Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 10 25 Public Hearing 503 Proposed Town Parke Apartment Project CITY COMMISSION AGENDA Consent ITEM 503 Information Public Hearin. X Re. u1a October 25, 2010 Meeting \ / MGR.\ � /Dept r/ �, REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the City Commission review the information presented in this agenda item and consider three (3) requests for the proposed Town Parke Apartment project. (1) special exception requests, (2) final engineering plans, and (3) a development agreement for a 108 unit senior apartment complex with amenities on 6.95 acres within the Town Center. SYNOPSIS: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the City Commission to consider all of the information presented herein and use that information as a basis in their consideration of the special exceptions, final engineering plans, and development agreement for the proposed Town Parke Apartments, an age- restricted (55 -plus) income - restricted development. Based upon information provided by the applicant via email on October 8, 2010,incomes are by household and range from a low of $14,000 /year to a high of $42,000.year. The number of units available by income is as follows: 10% of the units - incomes at 33% of Area Median Income (AMI) - $14.000 to $23,000 79% of the units — incomes at 60% of AMI - +/- $25,000 to $42,000 11% of units — unrestricted AMI CONSIDERATIONS: OVERVIEW: The 6.95 acre undeveloped and treed site is located within the Winter Springs Town Center on the southwest corner of SR 434 and the trail bridge (east of the Mobile station, on the south side of SR 434). A concept plan was approved April 27, 2009 and amended May 18, 2009 for 201 units on 10.32 acres, but the number and composition of the units and the land area have been modified by the Developer. On August 23, 2010, the applicant withdrew the submittal for the 201 unit development. (Attachments E & F) The modified and resubmitted development proposal consists of 108 senior apartments (55- plus), a pool, a community garden, a putting green, a small dog park, and 174 on -site parking spaces. There are an additional 29 on- street parking spaces adjacent to the project along the north and October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 2 of 13 south sides of "Townhouse Road ". Some of the on -site parking spaces may be covered to provide protection from the weather. The proposed development is located on 6.95 acres straddling the Cross - Seminole Trail adjacent to the south side of the trail bridge over SR 434. Site topography slopes eastward from a high of about 42 feet near the west end of the proposed "Townhouse Road" to about 32 feet near the bridge crossing at SR 434 (elevations based on NGVD 1929). The development site is located outside of the 100 year floodplain and contains no wetlands. Gopher tortoises (10 or fewer burrows; these are the only listed animal species known or believed to inhabit the site) must be relocated before site work commences. The project has a proposed density of 15.5 units per acre. LAND USE & ZONING: Future Land Use Designation (FLU): Town Center Zoning: Town Center APPLICABLE REGULATIONS & DOCUMENTS: Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 (HOPA) Chapter 163, FS Chapter 166, FS Chapter 760, FS Rule 9J -5, FAC Comprehensive Plan Chapter 9, City Code Town Center District Code Schrimsher Development Agreement (June 26, 2000) DISCUSSION: Transportation The 108 -unit apartment project generates an estimated 778 trips per day, including 57 AM peak hour trips and 77 PM peak hour trips (per ITE Trip Generation Handbook, Bch Edition). The site is accessed from S.R. 434 by Townhouse Road, a new City street located approximately 400 -feet west of the Seminole County Trail Bridge. The location of Townhouse Road is consistent with the City's Town Center Master Plan for S.R. 434 Intersections. The Townhouse Road / S.R. 434 intersection was initially planned to be a full- access median opening, which would allow left -in, left-out, right -in, and right -out turning movements, similar to the S.R. 434 intersection at City Hall. On October 15, 2010, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) completed their permit review for the project and concluded that no S.R. 434 median cut would be allowed at Townhouse Road, which means the Townhouse Road entrance would only be a right -in, right -out driveway. Under the current S.R. 434 configuration, having only a right -in, right -out driveway at Townhouse Road would mean that westbound entering traffic would have to make u -turns at Tuskawilla Road, the first median opening west of Townhouse Road, in order to access the site. Westbound traffic exiting Town Parke Apartments would have to make a right -turn from the site onto S.R. 434 and then make a u -turn at the next median opening to the east at Gardena Drive. Staff has safety and operational concerns about adding a high volume of u -turns along S.R. 434 in this area, especially at Tuskawilla Road where the intersection geometry is not favorable for westbound u -turn movements. 2 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 3 of 13 To minimize the number of u-tums on S.R. 434 at Tuskawilla Road, Staff recommends that the S.R. 434 median at the proposed Michael Blake Boulevard intersection, located approximately 400 -feet west of Townhouse Road, be constructed as a westbound directional left turn opening. FDOT has indicated they will allow the Michael Blake Boulevard median to be opened in this manner, since the Michael Blake Boulevard intersection has been previously approved by FDOT as a full- median opening (with future signalization when warranted). Staff will continue to work with FDOT regarding the Townhouse Road intersection to determine if at least a westbound directional left turn median opening can be installed at Townhouse Road. FDOT currently does not allow two full- access median openings to be less than 1 /4 mile apart on S.R. 434 in this area, which is the case with Townhouse Road and Michael Blake Boulevard. The applicant has submitted a traffic impact study that after several rounds of review was determined to be acceptable to Staff. The traffic study evaluated the project's impact on the following six (6) S.R. 434 intersections: Doran Drive, Cliff Rose Drive, Tuskawilla Road, Townhouse Road (project entrance), Gardena Drive, and Tuscora Drive. All study intersections currently operate at an acceptable level of service and are projected to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service after the project is built out in 2012. The traffic study also evaluated the project's impacts to S.R. 434 from S.R. 419 through the Town Center to Spring Avenue, and to Tuskawilla Road from Blumberg Boulevard to Winter Springs Boulevard. Staff required the applicant's traffic engineer to evaluate these roadway segments for the average daily traffic impacts as well as the AM and PM peak hour impacts. The traffic study indicates that all segments will operate at an acceptable level -of- service at project buildout for daily, AM peak, and PM peak periods. Utilities The site has central water and sewer available in the area, with adequate capacity. An 8" diameter sanitary force main is located in the southeastern corner of the site, along the SR 434 right -of -way. A 12 "potable water line is located along the eastern right -of -way line of Tuskawilla Road and extends southward of the Mobile gas station site. The applicant proposes to provide irrigation from the storm -water pond, to be supplemented by an irrigation well. An on -site sanitary -sewer lift station is provided. Property Division The development site is comprised of parts of separate parcels owned by the same owner. Section 9 -14 of the City Code allows land within the Town Center to be divided by plat, lot split resolution, or in accordance with a recorded development agreement, except unless an exemption set forth in Section 9 -13 is applicable. The applicant proposes to divide the properties through the development agreement option. Transfer of ownership of the "Townhouse Road" ROW will include a deed to the City. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES State Law requires that all developments must comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Section 20 -321 (e) of the City's Code of Ordinances (Code) states "All development of property subject to the Town Center zoning designation and these regulations shall be subject to the 3 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 4 of 13 Comprehensive Plan of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, and all approvals and land development permits shall be in compliance with the comprehensive plan." While there are elements of design where it can be definitively determined whether a development proposal meets the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and the Code, there are debatable issues associated with the subject development proposal that must be vetted in any consideration of this project to determine whether this project is in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The positive and acceptable economic impact on the City and the issue of concentration of affordable housing are debatable items that will be addressed later in this document. Much of the information relative to these two items was unknown at the time of the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Site Plan Considerations The Plan (primarily the Future Land Use Element: Town Center and Urban Central Business District objectives and policies), Town Center Code (sections 20 -320 through 20 -327 of the City Code of Ordinances), and the Schrimsher Development Agreement address a number of items as related to the subject property. One of the most important considerations is the continuation of the street grid previously established in the Town Center Master Plan. This pedestrian -scale grid has been furthered in the proposed site plan and provides for a continuation of the street network through the subject site for eventual connection to Tuskawilla Road. The intersection on "Townhouse Road" that connects to parking and site amenities provide an opportunity for a connection to the north to Michael Blake Boulevard (through a future, non - related development), providing access to what is envisioned to become a full access signalized intersection. This interconnected grid network helps to provide a pedestrian -scale to the development and makes efficient multi -modal transportation possible. It also provides the first increment toward multiple routes for emergency response teams. There will be a LYNX bus stop adjacent to the site in the SR 434 right -of -way (ROW). Bicycle, wheelchair, and pedestrian access to the Cross - Seminole Trail are provided, near the SW corner of the site, where it is compatible with the trail bridge slope for ease of use and safety. Wide sidewalks and a nearly continuous line of 4 -story buildings oriented to the street (SR 434 and "Townhouse Road ") with elevated first floors (the first floor and the porch or stoop elevated at least 2 feet above the elevation of the adjacent public sidewalk) are required to enhance the pedestrian — oriented aspect of the neighborhood and help to create walkability and a sense of place — key goals of the Town Center Code. Street widths have been properly scaled to Town Center dimensions to accommodate on- street parallel parking as well as street trees which assist in the creation of a meaningful public space. Additionally, to further keep automobile speeds low, which is critical to a pedestrian- oriented development, corner radii are the prescribed 15 feet, except at the intersection of SR 434 and "Townhouse Road ", where they are 35 feet, as required by the FDOT. The density of 15.5 dwellings per acre is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (FLU Policy 2.2.6) for traditional development. Residential density above about 8 dwellings per acre is generally recognized as essential for efficient bus transit service. A critical mass of residential units and non - residential intensity (density and diversity = efficiency and flexibility) is an important principle of new urbanism that is necessary to create a sense of place, vibrant social and commercial interaction, and long -term value enhancement (long -term residual value for the 4 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 5 of 13 investment). Public infrastructure and services have a lower per capita cost as residential density and /or non - residential intensity increases. Economic Development Those remaining opportunities for diversification and optimization of the City's tax base predominately lie in the City's Town Center District and Greeneway Interchange District (GID). The City's Comprehensive Plan recognizes the financial importance of the Town Center and Greeneway Interchange Districts by requiring economic impact analysis in the decision making process for all development proposals within these districts. Accordingly, it is required that the City closely examine all potential development applications and opportunities in these districts to best ensure that any and all approved projects are in keeping with this direction and with the goals, objectives, and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Objective 2.3 of the Plan's Future Land Use Element addresses Economic Development. Policies 2.3.3 and 2.3.4 specifically address the aspects of tax base diversification and optimization and the fiscal impacts of development. FLU Policy 2.3.3 Optimization of Tax Base. Ensure compatible land uses and development projects within the Town Center that optimally increase and diversify the City's tax base and economic well - being, while complementing and protecting the established surrounding neighborhoods. As of Tax Year 2010 (Fiscal Year 2011), the City's ad valorem tax base allocation between residential and commercial properties is 88.22 %/11.78 %, respectively. This allocation has held historically and relatively consistent over the past 10 years or longer, placing an undue burden on the City's residential taxpayers. Additionally, unknown future economic conditions and pressures from the State Legislature relative to the City's ability to levy ad valorem taxes exacerbates this problem and place further burdens on the City's fiscal health and future. Thus, the City's stated goal of suitable diversification and optimization of the City's ad valorem tax base is a "mission critical" comprehensive plan policy of the City and the Town Center to ensure the on -going and future fiscal viability of the City. FLU Policy 2.3.4 Fiscal Impacts of Development. Ensure that City policies, regulations, and decision making processes not only consider Town Center design and planning impacts, but also consider whether proposed new development will have a positive and acceptable economic impact on the City. In furtherance of this policy, the City Commission may require, as a condition of considering the approval or denial ofa development project, that developers provide a written economic fiscal impact report, prepared by a duly qualified expert, that details the associated fiscal impacts of any proposed new development project on the City and the School District. The applicant has submitted a Fiscal Neutrality Analysis and Economic Impact Study. The details of staffs review of this report are contained below under the Fiscal Impact section of this agenda item. 5 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 6 of 13 Options for Affordable Housing Objective 1.3 of the Plan's Housing Element lays out the City's methodology for providing housing for very -low, low, and moderate - income households. Policies 1.3.9, 1.3 12, and 1.3.13 detail some of the applicable strategies for provision of low to moderate income housing. Housing Policy 1.3.9. Encourage developers to address the need for workforce housing where appropriate, by including workforce housing units in their developments. Additionally, encourage developers of single family detached units, where appropriate, to include residential units with accessory dwelling units (such as garage apartments). The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) recognizes ADUs as a viable option for providing affordable housing. Adoption of Ordinance 2010 -08 reflects one of the City's options for providing affordable housing — simply stated, the City emphasizes integration instead of concentration. The Town Center District Code has permitted Accessory Dwelling Units as a housing option in the Town Center since the District's adoption in 2000. Further, Agenda Item 500 on the City Commission's October 25, 2010 agenda is for the second reading and adoption of Ordinance 2010 -08 creating the opportunity for accessory dwelling units (ADU) to be added to existing dwellings throughout the City. Housing Policy 1.3.12. Coordinate the provision of affordable housing with other agencies and municipalities in the area. In 1999, the City of Winter Springs utilized part of a construction fund bond program to redevelop areas around Kristi Ann Court and Rhoden Lane. This redevelopment was for the purpose of conversion of these units from rental to ownership. The goal of the project was to provide housing options in the area and to stabilize what had become an unstable, higher crime area. A total of 52 units were converted. Although these units are market rate, they effectively provide affordable housing option to the residents of Winter Springs, integrated into one of the City's older neighborhoods. The City invested over $1 million to make this project successful, exclusive of the City staff and attorney time. Seminole County provided down payment assistance to qualified residents through their housing program. Housing Policy 1.3.13. Amend the City Code to address the following issues in the provision of affordable housing: • Discourage the concentration of affordable housing units. • Encourage the provision of compatible, integrated affordable housing within the older neighborhoods through redevelopment of existing units and inclusion of compatible accessory dwelling units. • Establish a maximum size for new stand -alone housing developments. • Require a strong, local management company for rental developments. The City continues the process of implementing this policy through its efforts to allow the provision of ADUs citywide and the redevelopment work done on the properties around Kristi 6 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 7 of 13 Ann Court and Rhoden Lane. As previously stated, these efforts, which are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, Housing Policy 1.1.13, are in furtherance of discouraging the concentration of affordable housing units and promoting the integration of affordable housing within existing neighborhoods and redevelopment of existing units. HOUSING FOR OLDER PERSONS ACT of 1995 (HOPA) There has been much discussion during the community meetings about the 20% of units that are allowed to be occupied by persons who are not 55 years of age. The Federal Register /Vol.64, No. 63 /Friday, April 2, 1999 /Rules and Regulations offers the following information: There continues to be confusion concerning what is often referred to as 80/20 split. HOPA states that the minimum standard to obtain housing for persons who are 55 years or older status is that "at least 80%" of the occupied units be occupied by persons 55 years or older. There is no requirement that the remaining 20% of the occupied units be occupied by persons under the age of 55, nor is there a requirement that those units be used for persons where at least one member of the household is 55 years of age or older. Communities may decline to permit any persons under the age of 55, may require that 100% of the units have at least one occupant whose is 55 years of age or older, may permit up to 20% of the occupied units to be occupied by persons who are younger that 55 years of age, or set whatever requirements they wish, as long as "at least 80%" of the occupied units are occupied by one person 55 years of age or older, and so long as such requirements are not inconsistent with the overall intent to be housing for older persons. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff estimates that the two parcels that make up this project currently generate approximately $16,000 in ad valorem taxes. These numbers have been estimated because both parcels are the result of a division of existing parcels. On October 8, 2010, the City Manager and Finance Director met with a representative of Fishkind & Associates (Steve Schriever) and Atlantic Housing Partners (Marc Gauthier) to discuss a Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & Economic Impact Study of the proposed Town Parke Apartment development in Winter Springs. At that meeting, several questions and concerns were raised by staff as a result of a staff review of the Fishkind study. First is the question of appropriateness of the RIMS II multiplier to approximate the impact of the Town Parke project on the local economy. In economics, the multiplier effect or spending multiplier is the idea that an initial amount of spending leads to increased consumption spending greater than the initial amount of spending on a project. In other words, an initial change in demand causes a change in output for the economy that is a multiple of the initial change. The key question is where the money is spent that is generated by this project. Fishkind demonstrates that 19 new jobs would be created with a total economic output of $3.0 million dollars. It is the opinion of the City's Finance Director (Director) that most of the economic impact will occur outside the City limits, due primarily to the fact that Winter Springs is approximately 90% residential and 10% commercial. It is the Director's opinion that the multiplier used (RIMS II — Seminole County) in this study is too broad and therefore yields little information that can be 7 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 8 of 13 used to determine a true economic output or impact of the project. At this meeting Steve Schriever (Fishkind) agreed that the RIMS II multiplier was not the optimal model for the Town Parke report. The discussion then turned to the Fiscal Impact Analysis Model (FIAM), which also was used to approximate the impact that the Town Parke Apartments would have on the City of Winter Springs' Budget. Staff raised four key questions /concerns that arose after reviewing the Fishkind model for revenue projections: 1) Fishkind uses the Market approach to estimate the revenue that would be derived from property taxes paid on the Town Parke Apartments. David Johnson, Seminole County Property Appraiser, indicated that the customary and appropriate approach for estimating property taxes for this type of development would be the Income approach. Therefore, we have a disparity between the model and what will actually occur. This disparity will likely yield a higher revenue stream than can be expected when the project is completed. 2) The revenue model used in the Fishkind report projected Road Improvement Fund Revenues (i.e. second generation sales tax) continuing for the next 20 years. The Road Fund revenue will, in -fact, only continue for the next 13 months, expiring in December 2011. Inclusion of the Road Improvement Fund beyond its actual expiration date obviously inflated the revenue streams and resultant net fiscal benefit in a direction that favored the project. 3) In theory, the FIAM model relies heavily upon customized data relevant to the economy being studied. As of today, staff has not been granted access to the model's parameters or specific Winter Springs' data inputs. Further review to determine the accuracy or quality of the model can't occur without access to the specific model and data. 4) The results of the FIAM are stated in terms of Net Present Values using a "discount" factor of 10 %. The discount factor, in theory, is the rate that the City could reinvest monies at market rates if they decided to invest in an alternative investment. Staff argued that 10% is not a realistic rate of return that any government can sustain over the long run. At the end of the meeting staff sent a list of follow -up questions to Fishkind's office for clarification. Fishkind's response to these questions is included in this agenda item as Attachment G. The response to the questions raised further concerns about the appropriateness of the analysis and its application to Winter Springs. Those questions are as follows: 1) How do you complete an economic impact analysis without knowing the income levels of the occupants? 2) In the FIAM model, the revenues and expenses are projected out in a linear method. Revenues are increased at a constant 2% and expenses also increase at a constant 2 %. As staff looked back over history, this is not the pattern that the City of Winter Springs has realized. 3) What were the customized variables /inputs into the RIMSII or FIAM model? Simply stated, the Director's conclusion, as supported by the affidavit of Edward T. Wolpert, PH.D with Raffa Consulting Economists, Inc., is that the information presented in the Fishkind 8 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 9 of 13 report is very generic and sometimes not relevant to Winter Springs. Additionally, the revenue assumptions utilized to calculate the total net fiscal benefit and net present value (NPV) of the net fiscal benefit contain inaccurate and improper data. Thus, the Fishkind report is not sufficient to draw any conclusions about the optimization of this project and its economic impact on the City as required by the City's Comprehensive Plan. The entire Fiscal Neutrality Analysis can be viewed on the City's website by looking under "Proposed Town Parke Apartment Project" on the front page. The name of the analysis is "8- 23 -2010 Fiscal Neutrality Analysis" and is located under the "New Project Proposal" heading. COMMISSION ACTION ITEMS FOR THE TOWN PARKE APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT: ITEM 1 REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the City Commission review the special exception requests for a 108 unit senior apartment complex with amenities on 6.95 acres within the Town Center. SYNOPSIS: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the City Commission to review the special exception requests for waivers and deviations, pursuant Section 20 -321 of the City Code. Special Exceptions Section 20 -321 of the City Code states that the City Commission may, by special exception, waive strict compliance with the provisions of the Code. In granting a special exception, the City Commission must find by substantial competent evidence that: a. The proposed development contributes to, promotes and encourages the improvement of the Winter Springs Town Center and catalyzes other development as envisioned in the Winter Springs Town Center regulations. b. The proposed development will not have an unfavorable effect on the economy of the Winter Springs Town Center. c. The proposed development abides by all rules in this code other than those specially excepted. Special limitations apply to large footprint buildings (greater than (20,000) square feet); see subsection 20 -324 (12) for these limitations. d. The proposed development meets any reasonable additional conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed necessary by the city commission in order to preserve and promote the intent of the Winter Springs Town Center Master Plan. Staff believes that the code deviations and waivers listed below satisfy these criteria for a pedestrian - friendly, multimodal, urban, development that meets the intent of the Town Center. 9 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 10 of 13 Code Deviations & Waivers The site plan incorporates certain code waivers, as listed below. These are addressed separately in the special exception agenda item and, if approved by the City Commission, will be incorporated into a development agreement. 1. Section 20 -325 (c) (8) provides for the City Commission to waive the frontage road requirement (frontage roads are more suitable in front of retail development; the applicant is providing a wider sidewalk in conjunction with a bus stop with a shelter in the SR 434 ROW; staff supports the waiver). 2. Section 20 -324 (1) requires corner curb radii between 9 and 15 feet, which requires motor vehicles to slow down going around corners and thereby increases pedestrian safety. The applicant is meeting this standard, except at the intersection of the new "Townhouse Road" and SR 434, where the FDOT requires the roadway connection to SR 434 to have wider turning radii (35 feet), to maintain the motor vehicle level of service on SR 434 (therefore, since FDOT controls its ROW and will not issue a permit for tighter radii at the intersection, staff supports the waiver as a necessity). 3. Section 20 -327 (d) requires each floor of any building facade facing a park, square or street to have transparent windows covering from 15 to 70 percent of the wall area. The side wall of Building No. 1, which is in very close proximity to the trail bridge, has 10 percent window area (since this side of the residential building is so close to the trail bridge; staff supports having windows facing the trail for safety /surveillance purposes, but does not want to compromise the privacy of the residents, by allowing too much view into the living and bedrooms from the trail bridge; staff supports the waiver). The rest of the building frontages meet the 15 percent opacity requirement. 4. Section 20 -324 (10) (f) requires no more than 6 consecutive parking spaces provided without a landscape island, where there is not the alternative landscaping in front of the spaces. There are 8 spaces and handicap accessibility aisles in the area immediately south of the pool (toward the trail). The code allows tree spacing to be determined by the City Arborist, based on tree species and locations. The City Arborist supports this waiver, based upon the proposed tree planting /landscape plan. 5. Section 20 -324 (5) requires the first floor to be elevated at least 24 inches above the adjacent sidewalk grade. This is essential to a positive interactive relationship between residences and people on the sidewalks and street ( "eyes on the street "). The buildings will have monolithic slabs and some of the ends of the buildings do not meet the letter of this requirement. All buildings are designed to meet or exceed the 24 inch requirement at the front entrances. Staff has stated that deviations too minor to be noticeable at the ends of the buildings would be acceptable. 6. Section 20 -325 (8) and (10) set a maximum building width of 160 feet and building depth of 125 feet. Buildings 2 (L- shaped building at the corner) and Building 4 exceed these maximums. These buildings do not pose the "big box" problems, such as depicted in Section 20 -324 (12) picture. Staff believes these buildings relate well to the adjacent roadways and supports these waivers. Staff had also supported and the Commission approved waiving strict adherence to this rule in the Doran Phase II plans (for the east side of Tuskawilla Road, behind McDonalds), where it was determined that the overall design of the site more than compensated for the deviation. 7. Section 20 -325 (10) sets a maximum 35 foot distance between buildings. The distance between buildings 2 and 3 scales to about 80 feet. The driveway into the site (which 10 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 11 of 13 functions very similarly to an internal roadway) is located within this area, with a 10 foot wide sidewalk and parallel parking on each side. There is a distance of about 32 feet from the western end of building 2 and the driveway curb. The other buildings are much closer together than the 35 foot standard. Staff supports this deviation in this location due to the manner in which this driveway functions as a roadway. Staff Findings 1. The proposed development is located within the City of Winter Springs, within its Town Center (FLU designation and zoning district), and within the area encompassed by the existing June 26, 2000 Schrimsher Development Agreement. 2. Section 20 -323 (a) of the City Code of Ordinances lists adult congregate living facilities, retirement homes (including independent living through assisted living), and multi - family residential as permitted uses within the Town Center District. However, all permitted uses are subject to review for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan policies including those stated above. 3. The concept plan for 201 multi - family dwelling units on 10.32 acres was approved on April 29, 2009, but was amended on May 18, 2009. This plan was withdrawn in August 2010 and the plan modified to include 108 age- restricted apartments. 4. Deviations from the Town Center Code are addressed through a special exception, development agreement, or some combination of these, as provided in Section 20 -321. From a technical engineering standpoint, staff can support the listed deviations. However, pursuant to Section 20 -321 of the City's Code of Ordinances, the City Commission must also determine that the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 20 -321 [c -1(a) and (b)] and whether the project is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City Commission should consider the economic analysis stated above and any testimony at the meeting regarding these criteria in making a final determination on the deviations. Further, if the City Commission decides to approve these deviation, the City Commission may impose additional conditions, restrictions, or limitations deemed necessary in order to preserve and promote the Town Center. 5. The applicant has met with concerned citizens on multiple occasions to discuss the development, obtain input, and has reported that he has incorporated some of that input into the plans. COMMUNICATION EFFORTS: Extensive information on this site is posted on the City website. In addition, a sign has been posted on the site and letters have been sent to abutting property owners of land within 150 feet of the site as part of the public notification for the special exception. This meeting date has also been posted on the City's Website under the project name. This Agenda Item has been distributed to the Mayor and City Commission; City Manager; City Attorney; Department Directors; placed in Press Packets; placed in the Lobby binder; and will be available on the City's Website, LaserFiche, and the City's Server. 1 1 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 12 of 13 RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD: At its regular meeting of October 13, 2010, the P &Z Board recommended that the Commission deny the deviations. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the Finance Director's conclusion, as supported by the affidavit of Edward T. Wolpert, PH.D with Raffa Consulting Economists, Inc., that the information provided in the reports by the applicant as of the date of this staff report is insufficient to support any conclusion that the proposed development meets the criteria contained in Section 20 -321 of the City's Code of Ordinances, staff must recommend denial of the Special Exception for the deviation at this time. Staff has been unable to determine whether or not the project meets the requirements set forth in the Comprehensive Plan related to the fiscal impacts of the development (FLU Policy 2.3.4) and whether the project optimizes the City's tax base (FLU Policy 2.3.3.). In addition, the proposed development may not be consistent with Housing Element 1.3.13 of the City's Comprehensive Plan which discourages the concentration of affordable housing and encourages the integration of affordable housing. ITEM 2 REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the City Commission review the final engineering plans for a 108 unit senior apartment complex with amenities on 6.95 acres within the Town Center. SYNOPSIS: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the City Commission to review the final engineering site plan for Town Parke Apartments. RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD: At its regular meeting of October 13, 2010, the P &Z Board recommended that the Commission deny the final engineering plans for the Town Parke Apartment project. RECOMMENDATION: The information provided in the reports by the applicant as of the date of this staff report is insufficient to support any conclusion that the proposed development meets the criteria contained in Section 20 -321 of the City's Code of Ordinances. Staff recommends that the City Commission deny the final engineering plans for the Town Parke Apartment project based upon the inability to determine whether or not the project meets the requirements set forth in the Comprehensive Plan related to the fiscal impacts of the development (FLU Policy 2.3.4) and whether the project optimizes the City's tax base (FLU Policy 2.3.3). In addition, the proposed development may not be consistent with Housing Element 1.3.13 of the City's Comprehensive Plan which discourages the concentration of affordable housing and encourages the integration of affordable housing. ITEM 3 REQUEST: 12 October 25, 2010 Public Hearing Item 503 Page 13 of 13 The Community Development Department requests the City Commission review the development agreement for a 108 unit senior apartment complex with amenities on 6.95 acres within the Town Center. SYNOPSIS: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the City Commission to review the development agreement for Town Parke Apartments. This document incorporates the special exceptions and other Town Center issues, such as, but not limited to the applicant paying the difference between standard signage and street lights and those commonly used within the Town Center. RECOMMENDATION: If the City Commission approves the Special Exception and the final engineering for the proposed project, staff recommends that the City Commission approve the Development Agreement as may be modified at the direction of the City Commission at the City Commission meeting. ATTACHMENTS: A — Location map B - Draft P &Z minutes C — Development Agreement D — Madden Engineering Letter withdrawing the 201 Unit Concept Plan E — Letter from Community Development accepting withdrawal of the 201 Unit Concept Plan F — Affidavit of Edward T. Wolpert, PH.D G — Fishkind Response to Staff Questions H — Final engineering site plan 13 g ATT A g Continued P 2603 Continued P 2604 1 ' / 7 ; H s -"R� �� P ► O � �1.. , I0' 1.5/ 0 � �' gyp N v y `v ii,5 \9�2 t V " SS nva 4,6 i w \ ` u 461 N E 1200 a \A \ 1205 \\.\ o \\ �''\ � \\ / `` ► `, 190 \\ \\\\ ...... ,.. C("1 \\,„ \ b ri �� \ ► JU \ \\� 3 // ► 882 • ^ .. •, • • . A I fi l • •• • • • \� rt 1 • 2 • 3 • 4ontinue • g 2614 - 6 A 7 • 8 y w • . MILE 4 'p :. NOTES: ► - �� S, II I I r ' 1 � 3 . ESRCA Municipal Address Map Book 200 °°° i �._._� - r � ''..)/' . PRINTED: REVISED: Feet • , , ,, �i [ I I , 4 1• rj , June 2007 1 . 2 . 3 ' �.- �� ' `' e City of Winter Springs, FL Map 2606 i i ,,, , 'Tr(1 , n i I Page PAGE LOCATION KEY MAP WITH 1 8 2 MILE RADIUS RINGS Developed By Southeastern Surveying & Mapping Corp. ATTACHMENT B °R APT CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY R cara EGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of Wednesday, October 13, 2010 of the Planning And Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency (Rescheduled from October 6, 2010) was called to Order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman William H. Poe in the Commission Chambers of the Municipal Building (City Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708). Roll Call: Vice Chairman William H. Poe, present Board Member Howard Casman, present Board Member Rosanne Karr, present Board Member Bart Phillips, present Board Member Helga Schwarz, present A moment of silence was held, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. INFORMATIONAL AGENDA INFORMATIONAL 100. Not Used. CONSENT AGENDA CONSENT 200. Office Of The City Clerk Requesting Approval Of The September 1, 2010 Planning And Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency Regular Meeting Minutes. "I PROPOSE THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES AS CIRCULATED" (SEPTEMBER 1, 2010). MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER KARR. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN. DISCUSSION. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLO DRAFT UNAPPROVED M Ap PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENC REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 2 OF 24 VOTE: BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS: AYE r BOARD MEMBER CASMAN: AYE VICE CHAIRMAN POE: AYE BOARD MEMBER KARR: AYE BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ: AYE Ls MOTION CARRIED. AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS 300. Not Used. 400. REPORTS No Reports were given. PUBLIC INPUT No one spoke. PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS 500. Community Development Department Requests The P &Z (Planning And Zoning) Board Review The Special Exception Requests For A 108 Unit Senior Apartment Complex With Amenities On 6.95 Acres Within The Town Center And Provide A Recommendation To The City Commission. Mr. Randy Stevenson, ASLA, AICP, Director, Community Development Department stated, "If anyone is in the audience that will be Testifying in terms of expert Witness or giving opinions and anything other than opinions, we might as well swear everyone in at the beginning of the Meeting." Deputy City Clerk Joan Brown swore in those who may be addressing the Board during this Agenda Item. 0 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES �� PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 3 OF 24 Mr. Stevenson began the presentation and addressed Objective 2.3 as it specifically er relates to the Town Center and Policy 2.3.4 relating to the Fiscal Impacts of Development C=3 from the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Stevenson added, "What we covered for you in the Agenda Item - 108 units, the Property, some things that were provided by the Applicant in a Fiscal Neutrality Analysis (& Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter �3 Springs, Florida). Staff is currently still in the process of reviewing that for the future we nn Hearing with the City Commission. We have met a couple of times with the author of that Report. There are some concerns relative to methodology and some assumptions and multipliers. We are working those out at this point in time. I did want to let you know we are proceeding forward with that. We do not have all that information for you here tonight, because that is primarily an issue that we are bringing forward in detail to the City Commission." Next, Mr. Stevenson noted that, "If you have any questions, the author of the Report is here tonight and the Applicant may wish for them and may give you some additional information from their standpoint of the Report. But, I did want to let you know up front that Staff is looking long and hard at this Report in fulfillment of the requirements of this particular Policy within our Comprehensive Plan." Mr. John Baker, AICP, Senior Planner, Community Development Department spoke about this Agenda Item and stated, "A letter was sent out to all the abutting property owners within 150' feet of the site including the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and a sign has been Posted on the site as required by the City Code." Mr. Baker reviewed the history of the Town Center area and displayed the Town Center Master Plan Map and the proposed Town Parke Apartments Site plan. Next, Mr. Baker read the Special Exceptions and Code Deviations and Waivers from the Agenda Item and remarked, "Staff does believe that the Site Plan and Code Deviations listed below satisfies the Criteria for the pedestrian- friendly, multimodal, urban, development that meets the spirit and intent of the Town Center Code." In summary, Mr. Baker added, "We have advertised this according to Code and recommend Approval for these Special Exceptions." Discussion ensued on specifications of the proposed buildings. Mr. Stevenson stated, "Now that we have the Comprehensive Plan and the EAR (Evaluation And Appraisal Report) submitted, I think the next thing as we are able to get to it, is a rewrite of portions of the (City) Code and we would certainly take that under advisement to put in some more explicit language that might deal more with Commercial versus Residential on (State Road) 434." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORID DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES et PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 4 OF 24 Ms. Rebecca Furman, Attorney, Lowndes Drosdick Doster Kantor & Reed, P.A., 215 �. North Eola Drive, Orlando, Florida: addressed the Board Members on behalf of her client, Atlantic Housing Partners, LLLP and went through a PowerPoint presentation. =6c Ms. Furman stated, "I also have with me tonight, two (2) representatives from the i=164 Applicant, Scott Culp and Mark Gauthier and also our project team which were previously Sworn in, but we have representatives from Fishkind and Associates who prepared the Report if you all have any questions about that from our Engineers, Madden Moorhead & Glunt, (Inc.) our Architects Slocum Platts (Architects) our Landscape Architects from Foster Conant (& Associates) and Transportation Engineer from GMB (Engineers & Planners, Inc.) and we don't have Joel Ivey (Ivey Planning Group, LLC) with us tonight, but I do have an Affidavit from him." Next, Ms. Furman added, "What I wanted to enter into Evidence, now that we have everyone Sworn, so they don't have to come up and individually give that Testimony, but I will be happy to read them into the Record, but these are Affidavits from each one of our Consultants that has prepared a Report. It states that the Report was prepared under their supervision. It states their credentials; it states some at length in the ways this plan meets the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan, those requirements of the Land Development Code, and these Special Exceptions." Ms. Furman then stated, "We are not asking for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This is already designated `Town Center'. It allows this Use which is multi - family, it allows up to thirty -six (36) units an acre. We are asking for significantly less than that. It requires a Fiscal Impact Analysis be done which we have done. It requires a neo- traditional design which we have included. It requires that each project be designed and taken into consideration a "Green Network" within the Town Center. It also requires a connected network of streets and blocks and we take your adopted Town Center network and continue it through our project. In addition, when you look at the Housing Element of your City, this Comprehensive Plan Amendment goes to further those deficiencies in the market driven supply especially low to moderate households and elderly that is specifically called out in your Housing Element. Your Housing Element also states that the figures indicate that there will be a need for approximately 3,095 Housing Units for the elderly population and further that the City shall encourage safe, clean and affordable Housing for special needs populations of the City including the very low, low and moderate income households. Similarly, we are not asking for a rezoning tonight. We are already zoned `Town Center'. We are a Permitted Use, we are in Compliance with your street types, with your parking requirements. We meet Transportation requirements; we are in Compliance with the building placement and height. Your Planner pointed out that your Town Center Code is formed based which basically means the envelopes of these have been created in your Code instead of based just simply on setbacks and building heights. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORID DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 5 OF 24 We are in Compliance with the Architecture guidelines, we are in Compliance with your signage requirements and your amenity requirements. We do as the Planners pointed out, have a few Variances or Waivers from those requirements that many, we believe, make the project a better project and we believe we create a project that continues to be consistent with the Town Center Code. A little bit of the project history. Back in 2009, the Winter Springs City Commission -- Approved a Concept Plan in May of this year. We submitted this Development Plan which is consistent with the already Approved Concept Plan. And the City asked us to hold some Meetings and so for the last several months, that is what we have been doing. We have gone out and we have listened to the neighbors. Because of the feedback that we received in September, we revised the Final Development Plan, and I will go through what those revisions are. Recently, in October we had a Staff Report finding us in Compliance and then we are here tonight. The City approved a Concept Plan in 2009 that allowed this Project to be developed on over ten (10) acres with over 200 units. Our density was nineteen and a half (19 'h) units an acre. The proposed demographics were to be families with a modest senior component and you can see the amenities listed below. Based on the discussions with the Community, we have agreed to a revised plan significantly reducing the acreage of this, significantly reducing the unit's count, reducing the density, agreeing to limit this to seniors. With even fewer people, we still almost double the size of the clubhouse and add several more amenities which we believe make this a superior project. This is the Approved Concept Plan. It was Approved back in 2009 and you can see the Townhouse Road generally remains in the same place and on the screen. It is to your right, is that area that we have agreed — not to develop and that we have taken out of our plans." Mr. Mark Gauthier, Vice President, Director of Design and Permitting, Atlantic Housing Partners, IJJ.P, 700 West Morse Boulevard, Suite 220, Winter Park, Florida: addressed the Board Members on the Site Plan conditions. Mr. Gauthier remarked, "As Becky (Rebecca Furman) had mentioned, the plan that you are looking at is the Concept Plan that was Approved by City Council in April 2009. It includes a total of 201 units and a mix of three (3) and four (4) story buildings. After meeting numerous times with the neighbors, we have come up with an alternate plan and this is what you are looking at today. The area that we removed from the Project is right in here and what we have done, actually Townhouse Road is exactly where it was located on the Concept Plan and this is the location that the City has on their Town Center Grid Network. The intent is one day maybe this will continue through and connect to Tuskawilla Road. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORID DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY �� REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 6 OF 24 We have made significant improvements and I have to thank Staff, they have been working with this very, very closely. I always like to say that — we like to do what we like to do, but I found in the last number of years, when we listen to the Staff's plan, the municipality's Planning Staff, we really get a lot of input and ends up being a superior community. That is something that has happened here with a lot of the details that we are going to go through. One of the things we did, we found during our study, that there was a jurisdictional wetland in this area, so we redesigned the site and removed this completely mesa out of our site because we didn't want any wetland impacts. We have created not just a normal stormwater pond, but we have created what we believe is going to be a good amenity for the Trail. It is being constructed to sort of enhance the interconnected `Green Network' that is the Cross Seminole Trail. Our approved Concept Plan had a gazebo internally for the use of our residents and we relocated it onto the Trail so that not only our residents can use it, but also people that are using the Trail can also enjoy it. In our initial Concept Plan, this upper end was parking and there was a trash compacter in this area. But, recognizing that as you are using the Trail, you come down this way and you really have a terminal view — we wanted to lower the intensity of the development in this area. So, we have taken the parking out and in its place, we've provided a dog park that is fenced in for our residents, a putting green, we have provided a formal lawn — that we sort of envision people using for croquet and that sort of thing; a community garden where the residents can grow their own plants, flowers and maybe vegetables. We have relocated the compacter from this area, which is fairly visible from the Trail to over here so that it is sort of hidden from view. Our initial plan had no balconies and we have agreed to put balconies on every unit in the development. What that does, it furthers the — principles, crime prevention through environmental design giving the residents in here better eyes on the street. We significantly upgraded the — on site amenities; we have almost doubled the size of our clubhouse. Around the swimming pool, we have created a series of covered walkways and pergolas; we expanded the pool deck to allow for more chairs. There are pergolas on two (2) sides of them that have instead of columns what are called green screens. These green metal mesh columns that you grow plant material in, so ultimately it will be more vegetation, less structure. We also, in order to encourage our residents to use transit more often and make it more convenient for them, we are constructing a bus shelter in this area. It will be the Town Center style bus shelter that you see in some areas in the Town Center where it is an upgraded roof shelter. It will include a bench, a trash can and a bike rack. We have given a lot of accommodations, we believe to the neighbors significantly reducing the intensity of the development, although we sincerely believe that we really do have the right to request Approval of the full site. We are not here to do that this evening. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING — OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 7 OF 24 The Concept Plan included a Conceptual Building Elevation as well. This is a typical building that was Approved in April 2009. We have upgraded the building and this is what we are proposing today. This is the view along Highway (State Road) 434. Although, the Developer's Agreement is not coming in front of you tonight, I wanted to rnes just hit a few points on some items that are going to go into the Developer's Agreement just so that you can use that for a little bit of perspective. We have agreed to in the Developer's Agreement, to restrict the Development for Housing for older persons; we specifically agreed that neither of us or any related entity will develop any of the adjacent swerin properties. We are constructing Townhouse Road and dedicating it to the City as a public road. We have a number of `Green' development commitments and the City of Winter Springs is really big on `Green' development as are we, and the next slide will show you some of the things that we are committing to do. And also, there is an enforcement clause in there that gives the City some teeth in the event that we do not comply with these items." Reviewing some of the "Green" items, Mr. Gauthier noted, "These are some of the things that we have committed to do. There are some other energy efficiency items that we are doing, we just didn't include them in the Developer's Agreements. Let's go through them very quickly. A couple of the items, these are going to be budget permitting. What we would like to do is include carports, and they are in the Site Plan as optional that is before you today. Tape 1 /Side B Solar panels, we have done it in a number of communities, but sometimes construction costs get so high the money runs out. We don't want to have to cut things like landscaping, building design, because we don't think that that would be appropriate. Extensive landscaping - the Town Center has some very, very, very heavy landscaping Codes. We have met those and I believe exceeded them in a lot of areas. We are committing to go after a `Florida Yards and Neighborhood' Certification on our landscaping. We have been working with the `Agricultural Extension' on a number of our communities to get this designation. We have one (1) in Seminole County now. This designation was actually written for single family homes, so it was a little bit tough for us to get it the first few times for a multi - family development, but we have been successful and we have been successful in Seminole County. We partnered with the Florida Solar Energy Center. They are one of our strategic partners out at UCF (University of Central Florida). They have been helping us over the last three (3) or four (4) years improving the energy efficiency of our buildings while maintaining good air quality within them. O CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES q� PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 8 OF 24 I don't know if you are familiar with the HERS (Home Energy Rating System) rating C=I system. If you build a building the way the average building is built, meets Code and the way the average developer builds it, you get a HERS (Home Energy Rating System) rating of one hundred (100). And what that means is you should expect your energy consumption to be a hundred percent (100 %) of what the normal is. We are committing on Town Parke to have our apartment homes at HERS (Home Energy Rating System) intenra sixty five (65) or below. What that means — in the real world is they should have energy consumption sixty five percent (65 %) or less than the average. �---. We use Energy Star appliances and Energy Star ceiling fans, high efficiency air conditioning, digital thermostats, radiant barrier and a roof assembly, dual pane Low -e Energy Star rated windows, upgraded attic and wall insulation, extensively used compact fluorescent lighting within our units. This doesn't go to energy efficiency, but it does go to the air quality. We use only low VOC (Volatile Organic Compound) panes within our units and all of our carpet and padding is Green Level Certified. We use low flow faucets, low flow shower heads and this is one of the items that came from Florida Solar (Energy Center) — we actually have a duct to the outside that brings in a controlled amount of air to the inside when the air conditioning is running. Pressurizes the inside of the unit a little bit and prevents the humid air from migrating through the building. One important thing, our Management Company, we make them change the filters in the air conditioners. People typically don't change them especially if they are renting and they are big, big energy hogs." Continuing with the Powerpoint presentation, and referencing Design Waivers, Mr. Gauthier added, "This is the area where we are asking for — eight (8) continuous spaces instead of six (6). It is really important to note that you can have a stretch of spaces that exceeds six (6) if you abut a landscape area. This abuts all the way from the sidewalk — directly abuts the landscape area on our pool." Mr. Gauthier then added, "The vertical separation, the twenty -four inches (24 ") from the sidewalk to the finished floor. Let me explain how our buildings work so that you have a better idea. In order to provide an accessible route for handicap purposes to each unit, we have central corridors, a breezeway as you go through the building. Off of this breezeway, you have four (4) units that have the front doors within the breezeway — because the front doors open up to the same corridor, both of these apartment homes have to have the same finished floor elevation. You can't have a step for accessibility purposes. The challenge becomes, your floor is level, but your roadway slopes. So, using this little module as an example, we have designed it so that at the entrance doors to the apartment homes — we have a minimum of twenty -four inches (24 ") above the sidewalk. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA t % p DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 9 OF 24 But, since the floor is flat and the road slopes upward, when you get to this apartment =4 home your difference is a little bit less. You have a few inches less than a twenty -four raQ inch (24 ") drop. And on the other side you have a few inches more than a twenty -four C=> inch (24 ") drop. The entrance into the apartment, it is twenty four inches (24 ") or higher and when you are out on your balconies, you are still either two feet (2') or more separation, or really close to it. neml You can see when you get down towards the Trail, the Site slopes significantly along (State Road) 434. We have a retaining wall here that I believe is five feet (5') in height. So, you have actually on these units, you have something like a five (5) or six foot (6') difference which far exceeds the City's requirements." Reviewing the building length, Mr. Gauthier said, "I believe that the Staff Report said that this was 170 — I think it is about 167, but either way it is a minor deviation. As it was explained to me, this maximum building length in the Town Center was really to prevent big box development. You didn't want a Walmart Supercenter opening in the Town Center, so you said, `Let's make the building smaller.' These buildings have a lot — of recesses and the face of the building does a lot of jogging, so these actually appear as smaller buildings because of the way the building is designed. This is the area where we are showing or requesting a reduction in the window area. We have a retaining wall along the edge of the Trail and then we have landscaping then we have our first floor windows. I am not that concerned in this instance about the first floor windows, I think the first floor residents will have plenty of privacy; but what I am concerned about is people who are going across the bridge. They get to this point and maybe they are fifteen or twenty feet (15 -20') above the ground and they are able to look right into people's windows. And I would say that these people would probably have their best shot looking into the second floor or the third floor of this building. The first floor is going to really be too low for them to see and the fourth floor is likely too high for them to see, but you will have center section where the people's privacy can be somewhat compromised. I think that this is a very good Waiver to request and Staff supports us on this, but I will tell you that if this Board decides that they do not want to provide that Waiver, we just put some extra windows in. We are okay that way too. We were just trying to do something to provide still a good design and at the same time provide our residents with a better sense of privacy. This is the area where we are talking about a separation between the buildings exceeding thirty -five feet (35'). I wasn't here when the Town Center Code was written. I am assuming that it didn't apply to buildings that were across the street from each other. You have a sixty foot (60') right -of -way separating two (2) buildings. Those buildings can't be thirty -five feet (35') apart. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORID DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTE �s PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING — OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 10 OF 24 Granted, this is not a public right -of -way. It is a private driveway, but we have designed this area to be the same as the street. We have designed it like a public street. We designed one (1) lane in each direction, parallel parking on both sides, wide sidewalks and if you go just to the back of the sidewalk, we are already more than thirty -five feet (35') apart." Next, Mr. Gauthier stated, "DOT (Department of Transportation) requires thirty -five (35') on roadway intersections within the right -of -way. The DOT (Department of Transportation) is the Agency here that is going to be permitting the streets. In meetings with Staff, I have been told that this is what is done elsewhere in the City, thirty-five foot F ' — (35') radius, and that the Waivers have not had to be requested. We believe in being overly cautious and anything that we believe or the Staff believes could require a Waiver, we are just asking for a Waiver." Mr. Gauthier added, "All our buildings have elevators." Discussion. Board Member Howard Casman asked, "You are adding some wonderful amenities – is there any Federal subsidy or anything to help these people with their rents ?" Ms. Furman replied, "This is an Affordable Housing Project." Board Member Casman added, "I didn't see that here." Ms. Furman responded, "It is not a requirement of your Code to ask us what we are charging for rent." Board Member Casman commented, "I wasn't concerned what you were charging, I am just concerned about who was going to be living there." Ms. Furman added, "We also agreed for it to be part of the FHA's (Federal Housing Administration) Housing for older persons which is 55 (fifty -five) and older, so not necessarily seniors." Further discussion ensued. Board Member Helga Schwarz spoke about her concerns with the location of the Gazebo. Discussion ensued on tenant restrictions. Mr. Scott Culp, Executive Vice President, Atlantic Housing Partners, LLLP, 700 West Morse Boulevard, Suite 220, Winter Park, Florida: addressed the Board Members on this proposed project. Mr. Culp stated, "In regard to the on -going restrictions and the enforceability of those restrictions and we had a lot of those questions in the Community Meetings as well and with the public – the Atlantic Restriction Agreement that is Recorded on the property in the Public Records in Seminole County. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES 1 Ate PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE I I OF 24 It also is Recorded with the Federal Agency and the State Agency governing the programs for this development. We are required to Re- Certify each household on an annual basis and the State does an annual Audit on that and the Federal Government does an Audit every other year to make sure we are meeting those restrictions. So, with regard to that, there is going to be Audits on an on -going basis. The City also has the right to enforce it, just as I explained in a Community Meeting." Further, Mr. Culp added, "We have multiple levels of Government with the authority to restrict it and we have full time on -site management that will maintain and ensure that those restrictions are being met." Mr. Culp then added, "Enforcement would mean they would have to terminate the lease and they would need to vacate the apartment unit until they came into Compliance." Referencing the pool, Mr. Culp stated, "The pool for multi - family communities have to be approved by the Health Department, so our pool Engineer will submit for a Permit through the Health Department and then after it is constructed, the Department of Health does an inspection and gives you your Operating Permit. You first get a Building Permit based upon the plans that the — State Department of Health gives you and then they do the inspection for your Operating Permit, and that inspection is also done on an annual basis." Discussion regarding LYNX bus stops, Mr. Culp stated, "On a bus pull off, we did go through the possibility of a bus pull out with Staff and with LYNX. LYNX was not supportive of a bus pull out and we then drew up what the intersection would be like with a bus pull out and it really gets rid of — kills your sidewalk and so Staff agreed that a bus pull out was not the best thing to do here. The bus stop is after the intersection of the road which is the way LYNX likes to do it. They cross the intersection and then they stop and it forces traffic to go around them rather than put it before the intersection." Continuing, Mr. Culp stated, "I believe on the City's Master Plan this is intended to be an intersection not a signaled intersection — if it becomes a full intersection, I am sure the City will require who's actually doing the intersection to do some crosswalks, but I can't speak for the City." Mr. Culp pointed out, "I agree that nobody is going to walk down to Tuskawilla Road to cross to come back to here to get a west bound bus, but they always do have the Trail Crossing." Board Member Schwarz added, "Not if you are handicapped because that is an incline." Mr. Culp stated, "It is actually built to ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) Standards. It is designed for handicap accessibility." Discussion. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORID N DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY � REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 12 OF 24 Vice Chairman Poe opened the "Public Input" portion of this Agenda Item. Ms. Pam Carroll, 865 Dyson Drive, Winter Springs, Florida: addressed the Board M rawal embers and spoke about her concerns about the Fiscal Neutrality Analysis (& Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida) and mentioned that the Market Research Study (Market Feasibility Study) has not been completed and submitted. Mr. Steven Blount, 149 Cherry Creek Circle, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke about his concerns and noted he is opposed to the proposed Town Parke Apartment project. Vice Chairman Poe indicated that Mr. W. Scott Harden did not wish to speak, but wanted his comments stated. Vice Chairman Poe read, "As a member of the Board of the Chelsea Woods Homeowner's Association, I strongly oppose this project and am seriously concerned about the impact to quality future development of the Town Center due to the low rent status of the AHP (Atlantic Housing Partners) project." Mr. Kevin Cannon, 134 Nandina Terrace, Winter Springs, Florida: on behalf of himself as an Attorney and his clients, Mr. Cannon commented for the Record regarding a Binder entitled, `Winter Springs Planning and Zoning Commission, October 13, 2010 Evidence Binder'; and referenced the Affidavit of Mr. Joel Ivey, Tab 5, A, paragraph 11. related to a specific provision of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and asked that this proposed project be postponed. Vice Chairman Poe closed the "Public Input" portion of this Agenda Item. Ms. Furman stated, "We are here tonight as you are beginning to point out procedurally to decide if these Special Exceptions that are allowed for in the Land Development Code are consistent with the intent of the Town Center Code. In doing that, you all have the right to make sure that this is consistent with your Comprehensive Plan which is Town Center and we went through that. Don't believe anyone has presented any competent or substantial Evidence that it is not consistent with the Town Center Code. There seems to be a lot of discussion about the Fiscal Neutrality Analysis (& Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida), so let's see what in your Code required us to do that. And it is your recently adopted EAR (Evaluation and Appraisal Report) that requires that a developer in the Town Center — it is 1 -14 and it talks about the City Policy regulation decision making process considered design and positive and acceptable economic impacts on the City. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 4 � DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 13 OF 24 In furtherance of this Policy, the City Commission may require, I believe it may be the first time they required this, may require as a condition of considering the Approval or Denial of a development, that developers provide a written Economic Fiscal Impact Report. We prepared this by a duly qualified expert and I do believe that Dr. Hank (Henry) Fishkind is a duly qualified expert, that details associated Fiscal Impacts of any proposed new development project on the City or the School District. Nowhere else in your Code does it talk about this. Tape 2/Side A laCral That we have to provide it. We've provided it. We've provided those Consultants that prepared it to explain it but that is not something that is properly pending before you all as something to Approve or not Approve and no where in your Code are we required to bring this Fiscal Impact Study back to you all. With respect to the Developer's Agreement, your City Attorney and your City Staff have a copy of the Developer's Agreement. It's been up on your Website - for months. I think maybe at least six (6) weeks I'll say - Developer's Agreement has been up on your Website. It hasn't been finalized by the City Attorney because he told us the Developer's Agreement doesn't go to Planning and Zoning (Board/Local Planning Agency), they don't Approve it. We simply brought it up to show that we are making certain concessions and those concessions will be in a Developer's Agreement. We're also being told that people have not been provided due process because I, as Applicant am submitting Evidence. I am more than happy to go through this. It is your City Code. It is your Comprehensive Plan. It is your City Minutes. It is the Reports that have been on your City's Website and it is the Affidavits of the people that have provided those. There has been no professional Testimony here tonight to give any clear and convincing Evidence that we do not meet the Comp(rehensive) Plan or we do not meet the Land Development Code." Mr. Stevenson provided summary of the items involved with the Agenda and then explained, "The process is to P and Z (Planning and Zoning Board/[Local Planning Agency]), the Final Engineering comes before you, which is Item `600' and is usually the case when we marry these two (2) together in the same Meeting, the discussion encompasses both items simultaneously. Item `500' is Special Exception for the Deviations that have been requested. The reason the Development Agreement — does not come to the (Planning and Zoning Board/[Local Planning Agency]) is because it is a Contractual Agreement between the City of Winter Springs and the Developer and the only body that can bind the City in a Contractual Agreement is the City Commission. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 4 1 p 4 01;) DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 14 OF 24 However, the reason we are talking about the Deviations here tonight is these Deviations will be incorporated back into the Development Agreement. The Development Agreement covers a lot of other information; however, the Deviations will be a portion of pa that Development Agreement for consideration by the City Commission. ". Discussion ensued further on the Developer's Agreement. Mr. Stevenson added, "The Minutes are duly noted and they are part of the Agenda Item to the City Commission and will be part of what Staff considers when we do the final Agenda Item to the Commission." With further discussion, Board Member Schwarz referenced the Financial Analysis (Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida) and suggested the City hire a Consultant. Referencing the Analysis Report (Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida), Ms. Furman commented, "I am happy to read the Affidavit of Dr. Hank (Henry) Fishkind. It's in there. It said it was done under his supervision and that he read it and agrees with the Analysis." Discussion. Board Member Howard Casman asked for clarification and Mr. Stevenson then remarked, "There'll be two (2) Votes tonight Mr. Casman. One (1) for the Exceptions to facilitate the Site Plan, then one (1) on the Site Plan itself." "I AM GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM `500' AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. I HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEW AND A DIFFERENT OPINION AND THAT IS WHY THEY HAVE DIFFERENT FOLKS ON THE BOARD, BUT I AM GOING TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM `500' AS PRESENTED. DO I HAVE A SECOND ?" MOTION BY VICE CHAIRMAN POE. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. "I MAKE MOTION THAT ON THE CODE DEVIATIONS AND WAIVERS WE TAKE EACH ONE — FOR WHAT IT IS AND MAKE A MOTION ON EACH ONE." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 0# DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY �p REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 15 OF 24 BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ ADDED, "THERE ARE PEOPLE IN HERE TRYING TO STOP THE BALL FROM ROLLING AND WE HAVE AN APPLICANT WHO IS TRYING TO KEEP THE BALL ROLLING. THERE ARE c=1 CERTAIN THINGS IN THESE DEVIATIONS AND WAIVERS THAT I FEEL, ONCE THEY ARE REMOVED, THEY ARE OFF THE TABLE, SO TO SPEAK. WE DON'T HAVE TO COME AND REVISIT THEM, BECAUSE THEY ARE C GOING TO COME BACK." VICE CHAIRMAN POE STATED, "I AM NOT SURE IF THAT IS GOING TO me an ADDRESS THE QUESTION BECAUSE I BELIEVE ALL..." BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ NOTED THAT REGARDING HER MOTION, "...I CAN'T DO A PACKAGE DEAL IN A MOTION. SO MY MOTION IS TO SEPARATE THESE OUT AS SEPARATE MOTIONS." MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Vice Chairman Poe explained, "All of those Exceptions are Exceptions to the Code as it is written so, a package deal would be the only appropriate way to address them." Further comments. "I MAKE A MOTION WE REJECT APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION UNDER ITEM `500'. MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. "I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE CODE AND DEVIATION WAIVERS ON ITEM NUMBER 1. PROVIDING FOR THE CITY COMMISSION TO WAIVE THE FRONTAGE ROAD REQUIREMENT AND ON ITEM NUMBER 2. AND THE ITEM NUMBER 4." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. BOARD MEMBER KARR ASKED, "ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU WANT TO PASS THIS ON TO THE CITY COMMISSION JUST BASED ON THOSE THREE (3) WAIVERS ?" BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ REPLIED, "I AM JUST SAYING FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM THAT THE CODE DEVIATIONS FOR NUMBER 1., 2. AND 4. BE ACCEPTED PER STAFF'S SUPPORT. THE REMAINING ONES, THAT IS NOT PART OF MY MOTION. IT IS JUST TO ACCEPT THOSE THREE (3)." MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA () R o l DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 16 OF 24 "I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE P AND Z (PLANNING AND ZONING) BOARD." r MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN. DISCUSSION. ina •a MR. STEVENSON ANNOUNCED, "I HAVE INFORMATION FROM THE APPLICANT THAT SAYS RATHER THAN A TABLING, THEY WOULD RATHER REQUEST DENIAL." • BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ THEN INQUIRED, "IS IT BETTER TO MAKE THE MOTION A POSTPONEMENT, TO KEEP ANY TYPE OF ADVERTISING? THEN MY MOTION STANDS." VOTE: BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS: AYE BOARD MEMBER KARR: AYE VICE CHAIRMAN POE: NAY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ: AYE BOARD MEMBER CASMAN: AYE MOTION CARRIED. Ms. Furman commented, "I certainly didn't say this in the beginning of our presentation because I want it to be taken in a very earnest way. There are certain Comp(rehensive) Plan Criteria, Land Development Code Criteria that we believe our Concept Plan that was Approved — on April 27 2009 by the City Commission we believe that we have every legal right to build that. A City does not get to choose who lives in every single house. We came before you all with an accommodation that we thought made the neighbors happy. In order to make that accommodation, we have certain timing criteria financially if this is postponed, if this does not move forward to the City Commission then unfortunately, we will not be able to make those accommodations, but we will have to move forward with the Concept Plan that was previously Approved by the City. I just want to be really clear that a postponement you all will not see us come back with this Plan. You will see us come back with the previously Approved Plan." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORI DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES P PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 17 OF 24 "I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WHEN ALL INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO THIS BOARD, ANALYSIS FROM THE STAFF REGARDING THE FINANCIAL IMPACT; ANY INFORMATION REGARDING THE VIEW OF THE CITY IN RELATION TO THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO HOLD A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE P AND Z (PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD[/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY]) — THAT THAT MEETING GETS SCHEDULED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE IF WE CAN BEFORE THE NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Mr. Culp remarked, "The two (2) biggest concerns being crime and the impact on the schools, which we think we've addressed with this housing for older persons. Which, yes, there is some opportunity for some families in there, but it is a significant difference from no restriction whatsoever. Significant difference and a significant concession on our part and significant time and efforts spent in making those revisions and working on those approvals through the State Agency. We've tried to move this process forward following your process, following due process. What the first Agenda Item tonight, Item `500' was about was Special Exceptions. Those Special Exceptions don't relate to a Fiscal Neutrality Analysis (Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida). Those Special Exceptions are specific to those Code items and those requests for Variance to those Code items. I think those Code items need to be addressed as Special Exceptions. Mr. Stevenson raised the issue the Fiscal Impact Analysis so that you are aware that we are following the process. That process requires us to submit that. It does require us to respond to the City as they ask questions as we have been and as we've been meeting at their request. That will continue on to the City Commission. They'll have an opportunity to make a determination on whether that Fiscal Impact Analysis, that submittal was adequate or not. He gave you the status of that. But the item before you on Item `500' was the Special Exceptions not related to the Fiscal (Neutrality) Analysis and the Special Exceptions had a lot to do with trying to address the community concerns that were raised when you had hundreds of people here. I think we are not serving the community of Winter Springs when we look at a vocal minority who are putting us in a position where we are being forced to go back to a plan that people don't want. We think we've come along way towards meeting with the residents and revising our plans to a place to; although not everybody's ever going to agree, we've come a significant way forward and we've met all the Criteria of your process and at the same time, revised and made concessions to try and address the community concerns. Discussion. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA Oire DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY q p REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 r (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 18 OF 24 "I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THESE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER KARR. BOARD MEMBER CASMAN COMMENTED, "YOU DID MENTION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT EITHER REJECTED OR APPROVED. WELL, I AGREE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT REJECTED AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT GO AWAY. BUT YOU MADE A POINT ABOUT A VOCAL MAJORITY COMING HERE AND TALKING AND THAT UPSETS ME BECAUSE IF YOU WERE TO BUILD THIS FIVE (5) MILES DOWN THE ROAD, THEY ..�_ WOULDN'T BE HERE TODAY. BUT, THE PEOPLE FROM DOWN THERE WOULD BE HERE. IT IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE A VOCAL MINORITY. IT IS NEVER GOING TO BE THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE OF WINTER SPRINGS REGARDLESS OF HOW THEY FEEL ARE NOT GOING TO BE COMING HERE. IT IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE THE PEOPLE MOST CONCERNED. SO, A VOCAL MINORITY IS ABOUT THE BEST YOU ARE EVER GOING TO GET AND THAT IS ABOUT ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT." NEXT BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ MENTIONED, "I THINK I RESORTED TO THE TABLING BECAUSE THERE JUST DIDN'T SEEM LIKE THIS WAS GOING ANYWHERE. BUT NOW YOU HAVE OPENED UP HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT THESE ITEMS AND I AM A LITTLE BIT PERPLEXED WHY YOU JUST DIDN'T MAKE THAT MOTION. I KNOW HE DID, BUT DIDN'T IT DIE FOR A SECOND ?" VICE CHAIRMAN POE NOTED, "IT DID." BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ THEN SAID, "I THINK IN ORDER FOR US TO ADDRESS WHAT MR. CULP SAID, I MUST RESCIND MY MOTION TO TABLE THE ITEM TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING AND THAT IS MY MOTION." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KARL DISCUSSION. VICE CHAIRMAN POE THEN STATED, "I HAVE TWO (2) MOTIONS ON THE FLOOR NEITHER WHICH WERE SECONDED. FIRST MOTION I DID NOT RECOGNIZE WE HAVE MS. HELGA SCHWARZ. YOUR MOTION ORIGINALLY MS. KARR WAS JUST A MOMENT AGO, IF YOU WILL RESTATE THAT." BOARD MEMBER KARR RESTATED HER MOTION, "THAT WE VOTE TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AS PRESENTED IN ITEM '500' TONIGHT." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA Q DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY C l Pr REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 19 OF 24 VICE CHAIRMAN POE THEN COMMENTED, `BEFORE I ENTERTAIN THE MOTION, BEFORE WE CAN DO THAT, THE ITEM'S BEEN TABLED. SO, I AM GOING TO JUST DEFER YOUR MOTION UNTIL I RECOGNIZE MS. SCHWARZ. "I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RESCIND THE ITEM TO TABLE THE MEETING UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING, ITEM '500'." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KARR. DISCUSSION. VOTE: BOARD MEMBER CASMAN: NAY BOARD MEMBER KARR: AYE VICE CHAIRMAN POE: AYE BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ: AYE BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS: AYE MOTION CARRIED. "I make a Motion to deny the Special Exceptions and Waivers as approached and presented in item `500'." Motion by Board Member Schwarz. Vice Chairman Poe stated, "Before I entertain that Motion, we gave the Applicant an opportunity to provide the other side. We have those that are opposed to it, we need to provide them that same opportunity." Continuing, Vice Chairman Poe added, "The Vote was not to Approve or disapprove, the Vote was just merely to bring it back to the Table." Vice Chairman Poe opened "Public Input". Ms. Carroll spoke about the Comprehensive Plan and Affordable Housing. Mr. Gauthier stated, "We do understand that we are looking at engineering here. However, Item `500' does include the Fiscal Impact. Fiscal Impact on the City includes as Ms. Carroll noted taxes. One (1) of our concerns was that our understanding is that the tax basis for this development will be on the rents paid, not on the value of the improvements of the land. Is that correct ?" Mr. Gauthier stated, "My prospective as a citizen and obviously I am paying the same property taxes that you guys do same - is that by taking this prime piece of property off the tax roll, we are now going to forego; there's an opportunity cost here. Another type of development that is taxed for land and improvements would yield far, more in tax revenue to the City than this development would. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES I:* PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY q REGULAR MEETING — OCTOBER 13, 2010 r (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 20 OF 24 Now, I realize that there is no such alternative development on the drawing boards at the moment, but that's what was envisioned for the Town Center. I don't believe and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Stevenson, that this was what was envisioned when the Town "sm Center's zoning was actually inactive." Mr. Stevenson then remarked, "The Town Center Zoning is a Mixed Use type of development again based upon a form based Code." Mr. Gauthier stated, "Correct. That however doesn't address our concerns about — a tax rate. And also to go back to one of Pam's (Carroll) points is that the Code does specifically say that it is desirable to disperse Workforce Housing throughout the community. In fact, the research studies that have been since 2002 show the correlation between increase in crime and Affordable Housing diminished as you disperse units as opposed to aggregating them. They have however found threshold effects. Threshold effects meaning when there are more than `X' units per acre and I believe it is 1.46; then you begin to see crime effects. There are effects that this, by making these Exceptions and then going on to Approve a Site Plan, you may be Approving a Site Plan that in fact will endanger our tax base and will endanger our schools and is going to endanger, I believe the future of our Town Center development as it stands today. Thank you." Mr. Cannon commented about `Competent Substantial Evidence' and that the Affidavits were not posted on the Website. Mr. Cannon also spoke about the Comprehensive Plan and the Development Agreement. Vice Chairman Poe closed the "Public Input" portion of this Agenda Item. Discussion. Tape 2 /Side B Board Member Karr commented, "We do — make notes as to — what our objections were to this plan when we turn it over to the City Commission." "I WILL MAKE A MOTION WE DENY AND REJECT THE DEVELOPER'S REQUEST." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. "I WILL MAKE THE MOTION I ORIGINALLY MADE, TO APPROVE ITEM '500' AS PRESENTED BY STAFF." MOTION BY VICE CHAIRMAN POE. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KARR. DISCUSSION. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 14:4 �DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 21 OF 24 VOTE: carA BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ: NAY BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS: NAY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN: NAY .�. BOARD MEMBER KARR: AYE VICE CHAIRMAN POE: AYE itst MOTION DID NOT CARRY. Mr. Stevenson suggested to the Board, "I would request, Mr. Chairman that since we have split Vote on this decision that everyone write a reason behind their Vote so we can include that with the Commission in light of Ms. Schwarz request that the Commission be fully informed." Vice Chairman Poe stated, "Absolutely. So that being the case, Item `600' would not be addressed this evening, Randy (Stevenson) ?" Mr. Stevenson replied, "That's my understanding because the facilitating documents pertained in Item `500' would be what facilitated the design incorporated in `600'." Vice Chairman Poe then commented, "I would ask each of the Members then, at your convenience to write your summary of why your Vote went the way that it did and provide that to Joan (Deputy City Clerk Brown) at your earliest convenience." Discussion regarding review of Agenda Item `600' ensued. Mr. Culp addressed the Board and responded, "You denied — our request and Staff's recommendation with regard to Item `500'. We would request that you take up Item `600' and review that and make a Motion and Vote upon that because it is a separate item that stands alone. You have denied the Exceptions and those, therefore are denied and therefore now we need to look at the Site Development Plan; and we'd like you to take that Item up as it's presented to you with Staff's recommendation and we'd request a Motion on that as well. Thank you." REGULAR AGENDA REGULAR 600. Community Development Department Requests The P &Z (Planning And Zoning) Board Review The Final Engineering Site Plan For A 108 Unit Senior Apartment Complex With Amenities On 6.95 Acres Within The Town Center And Provide A Recommendation To The City Commission. Mr. Baker introduced this Agenda Item and mentioned review of the Final Engineering Plan and stated, "The Site has no hundred year (100) Flood Plain, no Wetlands, but there are Gopher Tortoises that have to be removed." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDAO DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 Pr (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 22 OF 24 Mr. Baker continued by saying, "The Site meets the City Code except for the Deviations and Waivers that we have outlined and we recommend Approval." Next, Mr. Baker explained to the Board Members, "This is looking at the Final Engineering Plan, the Site Plan for Compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the City's Code, primarily the Code Sections that I cited to you The only Deviations from the City Code are those that were brought to you in the Special Exceptions." Mr. Culp addressed the Board Members and stated, "Mr. (Board Member) Phillips asked a question first with regard to whether or not he could proceed with a Vote on Item `600' having denied Item `500'. This Board has the authority to condition their Vote whether it be a Denial or an Approval based upon the conditions they placed on that Denial or Approval.. You can condition an Approval or a Denial of this Site Plan on the Denial that you had Voted on for Item `500'. So, if you chose to Approve this Site Plan conditioned upon the Denial of the Exceptions, you could do that. You could chose to Deny or Recommend to the Commission a Denial of this Site Plan conditioned upon also your Denial of Item `500'. So, I just wanted to answer your question in that regard. The question in regard to the Valuation, that is a Tax Assessor's determination, they are Constitutional Officers and they are given the purview to be able to use the Market Approach or the Income Approach and they will look at the Income Approach and then they make the ultimate decision. But property that is rental property specifically for rental property and specifically that has restrictions on it for affordability is typically they look at the Income Approach because there are Land Use Restrictions; they are in perpetuity or at least fifty (50) years which from a Tax Assessor's standpoint is perpetuity and they do pay taxes but he does look at the different assessment values." Continuing, Mr. Culp added, "The question on the Fiscal Impact Analysis (Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida), we agree that your Comprehensive Plan requires that and gives your - City Commission the authority to request additional information to review that and to request that from us. We presented that and we are reviewing that with Staff and that will go forward to City Commission. We don't believe at this point that that is an item before you today, and we recognize that you want to look at that with the Special Exceptions and the Site Plan before you. We don't believe that Fiscal Impact Analysis (Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida) is before you today. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA R DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY p REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 23 OF 24 We do believe that properly addresses the development we are currently proposing has been revised for the development we are proposing and has been submitted in accordance with the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and will proceed forward to the City Commission as your Comprehensive Plan says. So, again we would request that Item `600' be addressed as it is presented to you and we are here to answer any questions. We CV. agree with Staff's recommendation and have all the professionals here to answer any questions you have in regard to the Site Development Plan that is proposed in Item `600'." Discussion. mortl "I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE REJECT THE APPLICANT'S APPLICATION FOR ITEM '600'. MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN. CHAIRMAN POE ASKED, "IS THAT BASED UPON THAT WE DENIED SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ?" BOARD MEMBER CASMAN REPLIED, "WE CAN ADD THAT — BASED ON THE FACT THAT WE REJECTED ITEM '500'." SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS. DISCUSSION. REFERENCING THE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (FISCAL NEUTRALITY ANALYSIS & ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY OF TOWN PARKE IN WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA), BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ THEN ADDED, "I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GET A CLARIFICATION BACK ON THAT ITEM." MR. STEVENSON REPLIED, "WE WILL REVIEW THAT AT YOUR NEXT MEETING WHAT THE OUTCOME WAS." VOTE: BOARD MEMBER KARR: AYE VICE CHAIRMAN POE: AYE BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ: AYE BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS: AYE BOARD MEMBER CASMAN: AYE MOTION CARRIED. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORID DRAFT UNAPPROVED MINUTE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY ��� \ \\ REGULAR MEETING — OCTOBER 13, 2010 r (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 24 OF 24 ADJOURNMENT IraQ Vice Chairman Poe adjourned the Regular Meeting at 9:47 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: mesa JOAN L. BROWN DEPUTY CITY CLERK APPROVED: WILLIAM H. POE, VICE CHAIRMAN PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY NOTE: These Minutes were approved at the , 2010 Planning And Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency Regular Meeting. ATTACHMENT C THIS INSTRUMENT WAS PREPARED BY AND SHOULD BE RETURNED TO: DRAFT 10.20.2010 DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT (the "Agreement ") is made and executed this day of , 2010, by and between the CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, a Florida municipal corporation (the "City"), whose address is 1126 East S.R. 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708, and a Florida ( "Town Parke "), whose address is 700 West Morse Boulevard, Suite 220, Winter Park, Florida 32789. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, "Town Parke" is the fee simple owner of certain real property currently located in the City of Winter Springs, Florida and more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Town Parke desires to construct a 108 unit residential housing development intended and operated for occupancy by persons 55 years of age or older; and WHEREAS, the City and Town Parke desire to set forth the following special terms and conditions with respect to the proposed development of the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the parties mutually agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Authority. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to the Florida Municipal Home Rule Powers Act. 3. Obligations and Commitments. In consideration of the City and Town Parke entering into this Agreement, the City and Town Parke hereby agree as follows: (a) Housing for Older Persons. Towne Parke hereby agrees that the Project will be restricted to a 108 unit development as housing intended and operated for occupancy by persons 55 years of age or older as defined by the "Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995." All occupied units shall be occupied by persons 55 years 1 or older (b) Purchase of Adjacent Property. Town Parke hereby agrees that, other than the property presented in the Final Engineering Plans referenced in subparagraph (c) herein (Exhibit "A" Parcels 1, 2, & 3), it will neither purchase nor develop, any of the real surrounding the property shown on said Plans. (c) Approval of Final Engineering Plan. The City hereby acknowledges and agrees that the Final Engineering Plans prepared by Madden Moorhead & Glunt and dated are acceptable, and are hereby approved. ( "Final Engineering Plans "). Any amendments or modifications to said Plans shall require approval by the City pursuant to the City Code. (d) Utilities. The City hereby acknowledges and agrees that it currently has sufficient water and sewer treatment plant capacity available to service the Property and shall provide such services to the Project as depicted in the Final Engineering Plans. Town Parke acknowledges and agrees that offsite improvements may be necessary, at Town Parke's cost, to provide water and sewer service to the Property including, but not limited to, force main, lift station and pump upgrades. Further, all water and sewer improvements required on -site to service the Property shall be at Town Parke's expense. (e) Roadway. The City desires to have a neighborhood street running through the Property as shown on the Conceptual Plan (to be named "Town Parke Boulevard). The Town Parke Boulevard shall serve as the primary entrance to the Project from S.R. 434. Town Parke Boulevard shall be referred to as the "Street ". The Street shall be designed, located and constructed by Town Parke in accordance with the Final Engineering Plans. Town Parke agrees to convey to the City the Street, along with all related improvements thereon and thereunder. All such land conveyances shall be by a warranty deed, or other mutually agreed to instrument, and shall be free and clear of all encumbrances. Conveyance of improvements shall be by bill of sale and shall be free and clear of all mortgages and liens. The dedication instrument and bill of sale shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. (t) Improvements in SR 434. In recognition of the City's goals regarding creation of a more pedestrian oriented community, and limitation of turn lanes along SR434, Town Parke agrees to support the City's efforts to request that the FDOT allow elimination and minimization of the FDOT required turn lanes, and potential reduction in speed limit. (g) Encroachments into the rights -of -way for the "Streets". In order to provide a hard urban edge, and to raise the first floor elevations above the elevation of the Streets, the City shall allow encroachment of the stairs at 2 building entrances, into the rights -of -way of Town Parke Boulevard and Michael Blake Boulevard. (h) Construction of Stormwater Improvements. Town Parke shall design the Project to accommodate the stormwater requirements for the Property, including the roadway improvements to the portions of Town Parke Boulevard included in the Town Parke Apartments Plans. The City shall permit Town Parke to use any existing City rights -of -way and/or easements to accommodate stormwater generated from the Property, provided said use is deemed acceptable and feasible by the City. (i) Subdivision of Land. Pursuant to Section 9 -14 of the City Code, the City hereby approves subdivision of the Project as shown on Exhibit "A ". The City and Town Parke acknowledge that each parcels may be owned by separate entities. This subdivision shall not be construed as the creation of residual parcels or tracts that are undevelopable by city standards. Further, to the extent that the parcels are owned by separate entities and are designed, permitted, and constructed to accommodate any aspect of this Project (e.g. stormwater), appropriate legally instruments shall be prepared and recorded against the parcels in order to adequately secure whatever legal rights are required to accommodate the Project. (j) Town Center Code Waivers. Based on the Final Engineering Plans and Town Parke's agreement to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, the City Commission hereby grants the following waivers to the Town Center District Code pursuant to the special exception criteria enumerated in Section 20- 321(c): • (1) As the FDOT is the body that issues permits within its right- ' of-way, and requires a 35 foot radius at the intersection of Townhouse Road and SR 434, the requirement for intersection radii to be between 9 feet and 15 feet, is waived for this intersection only. All other intersections have radii between 9 and 15 feet. (2) Due to the close proximity of Building No. 1 to the trail bridge, and in order to provide the residents with privacy, the required minimum transparent window coverage, for the end on Building No. 1 only, is reduced from 15% to 10 %. (3) In order to accommodate the driveway between Building No.'s 2 & 3, and in order to have this driveway designed with parallel parking, to function like a roadway within the Town Center, the requirement for a maximum spacing of 35 feet between buildings is waived between buildings 2 and 3. (4) In order to provide wider parking spaces, for potential future conversion to Handicap Parking, the number of uninterrupted parking spaces, adjacent to the south side of the pool area, may be increased from six (6) to eight (8). (5) Recognizing that the roadway slopes, while the finished 3 floors remain flat, and recognizing that the apartment homes on each side of a breezeway entrance have the same finished floor elevation, the vertical distance between the sidewalk in Public Right -of -Way and the finished floor elevation will be measured at the door to the balcony, and the required vertical separation distance, as shown on Exhibit `B" is deemed to meet the intent of the code and is hereby approved. (6) Recognizing that the street faces of proposed buildings include significant relief, providing visual interest and the appearance of multiple smaller buildings, the maximum building lengths are increased as follows (refer to Exhibit « ): a. Building 2 is increased from 160' -0" to 166' -7" b. Building 4 is increased from 160' -0" to 172' -2" (7) As recommended by the City Arborist, in order to create a more sustainable Tree Canopy, increasing shade in the parking areas, the spacing between landscape islands may be increased from six (6) parking spaces to ten (10) parking spaces, as long as the width of the landscape islands is increased from six feet (6') to ten feet (10'). (8) Recognizing that Frontage Roads along SR434 are intended to improve the connectivity to and between retail uses in the Town Center, and recognizing that providing Frontage Road on the Property will not provide any these benefits, a frontage road will not be required. (k) Compactor. A trash compactor shall be located on the Property to service the Project. Said compactor shall be serviced by the City's solid waste franchise hauler. (1) Recreational Area. Town Parke shall be required to provide and maintain a recreational area within the Project in accordance with the Final Engineering Plans approved by the City. Said recreational area shall be maintained in a safe and clean manner to a standard at least equivalent to the City's public recreational areas. (m) Maintenance of Stormwater Improvements. ii. The City shall maintain all stormwater improvements located within public right of way. iii. Town Parke shall maintain all stormwater improvements located within the Project, in accordance with the requirements set forth in the Environmental Resource Permit issued by the St. Johns River Water Management District. iv. The stormwater pond shall be used as a stormwater reuse pond, per the Environmental Resource Permit issued by the St. Johns River Water Management District. Project Irrigation shall be in 4 accordance with this permit. (n) Maintenance of Landscaping and Irrigation. (1) Town Parke shall be responsible for maintenance of landscaping and irrigation within the Project (2) Town Parke shall maintain the landscaping and irrigation within the portion of Town Parke Boulevard shown on the Project Plans (3) Town Parke shall enter into a maintenance agreement, with the Florida Department of Transportation, for maintenance of the landscaping and irrigation located in the portion of the SR 434 right of way adjacent to the Project. This shall only include the area located between the back of curb and the Project. (o) Parking Spaces. Town Parke shall construct a minimum of parking spaces within the Project. (p) Green Development. As part of the City's and Towne Parke's mutual commitment to Green Development, Town Parke and the City agree to the following design/construction elements: v. Programmable thermostats in each unit vi. Showerheads that use less than 2.5 gallons of water per minute. vii. Faucets that use 2 gallons of water per minute or less in the kitchen and all bathrooms viii. Energy Star qualified lighting in all open and common areas, where possible ix. Extensive use of fluorescent lighting x. Motion detectors on all outside lighting that is attached to the units. xi. Energy Star rating for all refrigerators and dishwashers xii. Low VOC paint (less than 50 grams per gallon) in all units and common areas xiii. Carpet and Rug Institute Green Label certified carpet and pad for all carpeting provided xiv. Florida Yards and Neighborhood certification (Florida Friendly Landscaping) xv. Daylight sensors or timers on all outdoor lighting. xvi. Dual Pane, Energy Star rated windows xvii. "Right- Sized" air conditioning systems, with sealed ductwork xviii. Make -up air systems to improve indoor air quality xix. Radiant barriers in the roof attic assembly xx. Stormwater reuse system, for reduction of Phosphorus into receiving waters xxi. Subject to available funding, carports shall be allowed in the parking areas behind the buildings, as shown on the Final Site Plan. These carports may be used for the purpose of installation of solar panels, a green energy source. 5 (q) Development Permit Fees. Town Parke agrees to pay all ordinary and customary development permit fees imposed by the City. 4. Representations of the Parties. The City and Town Parke hereby each represent and warrant to the other that it has the power and authority to execute, deliver and perform the terms and provisions of this Agreement and has taken all necessary action to authorize the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement. This Agreement will., when duly executed and delivered by the City and Town Parke and recorded in the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida, constitute a legal, valid and binding obligation enforceable against the parties hereto and the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Town Parke represents that it has voluntarily and willfully executed this Agreement for purposes of binding the Property, to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. 5. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall automatically be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the City and Town Parke and their respective successors and assigns. The terms and conditions of this Agreement similarly shall be binding upon the Property and shall run with title to the same. 6. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. 7. Amendments. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended except by written agreement duly executed by both parties hereto (or their successors or assigns) and approved by the City Commission. 8. Entire Agreement. This Agreement supersedes any other agreement, oral or written, and contains the entire agreement between the City and Town Parke as to the subject matter hereof. 9. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable to any extent by a court of competent jurisdiction, the same shall not affect in any respect the validity or enforceability of the remainder of this Agreement. 10. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon approval by the City Commission and execution of this Agreement by both parties hereto. 11. Recordation. This Agreement shall be recorded in the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida. 12. Relationship of the Parties. The relationship of the parties to this Agreement is contractual and Town Parke is an independent contractor and not an agent of the City. Nothing herein shall be deemed to create a joint venture or principal -agent relationship between the parties, and neither party is authorized to, nor shall either party act toward third persons or the public in any manner, which would indicate any such relationship with the other. 13. Sovereign Immunity. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as 6 a waiver of the City's right to sovereign immunity under Section 768.28, Florida Statutes, or any other limitation on the City's potential liability under the state and federal law. As such, the City shall not be liable, under this Agreement for punitive damages or interest for the period before judgment. Further, the City shall not be liable for any claim or judgment, or portion thereof, to any one person for more than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00), or any claim or judgment, or portion thereof, which, when totaled with all other claims or judgments paid by the State or its agencies and subdivisions arising out of the same incident or occurrence, exceeds the sum of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000.00). 14. City's Police Power. Town Parke agrees and acknowledges that the City hereby reserves all police powers granted to the City by law. In no way shall this Agreement be construed as the City bargaining away or surrendering its police powers. 15. Interpretation. The parties hereby agree and acknowledge that they have both participated equally in the drafting of this Agreement and no party shall be favored or disfavored regarding the interpretation to this Agreement in the event of a dispute between the parties. 16. Third -Party Rights. This Agreement is not a third -party beneficiary contract and shall not in any way whatsoever create any rights on behalf of any third party. 17. Specific Performance. Strict compliance shall be required with each and every provision of this Agreement. The parties agree that failure to perform the obligations provided by this Agreement shall result in irreparable damage and that specific performance of these obligations may be obtained by a suit in equity. 18. Attorney's Fees. In connection with any arbitration, adversarial proceeding, or litigation arising out of this Agreement, each party agrees to bear their own attorney's fees and costs.. 19. Development Permits. Nothing herein shall limit the City's authority to grant or deny any development permit applications or requests subsequent to the effective date of this Agreement. The failure of this Agreement to address any particular City, County, State and/or Federal permit, condition, term or restriction shall not relieve Town Parke or the City of the necessity of complying with the law governing said permitting requirement, condition, term or restriction. Without imposing any limitation on the City's police powers, the City reserves the right to withhold, suspend, or terminate any and all certificates of occupancy for any building or unit if Town Parke is in breach of any term and condition of this Agreement. 20.0 Default; Opportunity to Cure. Should either party desire to declare the other party in default of any term or condition of this Agreement, the non - defaulting party shall provide the defaulting party a written notice of default. The written notice shall, at a minimum, state with particularity the nature of the default, the manner in which the default can be cured, and a reasonable time period of not less than ten (10) days in which the default must be cured. No action may be taken in a court of law on the basis that a breach of this Agreement has occurred until such time as the requirements of this paragraph have been satisfied. 21.0 Termination. The City shall have the unconditional right, but not obligation, to terminate this Agreement, without notice or penalty, if Town Parke fails to receive 7 building permits and substantially commence construction of the Project within one (1) year of the Effective Date of this Agreement. If the City terminates this Agreement, the City shall record a notice of termination in the public records of Seminole County, Florida, and Town Parke shall lose any and all rights under this Agreement • [SIGNATURES FOLLOW ON NEXT PAGE] 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seal on the date first above written. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS By: Name: Title: ATTEST: By: Name: Title: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY For the use and reliance of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, only. [CITY SEAL] Dated: Anthony Garganese, City Attorney for the City of Winter Springs, Florida 9 Signed, sealed and delivered in the , a presence of the following witnesses: Florida By: Print Name: Name: Title: Print Name: STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ORANGE The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2010, by , as of a Florida , on behalf of said . He /she is personally known to me or produced as identification. Notary Public, State of Print Name: Commission No.: My Commission Expires: 10 ArcIMS HTML Viewer Map • 8.a 9 :Ik 7.0 �` $: :.h \ \ ,r 14 � il1<[LE N 4 1 y R PARCEL5 . d 8.D ti -I . REMAINDER OF PARCEL I D 26- 20-30- 5AR -0A00 -008H • • �..D L i lf1 1 1 : k ,v . r / Is -i g ` , PARCEL 1 - FUTURE TOWN PARKE BOULEVARD s 24 2 24 17 , F I 1 \ PART OF PARCEL IDS 26-20 -30- 5AR- 0A00 -00BH & 06- 21- 31- 300.002B -0000 • I �il l t f t: ?t,� f 1 1..,0 PARCEL : f ,' i3<` + 1.; 00 ; ,1► _ 5 „,, PARCEL 2 - TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS rit �s +� 12e 1 -- -1 E— I i ',' 1 l r I PART OF PARCEL IDS 26- 20- 30- 5AR -0A00 -008 & 06- 21.31- 300 -0028 -0000 .;.`.111 in REMAINDER OF rim PARCEL ID 0621 -31- 300 -0028. -0000 `' PARCEL 3 - POND PARCEL %Y , I (PART OF PARCEL ID 26- 20-30- 5AR- 0A00 -008E 3 1 2 ' ,,i J 36 3 ` � 37 8. !It'll, ' — IA . tC? Gt ` st! {,(t PARCEL4 38 ', 3 34 1 :1 , l` tfi 1 I Y;4 REMAINDER OF PARCEL ID 26-20 -30. 5AR -0A00-00BE ....d...r., r 11 , ( t +, , N,„ ,,,.. PARCEL7 { ` +rli' 1 t ' r i iild ' `i S i; rp� r1 t { f ,� t I { ur i ! I i 4 ti J. ¢;. t [r, it1l,. it lfu f=f { j.I'l ; ` \ • t1 if � r +It Aj Illtlo �Ip,r 53 52 4 d ti t U i r, l IU 11Ul; , 8.0 F.' f 54 `1 F `ti \\ \\N-s-'-' , 1 \ . 8.0 i. 1 r +r ._ Vii#++ v.C}2 5126:181,, - N.. Sketch & Legal Description — Parcel 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS PARCEL 1 - FUTURE TOWN PARKE BOULEVARD That part of Lot 8, Block "A ", P.R. Mitchell's Survey of the Levy Grant as recorded in Plot Beek 1, Page 5 of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida being more particularly described as follows: Commence at the Southwestern most corner of Lot 31, St. John's Landing as recorded in Plat Book 53, Pages 45 through 49 of sold Public Records. said point being a recovered concrete monument on the Easterly right of way line of Tuskowilla Road (formerly Brantley Avenue) as recorded in Official Records Book 3225, Poge 1829 of said Public Records: thence run North 59'31'38" West along the Westerly proongatlon of the South line of said Lot 31 for a distance of 15.00 feet; thence run South 30'04'55" West along said Easterly right of way line for a distance of 5.00 feet; thence continue South 30'04'55" West for a distance of 35.00 feet; thence run South 59'31'38" East for q distance of 1132.34 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the right having a radius of 150.00 feet; thence run Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through central angle of 60'36'00" for an arc distance of 158.65 feet to the point of tangency, thence run South 01'04'22" West for distance of 146,91 feet; thence run South 24'59'41" West for a distance of 318.72 feet; thence run South 00'00'00" West for a distance of 115.48 feet; thence run South 36'55'21" East for a distance of 217.54 feet; thence run South 1519'53" East for a distance of 140.49 feet; thence run South 07'25'15" West for a distance of 272.61 feet; thence run South 29'30'05" West for a distance of 231.32 feet; thence run South 50'31'58" West for a distance of 1475.69 feet to the Northeasterly right of way line of State Rood 434 according to Florida Department of Transportation right of way Map Section 77070-2516; thence continue South 50'31'58" West for a distance of 143,34 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of said State Rood 434; thence departing said right of way line, run South 50'31'58" West for a distance of 566.79 feet to the Easterly right of way line of the C.S.X. Transportation Inc„ "Lake Charm Branch" Rod Corridor; thence run South 62'07'01" West for a distance 6 of 101.16 feet to the Westerly right of way line of said Ralf Corridor and a paint on a curve concave Easterly having a radius of 2248.74 feet with a chord bearing of North 15'37'09" West and a chord j a distance of 296.18 feet, thence run Northerly along the arc of said curve through 0 central angle of 07'33'06" for on arc distance of 296.39 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue along said Westerly right of way line, and said curve, having a radius of 2248.74 feet, a chord bearing of North 10'58'45" West, and a chord distance of 67,82 feet; thence run Northerly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 01'43'41" for an arc distance of 67.82 feet; thence departing said Railroad Right of Way line, run North 51'14'12" East for a distance of 485.65 feet; thence run North 34'08'15" East for a distance of 33.91 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of State Road 434: ie thence South 38'45'48" East along said Right of Way line a distance of 79.94 feet; thence departing sold Southwesterly right of way line, run South 6816'24" West for a distance of 34.03 feet; thence run South 5114'12" West for a distance of 517.14 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 32,367 square feet, or 0.74 acres, more or less. SHEET OF SEE SHEET 2 FOR SKETCH • SURVEYOR'S NOTES: L : 1. This is not a survey. 2. Bearings shown hereon are based an the southwesterly right of way of State Road 434 os per Florida D,O.T.rlght of aoy rn p Section 77070 - 2516 as being South 38'45'48 - East • 3. This survey Is not valid without the signature and °deevl raised seal cf a 1orida licensed y — � s surveyor and mapper. • - JOB NO 28181 cAun ATEJ sr: EGT Fare rhE UcEer o BUSINESS OM sY : . DATE 9 -23-10 DRAWN BY: EGT SCALE: 1" " 1r CHECKED BY: AR 213 S. D7lare Street, Suite 210 Ids Wes, RLth 1118f r ( 44 ) [i1,5355 JAWS L WQafAN, f .SJA. /5833 ' 12 SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1 - FUTURE TOWN PARKE BOULEVARD DA. 4ARCJFLL'S SURVEY OF ROOK 1. GRAN SPURT ( T 1 /// 41/)4.1e :...7 :3.,� I. St/ � r • \ ST. JOHNS LANDING • / 'PLAT 90 53 • 1 4)5- �S 45-49 R�730 as > , t n LOT 3, BLOCK ^ A" J� Ce=NiY1YiD^M r SURVEY OF L LEVT � Cd0n0.151.3C PART OF LOT R. BLOCK "A" � 't�� , GRANT O.R. It T IT fE I EV'f;S Y G IRcIEV.,00F AT '''t �y �Q ` NF. LEVA< "' \\ r4 5 9 0 . a � 6 �E 0 � a \-‘6,t,., A.• a � � � \ L Qlg 4 i 0 'C`' it LNE TULE LINE LENGTH KARMIC r _- POINT OF BEGINNING 09 - 5 <°�y ,w00, N ,�. 71 0 EASIERLY R/W LINE Qr t. 35.00' S3o174'55"w ' (PQ4 DESC) / L4 113234' SSC'31'39'E Q L5 145.91• 5011)472V th g P�� 1A 315 22' s24 •59 N w R ®2248 74 1= 296.39 � \ . L7 J48.7' 73:25.55:215°D7: ' m d1<733'08" <Ut Le 21 7.x4' P L4 MA49' S CH = 709' 296.18' W CHORDORD ' Zn ( '�R "0 27761' 231 529 J0' @"w e. DA. MITCHELL'S SURV .q NW L12 1475:9' 3,30 -cy OF 1} LEVY GRANT 5 U PLAT ` D.R. MITCHELL'S SURVEY r _rso• 133 143.34' sYiO'3Y`58 - 11 5 GE {r+ DE THE LEVY GRANT PLAT 4pft SC4.E Lt4 33.91' R34•09'la't `T, BOOK 1, PAGE 5 b 3 73 ,.o L15 19 94' 4� AES1ERLY R/'s LINE 4 (PER OESC.) • ;O I 0. I CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS ' LENGTH CHORD CHORD BEARING DELTA ii \ Ci 2248.74' 67.82' 67.82' N10'58'45 ''W 1'43'41' SHEET 2 OF 2 7 SEE SHEET 1 FOR DESCRIPTION IL R/W Denotes right of troy L Denotes length ��- ,l 4 . ;,• � A Denotes cantruI angle C8 Denotes chord bevirq .; C'- - R Denotes rxlkla _ P.C.C. Denotes point of � � compound cur votUre Ii �`.,;3, ",',- ','X.Ea JC>8 NO 28181 CALCULATED 8Y: EGT DATE 9 -23-10 DRAWN BY: EGT 3 - . r SCALE 1 et 150' CHECKED BY: ,ILR 213 S Dilard Street Suite 21D * W% Rtrtlf AV , (4N) Ei1 -5355 / 13 Sketch & Legal Description — Parcel 2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 2 - TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS That port of Lot 8, Block "A ", 0.R. Mitchell's Survey of the Levy Gront as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 5 of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida hefng more particularly described os follows: Commence at the Southwestern most corner of Lot 31, St. John's Landing as recorded in Plat Book 53, Pages 45 through 49 of said Public Records, said point being a recovered concrete monument on the Easterly right of way line of Tuskawilla Road (formerly Brantley Avenue) as recorded in OHlcial Records Book 3225, Page 1829 of said Public Records; thence run North 59'31'38" West along the Westerly prolongation of the South line of said Lot 31 for a distance of 15.00 feet; thence run South 30'04'55" West along said Easterly right of way line for a distance of 5.00 feet; thence continue South 30'04'55" West for a distance of 35.00 feet; thence run South 59'31'38" East for a distance of 1132.34 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the right having a radius of 150.00 feet; thence run Southeasterly along the arc of sold curve through central angle of 60'36'00" for an arc distance of 158.65 feet to the point of tangency, thence run South 01'04'22" West for a distance of 146.91 feet; thence run South 24'59'41" West for a distance of 318.72 feet; thence run South 00'00'00" West for a distance of 115.48 feet; thence run South 36'55'21" East for a distance of • 217.54 feet; thence run South 1519'53" East for a distance of 140.49 feet; thence run South 07'25'15" West for a distance of 272.61 feet; thence run South 29'30'05" West for a distance of 231.32 feet; thence run South 50'31'58" West for a distance of 1475.69 feet to the Northeasterly right of way line of State Road 434 according to Florida Department of Transportation right of way Mop Section 77070 -2516; thence continue South 50'31'58" West for a distance of 143.34 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of said Stote Rood 434 for the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence deporting said right of way line, run South 5031'58" West for a distance of 566.79 feet to the Easterly right of way line of the C.S.X. Transportation Inc., "Lake Charm Branch" Roil Corridor; thence run South 62'07'01" West for a distance of 101.16 feet to the Westerly right of way line of said Rail Corridor and a point on a curve concave Easterly having a radius of 2248.74 feet with a chord bearing of North 1537'09" West and a chord distance of 296.18 feet, thence run Northerly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 07'3.3'06" for on arc distance of 296.39 feet; thence departing said Railroad Right of Way line, run North 5114'12" East for o distance of 517.14 feet; thence run North 6816'24" East for a distance of 34.03 feet to the southwesterly right of way line of State Road 434; thence South 38'45'48" East along said Right of Way Ilne a distance of 274.50 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 176,150 square feet, or 4.04 acres, more or less. 4 a N JJ y g A SHEET 1 OF 2 5 SEE SHEET 2 FOR SKETCH �• t SURVEYOR'S NOTES: e 1. This is not a survey. 2. Bearings shown hereon are based on the southwesterly right of way of State Rood 434 es per . ` � i Florida D.O.T.right of way mop Section 77070 -2516 as being South 38'45'48 "East �C:_- ♦ �. e� - -_ . 3, This survey is not valid without the signature and original raised scat of a florido licensed surveyor and mapper. - JOB NO 28181 CALCULATED BY: ECT FOR IKE ucEnsm Bu:1nEM 05723 BY: .... _ _, DATE: 9-23 --10 DRAWN BY: ECi SCALE: 1- ° 150. CHECKED BY: ,AR 213 S Dillard Street, Suite 210 V* Ws, Milk Milk ) 3.55 JAMES L RICIaAAN P.S 1/ 15633 / • • 1 4 • SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION PAR EL 2 - TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS DR ► SURVEY OF THE LEVY GRANT PLAT O C S vy �� BOOK 1, PACE 5 O � n � t t .. C -'7 J � i FNT yy 7 lni x • 'I' � I 5T. JCHNS LANO(fiG C� / PLAT BOOK 53 RAGES 45-49 \ -///7 \ R�I 00 �� 1,.I5A66' -- LOT 3. 6LOCX re A °' � DR. MITCHELL'S CD- N29'fY3elf StRvE'f Or THE LEVY g [IORa�I$I.la' (:RANT : � L1 A �� ,090 . . / S. y_ Z i:' Pa � p lti •<-11 r / �q �` i 210 • / 4 ,< \ P OINT OF BEGINNING a PHASE 1 A PART OF LOT 8. BLOCK'A` e - -- LNE TAeIE D.R. M I T C H E L L' S S IJ R V E Y O F L PE LFHa1H eEAWi:G THE LEVY GRANT - 0 'L a 15.00' /159 gy p. 19 c�� L2 5.00' 33034'53'W f t? 'T P/' L3 35.05' 4.30'0435"W t•` +n EASTERLY R/W ME 6 14 1131.34' 339'31'JSE (PER DE5C.) ,�� 16 141.81' $01'421N/ _ - R- 2248.74 L- 296.39' 4 p \\ � In 318.72' S24'9,1'41 '`ii b- 733'O6' 1g ` S. \ ,Z 4Le L7' 11548' ' $aoca'oo w CB= NN15'37'09 "W 16 217.54' S.3616 E CHORD - 296.18 SO ca SP ��P ` L8 L10 27 140. 2. 4 11 9 ' `S0 ' $IS 251SYr I9'63'E _ 11) 231.32' $275.'65 * od D.R. MITCHELL'S SURVEY 112 147569' 550 W Of WE LEVY GRANT PLAT 'i t C Z \ t D.R. C4J . uO1•s SURVEY L13 14134' S50'37'5811 1 Y BOOK 1. PAC£ 5 .�c OF 1H LEVY GRANT PLAT L14 34,01 F$8 - 1 4. 24 0, '.7 BOOK 1. PACE 5 i '97. 1 WESTERLY R/W LINE ` ` F {PER DESC.) ; ,p1 \ ~ . YY \ 5 1 m Fa SHEET 2 OF 2 SEE SHEET 1 FOR DESCRIPTION A LEGEND X. RP( Denotes right of way L Denotes length \ ,, A Denotes central angle CB Denotes chord bearing b �== _' - + R Denotes rodlus P.C.C. 0eootes point of - _ ,11 compound curvature J -- �.� 7. .Ea _ • E C s -_y JOB NO 28161 CALCULATED BY: EGT ,.. • DATE. 9 -23-10 DRAWN BY: EGt • - =W'_T_`x SCALE: 1 ' 0.R 150' CHECKED DY:_ 213 S. Dilord Streak Sulte 210 MI / Me We, 9r3W 306)' ((T) 854- 15 Sketch & Legal Description -- Parcel 3 f _ LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 3 - POND PARCEL PARCEL 3 - POND PARCEL That pat of LM 8 pock "A ", O.R. hatdtelfs Survey of the Levy Grant as recorded In Plat Rook I. Page 5 of the Public Records of Seminole County. Florida being more particularly dcehxibe4 ue follows Commence at the Southwestern roost corner of Lot 31 St. Joker Lading os recorded In Mat Zook 53, Paghu 45 through 49 of said Public Records, said paint beiifg a recovered concrete mwnument as the Easterly right of way line of Tuskswlla Rood (formerly nrantIcy Avenue} as recorded In OtfleId Records Book 3225. Page 1829 of sold Pubic Records; thence run North 59'31'38" West Arno the Westefly prolon99tbn of the South Ilse of said Lot 31 for a distance of 15.00 feet; thence run South 30'14'55" West along said Ecuterly right of way Int for a distance of 5.00 feet; thence con -fine South 30 West o distance of 35.00 feet; thence South 59' 31'38" East a distance of 1137.34 hat to a point of crvatve of a curve to the right having a radon of 150.00 feel; thence run Southeasterly along the arc of Bad aurae through a central angle of 80'36'00' for 0 arc distance of 158.65 tout Ea the point of tangency, thanco South 01'04'22" West a distance of 146.91 font; thane South 2+'59'41" West a dietarca of 318.7Z foe thence South 00'00'00" East a distance oY 115.48 feat; thence run South 36'55 East for a dlstrnrd of 217.54 fent; thence fan South 15 19'53" East fa a distance of 140.49 feet; thence tun South 07'25'15" West tor a distance of 272.61 feet; thence run South 29'30'05" West for a distance of 231.32 feat: thence run South 56'31'58" West for dlntoce of 1475.69 feet to the Northeasterly right of way the of State Road 434 accordng to Florida Department of Transportation right of say lap Section 77070 -2516; thence cmttnua South 50•31'58" Mist for a distance of 143.34 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of said State Rood 434; thence South 3815'48" East along said right of way line for a distance or 50.00 fear thence departing add right of way line. run South 50'31'58" Weat for a distance of 3.18 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence run South 07'29'40' West for a distance of 31.56 tact; thence run South 37"5817" East for o distance of 28.57 feet: thence ran South 12'32'43' West for a disheice of 9,57 feat; thence run South 4426'39" West for a distance of 24.25 feet: thence tun South 11'46'56" East for a distance of 25.26 feet; thence. run South 60'03'02" Went for a distance of 32 feet: thence run South 281)5'37' West tax a dstrmce of 85.43 feet; thence nn South 5818'57' West for a distance of 64.44 feet: thence South 22'13'76" East far a distance of 99.77 feet; thence South 16 West for n distance of 183.50 feet thence North 84 29'19TWset for a distance of 263,54 feet; thence North 2213'491Weat for a distance e.1 108.92 feet; thence North 50'31'58('Eaat for a distance of 579.56 feet to the POINT OF BEQNNINC, Containing 93,917 square feet or 216 acres, mare or Tess 1 4 a. 1 ro a SHEET 1 OF 2 \ SEE SHEET 2 FOR SKETCH j SURVEYOR'S NOTES: Tor t_ This Is not n srvey- i 7. Bearings ?town hereon are honed rt the scuirhwesterly riot o way of State Roan 431 CO par ;..._ Florida 0.OT_rlght of way reap Sactke 7 /0 /0 -2516 as being South 38'45'48"Ean 3. This acrvay is not valid without chin signature and oricanal raised scxd c+ a flarldo Iiconand ��--= surveyor and mapper. rat THE tirmr8X at,It81f 5 46123 ST N Ei y . it ; ii + ..*13 NO 28181 CALCULATED BY EOT DATE; y -7110 aiawf1 oY. 11Y SCALE: 1" 1317' L71ECxE0 tY: RT 213 S. Ward Sheet, Suite 210 ,tWES L RICK MAN,. P.6.4 #5633 / ids 1, ibik h (lf3) i51-SM • 16 SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION PARCEL 3 — POND PARCEL L TABLE UK LE11018 BEAR940 u 17.07 itsr31'ww st 12 are 930 4 .1y 2.3 35.07 53041'36'!1. it . '9 ' L4 1132.34' 5.39•31'33"E r OT 'I 13 140.2I' 901'ows, /:T Id, ;1"1 f,...]„3,....3 .7 t- . !s0 2.6 313.72. '".,.14'99' {1'w SCALE /-. � � .� ... l01 >t 1.7 110.48' 30 00'00'W 0 Sf.s 2'a / 4' 160 " LJ! 217.64 4361521'E 2.9 / \ 140.40' 415112 k / / (j / 110 272.61' 307'23'15 "w 8.13400 u 1 231.32' 52r37o3'w Lt156.65' 3 LI2 1475.69' 5,50"31 6+07]6'00' LOT 3, [ILOCK 'A' L13 143.34' 570'31 'p' S� c3••2913'33'r D.R. MITCHELL'S S1IRVEY OF THE E LEVY EVY I{ H 3.' 630'A's6'w N.14, 11' C140141..134..33' GRANT 115 31, 5077r40'11' ,1.l, L16 • Y 53 Y ■ \ ZC, �10 \ 1 iF iBra ,y, 9 1.15 24.25' 54t26'39 'G� ., �Q U9 7546' 311%16'36'[ 17 --) 1.20 32.39' 40033'01 4 0 4 121 95.57 526V5'37'W O h 4< Wive C Atvi Ow.. art M .qf . H D A.ral• mind ..d. 9 Nret. rafts .e L C. . 2..,19 Q . Dow d, ,4 h.fiq ✓//`-� 538'4548 E PART OF LOT B. BLOL'K'A' , 55.00' • 4 O.R. MITC t 1IELL'SSURVEY OF ------\ \ 14 � , - - POINT OF RE( NNING THE LEVY GRANT PARCEL 3 — POND o PARCEL 6 r • 17 E4� ,a t a EASTERLY R/W LINE 9 t V, � (PIB OESC.) ,' 2 a /° i1 + 0 1 / �,.� 4 % Ste • 6 \ \ ! #s J� D.R. LEVY MITCHELL'S // SURVEY OF TIE LEVY .JR D.R. MITLHELL'S VEY m0 i OF , GRAN1 FLAT BOOM 1, 4. OF THE LEVY GRANT PLAT 0, PAGE 5 BOOK 1, PACES TA • 5 L - PARCEL 3. POND PARCEL a. 1. F. . 4' v' v m1 7 \ � 1484Z9'79 " SHEET 2 OF 2 283,54. P. 3 SEE SHEET 1 FOR DESCRIP11ON 3 .106 NO 28181 CALCULATED BY: EGT c. ? ° DATE 9 -21 -10 DRAWN BY: DY E SCALE: 1" ■ 15D- CHECKED BY: RT 7 213 S Dillard gtreet. Sulte 210 YliE Wit, Pa 34161'(U7)d54- 06 / 17 Sketch & Legal Description - Parcel 4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 4 • • PARCEL 3 - POND PARCEL That pat of Lot 8 Block "A ", 0.R. Mitchell's Survey of the Levy Grant as recorded in Plat gook 1, Pogo 5 of the Pudic Records of Sentinel* County, Florida being more particukrly dsecrlbed as follows: Commence at the Southwestern most corner of Lot 31 51. Johns Landing as recorded to Plat Book 53. Pages 45 through 49 of said Public Records, acid point being a recovered concrete monument on the Easterly right of way Inc I of Tuskawllla Road {formerly Brantley Avenue) as recorded in Officio! Records Book 3225, Page 1829 of said Public Records: thence run North 5911'38' West along the Westerly prolongation of the South line of sold Lot 31 fa a distance of 15.00 feet; thence run South 30'04'55" West along said Easterly right of way One to a dtatmce of 5.00 feet; thence continue South 30'04'55" West a distance of 35.00 feet; thence South 59' 31'38" East a distance of 1132.34 feet to point of curvature of a curve to the right having a radius of 150.00 feet; thence run Southeasterly along the arc of sold curve through a centre' angle of 6016'00" for a arc distance of 158.65 feet to the point of tongeney; thence South 01'04'22" West o distance of 145.91 feat; thence South 2419'41" Went a distance of 318.72 feet thence South 00'00'00" East a distance of 115.48 feet thence run South 36'55'21' East for a distance of 217.54 feet, thecae run South 1519'53" East for a distance of 140.49 feet; thence run South 0775'15' West for distance of 272.61 feet; thence run South 29•30'05" Weal for a distance of 231.32 feet; thence run South 50'31'58" West for a distance of 1475.69 feet to the Northeasterly right of way inc I of State Road 434 according to Florida Department of Transportation right of way Map Section 77070 -2515; thence continue South 5011'58' West for a distance of 143.34 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of said State Road 434; thence South 38'45'48' East along said right of way Iine for a distance of 50.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue South 38'45'48" Emit dong said right of way Iine for a distance of 522.20 feet thence run North 51'43'41" East, Bong sold right of way inc. I for a distance of 11.00 feat to a point on a curve, concave Northeasterly, hovng a radius of 8980.09 feet, a chord bearing of South 3813'51" East, and a chord distance of 195.09 feet: thence run Southeasterly along the are of sold curve, and said right of way tins, through a central angle of 115'04' for an crc distance of 196.08 feet; thence departing said curve and said right of way tine. run North 84'4506' West for a distance of 872.41 feet to u point on the Easterly line of CSX transportation right of way line. mold point being on 0 curve. concave Northeasterly, having a radius of 2148.74 feet. a chord bearing of North 2152'38" West and a chord distance of 109.78 feet; thence run Northerly along the arc of sold curve through a central angle of 2'55'39' for an arc distance of 109.79 feet; thence departing said Easterly line. run North 5031'56" East to q distance of 1.40 feet; thence run South 2213'49" East for a distance of 106.92 feet; thence run South 84'29'19' East for a distance of 263.54 feet; thence run North 16'48'45" East for a distance of 183.50 feet; thence run North 2213'26' West for a distance of 98.77 feet; thence run North 5818'57" East for a distance of 84.44 feet thence run North 26105'37` East for a distance of 65.43 feet thence run North 80'63'02" East for o distance of 32.69 feet thence not North 1146'56' West fora distance of 25.26 feet thence run North 447619" East for o distance of 24.25 feet; thence run North 12'32`43" East for a distance of 9.57 feet; thence run North 375817" West for a distance of 28.57 feet; thence run North 07'29'40' East for a distance of 31.56 feet; thence non North 5011'58" East for a distance of 118 feet to tho POINT OF BEGINNING, Containing 156.611 square feat, or 3.60 acres, moro or Tess. CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS LENGTH CHORD CHORD BEARING ____ DELTA CI 8980.09' 196.00' 196.09' S38 '53'51 "E 115'04' C2 214-8.74' 109.79' 109.78 N21'52'38 "W 2'55'39 "__ s SHEET 1 OF 2 SEE SHEET 2 FOR SKETCH SURVEYOR'S NOTES: t This Is not a survey. 2 Bearings shown hereon ore based on the southwesterly right of way of State Rood 434 as per �.. Florida O.O.T.right of way map Section 77070 -2516 as being South 38'45'48 "East 'G 3. This survey Is not valid without the signature and original raised seal of a florida licensed •� surveyor and mapper, JOB NO_ 26181 CALCULATED 9 y: EGT F THE LICENSED BUSINESS ,16.753 0Y: . - -. • L DATE 9 - 2110 DRAWN 9Y_ DY SCALE 1" • 150' CHECKED BY: RT 213 S. Dillard Street, Suite 210 tAAES L � � P.StI l F1e tafat Rank 3481 (40/ ) 6S{ -955 / 18 SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION PARC L 4 L.E TAKE g ME LEf401H eEAR%1: Fed Li 15.00' N59717e'1L �J L2 5.00' S50'04'55Y i.-,--,4,... L3 35.00' S3012455'IT RBI 4/4/ • 1 _ , . 4 . .... a. a ENT LA 113234' 559'31'35 1 "E ' 71 '1 ea L9f N m W7 LS 14891' S41d'22'W ' 0 """ C II ! •:\�-• L5 31!72' 52419 "411r G 37.3 n 13G ..tar -+.. LT 11545' $00130.00'1! 4 \ ■ LE 217.54' 5359Y21 - E R.130.00 L9 140.49' 51511'53'E LIO 272.Ei sensing ; LOT S. BLOCK 'A' Lfl 23122' S29'30'05'e 't ( „,- 09- I129'1535"N DR. MITCHELL'S U2 wade ssnl'SS-1Y ' .9, 9 � CR3210 551.36' SURVEY OF 'ME LEVY cP GRANT Lis 14134 5'V , 550 L14 1111 102•31"35t O \ LI5 31.55' tior2V401E A,�_ 10 Os 24-Fr N3rStfirye L — UT — o, � \ , g. + Ya 9 j L19 7 1111 o 120 3219' n90O3'eI1 y \ I i +� 121 015$ nZn053Y1_ --� , LINOC d Q 122 1.40' R50'31^35't < l 4 T R/f C.N. i1W1 MM I I i A 0 :its carted sde 1 — \ l � C.v.. �„ t Q' c.f.. vd 9.0 w. \ S313'45'4-8'E 50.00' PART OF LOT B. BLOCK 14 —X, 6357. MITCHELL'SSURNEY OF 4 - POINT OF BEGINNING THE LEVY GRANT PARCEL 4 to i • + % EASTERLY Rfk LINE //_ 4 \ t 19 iZ (PER DESG) ,/,/ .d 0 f" A \ t1� U. i\i \ ,� / 1. `b• .. / . D.R. MITCHELL'S SURVEY OF THE LEVY GRANT PUi ROOK 1. 1 \ PARCEL 3. FOND PARCEL P E, AGE as` v, PARCEL 4 go S 04-2g9' E 263.54' c i SHEET 2 OF 2 b SEE SHEET 1 FOR DESCRIPTION "e4�sDe'N, e7z4r I • p ■ -=-cA. ■ 1 .. ''5 - 41 - :�k - NO 28181 Ecr ;a � . . IUB N � CALCULATED BY: .:... - .. DATE 9 -21 -10 DRAWN BY: DY 3_ SCALE 1' — 150' CHECKED Ht RT 213 5. 0i0erd Street. Suite 210 lliiteroriallaill 308P(48/) 631-5355 / 19 Sketch & Legal Description - Parcels 5 & 6 Combined LEGAL DESCRIPTION TOWN PARKS APARTMEN PARCELS 5 AND 6 that part of Lot 8, Block "A ", D.R. Mitchell's Survey of the Levy Grant as recorded in Piet Book 1, Poge 5 of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida being more particularly described as follows' Commence at the Southwestern most corner of Lot 31, St. John's Londing as recorded in Plat Book 53, Pages 45 through 49 of said Public Records, said point being a recovered concrete monument on the Easterly right of way line of Tuskawilla Road (formerly Brantley Avenue) as recorded in Official Records Book 3225, Page 1829 of said Public Records; thence run North 59'31'38" West along the Westerly prolongation of the South line of said Lot 31 for a distance of 15.00 feet; thence run South 30'04'55" West along said Easterly right of way lime for a distance of 5.00 feet; thence continue South 30'04'55" West for a distance of 35.00 feet thence run South 59'31'38" East for o distance of 1132.34 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the right having a radius of 150.00 feet; thence run Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through Central angle of 60'36'00" for an arc distonce of 158.65 feet to the point of tangency, thence run South 01'14'22" West for a distance of 146.91 feet; thence run South 24'59'41' West for a distance of 318.72 feet; thence run South 00'00'00" West for a distance of 115.48 feet; thence run South 36'55'21" East for a distance of 217.54 feet; thence run South 1519'53" East for a distance of 140.49 feet; thence run South 07'25'15" West for a distance of 272.61 feet; thence run South 29'30'05" West for a distance of 231.32 teat; thence run South 50'31'58" West for a distance of 1475.69 feet to the Northeasterly right of way line of State Road 434 according to Florida Deportment of Transportation right of way Map Section 77070 -2516; thence continue South 50`31'58" West for a distance of 143.34 feet to the Southwesterly right of way Ilne of said State Rood 434; thence deporting said right of woy line, run South 50'31'58` West for a distance of 566.79 feet to the Easterly right of woy line of the C.S.X. Transportation roc.. "Lake Charm Branch" Roll Corridor; thence run South 62'07'01" West for a distance of 101.16 feet to the Westerly right of way line of said Roll Corridor and a point on a curve concave Easterly having a radius of 2248.74 feet with a chord bearing of North 14'45'18" West and a chord distance of 363.81 feet, thence run Northerly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 0916'47 for an are distonce of 364.21 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue along said Westerly right of way Tine, and said curve, having o radius of 2248.74 feet, o chord bearing of North 07'54'08" West, and o chord distance of 173.71 feet; thence run Northerly olong the arc of said curve through a central angle of 04'25'38" for an are distance of 173.75 feet to o point of compound curvature of o curve, concave Easterly. having o radius of 3707.33 feet, o chord bearing of North 0317'40" West. and a chord distance of 309.67 feet; thence continue Northerly along said right of way line, and saki curve through a central angle of 4'4714" for on arc distance of 309.76 feet; thence departing sold Railroad Right of Way line, run North 89'05'57" East for a distance of 100.00 feet to the Easterly line of sold Railroad right of way line, said point being on a curve, concave Easterly, having a radius of 3607.33 feet, a chord bearing of North 0112'19" East, and a chord distance of 265.14 feet; thence run Northerly along sold Easterly right of way line end said curve through a central angle of 412'44" for on arc distance of 265.20 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of State Road 434; thence South 38'45'48" East along said Right of Way line a distance of 533.18 feet; thence departing saki Southwesterly right of way line. run South 38'08'15" West for a distance of 33.91 feet; thence run South 5114'12" West for a distance of 485.65 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 161,711 square feet, or 3.71 acres, more or less. SHEET 1 OF 2 SEE SHEET 2 FOR SKETCH • SURVEYOR'S NOTES: 1. Thls Is not a survey. 2. Bearings shown hereon are based on the southwesterly right of way of State Road 434 as per Florida D.O.T.right of woy map Section 77070 - 2816 0 being South 38'45'48 "East ---44r". . 3- This survey Is not valid without the signature and original raist d seal of a florido licensed rurvcyor and mapper. • 0 L JOB Na 28181 CALcut.ATEG By: EGT FOR D1E LICENSED BUSINESS 0723 ET: - -- -. DATE: 9-21 -10 DRAWN DY: EGT SCALE: 1" tar giEGKEa) Dl': JLR 213 S. Diked Sheet, Suite 210 JAMES L ROWAN. P.S.M. (5633 Mr Ede, Ne is M%i { 07)151-53.55 20 SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION PARCELS 5 AND 6 U �rp. o 41 S l • s4 Tr • m o t N4 4,4 0 6.. '12 �^ { 3: OR, 1F 84'05'57. 5 Y % /,7` 54. • A.; _..•a.: • 2 100.00' / ( e 15' ST .,. JOHNS LANDING PLAT BOOK 53 4‘ PAGES 45-49 �pp R +150.Do J 1 V'1 1. - 1$624' . LOT 3. BLOCK "A' N PARCEL 5 it �1 C6"N S . O Y .._,5,..., GRANT O -1 , O PARCEL 6 Cr 4, ix. Ay ! ,i / ;‘ 6 p ly h`� �� P ( 4, Qt 43\ / / b . - LITE TAKE • POINT OF BEGINNING � - ORE LENGTH 6EARINO p'1 L7 15.0G' N5971'39'Y cl*s ••x�, 6;19 q. l7 6.65' 53094'65"W C1 LEASTERLY R /N/ LNE `4' Q t" LS 3300' 53os1'55'w LS 3197a 52419'41V P (PER DES[.) / t ogs' L4 1132.14' 56931'311-E q g * 15 146.41' DM t14-22-111 = L 7 1" - U ti3.td' 500o0'00I9 R =2248.74 L- 364.21 -sr' Q A= 9'16'47" Z (( `) 9 La 212.54' 83595'21'[ °i � y h�" L3 140.4r 51519'5YE ut ■ CB- 1114' ' , uo 272.51' so '15'+1 • r CHtH�t)°36 p P 1.11 231.32' 528 . r' , �1 WTCHFJJA SURVEY \ R M y C' 152 147464' S60'31'NSR'i O.R. OF THE LEVY GRANT PLAT 'd \ US 142 S50'31'30"01 g$ O.R fentrif N T PL Y r =110' L BOOK 1. PALE 5 � t OF THE LEVY ( C ANT PLAT r�tVec r�a� 111 15.61' S7fGel.rve 1 ROOK 1. PAGE. 5 6 J3 .s is 130 I WESTERLY R/W LNE (PER DESC.) • ,0,16 CURVE TABLE . - CURVE RADIUS LE401H CH C123 CHORD FEARING DBIA • • , C2 .. AI :e. c3 E.�}.' ST.liIIII r.. 1�1117F"lj:li 1 C4 r'i ll l♦MEME M7j :11. SHEET 2 OF SEE SHEET 1 FOR DES RIP110N *�► LEGEND ' \,- -__ R/W Denotes right of way L Denotes length �. � • A Denotes central angle C"4 Denotes chord bearing R Denotes radius P.C.C. Denotes point of :.. — compound curvature @ r i _ � y _ F F"+ d , : J09 Na . 28181 CALCULATED BY: LOT DATE ___ 9 -21 -10 DRAWN BY: EGT , -- - SCALE: 1" - 150' CHECKED 13'f "LR 213 5. Diked Street, Suite 210 14 fir die, F1ed81 WV r (iV) j$54-51$ - / • 21 Exhibit `B" / I I 1 1 1 1 € I; ! / , _ DeSTAR E OF MIMEO FLOOR ABOVE ADA40317 IDENUC I. ' ` / 18 i / I v i 1 _ ilk fr- �.amair iik '11ii_ .. .ai - I y aa as a - -. .. ' a �f4�:F �'. .: li■ - � I �' s ir - �i�r�ari��, e - t_� • te' - _ 4, ,p, ► 1 t All ' l Ti _ II II ' - Rt t{ '_ L'4._. , .. _ _ E ., . - l -. _ _ L ' i r.. � U i i �I ��U € i i l� U f t O l i i� j l� � 1. �} ` • �9 � � 1 1 F 1 `i' $4 ! IS1 F : cam Alt ,€ 3 F ® I WI' 1111 ;f =1 W �!I HI 7! i � ° 1 pp _ .... . ,,_. , c....____i i ---"Al , .,4 - 0 - i 1 1 i / / \,, ,- - s 0 , , •• ., µ / ,....',-,./"...'" 1{ it MADDEN RAND. TN31c TOWN PARKE SEC. 6, TYYP. 215�� "' " � ft'MOORHEAD .S GLUNT, INC. APPROVED BY; DFC GRADING EXHIBIT i 1 CIVIL ENGINEERS DATE: 09/30/10 131E HORA1IO AVE., 51E. 200 HAIR -AND, FL 32751 • (407) 629 - 8330 SCALE 1" = 100' 22 Exhibit "C" e 5,1W 0 a i7 • r _ ]mss BUILDING !_ i ` • _.. -- ORMER / Kx w B' S/V J s , - - I " ' \ ti 1 SM T • rY�ma —x-- v\ . . +8 �'7,,, + 4 i.. FIB B B i.. I < / r R. • ._ _. .i -- L 1 Ri 6' S Y I - - tea / c 1 11::,...:/• . +S 1._._ {# ' ' - . 1 . , 1.I 1 ..1 _ l' h 8 ft I B B ; I I • s° 1 d ! ae i eo i C TYP. 114 Q 1' :I 9� ` i 14 1 N L iittt S.F, '. ^� + i _ ' 22' „' R9' • B B 8 8 ky • I I T4P• a e 1 � •t o ae T i 1. � ry ` R. 1 i ' F 11 L 1, . t •tt e t.' .41 • 4 - - - ' . �! ` R15' 22 9 t . } . , 1 f .` IC ik I . 1 IY j ! , I 1 ae B _ iy 8B �II B I BO • 1 W 11111 1 . __ 1 it__•. ea ' a I m • • r i � � � _ i � a ■ S R } IL"; _._ •4111111 R1 • II tki . R111' - R1 ,s 5 74-2• :1 -[ • 4 Y' tI r t . I ' • . a: ' g SM 17F_. _ POOL VAC PACK . _.. 2{Y L.- 6 • " J ' A. 4 �,1,` ) 1 _ h r ,,, i a e t !i a •ia 1 1 TP. - i t l � '',":1 , 1 I 1. <_ rj ' 742' !`' .r` +: f - .. —'- • 1 i'2,‘- 1..' '' 9 ' P'IIAPT " . 1,71.- 1 I •w. 13 „ , .f 1 1 1Li t. i s 1 � i ) 1 �{ ''` 1 � - 1 B8 38 • 1 �! ! • c • . r : 1 t i . r,-'___.,, . 4, t ' B 8 I B i3 .� � , ' !! I . , .r 4 , 1 .., t i l\ , POOL ;� '-- j-- - -- •lllO• 1 i Y 4 — d a1 a . 8 ja'` 'v j p 1 ' 86 4x it I 1 I I _ F BR ! a OB l i An a • . : : ; I N 1 ' ` _8 B 4 N_ 8 ` 1! B r A A B O t LEAv • , . cF 'et x r ▪ ?.:,r -, f - 8 8 5 B.F. B 8 9 B t B A r if .' -';•:' 31 i 88 88 B8 I _� B8 C ew B . L ' 1 i �� 11/111111 1 1 1 Io. - BUILDING 1 • BUILDING 2 - _ ` I Il \, i-_= 86 -5' - -_ 166, r . _-� 1 / ! i Ben.o1NC s, i TC A i 1 / 23 A2 • 6" 74 , Z-s MADDEN ATTACHMENT D tottie) MOORH[_AD K GLUNT, INC. y - CIVIL ENGINEERS August 23, 2010 Kim Trench City of Winter Springs 1126 East State Road 434 Winter Springs, FL 32708 RE: TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS Dear Kim: In regards to Town Parke Apartments, please accept this letter as a request to withdraw our submittal to the City of Winter Springs dated August 13, 2010. We anticipate resubmitting by the end of the month. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our office. rely, David F. Glunt, P.E. Principal DFG /nwm HADate1080171ConClly -Add►.aIng- WUhdraw- LV.doc 431 E. Horatio Avenue • Suite 260 • Maitland, FL 32751 • 407- 629 -8330 • FAX 407 - 629 -8336 ATTACHMENT F AFFIDAVIT OF EDWARD T. WOLPERT, PH.D. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ORANGE BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared EDWARD T. WOLPERT, PH.D., who being duly sworn, deposes and states: 1. I am over the age of eighteen (18) years and have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this Affidavit. 2. I am a professional economist, having earned degrees in the field of economics from Villanova University (Bachelors of Arts), the University of Central Florida (Masters of Arts in Applied Economics), and The Florida State University (Masters of Science in Economics and Doctor of Philosophy in Economics). I have received multiple honors and distinctions including a graduate research grant from Florida State University, teaching awards, and membership in Omicron Delta Epsilon (International Honor Society in Economics). From 1994 to 1998, I was employed by The Florida State University, working on economic impact studies for the university. Since 1998, I have been employed continuously to date by Raffa Consulting Economists, Inc. in Orlando, Florida, working on litigation and non - litigation related matters, including business valuations and economic impact analyses. Since 1998, I have also been employed continuously to date as a Professor of Economics at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, Florida. 3. Raffa Consulting Economists, Inc. (RCE) has been retained by the City of Winter Springs to evaluate the reports prepared by Fishkind and Associates, Inc. (Fishkind) regarding the Town Parke project. RCE has no interest, political or otherwise, in the proposed Town Parke project. Fiscal Neutrality Analysis 4. A fiscal neutrality analysis examines whether the net effect of taxation and public spending is neutral, neither stimulating nor dampening demand, in the face of a change such as in the instance of a real estate development project. 5. I have received and reviewed two (2) fiscal neutrality analyses (June 7, 2010 and August 23, 2010) of the proposed Town Parke in Winter Springs, FL, as prepared by Fishkind. 6. The neutrality analyses contained in the Fishkind reports are completely lacking in substantiation, and silent with regard to how the conclusions of the studies were actually derived. As a result, it is not possible for me, or anyone else outside of Fishkind, to confirm or refute the conclusions drawn in these analyses. 7. The Fishkind neutrality analyses claim to be based on a Fiscal Impact Analysis Model (FIAM) that was developed by Fishkind, and allegedly "calibrated" based on the latest adopted budget and demographics of the study. I have neither received nor reviewed the so- called "calibrations" that were performed. Consequently, I cannot confirm nor refute that the calculations performed by Fishkind have any reasonably degree of accuracy. 8. The Fishkind neutrality studies have allegedly relied upon a "Modified Per Capita Method," where a measure of the full -time equivalent (FTE) population, employees and visitors has been determined. I have neither received nor reviewed any data related to the calculations performed by Fishkind in determining this FTE measure. Consequently, I cannot confirm nor refute that the calculations performed by Fishkind have any reasonably degree of accuracy. 9. It is unclear from the Fishkind neutrality analyses what population, employees and visitors formed the basis for the full -time equivalent (FTE) study allegedly performed. It is unclear if any consideration of the specific characteristics of the proposed FTE population, employees and visitors have been considered by Fishkind, and if so, how that has factored into the analysis. 10. The Fishkind neutrality analyses have allegedly applied these FTE values to the City's budget, to measure a "per capita" revenue and expense value. The conclusions of this measure are included in Table 4 of the June 7, 2010 and August 23, 2010 Fishkind reports. Without detailed information regarding how the FTE was created or applied to the City's budget, I am unable to confirm or refute the "per capita" calculations contained in Table 4 of each analysis. 11. The Fishkind neutrality analyses provide no insight regarding how the proposed new residential units would affect specific aspects of the City's budget. Fishkind has apparently considered an "average" approach to the analysis, relying solely on average per- capita values. However, a "marginal" or incremental analysis with specific consideration of the characteristics of the anticipated new population, employees and visitors would appear necessary in determining the actual impact of the new project on the City budget. For instance, Fishkind has factored in anticipated revenue in the form of collected half -cent sales tax. However, there is no discussion in the Fishkind analyses regarding the anticipated disposable income and consumption patterns of the new residents. It appears that Fishkind has merely assumed an average rate of consumption (and, in turn, sales tax collection) based on historic rates. Yet there is no apparent attempt made to compare the anticipated new population, employees and visitors to the historic base population, employees and visitors. In the event that the consumption patterns of the anticipated new population, employees and visitors differs from the historic base, the conclusions of the Fishkind would be invalidated. Economic Impact Analysis 12. An economic impact analysis measures a subject entity's total economic impact on an affected geographic region. This economic impact comes about through the subject entity's "direct impact, "or initial round of spending on the subject entity, and the resulting "indirect impact," which reflects additional rounds of spending through the backward linked industries supplying the initial industry. Economic impact analyses are commonly measured in terms of jobs, output and earnings created. 13. I have received and reviewed two (2) economic impact analyses (June 7, 2010 and August 23, 2010) of the proposed Town Parke in Winter Springs, FL, as prepared by Fishkind. 14. The economic impact analyses contained in the Fishkind reports are completely lacking in substantiation, and silent with regard to how the conclusions of the studies were actually derived. As a result, it is not possible for me, or anyone else outside of Fishkind, to confirm or refute the conclusions drawn in these analyses. 15. The Fishkind analyses are silent with regard to the construction of the project itself, including jobs, output and earnings. It is unclear where the construction and related workers would originate, and where their initial round of spending would take place. In the event that a number of these construction and related workers originate from outside of the immediate area, it is reasonable to conclude the impact multipliers will occur outside of the immediate area, as well. It is also unclear what amount of the suggested "jobs created" are directly resulting from the construction project, or indirect resulting from the initial round of spending. There is also no information in the report regarding the breakdown of direct and indirect income and earnings, that are projected to occur as a result of the construction of the project. 16. The Fishkind analyses provide no insight as to how, and in what form the permanent jobs, output and earnings would take. It would appear reasonable to conclude that a consideration of the characteristics of the new residents (and related employees and visitors) of the proposed Town Parke project would be relevant in this regard. It is unclear from the Fishkind analyses if those characteristics were taken into account by Fishkind. 17. Fishkind indicates that their analyses utilizes the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis RIMS II regional multipliers for Seminole County, FL, to determine the economic impact of the Town Parke project. As a result, Fishkind's analysis actually measures the impact of the Town Parke project on the entire Seminole County, rather than on the City of Winter Springs or the Town Center. The consequence of this is that the Fishkind analyses have over - estimated the impact of jobs, output and earnings that the City of Winter Springs and the Town Center would have actually realized. For instance, if an anticipated job created by the project is held by an individual in Longwood, then it stands to reason that the majority of that individual's spending would occur at establishments in Longwood rather than Winter Springs or the Town Center. A perfect example of this can be viewed when considering that one of the categories of spending in the RIMS II model is "vehicle purchases (net outlay)." With no auto dealerships in the City of Winter Springs or the Town Center, that amount of spending would have to occur elsewhere in Seminole County. The Fishkind analyses do not provide clear evidence of the economic impact of the Town Parke project on the City of Winter Springs or the Town Center. Optimization 18. I have reviewed the Town Center economic goals in the City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan (Future Land Use Elements), and its related elements to include Policy 2.3.3. Specifically, that policy reads: Optimization ofTax Base. Ensure compatible land uses and development projects within the Town Center that optimally increase and diversify the City's tax base and economic well- being, while complementing and protecting established surrounding neighborhoods. 19. With respect to the language of the policy, it is unclear from the Fiskind analyses whether either version of the Town Parke project could be considered "optimal." No apparent comparison or relative measure of alternative projects had been contemplated by Fishkind. The Fishkind conclusions reflect that the August 23, 2010 version on the project contains a larger net fiscal benefit, and a smaller economic impact relative to the June 7, 2010 version on the project. It is not clear from the Fishkind analyses whether or not an alternative project would be better suited for the space, with regard to the policy language. Dated this � day of 061 2010. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. Signature: a...At, EDWARD . WOLPERT, PH.D. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 20 day of October 2010 by EDWARD T. WOLPERT, PH.D., ❑ who is personally known to me or ❑ produced personally known as identification. (NOTARY SEAL) ,e1,4k D. Z1) Notary Public Signature Barbara D. Wells Notary Public State of Florida . Barbara D weua (Name typed, printed or stamped) w N�' Expires 1 0/0112 0 1 1 �+ My Commission DD720884 Notary Public, State of Florida My Commission Expires: 10 /01 / 2011 ATTACHMENT G FISHKIND & ASSOCIATES L: ni 144 I MEMORANDUM TO: Marc Gauthier Atlantic Housing FR: Steve Schriever Fishkind & Associates DA: October 4, 2010 RE: Sufficiency Questions Responses to the Preliminary Comments are provided below: FISCAL NEUTRALITY ANALYSIS (Preliminary Comments) 1) The study assumes that expenses for this project (after completion) will increase by Tess 1.6% per year for ever. This is highly suspect because these types of buildings generally require increasing maintenance cost as they age (about 3 years from construction). This expense is immaterial as the Project's maintenance costs do not affect City revenues nor City expenditures. 2) The entire FTE resident calculation assumes that if a person is working in a neighboring City /County that City services are not required for that person. The Police Chief will probably maintain that policing services are increased during those times because houses are empty and criminals know it. The FTE methodology was developed under contract with Florida Department of Community Affairs, approved by DCA and later adopted by the Florida Legislature. It provides for full credit for building structures and accounts for all residents and employees while in the City. 3) The "modified per capita method" also assumes that all residents require the same level of service. This is not true; there is a high correlation between crime and income levels. There is also a high correlation between fire and rescue usage and the age of the city's population. The LOS methodology was developed under contract with Florida Department of Community Affairs, approved by DCA and later adopted by the Florida Legislature. It provides a reasonable estimate for normal dee'elopment within the City. This project is not designed to lure criminals nor is it designed as a nursing home. Most people 55 to 65 are actually active, working adults. 11869 High Tech Avenue, Orlando, Florida 32817 • (407) 382 -3256 • FAX (407) 382 -3254 4) Please provide more detail relative to the 19 permanent jobs. We need more detail. Are they direct employees of the complex or support businesses? Some of these jobs will be on -site property management, grounds keepers and maintenance workers. The remainder are economic induced jobs related to housing and include everything from professional services to utilities. 5) Road Improvement fund stops in 18 months; not 2030. Since the Road Improvement Fund revenues stop in 18 months, it is assumed that the expenditures will stop in 18 months. Therefore, removing this line item revenue and expense will not change the net fiscal result. 6) Does property tax increase on these types of lauildings? Do property assessments increase or decrease? Is the 3% rise reasonable? Yes, these types of properties can increase in value. Apartments may be valued a number of ways. As rents increase, the income- approach will lead to a higher valuation. A 3 percent increase is within historical averages. 7) What is the specific RIMSII multiplier for both Output and Earnings? Output: 0.9134 Earnings: 0.1773 8) What is the cost of construction per square foot? We did not perform the Project pro forma and are not able to answer that question. 9) What is the assumed per capita income for the residence? We did not perform the market study and are not able to answer that question. 10) The NPV calculation is using a discount factor of 10 %? Is this reasonable? This is the standard discount rate that we have used throughout the state for FIAM model studies. 11) Expense growth for government is estimated at 1.5 %? Police growth of 1.5 %? For purposes of this study, all revenues and ekpenses have been projected with a growth rate of 2 percent per year. 12. The report concludes that the 201 residential units to be built (which are alleged to have a taxable value of $155,250) will provide a $145,000 cumulative net present value to the City over the next 20 years. This totally undocumented analysis consists of projecting revenues to the City consisting of projected ad valorem taxes, fees, grants, sales taxes, and something significant that Fishkind calls "Interfund Transfer," which is noted with a footnote (1) but no footnote explanation is provided in the table. Without this undefined "Interfund Transfer" which averages in excess of $125,000 per year, the projected costs 2 associated with the City providing services to the new residents and their apartment homes over the next 20 years would greatly exceed the projected revenues. Our report shows 108 units with a net taxable value of about $107,000 per unit. This analysis is fully consistent with the FIAM methodology approved by DCA for all local governments in Florida. This fiscal study is based upon the City budget. lnterfund Transfers are revenues collected in other funs and transferred into another, in this case they are transferred into the General Fund. The City would not have a balanced budget without including these revenue sources, therefore, they were included in our study. 13. Clearly, a project that only generates a cumulative net present value of $145,000 (based on the inclusion of these "Interfund Transfers ") over the next 20 years is, on the surface, highly suspect. Without specific documentation of the data and assumptions used in this analysis, this might well be nothing more than someone's wishful thinking and perhaps not the most profitable "thinking" at that. It is indeed unfortunate that Staff's biases against the project should override their ability to equitable analyze it. Fishkind would have been available to discuss the methodology and assumptions, if Staff had requested. The methodology used is both professional and approved by DCA and the State Legislature. The comments above are both unprofessional and inappropriate. 14. To properly evaluate this analysis, we will have to obtain Fishkind's data sources, verify them for accuracy and replicate (if possible) the calculations. If that fails to validate the cumulative net present value cited by Fishkind, then the matter may become moot as the project would not be fiscally neutral. Fishkind is willing to provide this information with the authority of the Developer. 3 FINAL CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS PHASES 1, 2 3 & 4 SECTION 6 , TOWNSHIP 21 SOUTH, RANGE 31 EAST WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA FOR INDEX OF SHEETS SHEET REV. # REV. DATE DESCRIPTION COV 5 10/06/10 COVER SHEET 1 -3 — 3 -3 — — BOUNDARY AND TORO SURVEY SY -1 — — SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS NT —1 1 07/01/10 GENERAL NOTES ST -1 6 10/06/10 SITE PLAN VC —1 2 08130110 VEHICLE CIRCULATION PLAN UT —1 6 10/05/10 UTILITY PLAN UT -2 4 09/23/10 OFFSITE UTILITY PLAN DR -1 4 09/23/10 DRAINAGE PLAN DR —2 2 08/30/10 YARD DRAIN PLAN EA —1 4 09/23/10 EASEMENT PLAN GR -1 5 10/06/10 GRADING PLAN GR -2 6 10/06/10 GRADING PLAN PP —1 4 09/23/10 PLAN AND PROFILE PLAN OS —1 5 10/05/10 OFFSITE TURN LANE PLAN DT -1 5 10/05/10 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS DT -2 — — CONSTRUCTION DETAILS DT —3 1 08/08/10 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS DT —4 4 9/23/10 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS DT -5 1 07/01/10 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS DT -6 4 10/05/10 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS CD -1 2 08/08/10 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS DETAILS CD —2 2 08/08/10 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS DETAILS LS -1 5 10/05/10 LIFT STATION SITE PLAN L -001 LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PLANS SEE COVER FOR SHEET INDEX * PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED TOWN PARKE LTD 700 W. MORSE BLVD. WINTER PARK, FL 32789 PH (407) 741 -8666 MADDEN CIVIL ENGINEERS 431 E. HORATIO AVENUE, SUITE 260 MAITLAND, FLORIDA 32751 PHONE (407) 629 -8330 FAX (407) 629 -8336 VICINITY MAP a r iMe e�. - ^ SITE ;y m I SI l a �a 0 T 1 i BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY .• :%' S ., ` • � AL .1 �1 COMPANY 1 PHASE ■ That part of Lot 8, Block "A ". D.R. Mitchell's Survey of the Levy Grant as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 5 of n the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida being more particularly described as follows: 1 r Commence at the Southwestern most comer of Lot 31, St. John's Landing as recorded in Plat Book 53. Pages 45 through 49 of said Public Records, sold point being a recovered concrete monument on the Easterly right r of way line of Tuskawillo Road (formerly Brantley Avenue) as recorded in Official Records Book 3225, Poge LEGEND: ' 213 S. DILLARO St. SUITE 210 I 41 1829 of said Public Records; thence . run North 59'31'38" West olong the Westerly prolongation of the South K SINTER GARDEN, FLORIDA 34787 LAKE JESSUP line of sold Lot 31 for a distance of 15.00 feet; thence run South 30'04'55" West along said Easterly right of - x - Denotes wire fence (407) 654 -5355 way line fora distance of 500 feet;. thence continue South 30'04'55" West for a distance of 3500 feet; ''�� thence run South 59'31'38" East for a distonce of 1132.34 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the -a- Denotes chain link fence right having a radius of 150.00 feet; thence run Southeasterly along the ore of said curve through central Denotes wall angle of 60'36'00" for an arc distance of 158.65 feet to the point of tangency, thence run South 01'04'22" i v., West fora distance of 146.91 feet; thence run South 2439'41" West for o distance of 318.72 feet; thence V Denotes fire hydrant I run South 00'00'00" West fora distance of 115.48 feet; thence run South 36'55'21" East for o distance of wv r� j 217.54 feet; thence run South 15'19'53 East for a distance of 140.49 feet; thence run South 07'2515" West N Denotes water valve R W for a distance of 272.61 feet; thence run South 29'30'05" West for o distance of 231.32 feet; thence run South 50'31'58" West for a distance. of 1475.69 feet to the Northeasterly rio'.' of way line of State Rood 434 ® Denotes meter box . ( 4 7 ) M I according to Florida Department of Transportation right of woy Map Section 370 -2516; thence continue ® Denotes well V South 50'37'58 West for a distance of 143.34 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of said State Road Si 1 434 for the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence departing said right of way line, run South 50'31'58" West fora Denotes concrete � = Z 1 distance of 566.79 feet to the Easterly right of woy line of the C.S.X. Transportation Inc.,"Lnke Charm Branch" 1 Roil Corridor; thence run South 62'0701" West fora distance of 101.16 feet to the Westerly right of way Ilne 1 Denotes dirt road - we SITE a o 1 of said Roil Corridor and a point on o curve concave Easterly having a radius of 2248.74 feet with o chord < _ 2O bearing of North 14'45'18" West and a chord distance of 36381 feet, thence run Northerly olong the arc of Denotes edge of pavement with concrete curb Et JJJ (- said curve through a central angle of 09'16'47" for on arc distance of 364.21 feet; thence departing said " .,.. D eno t es edge Of pavement 419 (, I. D L. Railroad Right of Way line, run North 5114'12" Eost for a distance of 485.65 feet; thence run North 34'08'15" 414 0 Z O Y` East for a distance of 33.91 feet to the southwesterly right of way line of State Road 434; thence South Denotes sanitary manhole 38'45'48" Eost along said Right of Way line a distance of 354.44 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. D_ W Z Containing 4.79 acres, more or less. ® Denotes storm manhole Denotes underground drainage pipes O 0 0 = o ❑ Denotes catch basin LOCATION MAP ( not to scale ) Q V) o Z SOUTH PARCEL ® Denotes mitered end section Z O O m d d ti Th part of Lot 8 Block "A ", D.R. Mitchell's Survey of the Levy Grant as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 5 of ��qpp w the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida being more particularly described as follows: 'r0 Denotes trial boring 1- rn Commence at the Southwestem most corner of Lot 31 St. Johns Landing as recorded in Plot Book 53, Pages Q Denotes centerline UNE TABLE ›- C 45 through 49 of said Public Records, said point being a recovered concrete monument on the Easterly right N of way line of Tuskawtlla Rood (formerly Brantley Avenue) as recorded in Official Records Book 3225. Page R/w Denotes right -of -way LINE LENGTH BEARING < ZU 1829 of said Public Records; thence run North 5931'38" West along the Westerly prolongation of the South Lt 15.00' N59'31'38 "W Q line of said Lot 31 for a distance of 15.00 feet; thence run South 30'04'55" West along sold Easterly right of Denotes sign L2 5.00' S30'04'55 °W Z U way line fora distance of 5.00 feet; thence continue South 30'04'55" West a distance of 35.00 feet; thence as Denotes traffic signal / control box L3 35.00' S30'04'55 "W D W South 59' 31'38" East a distance of 1132.34 feet to a point of curvature of a curve to the right having a L4 1132.34' S59 radius of 150.00 feet thence run Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of r 0_+ Denotes wood power pole m 60'36'00" for o arc distance of 158.65 feet to the point of tangency, thence South 01'04'22" West a distance L5 146.91' SO1'04'22 "W - of 146.91 feet; thence South 24'59'41" West a distance of 318.72 feet; thence South 00'00'00" East a a Denotes guy pole L6 318.72' S24'59'41 "W distance of 115.48 feet; thence run South 36'5521" East for o distance of 217.54 feet; thence run South t Denotes overhead power L 115.48' S00'00'00 °W 1519'53" East fora distance of 149.49 feet; thence run South 07'25'15" West for a distance of 272.61 feet; LS 21734' 536'5521 "E then run South 29'30'05' West for o distance of 231.32 feet; thence run South 50'31'58" West fora ce distance of 1475.69 feet to the Northeasterly right of way line of State Road 434 according to Florida E- Denotes guy wire 1.9 140.49' 5151933 "E Deportment of Transportation right of way Map Section 77070-2516; thence continue South 50'31'58" West for In Denotes electric box and / riser L10 272.61' SO7'2515 "W - a distonco of 143.34 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of sold State Rood 434; thence South 38'4548" East along said right of way fine for a distance of 50.00 feet; thence departing said right of way ® Denotes electric. meter 01 237.32' 529'30'05 "W Ih,e, run South 50'31'58" West to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence run South 07'29'40" West for a distance of L12 1475.69' 550'31'58 "W 31.56 feet; thence run South 3758'17" East fora distance of 28.57 feet; thence run South 12'32'43 West Lt Denotes light pole L13 143.34' 550'31'58 "W U Oi z fora distance of 9.57 feet; thence tun South 44'26'39" Net for a distance of 24.25 feet; thence run South -sv- Denotes reuse water line 04 31.56' S07'29'40 "W 11'4636" East for a distance of 2526 feet; thence run South 60'03'02" West for o distance of 32.69 feet; 05 2857 S37'5817"E O thence run South 26'05'37" West for a distance of 6543 feet; thence run South 5818'57" West for a -vx - Denotes marked but unknown utility 06 9.57' 512'32'43 "W distance of 8444 feet; thence South 2213'26" East for a distance of 99.77 feet; thence South 16'46'45" L17 24.25' 044'26'39 "W F West fora distonce of 183.50 feet; thence North 84'29'19rWest for a distance of 263.54 feet; thence North o Denotes force main 08 25.26' S11'46'56 "F Li 22'13'49NWest fora distance of 106.92 feet; thence North 50'31'584E0st fora distance of 579.56 feet to the -,w- Denotes underground water line L 32.69' S60'03'02'1v O p' POINT OF BEGINNING L20 55 43' 526'0537 "W L < Contoining 93,917 square feet, or 2.16 ocres, more or less - w - Denotes underground telephone line L21 3391' N34'08'16 "E -w- Denotes underground electric line SURVEYORS NOTES - ..- Denotes underground fiber optic cable M Denotes telephone riser Bearings shown hereon are based on the Southwesterly right of way line of the State A SCHEDULE OF TREES 'MTHIN 100' X 100' SAMPLE AREA Rood 434 as being South38'45'48" East per FDOT R/W MAP SECTION 77070 -2516. -42--- Denotes contour elevation _>,d DESCRIPTION QUANTITY Legal descriptions shown hereon were provided by the client. v.. Denotes spot elevation 12" OAK 1 There may be easements and restrictions of record and /or private agreements not 12" OAK 1 Denotes sanitary valve g furnished to this surveyor or shown on this boundary survey that may affect property % 4" OAK 13 A Denotes central angle rights and /or land use rights of the subject property. 5 • n 5 OAK 10 a Denotes radius This Survey was performed with the benefit of First American Title Insurance Company S N 6" OAK 6 Commitment Number SO422-0519 (2037- 2228068), effective date October 04, 2009 at 8 1 7" OAK 7 Denotes length 8:00 a.m., Revised November 30, 2009. 8" OAK 7 w Denotes chord bearing There may be environmental issues and /or other matters regulated by various Departments 9" OAK 1 e.cc Denotes Point of Compound Curvature of Federal, State or Local Govemments affecting the subject property not shown on this y € k survey. TWIN 6 ", 9" OAK 1 ea. Denotes reinforced concrete pipe Subject property shown hereon is in Zone X, areas determined to be outside the 0.28 6 E I K z QUAD 6 ", 7". 7 ", 10" OAK 1 ° as Denotes corrugated met01 pipe annual chance floodplain, according to Flood Insurance Rate Mop number 12117C0160 F, & v 10" PINE 1 map dote September 28, 2007. d :8 -Ya S Denotes polyvinyl chloride pipe WW yt wor 17 "PINE 1 rvc Denotes description This Survey was performed for the sole anal exclusive benefit of the entitles listed hereon W y ty o 4" PINE 1 °4G and shall not be relied upon by an, other entity or individual whomsoever. e S 5" PINE 1 4 Denotes ground light This Survey is not valid without the signature and original raised seal of a Florida licensed 9 9 o 9 a surveyor and mapper. 1 4 4 J 4 k' 6" PINE 3 56 . Denotes wetland d b ,b 1 4 .4 4 7" PINE 3 ® Denotes blow off Underground utilities and improvements were not located. unless shown hereon. 8" PINE 1 t2 Denotes oak tree ( example = 12" oak ) Underground utilities shown hereon were located and marked by the individual utility JOB # 28181 companies. This surveyor only shows these above ground markings as field located and is DA1E 03/30/2010 0) Denotes pine tree ( example = 17" pine ) not responsible for inaccurate and /or possible utilities not shown. SCALE: i " =5o' NOTE: within the 100' x 100' sample area, all trees 4" or Last date of field survey: March 25. 2010. CALC BY: MER/EGT greater in diameter when measured at a distance of 12" FIELD BY: DM / FS above ground level were located. Elevations are bused on Seminole County Benchmark Number 473 -35 -01 having an DRAWN BY MER/PJR elevation of 39.102' NOVD 1929 Datum. CHECKED BY: EGT o SHEET 1 OF 3 i / / \ � N .,- ���� >a \ ALL.EI�J -.. Js° s' COMPANY d i \ iL „S I IVRC / Inv WRY \ �EERR VV '..\ 4 �TroM� 39!63' ' \ f 213 . DILIAD R Si„ SITE 210 / N \ WNJTE GARDEN, FLORIDA U 34787 u R� / lNV -Sono (407) 654 -5358 Ra /NE IN �� GRAPHIC SCALE / '/' ?\ y � \ � \ � n c >"' \ Ili (Blrser) \ �� L19,on =aD 1c C4 Q C 1 EL Ill Ill Lc za 1 \ * �`. \ uJ I "5- c ,-2 / _ ae W 7 s P � / M - ,� \ I Ir RCP NE My x.a (n j � � J> e e .m NOiII KR' � ` u W o z 1 X RM— - -47 .�� ,/ o InaN i � ,Y. ` .\ ^ O N O M j4 \ � z O g 1 4 \..�, \ hb "\ . Q N , , >_ 0 , \ \ \ '- Z tu co CO / + 0'1 ' ..,* + 0 0 \ • .t ''‘ \ '' `''', % f s va \ � j I I i i I � `� I ( , * ., , ,,',„,_ \ \ \ ,..,., \ , . .,„ ,, .......:3,.....,,*.„, I �� // i `t's +. \ ` 1r I M 9�EP M� EN I I \ / \ \ g Iy \ \\ I / 1 i N \ \\ \ ir e c os v , V V is m : � i s �o` \i t , Ist th, w :1 �'ce� 4 y'g f I: 9 ,49.' e gam � ' Oi �t P�' , \ >,\ / / L'IN �� �v x� 0— _0.._� - 4 . / p I" f° 12 \ \ J ' < POINT CO WEN POI OF M NT Y� Td �o P I r / SW eE5 RN MOST CORNER, LOT St R auN Ow 9Fr1¢ 3 t u I � / ,IpM1� � /' \ "S 0 '� \ yy'F{' . \ \� \ \ y� \ M` • , B `. ST. JOHN�KKIDWG PLAT HMO —.re —re, F - ' \'MY`' \ '' \// _ PnneS a -na • 16 L Tao OM.) ) ' O'q,�.l `l + \ \d\ \ 11' - \ / Sd n ,�' IT a y�e\�i A \ \ '''C'' '� C 8 `` \ \ ' \ \ LOT 3 BLCCK A` JOB N 28181 \ , 5 p � 5 + \ \ \ ?c DR. MITCHELL'S SURVEY DATE 03/30/2010 44 ro I , G� G`'' O CALC BY: MER/EGT y OF /HE LEVY GRANT 1` =50 55 EL vI/V � POOE �i \ A.. V- SCALE: \ii t O 'l'TVi000t G \. \\ ` \ \ 45, \`. \. J FIELD BY: DM / FS O F el o \ l : 20F3 o t 1 I , I c��P� / a LOi 3. BLOCK \ \ R \ J c , , , G Ia . ' I 1 \ r \ \ D miTCr_LLS SURVEY ♦� , WT &,•-•,-,, \ \ ''� \ \ OF THE LEVY GRANT + \ 4: , F.�� �.����� � \v - ALLEN j �� 9LLB.: RD C..O M PAN Y ' . ( / A v 4 4k t 9 N x e,� '1 4 c \ ,--`b— l vF a t \ 4 4,- s • I \\ , \. „ I T s ": " _ f \ \ \ 213 S. DILLARD ST„ SUITE 210 ■ S / _ WINTER GARDEN, FLORIDA 34787 I i� \ , A (A07) 654 -5355 �i ° a ey '� ,.>'' � ' H En ,d A � `1 v Cn : 4� " . 94 p = ,,,, - \ FORMERLY KNONN AS g¢ L Y Y \ \Q, 3 `, ''•12...‘ ,n,,,,,+, 3 /� /Q� O FO R TRANSPORTATION 1 / r \ r i \ r � 'W g A y `� Q LANE CHARM BRANCH q � \ DD ; L � L RAIL CCRMOOR \ `. �r" '.i • �ts. \ GRAPHIC SCALE C.S. • a / I � r, \ r �°a ~ O r RA N i k I " A PORTION OF LOT 8, 3 Q ,, � � A, '. A �∎ - . A ,�'4 O ul W . G " BLOCK "A" O.R. MITCHFIL ,��on \ � � 1� \\* � � _ x �. Q. W E \ \ \ • p SURVEY OF THE LEVY GRANT RANT yc\G - �\ �Ti. qk ( IN F'EEf) • p (J N dCr7t ' `" X d 2e�. 4. N faun = fiD ft O d v 2 Z ? ya6' PHASE WOODED v�pd'I A 'Cy.,,/ifilf•VIN ® � B O 7 W \ 4 j + ` i d% \ a ~ 1- . ° �/ Q . • 6 Q % 8 • i Q O s Z F R- 2248.74' - ' \ \ 1 : eL�' ./.\,"6. f •� am 22 L =364.21' , y66�.- g ..A g4 2 _ CH= 383.81' O CB= N74'45'18 "W ' t ' \ / -03 ` f g 4 CO 6.976'47" r•'\' rW I '% rY l r ...,>° e A \ ., °'.9 4' . �b J . / t OWNER LA) PLMITE INC y " , / •� , , �. \• PARCEL LO.: 2c20305AROA000080 a � 1 f`� '� ' , _� / RN \ .. R4 D -R. MITCHELLS SURVEY 4' �' eN / ( OF THE LEVY GRANT PLAT ` c 8 c / � ^ •O a °' 1p � � 7 BOOK t, GAGE 5 �• - R n m 1 / / / ^' ry �+ s t r f 4' JI L t4 O N� DRMITHL'S SURV / x � yt U I s ` � R4 N F THLVY GRANT / /J /1 � T 1 a A q A m PLAT BOOK 1, PACE y p i xu / eE IRV - �a.�n• O Q s \ ^p Nay / LL 8 4 PORE FENCE O. . l . f nI /l R -9 A Oa \ R 5`'e .,Z. SOUTH PARCEL y * / q / / A . 000 0111K 4 �. VACANT - WOODED I n d x ' `x .x.16 a � / I ' "f h / i Y •` OWNER SCHPoMSHER LNNO FUND ,Q 1 a / I n & x /1 PARCEL LO.: 2a20305AR00008E \ II ,01'01y; i ri 4 I L x 1., A FAVa. Q \ L b ZN •---- i A I y S , � . J $ A z B "T ` R{ A / _/ + � NBazs'1s °w ff? / / 1.§1,.32E, �� s \ \ ..a • x 263. ) p . � '.. 4 A A f / I ��35 /. ydyy "a" A$ / 1 a 1 : 1 T / / / 1 II 61 ° , e., / JOB d 28181 / / DATE 03/30/2010 SCALE: 1 " y =5O' CALC BY M/EGY I \''. : ER d \ N; q FIELD BY: DM / FS At \ DRAWN BY MER /PJR { + CHECKED By EGT - (N A SHEET 3 OF 3 ABBREVIATIONS ONS EXISTING SYMBOLS PROPOSED SYMBOLS b F FT LINES LINES STORM DRAIN DDEN U,eoj n _ _ oR.onree �� ° T>P JE eeNiEre uNe ,,,,,,,,,,,, NULOINC LINE BOUNDARY CONSERVATION , 00 LF 3T5 24 HDPE 0 020% RM PiPE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - POL,ETNELENE PER ® .2D1 _U� -11 Y,CDE ITN ITT 1E ' Z D PI PH IL PHILP� .T of eE�Ea,E aaV.T eE PR a PE � PEIP PaoPO POT -- — — CHAIN LNN FENCE — --— -ED PENCE RAI RO D TRADKE BAC ¢ CENTER LINE CHAIN EENGE — -- -- -- DRANAGE FLOW DIRECTION �.: Sfe ,.rv� aE�rvrE� LL "° �NreoL �� PLATS D - -- DDT N T YPE 3 W F,ow a.rE ocONCgE PPE.a.« w _ _ RGHTNOFwAYLINE PN ONE E�EEMENTre F e - -- - — — — = SHOREL NE OVECTR ER 0 o RURAL DOT NLETYPES W m RV c RLT a. , e. y - wA E LE UND ON LOT LINE P FDDT NLET TYPE R MANHOLE Q Q 111T III �s H ROPERTY NE RETANNN wA M ERED END SECTION Lu SANITARY �E s LIN ~oa.00 __- _ -., SEWER LNE - �. - - - MAN n cLEANORU MoRCE . R.. .. sETBAGK LNEY SPOTPOLEVATONSLOPE .a.E I NNE _ — _— SHORELNE �R� NET a H WATER & REUSE WATER " wA ER MAIN P PIPE WA ER VAL HIGHWAY & UTILITIES PEA G-HE d P L dET �, REUSE WATER MAIN FIRE HY E— BGUND GGRNER Q r SANITARY E 11-1 11L- BAGKFLOw PRE ENTDR kT WA ER METER 0 J ITE °eiJ INI STORM DRAIN ONGRE E Y P - sNry a OO R P D p40 seo couNTY ROADS x m Q - - STORM SEWER FORT TYPE , NLET PE ®D 4D SLD CLEANOUT DETAL REFERENCE e o xa � r M _ OLE - -� DOT YPE z IN T S CE NIT RY DDMPSTER PAD Z 3 RN ' ; E - NT MITERED ENE _ FOOT TYPE 3 NLET RTE D DN W/ FHA LOT rvPE E Tae Tos nu eaTT�u oln oaMEIEA Lorvo L", o PIPE ``M -' = R,,T�o „� N11 DIU1 HeL x�E NN _ ST— WEFT FOOT TYPE a WEFT -- FM FM FM PVC PIPE wE a GUY POLE HANDICAP PARKING WATER & REUSE WATER HIGHWAY & UTILITIES %4E Ns RSTA E RDADB w. Fa PE:cvu E wU ', BENDHMARK \� cuY POLE ?._ BRICK PAVERS H M WM : /z SEND E vy LIGHT POLE Toa WOOD UTLTY POLE DIRT ROAD 22 1/2' BEND = LINE � re LE TI - REt�VERED 4x4 CM � - CONCRETE VTlutt POLE e MAPLE TREE �Imi^ SIGNS M =N5 - V a SET 4x4 DM _ r RI BEND 2 �y RZ SECTION CORNER - _ *G _ PS ELECTRIC MANHOLE _ 8 0AK TREE SET IRON ROD Ei{ TEE STATE ROADS ou �P TELEPHONE MANHOLE RON ROD - e PINE TREE L�i, CRO55 LOT EIU VA LE - LEI`” L EASYMLET N Tancr wT� i CONOCRETE /R SE 11 TREE R PAVEMENT MT E=Z­ E xcnvnnou HE _ TRANSFORMERS _ _ COUNTY ROADS • r � a MSC TREE •W a CHECK VALVE ERVI E � 'r UTILITY POLE °T 'i �o „_T� TAG INTERSTATE ROADS MONITORING WEL 0 BLDG OR STRUCTURE rvM Y RE H RANT IHNI OPEN NI - F PPF r - STATE ROnos .�-- DuMPSTER FI METER TYPE F cHR. w, GUTTER ay„o CR1eE ov��o M cDFLTA oD ANN�oR METAL •- rere ceosswc sicN LGT D REODCEA RETE POLE T sGNAG O1 `"` K ' GROSS DETAIL _ T IGHT DsH GN PREVONTER .� _ GUYwRE z z sECTEONACORNERS HANDICAP PARKING -N Rvn uNDEreoreA CEANOU RECLAIM wATE R SY -1 wyE ORa AVEMENT SPOT ELEVATION E C E e F PAVEMENT + conNECnoN srsTE J I WADE, GENERAL NOTES DE 1111Y 1-11HEIIIN ­111 .1 NNE 111 11 ­1 1 LAID SCILICS ITT BAR E11T III ED, N A'MATCN AND A A . 1111 DID DID T11 I-11H FEII �) 11111 1111PLE — ON I I wt H re Mt. reNR etPe�reL tYt EM T E IIAT OUTSIDE IT I.- 1BOTHA 11 lRclUAEI THAIII SANITARY SEWER - I at .H aT Ea ITOreM wATCR _ONNEaTONI TI R 3RTA re3 a ER PPE P ALL a E„ER PEE cONFOR.,N� TO aETM A 11 PRINTED I IFF BE A F_ INDIE RAIDELF1 THLEII .1 _RIIIII NOTED BEREPERI ALTO FOR E AREA AP5 LC CAN UP ECIOL 7 CON NA IR N T F FF H Pre TN I reAY -11 1111LATED TRIED FIAT 111 11 111 N .=TN. F PRaPH=FE 1 ILL INITIIY 11111E LITEIILI I—L 11 1 INIHI DIASIDE1 INLESI T , THE MaNNOLE ANI IA OLE, ,N,L_ aF N COIF THAN O , , 1 «, AN. 1EIIE CE-DINI IOICTIJITAN DEAL” "ED AF 1111­ 'EIIEIS A — IF IEDINED TF LIFE FEET —INE THE AR IF �.TERA�= ,rvre „ N ITS �, TEre re1,E> > I A „Ere Ma rva/ AN 'I TINHIIIAII IHILL ITT 1111 El ITT NITUI_ AND IRTINT IT III INII TABLE AAT­ AT PREPARE TANCN IN' E CUR a „s PrecEEMS reEEN R N, aE renON Frec n EaN AN D ,ECF�R2NS a =a, os=„ w (2, areM1a re ,�re I MINI arvo RECLA NAIN TO' LDEB TET ry FRre� � wry ,ary Arvo ,ary AND D, SEA OF EY THE �reaTOR eN�aa ETHET�aE e reECTEe RY (re) N AS OR RT <<FHLL RTRNAFEDOPPNPao o eE OcRHEae 2te T N r OE ,�H E3N= R�PP�s29 a3�e . MreeeE. )Ae.) a2 ALL EOaTa �NCeRR R TO R P<�R EAMre are IRFE�aoEO. ��PER�ROeNIEAEre �.�INS creassNa AN. _x�sT�Na Ore (1) NEw R III TTED R a�< <rva�rv«re 11-1 T�oF,�E` EN; IF 2RI.�PLET�ON OF �E re cTN B_TON >L'_,aEE' reNO T�ER,ECET„HON OUSOE -.E UUiT„ OCDsTRNCRON. OFFER w reed� THE OUTER DECIDE �. �aP " "`�`° THe wreT cre PAVING AND DRAINAGE ecT ate PE= IPE1�11 ( Y ) IT TME HTLTY CRDEVI t REYRIeER Ire PAR.reRaPTO (A) AND SO reeOVE. CFL­ ­1 EO THE �' FEE N UANTEP lLL CA Al 11 'AE"ENT 11 EASED, ITHIP11 HOLD INI CHILD TRATTI NONTROU 1L11 11 NoT ' R reT, OF rvN, R �PRrva� M� IDIOM ON THE ..RAlN1 PLIN T ERreRE. 'HILL creNEOreM TO T,TSE 11-1 EER IT ' THE "'I"N" I 11 TIE ACCULTAITS1 TA p A' y TREA111 11— ITANI TO FIAT P11.1 IF I.MILLUITCH CLIFF BE T HAT RAm �P�HNRCnOE.NT� reN�, ­El EI LEI �) F E _ FULDN O.NRYPR RreaeE.aNE 14 �O, AS HALF TH"LLY A�H AFF AD 11 ­11 IFUNIF — ULPHIN—NI, HD TI-111I — 111ADED El ALLEN I ARMUINY INI �, E, sT �RLE a ER 2N; R ICI 2z<°<R2 A A I AAHER L­ IHA_L NE 'I'S 'I A11A IS 11 OR LIFE 1111 ElFAN�IAL T. IITA IIIOJ 1ILE11 I­ CPENFIEl IIANAIE IND SECNEI , _P FIND INLAtL­ANCOI 111INI IN 'ERNST, PR FDA THE AT, A " OR AlIN A TL LT., O'S" TO -_AT11l 17 ILL NES FUL I FIND TPCR'IDED UTURTNEI IIAIDED TO AD IN THE SIDE MOST IF _�EF LEE _NF"NQD ED 0' _ _ IS THE SATE lEEPONAIDAILTY OF THE 7 111 11PAI IHILL � IFIN. UN IIIOA I-RIE-7, ITT REENIH ITT E—NEAN AT _ INS OFTEN PPURTINTINI - A IS ISCRIBER THEY SHALL BE IRAN SID1 1 TT a o + %A I I ., a ER `E 11 111HEYINIEA 11'11L 1111 1 AII I TAII I A 1EIL A.— IN' ART .. NEERN, ME_MES RIE IFEN 11.11DEI BY PR EL R eY .o. +V EOIVEE NG ,.RA c[s. HE ,u c., Rt oR y FN A YOU T HE T 11`111� 11111UNI 11 IT SL HIT R N, I ROAD AND _ IN' RAN 'NENO aH 10 NEI' FIRE "AN TO "'LL ' N 'T' IF 11 FLAT A "" DINI PONT I IAA N A UP E - - Rs `tzF - E PHOreE o A l o `ANN— a - RES ro T s` CCNS ° c; M +YRU ery IN mreN Trearrc core ROL oeti.,ES Eore sTreLCrs aNO H eHres Mw�)a aa MIDDE , i3ea) 12 -7 sere re„s. Ec «T HCORS TI H� BE ry amoreoArv.c wm Preovsorvs OE amxa A /' REST R DEVA ON FROM —SE PLANS L EPECF,AnoN LL THE INS IN AT ANYTIIUE EYE TO DED11-1- RECRE 0, MATE, Tao- are re2, s HE WA TER TE. rere re M >.N ILLVON„ IN' 'PER N EET., A, THE CITY IF SUTER N" - 1 1 � PO.Eo PreTEtiE.T To nE T DNOTEr. 2 BE ALE11THED vc (21 - 12 „uuv rv.s.i.. off sn<tL u�E carvcreETE ASSN a v N. xe o,. S recry RTn of NET ATa o VnVE_ PHI oEUY� NATE core L cT., R THE ArRK. ANO III rervv L PR OR TO REr,£NrvG a CJPV OF FILE BUILT (s. ED N ` 1A1`EN TA " SPINAI Y N 16 1 I ELE T EN Q c TE s OPE M N uu. 11 1 lEIRINI FIRE FIR 110ED NIINI IT S 1011 BUT IL­ UTILITY '. AREA AND „vc z LNNEC ,.,nFY oEUrI STILL BE - _1IDEl All IlDlE1 ETHEL T L P FOR ,HE HLEIINT PER �z aEZ s H THE MorL< of �E T�F c LANE NEaaEn SOILIC TV THE FIRE TO DO 1 11 Ll - 1 HE PIESENT I D" IF ' ERR ETY OE .LATER .,P3 NG, HaL'_ aE reECE,EE PRRre TO PANS F To, IIF`IMPNL� IITH ALL OF CITY OF .11TER PC 1AFNI . .. noxrnF ra TxF aFau eF,FNTS OF IT o�cN E WATER HoEZE� , ILL Ns,reucTON reEOV MECA A' THE RETED 11 TI III (. ES" Ex x To TOP OE P E E ASE VE. s uvMT TxatE THE 'ATER MAIN STILL BE LOCATED EEEIIE THE AT11MAIATED ALI N _ 01 111 TAR PC u_ I INS c a AN" ::HD on Mt e xtu ev au n All a wry En �rvH nU.. I ICIA ITAB LARKI AIE IFINEED IN FILE APYARES NFI IITY IIITEI 'IlINIS E E PP FONTS sHreLI_ BE .,a >PPET N RLTER F.eec. a o T IN APTDC I AN ANN ) E II IF NI1 INUNC 11(_ DI) . of Pavnc arvo a SLIDE PR Oa o FN. rvsvECnory o FROM THE EoGE Al PAVE ury ccc aTaFax [ rveTEO- t BE vEnSUR MENT Al IUDCR­ EDE.ALKC TO AN SE CANSTA11TED 111 11 INTIAITIRLIT1111 2' AONTR4ETO -I III IT ENAL D­ HE A AIN IN BETTER IONITICI THAN ED ST AS �. A CNCNENE A ENT OF 2C THE CONTRACTOR IIALL -.11TRUIT ALL E_MRM C-1 AP-11TENAII IN F ANII A AN AN ERIA1AT.N PI­ AND ITAIM SESE1 ­1 IRA-- BE DID IN AAI1RDIN_E 11 PC ­ N1, D11111 NUINERI IN IF 11111 MAI 1, IN I SAINT FG1 EASEMENTS ETC UNTIL THE SORK HIS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE OBNER ILL DISRUPTED AREAS S11-T BE RETURNED TO TIER .1 COAL I0ND_.N PERFORMED PRIOR TO COISTRUCTION CE'T INS HAS BEEN —AIDED THE PROG-ROUTING AND COMPACTION 31 COMPACT ALL SACIATER IN A DIRECTOR I—OPIPAITEDLY "I'LLEL - HE THE RAN OF FILL THE SOL SIALL APIROIE THE IREA PRIOR IS TIE FR,AE 'FILL GUESUCTURE, N - ARE, "RE" 5 TO FACE STEEL ARE" OF ITINDINA -IS IN THE PIT. IHILL IF I'HSE FOR IEElT ON PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS: DEVELOPER ENGINEER On_ H O ) TAi (am) A 13-1 2.s PHON SURVEYOR GEGTECHNICAL ENGINEER I LINE. —) - 1` 1'1 PuoNtcIN(AFECE)aR nG3ys03.32TiA TRAFFIC CONSULTANT'. LANDSCAPE: reHCnHtcis GMT APRIL 'L SPINE (a1T) Ala -Sa2a E PHOrvE N (aa7) T CK�222T UTILITY PROVIDERS: PowER WATER & SEWER:Q R 42N 11 IF IIINTEI FRANCS DRAP �R. � IINTED LT ALH (.O,) � I'l TzTOa CABLE PHONE AST) z snss ODE soz T, GAS LED S HIY 17 (sae. bet - PStD STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION NOTES: 0 THE —UNE AND FLAT ARE "CLING PROD TO FILE REST RED TO MEE T T� 6 US o IN ON "ITCHOUT THE "' OF FILE A INLETS AND IAT" IRA NEED NI I T SIT IINT111UTE IGNEINT T. 11 INLET UP HE YUE ED UE FAR FINAL GLAA 1ICI CLIFF IF A­ .1 A RHINE A­ FERAIII MDECIIES ­1H _ E SITE IF IE CH— BE IF lULNIB 'ER 1111 IPRIANI Fare THE EITAA HMENT a , ARrea2I.YE A ALL A IF THE YNEI IT STILL BE I— UP 11 11,11IN I'D TE4 SEB T INA INA L IF N, OLD RED DUN NI THE LEE IF THE ON "'0 TA FTN�Tlo`Tp C HICUT TIE TREA— VAPOR AN TO TV H45 EECQME N EPL`E` DUE TO ER03 AN AD DIE TA IIIFFEIINEII III 12 IF NTREACTCHR IHILL 101-LY ITT ALL IREOAL STATE AND LOCAL FROM END DU _ SEA 'R REST .1 IF 11`1111 P All ANN A FILE CUP, STILL Al IFIT Yll 1A IALH� O NE .1 11 CANTIACTIS I P MADDEN w � Q g sa w w w � z Z 3— O H 0 WP Y m ll H`m d Z 0 0 NTI IF I ITS = 3 N ^ ■e ® ® © ®m ®o ® ®o I �� ory ana na 1. oao 'W a S310N L � SNI2N3�0 31IS � � I as .N ed3o. N. III saavarw xvmaroa ao a £14 snnd svvas z m das 3'b8a svvd snvas ss oxaavaaavaxras s�x gismo zi srvrare s�s vrvn eou niaL / 1�„n ma SNb z lmrvasv3 unun s� = s _ (e1 nooame z nwn zt = (s) nooame z b virvn ni = (e) rvooa s oximine (�) nooame t - (9) nooame z stun a = �., wooama� Inn s - a) nooame J UV0d J 31V1S W eLaH.Lo A9 mamol3wo 3HNl1H � � v v as �,x�,�na �,. > ,rm a 32 ax saavarw xvmaroa ao a £14 -- - -- - -- - -- - - - : - - - -- o - - - - - - - - � < - � t , :g - - 1 - -- - �rvn os a i n.3 1 .. ... . - -- - - - _— lii vv W :S310N ONIA?]Vd 1 d LINfl sx,vm3ais v,oev s,xoxi av 3e o. aoov mxsixu swmne „v u IN—nni N— 'av/ �n� a -wisx s n'a xvry t vwn eoi - vwn o—e s — NI t u � o� w) [ awoam A,uvsx as usisrvoz sus inroad iwwm,arvsa Sad z mos 0IHdV2If) a o m © :S310N 311S o au) «6 ean� xnaaa �ry 60 LU .spa 1 6 � ' II 6Z n % s e � i I III I i ivi.i. 5 Y}.J �l -l.i L -�4- I II 9Za ( via aav \ � \ \\ l u v ix —) iwwsys xviw.mma —H axv 1 A 37sr5soas,.os oxusrca wads orvuina�uvaoma mm - ON3031 1105 ZZ W eLaH.Lo A9 mamol3wo 3HNl1H � � �' � \ saavarw xvmaroa ao a £14 W :S310N ONIA?]Vd 1 d LINfl sx,vm3ais v,oev s,xoxi av 3e o. aoov mxsixu swmne „v u IN—nni N— 'av/ �n� a -wisx s n'a xvry t vwn eoi - vwn o—e s — NI t u � o� w) [ awoam A,uvsx as usisrvoz sus inroad iwwm,arvsa Sad z mos 0IHdV2If) a o m © :S310N 311S o au) «6 ean� xnaaa �ry 60 LU .spa 1 6 � ' II 6Z n % s e � i I III I i ivi.i. 5 Y}.J �l -l.i L -�4- I II 9Za ( via aav \ � \ \\ l u v ix —) iwwsys xviw.mma —H axv 1 A 37sr5soas,.os oxusrca wads orvuina�uvaoma mm - ON3031 1105 ZZ 1 N9N \ -- -_- —' I - i -- i li �I I Flu V r :l 13 `�' GRAPHIC SCALE L�e� 6.00 25.85 SEMINOLE CO( Width Track Lock to Lock Ti— Steering Angle JNTY ENGINE 40' RADIUS feet 8.50 8.50 6.00 39 .30 3AL­3 oa� H3NNn —3—i—H NOLIN—S —A Mn� ------ ------ 'f­ IN1­1 NO ana n° �,l IONI­ W.., anoH ON. 7lV13(l IONVdV370 1NVa(1),H 3UU o — � ^..� .ne �� 01'dA<l A,ex�� rvraeAx eae Z N­-1 NO 1.) A -a 'F17�=M 5d z aa m s am 7o Sfl ♦a " O Al v N11. ­ N", 'N U) _ . I'll N3(]CrM MDS 3lHdVZlD ---------- ------------ N�l -------------------- -------------------- —1 1 -1 1 N11 ------------------- ----------------- ------------ ' 0, A n_.'_ d ;N 11 - ---------------- -- j-11F , -7,i,_F �j F T F j ----------- NI AN' n 010' d I Id L -z ;❑ d- 4 \v Q ------- ---- --------- (N.­ N. r 1� �d A., _ — — --I— — — — — — — — IN. .— 0 1 - --- y � ------------ --------- - - I AO I ­N A I f (1) NO NOA "'."71NI Al 3. j X- ­ ` OAd �O IF ANI N­ N, IN, I V­'A N,. N. 013,3INN, E N, ­n, � .�l NO I—— . 0 u,a —M ONNIO 1— 0. 1. " . ° 1 3 101; . INO le 99a N Nt �N Id N Mt U�w N11 ­1 At AN N II—d 11 1" N11 = Z. AN 1111 1111 - ' w ar y 1. 'Of 3�8vi 3�df)iMdis N­.N.O Z - in i�EIHS A�S �NI I N11111111 INI­­ I Ill — (I :1 11 1— N—INNOD ­ ­0 ON (3 ­A 'OHl ­N ­ O__ _NNI— N.— —OV ­3 1 INIOd � 1� ON3 QNV NO­04d 34U ­N ,in. —ON— NNN. ON. I— —0.— - �; � v� ,a ou.N�rv� � so %z�EVEANO��W� ����� �s Al A4 \� is vROaos[o unutt [ MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET UT-1 }, lo GRAPHIC SCALE MADDEN 00 us Q Egg zli IRRE 1ED1111MENTE UNDER 61-111,111 ElIE111 —AND DERANAMN 7 7. R' . 7 IIINT N 4A ... ... ---- I gm UT -2 ]i GRAPHIC SCALE NV ' 1-25 T11.11 MFD ... ECT T I. j� A TN M N, T, ; A � l 1 1-2 .1 A— T. 1.1 ou 11 -21 Al rAreo oxuxs T 11 11' A1111 1111 AALL A Q od r V -1 272 W Arena —1--N —A— xv. x6 " � W , DT3 OOPS— rvar T T _, . N —T 11. or .1 ��/ / � 2 —%, TO N P S �E T R`1'. T 3 F F. 32 1.1 UT 1N— �7 L P 1 2, 731A 11E '.- 41 I� 2— -21 �l o T 2-1 1— Dll 11 111 -21 11 Ll 1,171 J J 1 21 DT4 1. T - 3 l 71 1-1. di ®aaax T �E CONNE—N J E ' N� 10011A I 1 11 lAll -7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - N- 20D 201 N N ' , 2 11 , INI IN N T— IN 7 Nl :N 117 1 ,D 5 , 5 r 7l , I, I W5 218 14 TDPI I I /21 b —A— 1 21 1— U. TM 1.1 WT - I- - - - - - - - - - - - — - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - VF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I ---- -- - — - - - - -- - E 434 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- ---------- ------- -------- --- ----------- ----- ----------- -------------------------------------------- -12 I IAP T11 I N17 IN 'o T, o IT 1— q INI UT —1 7 PI 14� 11 IT xoPE 1 1,171 IT11L I�A Ll R. L xl P OAP L —;4— 'T T_, 2' "T T_, E - = — T - 1121 P— s INV ®� ®�� - .. - ®�� �� ®�� • ' ®�� ■ ®® 5 MADDEN w Y a= O 0 Q a Z 8£a 3 0 - r 3 `s 8 3 t gg�a rc b o g /22/1a Y EA -1 o4j '..19 I� 751 � 1 9 \//\ - F-E =43-2 TIE IN SECTION �� W o� N.T.S 71 Eli ��_,��,,,, �� \ ems` `\ i ��,� � ;� • - �so�,�ro��� �� Tt TIE IN SECTION� S;i., ; l, _, — N.T.S. awa,.ow„w FF9� Jd e Z ^ ���� e e ❑ 7 III � m I iiiiiiiil, �p fa h FFEP44so o r� e e ���;� s^ . 0 Wii w i i I , A El ❑ � 0 D ❑ o B FIFE 4a82 -- -- -- -- MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET GR -2 -- -- -- FGR ]i ®� r-�� - a� _ ®� -y.. _ m�� ■® V �6 BFI F�naE ���E�ro� - �,z nRE c� E »o T FOR e M�3 o s W, F � avc vy mn� d F' I ^ ti I J TOWNHOUSE ROAD AA m � ml � 4� to O 2box0 ®o ox® PROFILE READS RIGHT TO LEFT GRAPHIC SCALE Lu 5 (w ever ) MADDEN s J L — LEGEND: � � Z CIL p t F' o Q - a z 8a 3 _ a 8 3 t 4 -9 oho — 0 Fpp __ H - zq A 4 ww a nRn e a vu , 8 , %zQ nn��Ax uce ca, «e o.ioz� .vu Osrs I 1 1 507 ®o. 8 s ,a xcv x O 2box0 ®o ox® PROFILE READS RIGHT TO LEFT GRAPHIC SCALE Lu 5 (w ever ) MADDEN s J L — LEGEND: � � Z CIL p t F' o Q - a z 8a 3 _ a 8 3 t 4 -9 oho — 0 Fpp o Q�a 4 d z Z SAS ao D w F " �o m r 0 m z Z N3addW 4 11 ­1 11 NIII 11 131-1 11 111 113— ­11111131 1,133NI— IN 111I I e� 8'IVOS OIHdVNJ 41 o IX zuo�# eis Z sis a so _,I s cuo � i` � 3e sis i zi�w "i " sue 318tl1 321010112110 03SOd021d �'°r inxi s a �us q74 ams 9N� -'aO wa,a�s.zz �E ,3 \Q LL . � 3� o=a Aw lsp 3F LS �+ o 1 INn ziw-rN ws us STN - °'""°°' 1S° N011035 NI 311 MS ,sad 6311n0 (INV Odn0 ,3, 3dA1 00 Li N - �o�� .3a,.�ptlw N�Mi R (STV130 2Od NOIlO3S IV31d).1 33S) IN3W3AVd M31N 03SOd0dd a3d eva ID a H J V/ V V A 99 _ I � J I� 0IS -1a 03AOIA3d ONV 1110 MVS 30 Ol H30nf10H5 � 1N3W3AVd `ONIISIX3 i xFy iy s UV I a -1� U S 1V �J sbsd :11 V I S 1.11 .11. I. NI 3un we .s iNSw � r asms 3 .na mvs ­­3 —11 Pau) w s de 3aoa .a� �� a3a owaiws xoaav Nara ll aros .a azsomaa I I ' ll It 0 0 ��— — — — s e� __ .. .._ _ _ ___ _ _— - --- -- 1 A ��_ ___ ___ - - - - - - - - - ----- � llll Ijr -I a 3z� ----. - / z !% �•ea�? :SS�3 _ -: as 4 ss 1 11 oa a,e 3 11 A M 111 11 oa r a N a w a� �o Ewa s us .N� s 3au ­�x3 oo msso », oa� are a�s ao.s o�: pus rnITNEnc BALES F � 9 ^ B ACKED e rNY BV PFENCE I .. x.,. , . .Pw+ o � e _ � s.r<. O rumxu elwuxo xoaes .awew Txe mwos soae PARTAL INLET ED INLET GI COTTON INET PROTECTION ON AR IN LETS OR SIMILAR ST RUCTURES � AnaS RUCTURES USING SYD@TIC BALES F6 nsnc sTm eAre a vm „« IMY DEN 1�nLrll!N E— PLAN eq<or ea« P•wm, sm <.. r.. ea. � � � r r. z . ♦ woo aox aosro ae.. To eo�/ l T \ 0 o sx r x.. xR,mm..ae m FIEVATg1 .s e..w =<e o .ao.moa .iu n PAVED sow ve eo.. wmi w m.o.a reowl PLAN w =w nioo m. uP.n•�m Fez. ar eaea - r. ass mc. v. d _sure rmn, �� <b � I D-1 1-1 J y� BARRIER FOR DITCH EIEVATpN ry e, w (r �_ (� w c a �M xaivau sra�is aw�r mau ar scaz � r AT � �L'T�H e. TYPE III SILT PENCE Px« BARRIERS FOR FILL SLOPES xer<. zur �« r Pz a rxr..e rn< w ran xxr ror nzk<o zor F«« (Lrt PEIt MIITCU 2B -L (R1 -1) �S,N L]L /AL AT 2e FNGNFEING GRADE STOP g gGN FOR INTERNAL gdANGE A l -� -°_ -LL N usm 6 Al 11 u `a 1„ LL! , ,FU.. L _ ° U (gA00T1 POLE) OR EWAL AB AFFROYFD BY 1HE cltt Q "N" Q PLAN PLAN e. �. -;E.. z z STOP SIGN, BAR AND CROSSWALK sPRIN¢ - N.T.S. /�7 R W E'er F1E'/ATINI EIEV ATIXi TYPEIIooe sgoeo erov o:L ��e oonon'�`s, %E uo orz _ '" �� � ' - ° " °s• nv •,. .wow... s.x z a i .ra srrw« swoe - W i 9 i LL o - BARRIER FOR UNPAVED DITCHES NOTES: . ®e or P ...a•m`re « o a: ore ° 01V "P =ee W �r =K mx wa <x. emr� a 102 n SE.T FENCE APPUCATWS L,vn creU wecx.UE , nxo wcsiw wxmo� snexic c,w usm m axorza ixlns. z x�v w rnuw e,+us .wE auxianm - N.T.g .xxn nT rzo o.c uiw aw CONCRETE WALK 1rz sTABiLIZEO sVECRnoE T RO`A ' 44 d a1a VERTICAL CURB DETAIL $ W o Q F¢ a, - E O „°,�, ,. A WELL sx.r. „E usEn mR ., - U- -TAUUN of THE Pox° ro NAIRTAN a THE F..AL w- LEVEL. r, z PUMP NTAxE rTEV.nUN WALL cE ° RErnw w.TEre suRFAU1 uRIRUIn wATm GwTx REa 'ALL ee Ls RRSnn°x vuxs F. RFUSE PNNP —1 Axo oETA LS. eNCx PAVrns AuEUe�T o ;; s Z sE/ p , - N.T.S. - N.T.S. aFCN VALVE CONTROL REUSE PANEL PUMP WELL o / RAGE TMlcx _ L ,w,,, a 4 srn MODIFIED VALLEY GUTTER - N.T.S. ° „I„ REUSE POND aU AUToMALC VA” aooR CONCRETE RIBBON CURB - N.T.S. aoa CONC WALK & CURB 30OF STANDARD CURB AND GUTTER N.T.S. N.T.S. AT 11DD — 12.11 V A_ RI-N Pu „P is -NI- R 's ;�a6a REUSE POND CONTROL ELEVATIONS RRCATON PUNP oN waL /REUSE wcNErrtAT O„ vuvE cLOS[o T wEnn ry RuFrcre vAR ES eERN ° eER e' . rI cure e' . ra° w„e INI—N 3J Ficv e° 1 mo x om.o x. / No T.0 n.o To a Re s s3 mx oS °gip �� In a Lv.�2oo vmL� /REUSE AN..E —.N vuyE.1Ery — - nUS�� s�� 7—ND Ev. -ao.UU rL Jr suo CUxe _ araSSwro x i A xm ev .— T -reU ixw S_ Mix. _ ra° PA (` E ` H" ` A”" °5 .. T °a ° ° °T -) sos D201 TYPICAL WET DETENTION POND SECTION - N.T.S. � sIS TrPIC AL PARKING SECTION - DT -1 SUB DESIGNS Z=' W.7 A, (Al SQOARE AND RECTANGULAR SMUMIRES .13 — .1) SUB DES�S �141) MUMIZES = mu reExmaaxs —T A.. w A R LEE- WALL DESIGNS e RECTANW UR STRUCTURE V V� M"Ifl, ir 7- Lu ma F F Q n Lu °n£im A , .... . ... . . Z zm @)�IEU 110 TYPE I AND P N17 11-1 4 6 z Tp 4 t RON— STAR Z%— M. CAST IRON GRATE PLAN Ecnan TYPE IRF—T 1.1— MNI X a HALF SE-ON CAST IRON GRATES SECTCN TYPE C MANHOLES STEEL GRATE F � i � �) MANHOLE �a� °L��� wu.,r �o °� T TOPS =201' - iz m �re�R � �.rs e a ,. °„ ®... m - ,p xew Tp COVER FOR ALL FRAMES n �� i II =I4L DRAINAGE o G���� z ®eea ,Cwre �.ws� =7Z" STRUCTURE INVERT .ALL C— —TRN TYPE ... CAST IRON_ ° °r.. °�.r . °. BOTTOM &UPPLEMENTARY DETAILS FOR MANHOLES AND INLETS N.­ FRAMES SECTION SECTIO TYPE C TYPE C FDOT MODIFIED TYPE "C" INLET CONTROL STRUCTURE CS-1 ��N.T.S. ssN svuE (nv Gu) w.n w /+svnn EE. j �PN PARKING BY s DISABLED Q � D =ED NED P.NE DND 4 MADDEN Q,PVaE � w woRr /J� PERMIT ONLY =1 =1 PROFILE 'El IEr<EN..nEa E °�o;� A ., _ �� $100 FINE s. 31a.19 r H E GE m a aEa�Ea.C�ss�E�s�,v DoE ..,. Sze END OF ROADWAY MARKERS N.T.S. a W W Q ---- SEEr�EN s., -� a "crosva z 12 IN LNI t - 9aIN a oa ° 1— (- NDICAP s ONLY) E ° « °� DND "n.ND or... >ND,N.�,° LE -11 11— GE NG GRADE) E r Eaam E ,I-N ai,` aoDn ° �°N x nP""TMO >re he eacNCaaNO eoa`oE"aoEi N��,E LOAD N� " SO f9R Er ir,NH °PEaroRA;�oi L W Q - p ISI or Co A-1 PLAN T N AG.lE aNE D EE.. r�os�SEOEE° ina „ -,E °s, `z -`n96 gp4g HANDICAP RAMP AND PARKING STALL DETAIL - N.T.S. wxmncmE ro coo"Eirvnre PuwErnervr Er nos PE� wim�n s revreesarnnvE 0 ggp COMPACTOR PAD DRAIN DETAILS - N.T.S. aea ADS YARD DRAIN DETAIL - F w tt _ Q R � LL F' D.ENNSIGNS IND CUPNTn6 x — E _____ _____ SECTION AA HE ff H SECTION BB s z in U R RE ig" p H . xm w s�"s es " -- 3990 qp: j6 40.16 40 66 sIXb 'O yq ,p^ �Ex - & X55: SECTION CC r ', ___ —_— / _____ ____�_— � r ° < ". a�a c °,e \ sn° c °tte• c ° °scNEttA ns ° .E a° PI .- ,_�� � \� / 0 20 � a A P LBcC<e, EEL / / E 5 ROSS Nwr 'CC'S. a I.—IAN rxr '° rur �w- NULnne wre °` ° " °" °°' •� _ (EnsENENr ,� TRAIL BYPASS � BP cornvn o rE ", unx. DENSiry N.T.S. CS SECTION A -A Sow VALLEY GUTTER DETAIL " °, " °�- °••• "••' "` °' ° ° °• ° ^ ° ^ ° °° ° ^� A �.E^ °° °- "' P P' ° ° °" ° _� . &: °dr. zTZ MITERED END SECTION "�a, seGnDN N.T.s . °..�,® z. Ma �.... S 'ter" - N.T.S. DT -3 - k T HALF SECTION CAST IRON GRATES T T i T SEG GN CAST IRON GR—S N TYPE; PLAN »aMrn,xrn a,L a, »,55 irz xmrs e.L °w MADDEN � THEE CAST IRON " GRATE PLAN CAST P IRON 36 GRATE SwYe cml ervO�rvcEfx8 z 1 scei °e.. A, P N +max =�» TWE C FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT NOTES w TYPE E i eP en:i3'eN' s —, wa.z ix nc, wonr iw .wuw. siw.»EUrcw,w�,u r vwm. �..mw. ... �... ,r» �m ».<re,....e » off µo xu,rsno» ,a rxs » „muu iexorc» w m ¢u,L w J TYPES _ „'3d= .,GRATE re s,:n. .� ..��, ,4 STEEL GRATE A�RxLL o,,,,,zo axn ,ranL_Ln LILL »Pnox STEEL — GENERAL NOTES ° Poe. a � LIP TMS,rn, �.�L »=ro E.,rn,L, rmar,TMTMr »w »rn6�TMr »,E.�.a »w .ama» a W Z O _ ,L.:E FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT CUT T F W 4 a Y m w L Norc . +x. a ary. <,.< eou,m o r. se< o <, °u u,. zoo �en.a<a �, <em. °<r .,n >.a rw �m<,,. o °.m�u<. ,ry °., °.< n. °rormeu.„ rn r. STRUCTUREBOTTOM FOR INLET T E E I ° °e .n°n t°i,ae .n. ,Ar ra . °r .�.,� ° , °„ ° ° °e ° °v °��+.•w ° °r ° °r.. z3 zE F.D.O.T. TYPE E INLET 8 5o »,. �„ e<,..<� , rc.. aa�. ». rd o, ro`so es r .a< o.e N— ar. s S-1— aerrem r - o<mn rve. i°o STRUCTURE BOTTOM FOR INLETS TYPE C .,..n.n i.<ien< rn< ro...r a..,a. r. ° °r °°,r.e �° , °.,.e �° ° °e ,,�e ro. ° °e.. w °w°r 232c F.D.O.T. TYPE C INLET 30] F.D.O.T. OPEN CUT N.T.S. — N.T.S. — N.T.S. 5- e E a� ,sue' eeveeeee T - assess° 30 n corvc __ aaRrcry _ ro TRA1.1 xe _ ro TxnveLUxe vawax nL III- soex rc "•• """i a a �•'°' r ...00. 4 '” � � - sL L—I - �nC E - sr >ausxc z / + El ia s m s.. „ xis Ai 916 TOWNHOUSE ROAD N.T.S. rrr ».a rn „rrvsious nr ai 1-1 icc,nour � 3 MR. E .�. ....•...�m......�.�,. �. 2tt CURB INLET TOPS TYPES 5 & 6 - N.T.S. DT -4 v, k4 "ti , C� a r� sip vim, h ° �\r\ rte, L 4W���� G2 r> 4 k y � / -- .- _._ -,. ±✓ a.. ., r .,,,> _ ^___ , �_. S \� ��?. H DIMENSIONAL FEATURES FOR PU311C SIDEWALK CURB RAMPS FOR L.7rEAR PFDESrftlAN TRAFFIC �' Q ' " -%- -r' cECrmiv i4vbJ!JY Re.UP FuN 1. r <NJIN:< WrTU 1119FWIWAL FEATURES FOP � W PUBLIC RAMP bMiD£P. CGNXTHW B OF !AWEA4 4 �' ,.. na �r ee s no axstr r.� ✓' ` ..ecr RAMP IM SIOFWALK CURD LPT.'DNS , ,.r , . •., ,,,� "; VV O a <YeuENr - r,Ei IEFATiID li CND J •,,, BACK OF SIDEWALK CURB - F J W m m -„ .... ,. n. J,MENSIONAC FEATURES FOR ?IIBLI� SIDEWALK CURB RM1P5 WhiERE PAMP AVO LANDING DEPTH ARE .VOT RESTRICTED BI' Rrollr VF WAY - - - - - so+n FOOT navidnm `_ TN'A n 2 NB z PUBLIC SIDEWAi K CURB RAMPS !�x i JU4 OR BUFFER TRANSITION - sn+o FOOT n3aann TN +N n.� i PUBLIC SIDEWALK CJR9 RAMPS Jtw ( Q ° ¢ n SHADED AREA DEE as C" 24 I SLAIIEI 01 u qu Z ^ NAj noDA -1 uvcRS '"E`" F POND 70P OF BERM HD s x N cuRe xFR Al aLV ELEI HO) E ilt z u R N - z AoanccNT unrcrts R "z. RRRaN —D PLA4 - - - -- -- - -- 3 sL - — _.. �' . .. ,. 3 22)4NDERLZN - i PGr l4 ✓I yr e tr xrz e IN F Aw.cENT uvERS - - - - --- - arn4r Yf R A. T Z T Yf J p 3 k DE ON POND rwsNEO sRADI ET (PER is)uu PED, 2 FT LAP DE—ED IN MDM IDDACENT a RS I Fy ¢ 11 '�'��� O ' CENIERUNE of A cACN so[ ILiRIN IFWb PC 2 tW Bpg EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR t'-A TYPICAL PLA:cIAENT OF DETECTABLE WARNING AT CURB RAMPS ___________________ +. __________ +v+m ears PUBLIC CID.-WALK CURB RAMP3 _ -- 364 9 -14 0o Ns a31N3n3ad MMA)dOVEI 3 a313W a31SVw a30 aVl g —iron, ]b —i H N3—n— a3 N3 ....dal. ... � 3H s H3.,3 »tl �I W3.�A� a3.db H g HN d NII IIINIIII 1111 3H nbxs Sa3i3W a3 - [ a A 6 a3 & - H S1tlH] Z Hllfl HSINI3 HNb a3Wld'd 3H1 %0 H3a H11fl AlHW3SSb 1NIbd a ]]bHS 3SN3d%3 NMO a3N ao SIN lb a3WO1Sn] /a3Nno 3N1 1 � � � � � m mxmumx NOLL]35 (uU suw mxmuve xnry xuvn oxrs me .° °` 4ai -u�rU ssw �e xo� xonouu D o — o A m � NI 'STN — 'STN 1IV130 llV1S JNIN21Vd 1311VNVd aNV d14VN dVOI4NVH X 'VW (1Vf103 a3AoNddV NO 313NDNOO) lZS (iNvnJ N3dY1f19 ow.a o5 i e 7C geiSoao .d ao3 ma l N3 Iry 1 1) 3 1 2" GATE VALVE FINISHED GRADE 2" THREADED CAP I � 2" P.V.C. (TYP) 2" 90° ELBOW 2" 90° ELBOW METER BOX WITH COVER ' ° oa°00000000000c 6" OF GRAVEL OR "" �- CRUSHED ROCK BEDDING 2" 90° ELBOW NOTE: ALL PIPE AND FITTINGS MUST BE SCHEDULE 80 P.V.C. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS BLOWOFF VALVE RESTRAINED MECHANICAL NOTES: JOINT FITTINGS AND PIPE 1. ALL PIPE AND FITTINGS ABOVE GRADE SHALL HAVE FLANGED ENDS. 2. BY -PASS METER ASSEMBLY NOT REQUIRED ON MONITORED FIRE SPRINKLER PROTECTION SYSTEMS. 1 THE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY, VALVES AND PIPING AND THE BYPASS METER AND DOUBLE CHECK SHALL BE PAINTED WITH A PRIMER SUITED TO THE BASE MATERIALS AND FINISHED WITH TWO COATS OF BLACK EXTERIOR ENAMEL. 4. BYPASS METER AND BACKFLOW PREVENTER SHALL BE ASSEMBLED WITH APPROPRIATE FITTINGS TO ALLOW REMOVAL AND RE- INSTALLATION. 05. TAMPER SWITCHES TO BE ADDED TO APPARATUS. DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK ASSEMBLY DUCTILE IRON POTABLE WATER MAIN NTS TYPICAL METAL PIPE 2.5 - 4" PIPE - 3" TAPE IS CENTERED ALONG TOP HALF OF PIPE. POTABLE WATER MAIN POTABLE WATER MAIN W.S. DETAIL 6 -9 -00 BY DT PIPE IDENTIFICATION AND WARNING TAPE MINIMUM LENGTH OF RESTRAINED PIPE TO BE INSTALLED ON EACH SIDE OF FITTING PIPE SIZE (INCHES) FITTINGS 4 6 8 10 12 16 24 90° BEND 21 29 37 44 51 65 89 45° BEND 9 12 15 18 21 27 37 22 1/2° BEND 4 6 7 9 10 13 18 11 1/4' BEND 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 BRANCH OR TEE 39 56 75 91 108 107 154 DEAD ENDS 44 61 80 96 113 112 159 6" STANDARD HYDRANT 2 1/2" HOSE WITH 5 1/4" OPENING NOZZLES 0 0 CAP CHAINS BREAKABLE 0 0 = BARREL COUPLING ONE PUMPER OUTLET NOZZEL OR FLANGE ON STREET SIDE z = x FINISHED PROVIDE CONCRETE COLLAR to GRADE IN PAVED AND UNPAVED AREAS 18 ° X18 "X4" CONCRETE COLLAR WITH #4 REBAR CAST IRON BOX 5 '-0" MIN COVE DRAIN VALVE 6" MECHANICAL JOINT SHALL BE PLUGGED GATE VALVE 1 1 LOCKING 6" HYDRANT ADAPTER AND HYDRANT TEE, OR 3/4" TIE RODS (MIN 2 PER CONNECTION PIECE) 6" CONNECTING PIECE NOTES: 1. THE HYDRANTS ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS SHALL BE EITHER THE CLOW # 42 MEDALION AMERICAN DARLING B8413, OR THE MUELLER A -423. 2. THE ENTIRE ASSEMBLY SHALL BE PAINTED SHERWIN WILLIAMS SAFETY YELLOW. 3. GRIP RING RESTRAINTS MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF ALL THREAD RODS FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY Straight U Branch & Curb Stop assembly with 7 1/2" spacing Ford Catalog No. U48 -43 1" Brass corporation Curb stop with stop meter coupling locking type Ford Catalog No. B13 -332W Tie service to a 2X4 PLAN I Edge of pavement Back of curb Right of way I Sidewalk ON SHUT OFF VALVES FLOW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y TYPE RELIEF VALVE STRAINER DISCHARGE FINISH GRADE­ 12" MIN DISTANCE ............................ .......................... NOTES: 1. ASSEMBLY TO BE PRIMED AND FINISHED WITH 2 COATS OF BLACK ENAMEL. REDUCED PRESSURE PRINCIPLE 0 BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY NOTES: 1. INSTALL FULL LENGTH JOINTS WITH TOTAL NUMBER OF JOINTS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN SHOWN IN THE TABLE AND FOR THE TOTAL EQUIVALENT LENGTH REQUIRED. 2. WHERE TWO OR MORE FITTINGS ARE TOGETHER USE FITTINGS WHICH YIELD THE GREATEST NUMBER OF RESTRAINED JOINTS. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT, DRAWINGS FOR RESTRAINED JOINT SYSTEM. 0 ENGINEER APPROVED SHOP DRAWINGS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY. 4. RESTRAINING SEWER AND WATER MAIN SCHEDULES SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE 0 ENGINEER, BASED ON ALL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING: PIPE TYPE, SOIL BEARING CAPACITY, SOIL TYPE, DEPTH OF COVER, TEST PRESSURE, LAYING CONDITIONS, SAFETY FACTOR. B s rass corporation Water service line Blue 1" ASTM D2737 Iop PE3408 Tubing 45° Max PROFILE NOTES: 1. Meter and meter box furnished by the city of Winter Springs 2. Service lines crossing under pavement shall be encased in 2" PVC pipe 3. For single service use 1" tubing with a 1" pack joint by 3/4" meter coupling Ford catalog No. B43 -342W CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS Potable Water Service Line Revised 8 - 28 -98 MADDEN CML ENGINEERS 431 E. Horatio Avenue Suite 260 Maitland, Florida 32751 (407) 629 -8330 a '^ 0 V, a_ 0 IL W G J W Q o Q 0 0 i W Ir Ir o N Z z_ O 0 W o U O _J p rn Q a Z z z 0 W U � o in ° o r ` � w z w z w s ly a < z (D z W o 0 w > a z a z W U U) O o as N 5 5 W o: m W o F- o 0 0 JOB g 08017 a DATE: 04/22/10 0 SCALE: N.T.S. m DESIGNED BY IAN DRAWN BY: IAN APPROVED BY: DEG j i w m 0 CD -1 0 2' REDUCED PRESSURE DACKFLOW PREVENTER� 2' WATER METER „,JrL�,aU” VU COILED :, TYPICAL) WIRE ( (` = l 1 RECLAIMED WATER SEWER POTABLE WATER AI/'�IL/�EN I � 2' GALVANIZED �� TO BE EE DETERMINED TO BE DETERMINED TO BE DETERMINED ErD R E s °�U Malv�a'N� IL MINIMUM PIPE s � E - — _' \` � AP TYPICAL VALVE BOX COVER DETAILS 2" coRP, 2 coR2, STOPS STOPS IRE THHN soup COPPER TRACING WIRE GENERAL NOTES' 1, PIPE L T WIRE IS TO BE SET TOP of VAL TO F GRADE X xrE soN STEM wITIT -- AR o wRENCH NUT RENUIREO R E THAN a' D T� TH ° pa REBAR z O% W a o L A WATER AL POT BLE W THE RUN. VA LVE BOX AT THE END OF _ RECLA WATER AVE D IME WATER AND SEWER BOX SHALL (CAS REST ON V LVE (CAST IRON) OR PIPE N W i FORCE MA S 2 SYSTEM A RE ALLOW VE "' TE VALVE GOINT GATE AS SP IFIED) TRACING WIRE SHALL BE INSTALLED T, E VAIN EVERY ANN SECURED sumsEx A D o n E nsu�InUre A Or wzB'EABOVE TYPICAL VALVE AND VALVE BOX DETAIL O o CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS TEMPORARY BYPASS GRADE AT EACH INTERVAL AND SHALL BE COILED AND PuCED IN A VALVE Box FOR EASY ACCESSIBILITY. TRACING WIRE CONNECTION ._ —L­11 N VALVE, VALVE BOX AND COVER M LOTWLINE EAM AS REQUIRED 'v° BRANCH WITH SPU /l 30' / CURVE �} ENA DICE IN N SHRINK GROUT FpusH WITH M NHOLE WALL PRECAST Ml WA NHOLE MANLDLE PVC RT D NOTES: 1 RTERIAL ROADWAYS LISP Rwc AND wveR seRlES nD -e - HEAVY DUTY LOAD RATING. COVER J SANITARY WEIGHT 21 )�', TOTAL WEIGHT 3T2/�. SEWER 2 RESIDENTIAL ROADWAYS- USA RING AND COVER SERIES HEAVY DUTY LOAD RATING. COVER WEIGHT 150, TOTAL WEIGHT 305, Q f Z 8 iv 3 - 11PAN OUT N'TA"ES TO ABOVE GROUND SURFACE SIZE VAR ES 112 LEfrERs FLUSH WTH TOP OF GCiVER LABELED SAN TART OR a a 3 r j PLAN MILL 11 13 GROUND LEVEL FORCEMAIN CONNECTION MANHOLE WALL EE 112 PIPE DIA BRlck AND NFLUEN MORTAR DAM SEWER CONCRETE ENCASEMENT INLET CONNECTION fin OF PIPE STORM AS APPLICABLE I.�GO __f' /a- MANHOLE COVER TYPE ELI g A - u y S.D. men T 6" MINIMUM VERTICAL AS EQUIRED MA NHOLE INVERT 90' BEND MA z t" SHELF TO BE INTEGRAL DROP CONNECTION WITH PRE - CAST BASE 7 MANHOLE COVER TYPE J PRECAST MANHOLE WAL ELL 1 /a SIZE VARIES UNDI'll DETAILS NOTE: PIPE C�WAP NOTES P LESS STEP ROUT BOUND pVC OR STAI 1 PErvErRAT ON ro Ex sT NC MANHOLES SHALL BE cRE MANHO E ERE DIP BRED RESIDENT m PROFILE IFXV Be us[o DO R a sn� L< sE2vice wssoo, „ - n - sT ... °. coNNECroR 2 OUTSIDE DROP - - . REQUIRED CON WHENEVER SHALL BE REOU RED WHENEVER Two N FEEL oR S MORE ABOV o THE TYPICAL CONNECTION /T p ' . USE 170 MANHOLE RING / / CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS TYPICAL SEWER CONNECTION MAIN INVERT CHANNEL A TYPICAL MANHOLE CONNECTIONS WS R-I 6-9 -CO MANHOLE FRAME & COVER CD -2 �ielNa eNNN1Ne dodos o NoildA�� NOUViS lAno SONIddS �]IiNIM -d0 J\llo SONIddS �]IiNIM 10 JiC o� /zz oeo9��^aa� S�It'130 82 2[ I17 r 11I� ma �u 3r °ry xrvs �. � .,n°e a°a e � s zA h ex >d � o -r '�� - ,a x •v R Sz fix.: d�e-e ,,, 82Ca AA IN, /C- s ,rko od°. S u i i .Yi �-- w � N111 ,ro z xr xx x , \�1% • �, rv°a� sr�n og 1 Sa —® °�� "�� L D o m �^ sa .. I _ „� / NI �o s srIi �":3J i ds II3., ten. w.,,, .rv3wnr�,n,° I �� is 113-11, r3.HOO,. M mr >H z�3zrN wnrvx+n,� » .. "wew .xa "x�. /rvn � � Sd1Ad- 2PL4-0Of m SSVd— e ONV lld �nwn NOliViS in na�wn= ;3�3,mn °, SONI?JdS b�1NIM d0 /1110 mvoJ 1 - tvr3[ —11 1 - 1� 131 ewne a a 3 awn x °� 3m�°aa unw i3 rei°aiwoa m .0. n �` „tl„ M31A 3415 a3ssnravl a a3 avail ro iie_3a - 3 ee —VI 33 = ESN 3e "„VHS "XG9 — A 2 m 3;d ,d 3a s ro z rorr (n N01103NN00 dWnd SStld -AB n sw°We eneas xi °` 5 53hdv� NO3HJ I� -S310N M31A d01 lld 3AltlA 1tl01dA1 N01-3— dWnd SStld -A8 y3�ON Wn NiW my m� wan anon H111 xoe —INOO� "�� �f9 o sNUSlx3 �y� N3aaVW �ro� ddJ � HJO, WHJ .rod 3aIHOHd �`;, TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS S][7[7E PLAN WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA ISSUED FOR PERMIT— 04.30.10 REVISED PERMIT SET— 10.04.10 E; F �F� CONANT & ASSOCIATES sHT. ND_ IssuE owTE aev. No_ eEV_ oaTE saEET TT_I L —obi o43o.m z R9.oLm 11E14lL SlI F (U5a 4 TREE IL— h saWRE aREH cAl 11LIous (lso) L —�]o CiMX I 1o,oam HFRRDSCnF=FUN L —col 0430.10 HFROSUP_PUN L -2ao M3) .10 HARDSGF= DETALS L —p)1 oE.SO.1a } 10,N I waa ELECIous L_zaz uoT INCwoeD luau EI Era�DNs L - 3w 0330.10 s ­1111CAll III M s 1iJ O4JC CODE UNOSCaFE FUN L -332 a4 �0.ID 10,04.IC CODE FLINT JST & c N. NDTES L -313 oaao.�o a 1) N IC coDE uuoscaPE oEroILI L -4ao 0330.10 4 D9 J1�R IRRGlilon PVJJ L-4>1 04.30.10 3 D9,02.1C IRR Canon PIHN L —o]a 0430.10 z oa.13.11 IRRCanoR NCZZLE CHAIT, DFIIS 's ON NCTEs L -4D3 04'M 10 IRR UIIIOn DLIaILS L—"I OE 30.10 PUTAP AaTION DETAILS 3 KFES L -5 012 -0.10 5 iD04.lD LGI 11 PIHN, LJm 11E IlH_IlLE, & 11 sLNNARY L —sJl o4 10 1 10,o4.�G usIf1NG PuN 0430.10 J o9 za.�c wb�INalltt cuI —s LLIS' L -5 OE.13.10 — — WNINAIRE CUT— SHEETS ;� �° z, Cr "t '� ;" I ti`v✓ r Lis i tI ( e f l '3 Ur. _ _I_ 7;iL�Int � a ev 1b N s1r ✓),soil , ,i_ ,. ,1.` IE' �_� _ L L_,. L 1_,u 7,74LINE L -1®® L-300 L -4®® L— 41. CONANT &ASSOCIATES m W.BObin®9 -Fk" �-M7 Om� �(4075�n L� J MATCHLINE TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS SITE PLAN P ' m ` Fi436'.Im see. I' - oa. C7R gun. RRr "• " ""YPRKLmeIDU,G L -001 TREE SURVEY LEGEND SITE CLEARING NOTES: 1. NO BURNING OF REMOVED PLANT MATERIAL OR DEBRIS SHALL OCCUR DURING SITE CLEARING. 2. ALL TREES REMOVED SHALL BE CHIPPED AND SIFTED AS TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPE QUALITY MULCH. 3. ALL RECYCLED MULCH SHALL ONLY BE USED IN PERIPHERY AREAS OF THE t ` SITE NOT NEXT TO ANY STRUCTURE AS SHOWN IN THE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS. 4. THE SITE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY TO ALL CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS SCHEDULE OF TREES WITHIN 100'X 100' SAMPLE AREA ~` R CONANT &ASSOCIATES 198 West PnbI -9t - C&IPk"8TW1 -1619 Phone (091698 -]4S Rx (407) 69801T3 CODE AND REGULATIONS. THE PROPER PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINED BY THE SITE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENTOFWDRK. LA=TE. os -[, th, 111 w 1rp s�nplP creo all to =s 4 car greater 5. TREE CLEARING AND VEGETATION REMOVAL SHALL REQUIRE CITY OF 'n d' —l- ben rr ured of o d'st�nce of I^ WINTER SPRINGS "ARBOR LICENSE' PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF uboVe grouna IEre .erE loeut-d. WORK. SUMMARY OF TREES REMOVED ON SITE > / =4" CALIPER: B. DISC IN VASIV E F IN EXOTIC PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED AND DISRDED OF IN H PROPER MANNER. TOTAL ACREAGE OF SITE: 7.12 HC./ 310,075 SF: 7 ANY HAULING OF DEBRIS OR CONSTRUCTION WASTE FROM THE SITE MUST 310 075 SF/ 10 000 SE= 31 X 59 TREES= 1 829 TREES MAINTAIN MOT ON 434 AND ALSO TUSKAWILLA ROAD. SCHEDULE OF TREES ENTIRE SITE ms.asim ss�EC rcv B. CONSTRUCTION WASTE CONTAINERS SHALL ADHERE TO THE CITY'S WASTE ..c ceV ew F FRANCHISE AGREEMENT. \ I 101,558 SF �p I b Yom, % },� OAK, 'SPECIMEN�HICTORIC' TR E LOCATION, TO BE REVOVED PILAF, "SPFGIIJFN TIFF I OCATION, TO IF kFMOVFD 1: NUMBER DESIGNATES SIZE OF TR =E, -A IPEF REVISED LIMITS OF SUMMARY OF "SPECIMEN /HISTORIC" ( >/= 24" CALIPER) WORK, 310,075 SF F OF TOTAL AREA L LIMITS OF 11K' X 107 SAMPLE AREA PER SURVEY SITE CLEARING NOTES: 1. NO BURNING OF REMOVED PLANT MATERIAL OR DEBRIS SHALL OCCUR DURING SITE CLEARING. 2. ALL TREES REMOVED SHALL BE CHIPPED AND SIFTED AS TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPE QUALITY MULCH. 3. ALL RECYCLED MULCH SHALL ONLY BE USED IN PERIPHERY AREAS OF THE t ` SITE NOT NEXT TO ANY STRUCTURE AS SHOWN IN THE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS. 4. THE SITE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY TO ALL CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS SCHEDULE OF TREES WITHIN 100'X 100' SAMPLE AREA ~` R CONANT &ASSOCIATES 198 West PnbI -9t - C&IPk"8TW1 -1619 Phone (091698 -]4S Rx (407) 69801T3 CODE AND REGULATIONS. THE PROPER PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINED BY THE SITE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENTOFWDRK. LA=TE. os -[, th, 111 w 1rp s�nplP creo all to =s 4 car greater 5. TREE CLEARING AND VEGETATION REMOVAL SHALL REQUIRE CITY OF 'n d' —l- ben rr ured of o d'st�nce of I^ WINTER SPRINGS "ARBOR LICENSE' PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF uboVe grouna IEre .erE loeut-d. WORK. SUMMARY OF TREES REMOVED ON SITE > / =4" CALIPER: B. DISC IN VASIV E F IN EXOTIC PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED AND DISRDED OF IN H PROPER MANNER. TOTAL ACREAGE OF SITE: 7.12 HC./ 310,075 SF: 7 ANY HAULING OF DEBRIS OR CONSTRUCTION WASTE FROM THE SITE MUST 310 075 SF/ 10 000 SE= 31 X 59 TREES= 1 829 TREES MAINTAIN MOT ON 434 AND ALSO TUSKAWILLA ROAD. SCHEDULE OF TREES ENTIRE SITE ms.asim ss�EC rcv B. CONSTRUCTION WASTE CONTAINERS SHALL ADHERE TO THE CITY'S WASTE ..c ceV ew F FRANCHISE AGREEMENT. \ I 101,558 SF �p I b Yom, SUMMARY OF "SPECIMEN /HISTORIC" ( >/= 24" CALIPER) ».. 208,617 BE ' ;,� r',z TREES REMOVED FROM THE SITE: 15 I kJ ALL TREES ARE TO BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE ORIGINAL X TREE SAMPLE AREA, PER SURVEY PERFORMED D BY ALLEN &COMPANY 1 n TOWN PARKE N- v i T'I -_ APARTMENTS wIPTER sPelNGs, FL. A✓ TREE SURVEY& I SAMPLE AREA / CALCULATIONS l V m` Fi436.1m CR RRr " "IrRK- onDUKa -- - - - - -- -- L -002 CONANT & ASSOCIATES MW.BabMamstleet Od.dn,PW"31801 -1617 Pu (401)698 M Q�.oA D aum vN�.a�. �m:�mL�.eE. en TOUIN PARKr= APARTMENTS WINNER SPRINGS, FL, HARDSCAPE PLAN 04.30,10 sw 3m' 7.... DR puma. RRC I MATCH LIME SEE SHEET LINE SEE SHEET L — • —101 � L - 1 00 L MATCH LINE SEE SHEET L 100 - - - - - -- I MATCH LINE SI L 10 0' WID "L CO4E D 6 0 HIGH DECD CCN4 WAL THE L S - WITH DE T A M y11AR4 L L ALUM FENCE - - IKE K ON WITH a'. 0' Sa. p� ITECT 0'XI SHELTER FRAJE T 6 AGE COMPACTO WITH H/ ® —C PAD PLANT£RS J TH OONC. FER T SHEET ACCESSI LE CO < PAD A6 4 4 hE ELE ONTROL PA CENTER WITH -08'Hi C^ O- -WIDE CGN BETE ; � £ [ FOR AT ON6 0 © WALK D C DE 10 0 WIDE DEC T WALK `�` DETAIL TE w K LS E RAT VE RETA NING GARDEN ACCE6 Carl DE W Ra L GATE _ DEC PvC FENCE GONGRE E GA WALK HANDICAP RAMP>I' TE WAL 1 ® MASONRT ECREEN / M i RDEN T 6ORAG �- P R'P J CON RETE WALK Al 6TEP WIT DE ORATIVE POTTING BEN - -- I 441LL. -BY A.RGH. 5 A I I LIIMJ - ODE DE ORAi,S AREA WITH SHADE \ GATE FEN E - TRELL 5 CIJ 4 1 POOL SCREEN 3 Tu CK CONC PAD / SHOWER iE � CONCRETE e BETA N­ ALL WILDING BY ACi1LE WWA-03 JWA-03 STRIP 6 0' WIG£ j II- S.DE CRA IVE 4RGH. HAND CAP RAMP - _ WALK I I % � / ` t�A90NRY COLIfnN R SE GARDEN� ❑ ❑ ❑ Imo` WALKWIQE GONG /- E011pMEN PLANTERS El El EI ACCESS CJ,ECORATIVE RETAINING q HIGH DEC -C PERIMETER FENCE O PcoE LL WITU DEC, W'I AL wrcH x�. m• firx nAEaNRY ccn.unNE '. 1 - WP ❑ El El El m•w1DE eau Pl -IfiNT \ yuaRDRaIL DOG GgJG: WALK A ` - PAK � -. � ORCHARD aREA -CRETE CEPS 12 m' WIDE D-ELM J SIGN!Y -rE DECg2AT •,+E GATE K BIKE RACK bN E PEDESTRIAN FbR MAINTENANCE 4 CONC PAD LAN ING , TY DECORA IVE DCG BIKE RIDER 6' Pi WIDE MASONR COLIIrM PARK / 4CCEE5 PROV DE CONCRETE WALK GAES-p T 111 !! RE DENT LOCKING HANISM PE CRJ IVE MASONRY RE N G W W LL / 6 0' HIGH DEC AL- 3140 1 FENCE'- WIDE NCREtE WALK �7 N TO T E T E ISTING WALK PUTTING 1 .MEN BOCCE BALL -. - -. - -- -. - -- -. DECORATIVE MASONRY J -. COURT -- RETAINNG WALL WITH PERGOL / - --TI WALK - -. -_ -.. RAIL NG AND 10' SQ \ / / / / / MASONRY COWYMS V BOARDWALK SHEET L_lD0 CONANT &ASSOCIATES MIWMPnbIre 9'.- Cd..b Plmid99TW1 -1619 Phone W) W= Rx (407) 6980173 6rm 99uEO Fcrz 7 T" T1111111 oy �ossao oEE racr. /� m mnaurs TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS PLAN m ` Fi436'.Im sm. gym oa. pR mun. RRr L -101 I A PROJECT ICON ELEVATION POOL AREA PERGOLA — ELEVATIONS SPHERE POST CAP I' X -12' WIDE 5 UMINUM ) \I I \ � l FENCE ELEVATION B SO. STEEL POST ALUM. STRUT 2 'X4' I� I X 4' ROLLED "'TEFL JOIST , , A dd & ASSOCIATES ]]DW®t RabMam3tleet Oelmdo, Pbtlda 318 01 -1 61] PMre 14M) &]]TS sm I4x (407)618 M D �.op 0� CANTILEVERED Box BEAM BEEN- SCREEN WRAP MASONRY COLUMN BASE WITH PRECAST GAP L2 0 scaLe...za m TOLN P,4RIKE APARTMENTS WINTER SPRINGS, FL, HARDSCAPE DETAILS 04.30,10 45- NOTED w '7PRKL200DWi ��� L -200 ,� SI ^�) If S ° 11 II ^) II S' I' �I ,. I' II ,• ' 11 SI ° li �I ' L fl 1 II �I ALUMINUM RAILS 2 - 112' Sa . ALUMIN POST P PRESSED P ALUMINUM PICKET I" X 1 -1/2' WIDE AL NSH -E CHANNEL RAIL 5 UMINUM ) \I I \ � l FENCE ELEVATION B SO. STEEL POST ALUM. STRUT 2 'X4' I� I X 4' ROLLED "'TEFL JOIST , , A dd & ASSOCIATES ]]DW®t RabMam3tleet Oelmdo, Pbtlda 318 01 -1 61] PMre 14M) &]]TS sm I4x (407)618 M D �.op 0� CANTILEVERED Box BEAM BEEN- SCREEN WRAP MASONRY COLUMN BASE WITH PRECAST GAP L2 0 scaLe...za m TOLN P,4RIKE APARTMENTS WINTER SPRINGS, FL, HARDSCAPE DETAILS 04.30,10 45- NOTED w '7PRKL200DWi ��� L -200 b � U � H H d Ll � nawrENaucE accEVs / BON � �TAI Y - - - A L L m O' W DE CONC WALK -- -- -- -TI-1- ELECTRICAL SWTCH - 'GEAR BUILDING I AND 2 RETAINING WALL- PLAN VIEW WELL WITH PRECa3T CAP NC, I AND 2 RETAINING WALL- ELEVATION GAP �1Mal LANCSCAFE aroma / BREEZEWAY cc c. STEPS w/ 9 & ASSOCIATES Ha DR61L5 �1 KEY PLAN scALE. I _ /ED D• � ,m >� tbns+sm]s / S.R. 434 GAP 0 O / wxeure s�ALE. I -Im - - TOLN PARKr= APARTMENTS WINTER SPRINGS, FL, RETAINING WALL ELEVATIONS -- - - -. us. 04.30,10 Y 45 NOTED - TPRKL20 J11Ki L-201 �1Mal �/ fl CONANT 9 & ASSOCIATES srz aa< >anw�no�sl� (klmdo,Aotlda318 01 - 61] �1 KEY PLAN scALE. I _ /ED D• � ,m >� tbns+sm]s 0 O / wxeure s�ALE. I -Im - - TOLN PARKr= APARTMENTS WINTER SPRINGS, FL, RETAINING WALL ELEVATIONS -- - - -. us. 04.30,10 Y 45 NOTED - TPRKL20 J11Ki L-201 CONANT & ASSOCIATES 2 b � • MATCH LINE =W.R.bMamstlee9 Od.dn,P] tl"518 01 -1617 PMre 007/698-7725 Pu (407)6950175 QmmA �niaioLg cn TOUIN PARKr= APARTMENTS WINTER 5FRING5, FL, CODE LANDSCAPE PLAN " f PRKL300LlW+ L -300 - MATCH LINE SEE SHEET L -300 ® / - .} V K {Lai - MATCH LINE SEE SHEET 3"L ' m" HIGH DECORATIVE Y` � L4 / FENCE SHALL BE BEHOVED T " _ • C DNDE ADJACENT PROPERTY ® i CONANT IS DEVELOPED NTI P IE Q i^ FOR OWN CENTER CODE ^' WITH THE T NTERJDNNECTI T, l / &ASSOCIATES 15 0' =Wnt St.- 0 0 \�. } ✓J a REV BYFP�IE (407) �n I� L` ,. BIO- BARRIER oa:o.ro- suer, FCiz reEV ew —ALL m.asim J[cF v - - - BI0 BARRIER HN ® GF 29'DEPTH, PER aes rc 5svew /'p er HANUFAOTIJRER6 Cx / '�;F• l ( � [� RECd1MEM1IDATIONS } BAHI69 D BE /� N5TALLE ALL -. ., ., cwanee.cere 4REAS ADJACEN " - - Y C BIKE TRAIL �ossao r.s.uc racr. DISTURBED DARING ar�rs cONSTRUGTICN w BAHIA 60D TO BE • . � ' STALLED I' -0' BELOW EDGE CF NLIl, O 3ID . \ \ \\ BAHIA SOD TO `— MIETALLED TO EDGE . •, .. W WETLAND BUFFER TOWN PARKS „ APARTMENTS c WINTER sPelNGs, FL. C CODE LANDSCAPE PLAN BAHIA SOD TO BE CALLED TO EDGE �- DISTPoIBANCE � °t Fi436.1m AL AC UNITS AND 'LL UTILITIES TO BE OR R R SCREENED WITH LANDSCAPE MATERIAL THAT WILL PROVIDE SUFFICIENT COVER REFER TO SHEET L -302 FOR PLANT LIST & QENERAL NOTES L -301 NLL= PLANT LIST O 3 CUP�SSUS SEMF'ER/IRENS GENERAL NOTES ® 24' Hi., HATCHED (PLANT LIST t QUANTITIES INCLUDES ALL PHASES 1 -4) NAT VElICN- NATIVE I. ALL UNPAVED AREAS SHALL BE COVERED WITH ZOYSIA SOD OR BAHIA AS INDICATED ON PLANS. J / pyre SUGGESTED TREES 2. NEWLY INSTALLED TREES SHALL HAVE THEIR CALIPER MEASURED IV ABOVE THE SOIL LINE, 3, ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL MEET OR EXCEED THE STANDARDS OF FLORIDA NO 1 AR GIVEN IN "GRADER AND STANDARDS FOR NURSERY PLANTS 1998; STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, TALLAHASSEE, AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO. TREE SAVE/ REMOVAL NOTES —R- 2l —R VIRGINIANA 'HIGHRISE' ® HIGHRISE OAK 200 GAL., I6'- 18'X10' -12', 6' -Al- 40' O.C. NATIVE 4. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MAY REJECT ANY PLANT MATERIAL BROUGHT TO THE SITE WHICH HE DEEMS TO BE OF INFERIOR QUALITY OR APPEARANCE. NAVEL ORANGE 15 GAL., FULL NON - NATIVE 5. ALL PLANT BEDS SHALL BE TOP DRESSED WITH A MINIMUM OF 3' K MULCH PINE BAR OR PINE STRAW MULCH AS SHOLLN ON PLANS. 6. ALL TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF FINAL INSPECTION. • _ A LICENSED SURVEYOR, PLEASE REFER TO SHEET L-002 FOR EXISTING 'SPECIMEN AND HISTORIC' TREE I. SURVEY WAS PE O T. ALL TREES SHALL HAVE ALL SYNTHETIC BURLAP REMOVED FRI THE ENTIRE ROOT BALL. JUTE BURLAP SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE TOP ONE -THIRD OF THE ROOT BALL. THE TOP THREE ROWS OF SQUARES ON ALL CAGE5 AROUND THE ROOT BALLS SHALL BE CLIPPED OFF AND CONANT ® I 6 VIRGINIANA 'HIGHRISE 1l HIGHRISE OAK 65 GAL., 12' -14' HT., 6' SPREAD, 3 12' -Al, NATIVE REMOVED. e. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL READ AND ADHERE TO ALL WRITTEN SPECIFICATIONS. e c i �, n &ASSOCIATES THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VISUALLY INSPECT THE SOILS CONDITION OF THE SITE, HE SHALL DIG A MINIMUM OF 12 TEST HOLES 3 FOOT DEEP ® 1 —RCVS VIRGINANA LIVE OAK 65 GAL., 12' -14' HT, 6' SPREAD, 3 12' CAL, NATIVE 5- RANDOMLY AROUND THE SITE. HE SHALL PERFORM PERCOLATION TESTS IN THESE HOLES FOR A PERIOD OF ONE HOUR EACH THE HOLES SHALL BE FILLED WITH WATER AND IF THE HOLES HOLD MORE THAN 6' OF WATER AFTER ONE HOUR THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHOULD BE NOTIFIED OF THE PROBLEM. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RECOMMEND SUBSTITUTIONS OF PLANT MATERIAL AND PLANTING INSTALLATION TO ACCOMMODATE POOR DRAINING SOILS. 1TO R �� Plo'�9TB01 )619 DIETE6 VEGATA THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A SOIL TEST IN FOUR LOCATIONS AND PRO'ACE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENOMENTSBASED ON THE Im. RESULTS. IMPROPER SOIL SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RECTIFY ALL INCURRED DAMAGES Phone (m 698= (407 NB n Op 018 MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA 'GREENBACK' (LAND5DAF'E CONTRACTOR TO TEST SOIL GREENBACK MAGNOLIA 100 GAL., l4'- 16'Xl' -B', 4' CAL. NATIVE PH IN LOCATIONS WHERE MAGNOLIAS ARE TO BE PLANTED, IF THE SOIL PH AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW THE SOILS REPORT ON FILE WITH THE OWNER II. THE INSTALLATION OF PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE VIEWED 45 ACCEPTANCE BY THE CONTRACTOR OF EXISTING GRADES AS GIVEN TO HIM, u IS l OR GREATER (ALKALINE) PROPER SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE ADDED 10 PLANTING AREA AND MAINTAINED.) 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT A WRITTEN LETTER OF ACCEPTABILITY OF GRADES. FAILURE TO DO SO GAL„ FULL IN POT, IB' OG. 5 ELEOGARPUS DEGIPENS O JAPANESE BLUEBERRY 45 GAL., 8'- 10'X4' -5' NON -NATIVE WILL BE vIEWED AS AN ACCEPTANCE OF EXISTING GRADES BY THE CONTRACTOR 13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BERM ALL PARKING LOT ISLANDS 12 ABOVE TOP OF CURB ELEVATION WITHOUT EXCEEDING A 4:1 SLOPE (TYPICAL). Q 31 LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA 'STANDARD' O STANDARD CRAPE MYRTLE 100 GAL, 4' CAL., MATCHED NON - NATIVE FROM THE POLE. SEE TREE AND LIGHT POLE ISLAND DETAIL. 14. WHERE LIGHT POLES AND TREES BOTH OCCUR IN A PACING LOT ISLANDS, THE TREE SHALL BE SPACED AN ADEQUATE DISTANCE FROM THE POLE. SEE TREE AND LIGHT POLE ISLAND DETAIL. NATIVE © 48 LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA 0 CRAPE MYRTLE 30 GAL., B'- 10'X4' -5', 3' AGCsREGA1E CAL. NON - NATIVE I5. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO SAND AREAS OF 5CD THAT ARE NOT SMOOTHLY APPLIED TO ELIMINATE SMALL IRREGULARITIES IN GRADES. LARGE IRREGULARITIES IN GRADE WILL REQUIRE REGRADING t RESOODING. I6. THE CONTRACTOR 15 RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SITE INCLUDING ALL MOWING, EDGING, TRIMMING, PRUNING 4 SPRAYING VIBURNUM OBOVATUM 'WHORLED CLASS' WHORLED CLASS VIBURNUM l GAL., 18' X 24', 24' CZ. OF PESTICIDES f FUNGICIDES UNTIL THE TIME OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE BY THE OWNER O Q 6l LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM LIGUSTRUM TREE 45 GAL., 8'x8'S -6 CANES MIN. NON - NATIVE Il. IF PROJECT IS INSTALLED IN PHASES, OWNER WILL PROVIDE PHASING INFORMATION AT TIME OF BIDDING PROCESS, 18. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE ACQUIRED FROM GROWERS WITHIN 100 MILES OF SITE, 19. ALL LANDCAPE ISLANDS SHALL BE FREE OF LMEROCK AND CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS PRIOR TO PLANTING. THE SITE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT ms.asim- iss�ec rcv GAL., FULL IN POT, 12' O.C. NON-NATIVE FILL AND COMPACT ANY AREAS WITH LIMEROCK SUB -BASE INTENDED TO BE A LANDSCAPE ISLAND OR LANDCAPE AREA, IF SUCH AN AREA IS FILLED AND COMPACTED, IT WILL BE THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO REMOVE THE LIMEROCK AND RETURN THE AREA TO A =.IC CEVew 14 PLATANUB OGGIDENTALIS SYCAMORE TREE 100 GAL., 14'- 16'X1' -S', 4' GAL. NATIVE NON-COMPACTED STATE. �� NON -NATIVE re �a y f 10 ACER RI1BRIlM 'FLORIDA FLAME' 0 FLORIDA FLAME MAPLE 100 GAL., 14'- 16'XT' -S', 4' GAL. NATIVE C cone IRRIGATION NOTES PA5PALLM QUADREARILIM d 6 TAXODIUM 16CENDENS POND CYPRESS L, 2'X5'-6', 45 GA 10'- 1 4' CAL, NATIVE THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED ARDING TO STANDARD CODES AND REGULATIONS. THE AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM AS L RI CCO REQUIRED BY THIS PART SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN PROPER OPERATING CONDITION. THE AUTOMATICALLY CONTROLLED SYSTEH SHALL BE �a uweES osnE L PLANT LIST 8 NOTES OPERATED BY AN IRRIGATION CONTROLLER THAT CAN PROVIDE HIGH, MEDIUM, AND LOW WATER USE ZONES AND TUFPCRASS AR=A6 ON SAND CORD GRASS 4 13 TAXODIUM DISTICHUM BALD CYPRESS 100 GAL., 14'- 16'X1' -B', 4' CAL. NATIVE DEEP NT SCHEDULES- A MOISTURE SENSOR AND / OR RAIN GAUGE SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO AVOID IRRIGATION DURING PERIODS OF SUFFICIENT RAINFALL. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM HAS BEEN DESIGNED AND SHALL OPERATE CONFORMING TO ^- ^��°_^ SERENOA R-PENS 'SILVER FORT' ALL 5T. JOHN'S RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT MANDATORY WATER USE RESTRICTIONS AND REGULATIONS AND FLORIDA BUILDING CODE (FBC) APPENDIX (F) A l GAL., 28 " -30' Hi. X 30' SPRD., 48' O.C. 22 TAXODIUH DISTIGHUH BALD CYPRESS 30 GAL., 9'- 12'X3' -4', 3' GAL. NATIVE 2. ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS SHALL BE ACCOMPANIED BY AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM THAT SHALL PROVIDE I— COVERAGE, O 60 PINUS PALUSTRIS LOW LEAF PINE 15 GAL., 1'- B'X3' -A, 1 1/2' CAL. NATIVE 3. A RAIN SENSOR WILL BE PROVIDED. � ® 61 ILEX VOMITORIA YAUPON HOLLY 30 GAL, 5'- 6'X5' -6' NATIVE 4, THE SYSTEM SHALL OPERATE FROM WATER SUPPLIED FROM THE ADJACENT POND SOUTH OF THE SITE, A PUMP STATION SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A 4' SUBMERSIBLE RECHARGE WELL FOR THE POND TO BE USED ONLY IN PERIODS OF LOW RAINFALL. VIBURNUM OBOVATUM O 3 CUP�SSUS SEMF'ER/IRENS ITALIAN CYPRESS 24' Hi., HATCHED NON - NATIVE A TREE SAVE/ REMOVAL NOTES 3 CITRUS SINENSIS NAVEL ORANGE 15 GAL., FULL NON - NATIVE A LICENSED SURVEYOR, PLEASE REFER TO SHEET L-002 FOR EXISTING 'SPECIMEN AND HISTORIC' TREE I. SURVEY WAS PE O (SEE -IS, GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES THIS SHEET FOR SPECIAL INSTRUGTIOJSJ T LOCATIONS ONS AND CALCULATIONS OF TREES BEHOVED. SUGGESTED GROUNDCOVER5MEDIUM SHRUBS 2 NO TREES SHALL BE PRESERVED. DIETE6 VEGATA WHITE AFRICAN IRIS GAL, FULL IN POT, IB' OC. NON - NATIVE /! T45MANICA V BLUEBERRY FLAX GAL„ FULL IN POT, IB' OG. NATIVE TODUN P,4RKE A ILEX VOMMORIA 'NANA' DILF. YAUPON HOLLY 3 GAL., 15' X 11114' O.0 NATIVE APARTMENT$ VIBURNUM OBOVATUM 'WHORLED CLASS' WHORLED CLASS VIBURNUM l GAL., 18' X 24', 24' CZ. NATIVE BULBINE FRUTESCENS DESERT CANDLE5 GAL., FULL IN POT, 12' O.C. NON-NATIVE WINTER 5PRING5, FL. TULBAGHA VIOLACEA SOCIETY GARLIC (PLANT IN FRONT OF DEC. KNEE GAL., FULL IN POT, 12' O.C. AL WL) NON -NATIVE EIIJ MASSING SHRUBS /ORNAMENTAL GRASS IED C cone PA5PALLM QUADREARILIM EVERGREEN PA5PALUM 3 GAL., HT. X 24' 5PRD., 36' O.G. NATIVE PLANT LIST 8 NOTES SPARTINA BAKERI o SAND CORD GRASS 3 GAL., L IN POT, 36' O.C. FULL NATIVE SERENOA R-PENS 'SILVER FORT' SILVER SAW PALMETTO l GAL., 28 " -30' Hi. X 30' SPRD., 48' O.C. NATIVE SUGGESTED LARGE SHRUBS, ACCENTS N VINES VIBURNUM OBOVATUM WALTER'S VIBURNUM l GAL., 30' -36' HT, X 30' -36' SPRD- 36' O.G. NATIVE ° T e e 0430.10 N - 65 / 5 SUSPENSLIFI SANDANKWA VIBURNUM 1 GAL., 30' HT. X 24' -28' SPRO, 30' O.C. NON - NATIVE " �IBURNUM ® l ® 38 ODOGARPUS MACROPHYLLUS ` J PODOCARPUS PODOGARPUS 15 GAL, 48 X 24' 5PFI MATCHED NON -NATIVE OR °""' RRC �n w "`�PRKL3m2.GLli MACRCPHYLLU5 PODOGARPUS 15 GAL, 48 X 24' SPRD„ MATCHED uo ^^ f� 5 6TRELITZIA NICOLAI ORANGE BIRO -OF- PARADISE 1 GAL, 30' HT. X 24' -2B' SPRD. NON - NATIVE • [y 24 TRAGHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES CONFEDERATE JASMINE 1 GAL., IB-S RUNNERS MIN., TRAIN TO TRELLIS ANI P SUGGESTED SOD e MULCH m ZOYSIA SOD 3' PINE BAR: MULCH SOD // i �i 3'PINE BAR: MULCH L BAHIA -302 �c4� / i'1 n n 1 S'I'N 'STN �,OE ] SN0IJ. _1dZC Z? I;� 8 9NIC'lI(7G 01 C 9NI77t iS Grl - NHS 8 SLNI kH 2NI 01 'rQ 9NILN ld S��9SaN� 1 �J�1 „9m9NIG,lne 9m�N19,Ina N011�39 _ - ry im3a3 3 s VIII it 1IIII l it IIIIMIIIII 1 L VIII l u VIII u _ `/ VI III '1 NT, �� � 9 1NOaa j < a3 n9�d 39 T9HS NI 9,TQ£m£'d o 3 S9rzH9.O 533.1 ON o _ 531.'bn 9WO9d9 m0 '-\ , 9rt 9NI4,In9 IN- 1� n • t 6 Y ? 9N G 9 M'Jj �dv29 Nli „VHS • J 3H1 lloxi .l9m9 (Sn9,d 3HL NL ATb�IHdVd�J WIeJ'I9 9VJ AdoNb✓ �� 9wn bG as mlovd r o-I x r 3d'le V 3a16�fYJV3 • 3n1119od 3a 9NI o13,13�a'd,c9 a 31..VIa 3h119V3, lb NII 431 99 oa_ .e a�>s 3clnoad TvHS aol�valnc� I NO 3H1 `�I+avds of ln3�araa ­1 3­1 o v j uo.3 ,. nvnl .3s— '13n ao 01 ,bna3 m'm£'b./7 ♦n9 .]31 1- rvO,d 39 lw l CN9 91 TVH9 .¢ NVHl d3 „H lo, `�NIa'.Vd H�Y3 N 1-1.39 T9m ­1 3H1 —1 52l1dH9 aNV 933x'1 o b V Alin Ol t1O1�VdLNC� d 9 3 =9 N 01130 + 1_1 Lb __ 39 TVH9 SI.J,Vd'9a'3iI,A1�VG 1 a31N9,d 39 011-I 6LJ,Vd I... S.I,Vd N33na 6V H. - ifl5 S.,,b'd 31VNNId _14 O11N 1- G31V9,d 5' d'3�O1aNnoa'9 — SGn -31ON HI NN „1d N,1;m'SI- 1,9d SV H'OnS Sind 310N,9d �S,IH1303dH�SONb'1Q 41N '31On N'Pld - - 41N 9N1>I Vc4 =�O Qd H - 11VL�a 9NILN77d GlzlH C1 /� In 1 'F'/f1.f __)Nll I ki - 1-1 NCU1 EKF - 1� b3INlm v / S1N3W1Nr'4V 3>Z!iVd MCI SIN Q 71V_L�C 9N11NV7ci V 7Vcd XINZIObd 0 �. w xIN.— NO, a sn ININ— 7710 m31�� wpm T1��� aN9N 3�9 1 ij VIII IIII a'V9,IONH 11 .b H1d3a sewees tLal �a I� RR-8[9 VN) o�Yd Ll9i-I WLC oPFa41'^Pw1+D W95�41ed1®M OZI SUIVIDOSSV3y INVNOD r� ,' 3 O u l — �'� uui mo Bpi -ooi im z U T S'1 "N � 1110 9N11Ne l� ���1 >FNf1�1- 11�r1W 3a n5 - „I— 71x5 a331N31,nd 11d 3 1. 53415 %, &II1 �, m „9a loob b 3�1m139 o111d 33 1 � .313w9I� 19,x; °uN -I 31 IN ;;� b,I l 13 N 9 n1 5 0 9 1�� o ab H1 3NO do rm, aIu3. ° b aid as i9 i 3bi as a�E °_, 00� w 1 siN „m laob 49 ,bzx a3lwvds STN CI NI 11 111H' I VI IIN 11 53ddb9 oan H t -H '11'd130 u,b sn311 o n , I � Hl m SN 11 9 Z _ 9 3s1n.:35 3 SaN NH93H 9W " "'T" ' H23nllm 4 $ ��N1 3GVd'9 G_HSrvd T T 1� "Ni—, G,ne� un kI I -- — I _I 1 -- . 111111111, °� 111,1, 111,, 11, I — _ x'3 1319 i HO,nI -I N-139 7 b b3 07 3Gt>b9 '.I31NV,d „VHS S9'R1H9 9N1A, IN111' " IN 439 10­ 30 111-11, 9.n0 O ­3415 .'0'409 30 TOI d 7I'd1�0 9N11N'7`7d ZZ I l 1 d 3 ooa ao z313u� a an� 3'JIIA1 , 9 el l d 33.4 30 .3131,v ,£ 3'�n99 , cs �Nnd'1 • fYJ,fW d'V3,7 .b'J3M1OJ r'J,M .r JS ld3 _,i791OTO.Ym ni -31vo do Ada dV,ana . R1 „b 3.o,J3d 344b9 H5 Nlj l3' C9 3n099 .b a3OV,d B3�V16 3NId yd1 O 3599 Q s 31On' -_�3s d111­11 � 3zoH 3�9n3 �b,9 a3�adN133 3 zJ 331 o sl ­11 N l 3,Od m31n NTd 3,Od E I S & GEN. NOTES al""Add CONANT &ASSOCIATES MW.R&Mamslreet Od.d.,PW"31801 -1617 Pu (407)698 M FA TOU.NP,4RKr= APARTMENTS .JIKN-R5FRIN 5, FL. IRRIGATION PLAN i 151,1551 ". JOW5 • LINE SEE SHEET L-401 a L-400 rr rte > 11,4TCH LINE SEE SHEET L -400 • 16 > I 4 v *� cw »o u / 1 I s s Wo m r l SLV. op a a c F s s F 19 P Y P P l u �3ia u H u H m G 1 w w u w n INLINE 9H z ! 3 i F Po L Y, vM YUFb z u EyE 19 L FLA INSI E ISI�EVE vE WIFE LAID SCA A A � 6 SLEe2 � YPICFL s 6 MATCH LINE SEE SHE L -400 CONANT & ASSOCIATES laow•]waum.•rs� OAmdo,PbMa92W1 -1611 PApre (�616Y125 sml Rx (1p7)NBOlT3 LNE SHOU.N HERE LANDxAPE a�A ttrrauu � nAINLME ANR !l ALVES SNgY� J� HERE FOR CLARITY FLAiE INSIDE — L N05CA�A§A ttPICAL) o.m ss,[v rce Q WRrc eE E � [�oae i REFER TO SHEET L -402 FOR NOZZLE TOU.N PARKE APARTMENTS PLAN P1 04.30.I0 rrl, I , C r.. = I iIN I I I I Izn ==r TART, DETAILS & GEN. NOTES ® L_401 I GENERAL NOTES �FavIrG, Etc. aIGTIC 51111 D ET&1Y.Fb oR DIFE�rENCEb THE EE III TIE ELdaloa �,LOI=1, ­TE 1IT— ­11 E � THE THE La.o°<a�E rpcnlTEtt r�rld: To c�xa,�Tlou rtiz oESl�,.rdl�ICaIlo,.a. E uozzLE aTEEL auoL �wc ,EE N. OZ ELaow REFER TO SHEET L -404 FOR PUMP STATION DESIGN SR I LEGEND IRRIGATION SYSTEM PEORMANGE NOTES WELL SPECIFICATIONS Ralxel� l<� E ER FaR T.Eb. IT E ll_ �II,T o= �axxE�,la, � w� To DRIP RE ® as sR�, as ¢qo us, oo vbl L E Ia�Tae uEaP lAl- LL vALVE M d e NOZZLE CHART P EoRI, MEola,aTlox 0 eEE PLax vas Lo�an�l ` ° ' E "°`� 1­ 71— ® ® f /_\ Is, 11 NOTE: Groundln9 Ior decoders stall be done aL eau, valve owa�er. spnoee enan all be soldered (mllspec) and se led. xa wMeEatc oECOOEn cor+lmLLel _/ J _ l J ✓ J�J _lJ _l�J ETC Lc, corm zaE 7— ¢EE'i�ELLL TLI LA7E 1LN IEAD MAL e ¢paclnce, rg ­EE �a QED, li"-T°%ir.le ,Ea,a� FENS x. `— s✓ v also rzaoE i¢W L� w.:Yw4r �Earmo rmtoz \ \ .s ELL HECIWC VALVE POTCM IfAp OEfAL m To xuLE U 9, 11 CONANT & ASSOCIATES MWEeIIREI, aon% OA.&, Fl I,!" Y1801 -1617 PMre (4m) 6147175 Rz 06140175 QaooA L� soon �.nxe icemarw TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS WINTER SPRINGS, FL. IRRIGATION NOZZLE CHARTS, DETAILS 8 GEN NOTES "° L 5 NOTED °nin DR ` "• ""` RRG x ° " "Tpr�amaa7ue L -402 °� or m';:w;e�r °o, mo.a rye e Il Tm -P'^^ 1 11 -11 e;pgla Plen. » e1 , 7. P'"A " ° vbu a P' -H I . I Al sm e C l e p cW a�en%e.'s'ia'es'e"" pce a re. li e I ICS orEUevl il Euz Ey eol._e e.e ceneelL e va "e o'`�`icea e d G»� "� x� ` �� cod� �� enla�eyare�m y rkln Elettrle ror ae p a r�®perelble rei u�lrre�rexerlc. il to ei�tl pm a wmx rn e �u� b�ex �u���p Pmeew owa�cpeg� ,. vaLrf sou also rrzaoE e•nk — cwl.EC OR.s To LaTE2u LwE \as L I 1—, 1 )7 -1- TIB- �ETEIIED 41 . . . ftT P- .,A F or I'IrERAUno II 0 IRREGULAR AREAS TRIANLULAR L't, 11 1 1111 1 �-T 111TIL ICI, 4 01 11- 11, 1 E o. C) 3/- DIS- -ILTER (D-77 -11/', PR 0 MV. ' curs 'Ell 7, 1111TI 0 77T I E —)" I ......... LINE FLUSHING VA LVE C) 1111F ,ILL 0 Techline END FEED LAYOUT -11- -11L. 1111TE1 I I'll E) F T-11111 Tll�- 0 Tech - AIP VACUUM RELIEF (FLUMB[b T[ TI,Jhll,,j -- - Nl ­TLF- R- T �un�� oon <\�VUnns ozro IRI T-11- TEE I-EEI 0 V1 MT-OFF VALVE Tech[ir,a CENTER FEED LAYOUT ALE --------------- -E 0 — (F R — ILE1,1)T , I I- ILI T-11 — Tech[in, ISLAND L AYOUT lEIIL - 11 IIALE Pyre Ag CONANT &ASSOCIATES m W. e 9 Fk" s -M7 rmu Omwe-ms (407) n TOWN P,4R<E APARTMENTS WINTER 5P;ZNG5, FL. IRRIGATION DETAILS 0430.10 45 NOTED L-403 CONANT &ASSOCIATES on.mo,e�a.saem -wig rye ca w c n w. mn�+sm�s F , 1'F; -J O FTT - 0 _E E_ ­ °s) .�L.t a L I FILL -LILL e - I F F F F.F ,F _,F " ' T v . - F y GV �FFI`F =IFFF I . >: FN::I I ,F =:I I = vF '-ii D� cLSx �AIR . cL EArcL ILLI' (O '11,; ) T7 [,,CT- �� _L 1 1D FLTv, F `✓TT. — IFf 1 TC 3- L C — CI � . ] - CL) /N C Ull PLn' TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS WINTER 5F;ZDG5, FL. PUMP 5TATION DETAILS AND NOTES sm. AS NOTED oa. DR oeue. RRC ru x,,lFrKL404DLLr, F GENERAL NOTE: SYSTEM DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH SJRWMD (1) DAY PER WEEK WATER ALLOWANCE L -404 REFER TO SHEET L-502 FOR LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE & FIXTURE CUT SHEETS m DES IGN ENGINEERING INC. �p 2,1 ZLI L PdGLT pF UAY SIN 5 1 0 - ~ ��� /� 9d CONANT &ASSOCIATES w. (407) �n L TOWN FAFKE APARTMENTS WINTER 5F;RING5, FL. LIGHTING PLAN 0430.10 — 30 54 ,,,, 7FR<-SooDLr E SHEET L-301 L-500 M �Ai 6 � TA E L N ` T J I A to 4 k, 6, 2, 6 7�7 7 SH MATCH LI 77, SER, S �5616, k4ATC�d LINE 5 1 0 - ~ ��� /� 9d CONANT &ASSOCIATES w. (407) �n L TOWN FAFKE APARTMENTS WINTER 5F;RING5, FL. LIGHTING PLAN 0430.10 — 30 54 ,,,, 7FR<-SooDLr E SHEET L-301 L-500 MATCH Lfk , 560 - ''+ " I + ' �AfG}ol LINE SEE .SHEET L -500 Wo c 6 l 1 CONANT ' & ASSOCIATES P2� E'y LAa ° ° s @ , '( � .. � §' ¢ 120WMWabhxm Sheet {�� o c as eW d `� z OAmdo,Pbtide97831 -1611 1407)NB-1]TS — v s ° {,u`?bc NNa 6 'w ow) N n s "c � n a FR�ERT� LIME rmi r eo o s , e 0 Cq ° A Q ooa s +c a x .24 , w.. a , '' l msm-o m escED roe 3,; 9y ELECT G4L ruerc �r ew &UITC GE6R �wo�o-rsr�rexrw � N �. Loca oN a H 5 Y V ' p o s c � aw..rfe.c ei.e �mss.m a,ssv wxa,e.zcs 0 0 6 0', ° o - a + o v TOLLN PARKE APARTMENTS WINTER SPRINGS, FL, LIGHTING PLAN 04.50.10 54 r ' w �PRKL5mI.GLL1'a M DE SIGN ENGINEERING, IN gyp REFER TO SHEET L -502 FOR LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE & FIXTURE CUT SHEETS L -501 LuminaVe SCM1eE01e Symbol pry Label Arrangement B—pli- LLF Lm.Walts Cat.RClass No.L., O 52 CP 31NGLE VGR4C SOLED MVOLT WWHG L11(CEIUN. MOUNT) 0.800 50 Cutoll 1 22 SLA SINGLE GVI]DMHOOXX3NX; MOUNTED@ 12'AFG ON A VICTORIAN POLE 0.750 150 Non -CUroX 1 {] S SLB SINGLE ALX114000L SR4 VOLT COLOR; MOUNTED @20' AEG ON A ROUND TAPERED ANCHOR BASE ALUMINUM POLE -COLOR O.g00 220 CutoN 1 {] 6 SLBH SINGLE ALX114000L SR4 VOLT COLOR HS; MOUNTED @20' AEG ON A ROUND TAPERED ANCHOR BASE ALUMINUM POLE -COLOR 0.900 220 Luiolf 1 {] 1 BUD SINGLE ALX114000L SR5 VOLTCOLOR; MOUNTED @20'AFG DNA ROUND TAPERED ANCHOR BASEALUMINUM POLE -COLOR 0.900 220 CutoN 1 o-0 6 SLG2 BACK BACK ALX114000L SRS VOLTCOLOR; MOUNTED @20 AEG ON A ROUND TAPERED ANCHOR BASE ALUMINUMPOLE -COLOR 0.900 220 GuroO 2 5 SLD SINGLE ES,SOMHOONASS ; MOUNTED @ 20' AEG ON A PROMENADE POLE 0.750 150 CuroB Q. 11 SLF SINGLE BLG -HTI -L B4L 74K IT COLOR FIN2; MOUNTED @ 14'AFG ON A VICTORIA II COLOR -DT 0.900 105.18 CWON 1 0 STEP SINGLE SLE- STAINLESS -LED; STEP LIGHTS 1.wo 12 GuroO () 28 W SINGLE BP9972FL42CLF; WALL MOUNTED AS SHOWN ON DRAWING 0.800 48 Cu1aN 1 FAI dab.. m� 9 If Q Rwm a-9V Premier lig h t ing Premier decorative pAes P16gressEleyy I _........_. _... ,., m a a" L X11 H 8 ago« � m•i �_ �...�,,. N po CONANT & ASSOCIATES Imw�xan.,.�sl..ea @YttlO, ]belle 32&11 -1619 PMrc (407) 6I8 -2L5 Paz 00n6+B n TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS WINTER SPRINGS, FL. LUMINAIRE CUT- SHEETS 84.30.10 AS NOT 5A e '"'"'' SA ax �'10L50eDl1Ya �M DE SIGN ENGINEERING INC. m Lp „> �m CZ 1,an Inx `"` L -502 "SLA" FIXTURE LOCATION 1 ALONG TOWNHOUSE ROAfl ENLARbEMENT 0 R0S BMW i - SL5, 45LB, SL5H, SLr- $ SLr-2" FIXTURE: 4 POLE l 2 "A"— WALL LIGHT 9 If ­- - Vision3 MR16 Rh.hd -p Light. core Dnii MODEL PAS lighting' a STEP L16HT e. V 0 I'm nic, lightin I g decoradve-poles .4 " SLP" FIXTURE 4 FOLE REFER TO SHEET L-502 FOR LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE & FIXTURE CUT SHEETS PAO CONANT &ASSOCIATES PMrc (407) 61H= w. Om)e+ m TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS WINTER SPRINGS, FL. UUMINAIRE CUT-SHEETS 1111-1- AS NOTED '— IA M DESIGN ENGINEERING ,INC. . _ ...... .. L-503 ICJ i - SL5, 45LB, SL5H, SLr- $ SLr-2" FIXTURE: 4 POLE l 2 "A"— WALL LIGHT 9 If ­- - Vision3 MR16 Rh.hd -p Light. core Dnii MODEL PAS lighting' a STEP L16HT e. V 0 I'm nic, lightin I g decoradve-poles .4 " SLP" FIXTURE 4 FOLE REFER TO SHEET L-502 FOR LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE & FIXTURE CUT SHEETS PAO CONANT &ASSOCIATES PMrc (407) 61H= w. Om)e+ m TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS WINTER SPRINGS, FL. UUMINAIRE CUT-SHEETS 1111-1- AS NOTED '— IA M DESIGN ENGINEERING ,INC. . _ ...... .. L-503 Date: October 25, 2010 The attached was provided by City Attorney Anthony A. Garganese during Public Hearings Agenda Item "503" at the October 25, 2010 City Commission Regular Meeting. SUMMARY HEARING OUTLINE ITEM 503 Proposed Town Parke Apartment Application Proposal: The City Commission will consider three requests related to a proposed 108 unit senior (55 years of age +) complex with amenities on 6.95 acres within the Town Center: (1) several special exception requests for deviations from the Town Center Code; (2) Final Engineering Plans for the proposed project; and (3) a binding development agreement that memorializes the terms and conditions of the proposed project if approved. Quasi Judicial: The special exception and final engineering requests are quasi-judicial in nature. Therefore, general quasi-judicial principles and requirements will be followed when this Item is presented. During Agenda Item 503, the City Commission will receive testimony and written evidence from the Applicant, City Staff and consultants, and Interested Parties regarding whether the requests comply with applicable provisions of the City's Comprehensive Plan, City Code, and law. Substantial, Competent Evidence: The City Commission's final decision to approve or deny the Applicant's request will be based on the "substantial, competent evidence" presented during the hearing. The Florida Supreme Court has defined "substantial, competent evidence" to mean such evidence as will establish a substantial basis of fact from which the fact at issue can be reasonably inferred. It is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support a conclusion. The City Commission's decision can not be based on a "public opinion poll" unsubstantiated by any competent facts of who is in favor or against the proposed proj ect. During the hearing, cross - examination and other forms of probative questioning of witnesses may occur so the City Commission is informed of all of the facts and expert opinions on which it will base its decision. 1 Procedure: Fair and Orderly Hearing Procedure. In order to provide a fair opportunity to be heard during the hearing, the Applicant and Interested Parties (if any) will be afforded a reasonable period of time in which to present their respective cases. A public hearing for the general public will be held as well. The order of presentation will be as follows: I. Procedural Introduction by the Mayor and City Attorney II. City Commission Disclosures under Resolution 2001 -14 and Section 286.0115, Florida Statutes III. Brief Introduction of Item 503 by City Staff (Witnesses will be Sworn) IV. Applicant's Presentation (Witnesses will be Sworn) V. Any Interested Party desiring to present factual and/or expert testimony and evidence in favor of Applicant's application (Witnesses will be Sworn) VI. Any Interested Party desiring to present factual and/or expert testimony and evidence objecting to Applicant's application. (Witnesses will be Sworn) VII. Any Interested Party desiring to present factual and/or expert testimony and evidence which is neutral to Applicant's application. (Witnesses will be Sworn) VIII. Public Hearing (3 minutes per speaker) — Any interested person NOT presenting factual and/or expert testimony (e.g., Person only wants to express for or against project) IX. Optional Additional Comments by City Staff X. Rebuttal by Applicant XI. Deliberation and questions by the City Commission XII. Final Determination by the City Commission 2 Date: October 25, 2010 The attached was provided to the City Commission prior to the beginning of the October 25, 2010 City Commission Regular Meeting and relates to Public Hearings Agenda Item "503" at this Meeting. Andrea Lorenzo- Iuaces From: Randy Stevenson Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 3:17 PM To: _ Mayor & Commission Cc: Kevin Smith; _City Clerk Department Attachments: Minority Report.pdf Mayor & Commission, I have attached the two minority reports from the Planning and Zoning meeting. Please consider these as supplements to Item 503 on the October 25, 2010 City Commission agenda. If you have any questions, please call me. Sincerely, Randy Stevenson, ASLA, AICP Community Development Director City of Winter Springs 1126 East S.R. 434 Winter Springs, FL 32708 (407) 327 -5970 1 , E77:.ECE VED � r r.T I it 2010 STATEMENT i r CITY OF tfi SPRINGS 10/14/2010 OFFICE CF THE CITY CLERK The following information is submitted with regard to the vote taken on item 500 by the Planning and Zoning Board which met on 10/13/2010. I made the motion to approve item 500 granting 7 Code Deviations & Waivers pursuant to Section 20- 231 of the city code. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Karr. Mrs Karr and I voted to approve and the three other members voted no on approval. In looking at the deviations, I found each of them to be logical based upon the information presented. One of the deviations is actually governed by FDOT as they control State Road 434. I also believe that workforce housing is a major issue facing the citizens of Winter Springs. It was discussed at length during preparation of the EAR and later included in the Comprehensive Plan. A great deal of discussion centered on the Fiscal Neutrality Analysis which was required by the City Commission. That analysis had nothing to do with the exceptions being requested. Item 600 was also denied as the exceptions were depicted on the drawings accordingly we could not approve item 600 as we had denied those exceptions in item 500. I believe that this is an "opportunity missed" for the citizens of Winter Springs as the applicant made all attempts to satisfy those opposed to the project. 0/ r ` Willia . Poe Vice Chairman •, Y 1. Joan Brown From: Rosanne Karr (joy4life@cfl.rr.com] Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 6:14 AM To: Joan Brown Subject: Follow up to Wednesday night's meeting Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Winter Springs, Tonight the Local Planning Agency discussed the Towne Park Project, with its special exceptions and reworked Final Engineering Plan. At this meeting, we actually had Public present and several experts who presented sworn -in testimony. Being on the board for several years, I am used to getting the agenda packet, the large drawing packet, which I read in preparation for the meetings. Sometimes the information sent is adequate, but most of the time, additional information is presented in the meeting which affects the way the decision goes. I understand that we as the P &Z board are to make our decision based on whether the Plans correspond to the Comprehensive Plan and are in the best interest of the City residents. The Towne Park Project, being a low- income apartment complex, has met much opposition from the public, particularly the high income, tax- paying residents. I know from my work and the LPA's research for the Comprehensive Plan that our City needs "workforce" housing, meaning affordable housing for City employees. However, I believe the board rejected the special exceptions and the Final Engineering Plan, because, as is often the case, we were not given all the facts necessary to make an acceptable decision and the board did not give into pressure to vote for the project. It is unacceptable that our LPA should feel pressure to approve agenda items without being given all the facts. 1 Date: October 25, 2010 The attached was submitted during Public Hearings Agenda Item "503" at the October 25, 2010 City Commission Regular Meeting. RECEDED OCT 22 2010 AFFIDAVIT OF EDWARD T. WOLPERT, PH.D. CITY OF vvirvtFfZ SPRINGS OFFICE Or THE CITY CLERK STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ORANGE BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared EDWARD T. WOLPERT, PH.D., who being duly sworn, deposes and states: 1. I am over the age of eighteen (18) years and have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this Affidavit. 2. I am a professional economist, having earned degrees in the field of economics from Villanova University (Bachelors of Arts), the University of Central Florida (Masters of Arts in Applied Economics), and The Florida State University (Masters of Science in Economics and Doctor of Philosophy in Economics). I have received multiple honors and distinctions including a graduate research grant from Florida State University, teaching awards, and membership in Omicron Delta Epsilon (International Honor Society in Economics). From 1994 to 1998, I was employed by The Florida State University, working on economic impact studies for the university. Since 1998, I have been employed continuously to date by Raffa Consulting Economists, Inc. in Orlando, Florida, working on litigation and non - litigation related matters, including business valuations and economic impact analyses. Since 1998, I have also been employed continuously to date as a Professor of Economics at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, Florida. 3. Raffa Consulting Economists, Inc. (RCE) has been retained by the City of Winter Springs to evaluate the reports prepared by Fishkind and Associates, Inc. (Fishkind) regarding the Town Parke project. RCE has no interest, political or otherwise, in the proposed Town Parke project. Fiscal Neutrality Analysis 4. A fiscal neutrality analysis examines whether the net effect of taxation and public spending is neutral, neither stimulating nor dampening demand, in the face of a change such as in the instance of a real estate development project. 5. I have received and reviewed two (2) fiscal neutrality analyses (June 7, 2010 and August 23, 2010) of the proposed Town Parke in Winter Springs, FL, as prepared by Fishkind. • 6. The neutrality analyses contained in the Fishkind reports are completely lacking in substantiation, and silent with regard to how the conclusions of the studies were actually derived. As a result, it is not possible for me, or anyone else outside of Fishkind, to confirm or refute the conclusions drawn in these analyses. 7. The Fishkind neutrality analyses claim to be based on a Fiscal Impact Analysis Model (FIAM) that was developed by Fishkind, and allegedly "calibrated" based on the latest adopted budget and demographics of the study. I have neither received nor reviewed the so- called "calibrations" that were performed. Consequently, I cannot confirm nor refute that the calculations performed by Fishkind have any reasonably degree of accuracy. 8. The Fishkind neutrality studies have allegedly relied upon a "Modified Per Capita Method," where a measure of the full -time equivalent (FTE) population, employees and visitors has been determined. I have neither received nor reviewed any data related to the calculations performed by Fishkind in determining this FTE measure. Consequently, I cannot confirm nor refute that the calculations performed by Fishkind have any reasonably degree of accuracy. 9. It is unclear from the Fishkind neutrality analyses what population, employees and visitors formed the basis for the full -time equivalent (FTE) study allegedly performed. It is unclear if any consideration of the specific characteristics of the proposed FTE population, employees and visitors have been considered by Fishkind, and if so, how that has factored into the analysis. 10. The Fishkind neutrality analyses have allegedly applied these FTE values to the City's budget, to measure a "per capita" revenue and expense value. The conclusions of this measure are included in Table 4 of the June 7, 2010 and August 23, 2010 Fishkind reports. Without detailed information regarding how the FTE was created or applied to the City's budget, I am unable to confirm or refute the "per capita" calculations contained in Table 4 of each analysis. 11. The Fishkind neutrality analyses provide no insight regarding how the proposed new residential units would affect specific aspects of the City's budget. Fishkind has apparently considered an "average" approach to the analysis, relying solely on average per- capita values. However, a "marginal" or incremental analysis with specific consideration of the characteristics of the anticipated new population, employees and visitors would appear necessary in determining the actual impact of the new project on the City budget. For instance, Fishkind has factored in anticipated revenue in the form of collected half -cent sales tax. However, there is no discussion in the Fishkind analyses regarding the anticipated disposable income and consumption patterns of the new residents. It appears that Fishkind has merely assumed an average rate of consumption (and, in turn, sales tax collection) based on historic rates. Yet there is no apparent attempt made to compare the anticipated new population, employees and visitors to the historic base population, employees and visitors. In the event that the consumption patterns of the anticipated new population, employees and visitors differs from the historic base, the conclusions of the Fishkind would be invalidated. Economic Impact Analysis 12. An economic impact analysis measures a subject entity's total economic impact on an affected geographic region. This economic impact comes about through the subject entity's "direct impact, "or initial round of spending on the subject entity, and the resulting "indirect impact," which reflects additional rounds of spending through the backward linked industries supplying the initial industry. Economic impact analyses are commonly measured in terms of jobs, output and earnings created. 13. I have received and reviewed two (2) economic impact analyses (June 7, 2010 and August 23, 2010) of the proposed Town Parke in Winter Springs, FL, as prepared by Fishkind. 14. The economic impact analyses contained in the Fishkind reports are completely lacking in substantiation, and silent with regard to how the conclusions of the studies were actually derived. As a result, it is not possible for me, or anyone else outside of Fishkind, to confirm or refute the conclusions drawn in these analyses. 15. The Fishkind analyses are silent with regard to the construction of the project itself, including jobs, output and earnings. It is unclear where the construction and related workers would originate, and where their initial round of spending would take place. In the event that a number of these construction and related workers originate from outside of the immediate area, it is reasonable to conclude the impact multipliers will occur outside of the immediate area, as well. It is also unclear what amount of the suggested "jobs created" are directly resulting from the construction project, or indirect resulting from the initial round of spending. There is also no information in the report regarding the breakdown of direct and indirect income and earnings, that are projected to occur as a result of the construction of the project. 16. The Fishkind analyses provide no insight as to how, and in what form the permanent jobs, output and earnings would take. It would appear reasonable to conclude that a consideration of the characteristics of the new residents (and related employees and visitors) of the proposed Town Parke project would be relevant in this regard. It is unclear from the Fishkind analyses if those characteristics were taken into account by Fishkind. 17. Fishkind indicates that their analyses utilizes the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis RIMS II regional multipliers for Seminole County, FL, to determine the economic impact of the Town Parke project. As a result, Fishkind's analysis actually measures the impact of the Town Parke project on the entire Seminole County, rather than on the City of Winter Springs or the Town Center. The consequence of this is that the Fishkind analyses have over - estimated the impact of jobs, output and earnings that the City of Winter Springs and the Town Center would have actually realized. For instance, if an anticipated job created by the project is held by an individual in Longwood, then it stands to reason that the majority of that individual's spending would occur at establishments in Longwood rather than Winter Springs or the Town Center. A perfect example of this can be viewed when considering that one of the categories of spending in the RIMS II model is "vehicle purchases (net outlay)." With no auto dealerships in the City of Winter Springs or the Town Center, that amount of spending would have to occur elsewhere in Seminole County. The Fishkind analyses do not provide clear evidence of the economic impact of the Town Parke project on the City of Winter Springs or the Town Center. Optimization 18. I have reviewed the Town Center economic goals in the City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan (Future Land Use Elements), and its related elements to include Policy 2.3.3. Specifically, that policy reads: Optimization ofTax Base . Ensure compatible land uses and development projects within the Town Center that optimally increase and diversify the City's tax base and economic well- being, while complementing and protecting established surrounding neighborhoods. 19. With respect to the language of the policy, it is unclear from the Fiskind analyses whether either version of the Town Parke project could be considered "optimal." No apparent comparison or relative measure of alternative projects had been contemplated by Fishkind. The Fishkind conclusions reflect that the August 23, 2010 version on the project contains a larger net fiscal benefit, and a smaller economic impact relative to the June 7, 2010 version on the project. It is not clear from the Fishkind analyses whether or not an alternative project would be better suited for the space, with regard to the policy language. Dated this I day of C d41r)-- 2010. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. Signature: r EDWARD . WOLPERT, PH.D. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 20 day of October 2010 by EDWARD T. WOLPERT, PH.D., ❑ who is personally known to me or ❑ produced per sonally known as identification. (NOTARY SEAL) k , D. Le)1 otary Public Signature Barbara D. Wells e" % Notary ara PuD Wblic ell S tate of Florida (Name typed, printed or stamped) ‘ �,o ' My C o 110/01/20 Notary Public, State of Florida My Commission Expires: 10/01/2011 --- __�-._...__�_._�._____�-�----�---�____. �-,...-__m__._ _ ...,.-,�-.._ .. ,___.__ r �.��.�...� 0 2 1 P ; �Q7 .�5� 0003841731 OCT 20 2010 MAILE.D Fit4M 2tPCODE 32801 R.AFFA CONSULTING ECONOMISTS, INC. Suite 200 17 South Osceola Avenue Orlando, Florida 32801 Mr. Shawn D. Boyle City of Winter Sprin�s � 1126 East S.R. 434 Winter Springs, FL 32708 __ _____ ._