Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 01 12 Regular Item C-2 COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM C-2 REGULAR X CONSENT INFORMATIONAL January 12, 1998 Meeting } M R i( t~/lA Authoriza ' REQUEST: The Community Development Department - Planning Division requests the City Commission hold a public hearing to approve the first reading for adoption of Ordin~n_ce No. 694, to annex a 296.96 acre parcel located on the east side of State Road 417 (aka "The GreeneWay) and on the north side of State Road 434. PURPOSE: The purpose of this Board Item is to request the Commission to approve the first reading for adoption of Ordinance No. 694 to annex the 296.96 acre Battle Ridge Property. APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY: The provisions of 171.044(1) Florida Statutes which states "The owner or owners of real property in an unincorporated area of a county which is contiguous to a municipality and reasonably compact may petition the governing body of a said municipality that said property be annexed to the municipality." The provisions of 171.044 F.S. which states "Upon determination by the governing body of the municipality that the petition bears the signatures of all owners of property in the area proposed to be annexed, the governing body may, at any regular meeting, adopt a nonemergency ordinance to annex said property and redefine the boundary lines of the municipality to include said property." The City has expressed an interest in annexation in the past, (ref 8-14-95 City Commission meeting). JANUARY 12, 1998 AGENDA ITEM C-2 Page 2 CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The applicant and the City have proceeded, according to 163. 3184 F.S., to process the Battle Ridge Amendment based on DCA representations made via phone and print. The City staff have followed the requirements of Chapter 163 F.S. and presented the Battle Ridge plan amendment to the City's Local Planning Agency. 2. The Planning & Zoning BoardlLocal Planning Agency at its November 9, 1995 recommended that the City Commission not transmit the large scale comprehensive plan amendment (LG-CP A-1-95) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for its review and comment. 3. The recommendation of the Local Planning Agency was sent to the City Commission. 4. The City Commission, at the Transmittal Public Hearing on February 26, 1996, after a period of public input from residents, individuals outside the City, government agencies, unanimously voted to transmit the large scale comprehensive plan amendment (LG-CP A-I-95) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for its review and comment. 5. The Florida Department of Community Affairs sent its Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report on May 23, 1996 outlining its concerns and requests for clarification and information. 6. The applicant and the City have conferred with the Department's staffa number of times by phone and letter and have received assurances that the applicant could make their response to DCA's ORC Report and that further clarifications if needed could be provided between DCA and the applicant through succeeding responses to resolve any issues before proceeding to the second (adoption) public hearing of the amendment. In a phone conference with DCA, the applicant's legal representative, the City Manager and the Comprehensive Planning/Zoning Coordinator discussed with DCA staff members Charles Gauthier, John Healy and Scott Rogers, the 60 day requirement in 163.3184(7) F.S. DCA staff responded that the 60 day requirement should not present a problem if the applicant requests further dialogue with DCA after submission of the applicant's response to the ORC Report, and is making a good faith effort to resolve any further issues or data and analysis needs. The applicant indicated his desire to do so. JANUARY 12, 1998 AGENDA ITEM C-2 Page 3 7. The applicant has made three responses to DCA's requests for clarification or for more data. 8. The applicant has notified DCA of his willingness to deed over to a responsible agency all the wetland area on the Battle Ridge Property to be preserved in its natural state. 9. The applicant has indicated that his willingness to meet a higher standard of f.loodplain and natural drainage protection. The applicant will design the residential subdivision to meet the more stringent criteria of the Florida Outstanding Waters Program, a new program under the direction of the St. Johns River Water Management District and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. This will assure that the waters QfLake Jesup are protected from surface water runoff pollution. 10. The applicant has notified DCA that he will designate the large wetland area as "Conservation" and will give over to a responsible agency this large wetland area for future protection and conservation. FINDINGS: 1. The area surrounding the Battle Ridge developable site includes the following land uses: vacant land, citrus groves, residential subdivisions in the cities of Winter Springs and Oviedo with densities of3-4 DU/acre (similar or greater than proposed for Battle Ridge), an expressway (S.R. 417 "the GreeneWay") and an environmentally sensitive area, mainly the wetlands within the Battle Ridge property. 2. The applicant has notified DCA of his willingness to deed over to a responsible agency all the wetland area on the Battle Ridge Property to be preserved in its natural state. 3. The applicant has indicated that his willingness to meet a higher standard of floodplain and natural drainage protection. The applicant will design the residential subdivision to meet the more stringent criteria of the Florida Outstanding Waters Program, a new program under the direction of the St. Johns River Water management District and JANUARY 12,1998 AGENDA ITEM C.,2 Page 4 the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. This will assure that the waters of Lake Jesup are protected from surface water runoff pollution. 4. The applicant has notified DCA that he will designate the large wetland area as "Conservation" and will give over to a responsible agency this large wetland area for future protection and conservation. 5. The Battle Ridge property is within the Urban Boundary set by the county. Annexation and development of the buildable portion of the Battle Ridge property will conform to the county's comprehensive plan in that urban services may be provided to those areas inside the Urban Boundary and that urban residential development will not occur outside of the boundary. Thus, the purpose of the (Urban) Boundary which is intended to prevent the erosion of the character of the rural area to the east will have been maintained. It: should be noted that the Battle ridge property is indicated in Figure 2.9 of the county comprehensive plan as "New Urban Area created by GreeneWay/S.R. 434 Small Area Study. This further verifies that the county Small Area Study and Comprehensive Plan views this area as urbanizing with urban services provided by either the City of Winter Springs or the City of Oviedo. ' 6. Seminole County through the use of an "Urban Boundary" intended to prevent urban sprawl but allow urban land uses inside those areas surrounded by the Urban Boundary. The Battle Ridge property is on that side of the boundary the county intended to allow urban land uses. By including the Battle Ridge property inside the Urban Boundary, the county took the view that development of the Battle Ridge property with urban land uses would not constitute urban sprawl and violate Rule 9J-5 F AC. 7. With respect to compatibility of the proposed Battle Ridge residential subdivision: Within one (1) mile of the Battle Ridge property are residential developments with a net density range from 3 to 4 DU/acre in the Cities of Oviedo and Winter Springs. Across the street from Battle Ridge "within the City of Oviedo is McKinley's Mill subdivision on the south side of S.R. 434 and the Oviedo Oaks and Laurel Oaks residential subdivisions located on the east side of S.R. 434, south of Florida Avenue. The density of these subdivisions range from 2.8 to 3.9 DU/acre." [ref GreeneWay/S.R. 434 Small Area Study Final Report] Therefore, an urban pattern of development exists of single-family residential at 3 to 4 DU/acre. Battle Ridge is requesting the same density as that which exists. JANUARY 12, 1998 AGENDA ITEM C-2 Page 5 8. With respect to planned future development of the area: In the incorporated areas of Oviedo within a mile of Battle Ridge, the City has designated on its Future Land Use Map (FLUM) the majority of these areas as "Low Density Residential" (1-3.5 DU/acre) for future residential development. [Short Range Land Use Map and Map 1-3 "2010 Long Range Land Use" Comprehensive Plan City of Oviedo, Florida]. Therefore, a continuation of the existing urban pattern of development at the same density is planned for in the future as indicated on the City of Oviedo's Future Land Use Map in the its Comprehensive Plan. 9. A study of the Battle Ridge property by Breedlove, Dennis & Associates, Inc. Analysis of the Potential for Occurrence of Threatened and Endangered Species and Species of Special Concern on the Battle Ridge Project Site concluded that there are no known threatened or endangered (T &E) plant or animal species which have as critical habitat, the type of habitat provided in the uplands in the southeastern portion of the property. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No. 694 to annex the 296.96 acre Battle Ridge Property located on the east side of State Road 471 (aka "The GreeneWay) and on the north side of State Road 434, based on the findings indicated above. IMPLEMENTA TION SCHEDULE: The ordinance for annexation of the Battle Ridge Property "shall become .effective at the expiration of thirty (30) days after adoption or at any date specified therein." (in the ordinance) [per Section 4 .15( c) City Charter] ATTACHMENTS: 1. Aerial Map. 2. Ordinance No. 694. 3. City Manger's Memo to the City Commission dated February 26, 1996. 4. Minutes of City Commission creating Battle Ridge Steering Committee. JANUARY 12, 1998 AGENDA ITEM C-2 Page 6 5. Minutes of the Battle Ridge Steering Committee. 6. Memo from Thomas Grimms to Battle Ridge Steeling Committee dated October 17, 1997. 7. Memo from Thomas Grimms to Battle Ridge Steeling committee dated December 18, 1997 (faxed). 8. Memo from Charles Carrington to Ron McLemore dated December 19, 1997. 9. Memo from Thomas Grimms to Battle Ridge Steering Committee dated December 22, 1997. 10. Memo to Mayor and Commission from the City Manager, dated January 6, 1998, on the Battle Ridge Annexation. COMMISSION ACTION: ORDINANCE NO. 694 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY CO:KMISSION OF THE CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA, ANNEXING A 296 . 96 ACRE PARC]~L OF LAND, ALSO KNOWN AS "THE BATTLE RIDC:JE PROPERTY" LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE EAST SIDE OF STATE ROAD 417 (AKA "THE GREENEWAY") ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE ROAD ~34 PURSUANT TO 171.044(1) (2) and 166.041 FLORIDA STATUTES; PROVIDING FOR SE:VERABILITY; CONFLICTS AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the applicant, Battle Ridge Companies, Inc., has petitioned the City of winter Springs to be annexed into the City. WHEREAS, the City can provide to the subject parcel sewer and water service and other urban services it provides to the City. WHEREAS, the City has expressed an interest in annexation in the past, (ref. 8-14-95 city Commission meeting) . NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA HEREBY ORDAINS; SECTION I - That the City of winter Springs annexes the following described real property: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 21 SOUTH, RANGE 31 EAST, SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, LYING EASTERLY OF THE "EASTERLY BELTWAY".. LESS THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH 25.00 FEET OF AFORESAID NORTH 1/2 OF SECTION 4, THAT EXTENDS 1354.9 FEET EASTERLY FROM THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 4. TOGETHER WITH THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 (LESS THE NOR~rH 25 FEET OF THE EAST 25 FEET) AND THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF AFORESAID SECTION 4. LESS THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR STATE ROAD NO. 434. CONTAINING 296.96 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SECTION II - If any section or port:ion of this Ordinance proves to be invalid, unlawful or unconstitutional, it shall not be held to invalidate or impair the validity, force or effect of any other section or portion of a section or subsection or part of this Ordinance. SECTION III - That all Ordinances or parts of Ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION IV - This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, in accordance with 166.041(4) Florida Statutes, and section 4.15(c) City Charter of City of winter Springs. PASSED AND ADOPTED this____day of . , 1998. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS PAUL P. PARTYKA, MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK FIRST READING POSTED SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING .:/ .~ Regular Meeting City Commission February 26, 1996 95-96-10 Page 9 Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to recommend the transmittal of the Large Scale Compo Plan amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs in respect to the Battle Ridge property in accordance with 163.3184 of the Florida Statutes and Section 15-30 of the City Code. Seconded by Commissioner l\ilcLeod. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye; Commissioner Conniff: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner Langellotti: aye. Motion passes. ~ Commissioner McLeod said can the Commission add to the memorandum from the City Manager that McKinley's Mill gets included in the Steering Committee. It was the consensus of the Commission to include McKinley's Mill to be represented in the Steering Committee. B. Requesting transmittal of the Carroll Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review. Mr. Grimms said the issues with this item are essentially the same as the Battle Ridge item, they are requesting the same type of development and at the same density. Peggy Powell, 1711 Stone St., Oviedo, questioned the first response comment that was made during the other item and also stated that is one property goes high density t.hen they all will and the Black Hammock won't be rural any more and said she feels threatened. Let's protect what we have. Mayor Bush said this Commission has always fought for low density in any residential property within the City limits and there is nothing to leave me to believe they will not pursue the same activity with this development as they would with any other. The Commission recognizes the concerns that the residents have presented, but we do have to work within the law. Commissioner Gennell said she believes all the property in the whole project will stand on it's own merits in the end and because it is so sensitive and so large and controversial that it bears looking into by a lot of people, and that is why she voted for it and will vote for all of them, she wants it looked into and scrutinized. I have a tremendous amount of confidence in our Staff the way it's developing here and in our City Manager and I would urge you to work with us and bear with us and let's see if we can't all come to something that will be mutually agreeable. lVlotion was made by Commissioner Ferring for transmittal of the Carroll Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Florida Department of Community AtTairs for review. Seconded by Commissioner Langellotti. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner McLeod: aye; Commissioner Conniff: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Gennel1: aye. Motion passes. C. Requesting transmittal of the Weaver Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review. l\ilotion was made by Commissioner Ferring to transmit the Weaver Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review. Seconded by Commissioner Langellotti. Mayor Bush asked if there was any member of the public who wished to speak on this item. There was no member of the public who wished to speak on this item. Vote: Commissioner Conniff aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye. Motion passes. (SEE PAGE 3) MEJ\lfORANDillvf To: Mayor and Board of Commission From: Ron McLemore, City Manager (2wrY\ Date: February 26, 1996 Re: Battle Ridge, Carroll, Weaver, Minter, Plan Amendments This is a follow-up memorandum to the memorandum of February 23, 1996 contained in your Agenda Package relative to the Battle Creek, Carrol, Weaver and Minter Property Plan Amendments. In that memorandum I advised you that I would have a memorandum that I would like to publish in the record regarding the framework in which I believe we should conduct the transmittal process if the Board should decided to move in that direction. The four plan amendments represent some 365.6 acres of land, 297 in Battle Ridge, 13.6 in the Carrol property, 27 in the Weaver property and 28 in the minter property. Preliminary review reveals, of the 365.6 acres ofland being proposed for plan amendment and annexation, approximately 113.2 will be developable, including 50 acres in the Battle Ridge property, 8.2 acres in the Carrol property, 27 acres in the Weaver property and 28 acres in the Nlinter property. This would result in approximately 30.9 % of the property being developable, including 17% of the Battle Ridge property, 60% of the Carro I property, 100% of the Weaver property and 100% of the Minter property. G A vV-;;; /".. r" ...."': _" -_.~. -. : _ :.../_ /~ 1 ./ / ' :"..." _, The decision to recommend transmittal of the proposal was made after an extensive review and analysis of the record of this matter. GOALS: If the Board decides to move forward with the transmittal it appears to me that four goals need to be accomplished as follows: 1) That at the conclusion of the process everyone feels good about the open, fair, disciplined manner in which the process was carried out regardless of what the final recommendation might be. 2) The final recommendations .will be based upon compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan based upon specific findings of fact applied to the revelent law and good practice. 3) That the final decision provides an adequate measure of protection of the chosen life style of the surrounding property owners based upon specific finding of fact and good practice. 4) That the final decision provides an adequate measure of protection of the Lake Jesup Ecosystem based upon specific findings of fct nd good practice. 5) That the final decision is acceptable with the economic and life style interest of the residents of the City of Winter Springs. If the Commission decides to move ahead with the transmittal and consideration of annexation the Commissioners will eventually be faced with deciding two issues as follows: 1) Can the proposed annexation be found to be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and; 2) Is the annexation in the overall best interest of the City? Since this is a discretionary legislative proceeding all of these issues can be merged at the final public hearing of the Plan Amendment Process, or be taken into consideration in two separte proceedings. It is my recommendation at this time that we make separte findings and decisions on both questions, but both questions be addressed at the same final public hering date. Due to the intensified concerns of the various interest groups in this project, I think it is fair to advise that the owners may be held to a higher burden of proof in this project than might otherwise be required of a project in this type of process in order to facilitate specific fmdings of fact in all pertinent provisions of law and all issues. For example: 1) Wetland jurisdiction lines 2) Endangered species 3) Economic feasibility 4) Transitional land uses 5) Traffic impact 6) Dedication of Pub lic Conservation Lands Additionally it is quite possible that the final plan that the Staff would be willing to recommend may be different from that proposed, or that Staff may not be able to recommend any form of a plan that Staff believe is mutually acceptable to the property owner's and the City. Relatedly, it is possible that the Staff may recommend dropping one or more of the properties from consideration. i\tIEET AND CONFER STEERING COMMITTEE I::- In order to fascilitate open communications and confidence in the analytical process, I am recommending that the Commission authorize me to appoint a Steering Committee that will meet and confer on a regular basis during the process. No decision would be made in these meetings. I am recommending that the Committee be composed of the following: The City Manager 1 member from City Staff 1 member from County Staff 1 member from the Friends of Lake Jesup 1 member from the Black Hammock Property Owners Association 1 property owner from each property aI!.d/or their designees EX PARTE COi\llMUNlCATION Although this is not a quasi judicial process, I would like to recommend that the members of the City Commission voluntarily agree to Ex Parte Rules during this process. I believe, in this case this agreement would help the process. MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 18, 1997 BATTLE RIDGE STEERING COMMITTEE The Battle Ridge Steering Committee meeting of was called to order Thursday, December 18, 1997 at 4:07 p.m. by Charles Carrington, AICP Community Development Director in the Municipal Building (City Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida). Battle Ridge Steering Committee Members Present: Tony Mathews, Seminole County Planning Department - Comprehensive Planning Mike Rich, Friends of Lake Jesup Valerie Al-Jemile, McKinley's Mill Homeowners Association Jim Logue, Black Hammock Association Jim Allen, Owner, Battle Ridge Property Dave Moon, Planning Director, City of Oviedo Charles Carrington, AICP The City of Winter Springs, Community Development Director Others Present: Thomas Grimms, AICP City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Planning/Zoning Coordinator Meeting Coordinator Charles Carrington asked if there were other members coming. Mr. Grimms stated that they were all here. PURPOSE OF MEETING: Mr. Carrington stated that the purpose of the meeting is to update the Committee on the latest activities related to the Battle Ridge situation. Mr. Carrington stated that DCA sent a letter dated December 8, 1997, which the members should have received along with a letter dated December 1, 1997. Mr. Carrington asked Mr. Grimms to summarize the activities since the last meeting of the Committee. Mr. Grimms stated that a letter was received from DCA dated December 8, 1997 asking for further clarifications, verifications, and data on 11 items. This letter from DCA was in response to the applicant's (Battle Ridge Properties) responses to the May 21, 1997 letter from the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA), and to the November 14, 1997 letter from Ron McLemore and December 3, 1997 letter from Charles Carrington. The letter from Mr. Carrington presented a schedule for first and second reading of an ordinance to annex the Battle Ridge Property, adopt the proposed amendment, and rezone the property, and adopt a Development Agreement. Mr. Carrington asked Mr. Grimms to summarize the Decemb(lr 8th letter from DCA. Mr. Grimms went through the II points. On point # 1, he stated that it was the position of the applicant and the City that in phone conferences with DCA, they (DCA staff) agreed with the applicant that if the applicant wanted a series of responses back and forth to resolve the issues and data needs before going to the second (adoption) public hearing, it would be OK with them, even though this would extend beyond the 60 day period between receipt of the ORC Report and the date of the second public hearing on the proposed amendment. It was the view of DCA staff that if the applicant was showing a good faith effort to resolution of issues, they would not have difficulty with this approach. Mr. Grimms stated that there were other jurisdictions around the state that have exceeded the 60 days between the receipt of the ORC Report and holding the second public hearing. Mr. Grimms mentioned that Items 2 and 3 should be addressed by the applicant's environmental consultant, Breedlove, Dennis. Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 should be addressed by the applicant's traffic consultant, Turgot Dervish. Items 9 will be addressed by himself, while 10 will be addressed by both Mr. Grimms and Mr. Dervish. Item 11 will be addressed by Kip Lockcuff, the Public Works/Utilities Director. Mr. Carrington then stated that a letter was received from Dave Moon about concerns he had with the Battle Ridge situation. Dave mentioned that basically it reiterates many of the points made by DCA and that needs further clarification. He stated he sent a copy of his letter to DCA. Mr. Carrington said that the City has scheduled first and second readings of ordinances for annexation, Development Agreement, comprehensive plan amendment, and rezoning for January 12th (1998) and January 26th. Mr. Carrington opened the meeting for questions. Jim Logue asked if the sewer and water lines will be sized to only service the Battle Ridge Property. Mr. Carrington said that it was his understanding that the trunk lines would be sized only to serve the Battle Ridge Property. Mr. Grimms said that it was also his understanding. Jim said that this would have a definite bearing on the views of the Black Hammock community if there were assurances that the sizing of sewer and water trunk lines would be designed only to serve the Battle Ridge Property. Mr. Carrington asked whether positively. Jim suggested yes it would. Jim Logue expressed his concern about what he sees as an "inevitable" creeping of the urban area outward toward the rural areas such as Black Hammock. He wondered if there would ever be a stop to the spread of the urban area. He asked if the cities (Winter Springs and Oviedo) would consider an agreement that would prevent them from any more annexations. Mr. Carrington and Mr. Grimms explained that comprehensive plans were not meant to be forever unchangeable, but that planning is a dynamic process and that the focus is on orderly controlled growth rather than stopping it forever. They both mentioned it was doubtful whether an absolute limit could be established. Mr. Grimms mentioned that the county has established an "Urban Boundary" which affords some guarantee against urban encroachment. He said this boundary is at the east property line of Battle Ridge. He explained the significance of the urban boundary. Dave Moon said that Oviedo's comprehensive plan does have policies preventing them from annexing into the Black Hammock unless certain conditions are met first. Tony Mathews mentioned that the county's intention to establish an "Urban Boundary" was to provide a rural area component in the county's comprehensive plan and to protect the rural area lifestyle. He said that the urban boundary does provide a significant measure of protection against urban encroachment, since any change would involve a large scale comprehensive plan amendment that DCA must review. DCA approved the county's comprehensive plan and recognized the significance and appropriateness of the urban boundary as a growth management planning tool. Jim Logue wasn't sure this would provide the assurance he was looking for but said "at least its better than nothing". Tony Mathews asked at what density level the property owner was intending to develop his property. Tom Grimms said that he has requested "Lower Density Residential" category on the City's Future Land Use Map which allows 1.1 to 3.5 units per acre. Jim Logue asked what was it designated now. Tony Mathews mentioned the county has it designated "Suburban Estates" residential which allows 1 dwelling unit per acre maximum. Tom Grimms said that since the City has the capacity and is willing to extend sewer and water service to the Battle Ridge Property, the basis is made for allowing increased density. Tony Mathews said that the county designated the property "Suburban Estates" which is the lowest density for the county's urban land use categories, because the county does not have that area in its sewer and water service area. He said that the nonavailabilty by the county of sewer and water service was not the only reason the county gave the property that designation. The other reason was that S.R. 434 along that area in the vicinity of the Battle Ridge Property was a constrained rural arterial and the state did not have plans to widen the road to assure that the level of servic(: would be maintained. Mr. Grimms said what is holding up the state from putting in plac(: plans to 4 lane the road is the lack of agreement between FDOT and the City of Oviedo to eliminate some old buildings at the intersection of S.R. 434 and S.R. 426 (Broadway). Mr. Grimms mentioned that what will probably happen is that there will be a bypass along Division Street. Dave Moon mentioned that sooner than later the City will come to some sort of agreement with FDOT about widening S.R. 434 in that area. He mentioned that lack of agreement with FDOT on widening in that area does have its effect on maintenance of level of service northward on S.R. 434. He also mentioned that the City recently had a traffic study done with recommendations on that and other matters. Tony Mathews asked if Winter Springs could postpone the scheduling of the annexation, Development Agreement, large scale comprehensive plan amendment, and rezoning until after the Board of County Commissioners, which meets on January 13th, (one day later than the scheduled first reading of these items) has an opportunity to comment. Dave Moon mentioned that Oviedo City Council meets on January 5th. Tony mentioned that again, the Board of County Commissioners will meet one day after the second reading for adoption of the items at the Winter Springs City Commission. Mr. Carrington explained that the City staff had been directed to prepare the agenda items for the January 12th and 26th regular meeting dates of the City Commission. Jim Logue asked if a delay is possible and if the City staff could check on this. Mr. Carrington said that he would get answers to these questions posed by the Steering Committee as soon as possible, and notify the members. Mr. Carrington adjourned the meeting at 5:03 p.m. MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 29, 1997 BATTLE RIDGE STEERING COMMITTEE The Battle Ridge Steering Committee meeting of was called to order Wednesday, October 29, 1997 at 3:18 p.m. by Charles Carrington, AICP Community Development Director in the Municipal Building (City Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida). Battle Ridge Steering Committee Members Present: Tony Mathews, Seminole County Planning Department - Comprehensive Planning Mike Rich, Friends of Lake Jesup Valerie Al-Jemile, McKinley's Mill Homeowners Association Jim Logue, Black Hammock Association Jim Allen, Owner, Battle Ridge Property Charles Carrington, AICP The City of Winter Springs, Community Development Director Others Present: Fred Leonhardt, legal counsel to Jim Allen, Owner, Battle Ridge Property Thomas Grimms, AICP City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Planning/Zoning Coordinator Meeting Coordinator Charles Carrington asked if there were other members coming. Mr. Grimms stated that David Moon, a member of the Committee, representing the City of Oviedo was not present. INTRODUCTION: Charles Carrington introduced himself to the Committee. PURPOSE OF MEETING: Mr. Carrington stated that the purpose of the meeting is to update the Committee on the latest activities related to the Battle Ridge situation. Mr. Carrington asked Mr. Grimms to summarize the activities since the last meeting of the Committee. Mr. Grimms stated that the applicant (Battle Ridge Properties) responded to the May 21, 1997 letter from the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) requesting further clarifications to the Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report previously sent by DCA. He stated that the applicant sent his response to the City and that the City mailed it to DCA on September 10, 1997. Valerie Al-Jamile questioned why the Committee members were not sent the applicant's response at the same time that it was sent to DCA. Mr. Grimms stated that in the past the response was forwarded to the Committee with the meeting notice, and that he was unaware of any change in procedure. Jim Logue asked if the Carroll, Minter, and Weaver Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendments sent to DCA along with the Battle Ridge amendment were still being processed. Mr. Grimms stated that he repeatedly attempted to phone (7 times) Hugh Harling, the consultant for the Carroll, Minter and Weaver amendments and that he never returned the calls.. Tony Mathews recommended a formal written communication. Mr. Grimms stated a letter was sent after the calls were made, and no response was forthcoming. Mr. Grimms stated that he does not intend to make further contact with Mr. Harling. Mr. Grimms stated he considers the Carrol, Minter and Weaver amendments dead. Fred Leonhardt asked if City of Oviedo has an agreement with the City of Winter Springs on future annexation areas/boundaries between the cities. Mr. Grimms stated no, since a Joint Planning Area (JP A) is needed between the cities as well as the county. The county is currently working on an Interlocal Planning Coordination Agreement. Mr. Mathews said that the county is working on a final draft of the Interlocal Planning Coordination Agreement and that he has contact all the cities and that it looks like it will be sent out in the near future for approval by the various cities. Mr. Logue asked Jim Allen what will stop urban encroachment continuing toward the Black Hammock. Mr. Miller said he didn't have any answer, but mentioned that the housing market suggests that the demand is for less than one (1) acre lot sizes. He also mentioned that builders are calling him all the time asking when he can get his property annexed and building can begin. Mr. Leonhardt mentioned OFW Design Standards (a stricter level of Design Standard) that his client is willing to use in the development of the Battle Ridge Property. He also stated that his client is also willing to deed over the wetland area that comprises most of the property to some responsible agency for conservation and preservation. Mr. Mathews asked Mr. Allen if there was a preliminary plan for the residential subdivision that they plan to build. Mr. Leonhardt said no, but that his client envisions about a one-hundred and twenty-five (125) lot subdivision on the forty-five (45) acre site that is buildable. Mrs. Al-Jamile asked what the commercial establishments were that were mentioned in the May 20, 1997 letter on page 4 # 3. Mr. Grimms stated that the commercial establishments referred to were those along S.R. 434 beginning east of the Beltway (aka the GreeneWay). Mrs. Al-Jamile asked (on page 8 second paragraph) if the county is suggesting an "Interlocal Agreement on Planning Matters" between the county and the various cities involving annexation and other planning related matters. Mr. Mathews said the county is drafting a document that would address various planning matters between the cities and the county. Mr. Carrington asked if Mrs. Al-Jamile had other questions. Mrs. Jamile indicated that she did not have other questions. Mr. Carrington suggested that if the Committee wished to relay questions to DCA, that they should feel free to do so. Mr. Carrington adjourned the meeting at 4:23 p.m. MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 25, 1997 BATTLE RIDGE STEERING COMMITTEE The Battle Ridge Steering Committee meeting of was called to order Tuesday, February 25, 1997 at 3: 12 p.m. by Ron McLemore, City Manager, in the Municipal Building (City Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida). Battle Ridge Steering Committee Members Present: Tony Mathews, Seminole County Planning Department - Comprehensive Planning Steve Rich, Friends of Lake Jesup Valerie Al-Jemil, McKinley's Mill Homeowners Association Jim Logue, Black Hammock Association Jim Allen, Owner, Battle Ridge Property Fred Leonhardt, legal council for Battle Ridge Borron Owen, legal council for Battle Ridge Dave Moon, Planning Director, City of Oviedo Others Present: Thomas Grimms, AICP City of Winter Springs Community Development Coordinator PURPOSE OF MEETING: Ron McLemore stated that the purpose of the meeting is to update the Committee on the latest activities related to the Battle Ridge situation. Mr. McLemore asked Mr. Grimms for a summary of activities since the last meeting of the Seering Committee. Mr. Grimms stated that in May, 1996 a phone conference was held between DCA staff Charles Gauthier, John Healy and Scott Rogers and Ron McLemore and Tom Grimms concerning clarifications on the four (4) comprehensive plan transmittals before the ORC Report was sent by DCA. In July, 1996 the representatives for Battle Ridge and the Carrol, Minter and Weaver properties submitted their responses to the ORC Report sent by DCA in May, 1996. The City Staff made a presentation in June, 1996 to the City Commission on the ORC Report from DCA. The City Manager in June, 1996 sent a letter to Ron Rabun, County Manager suggesting the county and city explore the potential of accepting into the county's Land Acquisition Program the environmentally sensitive lands of the Battle Ridge Property. Mr. Grimms also stated a letter from the City Manager of Oviedo to Winter Springs Mayor John Bush expressing concern about the impacts of the four (4) proposed plan amendment, especially traffic impact, on the City of Oviedo. It was also stated that a letter, dated August 12, 1996 from FDOT to the Battle Ridge traffic consultant, Turgut Dervish, indicated that "Cumulative traffic impacts to S.R. 434 as a result of the proposed Battle Ridge, Pinky Minter, Donald Weaver and Luther Carrol developments will not create an adverse or significant condition." Another letter (copy) was received addressed to Aaron Dowling at the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council from Patty McKay at 1000 Friends of Florida expressing concerns over certain proposed comprehensive plan amendments from Oviedo and Winter Springs. Mr. McLemore stated that in November, 1996 City staff had a phone conference with DCA staff Charles Gauthier, Growth Management Administrator, and John Healey (in charge of comprehensive plan amendment review for Seminole County area), Harling Locklin representative and Borron Owen, legal counsel for Battle Ridge, on clarifications on certain issues and data requests by DCA. Mr. Grimms added that another phone conference was held with DCA staff in which they indicated that they will look closely at the issue of urban sprawl and protection of natural resources. Mr. McLemore stated that the phone conferences with DCA are part of the process to resolve outstanding issues and additional data needs before going to the second public hearing. Mr. McLemore opened the meeting up for discussion. Various members of the committee discussed the impacts that the proposed amendments would have on the Black Hammock, the City of Oviedo and the McKinley's Mill Subdivision. Mr. Grimms stated that the degree of impacts is still under study and through a series of exchanges between the applicant and DCA, hopefully it will become clear and issues will be resolved to the satisfaction of DCA and the various affected parties. Mr. McLemore stated that the purpose of the meeting is to primarily keep everyone updated where the amendments are in the process and the efforts at resolution of outstanding issues and data needs. Mr. McLemore adjourned the meeting at 4:51 p.m. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 30, 1996 BATTLE RIDGE STEERING COlVlMITTEE The Battle Ridge Steering Committee meeting of was called to order Tuesday, April 30, 1996 at 3 :09 p.m. by Ron McLemore, City Manager, in the Municipal Building (City Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida). Battle Ridge Steering Committee Members Present: Tony Mathews, Seminole County Planning Department - Comprehensive Planning Steve Rich, Friends of Lake Jesup Valerie Al-Jemil, McKinley's Mill Homeowners Assoc:iation Jim Logue, Black Hammock Association Jim Allen, Owner, Battle Ridge Property Fred Leonhardt, legal council for Battle Ridge Borron Owen, legal council for Battle Ridge Dave Moon, Planning Director, City of Oviedo Others Present: Thomas Grimms, AICP City of Winter Springs Community Development Coordinator PURPOSE OF MEETING: City Manager, Ron McLemore, welcomed the members of the Steering Committee and asked everyone to identify themselves. Mr. McLemore gave a brief background leading up to his request to the City Commission on February 26, 1996 that he be allowed to appoint a Battle Ridge Steering Committee. He stated that the purpose of the meeting is to update the Committee on the latest activities related to the Battle Ridge situation. Mr. McLemore stated he appreciated the sincerity of concerns that people may have about the four (4) proposed comprehensive plan amendments and said that he and City staff are open to the expression of concerns and suggestions that the committee may have. He stated that this is the beginning of a process to determine if the proposed amendments are desirable and in the best interests of the City of Winter Springs and not significantly adverse to the surrounding area. Mr. McLemore opened the meeting up for discussion. Mr. Grimms briefed the committee on where the proposed amendments are in the review process. He stated that the Local Planning Agency reviewed the amendments at the November 9, 1995 meeting and made recommendation to the City Commission to not transmit the proposed amendments. The City Commission at its February 26, 1996 meeting voted unanimously to transmit the amendments to DCA for its review and comment that would come back as an Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report. Mr. Grimms stated that in a phone conference with DCA staff and City staff, DCA staff said that they would have no problem with a series of exchanges between the applicant and DCA staff to narrow down any outstanding issues and data needs to resolve them. DCA staff understood that this approach would likely extend beyond the 60 day period between the receipt of the ORC Report and the scheduling of the second (adoption) public hearing by the local governing body. DCA staff indicated that as long as a good faith effort and progress is made, they would not have a problem with this approach. It was noted that many jurisdictions around the state have gone beyond the 60 day period in their approach to resolving outstanding issues and data needs in an attempt to resolve them before proceeding to second public hearing. The Battle Ridge representatives presented their position on the Battle Ridge amendment. They emphasized that this amendment proposal is very different from the one presented to the county a few years ago. They explained the differences. Valerie AI-Jamil mentioned her concern with cut-through traft1c to McKinley's Mill Subdivision, where she lives, as well as the impact on the schools. Steve Rich mentioned his concern about what affect the developments on the properties would have on the water quality of Lake Jesup. Tony Mathews talked about the Small Area Study that was done and that included these properties and suggested that the Study be the continuing basis for review of the amendments. David Moon objected to the City of Winter Springs annexing the property at all. Jim Logue said the Small Area Study was done to examine the impacts of further development in the area and to preserve the rural areas and lifestyle. He said that the Small Area Study should be followed. He also wanted to know about the sizing of the sewer and water trunk lines that would service the four properties, and whether the sizing could later serve other properties in the area and cause continuing urban expansion into the rural area. Mr. McLemore said that we are early into the process of review and that many of the questions the committee had will no doubt be addressed in the response to the ORC Report and other subsequent responses between DCA staff and the applicants. Mr. McLemore adjourned the meeting at 5:10 p.m. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 1126 EAST STA TE ROAD 434 WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708 Telephone (407) 327-1800 MEMORANDUM TO: Ron McLemore, City Manager Charles C. Carri to)1( AlCP, Community ev l'6gment Director ---/91f Battleridge Steering Committee FROM: SUBJ.: DA TE: December 19, 1997 The Steering Committee asked me to obtain answers to the following questions. 1. Will public utilities servicing the Battleridge property be sized to serve only Battleridge? I advised that I would check with the Utility Director and get back with a response. . 2. Would the City entertain an agreement that this annexation is the end of encroachment into the County? Tom Grimms and I explained that planning is a dynamic process which by it nature is subject to change and I doubt that it is possible to establish an absolute limit. We were asked to present the question to you. 3. The Seminole county representative asked if the matter could be postponed to allow the Oviedo Board and the Board of County Commissioners an opportunity to act. Oviedo meets January 5, 1998, and Seminole County meets January 13 and 27th. ccc\mgr\Battle.12-19-97 ( CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434 WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708-2799 Telephone (407) 327-1800 Community Development MEMORANDUM TO: Battle Ridge Steering Committee Members FROM: Thomas Grimms, AICP Comprehensive Planning/Zoning Coordinator 2 ~ December 22, 1997 DATE: RE: Battle Ridge Steering Committee Questions t' The questions posed were: 1. Will public utilities servicing the Battle Ridge Property be sized to serve only Battle Ridge? The answer we received from Kip Lockcuff, Public Works/Utilities Director, was yes. The sewer and water trunk lines will be sized to serve only the Battle Ridge Property. 2. Would the City consider an agreement that the annexation of Battle Ridge Property will end further encroachment into the county? The answer we received from the City Manager was no. The present City Administration and City Commission can not bind a future City Commission that "forever" the City will not consider or act on annexation eastward whether at the invitation of property owners, or changed conditions in the county at some future point. 3. Tony Mathews, Senior Planner with Seminole county Planning Department asked if consideration of the Battle Ridge annexation, Development Agreement, large scale comprehensive plan amendment (LG-CP A-I-95) and rezoning for first reading and second reading can be delayed to allow the Ovicdo City Council and the Board of County Commissioners an opportunity to act. The City of Oviedo meets on January 5th and Board of County Commissioners meets on January 13th and 27th. The City Manager indicated no, since there will be time between the first reading on January 12th and second reading on January 26th of the ordinances for comment from the Oviedo City Council and Board of County Commissioners. It is my understanding that these were the only substantive questions raised, without answers given, at the meeting. cc: Ron McLemore, City Manager Battle Ridge File Read File '.) CITY OF WI NTER SPRI NGS, FLORIDA 1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434 WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708.2799 Telephone (407) 327.1800 Community Development MEMORANDUM TO: Battle Ridge Steering Committee Members FROM: Thomas Grimms, AICP Comprehensive Planning Coordinator DATE: October 17, 1997 RE: Upcoming Meeting After polling the members, it was found that the common date and time for a meeting of the Battle Ridge Steering Committee is and will be Wednesday, October 29, 1997 at 3:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at Winter Springs City Hall in the Conf€::rence Room at 1126 East State Road 434. Attached is the revised response to the May 21, 1997 letter from the Department of Community Affairs. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434 WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708-2799 Telephone (407) 327-1800 Community Development FAX MEMORANDUM TO: Battle Ridge Steering Committee FROM: Thomas Grimms, AICP Comprehensive Planning/Zoning Coordinat~ ~ . DATE: D~cember 18, 1997 RE: Reminder Notice of Meeting Just a reminder notice of the meeting today, Thursday, December 18th, at 4:00 p.m. here at the Winter Springs City Hall of the Battle Ridge Steering Committee. In phone calls to you earlier, this was the best date and time that everyone could come. One member indicated that they may not be able to attend. I agreed that they should send an alternate. If you have any questions comments, please call me at 327-1800 X 315. MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and Commission From: Ron McLemore, City Manager !lwM Date: January 6, 1998 Re: Battle Ridge Annexation On February 26, 1996, the City Commission voted to forward the Battle Ridge, Carroll, Minter, and Weaver Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendments. At that time, I read into the public record a memo I had furnished to the Commission stating that I would not recommend adoption of the plan amendment unless I came to the conclusion that the annexation would be an asset to the community. In that memo, I requested the Commission to authorize me to set up an advisory committee made up of representatives from Seminole County Government, Oviedo City Government, McKinley Mill subdivision, Black Hammock, City staff, and the representatives of the property's owners, in order to receive input and to keep everyone up to date on the status of the comprehensive plan amendment. Since that time, staff and I have been in continuous communication with D.C.A. staff and had several meetings with the advisory committee. Additionally, during this period the Carroll, Minter, and Weaver property owner's have not proceeded with their petition. After exhaustive review of this matter by D.C.A. and members of the advisory committee, I have concluded that the Battle Ridge Petition should be accepted for annexation under the following conditions. These conditions have been formulated to attempt to address the concerns of the various parties involved, and to ensure that the project will have a value added impact on the City of Winter Springs. The property owner has agreed to these conditions in the proposed development agreement, currently before you. a) The density of development shall not exceed 2.75 units per finished acre. b) The average appraised value of home sites including land and buildings will not be less that $180,000 per unit. c) That all environmentally sensitive lands will be deeded to a governmental entity for conservation purposes. d) That the water management system will conform to Florida Department of Environmental Protection Outstanding Waters Program standards. e) That access to the development will be exclusively from State Road 434, except for any provisions requested by the City for emergency secondary access. f) That the property owner will apply for and comply with requirements for a Florida Audobaun Development Certificate for the project. g) That there will be no negative impacts on any endangered plant or animal species. h) That water and sewer will be provided by the City of Winter Springs, and that septic tanks of any type will be expressly prohibited from within the development. i) Additionally, I am recommending that the City acknowledge that it has no current interest in annexing east along the north side of State Road 434 beyond the Urban Service Line established by the county. Relatedly, I am recommending that the City agree that any further annexation in this direction would be based upon the county's agreement to adjust the Urban Service Line to accommodate a future annexation, provided that the City of Oviedo agrees to the same conditions. j) Finally, I am acknowledging that water and sewer facilities for the project will not be oversized beyond minimum standards for the purpose of providing services to future annexed areas in the vicinity. Based upon these conditions I am confident that the project provides an adequate measure of protection of the chosen life style of the surrounding property owner's, provides extraordinary measure of protection of the Lake Jesup ecosystem, and is compatible with the economics and life style interest of the resident's of Winter Springs. In consideration of the record of this project, I am confident that this project meets all the requirements of the City's comprehensive plan, and that approval of this annexation and this development project and conditioned is in the over all best interest of the City.