, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 204 This review did not authorize any deviations, variations or variances from the code. CONSIDERATIONS: This project is located on the south side of SR 434, immediately west of Jesup's Reserve in the Town Center. k includes two matching, symmetrical offks buildings, each three stories in height and setback back 45' from the SR 434 right-of-way. Although the Town Center Code requires buildings to be no more than 10-feet off of the street ROW, early discussbns between Staff, Dover-Kohl and the Applicant resulted in the building being located as shown, in exchange for the Applicant providing a public plaza at the front of the buildings. This concept was favorably reviewed by the Commission at the February 27, 2006 meeting. However, this review did not authorize any deviations, variations or variances from the code. The final engineering is expected to be finalized and submitted to the Commission in July. Any deviations, variations or variances from the code that are illustrated and approved as part of thk Aesthetic Review will need to be memorialized in a Development Agreement. The submittal requirements for aesthetic review are set forth in Section 9-605 and include the following: (a) a site plan; (b) elevations illustrating all sides of structures facing public streets or spaces; (c) illustrations of all walls, fences, and other accessory structures and the indication ofheight and their associated materials; (d) elevation of proposed exterior permanent signs or other constructed elements other than habitable space, if any; (e) illustrations of materials, texture, and cobra to be used on all buildings, accessory structures, exterior signs; and (t) other architectural and engineering data as may be required. The procedures for review and approval are set forth in Section 9-603. The City Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application only after consideration of whether the following criteria have been satisfied: (1) The plans and specifications of the proposed project indicate that the setting, landscaping, proportions, materials, colors, textures, scale, unity, balance, rhythm, contrast, and simplicity are coordinated in a harmonious manner relevant to the particular proposal, surrounding area and cultural character of the community. Harmony is particularly important within the Town Center. k is therefore critical that certain elements be coordinated. k is not enough to consider a project on its own merits, but it must be viewed within its context in the Town Center. Particularly Important with this proposal is its relationship to Jesups Reserve. The graphic below gives some indication of the architectural relationship of the West End Centre to Jesups Reserve as k would appear from SR 434. The West End Centre buildings will be constructed of tilt-up concrete finished in a textured coating and painted in neutral cobra which include a whits, light gray and darker gray for the simulated stone base. An expression line separating the first and second floors is included. Windows have a green tint. Doorways lead out to an extensive bak:ony system on the second and third floors. Awnings are included as an architectural embellishment to provide accent and contrast to the rest of the building. (These awnings are not intended to provide shade for pedestrians.) Depth of balconies and awnings is not known. Railings and window frames are black and the roofing is a standing seam metal roof. Building 35 also utilaes gray tones with white trim. Although the red awning appears to clash with the door cobr of building 35, in reality the two reds are exactly the same. Both buildings are three stories and include porches/ balconies. The West End roofllne includes a combination of a flat roof with a pitched roofline at the center. These architectural features and colors lurx '6. �1)t�f. P[_;BL.IC Ht >R I\� . s ; , � . harnWniZe well � � : �;,..� _.. � - ir - - �"��\ � ' �_• � _ � ��i t� .� � �� �T � �-� r . ; � . _ ��� f '� s "� �-..�i. �. Z��• •��; �i� '"� — �, -� � f Buildin� 1 E3uilciin`� >> � � , Jesups Reserve \1 �;2 f Iltj �)t}1�C C�entre I� addition, both projecta include a doubte row of trees sbng SR 434. The Applicant is proposing `Littie Gem' Magnolia at 30' o.c. However, the existin9 pattern of street trees (species and spacing) approved in the SR 434 ROW (Duercus virginiana `High�ise', 40-feat on center) shou4d be continued rather than util¢ing a dilfereM spacing and species for th� site. The second row of trees does not have to replicate Jesups Reserve and should be selected based on the best species for the piaza location. The project dumpster is effectivety shielded from adjaceM townhouses throuyh the use of a trellis coveri as rt of ihe d�n er encbsure. The verticai members are 3x8's s ced 1" .. ng pa pst pa 6 o c No details on tha selected lights (IuminariQS or posts) are included in the submittai. The seloctod ligtrts and re�ulatory signaye muat meet the upgraded Town Center atandard bein8 implemented by other projects. Will the project include tandscape lighting ar►d will the froM fayade of the building inciude fa�ade lighting? The regulatory signaga included in the Final Engineering drawings is not acceptable because R does not n►aiMain this hamwny. (2) The plans for the propose� project are in harniony with an}� future de��elvpment w�hich has bec�n tuc�nal}y approve� by the City w ithin the surrounding area. The projecYs harmony with Jesups Reserve has already baen discussed. �Ila Grande (the proposed devebprt►ent to the north acrosa SR 434) haa not yet received Flnal Engineering or Aeathetk Review approval. ( 3) The plans fur the proposed project are not excessi�•ely similar or dissimilar to any other bui�ing. �tructure or sign which is either fully wnstructed, per�tnitted but not fully construcied, or inctuded on t he same pernut application, and facing upon the same or inteisecting street within five hundred (500) tcct ofthe proposed site, wrth respert to one or mom ofthe following features ofexterior de.sign and �i��(k ai3i1CC: � :� ► Front or side elevatiom, i I3 i Siu and arrdngenxnt ofelevation facing the streei, including rc�ersc aaangement, � t ()ther si�iticant features ofdesi� such a�, but not limited to: materials, roofline. Fmrdsca{x improvemtntt, and height or desig� elements. The project i�cludea two office btuldings that are ideMical, each three stories in height, with matched plaza ares� abng SR 434. t�) The plans for the proposed project are in hnnt�ny vvith, or significantl}' enhance, the estahlished � I�aracter of other buildings, structwes or signs in the surrounding area v� ith respect to azchitectural ��ecifications and design features deem� significant based upon cumrnonly acr,epted architectural ��rinciples of the k�cal communit�. The proposed matching buitdings are very attractive and will enhance the character of the area. See Jame 26, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 204 extensive discussion of plaza area under (6). (5) The proposed project is consistent and compatible with the intent and purpose ofthis Article, the Comprehensive Plan for Winter Springs, design criteria adopted by the city (e.g. SR 434 design specifications) and other applicable federal state or local laws. The West End Office Centro buildings meets the requirements of the city's design criteria as specified in the Code. (6) The proposed project has incorporated significant architectural enhancements such as concrete masonry units with stucco, marble, termite-resistant wood, wrought iron, brick, columns and piers, porches, arches, fountains, planting areas, display wicxiows, and other distinctive design detailing end promoting the character ofthe community. As previously mentioned, the Applicant was allowed to have the building situated 45' from the SR 434 right-of- way, in exchange for the Applicant providing a public plaza at the front of the buildings. Each plaza includes appropmately 10,000 SF of open space. The paved area is surfaced with 2-1 /2" thick clay Berra pavers in white, gray and peach, edged with a continuous concrete ribbon curb. Included is a low 22"free standing seating wall that steps out from the building entrance and then back along the entrance drive. Nine-foot high columns punctuate the comers at each 90 degree tum of the wall. The 3-D rendering appears to induded some shorter columns, but no shorter column detail is included. Although the rendering does not illustrate it, other drawings indicate columns dividing the lengthier e~anses into 10-foot sections. The seating wall is deta~ed with a slightly peaked cap (see page "D"). Staff recommends a flat cap to accommodate seating. The 20-foot DOT ROW is planted with trees and grass. The pattern of street trees (species and spacing) approved along SR 434 (Quercus virginiana Highrise 40' on center) should be continued rather than utilizing a different spacing and species for this site. Another row of trees, is located between the ROW and the budding. Dover-Kohl has commented that "The double row of trees with the outer trees in a green strip and the innerraw in tree wells, should give the road a good, strong defined edge and help pedestrians to feel protected from the fast-moving travel lanes." Staff recommends that four of the trees (out of six) in front of each building be placed in a raised planter surrounded by a seating wall to provide shaded seating, give added protection to the trees, and break up the flatness of the space. The two trees immediately in front of the entrance should not include a seating wall, so that the entrance remains un-obscured. The Applicant currently proposes all trees to be at the same grade as the plaza without tree grates and indicates that "ample seating has been provided." William Whyte recommends 1 LF of sitting space for every 30 SF of open space. Given these figures, each plaza needs and an additional 100 LF of seating. Initial renderings of the plaza illustrated steps leading to a fountain at the entrance of the building, this detail has been removed from the drawings. The provision of the steps at the building entrance gave definition to the space and increased the prominence of the building The Applicant has indicated that "Steps have been removed to facilitate accessibility for the public" and "The fountain was eliminated to avoid long-term maintenance problems and liability issues". � �;,, , � ! i5i I� . � . , . _ . � . � — j ,, : -- _ , :: " --- — � . — — --- —. i � � � � , s' � i �� � i i ;� — ,� � � � i i ia ; �� - i -- i . v . Conceptual Review Elevation of West End Office Centre During Concept Review by the Commission on Feb. 27, 2006, Commissioner Milkr indicated, "There should be a four►tain on the Narth elevatian." The Applicant responded by saying, "There will be an architectural feature there, whether it is a fountain, or a scutpture, or wh�th�r it is a ga�n-that tms y�t to be determined and we will brin� that up in the Aestfietec Review." s�: � .r � � ,.�_��,� ��� � . � � � � � _ ��` , . : ; .��`.a- . , � i t , � _ . , ���_� �i: � `'��" ` I *'�� ' G � w' `��� !�■� � � � . � : � ;s. ; - r . '� ,�`-; ,r-tr. .* . . � � t , - _ - . _ , � . - X �;� . , . " � �. '� : '�: w.c - i�` 1 y .,.� ° . ..- - � . � .� �, •. � � g � s� ,... �I � . � s,- ' :u! '�.` ' ,� P�r•'� � ! � .. a , ` ' t � ' E "� � � iT' � �� `` .� i ` � .� I C' � !�! �. ii� - �' c i � � _ ��� �rr� ' * � ! � � . ir ._ � ` I � r - .R'� 7F• ��� � ��. � e � 1i�� � f � - � � � � � �:.... ~ {� � J� - " _ - �_ _ ; -£ � - � _ �. � � � � �� �� _ ,�__ -- -��� � ,- A fourrtain is not included, despke Commissioner Millar (see 02-27-06, Minutas} and SUff's raquost. Fourrtains enlivsn public spaces and add an elemsrn of fnterest and focus. Although a fountain is prefened, the Applicant could opt for a large bronze sculpture at the entrance to each buiidl�g, such as the lifesize sculpture illustrsted above, by Gary Price. Other i The ApplicaM is not proposin� any tenartt ideMification spnage at this t�r�e. Btack O►namerrtal Fencing �� is proposed along the edge of the retention area and is detailed fn the Final Engineering. A bike rack �s Junr _'h. : �� r Pt�a�c t�t :;h���, � � f�� �� . proposed but not detailed in this submittal. I FINDINGS: • TM building ekvations includ� archit�ctural d�tailing addin� to their appearanu and th� qwiky of ' the propoaed project. ' • The new buildir►ps utilizs colors and matsrials thst compleme� the adjacent b�ldinps in J�sups Reserve and tt►e Town Cerner. • Although some of the folbwing comm�rtts may appeat insignifkarrt, ft is such carsful sttsntbn to detailing that will ukimateiy make the public places in the Town Center a true asset. • Bas�d on a thorough analysis of tho proposed plaza area, Staff t "' , requasta the Town Center DRC requirs tha folbwing revisions oi the --�--► ��-� APPlicarrt: � � - 1- Revise the aeatin9 wall cap to be ftat to accommodate sestin�. (The i / ' p�opoaed peaked cap is illustrated on the right.) ' 2- Place fo� of the treea iMo raised planters with seat wal�. �—� ' I I �_: •J • • �--� r � I 3- Toward the east property li�e, continue the wall 10-feeT furtF� eastward � before jo�giny it to the rwrth. (Thia resuks in a more aymmetrical wall ,— �,— __ �, ' design and compkments tM symmetry of the building.) Z 9 3 4 5 -r - ! (�, . . t � I �� .- • �� � , _ _ �� _, — _ - .-�...i..T"`� �---�•� :� :. � � _ - �' - -::� : Yp � ' L__ • �� ' " '�''.�-«2� t Si�2:::».:S«'. »5... :..»� �. . . :".:�','L. ^"i' ••2::» �: S. » '2'.' �� -S::i�� � . ���-- V _ 'r�z�i ... 'f"' "'�' - .' - , - _� y �CS�L'I���' ~ J _ �� �. _ _ _. i I Q II � I ` � � . 4- Detail the relationship between the adjacent Jesups Reserve wab and the wall and columrss p�possd here. 5- Ertend the paving pattern to the east property (ine. 6- Detail and bcate shorter columns. I 7- Corttinue the �stablished pattern of street trees tspecies and spacing) approved along SR 434 I (Quercus virginiana Highrise 40' on center► June 26, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 204 S- Provide Staff with detail on proposed lighting luminaries and posts. Revise stopsign detail to nrfiect Town Center standard upgrade. 9- A fountain area or significant piece of sculpture must be included . 10- Deviations from the Town Center Code will be required to be memorialized in a Devebpment Agreement before any permits are released. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on a thorough analysis of the Applicant's submittal for Aesthetk Revbw~ Staff recorrunends that the Commission grant Approval of the Aesthetk Revkw package with the Condition that the Revisbns requested (above) under "Findings" be made. ATTACHMENTS: A. Aesthetic Review Package COMMISSION ACTION: CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 26, 2006 PAGE 12 OF 31 Mayor Bush opened the "Public Input "portion of the Agenda Item. No one spoke. Mayor Bush closed the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item. "I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT ORDINANCE 2006-09:' MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MILLER. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BLAKE. DISCUSSION. VOTE: COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARINGS 204. Community Development Department -Planning Division / Requests The City Commission Hold A Public Hearing For The Aesthetic Review For West End Offices Located On State Road 434 In The Town Center. Ms. Sahlstrom presented this Agenda Item and stated, "I believe you saw this concept that came before you back in February, but at that time, of course, the Review did not authorize any deviations, variations, or Variances from the Code. The Applicant is proposing two (2) office buildings that are identical. They're symmetrical buildings, each three (3) stories in height with a matched plaza area along [State Road] 434. The building as proposed is very attractive and we believe it will enhance the character of the area. We believe that it does have harmony with its relationship to adjust its reserve with a few minor comments that are in your packet as well. The biggest concerns that Staff has, are included in your Findings. Probably the biggest item is the fact that the Applicant has not included a fountain in this plaza. The fact that during the Conceptual Review it was indicated to him that -Commissioner Miller did indicate he wanted to see a fountain. Staff does believe a fountain would help to enliven the public space and add an element of interest and focus. This comment has been supported by Dover Kohl's [& Partners] office. You have their comments before you as well. In addition, there's some other changes to the plaza area that Staff has made; there's a graphic there and I can go through those, but they are in your Staff Report." Mayor Bush opened the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item No one spoke. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 26, 2006 PAGE 13 OF 31 Mayor Bush closed the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item. Discussion. Commissioner Miller suggested, "I would encourage the Aesthetic Review - if they want to put in a nice sculpture also in addition to the fountain, I think that would be great, but I think fountains in a setting like this is one of those things that make it nice for people to walk down the street. It's cooler around the fountain -people sit around in chairs and talk. Around sculptures that I have seen, it doesn't encourage people to come in and enjoy the area, whereas fountains do." Commissioner Miller then noted, "I would like to hope that it would be both a fountain and a nice sculpture." Commissioner McGinnis remarked, "I agree." Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "I wanted to comment that - in the Town Center Code, buildings are required to be no more than ten foot (10') from the right-of--way line as the build-to line and in this particular case because the client of the Applicant was very dead set on this building being located back from [State Road] 434, Staff determined, in discussions with Dover Kohl, that if they were to put in a public plaza area to the front of the building, that would be a way that we could justify having the building set back from the street. Because it is a deviation from the Code and so it was a give and take kind of situation, that the Applicant would then provide a plaza. In order to do a plaza. that really creates a very nice people place, it needs to have a fountain. And, as far as the pump goes, if it is a small fountain and it's raised it could be some kind of a raised situation where the pump could actually be below the fountain." Commissioner Joanne M. Krebs stated, "I do agree with Commissioner Miller, I do believe that you are right and you, Eloise (Sahlstrom), that we need something like a fountain - I like those chasing fountains -you've seen them at Disney [World]. I was just wondering about the color burgundy, it is kind of tiring. Is there another color that they might think of using?" Commissioner Krebs added, "It would be nice - if there was some kind of sculpture - and a fountain around it where people could throw in coins -like a wishing well." Discussion. Mayor Bush introduced former Mayor Paul P. Partyka. Mr. Paul P. Parryka, 934 Contravest Lane, Winter Springs, Florida: introduced himself as a partner and his associates in the audience. Mr. Partyka presented a brief background on the project. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 26, 2006 PAGE 14 OF 31 Mr. Pariyka began by stating, "Let me just go (1) through (9) on the Findings. On the first one, this talks to the seat situation. And all that is, is there was a slight crust to that, literally inches. And, the whole reason for that is that the rain would not settle on the seating area. It was meant to keep the rain off and not necessarily keep it flat because then it wouldn't dry as much. Whatever it is, whether it's flat, it has to have some kind of slant to it. So, this is minor and we thought it would be good. And, in addition to that, if anybody ever wanted to sleep on it in the evenings, they'd roll off. So, I think we're okay. But, that was the reason for that. We'd go either way, but the key is to have some kind of slant to that. In terms of number (2), placing the four (4) trees at the raised planters -with seat walls, we thought that the best thing for the trees was to put them in the ground and that would enhance the tree life and would not be a problem, especially under the dry conditions and architecturally it was the best thing to do. We agreed with number (3); we agreed with number (4); we agreed with number (5); we agreed with number (6). There's a Plan that our Architect had brought in that outlined again where those columns are. They've always been there, but you just couldn't see it as clearly. We do have some questions on number (7) and we're not sure what that really means. This was the Plan that was preliminarily Approved and we want to make sure that that's consistent with what this statement is. In terms of number (8), we've sent that into Randy (Stevenson, ASLA, Director, Community Development Department) over the weekend and we agree, it's going to be consistent with this Town Center. Number (9), at this point in time, and based on what was said earlier, the ownership has talked on this property in terms of fountain or sculpture. From a fountain standpoint, these are Lawyers and several things; number one (1), is this project is very expensive and the cost of that fountain would be extremely high relative to where we are right now; number two (2), not only there is a slight problem in terms of the capital cost of building it, but the bigger cost is the on-going operational costs of maintenance issues; and number three (3), when you're dealing with Lawyers, they're always thinking about liabilities and from the insurance and liability standpoint, it's very expensive and they don't want to do that in the long run." Mr. Partyka added, "And number (10), we agree with that in terms of the Developer's Agreement. So, I'll try to summarize the key points. We think this is a terrific project, it's a Class `A' project. No building's going to be like this in the City. From a cost stand~JOint or the way it's going to be done. The Law Firm is going to take the entire third (3`) floor, and our hope is with the interest that we've been generating with the type of clients that we want, we hope to be to Building 2 very quickly. At least that's the plan." Discussion. C[TY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 26, 2006 PAGE t S OF 31 Commissioner McGinnis stated, "As much as I would like to see a fountain there, I would hate to compromise to be a puny fountain that would be a terrible mistake. So, are you saying `No fountain'? That your backers have said `Absolutely no fountain', go to City Hall, and see what you can do?" Mr. Partyka replied, "No, no we have the key people here. Mr. Partyka added, "I won't make that decision." Further discussion. Manager McLemore stated, "Amenities like this, they're easy to take out, but I want to go back again and just reiterate what you heazd. You know, you all made a pledge to us to make this apeople-plaza. You need to follow through on that. Again, it doesn't have to be a fountain, but something that makes it a special place for the public." Deputy Mayor Blake commented, "I agree very much with what the Manager just said. I don't think it's really the Commission's job to sit up here and say it has to be a fountain and here is what it has to look like. What I am much more interested in is the quality level that has built into this people space." With further discussion, Deputy Mayor Blake stated, "My concern is that this structure and the space before it, provide a level of quality that we're trying to show in the City of Winter Springs. And, if that's a fountain, make it a really nice fountain. If it's not going to be a really nice fountain, let's find another way to create value. I think that is what is more important to this Commission." Deputy Mayor Blake added, "There is a lot of fountains here -we're not trying to be the City of fountains, I don't think. Just the main thing is quality; make sure it's at the right level; and make sure it's warm and inviting." Commissioner Krebs noted, "I heard three (3) Commissioners really supported a fountain there." Tape 2/Side A Furthermore, Commissioner Krebs stated, "I do care whether it is a fountain or not, so, I would like you to put a fountain there." Commissioner McGinnis stated, "I would like to see you come back -discuss the fountain, but also I am open to an option of a magnificent sculpture." Deputy Mayor Blake left the Commission Chambers at 8: 08 p. m. "TABLE THE ITEM." MAYOR BUSH STATED, "MOTION TO TABLE BY COMMISSIONER MILLER I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KREBS." DISCUSSION. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 26, 2006 PAGE 16 OF 31 VOTE: COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: ABSENT FOR VOTE COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Bush called a recess at 8:10 p. m. Mayor Bush called the Meeting back to Order at 8:16 p. m. C ~ 7"E M ~ ~ 1 n.- u En ~ N P~4~ ~ Z o~ REGULAR AGENDA REGULAR 300, Office Of The City Clerk Requests That Mayor John F. Bush Or A Member Of The City Commission Make An Appointment To Fill A Vacancy On The Code Enforcement Board. MAYOR BUSH STATED, "I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE SHERRI MOORE FOR THE POSITION ON THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD." "I MOVE THE MAYOR'S DESIRE." MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE. MAYOR BUSH REMARKED, "COMMISSIONER BLAKE NOMINATED SHERRI MOORE FOR THE POSITION ON CODE ENFORCEMENT [BOARD]." Deputy Mayor Blake stated, "Point Of Order" and stated, "Mr. Attorney, our Charter suggests the Mayor doesn't Vote but for a Tie, yet the Mayor has certain Appointments to certain Boards. How can the Mayor Appoint somebody to a Board if the Mayor is unable to Vote, but for the case of a Tie? Does the Mayor's Appointment require a Motion, or does it merely require Ratification? " Attorney Garganese stated, "I think the Mayor - he can recommend or Nominate somebody to serve, but it has to be approved by the City Commission pursuant to the City Code [Section] 2-42." Deputy Mayor Blake asked, "So, the question is, does there need to be a Motion and a Second for the Mayor's Appointment to be considered? Or, does the Mayor's Nomination then require a Vote?" Attorney Garganese stated, "Parliamentary procedure -would require a Motion by - a Commissioner and a Second to get the Mayor's Nomination on the floor." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 26, 2006 PAGE 20 OF 31 VOTE: COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE MOTION CARRIED. DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE STATED, "I WILL - POSTPONE THE APPOINTMENT ON THE BOWS (BEAUTIFICATION OF WINTER SPRINGS ADVISORY [BOARD]) BOARD." Deputy Mayor Blake stated, "I am actually leaving Office pretty soon and I just made an Appointment that will go out three (3) years into whoever fills this Seat, their Term of Office. I think it is very appropriate if we look at the way that we Appoint our Board Members." Furthermore, Deputy Mayor Blake noted, "I think we need to restructure the way we Appoint all of our Boazd Members so that they coincide with the Seats who Appoint them." Commissioner Miller stated, "I think we should just leave it the way it is." Commissioner McGinnis stated, "I was going to say, this has been discussed before. It has been dealt with before and the decision was made to just leave it like it is." Commissioner Krebs stated, "I would like to remind Commissioner Blake that I trust his judgment, but also keep in mind that when you make your Appointment, the rest of us Ratify it. So, we're all actually agreeing with you and there's usually a few of us still left on the Board at that time. So, I think we should leave it." • • AGENDA NOTE: THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA ITEM WAS AGAIN DISCUSSED, AS DOCUMENTED. • • PUBLIC HEARINGS PUBLIC HEARINGS 204. Community Development Department -Planning Division Requests The City Commission Hold A Public Hearing For The Aesthetic Review For West End Offices Located On State Road 434 In The Town Center. MAYOR BUSH STATED, "MOTION TO REMOVE FROM THE TABLE BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KREBS." DISCUSSION. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 26, 2006 PAGE 21 OF 31 VOTE: DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Partyka stated, "I think that we may be able to do something here tonight. Number one -the fountain was not something that we said we would do. It was something that we would consider. So, we're going to do that. More importantly, I think, we have a potential solution to this, and that's an outcome of discussions with Ron [McLemore], Eloise [Sahlstrom], and Randy [Stevenson] and also with the ownership here and the Architect." Mr. Russ Suddeth, 1. Raymond Construction Corporation, 46S West Warren Avenue, Longwood, Florida: stated, "On this particular building, the ownership elected to preserve the design intent that Mr. Starmer and Ranaldi put forth with the renderings. So, I did not attack or I did not focus any efforts on any exterior elements from a value engineering standpoint. Anything that was looked at for cost savings was on the inside components, the electrical systems, mechanical systems. So, nothing really has been changed or valued engineered, if you will. This is a first rate project. The Starmer Ranaldi [Planning and Architecture Inc] has specified top of the line materials with the railings, the balcony features, the standing seam roof. It's a solid quality construction, the structure will be made out of tilt-wall, which is solid seven and quarter inch (71/4) panels. The glazing in itself is one inch (1") insulated glass for sound proofing. It's not a case where the owners come in there with a hatchet to cut the components. They want the first rate, Class A office project which they've gotten. Having been involved with several office construction projects -around the state and locally here, I can attest to the fact that this building from a construction cost standpoint, of course some of that is attributed to the rising construction costs, it is a tad more than what you see from a construction standpoint over at the Town Center. So, those things, they haven't wielded the value engineering ax, and they've kept and preserved the design intent." Manager McLemore asked, "How long will it take to construct this building?" Mr. Suddeth replied, "Our timeline for, assuming that the permits come in place and the approvals are in place, we are hoping to break ground August-ish and have it ready for a shell completion in late 2006, early 2007, ready for build outs." Commissioner Krebs asked Mr. Partyka regarding his opening statement, "I was going to try to pin you down when you said -are you considering a fountain or are you doing a fountain?" CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -TUNE 26, 2006 PAGE 22 OF 31 Mr. Partyka replied, "Right now it's under consideration right now; and we also have some other comments that was given to us with Ron [McLemoreJ, and with Randy [Stevenson], and Eloise [Sahlstrom] that may ultimately get to where you want, which is a nice place and a people gathering place which is what we want also." Mr. Carl Napolitano, Allen, Dyer, Doppelt, Milbrath & Gilchrist, P.A., 255 South Orange Avenue, Suite 1401, Orlando, Florida: commented, "I'm one of the partners and one of the Managing Partners in the development of this office building. We've been looking for an office space for over a year and we started in October to give consideration to this particulaz site and we developed our team with Russ (Suddeth), Paul (Partyka), Bill Starmer and his group, and have given it serious attention. What's coming through or what came through more cleazly at this Meeting was that there's an interest on the part of the City to create a pleasant place and an inviting place for the public to sit and talk and read and whatever; and that's always been our intention. And, we thought we were doing that with what the Architect had done in the sense of the image that's being created in the structure of the building; the evaluation, the rounds, comfortable features and so on. At the break, we talked about in addition to what we have is about a hundred and sixty feet (160'), maybe more, of seating wall. In addition, to the seating wall, it was pointed out that it might be more inviting if we added some seating around -four (4) of the trees which we're more than happy to do if that's what enhances, or further enhances the attraction for the public to sit there. But, I have to contradict Paul (Partyka), we've given serious thought to a fountain and we are not planning to build a fountain. We're also not planning to put in a sculpture." Mr. Napolitano added, "With regazd to a fountain, it's not only the capital cost; and I've had experience with owning fountains and having to close them down. But, it's the maintenance, as Mr. Gilmore pointed out, but more than that, it's the liability that we're concerned about; and the feedback that I'm getting from my Insurance Agent is the difficulty in getting insurance for a building anyway. And, I don't want to create attractive nuisances from the insurance point of view, not from the aesthetic point of view. But, we think we've created an aesthetically pleasing facility. We think we've invited the public to mill azound and talk and take their break. We've created an image that we're proud of; and I think that we can present this with the modification of the seating wall and say that that's our public place in our plaza." With discussion on this project and public space, sculptures, and fountains, Commissioner McGinnis stated, "You might want to contact Villagio's. Find out who their Insurance carrier is; they have a fountain." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 26, 2006 PAGE 23 OF 31 Commissioner Krebs stated, "You are right, your idea, isn't my idea. But, that building, that place, that plaza, that's not inviting. It looks like a couple of colors of bricks and a few trees. There's no color, there's nothing that says, "Come and sit'. There's nothing that says stay awhile or walk slow. I would walk right past that building." Mr. Napolitano said, "The building is an office building. The plaza is what's inviting people to sit." Furthermore, Commissioner Krebs stated, "To me that looks like a bunch of trees and - if you're saying there's going to be seats there, I would have to see it - I don't think seats are the answer around trees - I think this is going to look like you're boxing it in - I think you need something of interest there. I don't think it is there yet." Discussion. Tape 2/Side B Further discussion followed on this proposed project, public space, and a quality fountain. "MOTION TO ADJOURN. IT IS AFTER NINE O'CLOCK." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KREBS. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Commissioner Miller stated, "I just wanted to point out that if we accept this Aesthetic Review here this evening, that's what the building is going to look like. There won't be a fountain, there won't be a sculpture, there won't be anything. It will look actually the way it is portrayed right there with the difference of the Elevation which is actually quite little things that would enclose the trees where people could sit on it; and that's it. So, for that reason I hope we -push for the fountain, water feature out there because Ithink - it would be sad if we don't ask for that." "I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE AESTHETIC REVIEW FOR THE WEST END OFFICES LOCATED ON [STATE ROAD] 434 IN THE TOWN CENTER, INCORPORATING STAFF'S FINDINGS (1) - (10) WITH THE EXCEPTION OF NUMBER (1) -NUMBER (1) IS TO REVISE THAT THE SEAT WALL WOULD HAVE TO BE FLAT TO ACCOMMODATE SEATING. I THINK IT SHOULD ACCOMMODATE SEATING, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE IT NECESSARILY HAS TO BE FLAT. AND SECONDLY, NUMBER 9, `THE FOUNTAIN AREA OR SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF SCULPTURE MUST BE INCLUDED' THAT WOULD BE AMENDED TO READ THAT THERE IS AN `AREA OF SIGNIFICANT VALUE THAT IS CREATED IN THE PUBLIC SPACE, ALONG [STATE ROAD] 434." MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. DISCUSSION. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 26, 2006 PAGE 24 OF 31 COMMISSIONER MILLER STATED, "I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE AREA OF SIGNIFICANT VALUE IN THE PLAZA INCLUDES - A WATER FEATURE OF SOME FORM, SUCH AS A FOUNTAIN." AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MILLER. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KREBS. DISCUSSION. VOTE: (ON THE AMENDMENT) COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER GILMORE: NAY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: NAY COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: NAY MOTION DID NOT CARRY. VOTE: (ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION) DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE COMMISSIONER MILLER: NAY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE COMMISSIOENR KREBS: NAY MOTION CARRIED. • • AGENDA NOTE: THE FOLLOWING REGULAR AGENDA ITEM WAS DISCUSSED NEXT, AS DOCUMENTED. • • REGULAR REGULAR 303. Community Development Department Requests, In Accordance With Emergency Ordinance 2006-08 [The Community Development Department Requests], That The City Commission Consider An Appeal Of A Staff Decision To Deny A Building Permit On The Basis Of Neighborhood Compatibility And Harmony Involving A Proposed Single Story Garage Attached To The House By A Breezeway At 1211 Deer Run In Unit 4 Of The Tuscawilla Planned Unit Development. Mr. Randy Stevenson stated, "Staff has reviewed the Application for the Building Permit in accordance with City Code and with the Criteria set forth in Ordinance 2006-08 and has denied the issuance of the Permit based upon the location of the garage door facing the street. A great majority of garages in this neighborhood are side loaded." Continuing, Mr. Stevenson noted, "Staff denied the request on June 19th, because it was not compatible and not in harmony with the existing single-family residence in the surrounding neighborhood. The Property Owner filed a timely notice of Appeal on June 21s1i [2006]. ATTACHMENT D COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 306 Consent Information Public Hearin Re ular X December 11, 2006 Meeting MGR. ~/~ /De t. REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the Commission consider the proposed Development Agreement for the West End Professional Center. The West End Professional Center is located on the south side of S.R. 434, immediately west of Jesup's Reserve in the Town Center. PURPOSE: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the Commission to consider the development agreement for the West End Professional Center. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Chapter 166, Florida Statutes Development Agreement (DA) & Modifications Chapter 5, City Code Chapter 9, City Code. Town Center District Code (sections 20-320 thru 20-327). CHRONOLOGY: February 27, 2006 -City Commission approval of the conceptual development plan for the West End Center. June 26, 2006 -City Commission Aesthetic Review Approval (subject to Staff s findings) August 14, 2006 -City Commission approved final engineering for Phase I CONSIDERATIONS: The West End Professional Center is located on 2.65 acres in the Town Center district, on the south side of S.R. 434, across from City Hall and immediately west of Jesup's Reserve. Phase I consists of one 24,390 square foot three-story professional office building, a parking area containing 105 parking spaces, a stormwater management system, utilities, landscaping, December 11, 2006 Regular Item 306 Page 2 of 3 irrigation, hardscaping, engineering plans. and other associated improvements as shown on the attached final Phase II consists of a second 24,390 square foot professional office building and 23 additional parking spaces. At buildout of both phases, there will be a total of 131 parking spaces serving 48,780 square feet of professional office space, for an overall parking ratio of 2.67 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross building area. The following items are addressed as part of the proposed Development Agreement: 1. The proposed building is located approximately 45-feet from the S.R. 434 right-of--way line with a pedestrian plaza located between the building and the right-of--way and no frontage road. This deviates from Section 20-325 (c) (8}, which requires the typical build-to line to be at the right-of--way of a frontage road parallel to S.R. 434. 2. The public sidewalk along the property frontage shall be located onsite in the plaza area, with sidewalk connections to the existing sidewalks at both ends of the property. The plaza area shall be maintained in perpetuity as fully accessible to the general public. 3. The design of seat walls are intended to be comfortable for sitting leisurely for extended periods of time, and as such will be maintained for these public purposes. 4. The wall at the northeast corner shall connect to and be coordinated with the proposed Jesup's Reserve wall. 5. The developer is responsible for obtaining permission from Levitt & Sons to construct the improvements shown on Levitt's property along the eastern property boundary. 6. The Developer's Agreement shall provide permission from the City for the developer to utilize the existing 30-foot wide City right-of--way along the southern property boundary for parking and the stormwater pond. 7. Retaining walls may be utilized at the pond perimeter in lieu of 4:1 side slopes as required by Section 9-241.d.2. FDOT does not require aright-turn deceleration lane, this will deviate from Section 9- 206.a and is recorded as part of the proposed Developer's Agreement. 9. Old Farm Road (Jesup's Reserve} shall be permitted to terminate at the West End Center parking area. 10. Installation and ongoing maintenance of the trees in the plaza area shall be to the City's satisfaction, and such trees shall be subject to replacement if they diminish in condition. 2 December 11, 2006 Regular Item 306 Page 3 of 3 FINDINGS: 1. The proposed development is located within the City of Winter Springs Town Center. 2. Deviations from the Code have been addressed in the proposed Development Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Commission approve the proposed Development Agreement for the West End Professional Center. ATTACHMENTS: A -Development Agreement B -Final Engineering/Site Plan COMMISSION ACTION: 3 - ~ - ..-, I , R~ns1Ei a __. ~ _. - _. - -----.. ~._ ..-.... ~~ -_ ~: PHASE II PHA5E1 I SEE ARCHi1ECNRAI PIAN ~ FOR CWRTYARD LAYOUT ~ saN slap . 5 9DEVNA (MAi ~ ) x ]5lT.! Q OM V`. N ]55)N o _~. - _ _ _ __ _ _ ~ ~y ~ rr ~.z ~~ .. ~ \ t ~, ~ .. - uy _ ...y w~.~,.R. , _ r r ~~ .. _ _ .. __... ~ ., . - _ -,.. ~ .. ~ ~ _ ~j _ 1 3i ~€ 1 / ~ . . ~.:. '- I ._ c ; 1 CRAPIRC SCALE gf F~[ 3. -,a Naos.TS - / _ / ~ __ 1 ' ~ i irl Km )a Ia ~, ~ 0 O - b ~ ~ Binc B'.~A+IC I tGY I ~ ~ Y ' :'. \ .I 7 _, f B` ~ ~ -- GEOMETRY NOTFS: s ~ A i. THREE (]) FOOT CURB iRAN900NS MALL BE FRONDED AT ALL CURB 1ERYINATIONS ANO ORCP CURB INTERFACES ~~ . 2. DETECTABLE SURFACE ON CDRB RAMP WALKING SURFACE (FULL WID1H ANO DEP1M) SNALL BE FDOT STANDARD FOR DETECTABLE WARMNG ON ~' \ 1 t _ CURB RAMP (SEE 511E DETAIL SHEET 0600) - ..- ~ I I 6 AA VRW MOCw111 w~ub E i. 4 __ ~ . r ~ . . _ ~ ':1. ._~ 5 '. f . . ~ ~ .. ' - ,p ~ a ' ~ TnTa 69R60.b0'W y +I.aT ~~ _ x9RW~OD W i N(~ 9 L w ~ O ° ` T°P .~~ " . t o1 W ~ ~ '. . ~ 3 1 _~ u ' ~ w A . W ,~ 3 E 686.5] ~ ?~~ m S ' .. ~~ ~ ~~~p8 'P~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ t V "S ~, U' Z T ~.. . R ~ ~ . ~ a ~ ~: e cT+P. ~ > ~„~ of ~ --- N w ~.~` 1 u 1a ' w o ~ ~.. 612]0 E 1 I ~ p . ~ CD w.t~--- I ' x..s~ ,1 I ~I - o„TA a~] "1... K ~~ N .66 ~. k~ i ET DETENTION I ~•~ I _ ~ _ ~~ PHASE III PHASE I ~ I' osoz6 __ ~~i,..l..~ ;1 '~.. c1 .~ '\ \ ~~ CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA M[NUTES CITY COMMIS510N REGULAR MEETING -DECEMBER 1 !, 2006 PAGE l2 OF 29 REGULAR 306. Community Development Department Requests The City Commission Consider The Proposed Development Agreement For The West End Professional Center. The West End Professional Center Is Located On The South Side Of State Road 434, Immediately West Of Jesup's Reserve In The Town Center. Mr. Stevenson introduced this Agenda Item. Commissioner Gilmore said, "There is going to be a wall there. How high?" Mr. Stevenson said, "I believe it's six feet (6')." Commissioner Gilmore added, "This will meet their requirements?" Mr. Stevenson said, "Yes." Commissioner McGinnis briefly spoke for the Record on working on sculptures. Mr. Stevenson said, "One (I) item I would like to mention that was inadvertently, well, it was left off of your copy - in addition to the ten (10) items that we've talked about, there's an added section 21. that basically speaks to the requirement for the utilities along [State Road] 434 to be placed underground. Those overhead utilities will be placed underground and that is covered in the Development Agreement." Mayor Bush asked, "Is there anything in the Agreement, Randy [Stevenson] that is going to address the dust that is kicked up by construction as it blows into the Tusca (Tuscawilla) Trails property?" Mr. Stevenson replied, "That's probably not an item for the Development Agreement, Mayor, but it would be an item for construction management out there, once construction does start; and they probably already have some of that, as you understand, a lot of the site work on this property has already begun." Tape 2lSide B Continuing, Mr. Stevenson said, "Then the wall, this actual seat wall comes around and actually goes down the entrance here so the actual separation is this much, rather than - it appears - we have walls here and between the seat wall and the building is landscaping." Commissioner Miller said, "One (1) of the things that we did discuss was putting seat walls around each of these openings also, is that correct? Around the tree openings?" Mr. Stevenson said, "I don't believe it's around every one. I think it's around these out here and then seat wall goes around here." Commissioner Miller noted, "I thought we agreed we would put them around the trees." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -DECEMBER 11, 2006 PAGE 13 OF 29 Furthermore, Commissioner Miller stated, "As I recall, it was agreed -that we wouldn't require them to put in fountains -and that they would do the seat walls; so I don't recall any of those openings being exempt from the seat wall." Mr. Stevenson said, "I will have to go back and look at the Final Engineering that was approved." Additionally, Mr. Stevenson remarked, "Do you want us to pull it up or just make it a condition of Approval that they are all a seat wall." Commissioner Miller noted, "They all have to have seat walls -all the openings. I understand they are only building one building to start, but -when the first one is done, it should have a seat wall around each of the tree openings." Mr. Stevenson commented, "Okay." Discussion. Commissioner Rick Brown inquired about the wall in the back "Dividing this property from Tuskawilla Trails? Will it be up before construction?" With further comments, Commissioner Brown then said, "But, there is going to be some kind of barrier during construction?" Mr. Fields stated, "Actually there is now. And, they've agreed to leave the existing fence up throughout construction and then -only fill when they're ready for the brick wall..." Mr. Stevenson added, "...Will the fence come down?" "I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE SEAT WALLS ON -ALL OF THE TREES -ALL SIX (6) DEPICTED ON THAT GRAPHIC THERE." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MILLER. MAYOR BUSH NOTED, "SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GILMORE." DISCUSSION. VOTE: COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE MOTION CARRIED. REGULAR 308. Community Development Department -City Arborist Recommends The City Commission Consider The Request Of Conraj Letson Of 108 Atrium Court To Remove (1) One Specimen Tree Located On The Resident's Private Lot. Discussion. ATTACHMENT E January 8, 2007 City of Winter Springs Regular Commission !Meeting 010807 Consent_4l5_ West_End_Development_Amendment COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 415 Consent X Informational Public Hearin Re ular January 8, 2007 Regular Meeting Mgr. / Dept. Authorization REQUEST: The City Manager requesting the City Commission to approve the First Amendment to the West End Professional Center One, LLP, Development Agreement with the City. PURPOSE: This agenda item is needed to memorialize West End's options to construct two additional seat walls around trees located in front of the West End Office Building, or in the alternative choice of West End to install a landscape architectural feature, or urban art feature in the front entranceway to the building. CONSIDERATIONS: At the December 11, 2006 Commission Meeting the Commission reviewed the Development Agreement for the construction of the West End Office Project on S.R. 434 in the Town Center. As shown in Attachment B of this Agenda Item, the plans associated with the project provided for four seat walls around the trees located in front of the building, and no seat walls around the two interior most trees of the plaza. This design was consistent with approvals provided by the Conunission in the June 26, 2006 Aesthetic Review Hearing and the August 4, 2006 Final Engineering Hearing. At the December 11, 2006 Development Agreement Hearing meeting the question was raised as to a previous Commission directive regarding seat walls around all six tree positions in front of the office building. The consensus was that the Commission directed seat walls to be built around all six tree positions. This consensus was incorrect. Following the December 11, 2006 meeting, at the request of the developer the staff performed an extensive review of the record of the project which clearly demonstrated the following: Page 1 of 3 1. At the June 26, 2006 Aesthetic Review Hearing the staff recommended that seat walls be installed around four of the six tree positions located in the plaza in front of the building, and that seat walls not be installed azound the two interior most tree positions. The purpose of leaving the two interior most tree positions without seat walls was related to another staff recommendation calling for an urban art or fountain type feature in front of the building. Related to this recommendation staff believed that seat walls around the two interior most tree positions would obstruct the view of the urban art or fountain feature. If urban art or a fountain feature were not to be approved then staff desired seat walls to be installed around the two interior most tree positions, as well as the other four tree positions. 2. At the August 14, 2006 Final Engineering Hearing the Commission agreed that the developer would not be required to install the fountain or the urban art feature, and that the developer would only be required to install four seat walls, thus eliminating the requirement for the seat walls around the two interior most tree positions. 3. In conclusion, the Commission's action taken at the December 11, 2006 meeting requiring the six seat walls was based upon flawed information resulting in a Commission action that was inconsistent with the previous Commission actions of the June 26, 2006 Aesthetic Review Hearing, and the August 14, 2006 Final Engineering Hearing. To resolve the conflicting actions the City Manager requested West End Representatives to voluntarily comply with the action of the Commission taken at the Development Agreement Hearing on December 11, 2006 requiring six seat walls to be installed as a matter of good will on the part of the Developer. The Developer agreed with two caveats as follows: 1. West End would reserve the option to either build six seat walls, or in the alternative to build four seat walls and an urban art feature. If the urban art feature is installed, the urban art feature would be located generally center of the entrance to the building, and the two seat walls around the interior most tree positions would be eliminated. This would be consistent with staff's recommendations. 2. If West End chooses to install the urban art feature, the City would not interfere with West Ends choice of urban art. FUNDING: Not Applicable RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff is recommending that the City Commission adopt Amendment One (1) to the West End Professional Center One, LLP to cure inconsistent action of the Commission caused by flawed information at the December 11, 2006 Final Development Agreement Hearing by permitting West End Office Inc. to install six seat walls around the six tree positions located in front of the West End Office Building located on S.R. 434 in the Winter Springs Town Center, or in the Page 2 of 3 alternative at the choice of West End, to install an urban art feature in the general location of the center of the entranceway to the building and four seat walls around the four outer most tree positions of the plaza located in front of the building, and that the design of the urban art feature would be solely the choice of West End. ATTACIIMENTS: A. First Amendment to the West End Development Agreement. B. June 26, 2006 Public Hearing Item 204 West End Office Building Graphic. COMIVIISSION ACTION: Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT A FIRST MODIFICATION OF BINDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS FIRST MODIFICATION OF BINDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, dated December 11, 2006 ("First Modification") is made and executed this day of , 2007, by and between the CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, a Florida Municipal Corporation (the "City"), whose address is 1126 East S.R. 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708, and WEST END PROFESSIONAL CENTER ONE, LLP, a Florida limited liability company ("West End"), and CHRISTOPHER F. REGAN ("Regan"}, whose address is 225 S. Orange Avenue, Suite 1401, Florida 3280]. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developer and City previously entered into a Binding Development Agreement, dated December 11, 2006 ("Agreement"}; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement as provided hereunder. Paragraph 5(D) is hereby amended to add the following second sentence: However, at the Developer's option, the Developer may substitute the middle two (2) seat walls with a significant sculpture or fountain at the front entrance of the building. 2. All other provisions of the Agreement not amended by this First Modification shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have hereunto set their hands and seal on the date first above „Witten. Sig~ied, sealed a»d delivered iu the presence of Witnesses: By: Print: sy: Print: STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF By: CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, a Florida municipal corporation John F. Bush, Mayor The foregoing instrument was aclrnowledged before me this day of , 2007, by as of the City of Winter Springs, who is personally ]mown to me, or has produced the following identification: NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida By: Frint: My Commission Expires: ATTACHMENT A IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have hereunto set their hands and seal on the date first above written. Sig~ted, sealed a~:d delivered in t)te presence of• Witness ~~~ B : Y ~ Print: v 1~ By: r d Print: n STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF WEST END PROFESSIONAL CENTER ONE, LLP., a Flo~lbnlted ifab[lity,~rt~rship By: I~~ Print: Christoucr F. Reran Title: Manag~ne Partner ~~ z The foregoing instrument was aclrnowledged before me this ~ i ~, , . day of 2~~~ by Christopher F. Regan as Managing Partner of WEST END PROFESSIONAL CENTER ONE, LLP, who is personally irnown to me, or has produced the following identification: NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida By: Print' My Commission Expires: Attachments Exhibit A -Property ~p~,i rtes EXPIRES: Jmumy L 2oto ea~etenBerryv~eec CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING-JANUARY 8, 2007 PAGE 22 OF 31 CONSENT 411. Utility Department Requesting Permission To Purchase (1) Ford F-250 (3/4 Ton Pickup Truck, 4x2) By Piggybacking Off Of Florida Sheriff s Association Bid #06-14-0821 With Duval Ford. No discussion. CONSENT 412. Public Works Department Requesting Approval To Purchase From The Federal General Services Administration (GSA) Contract A Pump To Be Used For Emergency Lowering Of Ponds And Ground Dewatering. There was no discussion on this Agenda Item. CONSENT 413. Office Of The City Clerk Requesting Approval Of The December 11, 2006 Regular City Commission Meeting Minutes. This Agenda Item was not discussed. CONSENT 414. Office Of The City Manager Requesting That The City Commission Consider Endorsing City Of Sanford Commission Member, The Honorable Art Woodruff, To Continue Serving On The Seminole County Expressway Authority (SCEA), In Coordination With The Council Of Local Governments In Seminole County's (CALNO) Recommendation No discussion. CONSENT ,_,_,_` 415. Office Of The City Manager Requesting The City Commission To Approve The First Amendment To The West End Professional Center One, LLP, Development Agreement With The City. There was no discussion on this Agenda Item.