HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 01 18 Regular
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708-2799
Telephone (407) 327-1800
MENO
John Ketteringham, General Service Director ~
Carl Gosline, Community Development coordinator~
January 20, 1995
P&Z staff reports and agendas
In response to your memo of January 17, 1995 regarding staff
reports and agenda items, I have attached a copy of the format I
used when I was doing subdivision staff reports for the P&Z and
City Commission. Also attached is a copy of the staff report I
prepared for the P&Z on the Joyce rezoning project. I offer both
of these documents as suggested formats for these reports.
All of my recommendations herein are based on my professional
experience and the advice of land use law experts throughout the
state. They recommend staff reports which present findings of fact
and adoption of rules of procedure for all advisory boards.
As I have repeatedly stated, I think it is absolutely essential
that a staff report be prepared for virtually everything that goes
befere the P&Z, BOA and City Commission. I further recommend that
the level of detail and analysis found in the attached Joyce report
is necessary to ensure the public record has sufficient findings of
fact for all quasi-judical matters. These reports should be mailed
no later than ten days prior to their meetings.
The P&Z established a thirty day deadline for agenda items when
their rules of procedure were adopted in September 1994. I also
very strongly recommend the P&Z and the BOA establish rules of
procedure and follow them. A copy of these procedures is attached
for your reference.
In the case of the Joyce project, the confusion resulted because we
were in transition between my involvement in the project and Don's
involvement. Since I no longer have any responsibility for this
function, there should not be any confusion in the future.
In regard to the agenda items, I established a procedure wherein
either Shirley, or I, would confer with the P&Z chairman when it
was necessary to have a meeting. Even though the current code says
they will meet twice a month, they HISTORICALLY NEVER met when
there were no agenda items. The same is true for the BOA.
Nevertheless, Shirley, or I, will clear the agenda with you before
we discuss the matter with the chairman, unless you WOU.I~. .r~. .. .
discuss the matter with her directly. ~~~y~
JAN 2 0 1995
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
General Services
STAFF REPORT
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
ISSUE:
Mayor and City Commission
John Govoruhk, City Manager
Carl Gosline, Community Development Coordinator
July 27, 1994
Final Engineering/Development Plans for Parcel 80
Project Number 94-SUB-1
Should the Mayor and City Commission approve the final
engineering/development plans for Parcel 80 ?
.-
PROJECT FACTS
Future Land Use Designation
Project Density
Zoning Classification
Site Area
Total Number of Lots
Typical Lot Size
Minimum Lot Size
100 Year Floodplain
Project Phasing
Projected PM Peak Hour Trips
Front Yard Setback
Rear yard Setback
Side yard Setback
Water Service
Sewer Service
Other
City of Winter Springs
City of Winter Springs
DISCUSSION
Mayor and City Commission - staff Report Project Number 94-SUB-1
August 10, 1994
page 2 of 2
Attached for your reference are copies of the final staff comments
regarding this matter, the minutes of the 1111111111 Planning and
Zoning Board meeting; a summary of the latest Staff Review Board
meeting action; and a copy of the Deeds, Restrictions and Covenants
document. A copy of the site plan is also enclosed for your
review.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends approval of the final engineering/development
plans for Parcel 80 as represented in the plans signed and sealed
on 1111111111111111, subject to the following conditions:
1.11111, etc.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the
preliminary engineering/development plan on 11111111111, subject to
1111
,---------.-......
STAFF REPORT
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
ISSUE:
John Govoruhk, City Manager
John Ketteringham, General Services Director
Carl Gosline, Community Development Coordinator
November 18, 1994
Proposed Joyce Property Rezoning
Should the Mayor and City Commission approve the request
of Mrs. Joyce to rezone the subject property from RU and
C-2 to R-3?
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant, Mrs. Clara Joyce, has applied to change the zoning
on the subject property from RU and C-2 to R-3 to permit the
remodelling of an existing residence to a 25 bed Adult Congregate
Living Center (ACLF). It is necessary to rezone the property to a
classification which would accommodate mUlti-family development
because the proposed facility will house more than the six clients
which would be permitted by right in the RU zoning classification
under the provisions of Chapter 419.001 (2), Florida Statutes.
ANALYSIS
The site is approximately eight acres in size and is on the north
side of the railroad tracks adjacent to the high school. The
existing 4400 sq. ft residence will be remodelled to accommodate 25
adult clients and common areas for meals and recreation. The
parcels on the west, north and east sides of the site are in the
unincorporated area. A copy of the property depicting the
existing buildings and the proposed parking area is attached for
your reference.
The site is presently served by a septic tank and well. Orange
Avenue is a county road which is periodically graded by the City
under an interlocal agreement with Seminole County.
Preliminary conversations with the Seminole County Planning
Department indicate that the County does not have any regulations
which would prohibit an ACLF which is served by septic tank, a dirt
street and a well. There are a few such facilities currently in
existence in the County.
The unincorporated area surrounding the subject site is designated
suburban estates (1 DU/acre) and lower density residential (up to
4 DU/acre) on the Seminole County Future Land Use Map. The County
has not expressed any opposition to this project.
-------r--.~-"_..,-"" ~"-""" ""
Joyce Rezoning Staff Report
November 18, 1994
page 2
The subject property is designated as Mixed Use on the Future Land
Use Map of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Mixed Use
desiqnation was established to .... .allow flexibility and efficiency
to development design..... (Future Land Use Element Policy C-1,
Volume II, page 22) This classification permits residential
development of up to 10 dwelling units per acre. The Mixed Use
classification also permits non-residential development
(institutional, industrial or commercial) on a maximum of 50
percent of the gross land area; a minimum of 20 percent of the
gross land area must remain in open space; public uses, utilities
and/or wetlands of not less than five percent; and residential uses
on up to 75 percent of the gross land area.
The City's Future Land Use Map designations are shown on the
attached map. The orange colored area depicts the Mixed Use
classification; the light blue is Public Buildings; the light green
is Central Winds Park; the pink is Commercial; the yellow is Rustic
Residential; and the fuschia color depicts the moderate density
residential (6.6 to 9.0 DU/acre) area mandated by the Tuscawilla
Settlement Agreement.
One of the underlying concepts in the Comprehensive Plan is the
development of a Town Center. The Town Center is generally
,- comprised of City Hall, Central Winds Park and the high school.
The Mixed Use classification was established on most of the land
surrounding these facilities to induce more intense development
typical in town centers areas. Its purpose is to create incentives
for such development, to provide as much design flexibility as
possible for proposed projects and to create opportunities to mix
development types on a single parcel.
The proposed ACLF is consistent with the Mixed Use designation.
Assuming that each client's room was termed a separate dwelling
unit, the proposed project's density would be 3.2 dwelling units
per acre. The existing residence, and the other existing
buildings, occupy far less than 75 percent of the gross land area.
Since the proposed facility can be served by septic tank and well,
there is no need to provide space for pUblic utilities or uses.
In addition, Housing Element Policy E-2 states .....The City shall
permi t group homes containing six (6) or fewer persons to be
located in any residential land use category or zone and group
homes of seven (7) or more to locate in multi-family, mixed use or
commercial land use categories or zones..... (See Volume II, pg.
39) Therefore, the proposed project is clearly consistent with
this Policy of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
The existing RU zoning is not consistent with the Future land use
Map designation of Mixed Use. The RU (rural urban) zoning category
includes properties which are .....developed or used predominantly
for agricultural purposes and government or public service
Joyce Rezoning Staff Report
November 18, 1994
page 3
facilities with single family dwellings as a primary use..."
Regardless of the ultimate disposition of this project, the City
should rezone the property to a compatible classification at its
earliest opportunity. The proposed project offers the City the
opportunity to make the zoning on this property consistent with
the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan as required
by Chapter 163.3194 C1a), F.S.
There are four zoning categories which are consistent with the
Mixed Use classification, i.e., C-1, C-2, R-3 and PUD. The C-1
zoning is a neighborhood commercial zoning category which would
permit 88 possible land uses. The current City Code permits
mUlti-family uses in a C-1 zone by a conditional use permit from
the Board of Adjustment. The Mixed Use development criteria would
permit a non-residential project to pave 70 percent of the land
area; be up to 50 feet in height; and contain up to 348,00 sq. ft.
of commercial use.
At the P&Z Board meeting several of the applicant's neighbors
commented that the R-3 zoning would permit as many as 60 dwelling
units to go on the subject property, if the ACLF did not
materialize. While this statement is true, it is also a reason for
the staff recommendation to use R-3 zoning. The R-3 zoning
category is the least intensive of the available zoning
classifications which are compatible with the Mixed Use
designation. A commercial or industrial zoning category would
permit far more intense development and would clearly be far more
incompatible with the surrounding development. In addition, the R-
3 category permits a good transition of land uses between the
suburban estates and lower density uses surrounding the property on
the west, north and east and the high school on the south.
The C-2 category is the City's industrial zoning classification.
It permits all of the uses allowed in the C-1 classification plus
44 industrial type uses. C-2 zoning would be incompatible with the
surrounding uses and would represent the most intrusive of the
possible zoning categories.
A case could be made for rezoning all the parcels in the City with
a Future Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use to PUD. The PUD
zoning category would permit a commercial, industrial or
residential, or any combination thereof, proj ect. It would require
an applicant to prepare preliminary and final development plans and
be processed in the same manner as the sUbdivisions in the
Tuscawilla PUD. It is staff's opinion that this approach would be
overly burdensome for the proposed use of the subject property,
i.e. remodelling an existing structure for an ACLF.
The R-3 zoning category is the least intensive classification of
the available zoning categories which are compatible with the Plan.
It is intended for multi-family development and permits lodging
'---.'...........-r--...-
Joyce Rezoning Staff Report
November 18, 1994
page 4
homes. The staff interprets the definition of a lodging home .to
include an ACLF. Multi-family land uses are compatible with the
intent of the Mixed Use classification to promote more intense
development, particularly in the Town Center.
The proposed rezoning is the first step in a multiple step
licensing process for the applicant. The Agency for Health Care
Admintstration (AHCA), the state regulatory agency for ACLFs, has
extensive criteria which must be met before a state license is
granted. However, the AHCA will not process a licensing
application until the site is properly zoned by the local
government. The proposed project will also be required to comply
with the Seminole County Concurrency Management since Orange Ave is
a county road. The remodelling will have to meet all of the City's
construction standards.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Board considered this matter at their
November 2, 1994 meeting. A motion to approve the staff
recommendation of approval of the request died for lack of a
second. No other motions were offered. Although the November 2,
1994 minutes have not been formally approved by the P&Z Board, they
have been reviewed, and approved, via a phone conversation by those
members in attendance, i.e., Messers. Lein, Hopkins and Stephens.
The minutes are attached for your reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends the City Commission approve the request to
change the zoning from RU and C-2 to R-3 on Lot 17 and a portion of
Lot 23, Block B, Mitchell's Survey of the Levy Grant based on the
following findings of fact:
1. The subject property is designated as Mixed Use on the
Future Land Use Map of City's Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed project is consistent with Future Land Use
Element Policy C-1. (See Volume II, page 22 of the Plan)
3. The proposed project is consistent with the density and
intensity requirements of the Mixed Use classification in the
City's Comprehensive Plan.
4. The proposed project is consistent with the requirements
of Housing Element Policy E-2. (See Volume II, pg. 39 of the Plan)
5. The Mixed Use designation was made for numerous parcels in
the area as part of an overall concept in the Plan to create a Town
Center around City Hall, Central Winds Park and the high school.
6. An Adult Congregate Living Center is a multi-family living
environment and as such is an appropriate use for a Town Center and
the Mixed Use classification.
7. An Adult Congregate Living center, essentially a rooming
house, is a permitted use within the R-3 zoning classification.
8. The R-3 zoning category is the least intense and intrusive
of the zoning categories available which are consistent with the
Mixed Use classification in the Plan.
Joyce Rezoning staff Report
November 18, 1994
page 5
9. The applicant must supply evidence that all applicable
regulations of the Agency for Health Care Administration (the state
regulatory agency), Seminole County concurrency management and the
current City Code have been met prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy.
The staff also recommends that the first reading of the zoning
amendment ordinance be held on November 28, 1994. A draft
ordinance is attached for your reference.
cc: Mayor and City Commission
Ms. Donna MCIntosh, applicant legal counsel
Ms. Judy stewart, Seminole County Planning Department
------c....c..--r-----------.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY / PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
POlicy LPA-l
All future meetings of the Local Planning Agency/Planning and
Zoning Board, or its successor agency, hereinafter known as the
Board, shall begin at 7:00 o'clock PM.
adopted September 7. 1994
Policy LPA-2
The Board will meet on the first Wednesday of the month, unless the
Chairperson, or Vice-Chairperson determines no meeting is
necessary. The Chairperson, or Vice-Chairperson may establish
addi tional meeting dates, known as special meetings, provided
reasonable notice is given to Board members.
adopted September 7. 1994
Policy LPA-3
All applications requ1r1ng Board action, other than internal
administrative matters, or matters continued from a previous
meeting, shall be filed with the staff no later than thirty (30)
days prior to the meeting at which the applicant wishes the matter
to be considered. This policy shall be effective at the November
2, 1994 meeting.
adopted September 7. 1994
POlicy LPA-4
All agendas for regular Board meetings shall be posted and mailed
at least ten (10) days prior to the scheduled Board meetings.
Agendas for special meetings shall be posted and mailed by such
date as may be reasonable.
adopted September 7. 1994
revised 9/7/94
t\vV~
Januaty 16, 1995
To:
Planning and Zoning Board Members
Don LeBlanc, Land Management Speci;ilist ~
From:
Re:
P&Z Board Meeting, Januaty 18, 1995
Section 20-267, Amendment
Allowing Adult Congregate Living Facilities (ACLF)
It has just come to my attention, on this date, that I am to be the presenter for this proposed
amendment to the existing Code of Ordinances.
The proposed amendment is to allow an ACLF in the R-U (Rural Urban) zoning category. This
DOES NOT require rezoning action and remains in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.
This amendment will also require any facility to meet all the guidelines of Chapter 9 (Land
Development) and those of the Agency for Health Care Administration.
A meeting to discuss this compromise was held on December 29, 1994. The minutes ofthis
meeting are attached. Also attached are a letter of no objection to this use from the County and
the proposed Ordinance 575.
This proposed Ordinance received a First Reading at the Commission Ivfeeting of Januaty 9, 1995
and will be scheduled for a Second Reading on February 13, 1995. There was concern about the
number of patients that would be allowed if this were granted. It is my understanding that the City
Attorney is modifYing the Ordinance to allow no more than six (6) patients per acre owned.
cc: City Manager
General Services Director
City Attorney
Community Development Coordinator
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708-2799
Telephone (407) 327-1800
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Zoning Board Members
FROM: Shirley A. Frankhouser, ~
Adm. Secretary, General Services
DATE: February 13, 1995
RE: Meeting Minutes of January 18, 1995
Enclosed please find a copy of your meeting minutes of January 18,
1995. Another set of minutes will be mailed to you of the January
18 meeting along with the next meeting agenda which has not yet
been scheduled.
Thank You.
-~$_.-
MEETING NOTICE/AGENDA
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS
JANUARY 18, 1995
7:00 PM
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL
4. OLD BUSINESS
A. Consideration of the minutes of the November 2, 1994
meeting
5. NEW BUSINESS
A. Consideration of a proposed amendment to section 20-267,
the RU zoning classification, of the current City Code to
include ACLFs as a permitted use
B. Announcement: The Joint City Commission/Planning and
Zoning Board workshop regarding the Land Development Code
is scheduled for Februarv 6. 1995 at 7:00 PM in the City
commission Chambers
6. ADJOURNMENT
Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any
of these proceedings should contact the Employee Relations
Department ADA Cooridinator at 407-327-1800, at least 48 hours in
advance of the meeting.
Persons are advise that if they decide to appeal any decisions made
at this meeting, they may need to insure that a verbatim record of
the proceedings is made, at their expense, which record includes
the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to based per
Chapter 286.0105, Florida Statutes.
./
ORDINANCE NO. 57.!;
~-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS,
FLORIDA, ANffiNDING SECTION 20-267. USES PERlvllTTED.
CHAPTER 20 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY, CONFLICTS AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs,
Florida, has determined that the following amendment to the Code of
Ordinances is in the best interest of the health, safety, and welfare of
the citizens of the City of Winter Springs, Florida.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY CO!vfMISSION OF THE CITY
OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA, HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I - That the following Section be amended to add an eleventh (11 th)
permitted use to read as follows:
Section 20-267. Uses Permitted.
(11) Adult Congregate Living Facility, which meets all the guidelines of Chapter 9
of the Code of Ordinances, Winter Springs, Florida and those of The Agency
for Health Care Administration (a State of Florida Agency).
SECTION II - If any section or portion of a section of this ordinance proves to be
invalid, unlawful or unconstitutional, it shall not be held to.iI\validate .or impair the validity,
force or effect of any other section or portion of a section of this ordinance.
SECTION ill - That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are
hereby repealed.
SECTION IV - This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and
adoption in accordance with Florida law.
Passed and adopted this _ day of
, 1995.
JOHN BUSH, MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
--.--...
Semino[e County Government
Planning and Development Department Administration 1101 East First Street
Telephone (407) 321-1130 Ext. 7397
January 9, 1995
Sanford FL 32771-1468
FAX 330-9594
Mr. John Bush, Mayor
City of Winter Springs
1126 East S .R. 434
Winter Springs, FL 32708
Subject: Joyce Rezoning
Dear Mayor Bush:
Thank you for the opportunity to meet with your staff to discuss
this proposed rezoning.
The County does not object to the proposal which would allow an
Adult Congregate Living Facility (ACLF) as a permitted use within the RU
zoning classification, and that development be subject to the site plan
review process by the City. We would request that any future
development within the Mixed Use designation in this area be rezoned to
PUD (Planned Unit Development) to ensure compatibility with adjacent
properties within unincorporated Seminole County, and that the County
be afforded an opportunity to review future rezonings in the area.
If you have any questions, please contact Tony Matthews, Planner,
at (407) 321-1130, extension 7396.
Sincerely,
----r-//) t2
~//
Tony VanDerworp, AICP
Planning and Development Director
TV:tm
c:joyce
R~
J p" ;,1 0 9 1995
CITY OF WINTEH SPRINGS
Community Devolopment
Coordinator
L..-- "
,
/
, ..
I
~ ~ ..-,.......,...---
-,'\in.'f{ "1':1"'1 ~,'T
L'( ;'.-"."~_"~11 ,v;
I f"-' ,:.,) '-- -,
,tJ; y-- ~
r---.
".-
\
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
DEe 3 0 1994
ell Y or- VViN fER SF
City Manager
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
. DATE :
RE:
1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708
Telephone (407) 327-1800
John Govoruhk, city Mana~ ~~.
John Ketteringham, Gener1~~ice Director \ A~
Carl Gosline, community Development Coordina or ~~
December 29, 1994
Joyce Rezoning - Neighborhood meeting
At the December 12, 1994 meeting of the City Commission, this
ma tter was tabled to permit the ci ty staff an opportunity to
coordinate our recommendation with the County planning staff. A
meeting' was held on December 29, 1994 with representatives of the
County Planning Department, the applicant, the neighborhood and the
staff in attendance. A summary of that meeting is attached for
your reference.
In summary, a compromise was reached wherein the staff recommends
an amendment to the RU zoning classification which includes an ACLF
as a permitted use. The City Attorney is in the process of
drafting an ordinance to this effect.
This compromise eliminates the need for Mrs. Joyce to rezone her
property to R-3 to permit construction of an ACLF. The staff
believes this approach mitigates most of the concerns expressed by
the County, the City Commission and the neighbors regarding the
possibili ty of apartments being constructed should the ACLF fail to
materialize.
cc: Mayor and city Commission
Doug Kelly - Seminole County Planning Department
Greg Bachnik - President SLJSHA
Bill Reischmann - applicant legal counsel
Frank Kruppenbacher
Don LeBlanc
,
(:
,.~
,-
Iii
MEETING SUMMARY
December 29, 1994
Proposed Joyce Rezoning from RU and C-2 to R-3 located at 1205
Orange Avenue, Winter Springs, FL
Attendees:
John Govoruhk, City Manager
John Ketteringham, General Services Director
Frank Kruppenbacher, city Attorney
Don LeBlanc, Land Management Specialist
Carl Gosline, Community Development Coordinator
Dour Kelly, Seminole County Planning Department
Greg Bachnik, President, SLJSHA
Scott Wassman, SLJSHA
Cathy Cowden, Realtor
Clara Joyce, applicant
Bill Reischmann, applicant legal counsel
The city staff proposed a compromise approach in which the staff
would recommend to the City Commission that the list of permitted
uses in the RU zoning classification be amended to permit ACLFs and
that the ACLF be subject to the site plan review process as
described in Chapter 9 of the City Code. After some discussion,
this approach was generally acceptable to the applicant and the
County Planning Department. The residents expressed some
reluctance to accept this approach.
Mr. Bachnik explained that the SLJSHA is opposed to the current
land use classification and would prefer to have it changed to some
classification more compatible to the existing development. It is
the SLJSHA position that an ACLF of this type is a commercial use
and as such is totally incompatible with the existing development
in the area. They also expressed concern about the traffic that
this facility would generate on a substandard road.
Frank explained that the city cannot change the land use
classification without going through the plan amendment process.
This process takes a minimum of nine months. In addition, the City
would still be required to act on the Joyce application based on
the current regulations.
He further explained that the city commission is very concerned
about site plan development issues such as provision of potable
water and possible traffic impacts and that all projects, other
than single-family residential, in the City of winter Springs are
required to undergo the site plan review process. However, the
si te plan review process cannot begin until the property is
correctly zoned for the intended use. The staff agreed to keep the
County staff and the SLJSHA advised of the site plan review
discussions as they progress.
--
:.
1.4/1
Joyce Rezoning Meeting Summary
December 29, 1994
page 2
The tentative schedule for the necessary actions to accomplish the
compromise is as follows:
1. Januarv 9, 1995 - first reading of the proposed ordinance
to add ACLF as a permitted use in the RU classification
2. January 9, 1995 - first reading of the draft ordinance to
rezone the property to R-3
3. January 18, 1995 - P&Z Board consideration of the proposed
amendment to add ACLFs as a permitted use in the RU
classification
4. February 13, 1995 - second reading of the ordinance adding
ACLFs as a permitted use in the RU classification
5. Februarv 13, 1995 - second reading of the ordinance to
rezone to R-3, only if the previous ordinance is not
adopted
--.-.r.
...".;</"
.---
I"'"'"'
,-...
Cl of Winter Springs Florida
To whom it may co~ern:
J IWJt/R J6l Y /-1, J9!.ii'
Recently We recelved a letter from the City of Winter Sp
Springs advising us that Mrs. ~oyce a neighbor had requested
approval of the City to have her property arproved for the
use as an Adult CoagregateLiving facility.
We have been neighbor s with the Joyce family since we
purchasrd our property in 1952. It has been a very good
nelgnblr relat1onship. We huve no objection to your
~~va of the request from Mrs. Joyce.
Ervine J. ~o
lr/~~Y~7/~
Martha M. Button
owners
January 12, 1995
To WinT.er Springs City Commission and others,
Regarding my neighbo~s Mr$. Joyce's desire to sell her home ~or a
retirement center I can think o~ no better use. It is a big lovely
home ~or this purpose and sits well back ~rom the road in a quiet
setting.
I have attended the commission meetings where someone ~rom the neigh-
borhood stands up and says he speaks ~or the neighborhood. Well, he
doesn't speak ~or me.
And I live the closest o~ anybody to Mrs Joyce. I~ I have no objection,
why does it matter what people way on down the street say? Why don't
you ask some o~ us quieter ones what we think? We are supportive of it.
// 6
av:f - 'i~ ~-
~ ..?~
Signature
/~tJ; t!~t2 ~ /)~~~J~/ c3~1CJ~
Address
....-.-,
January 13, 1995
To the City of Winter Springs,
I was notified of the request of Mrs. Dean Joyce to convert her property
to an adult congregate living center and asked if I had any objections.
Well, I don't. I live right across the street and I do not see any way
this type of use would have any negative effect.
Certain of my neighbors are being very vocal in their objections but
those of us most affected by it have DID objection to it.
I have been to all the meetings of the city on this change and the people
who are claiming to speak for the homeowners don't speak for me. I
wholeheartedly endorse this idea.
1f.~- C-; m4/lA,}~A~
/~J-O
Address
! !
i 1. .-,.,
i- ,. ~
"
I / if
/ / l,;'I.l 1 A; { .
. f "'"
(J/'~A/~J IkLJ
/)- ).(
(/1.,;1 lvf f
(? v-( ,
~/