HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 02 13 Public Hearing 201 Ordinance 2005-29 Large Scale Comprehensive Plan LS-CPA-06-01
COMMISSION AGENDA
ITEM 201
Public Hearing X
February 13.2006
Meeting
MGR./DEPT
REQUEST:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division requests the City Commission
hold a Public Hearing for First Reading and Transmittal of Ordinance 2005-29, a Large Scale
Comprehensive Plan Amendment, referenced as LS-CPA-06-01 which changes the Future Land
Use Map designation from "Industrial" to "Medium Density Residential" for seven (7) parcels
containing 47.27 acres, more or less, less areas 1 & 2, located between Shepard Road and Florida
Avenue. (This item was postponed from the January 9th and again on January 23rd to date
certain, i.e. February 13, 2006.)
PURPOSE:
The Keewan Real Property Company of Winter Park, Florida, has initiated the request for a
Large Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment, changing the Future Land Use Map designation
for the existing 47.27 acre (more or less) vacant property so that it can be developed into as many
as 334 residential townhouses.
APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY
Florida Statute 163.3174 (4): The Local Planning Agency shall have the general responsibility for the
conduct of the comprehensive planning program. Specifically, the Local Planning Agency shall:
(a) Be the agency responsible for the preparation of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment and
shall make recommendations to the governing body regarding the adoption or amendment of such plan. . .
(b) Monitor and oversee the effectiveness and status of the comprehensive plan and recommend to the
governing body such changes in the comprehensive plan as may from time to time be required...
Florida Statute 163.3187 Amendment of adopted comprehensive plan.
Florida Statute 166.041 Procedures for adoption of ordinances and resolutions.
Winter Sprines Charter Section 4.15 Ordinances in General.
Winter Sprines Article III. Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Section 15-30. Authority. purpose and intent;
Section 15-36. Review criteria;
Section 15-37. Local Planning Agency Review and Recommendation:
@
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Prior to the City Commission's consideration of the application, the Local Planning Agency shall
consider the application(s) at a Public Hearing, along with the Staff review board's recommenda-
tion, and recommend that the City Commission approve, approve with modifications (text only),
or deny the application for transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. At a minimum,
the Local Planning Agency shall consider the same factors considered by the Staff review board.
The LP A shall hold at least one (1) public hearing prior to making its recommendation to the
City Commission.
CHRONOLOGY:
The following summarizes the data the City has been able to gather related to the Wildwood
PUD and the adjoining Dittmer property:
Around 1971, the Wildwood PUD was established by National Homes Corporation of Lafayette,
Indiana. On July 24, 1973, the Wildwood PUD Plat was recorded with a cluster and patio homes
development east of (and including) the Florida Power & Light easement. The western portion
of the PUD was intended as garden apartments and townhomes.
May 10, 1983- At the request of Walt Dittmer, 30 acres west of the power easement of the
Wildwood PUD Master Plan was amended, from all Multi-Family to a mix of Multi-Family,
Commercial and Industrial uses.
July 12, 1983- At the request of National Homes Corporation, that portion of Wildwood Drive
located on the Florida Power Corporation easement was approved for public hearing related to
the vacation of the drive since it was included in the amended Master Plan.
April 24, 1984- PUD Master Plan Revision adopted by the City Commission. The Multi-Family
portion was amended to be Professional Offices. The final plan was a tiered office park concept
(Winter Springs Commerce Center) with Industrial development to the west, then Commercial
and next, Professional Offices facing eastward and appearing as residential structures.
July 10, 1984- The Preliminary Plan for Phase I (illustrating this concept) was approved by the
City Commission. (See ATTACHMENT A). The two cul-de-sacs were granted a double
variance with the condition that they be linked by a stabilized emergency connection for police
and fire vehicles. The design was never developed and the property has remained undeveloped.
Sept. 23, 1985- The easternmost portion of the Florida Power Corporation easement IS-feet by
1700- feet dedicated by Mr. Dittmer to the Rustic Woods Homeowners Association as a green
belt and 90-day extension given for PUD Final Development Plan.
Nov. 26, 1985- A subdivision bond was recorded for the following:
1- Construction of a berm to a maximum height of four feet;
2- Landscaping of such berm; and
3- Construction of a retention system with rip/rap support within such berm.
Page 2
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
These were to be located within the 175' wide Florida Power Corporation Right-of-Way as
recorded in the Wildwood Plat. Additionally, the construction of a "T" section on Wildwood
Drive resulting from the vacation of a portion of the Wildwood Drive right of way is noted.
Oct. 20,1988- Adoption of Ordinance 436, reclassifying Parcel 33-20-30-503-0000-025A (5.850
acres) as part of the PUD based on the petition of Dittmer Properties Inc. (see map on page 4,
Parcel "F".) The rezoning of this parcel was granted (according to the ordinance), so that the
property might "be included within the boundaries of the adjacent PUD." The City's current
maps do not reflect this change. (ATTACHMENT F)
1997- Seminole County Community Redevelopment Agency established the U.S. 17-92 Corridor
Community Development Area (CRA) and Winter Springs supported by Resolution. All of the
subject property, except Parcel 'F' is included in the CRA.
Feb. 16, 2005- Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request received.
Application and Fee returned to Applicant based on Winter Springs Code Section 15-32.
Sept 2005- Re-Application for Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Application included only four (4) of the seven (7) parcels: 26-20-30-5AR-OCOO-0210 (23.25
acres); 33-20-30-503-0000-0150 (2.0 acres); 33-20-30-503-0000-0240 (7.450 acres); and 33-
20-30-503-0000-025A (5.850 acres).
Oct. 19, 2005-Revised Application for Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment including
seven (7) parcels, less areas 1 & 2 (as described in ATTACHMENT B)
Oct. 26, 2005- Adjacent property owners within 150' notified by Certified Mail
Oct. 26, 2005- Public Noticing in Orlando Sentinel ofLPA Public Hearing
Nov. 1,2005- LP A postponed the public hearing to date certain, Dec. 6, 2005.
Dec. 6, 2005- LPA heard the request and made recommendation of "Denial" re: Ord. 2005-29.
Dec. 29, 2005-Public Noticing in Orlando Sentinel of Public Hearing for 15t Reading/Transmittal
Jan. 9,2006- City Commission Postponed the Transmittal Hearing / 15t Reading of Ordinance
2005-29 to Date Certain (January 23,2006) and preserved the Advertising.
Jan. 23, 2006- City Commission Postponed the Transmittal Hearing / 15t Reading of Ordinance
2005-29 to Date Certain (February 13, 2006) and preserved the Advertising.
Feb. 7,2006- Applicant met with homeowners in the Highlands and Lake Lucerne area to
discuss concerns.
Page 3
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
CONSIDERATIONS:
Applicant - The Keewan Real Property Company
Owner- Dittmer Properties Inc.; 1006 Shepard Rd., Winter Springs, FL 32708
Location - South of Shepard Road and North of Florida Avenue, adjacent to the Florida Power &
Light easement and west of Wildwood and Greenspointe residential communities.
Total Acreage- 47.27 acres, more or less.
Site Information - The property is included in the US 17-92 CRA Redevelopment District. The
parcels are primarily vacant (except for dirt bike racing and unauthorized outdoor equipment
storage along Florida Avenue). The parcels have an "Industrial" Future Land Use. The
Applicant is requesting a Future Land Use change to "Medium Density Residential":
The following parcels are included:
PARCEL 'A'
28-20-30-5AS-OBOO-015A
3.290 acres
LEG BEG 70 FT N 4 DEG 49 MIN 25 SEC E OF SE COR LOT 15 BLK B RUN N 4 DEG 49 MIN 25 SEC
E 629.50 FT N 86 DEG 2 MIN 40 SEC E 267.59 FT S 3 DEG 57 MIN 20 SEC E 166.02 FT SWLY ON
CURVE 60.21 FT S 26 DEG 2 MIN 26 SEC W 301.10 FT SLY ON CURVE 143.86 FT S 85 DEG 53 MIN
25 SEC W 161.12 FT TO BEG (LESS RD) BLK B OAK GROVE PARK PB 7 PG 83
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Zoning: "PUD"
Current Future Land Use: "Industrial"
Proposed Future Land Use: "Medium Density Residential"
PARCEL 'B'
28-20-30-5AS-OBOO-0170
3.404 acres
LEG LOTS 17 + 18 + LOTS 15 + 16 E OF W LINE OF LOT 21 BLK C LEVY GRANT (LESS BEG 70 FT N
4 DEG 49 MIN 25 SEC E OF SE COR LOT 15 RUN N 4 DEG 49 MIN 25 SEC E 629.50 FT N 86 DEG 2
MIN 40 SEC E 267.59 FT S 3 DEG 57 MIN 20 SEC E 166.02 FT SWLY ON CURVE 60.21 FT S 26 DEG
2 MIN 26 SEC W 301.10 FT SLY ON CURVE 143.86 FT S 85 DEG 53 MIN 25 SEC W 161.12 FT TO
BEG & RD) BLK B OAK GROVE PARK PB 7 PG 83
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Zoning: "PUD"
Current Future Land Use: "Industrial"
Proposed Future Land Use: "Medium Density Residential"
PARCEL 'c'
26-20-30-5AR-OCOO-0210
23.25 acres
LEG LOT 21 (LESS N 579.5 FT OF W 330 FT + PT PLATTED WILDWOOD) BLK C;
D R MITCH ELLS SURVEY OF THE LEVY GRANT PB 1 PG 5
Existing Land Use: Vacant, except for dirt bike racing
Zoning: "PUD"
Current Future Land Use: "Industrial"
Proposed Future Land Use: "Medium Density Residential"
Page 4
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
PARCEL 'D'
33-20-30-503-0000-0150
2.0 acres
LEG EL Y 225 FT OF NL Y 385 FT OF LOT 15 ENTZMINGER FARMS ADD NO 3 PB 6 PG 27
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Zoning: "PUD"
Current Future Land Use: "Industrial"
Proposed Future Land Use: "Medium Density Residential"
PARCEL 'E'
33-20-30-503-0000-0240
7.450 acres
LEG LOT 24 (LESS E 25 FT OF S 200 FT) ENTZMINGER FARMS ADD NO 3 PB 6 PG 27
Vacant, except for unauthorized outdoor equipment storage
Zoning: "PUD"
Current Future Land Use: "Industrial"
Proposed Future Land Use: "Medium Density Residential"
US1
Page 5
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
PARCEL 'F'
33-20-30-503-0000-025A
5.850 acres
LEG LOT 25 (LESS W 204.42 FT OF S 341.94 FT) ENTZMINGER FARMS ADD NO 3 PB 6
PG 27
Existing Land Use:
Zoning:
Current Future Land Use:
Proposed Future Land Use:
Vacant
"C-2" (according to the Zoning
according to Ordinance 436.
"Industrial"
"Medium Density Residential"
Map); however, PUD
PARCEL 'G'
33-20-30-503- OSOO-OOOO
.500 acres
LEG THAT 25 FT STRIP LYING N OF & ADJ TO LOTS 24 & 25 ENTZMINGER FARMS ADD NO 3 PB 6 PG 27
Existing Land Use: FP&L Easement, Water Retention
Zoning: "PUD"
Current Future Land Use: "Medium Density Residential"
Proposed Future Land Use: "Medium Density Residential"
Not included is PARCEL 'H':
28-20-30-5DL-0000-0001
6.840 acres
LEG 175 FT FLORIDA POWER CORP ESMT (LESS EL Y 15 FT) & VACD WILDWOOD DR
ADJ WILDWOOD PB 19 PGS 7 TO 10
Existing Land Use:
Zoning:
Current Future Land Use:
Proposed Future Land Use:
FP &L Easement; Retention
"PUD"
"Medium Density Residential"
"Medium Density Residential"
Existing Land Uses - All of the parcels are undeveloped. Overflow parking occurs along
Shepard Rd for Dittmer Aluminum; dirt biking is prevalent on parcel "C" (according to adjacent
property owners); and it has been reported the parcel 'E' is currently leased by Mr. Dittmer to
someone who is using it for outdoor storage but no site plan approval or permits have been
issued for a use on this parcel. Adjacent existing land uses, zoning and FLUM designations
include the following:
Existing Land Uses Zoning FLUM
Subject Sites Undeveloped PUD (WS) and Industrial (WS)
C-2 (WS)
North Dittmer Aluminum Fabrication C-2 (WS) Industrial (WS)
. ... .. ..... ....................................................................
South Equipment Storage and Single C-2 (WS) and Industrial (WS) and Low
Family Residential R-IA (SC) Density Residential (SC)
..................................................
East Single Family Residential PUD (WS) Medium Density Residential
West Miscellaneous Commercial & C-2 (WS) and Industrial (WS) &
Industrial Uses including Car C-2 (SC) Commercial (SC)
Dealerships
Page 6
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
(WS) Winter Springs; (SC) Seminole County;
The only Low Density Residential use adjacent to the property is south of Florida Avenue.
Development Trends - The most recent development within Winter Springs in the immediate
area is Apex Transmission (2005) immediately adjacent to 17-92 and west of the property. Other
recent development includes a wholesale coffee roaster (2004) and the KIA Dealership (2000).
The property representative for the Elsea property (to the south on Florida Avenue) indicates that
they get 1-2 letters a week from interested purchasers looking for industrial land.
Proposed Future Land Use Classification - The requested change in the future land use map
designation from City of Winter Springs "Industrial" to City of Winter Springs "Medium Density
Residential" leaves a remaining pocket of Industrial to the south (including the Elsea property
(1.7 acres) and two parcels (totaling 1.33 acres) owned by Florida Avenue LLC) that would then
be surrounded by Residential. According to the Applicant's attorney, the applicant has entered
into a contract for purchase of the Elsea property (1.7 acres) and the property's owners now
indicate full support for the change of land use, although the Applicant has not amended their
request to include the Elsea parcel in the request for a land use change. No correspondence has
been received from Florida Avenue LLC.
Letters/Phone Calls In Favor Or Opposition - Numerous calls requesting information have been
received. On Monday, Jan. 9,2006 a letter was received from the Elsea property reversing their
opposition and now supporting the request. Two adjacent property owners on US 17-92 have
sent letters formalizing their opposition (Moretti on US 17-92 [as represented by Ross
Burnaman] and Five Points Motors). No other formal correspondence has been received,
although intergovernmental notices of the public hearings were sent to the Seminole County
School Board, Seminole County, Highway 17-92 CRA, and the City of Longwood.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ANALYSIS:
The following summarizes the data and issues, which Staff analyzed m revIewmg this
application:
Justification for Future Land Use Desh!nation - The requested future land use map
designation is primarily driven by two factors:
1- The market for townhouse development; and
2- The owner's inability to establish the Winter Springs Commerce Center that was granted
preliminary plan approval in 1984 after the PUD Master Plan was amended.
The current demand for townhouse development is strong. Three hundred (300) building permits
have been issued since 2000. An additional 2,212 more townhouse/condominium units are in
various stages of approval. Of these, 70% are located within the Town Center. (Densification of
the Town Center is not only permitted but encouraged.) Urban Land magazine reported in
February (2005) that "the central Florida market has weathered the storms and is poised to
continue its tremendous run in housing activity and value growth at least in the short term" (p.
103) Building activity in this area of the city would help to improve surrounding property values.
Page 7
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
The current demand for industrial land is not as apparent. The property has remained vacant, and
therefore it might be assumed that no market exists for its use as depicted on the approved PUD
Amended Master Plan. However, Urban Land magazine (February 2005) reports, "The central
Florida industrial market, particularly Orlando, also continues to grow... Orlando is one of the
fastest growing high-tech markets in the country... Because of Orlando's centralized location
within the state, the distribution of goods from this location has always been a positive element
relative to the industrial sector" (p. 109)
The City has a limited supply of industrial property. Whereas, residential property is able to
locate in most parts of the City, industrial property cannot. The Comprehensive Plan indicates
that there is a need for an additional 105 acres of industrial land by 2010. Pending the
Commission's direction, Staff may reassess this number as part of the 2008 Evaluation and
Appraisal Report (EAR).
In October 2004, the City Commission directed the Planning and Zoning Board to participate in
Visioning Exercises to review and give recommendation regarding the City's commercial and
industrial use areas. The visioning exercises looked specifically at the City's existing
commercial and industrial zoning districts (including the subject property and properties along
US 17-92) and what the City's long term vision might be for these areas. (It was not part of the
scope of the visioning exercises to address whether there was a need for more or less acreage in
any of the future land use classifications.) The Visioning Exercise process revealed that the City
needed additional commercial and industrial zoning categories in order to promote sound
planning and to create distinctions between the various districts and resulted in the creation of a
new C-3 Highway Commercial Zoning District, as well as the addition of the C-3 permitted uses
in the 1-1 Light Industrial Zoning District.
Public Facilities:
ROADS/TRAFFIC CIRCULA nON:
Availabilitv of Access:
Direct access is available to the subject property from Shepard Road (north) and from Florida
Avenue (south). To the east, Wildwood Drive originally connected to the property through the
FP&L easement, however that connection was vacated in 1985. Mr. Dittmer owns property that
could give the subject parcel direct access to US 17-92, however, those properties are not
included in the Applicant's contract with Mr. Dittmer and, therefore, are not a consideration in
this request. (See Proposed Conceptual Plan, ATTACHMENT C).
Improvements/expansions needed as a result of proposed future land use change
In evaluating the impacts of the change in future land use, the Applicant has indicated that the
volume of residential trips that would be generated by the proposed land use change are
substantially less than the trips generated for an industrial use. Pursuant to the Institute of Traffic
Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook, ih Edition, light industrial (ITE # 110) generates
6.97 average weekday trips per 1000 SF of gross floor area. The amount of industrial square
footage could be as high as 850,000 SF. This maximum estimated industrial projection would
generate 5,925 average weekday trips; 883 trips on the PM peak hour (4-6 PM) of the adjacent
Page 8
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
street(s), and 782 trips on the AM peak hour (7-9 AM) of the adjacent street(s). The AM peak
hour of the adjacent street is the time most pertinent to school traffic.
The ITE also calculates light industrial trip generation on a per acre basis (51.80 trips per acre, or
2,449 average weekday trips for the subject property). The AM peak hour of adjacent street(s)
volume added would be 355 ( 343 PM) trips.
For town house residential (ITE # 230), 5.86 trips per unit for 334 units equals 1,958 average
weekday trips. The AM peak hour of adjacent street(s) traffic volume added would be 147 (174
PM) trips.
Shepard Road is considered a minor City collector road where it abuts the property on the north
and where the Applicant is proposing the main entrance to the development. [Shepard Road is a
2-lane collector with a LOS of"C" with a 2001 daily traffic volume of 5,226. A LOS "D"
capacity is 1 0,000 trips per day.] Shepard Road appears to have capacity to accommodate the
additional traffic that would be generated by the proposed residential use, but would likely
require a left turn and right turn decellane at the proposed project entrance.
Florida Avenue is a paved local County road and may require upgrading to support an increase in
traffic. [No traffic counts are available for Florida Ave.] Seminole County will require a right-
of-way (ROW) permit for connection to this road and will likely perform a traffic concurrency
review to assess the need for off-site improvements. Additionally, all development within the
City is subject to Seminole County traffic impact fees.
US 17-92 between Shepard Road and SR 419 is a 6-lane arterial. Between Shepard Road and SR
434, it is a 4-lane arterial. FDOT considers this segment of US 17-92 as having a LOS "F" based
on FDOT traffic counts. [It is not known why but, FDOT traffic counts and Seminole County
traffic counts vary substantially for the portion of US 17-92 between SR 419 and SR 434.
Seminole County traffic counts result in a LOS "D".] The Applicant indicates, "vehicle access
through Shepard Road will be offset by the proximity to US 17-92." Most of the traffic to and
from the site would disperse onto US 17-92. A traffic signal already exists at the intersection of
Shepard and US 17-92.
Staff believes that significant traffic improvements will be required to both Shepard Road and
Florida Avenue, irrespective of whether the site develops as industrial or multi-family
residential. A full assessment (traffic study) is required with final engineering site or subdivision
plans [Subsection 9-147(c) (2)).
POTABLE WATER:
Facilities serving the parcels:
Parcels at SR 434 & Shepard Road and SR 434 & Florida Ave. are currently serviced by City
water. Access is available along Shepard Road or at the juncture of Wildwood Drive and the
FP &L easement where there is a 10" line.
Improvements/expansions needed as a result of proposed amendment:
Page 9
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
The Applicant indicates "the additional impacts of the proposed townhome project on public
facilities will be offset by unit fees and the possibility of tying systems together to improve
service." The subject property will be required to tie into the existing city water line.
SANITARY SEWER:
Facilities serving the parcels:
Parcels at SR 434 & Shepard and SR 434 & Florida Ave. are currently serviced by City sewer. A
10" force main line runs across the FP&L Easement into the subject property providing sanitary
sewer access.
Improvements/expansions needed as a result of proposed amendment:
The Applicant indicates, "sanitary sewer will be discharged through a pressure force main to the
city system. "
RE-USE WATER SYSTEM:
Facilities serving the parcels:
A reclaimed water line runs from Wildwood Drive south along the eastern perimeter of the
FP &L easement.
Improvements/expansions needed as a result of proposed amendment:
The subject property may be required to tie into the existing reclaimed water line.
DRAINAGE/STORMW ATER:
Facilities serving the parcels:
The parcels at SR 434 & Florida Ave. are serviced by the City's stormwater system. The closest
access to the existing system is at Tanglewood Road and Wildwood Drive, just east of the
subject property.
Improvements/expansions needed as a result of proposed amendment:
The Applicant indicates, "drainage will be accommodated on-site to meet the city and water
management district requirements and that the existing lake on the property will also provide
adequate outfall for the stormwater drainage on the property."
SOLID WASTE:
Facilities serving the parcels:
The City has an exclusive franchise agreement with a solid waste hauler, Waste Services of
Florida, until 2006. The City is currently negotiating a new franchise agreement.
Improvements/expansions needed as a result of proposed amendment:
Dumpsters are required to be screened by a masonry wall enclosure with an opaque gate. The
Applicant indicates, "solid waste service will be accommodated through the city's contract waste
pickup and that the Seminole County transfer station is within close proximity for waste
handling. "
ELECTRIC SERVICE:
The City of Winter Springs is serviced by Progress Energy for electric service. A future land use
change will not impact the current electric rates.
RECREATION & OPEN SPACE:
Facilities serving the parcels:
Page 10
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
There are no public recreation or open space parcels adjacent to the area, although within a mile
(as the crow flies) are Soldier's Creek Park (Seminole County) and the Cross Seminole Trail.
The parcels will also be serviced by the City's extensive park system.
Improvements/expansions needed as a result of proposed amendment:
The subject property will be required to provide recreational amenities on site, if the property is
developed as residential townhouses. The city imposes impact fees for Parks and Recreation
facilities.
SCHOOLS & SCHOOL CAPACITY:
The Applicant has indicated that they have agreed to pay the Seminole County School Board an
additional $1200 per unit, in addition to the required impact fees, to compensate for any
reduction in level of service.
FIRE:
Facilities serving the parcels:
Station 24 on Moss Rd. in Winter Springs is the closest Winter Springs station. Station 17 in
Longwood would be first responder as it is slightly closer. Response time would be less than 5
minutes.
Improvements/expansions needed as a result of proposed amendment:
Buildings over 3500 SF are required to be sprinkled. The city imposes impact fees for Fire.
POLICE:
Facilities serving the site:
Station on 300 N. Moss Rd. in Winter Springs is the closest Winter Springs station. Response
time would be less than 5 minutes.
Improvements/expansions needed as a result of proposed amendment:
None. The city imposes impact fees for Police.
Nuisance Potential Of Prouosed Use To SurroundiDl! Land Uses - The change in designation
from (City of Winter Springs) "Industrial" to (City of Winter Springs) "Medium Density
Residential" is expected to be more compatible with the existing "Medium Density Residential"
patio homes to the east than the current "Industrial" classification.
However, the change could result in incompatibility between the proposed "Medium Density
Residential" use and "Industrial" uses to the south and west (along US 17-92), both existing and
future. Additionally, approval of the requested change in the land use of the seven (7) parcels
will leave three (3) parcels to the south (which also have an "industrial" land use and that are not
part of this application) as an industrial enclave.
Natural Resources Comuatibilitv -
The Applicant states, "The project will also be designed to preserve as much natural
environment as possible including perimeter buffers and internal trees. "
The properties under consideration include wetlands at Boat Lake. No other conservation areas
or environmentally sensitive areas are known to exist on the site.
Page 11
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
SOILS
The soils on this property are generally Urban Land.
Source: Soil Survey of Seminole County, Florida published by the Soil Conservation Service of
the U.S. Department of Agriculture The Applicant indicates, "the soil types are highly conducive
for development as depicted in the Comprehensive Plan on Map 1-3. "
TOPOGRAPHY
The subject property is predominantly part of a ridge that runs north and south and which
includes a knoll that is 20-feet higher in elevation than the adjacent Wildwood community based
on the contour information available through Seminole County GIS. The site drains primarily to
the east. Part of the site also drains to Boat Lake and to the south.
FLOOD PRONE AREAS
Boat Lake impacts parcels C, D & E. The Applicant indicates, "the proposed development plan
includes a 25' upland buffer area adjacent to the lake and wetland areas. This project does not
lie in a flood prone area as defined in by the FEMA map".
HISTORIC RESOURCES
The Applicant states, "historical resources will also be addressed during the water management
district permit process. "
WILDLIFE
The properties under consideration may have Gopher Tortoises. An environmental analysis will
be required if Gopher Tortoises or other listed species are located on the site and appropriate
permits must be obtained before any removal takes place. The Applicant has indicated that a full
environmental survey will be performed before the project is developed.
CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan is determined when the land uses, densities, or
intensities, capacity or size, timing and other aspects are compatible with and further the
objectives, policies, land uses and densities or intensities in the comprehensive plan.
Need for Industrial Land
The City of Winter Springs encompasses 9,460 acres (Dec. 2005). Lands that have a Future
Land Use classification of "Industrial" include 166.5 acres (Dec. 2005) or 1.76 percent of the
City's total land mass. The Applicant is requesting that 47.27 acres be removed from the
"Industrial" classification. If approved, the City's total acreage of land with an "Industrial"
Future Land Use classification would be reduced by 28.3 percent and "Industrial" would then be
1.26 percent of the City's total land mass. The Comprehensive Plan states that additional
industrial acreage is required to meet future growth (an additional 105 acres by 2010 [Future
Land Use Element, Table 1-4]).
An "Industrial" future land use designates land for uses not allowed in other parts of the City. As
stated in FLUE Policy 1.5.10, "lands designated "Industrial" on the Future Land Use Map shall
Page 12
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
also serve as an area to locate authorized land uses and activities which could have adverse
secondary effects (e.g. increased crime; neighborhood deterioration and blight; property
devaluation; economic deterioration; health risks; and other adverse effects) on residential
areas, religious institutions, schools, parks, day care centers, and other public institutions
located within the City. "
As stated in Policy 1.5.10, it is critical that the City maintain industrial future land use areas for
uses that may be considered detrimental to other areas of the City, in order to protect the health
safety and welfare of its citizens. Uses considered as obnoxious nuisances do not exist to the
same extent that they did in the 1920s when Euclidean zoning became prevalent it may not be in
the best interest of the citizens of Winter Springs to use up valuable industrial land for housing.
Consideration should be given to the City's potential future need for industrial property. Again,
the projected need will be reassessed as part of the EAR process.
Need for Residential Land
The Comprehensive Plan indicates that approximately 5,579 new housing units will be needed
from 2000 to 2010 to serve City residents (based on the Housing Needs Assessment methodology
prepared by the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing in 2000). The City's Housing Element,
Objective 1.1 states that the City "Assist the private sector to provide approximately 1,124 new'
dwelling units of various types, sizes and costs between 2000 and 2005, plus an additional 2,249
units between 2005 and 2010 necessary to house the City's anticipated population through the
planning horizon," and Policy 1.1.1 states, "The City's Future Land Use Map shall include
adequate amounts of land to accommodate the projected housing growth."
Although it can be argued how much land or what percentage of lands a residential community
such as Winter Springs needs for various uses, it is important to give consideration as to how
such a change in land use factors into the City's long term objectives and whether such a change
enhances or diminishes the City's ability to be sustainable.
The "Medium Density Residential" classification includes up to nine units per acre. The
Applicant has illustrated a conceptual plan that complies with the density requirements of the
Medium Density Residential Future Land Use classification. The Applicant states, "Based on the
city's future residential land needs, this project offers a transition development between the
industriallcommercial property on 17-92 and the existing multifamily development to the east. "
Land Use Compatibility and Neighborhood Buffering
Future Land Use Element, Objective 1.5. Land Use Compatibility, states, "Future development
must be consistent with the adopted Future Land Use Map and existing incompatible uses shall
not be allowed to expand and shall be eliminated, when feasible " and Future Land Use Element,
Policy 1.5.1: Inconsistencies, states: "Proposed land use amendments which are inconsistent
with the character of the community or inconsistent with adjacent future land uses shall not be
approved by the City. "
Page 13
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Where incompatible uses exist, neighborhood buffering is required. Housing Element, Policy
2.2.7: states, "The City shall continue to require, through the City Code, adequate buffering and
screening of residential neighborhoods from incompatible uses, which could adversely impact
existing neighborhoods. Landscape buffering and transitional uses shall be utilized to further
this policy, " and Future Land Use Element, Policy 1.5.7 states, "The City shall maintain a
landscape ordinance that requires adequate buffering between incompatible uses." The
Comprehensive Plan further states, "Light industrial uses may be located adjacent to urban scale
residential land use categories only if appropriate transitioning and buffers are provided per the
Code of Ordinances. "
The FP&L Easement acts as a 175' buffer to the Wildwood PUD. The Wildwood PUD is a
Medium Density Residential area. The easement includes existing benning, retention areas, and
a vacated right-of-way to further buffer the PUD from the subject property and to prevent access
from one property to the other. If the land use were changed to "Medium Density Residential",
these actions would have unnecessarily divided similar uses and reduced interconnectivity of
residential properties.
If the land use were changed to "Medium Density Residential", the remaining adjacent industrial
properties to the west and south will require buffering to reduce incompatibility conflicts that
may result. The required buffering will also remove land that could otherwise be developed if
buffering were not required. Although not illustrated on the conceptual plan, the Applicant
indicates, "The town home development will transition to the industrial and commercial property
on US 17-92."
The existing topography and vegetation on the site currently buffer the site well from the adjacent
uses along US 17-92. However, the proposed conceptual plan does not reflect the site's
topography and instead, illustrates retention areas to the west and south along Florida Avenue.
Although the proposed retention area to the west would physically separate the development
from the adjacent US 17-92 uses, utilization of the natural topography would be more effective in
shielding noise and views as well. Although the proposed conceptual plan illustrates retention
areas along Florida Avenue, no buffer is shown to the Elsea property, also on the south. The
Applicant has stated, "The project will also be designed to preserve as much natural environment
as possible including perimeter buffers and internal trees. "
Wetland & Lake Buffers
Future Land Use Element, Policy 1.2.11 states, "The minimum upland lake buffer shall be fifty
(50) feet. No fill shall be placed in lakes, except as permitted by applicable state, regional and
federal agencies." Conservation Element, Objective 1.4 states, "Wetlands and the natural
functions of wetlands shall be conserved and protected from activities, which alter their physical
and hydrological nature. Incompatible uses shall be directed away from wetland areas.
Implementation activities to ensure the protection and preservation of these areas shall be
included within the Code of Ordinance, " and Conservation Element, Policy 1.4.2 states, "In
order to prevent development from having adverse impacts to existing wetlands, the natural
upland buffer shall be preserved a minimum oftwenty-five (25) feet from the edge of the wetland.
Page 14
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Where a wetland is unavoidable impacted by development, the development will be subject to the
mitigation requirements of the pertinent regulatory agency. "
The Applicant's proposed conceptual plan illustrates a 25' upland wetland buffer. This buffer
will need to be adjusted to 50' to reflect the upland lake buffer.
Transportation
Future Land Use Element, Policy 1.6.4 states, "The City shall prohibit proposed land use
amendments which are anticipated to reduce the LOS for transportation facilities below the
standard," and Future Land Use Element, Policy 1.6.5 states, "Land uses that generate high
traffic counts shall be encouraged to locate adjacent to arterial roads and mass transit systems."
A traffic study will be required during the final engineering phase. The results of that study will
determine further compliance measures, if needed.
Intergovernmental Coordination
The Comprehensive Plan Intergovernmental Element clearly states that the City is to coordinate
with other governmental entities as plans are reviewed. Intergovernmental notices of the public
hearings were given to the Seminole County School Board, Seminole County, 17-92 CRA, and
the City of Longwood, but no formal response was received either in support or objecting to the
requested change in land use.
FINDINGS:
· The subject property is within the City with an "Industrial" future land use and "PUD" zoning;
· No Development Agreement is known to exist for the subject property;
· The 1984 PUD Master Plan and Preliminary Site Plan for the property has expired and is no
longer valid;
· Development Plans must follow the PUD regulations set forth in the Winter Springs Code.
· The following are based on Code Section 15-36, Review Criteria:
(1) Whether the proposed amendment will have a favorable or unfavorable effect on the city's
budget, or the economy of the city or the region;
The proposed land use change will allow the currently vacant property to be developed into 334
townhomes. Although residential development sometimes costs local government more in
services than what is realized in taxes, Seminole County has determined that a residential unit
with an average sales price of $190,000 will result in a positive return to the county budget over a
twenty-year period. Winter Springs does not have a Fiscal Impact Analysis Model in place;
however, it can be assumed (given the level of services provided by the City) that housing would
need to be valued somewhat higher than the County's break-even point. According to the
Applicant, the average unit price is expected to be about $225,000.
Additionally, the economy of the City and of the region is derived from more than just residential
property taxes. Other factors include job creation, wholesale and retail sales, and employment
earnings. These factors are most commonly associated with commercial and industrial land uses
Page 15
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
and will vary in importance from place to place depending upon what a particular community
considers as their economic priorities.
(2) Whether the proposed amendment will diminish the level of service (LOS) of public
facilities;
Traffic- Although the proposed "Medium Density Residential" land use will generate less traffic
than an "Industrial" land use (as previously documented), any development of the subject
property will require significant improvements to Shepard Road and Florida Avenue, concurrent
with the development and at the expense of the developer. Any further development will
diminish the level of service of US 17-92. In situations where a state or federal road cannot be
upgraded to accommodate the development, a fee in lieu of the upgrade is required to be paid by
the developer to FDOT.
Schools- Although the area schools will be impacted with additional students as a result of the
change of the land use to residential, the Seminole County School Board has not objected to the
development. Additional fees will be paid to the school board to offset the project's impact.
Other- Other public facility LOS standards are not expected to be diminished. The City has
adequate capacity to service the proposed development with water and sewer.
(3) Whether there will be a favorable or unfavorable impact on the environment or the natural or
historical resources of the city or the region as a result of the proposed amendment;
Staff is not aware of any known historical resources in the area of the proposed development.
The proposed use is not expected to have any unfavorable impact on the environment or the
natural resources of the City; Part of the review of any proposed development will include an
environmental study. The Applicant indicates that the project will be designed to preserve as
much of the natural vegetation as possible.
(4) Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the
state comprehensive plan set forth in Chapter 187, Florida Statutes, and the East Central Florida
Regional Policy Plan, adopted by Rule 29F-19.001, Florida Administrative Code;
The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies ofthe State
Comprehensive Plan set forth in chapter 187, Florida Statutes. Consistency with the East Central
Florida Regional Policy Plan, adopted by Rule 29F-19.001, Florida Administrative Code is not
longer required as this rule was repealed.
(5) Whether the City is able to provide adequate service from public facilities to the affected
property, if the amendment is granted, and whether the amendment will promote the
cost/effective use of or unduly burden public facilities;
The City is able to provide adequate service to the development without burdening the City's
public facilities. Pursuant to the Seminole County First Response Agreement, Longwood's
Station 17 will be the first responder for fire and emergency response services.
Page 16
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
(6) Whether the amendment is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods and land use;
The proposed amendment is compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods to the east;
however, compatibility with the remaining "Industrial" future land uses to the south and west has
not yet been adequately addressed by the Applicant. Although the Applicant indicates that the
townhouse development will transition to the industrial and commercial property on US 17-92,
this is not, as yet, supported by the conceptual plan submitted with this application. This will be
undertaken in the site planning process.
(7) Whether approval of the amendment will cause the comprehensive plan to be internally
inconsistent;
Staff believes that the Application submitted has not as yet adequately addressed the
Comprehensive Plan requirements for land use compatibility and neighborhood buffering.
Again, these issues will be addressed during the site planning process. The City's need for
industrial land is not addressed and will have to be determined within the merits of the project.
(8) Whether the proposed amendment will promote or adversely affect the public health, safety,
welfare, economic order, or aesthetics of the city or region; and
Staff believes that the change in land use could promote the public health, safety, welfare,
economic order, and aesthetics of the immediate area.
(9) The contents of any Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) prepared pursuant to 163.3191,
Florida Statutes.
The contents of the City's EAR has been incorporated into the City's Comprehensive Plan.
P&Z / LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY RECOMMENDATION:
At a regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board! Local Planning Agency on December 6,2005,
the Board held a Public Hearing and voted 3-2 to recommend "Denial" to the Commission.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Commission hold a Public Hearing for First Reading and
Transmittal of Ordinance 2005-29, a Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment changing the
Future Land Use Map designation of seven [7] properties (less areas A & B as described),
containing 47.27 acres, more or less, between Shepard Rd and Florida Avenue, from (City of
Winter Springs) "Industrial" to (City of Winter Springs) "Medium Density Residential" and
determine if it desires to transmit the proposed land use change, based on the information
contained herein.
This is not a simple set of facts to deal with and requires a great deal of judgment based upon the
long range impacts of this proposal on the quality oflife of our residents.
Page 17
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
If the Commission finds in its collective wisdom that the protection offered to the adjacent
residential neighborhood by the proposed Medium Density Residential land use amendment is
more important to the overall quality of life of the residents of the City than the possible
incremental difference in economic potential offered by the current light industrial land use, Staff
would recommend the Commission consider transmitting the land use amendment to DCA.
If however, the Commission finds that the possible incremental difference in economic potential
offered by the current "Industrial" land use is more important to the overall quality of life of the
residents of the City than the protection offered by the proposed "Medium Density Residential"
land use to the adjacent residential neighborhoods, Staff would recommend the Commission
consider rejecting transmittal of the proposed land use amendment to DCA.
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE:
Dec. 29, 2005-Public Noticing in Orlando Sentinel of Public Hearing for 1 st Reading/Transmittal
Jan. 9,2006- City Commission Postponed the Transmittal Hearing / 1st Reading of Ordinance
2005-29 to Date Certain (January 23,2006) and preserved the Advertising.
Jan. 23, 2006- Transmittal Hearing / 1 st Reading of Ordinance 2005-29
Jan. 30,2006- If approved, Transmittal to DCA and other agencies
ATTACHMENTS:
A- Excerpts from Minutes from P&Z/LP A Meeting of November 1 & December 6, 2005
B- PUD Master Plan Amendment & Preliminary Plan, 1984
C- Application and Justification for Request
D- Proposed Townhouse Concept Plan
E- Existing Future Land Use, November 2005
F- Proposed Future Land Use, November 2005
G- Existing Zoning, November 2005
H- Noticing in the Orlando Sentinel; Letter from Applicant requesting postponement from
Jan 9, 2006 to Jan. 23, 2006 and January 23, 2006 to Feb. 13, 2006 and Minutes from
Commission Meeting including the Postponements.
I- Letter of support (reversing previous opposition) from Victor Richardson, et aI,
representing the Elsea property on Florida Avenue. Letter of opposition from Ross
Burnaman representing the Moretti property on US 17-92 and from Five Points Motors
also on US 17-92. Response to letter from Ross Burnaman from Applicant's attorney, M.
Rebecca Furman.
J- Ordinance 2005-29 with Exhibit A (Map & Legal Description)
COMMISSION ACTION:
Page 18
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
APPROVED MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 1, 2005
*****
PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS
400. Community Development Department - Planning Division
Requests That The Local Planning Agency Hold A Public Hearing To Consider Ordinance
2005-29, A Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Referenced As LS-CP A-06-01
Which Changes The Future Land Use Map Designation From "Industrial" To Medium
Density Residential" For Seven (7) Parcels Containing 47.27 Acres, More Or Less, Less
Areas 1 And 2, Located Between Shepard Road And Florida Avenue.
Chairman Poe said, "We have two (2) requests that are before us. One (1) from the Keewan
Investment Real Estate apparently who is making the request and also from a member of the City
who has asked that this be delayed because they could not be present for the Meeting."
Chairman Poe asked, "Do you wish to hear from the people who are present and/or would you
desire to postpone the Meeting to Date Certain to ensure that we have met the advertising
requirements?" Board Member Linda Tillis said, "Is it possible to do both?" Chairman Poe said,
"We can." Vice Chairperson Karr said, "I think I would like to do that." Board Member Tillis
said, "I would like to postpone the decision, but hear all the folks that are here this evening."
Chairman Poe asked, "Do you need to make your presentation first?" Ms. Sahlstrom said,
"Actually I would prefer to not make my presentation tonight and wait until the next Meeting, if
that would be possible?"
Chairman Poe opened the "Public Input" portion of this Agenda Item.
Ms. Helga Schwartz, 720 Galloway Court, Winter Springs, Florida: commented about the road
congestion off Shepard Road and Florida Avenue, suggested a Transportation Element review of
the area and spoke against high and medium density residential.
Chairman Poe closed the "Public Input" portion of this Agenda Item.
Chairman Poe said, "I would entertain a Motion - would like to postpone this issue until 'Date
Certain'. I believe recommended as the 6th day of December [2005] which would be our next
scheduled Meeting. Is that correct Eloise [Sahlstrom]?" Ms. Sahlstrom said, "Being that it is a
Page 19
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Tuesday, it is the day before your regularly scheduled Meeting." Chairman Poe said, "Yes. But,
I understand there is a conflict with the building." Ms. Sahlstrom said, "Right."
Vice Chairperson Karr asked, "Have we checked with the two (2) people who could not make it
tonight to see if they can make it on December 6th?" Ms. Sahlstrom said, "I know that the
Applicant did state he could make it on the 6th [December]." Vice Chairperson Karr asked, "But
you will contact that other person to make sure?" Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "I wi11let them know
that the Meeting was postponed to 'Date Certain'."
"I RECOMMEND THAT WE POSTPONE ANY FURTHER ACTION ON THIS ITEM
UNTIL DECEMBER 6TH [2005]." MOTION BY VICE CHAIRPERSON KARR.
SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER TILLIS. DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
VICE CHAIRPERSON KARR: AYE
BOARD MEMBER TILLIS: AYE
CHAIRMAN POE: AYE
BOARD MEMBER VOSKA: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 6, 2005
(RESCHEDULED FROM DECEMBER 7, 2005)
*****
PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS
400. Community Development Department - Planning Division
Requests That The Local Planning Agency Hold A Public Hearing To Consider Ordinance
[Number] 2005-29, A Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Referenced As LS-
CP A-06-01 Which Changes The Future Land Use Map Designation From "Industrial" To
"Medium Density Residential" For Seven (7) Parcels Containing 47.27 Acres, More Or
Less, Less Areas 1 & 2, Located Between Shepard Road And Florida Avenue. (This Item
Was Postponed From The November 1, 2005 Meeting, To Date Certain, The December 6,
2005 Meeting.)
Page 20
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Ms. Eloise Sahlstrom, AICP, ASLA, Senior Planner, Community Development Department
presented this Agenda Item and noted to the public of a Citizen Courtesy Information List. Ms.
Sahlstrom said, "If you wish to put your name on that list - this Item is then transmitted to the
State. The State will notify you of any pending action on the Item."
Ms. Sahlstrom said, "Staff, therefore, recommends that you decide whether you wish to approve
or to deny this request for transmittal to the State."
Discussion.
Ms. Rebecca Furman, Attorney, Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor and Reed, P.A., 215 North
Eola Drive, Orlando: representing Keewan Real Property Company, Ms. Furman presented a
Powerpoint presentation.
Discussion ensued on the property site.
Ms. Furman said, "We think that this sort of language in the Comp [Comprehensive] Plan
actually shows that this property is not correctly designated for 'Industrial' - we are adjacent to
residential properties right now, and we feel like if an 'Industrial Use' was allowed there, it
would lead to the deterioration as your Comp [Comprehensive] Plan mentions of that
neighborhood, and we feel like that by changing this to 'Residential' to PUD [Planned Unit
Development], we would come back before you with a Concept Plan. It would have to be
approved by you. You would get to have a 'Say So' on buffers, on walls, on any kind of
plantings - to buffer this 'Residential' from the 'Industrial' or 'Commercial' that is closer to
[U.S. Highway] 17-92."
Referencing the proposed 'Residential Use', Ms. Furman said, "We would have to come back
before you - to rezone this property, so you would get to take a look at exactly what these are
going to look like. These gentlemen are in the business of building high quality homes. We
have two (2) car garages - that was something that your Staff asked for so that we could try to
keep parking off of roads. Amenities would include a preservation of Boat Lake, pools, cabanas
and park. The average unit size is sixteen hundred (1,600) square feet. Average unit price-
would be around two hundred twenty five thousand dollars ($225,000.00)." Ms. Furman added,
"I know schools have been mentioned. We have an agreement with the School Board [Seminole
County] that on top of our impact fees for town homes, I believe run a little over six hundred
dollars ($600.00), we would also pay a contribution per unit in addition to the Impact Fees of a
little over twelve hundred dollars ($1,200.00)."
Ms. Furman then said, "We will do an Environmental Study and we believe that 'Residential' is
a more appropriate 'Use' around Boat Lake."
Discussion.
Tape 1/Side B
Page 21
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Discussion ensued on other town homes in the area and schools.
Chairman Poe opened the Public Input portion of this Agenda Item.
Mr. Dick Crenshaw, 751 Summerland Drive, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke of the tax base for
the City and is in favor of the town homes.
Mr. Gary Diller, 609 Nighthawk Circle, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke in favor of "Residential
Designation" if traffic issues are worked out.
Mr. Victor Richardson, 301 South Street, Fern Park, Florida: representing the Elsea family
property, Mr. Richardson indicated an objection to the request for a change in the Future Land
Use.
Ms. Cindy Gennell, 706 Meadowbrook Drive, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke in favor of
changing the land use designation to "Residential".
Mr. Richard Jacks, 3223 Everett Street, Apopka, Florida: owns property in the Wildwood
subdivision and spoke in favor of this as a tax base for the City and for the change to a
"Residential Designation".
Chairman Poe closed the Public Input portion of this Agenda Item.
Discussion.
In making a recommendation, Ms. Sahlstrom said, "If you feel that there is not adequate data to
do that, then you can either request Staff to go back and to do more determination or the
Applicant to provide more determination."
Ms. Furman said, "As it stands now as 'Industrial' there is a Florida Light and Power easement
that runs just between the two (2) and that would be the only buffer between Wildwood [Drive]
and the 'Industrial'." Vice Chairperson Karr asked, "What kind of recreational area would you
have for the people who would be buying these town homes?" Ms. Furman said, "It is still a
Concept Plan." Ms. Furman added, "There would be a park, a pool, some - amenities associated
with Boat Lake."
Discussion.
Ms. Furman said, "We would like the opportunity to come back and work with you - to make
something that is more appropriate."
"I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT [ORDINANCE NUMBER] 2005-29 -
LARGE SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BE MODIFIED TO MEDIUM
Page 22
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
RESIDENTIAL HOMES ON 47.27 ACRES." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER VOSKA.
SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER BROWN. DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
BOARD MEMBER BROWN: AYE
VICE CHAIRPERSON KARR: NAY
BOARD MEMBER TILLIS: NAY
CHAIRMAN POE: NAY
BOARD MEMBER VOSKA: AYE
MOTION DID NOT CARRY.
Chairman Poe passed the Gavel to Vice Chairperson Karr.
"I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THIS ACTION BE DENIED. OUR
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL [COMMISSION] THAT IT BE DENIED."
MOTION BY CHAIRMAN POE. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER TILLIS.
DISCUSSION.
VICE CHAIRPERSON KARR SAID, "WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY [AGENDA]
ITEM '400' AS PRESENTED TONIGHT THAT IS ORDINANCE [NUMBER] 2005-29, A
LARGE SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REFERENCED AS LS-
CPA-06-01 CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION FROM
'INDUSTRIAL' TO 'MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL' FOR THE SEVEN (7)
PARCELS CONTAINING 47.27 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, LOCATED BETWEEN
SHEPARD [ROAD] AND FLORIDA AVENUE."
VOTE:
VICE CHAIRPERSON KARR: AYE
BOARD MEMBER BROWN: NAY
BOARD MEMBER VOSKA: NAY
CHAIRMANPOE: AYE
BOARD MEMBER TILLIS: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Chairman Poe stated, "I had other concerns. I have concerns about traffic. I had concerns about
the quantity of residential. I had concerns about the amount of residential that we already have
under construction in the City of Winter Springs; also the centralization of that construction in
the Town Center which I believe - the City Commission has indicated very clearly to me that that
is where they want to centralize that - the concern for a need for more - industrial space for the
year 2010."
Chairman Poe resumed his Chairmanship.
Page 23
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
ATTACHMENTB
PUD Master Plan Amendment & Preliminary Plan, 1984
Page 24
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
OFFICE/W AREHOUSE
FRONT ELEVATION
GARDEN OFFICE
Page 25
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
ATTACHMENTC
CITY,-OF WINTE_R SPRINGS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1126 STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FL 32708
407-327-5967
FAX:407-327-6696
APPLICATION FOR
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
APPLICANT:
MAlLING ADDRESS
PHONE
The Keewin Real Property Company
1031 West Morse Blvd. Suite 325
Winter ParkL FL32789
(407)645-4400
If Applicant does 'NOT own the property:
PROPERTY OWNER.: ....Dittmir Properties. Inc.
1006 Shepard Rd.
Winter Springs, Fl 32708
PHONE:
This request is for the property described below:
PROPERTY ADDRESS: South side of Shephard Rd., East of S.R.17-92
TAX PARCEL NUMBER: See Attached- multiple parcels
SIZE OF PARCEL: 2,059,081.2 SF 47.27 Acres
Square Feet Acres
Please state the reason or justification for your Comprehmsive Plan Amendment(Future
Land Use Change):
Current FUTURE LAND USE Classification: Industrial.
REQUEST forchange to City of Winter Springs FUTURE LAND USE Classification: Yes
If you are requesting an Amendment to the Goals, Objectives &Policies of the City's Comprehensive
Plan, set forth the proposed Amendment in detail and provide support documentation.
Current ZONlNG Classification: PUD, C-2
Page 26
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS are subject to the Approval of the City Commission. Each
action is only effective when the Notice and Vote requirments of Chapter 166 and 171, Florida Statutes
have been achieved.
LARGE SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS are subject to approval by the Florida
Department of Community Affairs and are not effective until the Department of Community Affairs Issues
a "Notice of lntent" to find the Comprehensive Plan Amendment in compliance with the requirements of
Chapter 163.3184 land 163.3187, Florida Statues, Unless otherwise provided by law, the comprehensive
Plan of the City of Winter Springs shall be amended only twice per year in accordance with 163.3187(1)
F.S. and Winter Springs Code of Ordinances. Section 15-32 as follows:
Application submittal deadlines:
Spring- No later than 5:00 p.m. on the first Wednesday in February. The applications will be reviewed
at a meeting of the local planning agency to be held in April or as otherwise practicable.
Fall-no later than 5:00 p.m. on the first Wednesday in August. The applications will be reviewed at a
meeting of the local planning agency to be held in October or as otherwise practicable.
SMALL SCAlE AMENDMENTS may be approved without regard tostatutory limits on the frequency of
consideration of amendments under the Conditions approved by law.
APPLICANTS are advised, that if they decide to appeal any decisions made at the meetings or hearings,
with respect to any matter Considered at the meetings or hearings, they will need a record of the
proceeding and for such purposes, they will need to insure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is
made, at their cost, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based,per
286.0105, Florida Statues.
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE TO BE SUPPLIED WITH THIS APPPLICATION:
A copy of tne most recent SURVEY of the subject property with Mets and bounds
description.
A copy of the LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
11 x 17 MAP thawing ADJACENT STREETS and ZONING AND LAND USE classifications
on the ADJACENT PROPERTY.
JUSTIFICATION for the Request based on Cooe Section 20.102(d). (See Attached List)
NAMES and ADDRESSES of each property owner within 150 ft. of each property line.
Notarized AUTHORIZATION of the owner.
If the Applicat is other than the Owner or Attorney for the Owner (see below).
APPPLICATION FEES:
FEES are as SHOWN BELOW plus ACTUAL COSTS incurred for ADVERTISING or NOTIFICATION,
and for REIMBURSEMENT for TECHNICAL and/or PROFESSIONAL SERVICES which may be
required in connection with the review, inspection or approval of any development (based on accounting
submitted by tbe City's Consultant), . payable prior to approval of the pertinent stage of development.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT per Applicant $1,000
Small Scale (Generally 10 acres or fewer) $500
Large Scale (Generally More than 10 acres;Text Amendments) $1,000
" Persuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes.
TOTAL DUE
S 1,000
Page 27
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
FOR USE WHEN APPLICANT IS OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY:
This is to certify that I am the owner in fee simple of subject lands described within this Application for
Comprehensive Plan Amendment:
Signature of Owner
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
day of 20__
Notary Public
My Commission expires:
Personally Known
Produced Identifiation
(Type)
Did take an Oath
Did Not take and Oath
FOR USE WHEN APPLICANT IS NOT OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY:
I, Walt Dittmer Jr. do herby with my notarized signature allow
Keewin Real Property Co. to represent me in the change of land use of my property. The
Property is identified as: Tax Parcel Number(s). See attached Multiple Parcels.
Located at South Side of Shepard Rd., Just east of S.R. 17-92
and as further identified on the Metes and Bounds description provided with this application.
Walt Dittmer Jr.
Signature of Owner(s)
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
15th day of February 2005.
M.O. Tubbe
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: September 21 2007
Personally Known
X Produced ID: (Type) Driver's License
Did take an Oath
Did Not take and Oath
Page 28
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Comprehensive Plan Request
Shepard Road Townhomes - Dittmer Property
February 15, 2005
The following submittal is for the Shepard Road Townhome development in the City of
Winter Springs, Florida. The existing property is located between Shepard Road and
Florida Ave. on the East side of 17-92. The existing property is vacant with an industrial
land use and PUD zoning. The proposed development will be fee simple townhomes
and will require a land use amendment to Medium Density Residential.
What effect will the proposed amendment have on the City's budget or the
economy of the region?
The proposed townhome development will offer approximately 350 units of residential
use to a vacant piece of property. This property has been marketed as industrial
development but continues to remain vacant. The townhome project will increase the
city's tax base while bringing new citizens to the region.
Describe how the City might provide adequate services from public facilities to
the affected property. Will the amendment promote the cost effective use of or
will it unduly burden public facllities?
The proposed project fronts on two roads Shepard and Florida Ave. Both roads are
public and provide adequate access for the townhome. Both roads access hwy 17-92
for conveyance to SR 417 and SR 434. Water and sewer lines are also available on the
Power easement and Florida Ave. The proposed water system may have the ability to
loop systems on Florida Ave. and improve the city's water supply. An existing lake on
the property will also provide adequate outfall for the stormwater drainage on the
property.
Describe the impact that the proposed amendment will have on the Level of
Service (LOS) of public facilities including sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage,
potable water, traffic circulation, and recreation.
The additional impacts of the proposed townhome project on publiC facilities will be
offset by unit fees and the possibility of tying systems together to improve service.
Vehicle access through Shepard Road will be offset by the proximity to 17-92. Other
proposed improvements may include a left turn and right turn decal lane on Shepard
Road. Sanitary sewer will also be discharged through a pressure force main to the city
system. Solid waste service will be accommodated through the city's contract waste
pickup. The Seminole County transfer station is within close proximity for waste
handling. Drainage will be accommodated through the existing lake on the property.
Additional retention will be accommodated on-site to meet the city and water
management district requirements.
Page 29
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Shepard Road Townhomes - Dittmer Property
February 15, 2005
What impact will the proposed amendment have on the environmental, natural
resources, historical resources of the City or the region?
Before the project is developed a full environmental survey will be performed including
wetland, threatened and endangered species, phase 1 environmental and soils surveys.
Historical resources will also be addressed during the water management district permit
process. The project will also be designed to preserve as much natural environment as
possible including perimeter buffers and internal trees.
Identify surrounding neighborhoods and land use. Is the amendment compatible
with these?
The property to the West is predominantly industrial and commercial along 17-92. On
the North across Shepard Road is also industrial property. The eastern development is
multifamily with a medium density land use. Southeast is public lands and south across
Florida Ave. is a mixed use development including residential and commercial
developments. Southeast is public lands. This development will be contiguous to the
property on the East and is requesting the identical land use. In addition the townhome
development will transition to the industrial and commercial property on 17-92
Will the proposed amendment promote or adversely affect the public health,
safety, welfare, economic order, or aesthetics of the City or region?
This amendment will promote the safety. welfare, economic order and aesthetics of the
city. The proposed townhomes will include double garages and large units. These units
will be offered in multiple room options to accommodate small to large families.
Amenities will also be provided for the units to further promote a recreational complex.
Identify how the request is consistent with the Objectives and Policies of the
Comprehensive Plan. Will approval of the amendment cause any internal
inconsistencies?
This town home development is consistent with the following elements of the
comprehensive plan policy.
. Under the Residential Land Use categories in the Comprehensive Plan Future
Land Use Element for the City of Winter Springs Medium Density Residential
includes townhouses up to nine units per acre.
· Within the Natural Resource section the project contains a natural water body
which will be maintained for the town home amenity.
· The soil types as listed in the Natural Resource section are also conducive for
development as depicted in Map 1-3.
. Since this project exists within the city boundaries water and sewer should have
adequate capacity for service as stated in the analysis section of the Future Land
Use Element under the analysis section for potable water and sanitary sewer
. This project does not lie in a flood prone area as defined by the FEMA map.
· Based on the city's future residential land needs this project offers a transition
development between the industrial I commercial property on 17-92 and the
existing multifamily development to the East.
Page 30
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Shepard Road Townhomes - Dittmer Property
February 15, 2D05
Describe how the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives
and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan set forth in Chapter 187, Florida
Statues, and the East Central Florida Regional Policy Plan, adopted by Rule 29 F-
19.001, Florida Administrative Code.
· The proposed amendment meets the State Comprehensive Plan due to the
compatibility with surrounding land uses and transition ability.
. Within the state plan infrastructure is in place to service this development.
· Transportation planning includes the widening of portions of 17-92 to further
allow growth in this part of the city.
· State environmental concerns will be adequately addressed including local and
state permitting for stormwater and preservation lands.
Page 31
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
ATTACHMENT D
Proposed Townhouse Concept Plan
Page 32
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
LEGEND
ATTACHMENT E
Existing FUTURE LAND USE October 2005
Commercial
Industrial
Medium Density Residential
Public Semi-Public
Recreation
Page 34
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
LEGEND
ATTACHMENT F
Proposed FUTURE LAND USE October 2005
Commercial
Industrial
Medium Density Residential
Public Semi-Public
Recreation
Page 35
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
ATTACHMENT G
ZONING October 2005
LEGEND
C-2
PUD
1,200 Feet
Page 36
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
ATTACHMENT H
NOTICE OF CHANGES TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
Page 36
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Lowndes
Drosdick
Doster
Kantor
Reed, PA.
M. REBECCA FURMAN
DIRECT DIAL: 407-418-6250
North Eola Drive Office
POST OFFICE Box 2809
ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32802-2809
rebecca.furman@lownes-law.com
A T TOR N E Y S
A T L AW
MERITAS LAW FIRMS WORLDWIDE
January 6, 2006
Ron McLemore
City Manager
City of Winter Springs
1126 State Road 434
Winter Springs, FL 32708
Re: Ordinance #2005-29, a Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment for
Approximately 47.27 acres located between Shepard Road and Florida Avenue
(the "Project")
Dear Ron:
As you know I represent The Keewin Real Property Company, the Applicant for the above-
referenced Project. Currently the Project is on the City of Winter Springs, Florida. City Commission
Agenda for January 9,2006. The Applicant is requesting that consideration of the Project be postponed
to January 23, 2006 City Commission Agenda. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter and look
forward to bringing the Project for consideration before the City Commission.
Please call should you have any questions.
Sincerely
M. Rebecca Furman
MRF/tmn
cc: Eloise Sahlstrom
The Keewin Rea! Property Company
215 North Eola Drive
Orlando, Florida 32801-2028
Tel: 407-843-4600. FAX:401-843-4444 . www.lowndes-law.com
450 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE, SUITE 800
ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32801-3344
Page 37
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
LOWNDES
DROSDICK
DOSTER
KANTOR
REED, P.A.
M. REBECCA FURMAN
DIRECT DIAL: 407.418.6250
NORTH EOLA DRIVE OFFICE
POST OFFICE: BOX 2809
rebecca.furman@lowndes-law.com
A T TOR N E Y S
A T LAW
MERITAS LAW FIRMS WORLDWIDE
January 20., 2006
Ron McLemore
City Manager
City of Winter Springs
1126 State Road 434
Winter Springs, FL 32708
Re: Ordinance. #2005-29, a Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment for
Approximately 47.27 acres located between Shepard Road and Florida Avenue
(the 'Project")
Dear Ron:
As you know I represent The Keewin Real Property Company, the Applicant for the above-
referencced Project. Currently the Project is 0n the City of 'Winter Springs, Florida, Cily Commission
Agenda for January 23. 2006. The Applicant. in order to address the concems of neighboring property
owners. is requesting that consideration of the Project be postponed to February 13. 2006 City
Commission Agenda. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter and look forward to bringing the
Project for consideration before the City Commission on February 13.2006,
Please call should you have any questions.
Sincerely
M. Rebecca Furman
MRF/tmn
cc: EIloise Sahlstrom
The Keewin Real Property Company
215 North Eola Drive
Orlando, Florida 32801-2028
Page 38
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 9, 2006
CALL TO ORDER
The Regular Meeting of Monday, January 9,2006 of the City Commission was called to order by
Mayor John F. Bush at 6:30 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of the Municipal Building (City
Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708).
Roll Call:
Mayor John F. Bush, present
Deputy Mayor Michael S. Blake, present
Commissioner Robert S. Miller, absent
Commissioner Donald A. Gilmore, present
Commissioner Sally McGinnis, present
Commissioner Joanne M. Krebs, absent
City Manager Ronald W. McLemore, present
City Attorney Anthony A. Garganese, present
A moment of silence was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
"I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE ITEM '201' WHICH
IS THE COMP [COMPREHENSIVE] PLAN AMENDMENT HEARING - ORDINANCE
NUMBER 2005-29 - UNTIL JANUARY 23RD, 2006." MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR
BLAKE. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
City Manager Ronald W. McLemore requested that "Regular Item '301', be delayed until next
meeting." Mayor Bush asked, "Any objections, Commissioners?" Commissioner Sally
McGinnis stated, "No." With no objections, Mayor Bush stated, "'301' is postponed to the
next Meeting."
Page 39
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Mayor Bush then asked that a Presentation on a recent trip to Tallahassee be given. Mr. Brian
Fields, P.E., City Engineer, Public Works Department addressed the City Commission on a
meeting with the Secretary of the Department of Transportation.
At the conclusion of this presentation, Mayor Bush stated, "Brian [Fields] did an excellent job
representing this! The Secretary interrupted him several times during the Presentation and he
gave direct answers that I think the Secretary appreciated. Mr. McLemore also did a nice job."
Commissioner McGinnis remarked, "I hope we develop a good relationship with him."
PUBLIC INPUT
Ms. Carol Wolff, 647 Elmwood Drive, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke on Agenda Item "201"
and noted flooding problems related to the Dittmer property and asked if something could be
done.
Discussion ensued with Mr. Kip Lockcuff, P.E., Director, Utility/Public Works Department.
Manager McLemore stated, "Once we get into a real Site Plan Review, we can fix this problem."
Mr. Gary Diller, 609 Nighthawk Circle, Winter Springs, Florida: representing the Greenspointe
Board of Directors and residents and read a statement in support of the Winter Springs Golf
Course.
Mr. Diller mentioned that "Mr. Brian Fields is an absolutely fantastic young man. We have a
problem in our community with drainage that involves the golf course - Mr. Fields was nice
enough to come out and take a look at the situation. He was nice enough to come out one
evening on his own time and present to our residents at our monthly meeting, the situation and
discuss some alternatives. And also - he came one time and discussed things with the residents
involved. So, I want to personally thank him on behalf of our Association for his fine work.
Secondly, and last but not least, Commissioner McGinnis continues to be and has always been
and continues to be an absolute strong supporter of our community. Our Board of Directors, our
residents - at any time that they have any kind of a concern, can always go to her, either in person
or on the telephone and she is there for us. If she doesn't know the answer, she will find out.
And again, she has come to our Board of Directors Meetings to discuss concerns and issues that
our residents may have."
Mr. Diller then gave a Petition to the City Clerk.
Mr. Ritchie Moretti, 2396 Overseas Highway, Marathon, Florida: as an owner of property
adjacent to the Dittmer property, Mr. Moretti spoke of his concern with neighboring lands that
affect his property.
Page 40
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Ms. Helga Schwarz, 720 Galloway Court, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke in support of Mr.
Moretti; and noted her concern with game play being planned for the Parker Property.
Mr. Tom Brown, 717 Adidas Road, Winter Springs, Florida: mentioned that Agenda Item "201"
be reviewed and suggested the Visioning process should be reviewed again by the Planning and
Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency.
Mr. Eric Breininger, 1207 Lake Lucerne Circle, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke on the property
related to Agenda Item "201" and his concern that access to this property will come through his
neighborhood.
Mr. Rick Brown, 211 Nandina Terrace, Winter Springs, Florida: mentioned an event at Tijuana
Flats this Thursday recognizing Winter Springs High School National Merit Scholars.
Ms. Viki Hamilton, 50 Moree Loop, #29, Winter Springs, Florida: representing some Highlands
communities, Ms. Hamilton asked for the City Commission's support of the Winter Springs Golf
Course and keeping it a Golf Course.
Brief discussion.
MEETING ABSTRACT
A. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
B. CITY COMMISSION
C. REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 2006 - 6:30 P.M.
D. CITY HALL - COMMISSION CHAMBERS
1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
a. CALL TO ORDER
The Regular Meeting of Monday, January 23, 2006 of the City Commission was called to order
by Mayor John F. Bush at 6:31 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of the Municipal Building
(City Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708).
Roll Call:
Mayor John F. Bush, present
Page 41
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Deputy Mayor Michael S. Blake, absent
Commissioner Robert S. Miller, present
Commissioner Donald A. Gilmore, present
Commissioner Sally McGinnis, present
Commissioner Joanne M. Krebs, present
City Manager Ronald W. McLemore, arrived at 6:34 p.m.
City Attorney Anthony A. Garganese, present
A moment of silence was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
Manager McLemore arrived at 6:34 p.m.
Under "Agenda Changes", Public Hearings 201 was discussed.
Commissioner McGinnis said "I spoke to Ms. Furman today and I asked her if she would be
willing to appear - have a Community meeting in the Highlands and she said yes."
Discussion ensued on a Mailing to the residents, to which Mayor Bush stated, "If they are hosting
the Meeting, they would probably send the Mailing."
Ms. Rebecca Furman stated, "We would be happy to meet with the residents to discuss their
concerns and we can set up a date. We would like to keep the - February 13 is the date of your
next Commission meeting, we would like to do it in between then, but we would be happy to
meet with the residents."
Furthermore, Ms. Furman stated, "We will set a night - the evening, and I believe that gives us
sufficient time if we can work tomorrow to set up a date to send out those notices."
Commissioner Krebs asked, "You will let us know too, right?" Regarding the notices, Mayor
Bush said, "Yes, I think that you [Ms. Furman] should send them out." Ms. Furman added, "Yes,
of course we will let you all know."
"MOTION TO POSTPONE UNTIL THE FEBRUARY 13TH COMMISSION MEETING
- 6:30." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. SECONDED. DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Bush noted, "That was Item 201, under Public Hearings."
Page 42
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
PUBLIC INPUT
Ms. Joanne Mattie, Fortrose Street, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke on being a BOWS Member.
Mr. John Hogan, 105 Arrowhead Court, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke on his concern with the
proposed Cell Tower in Tuscawilla.
Manager McLemore said he would call him.
A Trophy from the Winter Springs Grizzlies was given to the City.
Ms. Amanda Jacobson, 351 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke of other
tenants in building and problems with lack of access on State Road 434.
Manager McLemore said, We can give you an address to send a letter to FDOT.
Mr. Art Gallo, 199 Nandina Terrace, Winter Springs, Florida: representing the Seminole
LaCrosse League, thanked the City.
Mr. Eric Brueniger, 1207 Lake Lucerne Circle, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke on his area and
the problems with the proposed land change.
Ms. Maria Redmond, 801 Kilt Court, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke on concerns related to
Public Hearings Agenda Item 201.
Mayor Bush said
Ms. Lorretta Sagers, 804 Kilt Court, Winter Springs, Florida: also spoke on concerns related to
Hearings Agenda 201 and the Community proposed Meeting.
Page 43
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
ATTACHMENT I
From: Furman, Rebecca [rebecca.furman@lowndes-law.com]
Sent: Mon 1/9/2006 12:56 PM
To: Eloise Sahlstrom
Cc: jfolk@keewin.net; diennings@keewin.net
Subject: Dittmer Property/Elsea Property
Attachments: <<Fax18.TIF>>
Eloise,
In an effort to respond to the City's concerns and the owners of the Elsea property's
concerns, The Keewin Real Property Company (Developer) has entered into a contract
for purchase of the Elsea property (appr. 1.7 acres). Attached please find a letter from
the Elsea family stating their support for the Developer's proposed development. Please
let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks.
Becky
Notice of Confidentialitv:
This e-mail communication and the attachments hereto, ifany, are intended solely for the information and use of the addressee(s) identified above and
may contain information which is legally privileged and/or otherwise confidential. Accordingly, if a recipient of this e-mail communication is not an
addressee (or an authorized representative of an addressee), such recipient is hereby advised that any review, disclosure, reproduction, re-transmission or
other dissemination or use of this e-mail communication (or any information contained herein) is strictly prohibited. If you are not an addressee and/or
have received this e-mail communication in error, please advise the sender of that circumstance either by reply e-mail or by telephone at (800) 356-6818,
immediately delete this e-mail communication from any computer and destroy all physical copies of same.
Replies Filtered:
Any incoming e-mail reply to this communication will be electronically filtered for "spam" and/or "viruses." That filtering process may result in such
reply being quarantined (i.e., potentially not received at our site at all) and/or delayed in reaching us. For that reason, we may not receive your reply
and/or we may not receive it in a timely manner. Accordingly, you should consider sending communications to us which are particularly important or
time-sensitive by means other than e-mail.
Page 44
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Jan 09 O6 10:15a
KEEWIN REAL PROPERTY CO
407-645-0340 P2
EXHIBIT "D"
Re: Seminole County Tax 10# 33-20-30-503-0000-0250
1228 Florida Ave., Winter Springs, Florida
To Whom It May Concern:
We, the legal owners of the above captioned property, hereby express our full and complete
support lor the proposed townhome community by The Keewin Real Property Company which
they plan for the "Dittmer" property located between Shepard Road and Florida Avenue in
Winter Springs, Florida. We believe that Keewin's proposed community will be an asset to the
City and will prove to be more of an asset to the area than if the property were to be developed
[or industrial uses. We have no opposition to the change in future land use and zoning to that
which is appropriate for a townhome community.
Victor H. Richardson, Jr,
Shelly Cooper
Notary Public
Subscribed and sworn before me
This 3rd day of Jan, 2006
Charles A. Richardson
Notary Public
Subscribed and sworn before me
This 3oth day of Dec, 2005
Timothy W. Elsea
Shelly Cooper
Notary Public
Subcribed and sworn before me
This 3rd day of Jan, 2006
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
ROSS STAFFORD BURNAMAN
Attorney at Law
1018 Holland Drive
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
rossburnaman@earthlink.net
(850) 942-1474
December 29, 2005
Honorable John F. Bush, Mayor
City of Winter Springs City Commission
1126 East State Road 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708
RE: Objection to Proposed Ordinance 2005-29
Large-scale Future Land Use Map Amendments Item 400
Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda (December 6)
Dear Mayor Bush and Commissioners:
This letter is written on behalf of Mr. Richie Moretti and Richard Moretti, LLC
(collectively "Moretti") to state objections to a proposed ordinance to change the future
land use map (FLUM) of the City's Comprehensive Plan on seven parcels comprising 47.27
acres.
Moretti owns parcels within the City and within unincorporated Seminole County that
abut to the west the 47.27 acres that are the subject of the pending FLUM amendment
request. Moretti's land consists of three parcels of industrial land along Highway 17-92.
Moretti specifically acquired the property within the City in 1979 based upon the
assurance that the property could be used for industrial uses. Based upon that assurance,
between 1980 and 1990, Moretti operated an automobile reconstruction business on the
property. Moretti currently leases property for industrial use in the manufacture and sale
of gazebos.
Proposed Ordinance 2005-29 was considered by the City's Planning and Zoning
Commission on December 6, 2005, as Item 400. The Planning and Zoning Commission did
not recommend adoption of the proposed Ordinance to change the FLUM from
"industrial" to "medium density residential".
Opportunism Instead of Planning
Page 46
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
The current FLUM amendment request is not driven by the City's comprehensive planning
processes, instead it is motivated by the desire of a real estate developer to maximize short-
term profits without regard for the long-term economic health of the community. For
example, while the City's Staff report indicates that most of the 47.27 acres is within the
U.S. 17-92 Community Redevelopment Area, it is apparent that no effort has been made to
coordinate the FLUM amendment request with the Community Redevelopment Agency, or
the adopted Redevelopment Plan. I confirmed this fact with Mr. Kevin Fall, the
Community Redevelopment Agency Coordinator. Given this oversight, there is no showing
of internal consistency with FLUE Objective 1.4 and Policy 1.4.6 since the City has agreed
to the designation of the 17-92 Redevelopment Area.
Moreover, the 47.27 acres is part of an approved, partially-developed, planned unit
development ("PUD").
As revised in 1984, the "Winter Springs Commerce Center" "final plan was to be a tiered
office park concept" with "Industrial development to the west, then Commercial, and next,
Professional Offices facing eastward and appearing as residential structures." The PUD
was most-recently amended in 1988 to include additional properties by Ordinance 436,
according to the City's Staff report. (Apparently, the City's Zoning Map does not include
the PUD amendment in Ordinance 436). Now that the PUD is partially developed, the
landowner apparently wishes to "unplan" it. The residents and property owners within
the area deserve better than "willy nilly" development at this location.
Moretti's Concurrence with Two Staff Findings
The City's planning Staff "findings" correctly identified at least two flaws with the FLUM
amendment request.
First, the proposed medium density residential land use is incompatible with the industrial
properties to the west and south of the 47.27 acres. [Finding No.6]. Presently, a 175-foot
wide power line easement serves as a buffer between the residential development (the
Wildwood Planned Unit Development) to the east of the industrial lands (which include the
subject property and other industrial lands between the subject property and Highway 17-
92). If the FLUM amendment is approved, the MDR land use will abut industrial
properties, many of which are on-going businesses. The application is inconsistent with
FLUE Objective 1.5 and Policies 1.5.1 and 1.5.10; moreover FLUE Policy 1.5.6 only
requires buffers to "low density residential areas" whereas the proposal is to have medium
density residential abut industrial FLUM properties.
Second, the proposed FLUM amendment would reduce the City's designated industrial
land, already in very short supply, by about 28 percent. [Finding No.7]. The City has a
limited supply of industrial property and based upon the City's evaluation and appraisal
process and subsequent plan revision, the Plan indicates that an additional 105 acres of
industrial land are needed by 2010. Table 1-4 of the FLUE ("Projected Demand for Vacant
Land 2010) documents the need for 188 acres of Industrial land in 2010, with only 83 acres
Page 47
February 13, 2006
Public Hearing Item 201
identified as "developable acreage" in 2001. According to Table 1-1 of the City's
Comprehensive Plan, industrial land constitutes about 1 % of the City's developable land.
Since the Plan was adopted, the stock of industrial land on the FLUM has been reduced
further by changes in Ordinances 2003-16 and 2003-31.
While townhouses and other medium residential density development are permitted by the
FLUM throughout the City, there is a very limited supply of land that is suitable for
industrial use. Recently, for example, new townhouse developments have been approved
throughout the City (many of which are in the Town Center), including Barclay Reserve,
Harbor Winds (a/k/a Big Cypress), Highlander Property (a/k/a Jesup Reserve and Barclay
Town Center), Jesup's Landing, Landings at Parkstone, Lincoln Park, Winter Springs
Town homes (Eagle Homes), and Lake Jesup Shores.
In the immediate vicinity of the subject property, an Apex Transmission facility (known as
Dlutz Transmission Shop/Wallace Plat) has recently been developed, including a
transmission shop, parking, an dumpster and stormwater facilities. According to the City
Staff report, in the immediate area, a wholesale coffee roaster was developed in 2004, and
an automobile dealership was opened in 2000. Apart from the initial construction-related
jobs, the proposed FLUM change to facilitate development of townhouses will not promote
the City's long-term economic wellbeing. While people need places to live, they also need
places to work.
Failure to Meet Section 15-36 Criteria
City Code Section 15-36 provides nine minimum review criteria. The Applicant's
application form and supporting documentation, and the resultant "findings" in the City's
Staff report, fail to meet these minimum review criteria.
For example, for the whether the proposed amendment will "diminish the level of service
(LOS) for public facilities," the report and application do not demonstrate how LOS
standards for all public facilities will be maintained; only the transportation LOS on 17-92
and Sheppard Road is addressed, and then only in summary fashion.
Increased demand on public schools is not addressed at all in the application or Staff
report. The 2005 amendments to Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes apply to the City's
consideration of the proposed ordinance. One of the most significant changes in the 2005
legislation was intended to address school concurrency. The capacity of the respective
elementary, middle and high schools to accept new students associated with the proposed
land use change is not addressed, nor does the file contain any coordination with the
Seminole County School Board.
Other public facility LOS standards are only addressed in summary fashion. For example,
as to "Recreation and Open Space" the Staff report provides in part "there are no
recreation or open space parcels adjacent to the area...." Without any basis in the record,
the Staff excuses this deficiency, stating: "The subject property will be required to provide
Page 48
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
recreational amenities on site, if the property is developed as residential townhouses. The
City imposes impact fees for Parks and Recreation facilities."
Neither the FLUM application, nor the Staff report, indicate compliance with FLUE
Objective 1.7 and Policies 1.7.1 and 1.7.2; and with Intergovernmental Coordination
Element Objectives 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and Policies 1.1.4, 1.2.5, 1.3.3. The documentation reflects
neither coordination with adjacent Seminole County officials, nor consideration of the
goals, objectives and policies of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan (and 17-92
Redevelopment Plan).
Conclusion
Rather than approve this legally insufficient request for a large-scale FLUM amendment
for transmittal to the various State and regional agencies for review, the City should deny
the request and maintain the status quo for these properties.
If the existing pun is not economically viable, then the landowner should consider a
revised pun instead of an abandonment of the partially developed pun and speculative
townhouse development.
The City should respect the rights of existing landowners and businessmen, who have
invested in the long-term economy of the City of Winter Springs. To approve the requested
FLUM amendments is to disrespect the comprehensive planning process, waste State and
regional agency resources on the review of an inadequate proposal, and to invite litigation
should the City ultimately adopt the FLUM changes after State and regional agency
review.
Thank you for your consideration. Please provide me with notice of the City Commission's
action on this item.
Sincerely,
Ross Stafford Burnaman
Attorney at Law
Fla. Bar No. 397784
cc: Eloise M. Sahlstrom, Senior Planner
Page 49
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
From: Nicholas Gattuso [FivePointMtrs@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 5:07 PM
To: Eloise Sahlstrom
Subject: item 201
FIVE POINT MOTORS, INC.
975 N. HWY 17-92
LONGWOOD, FL. 32750
Tel: 407-695-1449
Fax: 407-695-1471
01/05/2006
To Winter Springs City Planner
I, Nick Gattuso property owner of 975 N. Hwy 17-92,
Five Point Motors, Inc. understand that you might be
rezoning the property adjacent to mine due to new home
construction. I strongly protest against this move,
unless some kind of buffer will be put up. ( 6 ft wall etc.)
Thank you for your consideration
Nick Gattuso
Page 50
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
Lowndes
Drosdick
Doster
Kantor
Reed, P.A.
M. REBECCA FURMAN
DIRECT DrAL: 407-418-6250
NORTH EOLA DRIVE OffiCE
POST OFFICE Box 2809
ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32802-2809
rebecca. f1mnan@Jowndes.law.com
A T TOR N E Y S
A T L A W
MERITAS LAW FIRMS WORLDWIDE
January 18,2006
The Honorable John F. Bush, Mayor
City of Winter Springs, City Commission
1126 E. State Road 434
Winter Springs, FL 32708
Re: Response to Letter from Mr. Ross Stafford Burnaman, Esq. (the "Letter")
related to tbe Large Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment,
Item #400, Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda (December 6, 2005)
(the "Application")
Dear Mayor Bush and Conunissioners:
This letter is written in response to the above-referenced letter received by each of you from Mr.
Bumaman, on behalf of Mr. Richie Moretti and Richard Moretti, LLC, which states objections to the
proposed ordinance to transmit the above-referenced Application. As many of you know, I represent
The Keewin Real Property Company (the "Developer'') with respect to the proposed amendment to the
Future Land Use Map changing approximately 47 acres from Industrial to Residential. Throughout his
letter, Mr. Bumaman cites sections of the City's comprehensive plan in an attempt to support his
assertion that the Application is inconsistent with the City's comprehensive plan. However, even a
cursory examination of Mr. Burnaman's statements, when compared to the facts, reveals that Mr.
Burnaman's position is without merit. I will explain in detail below.
The Letter states that Mr. Moretti acquired property within the City in 1979 "based upon the
assurance that the property could be used for industrial uses." The proposed land use amendment does
not change the rights of adjacent or surrounding property owners. Mr. Moretti's property can continue
to be used for industrial and commercial uses. In addition, the Developer will be required to incorporate
appropriate buffers in the proposed residential development to buffer industrial and conuncrcial uses
from the townhouse residents.
Furthermore, in 1979 the Dittmer property was part of a residential PUD which contemplated
that the parcel would be used for townhouses. In 1983, the PUD was amended to include a mix of
multi-family units, commercial and industrial uses. It was not until 1984, five years after Mr. Moretti's
(91)9576\112882\913582\1
215 NORTH EOLA DRIVE
ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32801-2028
TEL: 407.8434600. FAX A07-843-4444.
450 SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE, SUITE 800
ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32801-3344
Page 51
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
John F. Bush, Mayor
City of Winter Springs, Florida
January 18, 2006
Page 2
purchase of the adjacent property, that the PUD changed to exclude multi-family, but included
industrial, commercial and office. Therefore, his basic assertions questioning the residential use are
without merit, since that is exactly the condition which existed at the time Mr. Moretti bought his
property.
Mr. Bumaman's letter accuses the Developer of "opportunism instead of planning" and
"disregard for the long term economic health of the community." This could not be further from the
truth. As mentioned before, this property was originally planned for residential development. It was at
the owner's request that the property be allowed commercial and industrial uses as opposed to
residential. In fact, the long term economic health of the community will be improved by high quality
townhouses instead of industrial uses being developed on these 47 acres. Not only will such townhouse
development improve the property values of the adjacent residential use known as the Wildwood
subdivision, but the Developer has agreed to make certain improvements to the Wildwood community to
make it safer and more aesthetically pleasing.
Mr. Bumaman further asserts that there is "internal inconsistency with FLUE, Objective 1.4 and
Policy 1.4.6." Objective 1.4 states that "the City will maintain regulations and procedures in the City
Code of Ordinances to limit the proliferation of urban sprawl and encourage redevelopment and
revitalization of blighted areas." First, the Developer is not proposing any change to the City's Code of
Ordinances. Secondly, the proposed development furthers the objective of encouraging redevelopment
and revitalization. The property is currently vacant and surrounded on the north, south, east and west by
development. This is not urban sprawl, but infill development. In addition, townhouses will revitalize
the economic well being of the adjacent Wildwood residential homes and end the vagrancy problem
associated with this parcel, the power casement parcel, and the Wildwood park. Policy 1.4.6 states that
"if additional blighted or otherwise deteriorated areas develop within the City, the area shall be targeted
for special consideration through a redevelopment plan and the City shall pursue available Federal,
State, County and Local funds for redevelopment." Instead of the City spending time and energy to
pursue funds from other governmental agencies, thc Developer proposes to develop high quality units in
this "deteriorated area".
Mr. Bumanlan's letter states that property owners within the area deserve bettcr than "willy
nilly" development. Although it is unclear what Mr. Burnaman means by "willy nilly," the Wildwood
PUD which he is referring to, and as mentioned above, originally contemplated residential units on this
parcel of property. Mr. Burnaman apparently does not believe that past amendments to the PUD which
changed it from residential to commercial and industrial was ''willy nilly" development, but now feels as
though a change to allow what was originally contemplated is '"willy nilly" development. In addition, it
is questionable whether the property still has entitlements to develop with office, commercial and
industrial uses under the pun since those approvals may have expired.
Mr. Bumaman's letter asserts that the proposed medium density residential land use is
incompatible with industrial property to the west and south of the Dittmer property. The property he is
Page 52
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
John F. Bush, Mayor
City of Winter Springs, Florida
January 18, 2006
Page 3
referring to on the south side of the parcel, the Elsea property, is under contract for purchase by the
Developer to be incorporated into the proposed townhouse development in the future. The properties to
the west include industrial and commercial properties, some within the City of Winter Springs and some
in unincorporated Seminole County, that each have frontage on SR 17/92. The Developer will provide
sufficient buffering on the Dittmer property to create a buffer between the industrial and commercial
uses to the west. The proposed buffer will include a berm, a wall, and heavy landscaping. The
referenced 175' wide power line easement between the current Wildwood residential development and
the Dittmer property is an open space with no real landscaping to create a real buffer from the Wildwood
residents if industrial uses were to be developed on the Dittmer property.
Mr. Bumaman cites FLlJE Objective 1.5 and Policy 1.5.1 and 1.5.10 as support for his
proposition that the proposed amendment is incompatible with surrounding land uses. Objective 1.5
states "future development must be consistent with the adopted future land use map and existing and
compatible uses shall not be allowed to expand and shall be eliminated where feasible." We are
currently in a process to amend the future land use map so that the proposed development win be
consistent \vith an adopted Future Land Use Map. Appropriately buffered medium density residential is
compatible with industrial and commercial land uses. Medium density residential serves as an
appropriate transition to non-residential uses. Policy 1.5.1 states "proposed land use amendments which
are inconsistent with the character of the community or inconsistent with adjacent future land uses shall
not be approved by the City." The proposed amendment is consistent with the character of the
community of this area. Currently to the cast exists a medium density residential family land use and a
single family development. Currently the existing medium density residential development is adjacent
to industrial land. It is inconsistent to state that it is appropriate for the Wildwood homeowners to be
adjacent to industrial, but it is not appropriate for future townhouse residents to be adjacent to industrial.
Objective 1.5.10 states "as implemented through the adoption of the City's Land Development
Regulations, lands designated industrial on the future land use map shall also serve as an area to locate
authorized land uses and activities which could have adverse secondary effects (e.g. increased crime;
neighborhood deterioration and blight; property devaluation; economic deterioration; health risk; and
other adverse effects) on residential areas located within the City." Mr. Burnaman alleges that the
application is inconsistent with this objective. How can Mr. Burnaman possibly make such an
assertion? We are eliminating a use that can cause "adverse secondary effects" and providing superior
buffer between the existing industrial and commercial uses located on SR 17/92. Mr. Bumaman
correctly points out that the City's comprehensive plan only requires buffering of industrial to "low
density residential areas." The fact that the City's comprehensive plan does not require buffers between
medium density residential use and industrial use shows that medium density residential is compatible
with industrial use. Although Mr. Bumaman believes the City's comprehensive plan to be correct in all
other aspects, he seems to imply that is should require additional buffering for medium density
residential. Regardless, we have agreed to a buffer including a berm, a wall and enhanced landscaping
to be approved by the City Commission at the time of rezoning.
Page 53
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
John F. Bush, Mayor
City of Winter Springs, Florida
January 18,2006
Page 4
Mr. Burnaman is concerned that his application will reduce the City supply of industrial land.
The City's comprehensive plan states a need for additional industrial land, and it also states a need for
5,579 new housing units and 664 additional acres of residential land. Mr. Bumaman states that there is
"a very limited supply of land that is suitable for industrial use." Mr. Burnaman does not take into
account the City's land use designation of Town Center Greeneway Interchange and Mixed Use
Category. The Town Center may have light industrial uses such as dry cleaners and automotive repair
shops. The Greeneway Interchange land use designation also allows light industrial uses such as
cleaners, mini-warehouses, automobile repair and automobile rentals. The Mixed Use category allows
any light industrial uses. Although these land use designations are not "Industrial" and therefore not
counted in the City's "Industrial" land, they do allow industrial uses.
Mr. Bumaman claims that the proposed amendment will "diminish the level of service for public
facilities." The issue is whether there are adequate public facilities. There are, Mr. Bumaman is simply
wrong. There are adequate public facilities including sanitary sewer, potable water, storm water,
transportation, and solid waste to serve the project. In addition the Seminole County Public Schools
have agreed that a mitigation payment in the amount of $1200.00 per unit will provide for adequate
public school facilities.
Mr. Bumaman asserts that the City did not comply with FLUE Objective 1.7 and Policies 1.7.1
and 1.7.2 and Intergovernmental Coordination Element Objectives 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and corresponding
policies. The referenced FLUE and Intergovernmental Objectives and Policies require the City to
coordinate with Seminole County to promote compatibility of adjacent land uses. The City has
complied with these Objectives and Policies by sending Seminole County written notice of the proposed
changes to which they have not objected. As mentioned before, the implication that medium density
residential is not compatible with industrial use, is inaccurate. Often, good planning practices include
medium density residential between single family homes and industrial. In addition, the proposed
project is in compliance with Seminole County's FLUE Objective 4 and Policy 4.2 which promotes
infill development like the proposed project.
Mr. Bumaman also alleges that the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) for US 17/92
Redevelopment Plan was not considered. The purpose of the CRA per the Seminole County
Comprehensive Plan Intergovernmental Coordination Element is to improve "the visual character of US
17/92 and attempt to revitalize and redevelop parcels along the corridor." The CRA's Redevelopment
Plan objectives include, among other things: (a) "refining future land use strategies based on periodic
market analysis and demographic research"; (b) "encouraging a variety of uses, including residential";
(c) "encouraging preservation of lake shoreline" (d) "promoting marketing and development of housing
opportunities within the redevelopment area"; (e) "encouraging higher density housing opportunities;"
and (1) creating "compatible yet diversified interests and activities." It is clear that the proposed
amendment furthers these objectives by creating housing within the Redevelopment Corridor and
preserving and enhancing Boat Lake, located on the property, as a recreational anlenity. The CRA's
redevelopment activities are funded through Tax Increment Financing. The proposed amendment and
Page 54
February 13,2006
Public Hearing Item 201
John F. Bush, Mayor
City of Winter Springs, Florida
January 18, 2006
Page 5
development of this property further promote the CRA's objectives by creating funds for the CRA to
continue its proposed projects such as Aesthetic and Environmental Improvements Program, Corridor
Marketing Program, Redevelopment Partnership Program and the Small Business Property
Improvement Program.
Mr. Bumaman incorrectly concludes that the proposed amendment should not be transmitted to
the Department of Community Affairs. Although we appreciate Mr. Bumaman's comments, we believe
that the DCA should be the final arbiter of the appropriateness of the proposed amendment, not an
attorney hired by an adjacent property Owner. The proposed amendment does not change the rights of
existing landowners but only amends the land use designation of the proposed site. Mr. Bumaman's
threat that the application "invites litigation" should not be a basis to deny this properly filed amendment
which furthers the objectives and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. There are also goals of the
City which are not mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan, but are known to those who occasionally
observe City Commission Meetings, such as the desire to preserve the existing golf course near this
project, the need for more residents to support the unique businesses in the Town Center development
and the desire to create higher property values for the adjacent Wildwood homeowners.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to Mr. Bumaman's letter.
Sincerely,
M. Rebecca Funnan
MRF/tmn
cc: Ron McLemore
Eloise Sahlstrom
The Keewin Real Property Company
Ross Burnaman, Esq.
09(l9S76\112S82\913582\1
Page 55
ORDINANCE NO. 2005-29
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, SEMINOLE COUNTY,
FLORIDA, RELATING TO COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING;
SETTING FORTH AND ADOPTING A LARGE SCALE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, REFERENCED AS
LS-CP A-06-01, PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION OF AN
AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY
DESIGNATING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS
SEVEN (7) PARCELS OF LAND, CONTAINING 47.27 GROSS
ACRES MORE OR LESS, AND LOCATED GENERALLY
ALONG SHEPARD ROAD AND NORTH OF FLORIDA
AVENUE, MORE P ARTICULARL Y AND LEGALL Y
DESCRIBED HEREIN IN EXHIBIT "A," ATTACHED
HERETO AND FULL Y INCORPORATED HEREIN BY THIS
REFERENCE, FROM CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
"INDUSTRIAL" TO CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS "MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL"; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE AND LEGAL STATUS OF THE PLAN AMENDMENT;
PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL OF THE PLAN TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS; PROVIDING
FOR THE REPEAL OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, SEVERABILITY, AND
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, section 163.3161 et. seq., Florida Statutes, establish the Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act; and
WHEREAS, section 163.3167, Florida Statutes, requires each municipality in the State of
Florida to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan as scheduled by the Florida Department of
Community Affairs; and
WHEREAS, sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes, establish the process for the
amendment of comprehensive plans, pursuant to which the City of Winter Springs has established
procedures for amending the City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency ofthe City of Winter Springs held a duly noticed
public hearing, in accordance with the procedures established in chapter 163, Part II, Florida
Statutes, on the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and considered findings and advice of
staff, citizens, and all interested parties submitting written and oral comments and has recommended
adoption to the City Commission; and
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2005-29
Page 1 of 3
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency recommended that the City Commission transmit
the subject property large scale comprehensive plan amendment (LS-CPA-06-0l) to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs for its review and comment; and
WHEREAS, the amendment adopted by this Ordinance complies with the requirements of
the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission hereby finds that this Ordinance is in the best interests
of the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Winter Springs, Florida.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WINTER
SPRINGS HEREBY ORDAINS, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are fully incorporated herein
by this reference.
Section 2. Authority. This Ordinance is adopted in compliance with, and pursuant to, the Local
Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulations Act, sections 163.3184
and 163.3187, Florida Statutes.
Section 3. Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent ofthis Ordinance are to adopt the large
scale comprehensive plan amendment (LS-CP A-06-0 1) designating the subject property from
Seminole County "Industrial"to City of Winter Springs "Medium Density Residential."
Section 4. Adoption of Amendment to the Future Land Use Map. The City of Winter
Springs' Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Map, is hereby amended by designating the real
property, depicted in Exhibit "A" as City of Winter Springs "Industrial," to City of Winter Springs
"Medium Density Residential." Exhibit "A" is attached hereto and fully incorporated herein by
this reference.
Section 5. Transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. The City Manager or his
designee is hereby designated to sign a letter transmitting the adopted comprehensive plan
amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, in accordance with section
163 .3187(4), Florida Statutes, and Section 9J-ll, Florida Administrative Code.
Section 6. Repeal of Prior Inconsistent Ordinances and Resolutions. All prior inconsistent
ordinances and resolutions adopted by the City of Winter Springs City Commission, or parts of
ordinances and resolutions in conflict herewith, are hereby repealed to the extent of the conflict.
Section 7. Severability. Ifany section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or provision
of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent
jurisdiction, whether for substantive, procedural, or any other reason, such portion shall be deemed
a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2005-29
Page 2 of 3
remaining portions of this Ordinance.
Section 8. Effective Date and Legal Status of the Plan Amendment. The effective date of
the comprehensive plan amendment adopted by this Ordinance shall be the date a final order is
issued by the Florida Department of Community Affairs, or the date of the Administration
Commission finding the Amendment in compliance with section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. No
development orders, development permits, or land use dependent on this amendment may be issued
or commenced before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the
Administration Commission, the amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a
resolution affirming its effective status. After and from the effective date of this amendment, the
comprehensive plan amendment set forth herein shall amend the City of Winter Springs'
Comprehensive Plan and become a part of that plan and the amendment shall have the legal status
of the City of Winter Springs' Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, in a regular
meeting assembled on the _ day of ,2005.
John F. Bush, Mayor
ATTEST:
Andrea Lorenzo-Luaces, City Clerk
Approved as to legal form and sufficiency for
the City of Winter Springs only:
Anthony A. Garganese, City Attorney
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Effective Date:
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2005-29
Page 3 of 3
D'ittmer Propelrty FLUM Change Request
US 17-92
Shepard Rd.
Subject
Property
PARCEL NUMBERS
26-20-30-5AR-OCOO-0210 28-20-30-5A8-0BOO-015A
28-20-30-5A8-0BOO-0 170 33-20-30-503-0800-0000
33-20-30-503-0000-0150 33-20-30-503-0000-0240
33-20-30-503-0000-025A
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 described as follows:
BEGIN at the Northwest corner of WILDWOOD according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat
Book 19, Page 7 through 1 0, Public Records of Seminole County, Florida; thence South
03057'20" East, along the Westerly 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 Westerly 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 Northerly line of said Lot 18; thence North
86002'40" East, along said Southerly 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 "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 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, Public 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 Southerly right of
way line of Shepard Road and Northerly line of said Lot 18; thence North 86002'40" East, along
said Southerly right of way line, for a distance of 67.07 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Date: February 13, 2006
The attached documents were distributed under
Public Hearings Agenda Item "201" on February
13, 2006.
02/89/2086 13:07
4876450340
KEEWIN REAL PROPERTY
PAGE 02/132
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPA~rMENT
February 2, 2006
Jay E. Folk
Presidmt
The Kccwiu Real Property Company
1031 West Morse Blvd., SuneS25
Winter Park, FL 327~9
0_ J'ay:
I enjoyed meeting with you earlier today to review and. discuss the development, W'mter
Place Town Homes~ being proposed :fbt the Dittmer property between Shepard Rond and
Florida Avon,ue in Winter Springs. AI. you are aware,.t1te majority of the property lies
within the Winter Springs Community Redevelopment District md the 17-92 Community
Redev-elopntent Agency.
The project you a.rc t'ropoG.fD$ Is oonsistcnt with the stated. goals of the CRA to enooWlge
"'ow quality developments within the boundaries of the CRA. To that ond, tho CllA is
committed l\s..cnst 8.I1d suppOIt your project in whatever way possible 'Witbfn 0'I1t' lUeans.
We bollovc tile project will re$Ult in an increase in tb.e overall value oftbe real estate in
the surrounding area, ineluding tho 11-92 corridor, as well tU! inot:ease the llkeUhooc1 of
additional investment.
Our offioe looks forwatd to working with you. 0:0, this new investmc;ut in the CRA.
Best regards,
~4i:g~~
0i:1
t,. '. ... CI
. ... II
Put.ting irnaginatiofl t(1 w.,"le
.~.':AJ"',,"..'().~.r~ _:....C'.lf""!4f rr:"~ ..:!) r~~:...1.1..:!:t;
t '01 EAST SE(;()NIJ STR~" SANroRD Fl 32171-1468 rnBPHQNIl (4/)') 669.'71 '" FAX (401) OO!M'003
l\)()tD"U
(0 -, :J ..,
__ ~ 1>>' CD
Om:J"O
O>:J"TI!!l
10 -. CD
-. CD 0.
:JC::c-
CDlIl,<
CD. ..
.., :-u
fTI
~~
-II>>
m..,
,CD
I>> ::T
:J 0
0.5j
e 5'
lIllO
CD .
()~
o :"l
0.1\)
CD ---l
.....)>
01(")
o(il
-lIl
01
---l
N
w
-
:J,
"0
III
--
I>>
(")
(il
I\)
---l
o
01
w
co
~
~
......
01
(J)
-
o
iil
10
CD
a
3
I>>
-
CD
..,
iii'
00
~~
-II>>
m:J
,s::
I>> it
:J (")
0.-
s::
e :J,
III :J
CD!!='
()~
o ---l
A.'
CD I\)
---l
......)>
~(")
0..,
-CD
III
w
CD
00
CD
-
:J,
"0
Ie..
I>>
(")
(il
......
CD
W
CD
t
o
~
W
01
()
o
:J
<
CD
..,
III
0'
:J
a
~
3
I>>
ro
..,
iii'
00
5'
o
:::!l
:J
w'
::T
CD
0.
10
o
o
0.
(f)
-
-:J
-10.
ms::
,!e-
I>> :J,
:J I>>
0. -
e"U
III I>>
CD~
()~
o ---l
A.'
CD I\)
---l
......)>
w(")
0..,
-CD
III
0>
~
.....
.....
-
..,
-0'
III
--
I>>
(")
(il
I\)
co
CD
w
w
co
I\)
~
......
o
C:~
<' x'
CD 0
Cil -
3i3
CD I>>
o.:J
-s::
it
(")
-
s::
..,
5'
!!='
III
CD
<
0'
.CD
I>>
:J
0.
::E
I>>
(il
::T
o
s::
III
CD
c-
~,
Q;
:J
10
(f)
~~G>~-I
-I:"lCD -IS1
ml\):J m...
,---lCD ,:J
I>> )> iil \l) ::To
:J(")-:J
0.(il,0.3
elll<g:em
en r+ en I
CD 3" CD ~
..... 0. I\) I\)
..... s:: W01
.8 lIl.8 s::
!:j :J
~ it
01
.....
00
o
-
:J,
"0
III
iil
(")
(il
I\)
t
CD
W
---l
0>
~
.....
01
I>>l>>z
III III 0
8l -g l'
3 5' 3
C-O:I>>
-<cfie
. -
3 ~
!la.2"
CD :J,
:J. :J
~1O
-I>>
CD (")
en c:t.
0:<
:J ;::+
10 -,
_ CD
o.lIl
!la. ~,
I>> ::T
"0
a ~,
(") :J
m 3'
III I>>
5' 0"
~31
.0 (")
s:: CD
-o'.gJ
3 I>>
CD (")
::J CD
--
III
s::
(")
::T
01
00
0>
-
:J.
"0
Ie..
0.
I>>
'<
"0
CD
..,
s::
:J
;:;:
I\)
~
co
o
.....
CD
---l
I\)
I\)
.....
~-I
rrl~
,:J
I>> ::T
::J 0
0.3
em
III I
CD W
I\)w
w~
.8s::
:J
;:;:
III
01
00
0>
-
:J.
"0
(f)
--
0.
I>>
'<
"0
CD
..,
s::
:J
;:;:
......
co
01
---l
.....
~
---l
......
~
-I
...
'3'
Ii)
CD
:J
CD
a
o'
:J
;u
a
CD
o
o
3
"tJ
I>>
...
fir
o
~
o
-tt
....
:!.
- "tJ
t.nCi)
o CD
~ ~
(') CD
CD ...
.. I>>
-
~ g'
;ta
'S'....
~~
::s ~
CD ::r
Q1 0
ct3
o' CD
::s t/J
-
......0
~~
m :!.
c.o
;:::;c
-. t/J
o _
::s ::s
-c.
c
t/J
-
:!.
at
r-
I>>
~
C.
C
t/J
CD
t/J
Ii)
CD
:J ~
~ CD
~c a ill
~~
"'0-1
~ ~.
CCII
~
)>
::J:3:
o "'0
c CD
... I>>
~
"'0
::J:3:
o "'0
c CD
... III
~
::j
m
c:
CII
~
CD
C
CD
CII
n
...
9:
o'
:J
f
Claxton & McCulloh
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Attorneys:
Kenneth M. Clayton
Neal McCulloh
Russell E. Klemm
Joy E. Carney
Brian S. Hess
JosephC Stayanoff
Christopher P. En
February 7, 2006
Honorable John F. Bush, Mayor
City of Winter Springs, City Commission
126 East S.R. 434
Winter Springs, FL 32708
RE: Large Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment ("Amendment"), Item # 400, Planning and
Zoning Commission Agenda (December 6, 2005)
Dear Mayor Bush and Commissioners,
We have the pleasure of representing The Highlands Homeowners Association, Inc. ("Association")
which is the master homeowners association affiliated with The Highlands community located in the City of
Winter Springs ("City'} Our client has expressed a h1gh level of concern regarding the potential re~zoning of
approximately 47.27 acres ofland between Shepard Road and Florida Avenue ("Subject Property") cUlTently
designated for Industrial usage.. Our client has a strong concern that a Medium Density Residential
reclassification, as proposed by the Amendment (referenced above) or similar document submitted by the Keewin
Real Property Company ("Keewin") which provides for the development of 334 townhomes on the Subject
Property, will have a detrimental impact on the neighboring residential communities, in general and on 'Dle
Highlands, in particular.
:r'v10re specifically, the Association is concerned that allowing the proposed development of the Subject
Property \vill cause or could result in one or more of the adverse and unacceptable conditions discussed hereafter:
1. Traffic Congestion and Overcrowded Roads. Such proposed development will significantly
increase traffic on roads currently servicing The Highlands and sUlT0lll1ding communities,
particularly during the peak times of day. The increased traffic is anticipated to cause the Level
Web Site: www.dayton-mcculloh.com
long Distance Toll Free: (8B8) 793-1486
Please Address Correspondence To: Main Office
Brevard County Branch Office:
indian Harbour Beach Professional Plaza
2040 S. R. A 1 A, Suite 201
Indian Harbour Beach, FL 32937
Tel: (321) 777-0866
Fax: (321) i73-9681
Main Office: .
The Clayton & McCulloh Building
1065 Maitland Center Commons BlVd.
Mailland, fl 32751
Tel: (407) 875-2655
Fax: (407) 875-3363
Volusia County. BranehOfflce:
The Charles Tindall Building
406 North Wild Olive Avenue
Daytona Beach, FL 32118
Tel: (386) 947.9996
Fax: (386) 255-6148
,
Honorable John F. Bush, Mayor
City of Winter Springs, City Commission
February 7,2006
Page -2-
of Service ("L.O.S.") of these roads to be dramatically and adversely impacted to the detriment
of those already residing in these communities. The Association fears that Shepard Road and
Sheoah Boulevard will become "cut-through" roads running to and from State Road 434 and U.S.
17-92. It does not seem that the City is requiring Keewin or any other developer of the Subject
Property to pay for or construct road improvements, particularly as to Shepard Road and its major
intersections, such as at U. S. 17-92, to alleviate the substantial traffic impact that would be caused
by the proposed development. Furthermore, no proposal or solution is being proposed by the
developer or considered by the City to prevent the heavy traffic impact of this project on Sheoah
Boulevard.
2. Overcrowdin~ Schools. This proposed development of the Subject Property will have a negative
overcrowding impact on schools (e.g., Highlands Elementary). The overcrowding of the
elementary school, as weUas the middle schools and high schools which currently service most
of The Highlands, may even force a rezoning in the school districts. This could force children
who live in The Highlands to attend alternate area schools. This concern of residents in The
Highlands cannot possibly be ameliorated by a higher impact fee. Keewin does not seem to be
offering nor is my client aware of the City suggesting that the Subject Property be developed as
an "over 55 community" so that there would be no impact on the neighborhood schools.
3. Inadequate Open Space and Recreation Facilities. The considerable number of new residents and
children that win result from the proposed development of the Subject Property viill encourage
the unauthorized use of private parks and recreation facilities located \'"ithin The Highlands. It
is certainly disturbing that such a large proposed residential commwlity does not seem to be
offering to provide and/or being required to provide public or private recreation or open space
parcels commensurate \vith the project and number of residents contemplated within or adjacent
to the proposed site of development. Perhaps the proposed development should be required as
a condition of development approval to dedicate portions of its land to the City for open area
parks and recreation areas which would he adequate to service the number of new residents.
4. Negative Impact on Property Values. OUf client is concerned on hehalf of its residents thatthe
proposed development v,rill negatively impact property values in The Highlands and other
surrounding residential communities due to the potential lack of neighborhood buffering required
to surround the Subject Property if the zoning is reclassifi.ed. Such negative impact shall also be
the likely outcome of traffic congestion and overcrowded roads and overcrowded schools,
resulting in rezoning of school districts and inadequate open space and recreation facilities.
Honorable John F. Bush, Mayor
City of Winter Springs, City Commission
February 7, 2006
Page -3-
We applaud the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission on December 6, 2005, with respect to
voting to deny the proposed Amendment. Our client hopes that Mayor Bush and the Commission will continue
to consider the potential detriment to existing communities like The Highlands if the City approves the proposed
reclassification and development plans as they currently exist for the Subject Property. At a minimum, a much
greater level of study of the potential impact on traffic and roads, area schools, open areas and recreation
facilities, property values and the like should be l..mdertaken prior to the City approving the adoption of a large
scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment providing for the adoption of an Amendment to theFuture Land Use Map
in the manner proposed. Then, unless Keewin can offer compelling and workable solutions to these and other
problems for existing communities that the proposed residential development of the Subject Property will create,
the amendment to allow the reclassification should be denied.
The Association plans to stay involved in this matter and to object to any such Amendment unless and
until the potential problems set forth herein are properly and satisfactorily addressed. We appreciate your time
and effort in this matter and look forward to the City's continued cooperation and interest in the welfare of its
current residents.
Sincerely,
CLAYTON & MCCULLOH
...........,....,....
,
Kenneth M. Clayton
KMC:jec
cc: Eloise SahlstrolTI. Senior Planner
Michael S. Blake, Commissioner
Donald A. Gilmore, Commissioner
Joanne M. Krebs, Commissioner
Sally McGinnis, Commissioner
Robert S. Miller, Commissioner
Anthony A. Garganese, City Attorney
Ross Burnaman, Esq.
Rebecca Funnan, Esq.