HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 02 23 Regular 502
COMMISSION AGENDA
ITEM 502
CONSENT
INFORMATIONAL
PUBLIC HEARING
REGULAR X
February 23. 2004
Meeting
MGR lit,.../' IDEPT ~
Au thorization
REQUEST: The Community Development Department recommends the City Commission
hear a request by attorney Bruce Duncan, agent for A V A-Anthony and/or Kamil Gowni and/or
Phelepateer LLC, for one 6 month extension to a variance from Section 20-418 of the City
Code of Ordinances (Ordinance No. 2001-13), to allow a gasoline station to be constructed on
a site within 350 feet of another existing gasoline station site or within 350 feet of residential
property.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this agenda item is to consider a request by Bruce Duncan for an
extension to a variance from Section 20-418 (Ordinance No. 2001-l3) of the City Code of
Ordinances to allow a gasoline station to be constructed at 701 East SR 434, at the south-west
corner of the intersection of SR 434 and Hayes Road. The site is closer than 350 feet to the site
of the existing Cumberland Farms convenience store with gasoline pumps and also closer than
350 feet from residential property (e.g. Hacienda Village).
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Sec. 20-83 (h). Procedures.
(h) Any variance, special exception or conditional use which may be granted by the City
Council shall expire six (6) months after the effective date of such action by the City
Commission, unless a building permit based upon and incorporating the variance, special
exception or conditional use is obtained. However, the City Commission may renew such
variance, special exception or conditional use for one (1) additional period of six (6) months,
provided good cause is shown and the application for extension shall be filed with the board at
least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the six-month period.
Settlement Agreement
CONSIDERATIONS:
February 23,2004
Regular Item 502
Page 2
The site had once received approval for site development and had commenced
construction. The City's Code Enforcement Board had various issues with the site and took
action accordingly. Construction stopped at the site and the applicable City permits expired.
On July 23,2001, the City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 2001-13, defining
gasoline stations and restricting their placement. This subject site was referenced in the fourth
"WHEREAS" clause of the ordinance. The ordinance noted that too many gasoline stations in
one area can cause the area to become a blighted eyesore which greatly diminishes the area in
aesthetic and commercial appeal, that the enhancement of aesthetic appeal is a proper exercise
of police power, and that too many gasoline stations in one area presents a high risk of fire,
explosion, and traffic congestion.
On February 25,2002, the City Commission considered and rejected a proposed
development agreement with A V A-Anthony, Inc., to construct a gasoline station at the site, as
part of a settlement agreement. The proposed development agreement addressed vested rights
and included a conceptual site plan, building elevations, and landscape plans.
On July 22, 2002, the City Commission considered and approved a request by A V A-
Anthony for forgiveness of a code enforcement lien of $75,900 against the site at the southwest
comer of SR 434 and Hayes Road. The City and applicant agreed that the fine would be
reduced to $12,500 (estimated actual cost to the City) - the City agreed to drop all pending
legal action and the applicant agreed to drop any vested rights [to construct a gasoline station]
claims. The attached settlement agreement was executed on September 25,2002. The $12,500
has been paid (check # 4932, dated 7/30/02, received by the Finance Dept. 9/25/02).
On August 11,2003, the City Commission approved a variance from the gas station
separation (from other gas stations and residential properties) requirements set forth in Section
20-418 of the City Code (Ordinance No. 2001-13).
On February 5,2004, staff notified the applicant's attorney that the variance was about
to expire. That same day, staff received a letter requesting a six month extension for the
variance. The request was received before the 6 months had expired, but not within the 30
days prescribed by Code.
FINDINGS:
1).The subject site, 701 East SR 434, is located within the C-l zoning district, the
Commercial Future Land Use designation, and the SR 434 Redevelopment Overlay Zoning
District.
2). On July 23,2001, Ordinance No. 2001-13 was adopted, creating a 350 foot air line
separation requirement from the nearest points of lot boundaries between a proposed gasoline
station and any existing gasoline station, any lot zoned residential, or any school or playground
that is proposed or exists.
3). The settlement agreement, executed September 25,2002, between the City and
Phelopateer, LLC., states that the applicant waives any claims to vested rights to develop the
site as a gasoline station. Therefore, there is no vested rights claim and no argument may be
February 23, 2004
Regular Item 502
Page 3
made alleging vested rights to develop this site as a gasoline station. The settlement agreement
is binding upon Phelepateer and the City and their successors and assigns (runs with the land).
4).On or about June 11, 2003, the variance application, fee, and letter of authorization
(authorizing Mr. Duncan to represent the owner) from Mr. Kamil Gowni was received by the
City.
5). The site is closer than 350 feet of both an existing gasoline station (Cumberland
Farms) and residential property (Hacienda Village to the south and North Orlando, 4th Addition
to the north).
6). At its July 17, 2003, meeting, the Board of Adjustment voted to recommend denial
of the variance.
7). At its August 11, 2003, meeting, the City Commission granted a variance to the
Section 20-418 separation requirements.
8). Subsection 20-83 (h) of the City Code states that variances expire after 6 months
unless a building permit based on or incorporating that variance is obtained, although the City
Commission may renew such variance for one additional period of 6 months.
9).On February 5, 2004, the City received a request to extend the variance for an
additional 6 months.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Commission consider the applicant's request to extend the variance
for 6 months.
ATT ACHMENTS:
A - Applicant's correspondence
B - August 11, 2003, Minutes
CITY COMMISSION ACTION:
. ATTACHMENT A
POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY & DUNCAN
A TTORNEYS A T LAW
308 EAST FIFTH A VENUE
MOUNT DORA, FLORIDA 32757
DEL G. POTTER, P.A.
G. EDWARD CLEMENT, P.A.
ARCHIE O. LOWRY, JR., P.A.
BRUCE G.DUNCAN
352-383-4186
FAX-352-383-00 13
E-MAIL-bgduncan@earthlink.net
John Baker, Director
Planning and Zoning
City of Winter Springs
ll26 E. S.R. 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708
February 5, 2004
FAX No. (407) 327-6695
RE: Kamil GownilParcellocated on southwest corner of 434 and Hayes
Dear Mr. Baker:
I sincerely appreciate your giving me a call to warn me of the impending deadline for the above
referenced site. Your actions went above and beyond the call of duty and please know that my
client and I are grateful for your diligence.
I spoke with my client immediately upon receiving your message. It appears that some meetings
have occurred with the City of Winter Springs since the granting of the variance however you are
correct in that no development approvals have been granted at this time. Due to the
ineffectiveness of the prior project engineer, my client has been forced to change engineers in
mid-stream. The new engineer is Kim Hall. It is my understanding that Ms. Hall will be
contacting the City today to ensure that you are aware of the status and she should be able to give
you an idea as to a timeframe.
By this letter, I am requesting an extension of the timeframe to ob~ain development approvals for
this project.. I have been assured that the project is now moving along,at an acceptable pace and
it will not be much longer before plans are submitted and negotiations with the City can begin.
Thank you for your understanding in this matter. As always, if you have any questions or if you
would like to discuss this matter with me personally, 1 welcome you to contact me at your
convemence.
~~
- ~~,
Bruce G. Duncan
cc: Kamil Gowni
Feb 08 2004 21:11
HP LASERJET 3330
p. 1
POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY & DUNCAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
308 EAST FIFTH AVENUE
MOUNT DORA, FLORIDA 32757
(352) 383-4186
E-MAIL ADDRESS;bg:dullcRII.ij).earthlll1k.net
DEL G. POTIER, P.A.
G. EDWARD CLEMENT, P.A.
ARCIDE O. LOWRY, JR., P.A.
BRUCE G. DUNCAN, P.A.
FAX
(352)383-41087
TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET
To:
John Baker, Director
Fax No.:
407M327M6695
From:
Bruce G. Duncan, Esquire
Date:
February 9, 2004
Re:
Kamil Gowni/Parcellocated on southwest oorner of 434 and Hayes
Number of Pages (Including Cover Sheet): 2
Message:
Letter dated 2/9/04 w/site plan
File No.:
19864
If you do not receive all pages, please notify sender as soon as possible at (352) 383-4186.
THE INRlIlMATJON COlo/TAiNED ~ lHIS nANSMIS$lON IS ATTORNEY ?RlVJLEOEO AND COM'lDBlmAL rr 1& om.y fOR TllB lI1i1> OF 1llE lNDfVlllVAL a\ EN1lTY NAMED ABOVE. If THE READER (ll'
TlDS MESSAClE IS NOT THE 1l<Y1!M>ED REClPIENT, YOU ARZ HEllBBY N'DT'lPIED mAT ANY rnSiE_ATION, D1ST1lJllI.I1'1ON OR COPV1>lO OF 1HIS <XlMMUNJCATJON IS STRlCTt. Y PRQHIIl/Tel>. If YOU
JkVf: ~ 'IHIS COMM1JNlCATICl>IIN 1!IUl0R,. PlJ!ASE NO'TIFY us """"<IDlA1l!LY BY TOu:PHOh'l! COLLECT AND ~ ntI! ORlo""...L MESSAGe TO lJl; "'T THE ABO\IE AOORI!SS VI'" THl! !J.s.
l'06TALSBRVlCI!. WE WILL RIDalUJtSEYOOPQ\ THE POSTAGE. TllANIt Yoo.
Thank you,
POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY & DUNCAN
By: 't& U ~ ~J A~:OOO~
. Dollie J. Whitt
Legal Assistan t
:11
Feb 08 2004 21:11
HP LASER JET 3330
p.2
POTTER CLEMENT LOWRY & DUNCAN
ATTORNEYS AT LA W
308 EAST FIFTH AVENUE
MOUNT DORA, FLORIDA 32757
DEL G. POlTER, P.A..
G. EDWARD CLEMENI', P.A.
ARCHIE O. LOWRY,.m.. P.A.
BRUCE G.DUNCAN
352-383-4136
FAX..JSZ-38J..oOI3
E.MAIL.bgdu ncan@earthUnk.net
February 9, 2004
John Baker, Director
Planning and Zoning
City of Winter Springs
1 ]26 E. S.R. 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708
FAX No. (407) 327-6695
RE: Karnil GownilParcellocated on southwest comer of 434 and Hayes
Dear Mr. Baker:
For your information I am providing you with the initial site plan submitted by our engineer on
Friday to Ken Wood who I believe serves as the city's engineer. ' J wanted you to be aware that
we are very close to final submittal and our engineer indicates that it will be submitted on
February] 6th when she returns from vacation. OUf engineer apparently formally worked as the
engineer for the City of Winter Springs.
I have asked my client to try and ensure that all plans are submitted to the City prior to our
appearing before the City Council this month. I understood you to say that we will be required
to appear before the Council and request an extension per my letter to you of last week. I believe
that you said the meeting will he held on the 23m of February. Please confirm the date and time
for me when you get an opportunity. You may do so bye-mail if you wish at
bgduncanClUearthlink.net. Thank you again for your continued cooperation.
~~
-=- - ~'--- ----
Bruce G. Duncan
---
cc: Kamil Gowni
il
Feb 08 2004 21:11 HP LASERJET 3330
FEB. 6.2004 2:41PM MEDAlLlON CONVENIENCE STORES
p.3
NO. 9146 P8.lP. 2,f I
Ken Wood
From: KHaD@cycorpeng,com
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 1:19 PM
To: "Ken Wood'
Subject: wtnter springs at Hayes Road
Please be advised that the final englneertng plans will be submItted on the week of.February 16. 2004.
Kim Fischer, P.E., Principal
Cyc:orp Engineering, Inc.
2810 Matquesas Court
Wmdennere, FL 3478~
407-217-8000
407-876-3751 (fax)
407-405-7819 (mobile)
kfischer@cvc'olJ)OO~.com
2/612004
II
- .
- - .- -. -:- - - - - ~ -.. '. UJNOrOOIJ-: ol'lBDO.1lfiiD 7~ m) - -_ - - -; ~ :: .- :: ::::: ::
. -; - - - -:-., - . - --r- -t . - --r - , == ::. :....- _ __ _
. -
----------------------------~-------
..
f II
",
~,
!,
I
I
,
I
I
,
,
, . I
___..J..M!._J
"
III
I:T
BOIlNDMlY SURVEY
SEC'f'1DN :u It 81, fOJfN81lJ1> 10 soum. 1Wit:B :tD BAS1'
~ SPRINGS, SE1IINOlZ COUNTY. F1ml1DA
-n
.~~
.B!::JIsrI
I\l
.-
.-
-
:J:
1)
r
:D
CJl
m
;0
c...
m
-t
W
W
W
o
!
I
i
i
i
j.
i
i
j ...
I 0
1 .
T~
I
!
Q lr
""
Q @
PtDnd -.
.....
v
~
,
.
~
~
en
-<
C>
"""
......
en
"
l
.
~
'"
iil
o
~
..,
,..
...
..It
...
-
. :::-.r=."lJRiL-l!I'-~ ~
-=-=:~~.=:a&
--....----
..-------------
.~~=Nn=a_..~_
==-~-=-
I
,
I
iWii......-
"
.,.
-' . I .
Feb 08 2004 21:11 HP LASERJET 3330
FEB. 6.2004 2:42PM MEDALLION CONVENJENCE STORES
~
qPo~""
8~~-
~~~-
~
!fI~ ~
-....;:
p.5
NO. 9146 P. 4
",t
-
~
..
~I .,
~tt
~ .;,
lIf::m e
N
~
~
"1Il::1D .~
------------
.JZ JR
.~
.,-----
1H::m ~ t
,Lll....
111
1;:! ~
1Il::m
k
".f.
.zr'06~
No .t~,L~.LL N
,I
AftACHMENT B
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - AUGUST 11,2003
PAGE 13 OF 26
REGULAR
REGULAR
24. A. Community Development Department
Recommends The City Commission Hear A Request By Attorney Bruce Duncan,
Agent For AVA-Anthony And/Or Kamil Gowni And/Or Phelepateer LLC, For A
Variance From Section 20-418. Of The City Code Of Ordinances (Ordinance
Number 2001-13), To Allow A Gasoline Station To Be Constructed On A Site
Within 350 Feet Of Another Existing Gasoline Station Site Or Witll1in 350 Feet Of
Residential Property.
Commissioner Martinez stated, "I would like to state for the record that yesterday
afternoon, I received a call from Mr. Kamil Gowni regarding this Agenda Item."
Commissioner Blake said, "About a month ago, Mr. Gowni contacted me and asked for
an appointment, and came to my office and we sat and spoke for a few minutes." Deputy
Mayor Miller added, "Mr. Gowni called me yesterday." Commissioner McGinnis said,
"I talked to him to." Commissioner McLeod stated, "I would like to disclose that I had a
conversation with him."
Mr. John Baker, A1CP, Senior Planner, Community Development Department reviewed
this Agenda Item with the City Commission.
Discussion.
Mr. Bruce Duncan, Esquire, Potter Clement Lowry & Duncan, 308 East 5th Avenue,
Mount Dora, Florida: addressed the City Commission.
Commissioner Blake stated "Point of Order " and spoke about Variance criteria.
Mr. Duncan spoke on the proposed Variance.
Tape 2/Side A
With discussion, Mr. Duncan stated, "The gasoline storage tanks as I said are already in
the ground. The lines are run for the future pumps thatwe are requesting permission to
receive the Variance to finish the construction on." Furthermore, Mr. Duncan added,
"What we are requesting here tonight is a 140 foot Variance from the 350 foot
requirement from the Cumberland Farms which is the existing gasoline station that is
causing us the brunt of the problems here. We are 210 feet away from property comer to
property comer. We went out there and we took a measurement and we are actually 450
plus or minus a few feet, from the existing pumps at the Cumberland Farms to where
these pumps will be located on this particular site.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - AUGUST 11,2003
PAGE 14 OF 26
The Ordinance does require a property line to property line so it is a 210 foot buffer
between the - existing Cumberland Farms and this proposed site. In between the
Cumberland Farms and where we proposed to build this gasoline convenience store, there
will be another commercial construction site that will be developed at a future date.
There is a second lot that exists between the Cumberland Farms and where we are
actually trying to - or proposing to construct this particular facility. So what we are
asking for is the minimum required to allow the development of this site."
Mr. Duncan continued, "The granting of the Variance will not be injurious to the
neighborhood and will be in harmony with the Code. We believe the station, as we have
proposed it, will be a great addition to the City of Winter Springs. A couple of other
conceptuals that we have had prepared by our Engineers - this will give you an idea of
what the site will look like, this will give you an idea of the entryway - the pumps, and
how the pumps will be constructed and how they will be located on the site. We do not
believe that it will be injurious to the neighborhood. There will be brick walls that will
be constructed along the backside of the property - a six foot (6') high brick wall that
will provide a buffer between the Mobile Home Park, or Manufactured Home Park that
exists behind this particular site.
We have agreed through the Development Site Plan to eliminate off-site lighting
problems by providing bucket lighting and directional lighting. As I am sure you are
aware there are some pretty nice advancements as far as lighting is concerned, and we are
going to ensure that that lighting stays on-site, that there will be a minimal off-site
impact. I believe the Ordinance actually puts a minimum percentage of off-site lighting
that would be permitted by the design and construction of this particular facility. We do
not believe that it will have an injurious impact on the neighborhood.
This property is zoned Commercial. Whatever goes on this site will be commercial
development and what we are proposing we think is as good looking, as aesthetically
pleasing a convenience store/gasoline station, as you are ever going to see. We have
agreed to these improvements and advancements in an attempt to try to satisfy the Staff,
and in an attempt to try to obviously incur you to enter into - or grant us the Variance."
Next, Mr. Duncan pointed out that "I think we have addressed the aesthetics concern for
this gas station and I can assure you the investment that my client is making in this
particular comer will not result in his abandonment - probably in my lifetime. This is a
substantial investment in what he has already put into it and what he has agreed to put
into it as a result of the improvements and the continual development of this site. The
other issue that they cite is safety in that Ordinance - too many pumps too close together.
As I have pointed out, these pumps are actually going to be about 450 feet away from
each other so the location of these pumps, the pumps themselves actually exceeds that
which was addressed in that particular Ordinance."
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - AUGUST 11,2003
PAGE 15 OF 26
Commissioner Blake said to Mr. Duncan, "You talked about an item - criteria number
three (3) - the granting of the Variance will not differ - any special privilege that is
denied by the Chapter, to other lands, buildings, and structures in the same Zoning
District - and you say that you passed that test because this property had a permit issued
at one point in time that was in existence and the property owner you said had a right to
develop at that point in time this use, and then we created the Ordinance in between the
two (2) permit applications. Once that permit lapses you no longer had any rights at that
point in time without going through the process again - how would this be different if not
only did the permit lapse, and I do not hear any argument that the permit did in fact not
lapse and that you did initiate, or the partnership did initiate a new permit process, and in
between something else changed, and laws change all the time and when new things
happen they have to comply with the new laws, with currently existing laws, not laws as
they once were or laws that did not exist previously. How do you reconcile this
difference?"
Mr. Duncan responded, "I think that the issue is are you conferring a special privilege
upon my client that someone else in that particular Zoning District, or category, or
neighborhood would not be able to enjoy. My argument is that you are not because
anyone else has the opportunity to go through that process as well, just as we have and to
seek approval for the development."
Regarding Zoning, Mr. Duncan stated, "The existing Zoning permits a gas station at that
site. The Ordinance that prohibits the location within 350 feet is another matter. The
existing Zoning - my Client has made the business decision that a convenience store, gas
station, 'Starbucks' Coffee Shop, is the highest and best use for that particular site.
Certainly anyone could come in here and argue that that site he could make more money
for it as a bank or as a dry cleaning store but my client has made the business decision
that that is the highest and best use for the property that he owns."
Additionally, Mr. Duncan said, "We have imposed upon ourselves certain design criteria
that will limit or negate those impacts that mayor may not be there. Certainly one of the
issues that you must address is will it have a negative impact on the surrounding property
values. I do not believe that there has been any evidence or testimony that it will have a
negative impact on the surrounding property values. But the design criteria that we have
agreed to would provide for a substantial - not only a brick wall but there will be
landscaping on both sides of the brick wall. The lighting issues will be addressed
regarding the added expense providing the bucket lighting and directional lighting.
Those issues were designed to negate the impact on the surrounding property owners."
Discussion.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - AUGUST I 1,2003
PAGE I60F26
Mr. Duncan stated, "I would like to submit to you two (2) separate Petitions signed by
about fifty (50) or fifty-two (52) residents of Winter Springs that are in support of this
particular request for a Variance, and I will submit those to the Council at this time."
Discussion.
Mr. Connie Mack Crawley, 206 El Camino Real Circle, Winter Springs, Florida: as the
President, Mr. Crawley spoke on behalf of Hacienda Village and voiced concerns with
excessive noise, lighting, and gasoline odors.
Mr. G.H Massey IIL 31142 Cove Road, Taveres, Florida: as the Vice President of
Medallion Convenience Stores, Inc. Mr. Massey addressed the City Commission on his
interests on this issue.
Discussion ensued on current trends in the gasoline industry.
"I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE VARIANCE." MOTION BY
COMMISSIONER BLAKE. SECONDED BY DEPUTY MAYOR MILLER.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: NAY
COMMISSIONER BLAKE: NAY
DEPUTYMAYORMILLER: AYE
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: NAY
COMMISSIONER MARTINEZ: NAY
MOTION DID NOT CARRY.
"I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DO APPROVE THE
VARIANCE." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER McLEOD. SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. DISCUSSION.
Tape 2/Side B
WITH FURTHER DISCUSSION, ATTORNEY GARGANESE STATED, "WHEN
WE WERE DEALING WITH THE VESTED RIGHTS ISSUE, I BELIEVE THE
CITY MANAGER AND I PREPARED A VERY EXTENSIVE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT THAT WOULD IMPOSE CERTAIN CONDITIONS ON THE
DEVELOPMENT OF GASOLINE STATIONS, SO IT WAS IN HARMONY
WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THAT CERTAIN SAFEGUARDS WERE
IMPLEMENTED." ATTORNEY GARGANESE ADDED, "IF YOU DO GRANT
THIS VARIANCE, YOU MAY WANT TO REQUIRE US TO BRING BACK
THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH OBVIOUSLY ANY CHANGES
THAT ARE NECESSARY SO THAT YOU CAN IMPOSE THOSE
SAFEGUARDS."
. . .. ..
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - AUGUST I 1,2003
PAGE 17 OF 26
"I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE - MAIN MOTION
THAT THE SAME GOES FORWARD - WITH THE CHANGE WITH THE
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT ATTACHED THAT HAD BEEN WORKED OUT
PREVIOUSLY." AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER
McLEOD. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. DISCUSSION.
VOTE: (ON THE AMENDMENT)
COMMISSIONER MARTINEZ: AYE
DEPUTY MAYOR MILLER: NAY
COMMISSIONER BLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
VOTE: (ON THE MOTION, AS AMENDED)
DEPUTY MAYOR MILLER: NAY
COMMISSIONER BLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER MARTINEZ: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Bush called a Break at 9:02 p.m.
The Meeting reconvened at 9:10 p.m.
REGULAR
25. B. Community Development Department
Recommends The City Commission Hear A Request By Richard Gudenkauf For A
Variance From Section 20-486. (Please See Ordinance Number 2000-17) Of The
City Code Of Ordinances, To Allow An Existing Non-Conforming Sign To Remain
Within The State Road 434 Redevelopment Overlay Zoning District.
Mr. Baker introduced this Agenda Item. As photographs were shown to the City
Commission, Commissioner Blake asked if the photographs were digital photographs.
As the photographs were digital, Commissioner Blake suggested that such photographs
should be shown through the network and that Staff becomes "Hi-tech."
Commissioner McLeod suggested that perhaps we should have done "A survey of the
existing signs" and inquired as to what we are doing to get rid of certain signs.
Date: 022304
The following Document was read into the
Record by Mayor Bush on 02/23/04 during
Regular "502"
;
I
ROBERT S. MILLER
City Commissioner, Winter Springs, Fl32708
February 21, 2004
TO: City Manager, Mayor, and Commission
SUBJECT: Request to postpone City Commission Regular Agenda
Item 502 for Gas Station at Hayes Road and SR-434.
Once again the ApplicantlDeveloper of the Ava Eva group, for a gas station to be
constructed on the comer of State Road 434 and Hayes Road, is before this Commission,
this time for not renewing a special variance provided six months ago. This variance
request should never have been approved. I am therefore now requesting that Agenda
Item 502 be postponed until I am able to be present.
The Developer for the subject gas station continues to be a serious issue of concern to
residents of Winter Springs, especially those in the area around the proposed site. The
Developers latest failure to comply with simple requirements is indicative of a more
serious issue this City has been dealing with now for almost four years. It is the
Developers own conduct which has brought about the public's concern and distrust of
this Developer.
1. The Developers repeated inability to comply with existing rules and regulations
over a period of four years is a serious case in point.
2. The Developer has repeatedly allowed his approved city permits to expire, and
then come to the city for special consideration, which has repeatedly been granted
to this particular developer.
3. The Developer's unwillingness to behave, as would a reasonable man, in the last
four years, insofar as his abandonment of the property for almost two years, and
allowing it to become a public eye sore which the city had to clean up at taxpayers
cost, is another.
4. The Developers attempt on August 11, 2004, to falsely convince this Commission
that the Citizens of Winter Springs supported his project was reprehensible. The
Developer knowingly and deliberately misled this Commission. The Developer
publicly provided this commission with several pages of petitions signed by
residents of this city, which were later found to be completely false and bogus.
Despite the foregoing, the Commission by a vote of 4-1 on August 11,3004, approved a
variance to allow the developer t~ build a gas station, when the city's code clearly
prohibits gas stations within 350 feet of one another. The City Commission also forgave
substantial code enforcement liens against the Developer: from $75,000 down to $12,500.
Now we are informed. . . that the Developer has again failed to request another six month
extension on the special variance already granted him by the City in August 2004.
Undoubtedly, as in the past with the particular developer, there will be a long list of
reasons why he has again failed. This will come as no surprise to the City and residents.
This Developer's record is truly abysmal, and the request should not be granted.
This City's continued support of this developers inability to conduct his affairs III
accordance with normal.developer standards is no longer acceptable.
~~ S. H:lLv"
ROBERT S. MILLER