Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 02 12 Regular 303 Vistawilla Office Center Buffer Wall CITY COMMISSION February 12, 2007 Meeting Regular ITEM 303 MGR. /Dept. REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the City Commission consider the proposed buffer wall (between the rear of the site and the adjacent Eagles Watch Phase II residential subdivision) modification for the Vistawilla Office Center, located on the south side of SR 434, just west ofthe Greeneway interchange. PURPOSE: To consider a request to allow the required 6' masonry wall along that portion of the rear of the site (southern border) that is not within a wetland to be constructed of steel reinforced polystyrene with a yz" thick coat of acrylic modified stucco, at the 9.17 acre Vistawilla Office Center within the Tuscawilla Planned Unit Development (PUD). APPLICABLE LAW: Chapter 166, Florida Statutes. Development Agreement (DA) & Modifications Chapter 9 (Code). Land Development. Chapter 20 (Code). Zoning. CONSIDERATIONS: The site is subject to the SR 434 New Development Overlay Zoning District regulations (sections 20-463 through 20-474) as well as an existing development agreement, 3 modification agreements, a settlement agreement, and 2 approved site plans. The attached 1998 development agreement between the City and Robert Yeager, which is binding upon and which runs with the land (regardless of ownership), requires a "six foot masonry wall at or along the rear (south) boundary of the property." Section 3.4 further states that "Failure of the Property Owner or his assigns to install the landscaping and six (6') masonry wall (as lots are developed), agreed to and required by this Agreement shall be a breach of this Agreement and shall February 12,2006 Regular Agenda Item 303 Page 2 of 3 constitute a basis authorizing of the City to withhold issuance of permits, and/or certificates of occupancy, until the landscaping and wall construction obligations imposed by this Agreement are fully complied with." Additionally, the site plan approved on January 23,2006, depicted a detail for the 6' tall masonry wall. An associated development agreement modification approved at that same meeting exempted the developer from constructing the required wall through the wetlands. The City's consulting engineer opined in the attached February 2,2007, letter against allowing the proposed foam wall, even with a 12" thick coating, in this area with an anticipated high activity. If the Commission were to agree in concept to the applicant's proposal, the development agreement and approved engineering plans must be modified to address the deviation. Section 20-417 of the Code requires "an opaque wall of six (6) feet in height along the full length of the property line between such development or redevelopment and the adjacent single family zoing district or use... The wall shall be constructed of concrete block, brick or other durable material(wood not allowed) which is compatible with the surrounding area, and acceptable to the development review committee as to compatibility, design, and compliance with this section and the City Code." Staff further believes that any such finding in favor of the foam wall should be subsequent to a Commission determination that the steel reinforced foam wall is consistent with the Code's Section 20-417 "other durable material" requirement. Staffhas notified the City Attorney. Depending upon the Commission's direction, staff will work with the applicant to facilitate the requested changes to the existing documents. FINDINGS: 1. The Vistawilla Office site is located on the south side of SR 434, west of the Greeneway interchange and east of the Hess gas station, within both the Commercial portion of the Tuscawilla PUD and within the SR 434 New Development Overlay Zoning District. 2. The site is subject to a 1998 development agreement, approved site plans, and development agreement modifications. 3. The proposed wall modification would require modifying the Development Agreement and site plan. 4. The City's consulting engineer has opined against allowing the steel enforced foam wall, even with a 12" thick modified stucco covering. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Commission deny the applicant's request to provide the proposed steel reinforced foam wall with a modified stucco covering (in lieu of a 6' masonry wall) between the Vistawilla Office site and the adjacent Eagles Watch Phase II single family residential subdivision. February 12, 2006 Regular Agenda Item 303 Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENTS: A 1998 Development Agreement (see sections 3.3 and 3.4 at top of page 5) B. Concrete Block Wall diagram from approved plans (sheet C-10) C. February 2, 2007 letter from CPR Engineers, Inc. & Viking Wall detail CITY COMMISSION ACTION: ATTACHMENT A DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT TUSCAWILLA TRACT 15 PARCEL 1-B This DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT by and between Robert Yeager, TRUSTE~ M1 (hereinafter called "Property Owner") and the City of Winter Springs, a Florida municipal corporatiofi> (hereinafter called "the City") is entered into pursuant to City Code, and is intended to constitute a covenant covering the property descnbed herein. This Agreement is based on the following premises: Whereas, the real property described herein as Parcel 1B of Tract 15 of the TuscawiUa P.U.D., further described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto is located within the City limits of the City; .. and Whereas, the real property is subject to certain land development regulations of the City, including the "S.R 434 Corridor Vision Plan: New Development Area" (Ordinance No. 675 of the City); and (.A,) Whereas, the real property is subject to a Settlement Agreement set forth in Ordinance 489 - and recorded at Official Records Book 2277, pages 0464 through 0500, Public Records of Seminole County, Florida (hereinafter call lithe Settlement Agreement"); and Whereas, parties concur that this Agreement deals with issues separate from the issues addressed in said Settlement Agreement, and this Agreement should beoonstrued as consistent with ~ the said Settlement Agreement, and in the ev~nt of conflict between the terms of this Agreement and ~ the Settlement Agreement, the Settlement Agreement shall prevail; and Whereas, this property has received a Certificate of Vested Rights Special Use Permit from the City on August 4, i993, which is in full force and effect, and this Agreement s~all not cause to affect the vesting status of this property; and Whereas, the City agrees that Parcel IB of Tract 15 of the TuscawiIla P.U.D. may be subdivided and developed into a maximum of five (5) parcels platted as provided by law; and ~ Whereas, an applicatiori for final engineering approval and permit was submitted to the Cit~ prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 675 for one parcel located at the southeast comer of th~ intersection of Vista willa Drive and State Road 434 (hereinafter call the Hess Site, as depicted iri.' Exhibit liB" attached hereto), and Property Owner and City agree that this Development Agreement should address specific issues relating to development of said Hess site; and Whereas, Sections 20-458 and 20-459 ofOrdin~ce No.675, the "S.R 434 Corridor Vision Plan: New Development Area" provide for a Development Agreement for real property such as that described on Exhibit "A" and Exhibit liB" upon a finding that the site is constrained, and extra development enhancements are provided by the Property Owner to preclude or mitigate against any impacts upon abutting properties or the S.R 434 corridor; and, Whereas, the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs finds that the real property . described in this Agreement is constrained by width, proximity to water retention areas to the rear of the property, and by wetlands; and Whereas, the City Commission finds that Property Owner is making sufficient development concessions and enhancements on the real property described on Exhibit "A" to authorize a Development Agreement for the Hess site described on Exhibit "B", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein; and Whereas, in consideration for the City entering into this Agreement, the Property Owner has agreed to provide certain enhancements for the entire parcel (such as landscaping) and certain common design themes or criteria (a uniform ground mounted sign system for the individual parcels). 2 NOW THEREFORE, be it agreed as follows: The City and the Property Owner hereby agree that the foregoing premises are true arii 1. Premises Incorporated Herein The City and the Property Owner hereby agree that the foregoing premises are true and correct. 2. Property Affected 2.1 The real property described on Exhibit 1/ A" constitutes the entire property subject to this Development Agreement. A consideration for the City entering into this Agreement is that certain enhancements (such as enhanced lapdscaping and a six (6') food masonry wall along the rear of the subject property) and certain common design themes or criteria (a uniform ground mounted sign system for the site) are being proposed by the Property Owner and .accepted by, the City. Certain requirements set forth herein, therefore, apply to the entire property (Exhibit 1/ A"). 2.2 Such a specific implementing development agreement is created for the Hess site (Exhibit "B") in this Agreement. Certain development obligations are being agreed to by and between the Property Owner and the City as the standards gc;>verning certain aspects of development of the Hess site. 2.3 Where no requirements concerning a development issue are set forth in this agreement for the real property described on Exhibit "A" or Exhibit liB", then the standards set forth in the "State Road 434 Corridor Vision Plan: New Development Area" standards shall first apply, and if no standards exist in said ordinance. then other applicable City Code provisions shall govern development of the property. 3 2.4 This Agreement does not and cannot exempt any real property from complying with state or local law or ordinances relating to platting, environmental permitting, wetlands regulations, stonnwater, or other matters nor any development issues not directly addresse~. by this Agreement. 3. Enhanced Landsca,ping. Sidewalks. Wall. and Retention Ponds. The development of all or any part of the real property described on Exhibit "A" shall be subject to the enhanced landscaping including berms and meandering sidewalks (to the extent such meanders and additional width are allowed by the Florida Depart}1lent of Transportation (DOT)), as set forth on the Master Development Program for Tuscawilla Tract 15, Parcell-B (Sheets 2 & 3), dated December 23, 1997, and revised February 23, 1998 and March 4, 1998, prepared by Bower- Singleton and Associates, Inc. (hereinafter called the Mater Development Program), and on file with the Office of the City Clerk, Winter Springs, Florida. The enhanced landscaping to be provided by and at the cost to the Property Owner per the tenns and conditions of the following: 3.1 The enhanced landscaping specified herein shall be provided by the Property Owner or his heirs, assigns, successors, or agents, as a condition of development of the property and at the time ofinstallation of other site related improvements for each parcel created from the real property described on Exhibit "A" of this Agreement. 3.2 The Hess site described on Exhibit "B" shall be subject to and comply with the landscaping specifications set forth on the Master Development Program, on file with the Office of the City Clerlc, Winter Springs Florida, as a Final Engineering Permit condition for site development of said parcel. 4 3.3 The City agrees that the enhanced landscaping together with a six foot masonry wall at or along the rear (south) boundary of the property described on Exhibit " A" in the Master Development Program separating the commercial property from the adjacent residential property to the south are acceptable buffers in consideration of the intent of the State Road 434 Corridor Vision Plan New Development Area Ordinance, constraints of the site and, potential impact on the surrounding properties. 3.4 Landscape and wall construction plans shall be incorporated into the construction documents. Failure of the Property Owner or his assigns to install the landscaping and six (6') masonry wall (as lots are developed), agreed to and required by this Agreement shall be a breach of this Agreement and shall constitute a basis authorizing of the City to withhold issuance of permits, andlor certificates of occupancy, until the landscaping and wall construction obligations imposed by this Agreement are fully complied with. 3.5 This Agreement obligates the Property Owner to instaU a meandering six (6') foot wide sidewalk along the State Road 434 frontage of this property as shown on the Master Development Program. The City acknowledges that the landscape design depicted on Sheet 3 of the Master Development Program requires use of D.O. T. State Road 434 right-of-way and modification ofD.O.T. sidewalk placement and width requirements and therefore is subject to review and approval by the D.O. T. It shall be the Property Owner's obligation to obtain said approval with the cooperation and assistance of the City. In the event this cannot be accomplished, the design shall be modified and all landscaping will be constructed south of the road right-of-way within the Property Owner's property with the sidewalk being constructed byF.D.O.T. 5 3.6 Retention ponds shallnot be constructed at a slope steeper than four (4) horizontal to one (1) vertical. 3.7 Property Owner agrees to comply with all landscaping requirements of the SR 434 Visionin~ ~ Plan Ordinance not specifically provided for in this Agreement. 4. Sign Design Requirements. As mutual consideration by and between the City and the Property Owner the signage for the entire property described on Exhibit "A" shall be in accordance with the design and specifications per the Master Development Program, Sheets 2 and 3. 4.1 As to the entire property on Exhibit 11 A", the uniform design signage fronting on State Road 434 shall be that size, bulk and height and design as set forth on Sheet 3 of the Master Development Program and shall be constructed by the Property Owner or successors in accordance with the aforementioned plans. The City agrees to the number and placement of signs as depicted on Sheet 2 of the Master Development Program. 4.2 As to the Hess site (Exhibit liB ") the building signage and internal site signage shall be that set forth on the uniform sign plan on file with the City, as' pages A-I (dated December 10, 1997) and Page CE-l (dated January 23, 1998) by Metsky-Zuckennan, Architects and PI~ers. Building and internal site signage shall not exceed 193.5 square feet of copy space. Ground mounted signage shall not exceed a total of 110 square feet of copy space. The City ac~owledges that the Hess site signage exceeds the square footage area allowed under Ordinance No. 675 in Section 20-454 but permitted in Sections 20-458 and 20-459. 6 5.0 Setbacks forParcell-B of Tract IS. The building setbacks for the Property described on Exhibit "A" shall be fifty (50) feet (except on the Hess site described on Exhibit "B") which shall be set back 49' 6" from the adjacent right-of-way of State Road 434 in recognition of the enhanced landscaping for said site. The setback for all other amenities (other than buildings) shall be twenty five (25') feet from the State Road 434 Right of Way and fifteen (IS) feet from Vista Willa Drive. In the event of a default by the Property Owner in the installation of the landscaping to Tract IB per the Master Development Program or failure to maintain said landscaping. as required by City Code. then the setbacks pursuant to City Code shall apply to said Tract or part thereof. 6.0 Hess Site (Exhibit "B") Design Amenities. The Property Owner has agreed that the building design for the.Hess site is modified to provide that the green stripe around the building (generally parallel to the ground) will not be back lit with artificial lighting. 7.0 No Carwash Land Use on Tract 15. ParcellB TheProperty Owner agrees that notwithstanding the land uses permitted in the Settlement Agreement. no approval for a carwash shall be sought or permitted on the property described on Exhibit A of this Agreement. 8.0 Property Owners Association. There shall be a mandato!)' Property Owner's Association responsible for the ongoing maintenance of the landscaping. roads. reteIition ponds. amenities and other common areas and facilities. 9.0 Grace Period/time to Cure. In the event the City determines the Property Owner or Successor is not in compliance with the landscaping installation as required by this Agreement. or fails to maintain the landscaping as required by City Code. the City shall provide written notice of violation to the Prope~ Owner of the subject 7 parcel or parcels, stating the specific nature of the violation and the corrective actions to be taken to cure said non-compliance. The Property Owner shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of said notice in which to cure the violation before the City can declare a default under this Agreement. 10.0 Pursuant to the requirement of state law, the parties acknowledge and agree. This Agreement shall be recorded in the public records of Seminole County at cost to the Property Owner and shall be a covenant running with the (a) Duration of Agreement. This Agreement shall be recorded in the public records of Seminole County at cost to the Property Owner and shall be a covenant running with the land. (b) Development issues. Development issues shall be those permitted and controlled (such as building height, permitted uses, parking requirements and other development standards by existing City Code, including Ordinance No. 675 and the Settlement Agreement, except as said site development standards are specifically modified herein. (c) Agreement Consistent with Comprehensive Plan. The City commission, and the local planning agency, have found that the land uses and development proposed are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. By entering into this Development Agreement, the City Commission finds this Agreement consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. (d) Compliance With Other Laws. The failure of this Agreement to address a particular permit, condition, term or restriction shall not relieve the Property Owner ofthe necessity of complying with the law governing said permitting requirement, condition, term or restriction. 8 11.0 EnforcementI/Venue. This agreement may be enforced by parties to it by bringing action in the Court of proper jurisdiction::...) to interpret or enforce the provisions of this Agreement. Venue of any such shall be in Semili!le~ County, Florida. This Agreement shall be recorded in the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida and shall be \.0 12.0 Parties Bound. binding on the heirs, assigns or successors to the Parties to this Agreement. DONE AND AGREED on this 13th day of April 1998 WITNESS PROPERTY OWNER: STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1998 by Robert Yeager, as Trustee. He is personally known to , or has produced NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF FLORIDA My commission expires JULIE SUl.UVAN MY COMMISSION , co 834294 EXPIIIES: ApriI 8, 2001 9 STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF SEMINOLE THIS INSTRUMENT PREPARED BY: Robert D. Guthrie Kruppenbacher & Associates, P.A. P.O. Box 3471 Orlando, FL 32801-3471 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA Andrea Lorenzo-luaces Print My commission expires ANDREA LORENZO-LUACES MY COMMISSION Expires May 09, 1999 Bonded by ANB 10 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 24th day April of I 1998. by Paul P. Partyka, Mayor of the City of Winter Springs. Florida He is personaIly knownto m or has produced as identification. MAR 04'98 09: 31AM KRUPPENl3ACHER 8c ASSC PARCEL I DESCRIPTION. Commence at the Northeast corner of Section 8, Township 21 South. Range 31 East, Seminole County, Florida, thence run S 00-24'55 E along the East line of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section B for distance of 205.56 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of the Lake Charm Branch of the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad (100' R/W) thence run N 54-34' 87" W along said Northerly Right-of-Way line for a distance of 293.14 feet to a point on a curve concave Southwesterly having a radius of 1959.19 feet and a chord bearing of N 65' - 56' 09" W thence run Northwesterly along the arc of said curve and said Northerly Right-of-Way line through a central angle of 24 44 10 for a distance of 845.83 feet to the arc tangency thence run N 79 - 18 14 W along said Northerly Right-of- Way line for a distance of 691.26 feet to the point of curvature of a curve concave Southwesterly having a radius of 2612.09 feet, thence run Northwesterly along the arc of said curve and said Northerly Right-of-Way line through a central angle of 11 - 46 38 for a distance of 536.92 feet to the point of tangency thence run S 88 55 08 W along said Northerly Right-of-Way line for a distance of 96.48 feet to the Easterly Right-of-Way line of Vistawilla Drive and a point on a curve concave Southeasterly having a radius of 450.00 feet and a chord bearing of N 44 -53 28 E. thence run Northeasterly along the arc of said curve and said Easterly Right-of-Way line through a central angle of 69 - 00- 18 for a distance of 554.01 feet to the point of reverse curvature of a curve concave Northeasterly having a radius of 790.00 feet and a chord bearing of N 44 50 50 E. thence run Northeasterly along the arc of said curve and said Easterly Right-of-Way line through a central angle of 69 05 33 for a distance of 952365 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue Northerly along said Easterly Right-of-Way line and said curve having a radius of 790.00 feet and a chord bearing of N 05 22 51 E through a central angle of 69 05 33 for a of 135.65 feet to a point of non-tangency thence run N 08 10 16 E along said Easterly Right-of-Way line for a distance of 100350 feet thence run N 00 27 38 E along said Easterly Right- of-Way line for a distance of 214.99 feet to the point of curvature of a curve concave Southeasterly having a radius of POINT OF BEGINNING LESS. Right-of-Way for Eastern Beltway per order of taking filed May 30, 1991 in Official Records Book 2299 Page 984. AND ALSO LESS, THE RIGHT OF WAY OF S.R. 434 AS DEFINED IN THE ORDER OF TAKING DATED MARCH 24, 1994 IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 2747 PAGE 496. PUBLIC RECORDS OF SEMINOLE COUNTY FLORIDA. FROM 407-426-7767 03-04-98 10:38 AM P12 LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING A PORTlON OF LOT 19, PHIWP R. YONGE GRANT, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK PACE " PAGES JS THRU 38, PUBUC RECORDS or SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, MORE P ARnCUL,ARL Y DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: , FROM THE MOST NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF V1STAWlLl.}. DRiVE, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 47, PAGES 60 & 61, OF THE PUBUC RECORDS OF SEMINOl.E COUNTY, FLORIDA, SAID CORNER "LSO BEING ON THE MOST SOUTHERLY RIGHT-Of-WAY UNE OF' STATE ROAD 4.34, AS A POINT Of BEGINNING, RUN S89'J4'4'-E AL.ONG THE SOUniERLY RIGHT-Of"-WAY UNE OF SAID STATE ROAD 434 A DISTANCE or 250.00 f'EET: THENCE DEPARllNG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHi-OF -WAY UNE OF SAID STATE ROAO 434 RUN SOO"2S',g.W AT RIGHT ANGLES A DISTANCE OF 258.00 F'EET: THENCE. NS9",34'41.W P"RALLEL WITH THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-Of-WAY UNE Of SAID STATE ROAD 434 A DISTANCE OF 254.89 FEET TO AN INlERS(CnON 'MTH THE EASTERLY RIGHT-Of-WAY UNE OF' SAID \fISTAWlllA DRIVE: RUN THENCE AL.ONG '!'HE EASTERLY RIGHT-or-WAY UNE OF SAID V1STAWlLl.A DRIVE THE FOI.LOv"NG COURSES AND DISTANCES: N06'06'50-E A DISTANCE Of 4-8.97 f'(ET TO A POINT OF INTERSJ:;CllON AS SHOYrN ON SAID, V1STAv"LLA DRIVE PLAT. tHENCE N00"2a'45~E A DISTANCE: OF' 207.28 FEET TO THE POINT OF BECINNING. CONTAINING 1.47 ACRES MORE OR LESS. W CJ)+:'" rT'I N :x :z: o r- I""! n o wo. 0,." o~ o ."CT\ r- N N ~ r- ;.lJ :.., ,.... . . -"I , ...., ;.;~ \.;) I;,) . '''.r.. FROM 407-426-7767 03-04-98 10:38 AM Pl3 LANDSCAPE SR 434 CONCRETE BLOCK WALL February 2, 2007 ATTACHMENT C 1117 East Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32801 Mr. Ron McLemore, City Manager City of Winter Springs 1126 East S.R. 434 Winter Springs, Florida 32708 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS City Manager Phone: 407.425.0452 Fax: 407.648.1036 www.cphengineers.com Re: Foam Panels Fencing Systems CPH Project No. W0403.17 Dear Mr. McLemore: Thank you for sending over the data concerning the fencing/wall system that uses a polystyrene foam core and a covering of W' thick Acrylic modified stucco. The system is anchored in the ground by galvanized steel supports set in concrete. This system is indicative of new technology for decorative and screen fencing/walls. Based on the data supplied, it is apparent that the wall when properly constructed would meet the wind loading requirements of Winter Springs. It also appears that the wall can be constructed to architecturally appear the same as a masonry block wall covered with stucco. Our concern with this system, in high traffic/pedestrian areas like the Winter Springs Town Center, is the long term durability of the product. Will the product have the long term durability of a brick masonry or concrete block masonry fence? What are the effects of direct impacts on the system? If the wall is damaged by an impact, how is it repaired? Will the wall look the same as today within 5 years? We have seen problems with other foam type structures/amenities that have failed due to water wicking up from the bottom or entering from an opening in the outside finish. Water causes the foam and stucco to separate. It can also cause the foam to deteriorate, Le. the wall decay from the inside out. Another problem is that as the soil settles around the base or is eroded by rainfall, a gap occurs which would not be acceptable in commercial areas. The details provided do not indicate a seal at the bottom. If the foam is placed directly on the soil, there is a high potential for wicking. We have seen problems with foam facades with the thin coating of acrylic modified stucco. This thin covering is definitely not an acceptable product. We realize that the proposed product uses a thicker covering, but we have doubts concerning direct impacts upon the wall. It is our opinion that the screen walls/fences with the W' stucco is not acceptable in high traffic areas with possible impacts from pedestrians, bikes and vehicles. Therefore, we do not recommend it for use in the Town Center area. In areas where the product is not subject to high traffic, we have no objection to its use. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. J:\W0403.17\Documents\Letter\Foam Core Walls and Fences.doc Engineers . Surveyors . Architects (AA26000926) . Planners. Landscape Architects . Environmental Scientists . Construction Management. Desig7V'Build VIKING WALL SYSTEM GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. FOAM PANELS SHALL BE EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE WITH THE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES SHOWN ON TABLE 1 PANEL THICKNESS SHALL BE 5" NOMINAL 2. POSTS SHALL BE AS PER TABLE 2 WITH PROPER SPACING, GAUGE, DIAMETER AND EMBEDMENT. 3 SUBSTRATE BASECOAT SHALL BE 1/2" THICK REINFORCED ACRYUC MODIFIED. FIBERS SHALL BE ALKAU RESISTANT AND PORTLAND CEMENT SHALL ALSO HAVE A LOW ALKAU CONTENT. 4 ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL SUPPORTS SHALL BE NO LESS THAN .080" GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE. 5 ALL CONNECTION GAPS SHALL BE FILLED AND COVERED WITH STANDARD NON WOVEN MESH WITH A LOW ALKAU RESISTANT AND AT A MINIMUM OF 6oz. 6. CONCRETE USED IN POST ENCASEMENT SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 2500 POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH. 7. ALL CONNECTIONS SHALL BE HOT DIPPED GALVANIZED RAIL CLAMPS. BOLTED AND SECURED IN PLACE W/ SELF DRIWNG FASTENERS ON SUPPORT POSTS, TYP. NOTES FOR TABlE I; 1. mlCAL POST SPAaNG 15 7'-6' EXCEPT FOR TIlE 9, 10, 11 AND 12 FOOT HIGH FENCE WAlLS 2. POST ARE TO BE SUCH THAT A MINIMUM CONCRETE COVER OF 3'15 ACHIEVED AT THE BOITDM OFTHE POSTHOlES. 3. CONCRElE USED IN POST ENCASEMENT SHAlL BE A MINIMUM OF 2Soo POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH COMI'RE55IVE STRENGTH IN 2B DAYS. 4. POST EMBEDMENT DEPTHS WERE CALCUlATED ASSUMING AVERAGE SOIL CONDmONS OF CLEAN SANDS WHICH WIll HOLD THBR SHAPE DURING CONSTRUcnON AND PROVIDE AN ASSUMED BEARING CAPAaTY OF 2000 POUNDS PfR SQUARE FOOT . IN lOOSE SANDS , WHICH A.OW FREELY ,OR IN SILTS OR ORGANIC TYPf MATERIAlS DEEPER EMBEDMENTS WILl BE REQUIRED AND MUST BE DESIGNED ACCORDINGlY. CONTRACTORS SHAll NOTIFY ENGINEER If ACTUAl SOIL CONDmONS VARY FROM THAT ASSUMED. Barfield Fence and Wall WALL SYSTEM TECHNICAL DATA SHEET DRAWN BY: Bill Walker Table No, 1 TYP. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF WALL SYSTEM PI1l!>'rtY - A5TM Test 1.0PCF Density Density PCF 01622 1.0 Thennal Conductivity "40'F BTUjHR eS18 0,24 (kFactor) "75' F (SQ, FT.I{F/in) 0,26 Thermal ResOtance 040'F 01' 4.17 (Rva..) @7S'FThickness 3.85 SlrenglhProper1ies PSI Cnn"!>n!Ssive10% Defonnatioo PSI 01621 10-14 Flexural PSI C203 25-30 Tensile PSI 01623 16-20 Shear PSI 0723 18-22 Shear Modukr. PSI 2811-320 MooMr." E~~l:ity PSI 1811-120 MoIstu,.Resistance '1M Penn. I. E96{PROtA) 1.2-3.0 Absorption (VOL) .. C272 <3.5 Capllary nooe CoeIIicient "Thermal Expansion In/(ln)(F) D686 0.0000.35 _ Servi<eTemperatu,. 'F Long Term 167 lnlemitt!nt 180 Oxvgen index .. 02863 30.4 D1mensioool II 02126 MAX. Stability CltANGE (PROt elE) 2.0 Table No. 2 WALL SYSTEM TECHNICAL DATA INFORMATION Heijht PostDI."",,, lXamtterPostHolt ...- 4'-0" 21~'1'OII'inal 12" 3'-0" 5'-0" 21/l'1'OII'inal 12" 3'-0" 6'-0" 21/2''''''',," 12" 3' 0' 7'-0" 2112" nominal 12" 3'-6" 8'-0" 12" 4' 0' 9'-0" 12" 5'-0" 10'-0 14" 5'-6' 11'-0" 14" 5'-6" 12'-0" 14' 5'-6" 2.lIES1GiDRll W1ND\Jl\l)(f 140 HPH PERASCE 7-9B. 1 WINlIlFOOAta fACI(lll-0.n {CAlEGORY HIJIlE 6-1 (f ASCE7-98.) 4. GUST EfFECT -,085 5. RlltE COOfIOEHTCI-l.11H/lLESS l!'AN 3). PERASCE 7-9B. 6.IaOCJlYPRESSUlEEXI'OSlJECOEITIOEHTKl -US (EXI'OSlJE CO-1\') Date: February 12, 2007 The attached were referenced during the discussion of Regular Agenda Item "303" at the February 12, 2007 City Commission Regular Meeting.