HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994 05 20 Site Plan Review Board Meeting Minutes
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
SITE PLAN REVIEW BOARD REPORT
DATE: May 20, 1994
PROJECT: Grand Reserve
Project # 94-SUB-4
PLANS:
,Prel iminary Engineering Plans
Received by Winter Springs, April 25, 1994
PROJECT ANALYSIS:
Future Land Use Designation:
Zoning:
Total Number of Lots:
Minimum Lot Sq. Footage:
100 Year Floodplain:
Phasing:
Projected
Projected
Setback:
~Lower Density Residential
18
e (1) acre .:t.
14 Acre in Conservation area
School Age Population: 12
Average Daily Trips: 180
Front - 30 FT; Rear: 20 FT;
Side: 15 FT
Water Service
Sewer Service
City of Winter Springs
City of Winter Springs
We have completed our review of Grand Reserve PRELIMINARY
ENGINEERING PLANS. The following is a list of items that need to
be addressed prior to our approval of these plans:
BUILDING DEPARTMENT: Don Houck, Bldg. Official 327-1800, Ext 304
(NO COMMENTS)
ENGINEERING DEPT.: Mark Jenkins, P.E. 327-1800, Ext. 326
The subject engineering plans and soils report were received
on Apri 1 25, 1994. The following comments address deficiencies
noted during review:
1. My letter to you dated March 21, 1994, was answered by Mr.
Bi II Starmer, the developer. I t is requested that yOU, the
Engineer-of-Record, answer the engineering questions and respond to
direct wri tten inquiries on engineering matters related to the
project.
2. The Conklin, Porter and Holmes letter dated March 15, 1994,
asked for a copy of the restricti ve covenants. Mr. Starmer's
response letter, dated April 21, 1994, states that a copy is
SPR Report - Grand Reserve
May 20, 1994
Page 2
attached to the letter.
provide, as required in
Development Code (LDC).
No such
Section
copy was at tached. PI ease
9-46 (b.2.t) of the Land
Enqineerinq Plans
Cover Sheet:
3. Section 9-46 (b.2.a) of the LDC requires the, ".. .name,
address and telephone number of developer, surveyor and
engineer." Please provide this information for the surveyor
and developer, as you did for the engineer.
Sheet C-2:
4. Please delete the reference to "county" in note #9.
5. Please amend note #17 to state that the City will only
maintain the function of the pond as permitted. The City will
not cut the grass around the pond or other aesthetic measures,
that is up to the Homeowner's Association.
6. Note #21 states the streets will be dedicated to the public
and sheet C-5 describes a gated community. You cannot gate a
public street. If you wish to have a gate, then please delete
Note #21 on Sheet C-2.
sheet C-3:
7. Section 9-159 (3) of the LDC requires an easement for creeks
that traverse a development. Please show a drainage easement
for the creek, on the engineering plans and the plat.
8. It is noted that the proposed retention pond occupies the
complete width of the power easement. Don't you have to leave
room for power company trucks to get around the pond? If so,
please make this change.
9. It is noted that the proposed wall, along Tuscawilla Road,
extends completely across both power easements. Don't you
need a gate for the power companies to access the easements?
Please show this on the engineering plans.
Sheet C-4:
10. Please delete the reference to "Orange county" in the notes.
11. The "Typical Street Section" shown does not meet the
dimensions specified for a 50-foot right-of-way, shown in
Section 9-296 of the LDC. Please correct this by changing
SPR Report - Grand Reserve
May 20, 1994
Page 3
lane width to (10) feet, sidewalk-to-curb distance to (8)
feet and add (1) foot between the sidewalk and the edge of
right-of-way.
12. Pleas~ add the seasonal high ground water table to the
"Typical Pond Section." This is required in Section 9-46
(b.2.u) of the LDC.
13. PI ease show drainage easements for all the "rear yard drainage
swales" on the engineering and the plat.
Sheet C-9:
14. The "Median Curb (type D)" does not meet the dimensional
requirements of Section 9-301 of the LDC. Please change the
overall height to 12.5 inches and the shorter height to 7.25
inches, on this sheet.
Community Development Coord.: Carl D. Gosline 327-1800, Ext. 315
1. The proposed subdivision consists of 18 lots on a total site
of 29.8 acres. The net buildable area, after subtracting the
conservation area, is 16.8 acres. Therefore, the density for
this project is 1.1 dwelling units per acre.
2. The site is designated as Lower Density Residential (1.1 to
3.5 DUlAC) and is zoned PUD. The project is therefore
consistent with the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive
Plan and the current zoning classification.
3. The applicant received approval of the concept plan by the
Planning and Zoning Commission on January 6, 1993 and by the
City Commission on January 25, 1993. The proposed preliminary
plan is substantially the same as the approved concept plan.
4. Eighteen dwelling units will generate approximately 180
average daily trips (ADT). Traffic capacity is usually
determined by PM Peak Hour trips. Peak hour trips, in the
absence of a specific traffic study, are between 8 percent and
10 percent of the ADT. For analysis purposes, we use 10
percent. Therefore, this project will generate in additional
18 peak hour trips to the roadway network.
SPR Report - Grand Reserve
May 20, 1994
Page 4
5. The latest traffic counts, complied by the county Traffic
Engineering Dept. for the first quarter of this year, show
this section of Tuscawilla Road has an ADT 14,896, or a PM
Peak Hour count of 1489. Policy C-3 of the Traffic
Circulation Element establishes a level of service standard
(LOS) of E for Tuscawilla Road until the widening is
completed. Level of serve E is a PM Peak Hour design capacity
of 1540 trips. The addition of 18 trips during the PM Peak
Hour keeps the current level of service well below the LOS E
limitation.
6. The project has applied to Seminole County for a driveway cut
onto Tuscawilla Road. The driveway will be aligned with the
entrance to Arbor Glen Court. This alignment of the
subdivision entrances is consistent with Traffic Circulation
Element Policy B-6 which statesfl.. .Coordinate development of
all property in the City adjacent to Tuscawilla Road with
County requirements for laneage and intersection improvements
to lessen development impact until the road is widened..."
7. The site plan map should include a list of the various site
information. Contact me for further information in this
regard.
8. The right-of-way for the widening of Tuscawilla Road has
already been acquired from the owner by the County.
9. The applicant is reminded that Road Impact fees of $1256.43
per dwelling unit; Police Impact fees of $ 76.49 per dwelling
unit; and Fire Impact fees of $ 151.53 per dwelling unit will
be collected prior to the issuance of any building permits.
10. The applicant should be aware that the City and the County are
currently reviewing the typical cross sections for the
Tuscawilla Road widening in order to minimize the loss of tree
canopy on both sides of the road. To this end, I suggest the
applicant strongly consider placing a deed restriction on Lot
1 to the effect that no trees be removed from the East side 20
foot side yard setback. This restriction would ensure the
existing tree canopy remain after the road is widened. If
this is satisfactory, please show on plans.
11. The City Code requires sidewalks along Tuscawilla Road.
Please address this issue in your response.
,
"
SPR Report - Grand Reserve
May 20, 1994
Page 5
FIRE DEPARTMENT: Timothy J. Lallathin, Fire Chief - 327-2332
The above referenced development plan as submitted on April
25, 1994 have been reviewed by the Fire Department. The
development plans have been revised to incorporate the
requi~ed changes as requested by this Department.
NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ARE REQUIRED AT THIS TIME.
POLICE DEPARTMENT: Charles Sexton, Chief of Police - 327-1000
After review of the Plans and Grand Reserve's letter of April
21, 1994, I find that not all of the objections, or comments made
in Chief John Govoruhk's memo #43-92 of November 4, 1992 (See
attached), or my memo #11-94 of March 28, 1994 (See attached), were
addressed or resolved. Also, I didn't see a copy of either of
these memo's included with Grand Reserve's response. I have
therefore attached copies of both, and restate the following:
1. If the Tuscawilla cut is approved, it will align with
Arbor Glen Court. stop sign and stop bar at intersection
of Tuscawilla Road. stop sign in lot #10 at intersection,
and 20 m.p.h. Speed Limit signs in lot #2. All to conform
with F.D.O.T. and City Ordinances.
2. Recommend the request to omit sidewalks be rejected, and
require sidewalks within the property as per City order
9-221.
3. All traffic control signs and markings, street name sign
to conform to F.D.O.T. and City Ordinances.
UTILITY/PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.: Kipton Lockcuff, Utility Director
327-2669
We have received the preliminary engineering for Grand Reserve
signed and sealed April 25, 1994 and have the following comments:
1. General Note #2 should be revised to indicate utility
relocations are at the expense of the Developer. General Note #17
should be revised to, stormwater ponds are to maintained by the
develooper or homeowners. General Note #21 should be revised to
indicate the street will not be dedicated to the City. utility
Note #5 - delete the reference to Orange County.
SPR Report - Grand Reserve
May 20, 1994
Page 6
2. We recommend that a dedicated access to the 'retention pond be
provided instead of an easement.
The ,following comments can be addressed for the Final
Engineering submittal:
1. The County will probably require a jack and bore of Tuscawilla
Road for the water main in lieu of an open cut.
2. The reclaimed water system will initially be connected to the
potable water line until such time as the DEP permits our reclaimed
water service area: Please revise the drawing to reflect this.
The Ci ty wi 11 provide the temporary master meter and do the
reconnection to the existing reclaimed water line at a future date.
3. The single water service detail should have a straight through
curb stop in lieu of an angled curb stop. The double service
should have a straight through U-branch instead of an angled U-
branch.
4. It appears from the inverts that the 42" RCP pipe for the
stream and 24" street drainage pipe are in conflict. Please show
the 42" on your profile to verify no conflict exists.
5. No reclaimed water service is shown for the entrance plantings
and fountain. will a well be utilized?
6. I t appears that the wall is to go over the outl et of the
existing 30" drainage pipe under Tuscawilla Road at the Northeast!
property corner. How will this be treated? /
/"
(/
o 'jJ) ~O.."
S VvUV , ve ib-
tJ Q~~ \
rtQ-ft/
I
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (407) 327-1800
May 20, 1994
Bill starmer, Vice President
Stottler-Stagg & Associates
336 N. Orange Avenue
Orlando, FL 32801
RE: Grand Reserve - Project # 94-SUB-4
Preliminary Engineering plans
Received by Winter Springs, April 25, 1994
Dear Mr. Starmer:
We
to the
report.
discuss
have attached, a Site plan Review Board Report in response
above mentioned project. We ask that you review this
If you have any questions about an item, make sure you
it with the appropriate department head.
In your response to this SPR Report, we ask that you address
each comment in writing. Submit your letter along with ten (10)
revised plans to Shirley A. Frankhouser, Administrative Secretary.
You will be notified of Staff comments, or to schedule a Site Plan
Review Board Meeting.
The Developer must identify any substantial changes to the
plans which the Developer makes, and are not in response to
comments contained in this Site Plan Review Report.
If you have any difficulty in obtaining information from any
department, please inform me, and we will get back to you right
away. If there are any queS~e:~~ me a call.
,g{!-1~ Behrens, .Jt~
General Services Director
BCB/saf
cc:
John Govoruhk, City Mgr.
Carl D. Gosline, Community Dev. Coord.
All Department Heads