HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 05 29 Regular 606 Conceptual Development Plan for Winter Place
COMMISSION AGENDA
ITEM 606
Regular
May 29. 2007
Meeting
REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the Commission consider a
conceptual development plan for a 348 unit town-house and patio home development on
approximately 47.09 acres, located on the south side of Shepard Road, north of Florida Avenue,
east of Boat Lake, and immediately adjacent to the west side of the Wildwood residential PUD.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the Commission to consider, provide
comment on, and approve, approve with conditions and/or modifications, or disapprove a
conceptual development plan for 107 unit town homes and 241 patio homes (a.k.a. pull-apart units)
on 47.09 acres prior to the applicant proceeding with the PUD and subdivision process.
APPLICABLE. REGULATIONS:
Chapter 5, City Code.
Chapter 9, City Code.
Chapter 20, City Code.
Development Agreement of June 14,2006
CHRONOLOGY:
June 12.2006- Adoption of the change of Future Land Use from "Industrial" to "~edium Density
Residential" on the Dittmer parcels.
June 14.2006- Execution of Development Agreement related to Dittmer parcels.
July 24.2006- Adoption of the change of Future Land Use from "Industrial" to "Medium Density
Residential" on the Elsea and Florida Avenue parcels, including certain directives to be
subsequently addressed.
CONSIDERATIONS:
Overview
Access to the property is from Shepard Road to the north and Florida Avenue to the south.
A 100' power easement borders the eastern and northern perimeter of the site and buffers the site
from the adjacent residential Wildwood PUD to the east. A combination of commercial and
industrial uses, border the property to the west along US 17-92. Industrial properties, vacant land,
and Highland Elementary School are to the north along Shepard Road and to the south of Florida
May 29, 2007
Regular Item 606
Page 2 of 5
Avenue are single family residential homes. One of the City's waste water treatment plants abuts
the SE comer of the site.
The site is predominantly open, vacant property (with some structures located along the southern
end ofthe site, near the Florida Avenue ROW) and with some portions containing mature trees.
Topography slopes from a highpoint of about 70 feet along the west side to a low of about 39 along
the east side (under the power line). An existing lake, known as Boat Lake is located along the
west perimeter of the property. The water level in Boat Lake, which has a baseline 100 year
floodplain elevation of 55 feet, was measured at 48.5 feet on May 4, 2006 (all elevations NGVD
1929).
No tree survey, soils report, or environmental survey has been submitted for the site.
The aerial photograph submitted by the applicant does not correctly depict the area drawn on the
plan.
Previous Aoorovals & Associated Discussion
The majority of the site has PUD zoning, thought to be from at least the 1980s. No record can be
found except an expired industrial subdivision plan. The other properties have C-2 zoning and
need to be rezoned to a PUD designation.
A large scale Future Land Use amendment was adopted on June 12, 2006, for the Dittmer parcels,
which changed the FLUM designation from "Industrial" to "Medium Density Residential" (3.6 -
9.0 D.U.lacre). A Development Agreement was approved on June 12,2006, before the small scale
FLU amendments for the Elsea and Florida Avenue properties (2.93 acres) were heard on first
reading (June 26, 2006) The Development Agreement requires a buffer between the project and the
properties to the west (6' high wall atop a 5' berm - the berm to include trees, shrubs, and
irrigation), dedication of an appropriate amount of land as a park for the residents of the proj ect (to
be built pursuant to National Recreation Association standards), and a school mitigation payment
of$1,235.00 in addition to the school impact fees. Throughout the FLUM amendment process, the
applicant and his attorney, Rebecca Furman, represented the applicant's request as a proposal for a
maximum of334 (townhouse) units.
A small scale Future Land Use amendment, was adopted on July 26, 2006, for the Elsea and
Florida Avenue properties, which changed the FLUM designation from "Industrial" to "Medium
Density Residential" (3.6 - 9.0 D.U.lacre). Commission directives (to be included in a subsequent
development agreement) require unity of title, removal of the property acreage from the density
calculation, provision of adequate easements over the existing ROW should it be vacated, and
require that the Florida Avenue properties not be developed with units, but rather be used as a
buffer for storm-water or greenspace, due to the Public Works Director's concerns about locating
residential units near the existing waste-water treatment plant. During the public hearings for the
FLU amendments, the applicant's attorney spoke more than once of excluding these separate
properties from the density equation, resulting in no increase in density beyond the 334 number of
units proposed.
Considerable discussion was devoted to provision of meaningful open space and green space
during the series of hearings.
2
May 29,2007
Regular Item 606
Page 3 of 5
Transportation
The proposed development is seeking to have all of its direct ingress through one entrance from
Shepard Road. Shepard Road is a City controlled local roadway.
Egress is proposed onto Shepard Road at the entrance road or onto Florida Avenue, located at the
south end of the site. Florida Avenue is a County controlled local roadway. County approval will
be required for any access off of Florida Avenue to or from the site.
The egress connection with Florida Avenue should be relocated to move it away from the curve in
the existing roadway. The roadway connection should be located at the existing intersection near
the west end of the property, or it can be approximately halfway between the curve and the existing
intersection.
A traffic impact study is required for the project as a part of the final engineering. Approval of this
concept plan does not signify that the project meets concurrency for transportation or any other
aspect of the City's concurrency requirements. ;
Transportation Element, Policy 1.62 requires residential development greater than 200 units to
incorporate a bus stop location. The Element also contains requirements for bike and pedestrian
paths.
Proposed Concept
Although the applicant previously represented the project as having a maximum of 334
(townhouse) units, the proposed concept includes a total of348 units comprised of 107 town
homes and 241 "pull-apart" (or patio home) units accessed by a private gated entrance off of
Shepard Road. This concept does not reconcile with the applicant's previous commitment or with
the City's PUD regulations.
The "pull-apart" units have garages that face the street, while the town home units face narrow
greenspace areas that open onto the perimeter greenspace/walk. The 241 "pull apart" units (157
with 2-car garages; 84 with one car garages) are predominant throughout the project. The 107
town home units (44 with 2-car garages; 63 with one-car garages) have garages the open onto
alley-ways and are arranged in a V-shape at the southern end of the site, near the storm water
ponds, the sewage treatment plant site, and the southern exit onto Florida Avenue. The "pull
apart" units utilize 22' long driveways between the garage door and the sidewalk. The plan states
there are 398 driveway parking spaces, in conjunction with 197 on-street parking spaces, for a total
of 875 parking spaces.
The site has a lot of opportunities and constraints. However, the proposed concept ignores both.
The existing 31- foot elevation change, lakefront, existing mature trees should be incorporated into
the design and areas such as the power line easement, adjacent wastewater treatment plan site, and
adjacent industrial and commercial uses should be shielded and buffered from view by the site
layout, as much as possible.
A recreation area (area and use unknown) is located on the east side of Boat Lake and is connected
to a perimeter greenspace and walking trail. This feature could be a great amenity to the plan.
The plan includes deviations from the City Code, such as on-street parking (both parallel and 90
degree). Staff does not support 90 degree parking that backs out into a roadway, whether public or
3
May 29,2007
Regular Item 606
Page 4 of 5
private, because of safety concerns. Deviations from the Code cOilld be granted when they are
considered as an enhancement to the project and if enabling language exists for inclusion in a
development agreement.
Staff Comments & Recommendations
Staff reviewed the proposal and offered comments to the applicant. Staff stressed that to deviate
from either the Code or the 344 maximum units that had been discussed during the FLU
amendment process, the applicant should, as a quid-pro-quo, consider:
· Creating a sense of place (places that promote positive social interaction and community
life);
· Building on the strategic advantage of location, topography, the lake, and existing
vegetation;
· Creating a pedestrian and bicycle-friendly environment;
· Providing meaningful scenic vistas, a centrally located clubhouse and usable recreation
area that not only provides a terminating vista from Shepard Road, but is also in a central
and walkable location;
· Providing strategically located traffic roundabouts for both traffic and aesthetic purposes;
and
· Providing workforce housing options (e.g. accessory dwelling units over garages) with
appropriate parking.
Borrowing on what we learned from designer Randall Arendt, staff requested that the applicant
employ a landscape architect to provide the initial project design, to incorporate the existing
natural features (e.g. lake, topography, and trees), and minimize or mitigate the effects or influence
of the adjacent commercial and industrial uses as well as the power line, and provide top quality
usable green spaces.
The existing development agreement requires a 5-foot tall berm with a 6-foot tall wall along the
western property boundary. At a 3: 1 horizontal to vertical slope, the berm would extend at least 30
feet inward from the western property line. A flat area on top of the berm (where the wall will be
located) would require the berm to be even wider. The proposed concept layout does not provide
enough width along the western property boundary for this berm. In fact, given the scale of the
plan, 30' extends over the trail and into the buildings and vehicle accommodation areas.
Staffs full set of comments are provided as an attachment. Included are a number of
comprehensive plan requirements as well as code and public safety concerns raised by the City
Engineer.
FINDINGS:
1. The proposed development has a Medium Density Residential future land use designation.
2. The majority of the parcels have PUD zoning; The other parcels have C-2 zoning.
3. There is an existing development agreement on the Dittmer parcels; Commission directives
were given related to the Elsea and Florida Avenue properties, but a development
agreement has not been executed.
4. Any deviations from the Code must be addressed through a development agreement, special
exception, variance, or some other appropriate mechanism.
4
May 29, 2007
Regular Item 606
Page 5 of 5
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Commission consider, provide comment on, and approve, approve with
conditions and/or modifications, or disapprove the conceptual development plan with
consideration of the attached staff comments.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Staff comments
B - Location Map
C - June 26, 2006 Commission Minutes
D - July 24, 2006 Commission Minutes
E - Development Agreement, executed on June 14,2006
F - Concept Plan
COMMISSION ACTION:
5
ATTACHMENT A
MEMORANDUM
TO:
File
FROM:
John C. Baker AICP
DATE:
05/01/07
RE:
Winter Place Concept Plans Rec'd 042607
1. Comprehensive plan policies most pertinent to the proposed development include the
following:
a) FLU Policy1.2.9 requires an environmental study of the property;
b) FLU Policy 1.2.11 requires a minimum 50' upland lake buffer;
c) FLU policies 1.2.10, 1.2.12, 1.2.13 as well as Conservation Element policies 1.4.1
thru 1.4.7 address wetlands, 25' upland buffers, and conservation easements;
d) Transportation Policy 1.1.3 requires a traffic study for all new development
generating more than 300 daily trips;
e) Transportation Element contains a number of multi-modal requirements under
objectives 1.5 and 1.6 (policies 1.5.1 thru 1.6.6) - these include sidewalks on each side of
each road and a space for a bus stop (to include benches, signage, lights, and protection
from the elements) - probably need to extend sidewalks at least along Shepard;
f) Recreation Element Policy 1.1.2 sets a 12 acre minimum mini-park size;
g) Infrastructure Element Policy IV-B-4.7 req~ires 50% of the required landscaping area
be xeriscaping and native plant materials; and
h) Infrastructure Element Policy IV -D-4.6 requires littoral zone plantings for storm-
water ponds and lakes.
2. The project needs to be planned to provide scenic vistas (e.g. looking south from
Shepard Road to the clubhouse, looking east on Florida Avenue, looking" at the clubhouse
from 17-92, and looking into the project from Florida Avenue, and any long internal
vistas).
3. There appears to be part ofthe Florida Ave ROW that needs to be vacated.
4. Some of the property appears to still have C-2 zoning.
5. Some of the southern property was not to be included in the density calcs.
6. Needs lot split or reconfiguration at Shepard Road entrance.
7. If the applicant desires to create more density than that which was the consensus at the
Comp Plan hearings, this may be reasonably considered for garage apts./accessory
dwelling units - provided they are at least providing one nearby on-street space for that
unit. Always keep in mind (so not to exceed) the maximum density in the FLU
designation as well as the densities set forth in each of the 2 PUD sections - A & B.
Need to balance enough usable parking with proposed density.
8. For staff to support higher density and narrow muses, the applicant needs to clearly
demonstrate overall quality and a interconnected, aesthetic, and usable
openspace/ greenspace system.
9. Need to provide enough space for the berm and wall along the west side of the site.
10. Due to the on-site and adjacent off-site topo changes, lake, vegetation, and scenic
vistas, the applicant team should start with a landscape architect.
11. Ninety degree parking adjacent to a street - even a private street - is not safe; we
recommend angled back-in spaces.
12. Process for PUD to follow either PUD A or B set forth in Chapter 20. Probably a
better idea to take a concept plan to the Commission first.
Engineering Review Comments
Project
Submittal:
Date:
Winter Place
Concept Plan
May 21, 2007
Comments by:
Brian Fields, P.E.
City Engineer
Comments on concept plan received May 18, 2007:
1. The retention areas seem small relative to the project size and probable need to meet SJRWMD
pre-post phosphorous loading criteria.
2. The on-street parking count appears to be approximately 218 instead of the 197 stated on the
plans.
3. The number of two-car garage spaces should be 201 instead of 207 as shown.
4. Remove parallel parking spaces on the dead end-alleys, as there is no place to turn around. This
will eliminate 22 spaces but should stili be acceptable overall. .
5. Convert the seven 90-degree spaces near the north end to parallel spaces. About 3 spaces will
belosl
6. Additional 9O-degree parking could be provided at the ends of several alleys if necessary.
7. One or two additional roundabouts (or mini-traffic circles) could be added to improve traffic
calming. The optimal spacing between deviCes is 400-600 feet. Mld-block landscaped medians
could also be used as traffic calming devices. Also consider narrowing the asphalt width to 20-
feet to help reduce speeds.
8. The driveway connection with Florida Ave should be relocated to move it away from the existing
curve at Florida Ave. I Lake Lucerne Circle. Locate the driveway at the existing intersection near
the west end of the property, or it can be approximately halfway between the curve and the
existing intersection.
If there are any questions, please contact Brian Fields at 407-327-7597 or bye-mail at
bfields@wintersDrinasfl.ora.
Concept Plan (5-21-07)
Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT B
NOTES:
Municipal Address Map Book
PRINTED: REVISED:
Apr 2005 1: 2 : 3 .
City of Winter Springs, FL
Developed By: SmII"-tem &nwyIng" MDppIng Cap.
400
Feel
2401
Winter Place
ATfACBMENT C
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMmSlON
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26, 2006
PAGE 3 OF 31
AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
100. Office Of City Commissioner Joanne M. Krebs
Requests That The City Commission Listen To City Of Winter Springs Resident
Katie Tortesa's Presentation On ISlUes Related To Preserviag The Beautiful
Environment Of The City Of Winter Sprinp, Florida.
As noted earlier in the Meeting, this Agenda Item was to be rescheduled to a July 2006
City Commission Regular Meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA
PUBUC HEARINGS
200. Co....unity Development Department - Plannmg Division
Requests The City Commission Hold A Publk Hearing For Fint Reading Of
Ordinance 2006-05, A S..all Scale FLUM (Futare Land Use Map) Amendment
Which Chuges The Futare Land Use Map Designation Of Two (2) Parcels Totaling
1.17 Acres, Loeatecl On Lake Lucerne Cirele From (Winter Springs) "Industrial"
To (City Of Winter Springs) "Medium Density Residential".
Ms. Eloise Sahlstrom, AICP, ASLA, Senior Planner, Community Development
Department presented this Agenda Item.
"MOTION TO READ BY 'TITLE' ONLY." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER
MILLER. SECONDED BY DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE. DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
DEPUTY MA YORBLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Deputy City Clerk Franklin read Ordinance 2006-05 by "Title" only.
Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "This did go before the Local Planning Agency. Their
recommendation for this Land Use action was to disapprove it. Their concerns were
related to the loss of Industrial land which was also their concern with the Large Scale
Amendment. Then also, compatibility with the adjacent Wastewater Treatment Plant.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINtJI'ES
CITY COMMmSlON
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26,2006
PAGE 4 OF 31
I will make mention at this time that [Mr.] Kip Lockcuff [P.E., Director, Public
WorlcslUtility Department] has indicated a concern relating to the use of this property if it
were to have townhomes built on it. Because of incompatibility with the Wastewater
Treatment Plant, but if it were to remain as retention or common area, he would not have
a concern.
Staff does support the change of the Land Use. We don't know how the Applicant would
intend to use it at this time as we have not seen any projected Site Plans or anything like
that. So, Staff does recommend approval of the Land Use Amendment based on the
Findings that we've included in the Agenda packet."
Discussion.
Deputy Mayor Blake asked, "Kip [Lockcuff), you are talking about a concern of the
adjacent Uses over here? Where exactly in this triangle is the most intensive part of the
Wastewater Treatment Plant?" Mr. Lockcuff stated, "The package plants are located
generally right here, we have some storage tanks here. We do have a holding pond here,
that we do at some point foresee using that access as an egress and ingress to the plan."
Furthermore, Deputy Mayor Blake asked, "Is that Florida Avenue? Is that a County road
or do we have - an Interloca1 [Agreement] on that to maintain it? And, what is the status
there?" Mr. Lockcuffstated, "It's a County road."
Deputy Mayor Blake asked, "Would the City be taking over this portion back here? Or,
would that continue to exist or is the Applicant envisioning a request to vacate the right-
of-way?" Mr. Lockcuff commented, "They've requested to vacate the right-of-way.
We've requested that we retain an egress and ingress Easement and a Utility Easement
over that fifty foot (50') right-of-way." Deputy Mayor Blake then inquired, "Or, if not
there, some place within that corridor? Have there been any discussions there?" Mr.
Lockcuff answered, ''No, we have existing utility lines serving Kia, but the egress and
ingress could move though."
Further discussion.
Mayor Bush opened the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item.
Ms. M Rebecca Furman, Attorney, Lowndes Drosdick Doster Kantor & Reed, P.A., 215
North Eola Drive, Orlando, Florida: representing the Keewin Real Property Company,
Ms. Furman commented that "These properties were put under contract and then we've
made this Application in order, really in response to the Staff's concern over this little
piece being left as an Industrial enclave. It really didn't make a lot of sense to have this
Industrial, these two (2) small Industrial properties right next to the Single-Family. So,
that's why we brought them in; it's not to increase our density. I know that some of our
applications have shown that our intention was somewhere in the number of three thirty
four (334).
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA
MlNlITES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETlNO - JUNE 26. 2006
PAOE 5 OF 31
We'll bring a Site Plan and the PUD (planned Unit Development) back before you all,
but it's not our intention to increase that It was actually to respond to the Staff's
concerns. We would like to be able to put retention or open space, something like that,
but having not gone as far as to understand the hydrology yet and the topography of how
you could actually put it there, we don't know if anything would go there, if nothing
would go there, but we certainly are intending on having units all the way down there."
Commissioner Gilmore asked, "Does that apply to both [2006-]05 and [2006-]06, or just
[2006-]05?" Ms. Funnan replied, ''Not to '06 and I'll speak to that or I'll speak to it then.
That actually squares out the property and with the Staff's suggestion we agree that
makes a lot more sense to bring that in. So, it wouldn't increase, we're not asking for an
increase of the density, but it may be spread out over that parcel."
Deputy Mayor Blake asked Attorney Garganese, "This parcel that's under consideration
currently - if we had a different designation on that, that wasn't low-density or some
Residential Land Use, say for instance, if it was required to be left in either conservation
or open space or could only be used for green space or retention, would those acres be
included in the overall density development?" Attorney Garganese stated, "We can
address that, those issues in a Development Agreement."
Deputy Mayor Blake asked, "But would it change the actual Future Land Use designation
that we might put on it today? What I am looking for is some level of surety that this
parcel or these two (2) parcels aren't actually going to be developed with units, but would
act as a buffer, as green space, it would provide the issue with utilities, it would provide
some sort of a green space buffer for the residents that live there and still can provide the
open space requirements that they might have or retention without. Because - we are
talking about tonight, not the Site Plan, we are talking about the Land Use designation."
Attorney Garganese noted, "And this issue came up this afternoon. I talked to Becky
[Furman] about it and I was looking through the Comprehensive Plan to see if there was
something we could do by changing the Future Land Use designation, but given the
amount of time we discussed it today, one thought I had was doing a Unity of Title
Agreement which would require the Property Owner to unify all of this property as one
Development project and then place limitations. Because they're going to be going
through - a PUD (planned Unit Development) process. In the Unity of Title Agreement,
we can place limitations on this property, for example, saying it could be. used for
Stormwater purposes, perhaps. And - if you have some green space requirements, we
could certainly put that in the Unity of Title Agreement. And - with respect to density
calculations, I guess you want to exclude those, right?"
Deputy Mayor Blake stated, "Well, that is the question - how it would normally be done
if we didn't go through the steps that you were just talking about. Now, would it be part
of the density calculations?" Attorney Garganese answered, "I would think we can agree
to that beforehand." Ms. Furman stated, "We'd be happy to agree to that. That's not our
purpose."
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26. 2006
PAGE 6 0F 31
Ms. Furman added, "I looked at your open space requirements because 1 didn't want to
agree to open space and then find out that if it's designated open space we can't give you
all access across open space. Certainly, not across Conservation. We wanted to be able
to put Stormwater because, 1 mean, economically we are purchasing these pieces of
property and we're not just purchasing them to be a buffer, and if they do have some use
that's not intrusive to those neighbors, we'd like to be able to use it to benefit the
property. "
Attorney Garganese stated, "So, the answer is, I mean if you want to condition this
approval on putting a Unity Title or Development Agreement together in advance of their
PUD (planned Unit Development) submission, we could go ahead and do that between
now and Second Reading." .
Commissioner Sally McGinnis stated, "What would be the Future Land Use designation -
that's what you're just dealing with?" Attorney Garganese stated, "You would keep it as
proposed at what Staff is supporting, however it's going to come with limitations that
would be in the form of a Development Agreement"
Ms. Furman stated, "Well, PUD's (planning Unit Developments) even have several Uses
- different Comp[prehensive] Plan designations also get a little tricky. Again, we're just
talking about the -OS, 1 mean, we are planning on putting units on -06."
Ms. Helga Schwarz. 720 Gallaway Court. Winter Springs. Florida: as a resident and
representing the Highlands Homeowner's Association, Ms. Schwarz mentioned historical
references and expressed opposition to this project.
Mayor Bush closed the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item.
Regarding comments from Ms. Schwarz, Commissioner Robert S. Miller commented that
"Mayor, 1 just wanted to point out that all of these Hearings on these discussions have all
been in an open forum and the Highlands have been invited to all of these. So, I think the
fact that the statement was just made that, you know, their contribution has been totally
ignored or they don't have any say in this matter, I don't think that's appropriate. I
would like to make sure the Record reflects that - they have been notified about all these
issues and they've attended them all. And, this thing about the Golf Course, I find very
troubling because I think the City has bent over backwards to try and make that an issue
that is going to turn out well for the City of Winter Springs and for the Highlands.
So, I don't really understand what their issue is with regard to the Golf Course. I'm as
interested in making sure that either stays a Golf Course or if it doesn't, that the City
purchases that property and turns it into park property of some form that the entire City
would get to benefit from.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26. 2006
PAGE 7 OF 31
And, we've had that discussion here one or two times, I've raised that several times, but
yet it - continues to be ignored and presented to the people of Highlands as if this City
Commission is only interested in developing that as residential property and that is not
the case. So, I'd like that to be put on the Record very clearly. And, I hope that we don't
get more criticism for abandoning the Golf Comse because that is not the case."
Ms. Sah.lstrom stated, "This piece of property has been cleared. It's got a few trees on the
perimeter, but primarily it's been cleared - it could act as a buffer from distance point of
view, but it would have to be re-vegetated to be a visual buffer."
"I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE TO A - SECOND READING FOR
ORDINANCE 2006-05..." MAYOR BUSH ASKED, "...COMMISSIONER, DID
YOU WANT TO INCLUDE WHAT ANTHONY (GARGANESE]
RECOMMENDED ON UNITY OF TITLE...?" COMMISSIONER MILLER
STATED, "YES, WITH THE UNITY OF TITLE..."
ATTORNEY GARGANESE STATED, "...NO RESIDENTIAL UNITS; STORM
WATER WOULD BE OKAY, BUT NOT INCLUDED IN THE DENSITY
CALCULATION FOR THE OVERALL PROJECT..." COMMISSIONER
MILLER STATED, "...TO INCLUDE NOTICE, ISSUES, THOSE QUESTIONS."
ATTORNEY GARGANESE STATED, "YES, SIR." MOTION BY
COMMISSIONER MILLER. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GILMORE.
DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: NAY
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
PUBUC HEARINGS
201. Community Development Department - Planning Division
Requests The City Commission Hold A PubUe Hearing For Fint Reading Of
Ordinanee 2006-06, A Small Seale FLUM (Future Land Use Map) Amendment
Whieh Changes The Future Land Use Map Deslpation Of One (1) Pareel Totaling
1.72 Aeres, Loeated At 1228 Florida Avenue From (Winter Springs) "Industrial" To
(City Of Winter Springs) "M~ium Denlity Relidential".
Mayor Bush said, "Can we have a Motion to read by 'Title' only?"
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
OTV COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26. 2006
PAGE 8 0F 31
"SO MOVED." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GILMORE. SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER MILLER. DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE
DEPUTYMAYORBLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Garganese read Ordinance 2006-06 by "Title" only.
Ms. Sahls1rom stated, "This Item also went to the Local Planning Agency and for the
same reasons as previously stated or the other one was recommended for denial with a
Vote of four to one (4-1) and concerns were related to the loss of Industrial property
particularly related to the Large Scale Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendment as
well.
Staff does, however, recommend approval of this, given that it does square ~ff - a
development that you've already approved for an Amendment - that completely
surrounds it on three (3) sides and we would not want to see an enclave of Industrial in
the middle of all of that. And, the Comp[prehensive] Plan supports removal of
incompatible Uses and we would feel that this would remain as an incompatible Use and
therefore it's very much justified; and the Findings are included in your Staff Report
based on the Criteria stated in the Code and we believe this property does meet the
Criteria for a change of Land Use."
Commissioner Gilmore asked Ms. Sahls1rom, "In the Findings, and this appears in most
of them, it says,' At such time as the site develops the proposed Development will be
required to meet Concurrency standards'. If the State passes the Concurrency law, let's
say in early [20]'08 and this project doesn't go until [20]'08, does that mean that they
would have to meet the School Concurrency standards at that time?"
Ms. Sahls1rom answered, "We do have Concurrency standards in place now, if you are
speaking to the School one year, right, it will not be passed until [20]'08. We will have
to meet the Concurrency standards that are implemented in our Comp[prehensive] Plan as
part of that [20]'08 requirement. Whatever those requirements are - this would need to
be met, if this is not approved as the Site Plan prior to that Comp[prehensive] Plan
language being implemented."
Commissioner Gilmore asked, "The word was 'site develops'. What does 'site develops'
mean?" Ms. Sahlstrom replied, "Well, when it comes through Development Review and
it comes to you for Final Engineering approval, then it's given the 'Okay' to develop
according to those plans."
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26,2006
PAGE 9 0F 31
Continuing, Commissioner Gilmore then inquired, "So if they don't have that all done by,
let's say the time.the State puts through Concurrency, they may have some difficulties?"
Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "I think you have a good point, the word 'develops' is not the best
word to be used."
Manager McLemore stated, "I appreciate Eloise's [Sahlstrom] statement, but this is a
legal question and I think that the City Attorney should answer this question. I would
like to reiterate what the School Board said the other night, is that Concurrency, based on
the way they have developed an Ordinance at this point in time, would involve either
them being able to meet their enrollment requirements or some type of mitigation."
Tape IlSidc B
Attorney Garganese stated, "There's no clear answer right now on which properties get in
under the wire and which properties don't. I mean you're in the process of putting
together an Interlocal Agreement on School Concurrency and - it's going to be very
factual - which properties get in and which properties don't, under what's going to be
adopted eventually. Can't give you a clear answer right now."
Deputy Mayor Blake stated, "I just want to clarify something. Eloise [Sahlstrom], you
mentioned that the property is surrounded on three (3) sides by a separate or a different
Land Use." Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "Right, based on your Action at the last Meeting
where you Approved the Large Scale Amendment..." Deputy Mayor Blake replied,
"...But, all we Approved was the Transmittal." Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "You Approved
the Adoption of it and it's being transmitted to the State for fmal 'Letter of Intent of
ComplianCe' which has not been put forth by the State yet."
Discussion.
Continuing, Deputy Mayor Blake stated, "My only concern is that if one of the basis for
which we're changing the Future Land Use of this Item which doesn't go through that
same Large Scale process, that I would want to make the actual effective date of this
change, one that would coincide with the removal of the challenge period on the Large
Scale plan. That would avoid a reverse situation problem where if the other one for some
reason was challenged, was overturned, for whatever reason, then we don't have - the
same Residential Land Use surrounded by Industrial."
Attorney Garganese, "So, you're willing to have an additional, Conditional Effective
Date language in there for 2006-06..." Deputy Mayor Blake added, "...Yes, instead of
thirty-one (31) days after Adoption, have it coincide..." Attorney Gargarese said,
.....With the effect, when the Ordinance 2005-29 becomes effective." Deputy Mayor
Blake replied, "Yes."
Brief discussion.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 26, 2006
PAGE IO OF 3l
Mayor Bush opened the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item.
Ms. Helga Schwarz, 720 Gallaway Court, Winter Springs, Florida: representing the
Highlands Homeowner's Association and speaking as a resident, Ms. Schwarz noted
opposition to this project.
Mayor Bush closed the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item.
Discussion.
"MOTION TO MOVE TO SECOND READING." MOTION BY
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MILLER.
DISCUSSION.
"MOTION TO AMEND - I MOVE WE AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE
THE NEW DESCRIPTIVE LANGUAGE FOR TIlE 'Effeetive Date' THAT THE
ATTORNEY WILL CRAFf AND BRING BACK ON SECOND READING."
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MeGINNIS. DISCUSSION.
VOTE: (ON THE AMENDMENT)
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: NAY
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
DEPUTYMAYORBLAKE: AYE
CO~SmONERMILLER: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: .NAY
MOTION CARRIED.
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE STATED, "TIlE MOTION THAT IS ON THE
FLOOR CURRENTLY AS AMENDED IS TO BRING THE ITEM BACK TO A
SECOND READING AS PRESENTED WITH THE ADDmONAL LANGUAGE
THAT WHEREBY THE 'Effective Date' OF THIS LAND USE CHANGE WILL
COINCIDE WITH THE ULTIMATE 'Effective Date' OF A LARGE SCALE
AMENDMENT THAT WAS PRESENTED..." COMMISSIONER KREBS
ASKED, "...UNITY OF TITLE...?" DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE STATED,
"THAT HAS NOT BEEN PART OF THE MOTION."
ATTORNEY GARGANESE STATED, "THE APPLICANT IS SAYING, 'NO,
THEY CAN'T DO THAT."
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26, 2006
PAGE 11 of 31
MS. FURMAN STATED, "WE CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE IT'S A DIFFERENT
PROPERTY OWNER AND WE HAVE DIFFERENT OBLIGATIONS AS TO
CLOSING THAT PROPERTY. SO, WE WILL NOT OWN TITLE ALL AT THE
SAME TIME TO THESE PROPERTIES. WE WILL AS TO THE LARGE
SCALE AND WE WILL AS TO TIlE SMALL - AND WE CAN PUT THOSE ALL
TOGETHER, BUT IT MAY BE A COUPLE OF YEARS."
ATTORNEY GARGANESE STATED, "THAT WAS A TECHNICAL DETAIL
THAT I WANTED TO WORK OUT WITH THE APPLICANT, BECAUSE WE
NEED TO KNOW WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO BE CLOSING ON THESE
PROPERTIES. BECAUSE IN ORDER FOR THEM TO DO UNITY OF TITLE, I
DON'T WANT TO BOG THE COMMISSION DOWN WITH THAT ISSUE. BUT,
I THINK IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO DO UNITY OF TITLE, SO IT'S ALL ONE BIG
DEVELOPMENT PARCEL AND COINCIDES WITH THEIR CLOSING, WE'LL
PUT THAT IN TIlE AGREEMENT."
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE STATED, "IT'S REALLY RELEVANT TO THIS
PIECE AS WELL, MAYOR, BECAUSE THE PURPOSE OF DOING THAT WAS
REALLY TO PROTECT AGAINST ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PARCEL
RIGHT THERE, BUT TO USE IT FOR GREEN SPACE..." MS. FURMAN
INTERJECTED, "...1 AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BLAKE..." DEPUTY
MAYOR BLAKE CONTINUED, "...OR THE DRAINAGE, OR YOU HAVE TO
MAINTAIN THE ACCESS EASEMENT FOR THE CITY'S USE FOR THE
CITY'S BENEFIT."
VOTE: (ON TIlE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED)
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MeGINNIS: AYE
DEPUTYMAYORBLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: NAY
MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC BEARINGS
202. Not Used
PUBLIC HEARINGS
203. Community Development DepartlDent - Planning Division
Requests Tile City Commission Hold A Publk Hearing For Seeond
Reading/Adoption Of Ordi_ee 2006-09 WIlich Rezones 2.85 Acres (More or Less),
Located At 1057 U.S. Jliabway 17-92 Nortll From "C-2 Cenenl Commercial"
(Winter Springs) to "1-1 Ligllt Industrial" (City Of Winter Springs).
Attorney Garganese read Ordinance 2006-09 by "Title" only.
ATTACHMENT D
CITV OF WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETINO - JUL V 24,2006
PAGE 5OF 39
Mr. Ron Ligthart, 1036 Winding Waters Circle. Winter Springs. Florida: presented the
City with a way to save the City money by providing a step for the men's restroom; along
with a sign.
Mr. Brian Buholtz, 106 Trace Point. Winter Springs, Florida: inquired about the status
of funding for the extension of Orange A venue, and noted that it would provide an
alternate access point.
Ms. Helga Schwarz, 2200 Shepard Road, Winter Springs, Florida: representing the
Highlands Homeowner's Association's, Mayor Bush stated, "She did not want to address
the Commission; she is submitting Highland HOA's [Homeowner's Association's]
continued objection to Ordinance 2006-05, 2006-06."
PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS
200. Not Used.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
201. Community Development Department - Planning Division
Requests The City Commission Hold A Public Hearing For Second Reading I
Adoption Of Ordinance 2006-0S, A Small Seale FLUM (Future Land Use Map)
Amendment Which Changes The Future Land Use Map Designation Of Two
Parcels Totaling 1.17 Acres, Located On Lake Lucerne Circle From (Winter
Springs) "Industrial" To (City Of Winter Springs) "Medium Density Residential".
Attorney Garganese read Ordinance 2006-05 by "Title" only and stated, "There is a
revised Ordinance per the Commission's direction on the last time this was considered.
Section 9. Effective Date will include a sentence that reads, 'In addition, even if this
Ordinance is found to be in compliance per a final order as provided above, this
Ordinance shall only take effect at such time that Ordinance - 2005-29 becomes
effective' ."
Ms. Eloise Sahlstrom, ASLA, AICP, Senior Planner, Community Development
Department spoke on this Agenda Item.
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.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MJNUI'ES
CITY COMMl~ION
REGULAR MEETING - JULY 24, 2006
PAGE 6 OF 39
"I WILL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM '201'." MOTION
BY COMMISSIONER MILLER. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS.
DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: NAY
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
PUBue HEARINGS
202. COlDlDunity DeveloplDent DepartJDent - Planning Division
Requests The City Conunission Hold A Public Hearing For Second Reading I
Adoption of Ordinanee 2006-06, A SlDaU Seale FLUM (Future Land Use Map)
AlDenment Which Changes The Future Land Use Map Designation Of One P&reel
Totaling 1.72 Aeres, Located At 1228 Florida Avenue FroID (Winter Springs)
"Industrial" To (City Of Winter Springs) "MediUID Density Residential".
Attorney Garganese read Ordinance 2006-06 by "Title" only.
Ms. Sahstrom brief addressed the City Commission on this Agenda Item.
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 WILL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM '202'." MOTION
BY COMMISSIONER MILLER. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS.
DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: NAY
DEPUTYMAYORBLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Garganese said, "Just for the Record, that will include the Conditional Effective
Date I read into the Record for the prior Ordinance."
ATTACHMENT E
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS PREPARED BY:
AND SHOULD BE RETURNED TO:
Anthony A. Gerpnese
City Attorney of Wlnrer Springs
Brown, OIrpDtSC. Weiss ct O'Agrcsta, P.A.
22S E. Robinson St. Suite 660
Orlando, FL 32801
(407) 425.9566
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
~s DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the" Agreement") is made and executed
this I~ day of June, 2006, 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 THE KEEWIN REAL PROPERTY COMPANY, a Florida
corporation ("Developer") whose address is 1031 West Morse Blvd.. Winter Park, FL
32789.
WITNESSEm:
WHEREAS, Developer is the contract purchaser of that certain real property
located in Seminole County. Florida consisting of approximately 47 acres, as more
particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (the
"Property"); and
WHEREAS, Developer desires to develop townhomes or condominiums on the
Property (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS. Developer has applied for an amendment to the Winter Springs
Comprehensive Plan in order to accommodate the Project; and
WHEREAS, at this stage in the development review process, the City and
Developer have agreed to certain conditions of development related to. among other things:
(i) buffers; (ii) notices to potential purchasers; (Hi) school mitigation; and (iv) recreational
land; and
WHEREAS. the Developer acknowledges and agrees that as the Project is taken
through the City's development review process. the City may require that this
Development Agreement be modified to incorporate additional terms and conditions in
order to safeguard the public's interests; and
WHEREAS, the City and Developer desire to execute this Agreement in order to
more fully set forth the conditions of development.
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs /lnd Keewin RealPropcrty Company
Page lof9
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants
contained herein, the parties mutually agree as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this
reference.
2. Buffer. Since the properties to the west of the Project are zoned commercial and
industrial, the Developer has agreed to build a buffer between.the Project,and those
properti. loth. \Veat. The buffer will include a; 6' high wall OD topc.(',~ berm. The
buffer shall also include trees, shrubs and irrigation in accordance with a landscape plan
deemed acceptable to the City.
3. Notice to Purchasers. The Developer will include in the Covenants, Conditions and
Restrictions for the Project a notice to all potential purchasers that the properties adjacent
to the west have zoning designations of industrial and commercial. Said notice shall be
subject to the approval of the City Attorney.
4. Parks and Recreation. In accordance with Winter Springs Code Section 20-354 and
other applicable provisions of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code, the Developer
agrees to dedicate an appropriate amount of land as a park for the residcatt~ofthc Project.
Such park shall have recreational facilities built in accordance with tbe stN14A.r-4~ of the
National Rc4rcational Association. In addition, such park shall be protcc~;iUlr~~hdeed
restricu....prded in the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the Project which
shall ensure the preservation of its intended use, the payment of future taxes, and the
maintenance of the park and facilities for a safe, healthy and attractive living environment.
The park shall be included in the phasing plan, if any, and shall be constructed and fully
improved by Developer at an equivalent or greater rate than the construction of the
residential structures for which it serves.
5.~I"itip.tion Payment. In order to mitigate the potential impacts of the Project
on the Seminole County Public Schools, Developer has agreed to pay One Thousand Two
Hundred Thirty-Five Dollars (51,235.00) for each residential unit in addition to the School
Impact Fees charged for each residential unit. The Mitigation Payment shall be paid to the
School Board upon the date that the City grants the first vertical building permit for the
Project. The School Board shall be considered a third party beneficiary under this
Development Agreement for the limited purpose of enforcing the provisions of this
paragraph against the Developer. Nothing herein shall be construed as obligating or
requiring the City to pay, or otherwise enforce the payment of, the Mitigation Payment to
the School Board. Developer agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any
action, dispute, claim, or litigation directly or indirectly involving the Mitigation Payment.
6. Notices. Any and all notices. elections, demands, requests and responses thereto
permitted or required to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing. signed by or on
behalf of the party giving the same, and shall be deemed to have been properly given and
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 2of9
shall be effective upon being personally delivered, or upon being faxed to the number set
forth below to the appropriate party. or upon being deposited in the United States mail,
postage prepaid, certified with return receipt requested, or upon being deposited on a paid
basis with a nationally recognized overnight delivery service, to the other party at the
address of such other party set forth below or at such other address as such other party
may designate by notice specifically designated as a notice of change of address and given
in accordance herewith, provided, however, that the time period in which a response to any
such notice, election, demand or request must be given shall commence on the date of
receipt thereof; and provided further that no notice of change of address shall be effective
until the date of receipt thereof. Personal delivery to a party or to any officer, partner.
agent or employee of such party at said address shall constitute receipt. Rejection or other
refusal to accept or inability to deliver because of changed address of which no notice has
been received shall also constitute receipt. Any such notice, election, demand, request or
response, shall be addressed as follows:
If to Developer:
The Keewin Real Property Company
1031 West Morse Blvd., Suite 325
Winter Park, FL 32789
Altn: Jay Folk
Phone: 407-645-4400
Fax: 407-645-0340
With a copy to:
Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed, P.A.
215 N. Eala Drive
P.O. Box 2809
Orlando, FL 32801
Attn: M. Rebecca Furman, Esquire
Phone: 407-843-4600
Fax: 407-843-4444
If to City:
City of Winter Springs
1126 East S.R. 434
Winter Springs, FL 32708
Atto: City Manager
Phone: 407-327-5999
Fax: 407-327-4753
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 3 of9
With a copy to:
Anthony Garganese, Esq.
City Attorney of Winter Springs
Brown, Garganese, Weiss & D'Agresta, P.A
225 E. Robinson St., Ste. 660
Orlando, FL 3280 I
Phone: 407-425-9566
Fax: 407-425-9596
Either party may change the address provided hereinabove by giving written notice
of such change to the other part)' or parties as herein provided.
7. Entire Aareement. The making, execution and delivery of this Agreement by the
parties hereto have been induced by no representations, statements, warranties or
agreements other than those expressed herein. This Agreement embodies the entire
understanding of the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof, and there are
no other written or oral agreements in effect between the parties hereto relating to the
subject matter hereof. This Agreement or any part thereof may only be amended or
modified by an agreement in writing by both of the parties hereto.
8. Severability. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement shall be
interpreted in such a manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law, but should
any provision of this Agreement be prohibited or invalid under such law, such provision
shall be ineffective to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity without invalidating the
remainder of such provision or the remaining provisions of this Agreement.
9. Sindini Effect. Except as provided hereinabove, this Agreement shall be binding
upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and
assigns.
10. Waiver. A waiver of any provision hereof or any default hereunder by either party
shall be effective only in writing. A waiver of one provision shall not constitute a waiver of
any other provision hereof. and a waiver of default shall not apply to any other default
whether occurring simultaneously or at a later date.
11. CounterDarts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts. each
of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which if taken together shall constitute one
and the same Agreement.
12. Governin~ Law. The laws of Florida shall govern the validity, performance and
enforcement of the Agreement. .
13. Headin2s. The headings of these several paragraphs contained herein are for
convenience only and do not defme, limit or affect the contents of such paragraphs.
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 4 of9
14. Authorization. Each of the parties represents that this Agreement has been duly
executed by a partner or officer authorized to bind such party and that this Agreement
constitutes the valid, binding and enforceable obligation of such party.
15. Attornev's Fees. Any party to this Agreement who is the prevailing party in any
legal proceeding against any other party brought under or in connection with this
Agreement or the subject matter hereof, shall be additionally entitled to recover court costs
and reasonable attorney fees, and all other litigation expenses, including deposition costs,
travel and expert witness fees from the non-prevailing party.
16. Construction. The parties acknowledge that each party and its counsel have
reviewed this Agreement and the parties hereby agree that the normal rule of construction
to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be
employed in the interpretation of this Agreement or any addendums or exhibits hereto.
17. ~. Venue for any legal proceedings under this Agreement shall lie solely in the
state courts in and for Seminole County, Florida, or in the United States District Court for
the Middle District of Florida.
18. ReDresentations of the Parties. The City and Developer hereby each represent
and warrant to the other that it 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. When title to
the Property is vested in Developer and when duly executed and delivered by the City,
then this Agreement will be recorded by the City in the Public Records of Seminole
County. Florida. and will constitute a legal. valid and binding obligation enforceable
against the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
Developer represents that it has voluntarily and willfully executed this Agreement for
purposes of binding the Property to the terms and conditions set forth in this
Agreement. In the event Developer does not acquire title to the Property pursuant to
the Contract for Sale and Purchase or within one year of both parties signing this
Agreement, which ever occurs sooner, then this Agreement shall be of no force and
effect unless both parties agree in writing that Developer will be given additional time
to acquire the Property. Developer represents and warrants that they will notify the
City Attorney. in writing, within three (3) business days of closing on the Property.
19. Successors and Assillns. This Agreement shall automatically he binding upon
and shall inure to the benefit of the City and Developer and their respective successors
and assigns.
20. Amendments. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended except by
written agreement duty executed by both parties hereto (or their successors or assigns)
and approved by the City Commission.
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Kecwin Real Property Company
Page 50f9
21. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon approval by
the City Commission and execution of this Agreement by both parties hereto.
22. Relationship of the Parties. The relationship of the parties to this
Agreement is contractual and Developer is an independent contractor and not an agent
of the City. Nothing herein shall be deemed to create a joint venture or principal-agent
relationship between the parties, and neither party is authorized to, nor shall either
party act toward third persons or the public in any manner, which would indicate any
such relationship with the other.
23. Sovereiszn Immunity. Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this
Agreement, nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of the
City's right to sovereign immunity under Section 768.28, or other limitations imposed on
the City's potential liability under state or federal law. As such, the City shall not be liable,
under this Agreement for punitive damages or interest for the period before judgment.
Further, the City shall not be liable for any claim or judgment, or portion thereof, to any
one person for more than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00), or any claim or
judgment, or portion thereof, which, wben totaled with all other claims or judgments paid
by the State or its agencies and subdivisions arising out of the same incident or occurrence,
exceeds the sum of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000.00). This paragraph shall
survive termination of this Agreement.
24. City's Police Power. Developer agrees and acknowledges tbat the City
hereby reserves all police powers granted to the City by law. In no way shall this
Agreement be construed as the City bargaining away or surrendering its police powers.
25. Third-ParlY Rivhts. Except as provided in paragraph 5, this Agreement is
not a third party beneficiary contract and shall not in any way whatsoever create any
rights on behalf of any third party.
26. Soecific Performance. Strict compliance shall be required with each. and
every provision of this Agreement. The parties agree that failure to perform the obligations
provided by this Agreement shall result in irreparable damage and that specific
performance ofthesc obligations may be obtained by a suit in equity.
27. Develooment Permits. Nothing berein shall limit the City's authority to
grant or deny any development permit applications or requests subsequent to the effective
date of this Agreement. The failure of this Agreement to address any particular City,
County. State andlor Federal permit, condition, term or restriction shall not relieve
Developer or the City of the necessity of complying with the law governing said permitting
requirement, condition, term or restriction. Without imposing any limitation on the City's
police powers, the City reserves the right to withhold, suspend or terminate any and all
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 6 of9
certificates of occupancy for any building or unit if Developer is in. breach of any term and
condition of this Agreement.
28. Termination. The City shall have the unconditional right, but not obligation, to
terminate this Agreement, without notice or penalty, if Developer fails to receive building
permits and substantially commence vertical construction of the Project within three (3)
years of the effective date of this Agreement. If the City terminates this Agreement, the
City shall record a notice of termination in the public records of Seminole County, Florida
if this Agreement is recorded pursuant to paragraph 18.
[SIGNATURE BLOCKS BEGIN ON NEXT PAGE)
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 70f9
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seal on the
date first above written.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
For the use and reliance of the City of Winter Sprines.
Florida only.
CITY SEAL
Date:
By:
Anthony rganese, City Attorney for
the City of Winter Springs, Florida
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF SEMINOLE
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, John F. Bush and
Andrea Lorenzo Luaces, well known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk respectively,
of the City of Winter Springs, Florida. and acmowledgcd before me that they executed
the foregoing instrument on behalf of the City of Winter Springs, as its true act and deed,
and that they were duly authorized to do so.
Witness my hand and official seal this Jtt' day of ~ W\t. , 2006.
SAtl)lIIlJWI(ER
G MY COI6E8IDN tllDD223479
EXPIB: JUN 16. 2OlI7
1IondId~ AdnlUgIIlalIIy
J. {&Jf\ l1lA
~ubhc .1
My commission expires: \I Un! Ill, tCiY:;
(NOTARY SEAL)
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 8 of9
Signed, sealed and delivered in the
presence of the fonowing witnesses:
THE DEWIN REAL PROPERTY
COMPANY, . noricla corporatio.
(NOTARY SEAL)
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 9 of 9
Exhibit' A'
PARCEL NUMBERS
26-2Q-30-5AR-OCOO-0210 28-20-30-5A5-0B00-015A
28-2Q-30-5A5-OBOO-0170 33-20-30-503-0500-0000
33-20-30-503-??oo-0150 33-20-30-503-0000-0240
33-20-30-503-oo00-025A
LESS AREAS 1 & 2 AS DESCRIBED:
Area 1
A parcel of land being a portion of Lot 18, Block "B" of OAK GROVE PARK, according to the
plat thereof as recorded In Plat Book 7, Page 83, Public Records of Seminole County, Florida.
Being more particularly descl1bed as follows:
BEGIN at the Northwest comer of WILDWOOD according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat
Book 19, Page 7 through 10, Public Records of Seminole County, Florida; thence South
03057'20" East, along the Westel1y line of said WILDWOOD, for a distance of 166.02 feet to a
point of curvature of a curve concave Westerly, having a radius of 175.00 feet and a delta angle
of 29059'46"; thence, continuing along the Westerty line of said WILDWOOD, run Southerly
along the arc of said curve for a distance of 91.62 feet to the point of tangency; thence,
continuing along the Westerly line of said WILDWOOD, South 26002'26" West for a distance of
126.10 feet; thence, departing said Westerly line of said WILDWOOD, South 86002'40" West for
a distance of 94.04 feet; thence North 03057'20" West for a distance of 362.73 feet to the
Southerly right of way line of Shepard Road and Northerty line of said Lot 18; thence North
86002'40" East, along said Southerty right of way line, for a distance of 180.52 feet to the POINT
OF BEGINNING.
Area 2
A parcel of land being a portion of Lot 18, Block MB" of OAK GROVE PARK, according to the
plat thereof as recorded In Plat Book 7, Page 83, Public Records of Seminole County, Florida.
Being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCE at the Northwest corner of WILDWOOD according to the plat thereof as recorded
in Plat Book 19, Page 7 through 10, Pubic Records of Seminole County, Florida; thence run
South 86002'40" West, along the Southerly right of way line of Shepard Road and Northerly line
of said Lot 18, for a distance of 260.52 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, departing
said Southerly right of way line of Shepard Road and Northerly line of said Lot 18, South
03057'20" East for a distance of 298.01 feet; thence South 86002'40" West for a distance of
113.09 feet; thence North 04049'25" East for a distance of 301.55 feet to the Southerty right of
way line of Shepard Road and Northerty line of said Lot 18; thence North 86002'40" East, along
said Southerty right of way line, for a distance of 67.07 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Winter Place
Winter Place
Winter Place
Winter Place
Winter Place
Winter Place
winter place