HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984 08 22 Planning and Zoning Board Regular Minutes
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
AUGUST 22, 1984
The Planning and Zoning Board Meeting of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, was
called to order by Chairman D. Robert Smedley.
Roll Call:
Richard DeFazio, present
Arthur Hoffman, present
Taru Joshi, present
Jon Hall, present
D. Robert Smedley, Chairman, present
The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Smedley.
Approval of Minutes of Aug. 8~ 1984:
Motion was made by DeFazio, seconded by Joshi, to approve the minutes of August 8,
1984. Vote: All Aye; motion carried.
Fairway Club Condominiums:
Chairman Smedley explained this is a continuation of a previous meeting and all
input received at the July 23, 1984 meeting will be considered as having been
received at this meeting so that it will not be repeated. The issue at hand is
approval of a final development plan.
City Counsel Drew Thomas, Roland & Thomas, also said this is not a zoning hearing.
It is a final development plan approval hearing. The property is already zoned PUD
and within that specific designation, the area that is under consideration is shown
for a condominium use at 12 units per acre.
The following persons spoke against the proposed development: Attorney David Simmons
with the firm of Drage, DeBeaubien, Milbrath & Simmons, representing some concerned
homeowners (he also presented a petition to the Board); George Weigle, Northern Way;
Art Harris, Sable Court read the following Resolution: Whereas, the Imara Corporation's
proposal presented to the City of Winter Springs for approval increases the established
P.U.D. unit per acre density of the currently designated "Fairway Oaks" land area from
approximately four (4) units per acre to twelve (12) units per acre; and Whereas, this
proposed increase in unit per acre density violates contractual agreements and is not
compatible with the surrounding Tuscawilla residential development; and Whereas, the
environmental, economic and traffic impact of the proposed increased density is un-
acceptable to the Tuscawilla community; therefore, it is hereby resolved, that the
Tuscawilla Homeowners' Association is unequivocally opposed to the Imara Corporation
proposal to increase the unit density of the "Fairway Oaks" designated land area above
the currently specified density of approximately four (4) units per acre. Signed
Billee L. Rozansky, President and John Heiland, Vice-President.
Jay Nelson, Northern Way; Tony Tiano, Royal Oak Drive; Larry Keeler, Leopard Trail;
Fred Forbes, Nancy Circle; David Hurt, Northern Way; Jim Hughes, Northern Way; Terry
Rutter, Northern Way; Betty Shorthouse, OxBow Lane; Gene Dorman, Northern Way, George
Decker, Pebble Beach Circle; J. Gupton, Northern Way; L. Keeler, Leopard Trail;
Charles Pascual, Duncan Drive; Frank Miller, Shetland; Rev. F. Schramm, Winter
Springs Boulevard; Pete Corum, Shetland Ave.; D. Loberger, Gazelle Trail; Ellen
Weiss, Winter Springs Boulevard; I. Laub, Blue Spruce Court; J. Willis, Northern Way;
Frank Curatella, Oscelot Trail; Carolyn Hughes, Northern Way; Kay Tiano, Royal Oak Drive;
Donna Rickey, Tarpon Circle; Mike Saparito, Morgan St.; George Weigle, Northern Way;
Frank Miller, Shetland Ave., Susan Gibson, Attorney with Drage, DeBeaubien, Milbrath
& Simmons.
Planning & Zoning Board Meeting, Aug. 22, 1984
Page 2
Mike Jones, Attorney, representing the Developer and Mr. Terry Rice spoke for
the project.
Motion was made by Taru Joshi to recommend to the City Commission to decline the
final development plan for Fairway Club Condominiums because the public roads in the
adjacent area are not big enough to hold the traffic. Seconded by Richard DeFazio
for discussion.
Motion was made to amend the motion by DeFazio to include compatibility is not
consistent with the project. Amendment failed due to lack of a second.
Motion was made to amend the motion by Hoffmann to deny based on a conflict with
the intent and purpose of the Planned Unit Development, specifically Sec. 44.85.1 and
paragraphs 1 and 5. Seconded by Smedley for discussion. Discussion. Vote on the
amendment to the motion: DeFazio, aye; Joshi, aye; Smedley, aye; Hoffman, aye; Hall,
aye; motion carried.
Motion was made to amend the motion by Smedley to include that in addition to the
previous items that the existing and proposed utilities are adequate for the population
proposed; and that the phase of development in question cannot exist as an independent
unit capable of creating an environment of substantial desireability and stability.
Seconded by Hoffman. Discussion. Vote on the amendment to the motion: Joshi, aye;
Smedley, aye; Hoffman, aye; Hall, aye; DeFazio, aye; motion carried.
Motion was restated by Counsel as follows:
Motion to recommend to the City Commission that the development plan be rejected and
make specific findings as follows: 1. there is not substantial compliance with the
intent and purpose of the PUD District specifically with paragraphs 1 and 5 of Sec.
44.85.1; 2. that the phase of development in question cannot exist as an independent
unit capable of creating an environment of substantial desireability and stability;
3. that the road system is inadequate for the population proposed; however, other
existing and proposed utilities are adequate.
Vote on main motion as amended and restated by Counsel:
Smedley, no; Hoffman, aye; Hall, aye; DeFazio, aye; Joshi, aye; motion carried.
Meeting adjourned 11:09 p. m.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary T. Norton,
City Clerk