Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976 07 26 Regular e CLARK, DIETZ, AND ASSOCIATES - ENGINEERS, INC. ~~~ 7f~,-'--,' .~,_Ak - e ?/; ~/ 7i~ e . P.O. BOX 1976.500 WEST FULTON SANFORD, FLORIDA 32771 . PHONE 305-322-6841, 305-322-6741. 305-831-5717 July 22~ 1976 Honorable Troy Piland, Mayur City of Winter Springs 1 Fairfax Avenue . Winter Springs, Florida 32707 Re: Burgos Road Subdivision Dear Mayor Piland: I recommend approval of the engineering plans for this project subject to the Standard Provisos of Engineering Approval of Winter Springs, Florida attached here~o. . . Developer's engineer by his letter of July 16 has agreed to ,the City Engineer's review comments except for Item No.6 and has submitted revised plans. Item No.6 is satisfactory as proposed. The City should verify that the developer concurs and under- stands his engineer's resolution of these items. The City also needs to verify the agreements reached with the City Building Official and that the Fire Chief is satisfied. The developer should also be requested to furnish sets of the final engineering plans and documents to the City for the use of the Building Official and other City purposes. Sincerely Yours, CLARK, DIETZ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ ~/l ~4 JC)/C c,.; (~t!+~~~Ct'~1 B. C. Con~lin, P.E. BCC/1mg cc: MR. Ray Bradshaw, Building Official MR. Charles Holzman, Fire Chief MR. Dennis Unroe, P~~. Enclosures e CORPORATE OFFICE: 211 ~ORTH RACE STREET. l'RRA'A . ILLI'OIS 61801 · 217-384-1400 o THE R 0 F F ICE SIN: TEN N E SSE E . F LOR I D A . 1:\ D 1:\ :\ .-\. 'II S S 1 S SIP Pl.'" 1 S SOl! RIA N D I L Ll NO 1 S A PAR T o F R 0 L L INS N T ERN A T ION A L, I N C. e . e <'. . STANDARD PROVISOS OF ENGINEERING APPROVAL . WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA March, 1974 1) Approval is subject to review and approval by the State wocU of Florida, Department of Pollution Control and Division DE,~ of Health and Rehabilitative Services for sanitary sewage ~ facilities, storm water facilities and potable water systems. \ Copies of DPC and Division of Health and Rehabilitative .~ Service permits are to be furnished to the City. . 2) Approval is subject to review and approval by the Florida Department of Transportation for driveway, utility permits in State road right of ways, or similar use and road cross~ ing permits from Seminole County as applicable. 3) Approval of the private water and sewer utility company of plans and specifications is required, and a copy of their plan approval and the utility statement as to its ability to provide service and completion of contractual arrangements for provision of the service is to be supplied to the City. 4) Performance Bond or other suitable security is required.by the City prior to construction. 5) All work is subject to inspection by the City Inspector, City Engineer, or other authorized City representatives. Reasonable notice is to be provided by developers'or contractors in requesting inspections. , 6) Any unsatisfactory soil and ground water conditions determined existing under street and other facilities are to be remedied in a manner satisfactory \V'ith the City. In addition, dur.ing construction where the City determines that underdrains'are necessary for satisfactory temporary and/or permanent drainage of the road base, these underdrains are to be installed to City requirements. I 7j All drainageways, right of ways, and private or public ease- ment7 shall be sat~sfactorily grassed. In addition, any soddlng.around draln~ge structures or facilities or erosion! protectlve ~onstruct1on such as slope paving, rip rap, etc., and other m1nor construction not specifically shown on the ~lans but determ~ned as needed by the City during construction 1S to be accompllshed by the developer at no cost to the City. ~ e . e ~ (( e ( '(e STANDARD PROVISOS OF ENGINEERING APPROVAL WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA r-lARCH, 1974 PAGE 2 . 8) Where high ground water conditions are found in the field, special construction measures subject to City approval will be required to protect any limerock road base course proposed, or soil cement base or other substitute acceptable to the City for 'this use will be required; all subject to City review and approval. 9) Dedicated Permanent Easements are required for all public drainage, water and sewer, and utility facilities to be located outside of dedicated public road or other public right of ways. 10) A soils laboratory, subject to approval by the City will be employed by the developer to supervise, perform certain tests, and provide design mixes and laboratory and field control of road sub base, base course, and asphalt surface course construc- tion. The following will be required with copies furnished to the City: Stabilized Sub base thickness, density, and Florida bearing value Limerock Base Course thickness, density Asphalt Surface Course: thickness, compaction, 'plant certificate of mix conformance to specifications Soil Cement Base field sampling, design mix, and field control 11) Final certification by the Design Engineer of conformance of the completed construction to the City approved p19ns and documents is required before presentation of Maintenance Bond and acceptance by the City of the facilities. "., 12) Maintenance Bond is required following completion of construc- tion and prior to City accepting streets and drainage systems for bonded period. " e . e e e MEMORANDUM FROM: TO: GARY E. UASSEY, City Attorney MAYOR M-1D COUNCIL MEMBERS .. DATE: July 23, 1976 p~: Voting conflicts of Councilmen Hendrix and Ash in relationship to a zoning hearing now pending for the City Commission Dear Mayor and Councilmen: . To resolve any questions as to whether Councilmen Hendrix and Ash have voting conflicts in regards to a certain zoning request instituted by Mr. Jon Zabel within the City of Winter Springs, I have researched the law, as well as the ethical opinions from the Ethics Commission of the State of Florida, in regards to that particular situation. Councilman Hendrix is an employee of Chelsea Title and Abstract Co. which has handled certain work for Mr. Zabel and his associates in regards to the processing of abstracts. In this regard, Section 112.3143 of the General Laws of the State of Florida says; No public officer shall be prohibited from voting in his official capacity on any matter. However, any public officer voting in his official capacity upon any measure in which he has a personal, private or professional interest whi.ch inures to his special private gain or to the special gain of any principal by whom he is retained shall, within 15 days after the vote occurs, disclose the nature of his interest as a public record and a memorandum filed with the person res- ponsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who shall incorporate the memorandum in the meeting. This particular section does not prevent Councilman, Hendrix voting on zoning request and if he does so vote, unless he receives a special private gain or there is a special gain from the principal by whom he is employed, then he does not have to file the memorandum. In my opinion, unless Council- m~ Hendrix receives direct remuneration because of the process- ing of abstracts or by Mr. Zabel and his associates, then there is no conflict of interest and Councilman Hendrix does not have file a memorandum in this particular matter. In reference to Councilman Ash, apparently he rented a building from trr. Zabel and his associates outside the City of Winter Springs. In this regard, there is a Commission Ethics Opinion- CEO-76-75, issued April 16, 1976, in which a public official e . e e e .. Memorandum . July 23, 1976 'Page Two .. purchased a piece of property from a contractor who was regulated by City Council. In that opinion, it stated that the Code of Ethics Drovides that the law should be designed so as not to impede unreasonably the recruitment and retention of qualified persons to public service and that public officials should not be denied basic opportunities, available totther citizens, to acquire private economic interests except when conflict cannot be avoided. To pro- hibit a City employee the privilege of building his home within the employer City, while in compliance with the strict letter of Section 112.313(7), would not be within the spirit of the law as expressed in Section 112.311. In my opinion, Councilman Ash's position is the sam~ although not identical, as that expressed in CEO-76-75 and I do not believe that he would have a conflict of interest. However, again let me state, that if he does have a conflict of interest, this does not prevent him from voting and all that he would have to do would be file a memorandum stating what possible conflict of interest he might have pursuant to Florida Statute 112.3143. I hope that this will clarify the voting conflicts of the Councilmen in question and other voting conflicts that may arise on this and similar situations in the future. Yours .. Massey ~ttorney of Winter Springs, Fla. . e MEMORANDUM . FROM: GARY E. MASSEY, City Attorney .. TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS DATE: July 23, 1976 Re: Southern States Utilities Illegal rate increase Dear Mayor and Council Members: I have discussed with Mr. 1villiam Harrold, Attorney for the Florida Public Service Commission, the questions you related to Mr. Brock in reference to illegal rate increase. . }rr. Harrold informed me that based upon the Cohee case, he was of the opinion that the Florida Public Service COIT~ission could not order Southern States Utilities to cease charging illegal rates, nor could they order a refund of the illegally collected rates. However, he did ask that I send a letter briefly detailing the history of the controversy, as well as our authority for cleterming rates and that he would send me a more detailed response after he has had a chance to consider the same. I also asked him whether the cost of a rate hearing before the Florida Public Service Commission is chargeable to the customer of the particular system in question. He informed me that the costs, or a portion of the costs, were chargeable and that they would be amoritized over a three (3) years period of time. If this is the case, in relationship to the costs as stated by Southern States Utilities in its letter to the City of September 18, 1975, the costs for a rate hearing for the 160 customers being served by the Winter Springs system would be approximately $10,000.00. If the $10,000.00 were to be divided by the 160 customers, amortized for three years, the cost per customer for the three year period of time would be $62.50. In turn, the cost for one year would be $20.83 and the cost per month would be $1. 73. If the co'sti' as related by Southern States Utilities, is accurate, then it would cost customers $1.13 per month more if they were to apply for a rate increase. I think this should be compared with what increase in rates they are having to incur at this point in time, that are illegal on a per month basis to determine the appropriate action. clry' .