HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 11 07 Public Hearing 504 PUD Master Plan and Preliminary Development Plan/Preliminary Engineering/Subdivision Plan
COMMISSION AGENDA
ITEM 504
Consent
Information
Public Hearin X
Re ular
November 7.2007
Meeting
MGR. /Dept.
REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the P&Z Board consider a PUD
master plan, preliminary development plan, and preliminary engineering/subdivision plan for a 338
unit development on approximately 47.09 acres, located on the south side of Shepard Road, north
of Florida Avenue, east of Boat Lake, and immediately adjacent to the west side of the Wildwood
residential PUD.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the P&Z Board to consider, provide
comment on, and recommend the City Commission approve, approve with conditions and/or
modifications, or disapprove PUD master plan and preliminary development plan for 338 units,
consisting of 127 town homes (a.k.a. park home units) and 211 patio homes (a.k.a. pull-apart units)
on 41.16 acres of the total 47.09 acres.
ZONING AND LAND USE DESIGNATION:
Zoning: PUD & C-2
Future Land Use Designation: Medium Density Residential (3.6 - 9.0 DU/acre)
Previous subdivision plan from the 1980s or before has expired; Existing Development Agreement
(modifications pending); Ordinance No. 2007-05 Rezoning 4 parcels within Winter Place from C-2
to PUD is to be considered by the P&Z on November 7,2007; PUD Master Plan, Preliminary
Development Plan, and Preliminary Engineering/Subdivision plan being considered in this item.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Chapter 163, FS
Chapter 166, FS
Comprehensive Plan
Chapter 5, City Code.
Chapter 9, City Code.
Chapter 20, City Code.
Development Agreement of June 14, 2006
November 7, 2007
Regular Item 504
Page 2 of9
CHRONOLOGY:
June 12.2006- Adoption of the change of Future Land Use from "Industrial" to "Medium Density
Residential" on the Dittmer parcels.
June 14.2006- Execution of Development Agreement related to Dittmer parcels.
July 24.2006- Adoption of the change of Future Land Use from "Industrial" to "Medium Density
Residential" on the Elsea and Florida Avenue parcels, including certain directives to be
subsequently addressed.
May 30. 2007 - City Commission directed the applicant to try to work out as many issues as
possible with staffbefore coming back for final concept approval, and requested that the applicant
provide a statement from the power company regarding the use of the easement area, as indicated
on the concept plan.
June 23. 2007 - City Commission approved concept plan, subject to conditions.
CONSIDERATIONS:
Overview
Access to the property is from Shepard Road to the north and Florida A venue to the south.
A 100- foot wide Progress Energy power line easement borders the eastern and northern perimeter
of the site and buffers the site from the adjacent residential Wildwood PUD to the east. A
combination of commercial and industrial uses border the property to the west along US 17-92.
Industrial properties, vacant land, and Highlands Elementary School are to the north along Shepard
Road and to the south of Florida A venue are single family residential homes. One of the City's
wastewater treatment plants abuts the southeast comer of the site.
The site is currently predominantly open, vacant property (with some structures located along the
southern end of the site, near the Florida A venue ROW) and with some portions containing mature
trees. The topography slopes from a highpoint of about 70 feet along the west side to a low of
about 39 feet along the east side (under the power line). An existing lake, known as Boat Lake is
located along the west perimeter of the property. The water level in Boat Lake, which has a 100-
year floodplain elevation of approximately 54 feet, was measured at 48.5 feet on May 4,2006 (all
elevations are NGVD 1929).
The tree survey is included in the plan package. The general soil types are labeled on Sheet 2. The
soils report, storm-water report, and an environmental survey have not yet been submitted for the
project, but are required and will be provided with the final engineering plan submittal.
Previous Approvals & Associated Discussion
The majority of the site has PUD zoning, thought to be from at least the 1980s. No record of this
PUD zoning has been located, except an expired industrial subdivision plan. The other properties
have C-2 zoning and need to be rezoned to a PUD designation.
A large scale Future Land Use (FLU) amendment was adopted on June 12,2006, for the Dittmer
parcels, which changed the Future Land Use map designation from "Industrial" to "Medium
Density Residential" (3.6 - 9.0 D.U./acre). A Development Agreement was approved on June 12,
2006, before the small scale FLU amendments for the Elsea and Florida Avenue properties (2.93
acres) were heard on first reading (June 26,2006). The Development Agreement requires a buffer
2
November 7, 2007
Regular Item 504
Page 3 of9
between the proposed project and the properties to the west (6' high wall atop a 5' berm - the berm
to include trees, shrubs, and irrigation), dedication of an appropriate amount of land as a park for
the residents of the project (to be built pursuant to National Recreation Association standards), and
a school mitigation payment of $1 ,235.00 per unit in addition to the school impact fees. The
applicant proposes to modify the buffer, to include a masonry wall along the east and west sides of
the subdivision, but without a berm. This was explained to the Commission during the concept
approval. Throughout the FLUM amendment process, the applicant and their attorney represented
the applicant's request as a proposal for a maximum of 334 (townhouse) units, although neither
staff nor the Commission had any objection to 338 units. A proposed code change to the PUD
regulations is being proposed simultaneously to accommodate the density with the proposed
housing unit types.
A small scale Future Land Use map amendment, was adopted on July 26,2006, for the Elsea and
Florida Avenue properties, which changed the FLUM designation from "Industrial" to "Medium
Density Residential" (3.6 - 9.0 D.U.lacre). Commission directives (to be included in a subsequent
development agreement) require unity oftitle, removal ofthe property acreage from the density
calculation, provision of adequate easements over the existing ROW should it be vacated, and
require that the Florida A venue properties not be developed with units, but rather be used as a
buffer for storm-water or greenspace, due to the Public Works Director's concerns about locating
residential units near the existing waste-water treatment plant. During the public hearings for the
FLU amendments, the applicant's attorney spoke more than once of excluding these separate
properties from the density equation, resulting in no increase in density beyond the 334 number of
units proposed.
At the land use plan amendment hearings in 2006, as well as during the May 30,2007 concept plan
discussion, considerable discussion was devoted to provision of meaningful open space and green
space.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PUD Part "A"
The City Code provides for two (2) different types ofPUD approvals: Part A and Part B. Since the
May 30,2007 Commission meeting, the applicant has announced a preference for Part "A."
Subsequently, based on a discussion about which PUD section was most pertinent to the project,
the City Attorney opined that the project may proceed under the Part "A" PUD requirments.
Section 20-352 of the City Code sets forth the purpose and intent ofthe Part "A" PUD as follows:
(1) "To provide for planned residential communities containing a variety of dwelling unit types
and arrangements, with complimentary and compatible commercial centers with supportive
residential and/or complimentary and compatible residential and/or commercial land uses,
all designed to promote the public health, safety and general welfare.
(2) To allow diversification of uses, structures and open spaces compatible with adjacent land
uses.
(3) To preserve the natural amenities and environmental assets ofthe land by encouraging the
preservation and improvement of scenic and functional open space areas.
3
November 7,2007
Regular Item 504
Page 4 of9
(4) To encourage flexible and creative concepts in site planning that will allow an increase in
the amount and usability of open space that is possible through conventional practices.
(5) To encourage an environment of stable character.
(6) To encourage a more efficient use ofland and smaller networks of utilities and streets than
is possible in other zoning districts.
(7) To allow for the creation of well-balanced communities that provide basic recreational and
supportive facilities.
(8) To ensure that development will occur according to the limitations of use, design, coverage
and phasing as stipulated on the preliminary and final development plans."
Subsection 20-353 (1) states the following about permitted uses in Part "A" PUDs:
" Planned residential communities. Residential dwelling units, including but not limited to
detached single-family, patio homes, garden apartments, condominiums, cooperative apartments,
townhouses, provided that all are compatible with each other; complimentary and compatible
supportive commercial and/or industrial land uses designed to create an aesthetically pleasing and
harmonious environment."
Section 20-351, the definitions section for the Part "A" PUD, excludes "Land devoted to schools,
utilities and water areas ..." from the gross residential density calculation. The applicant states that
41.16 acres are eligible for density calculations.
Part "A" PUDs currently allow a density of 4.5 single family units, 7.0 patio homes, or 10
townhouse units per acre (Subsection 20-354 (b) (4)).
PROPOSED PLAN SUMMARY:
The applicant's concept plan consisted of 338 units, comprised of 127 town homes and 211 "pull-
apart" (or patio home) units accessed by a private gated entrance off of Shepard Road. This
concept still does not fully reconcile with the City's PUD regulations. Staff proposes amending the
density calculation portion of the regulation to be consistent with recent housing demand.
The "pull-apart" units have garages that face the street, while the town home units face narrow
greenspace areas that open onto the perimeter greenspace/walk. The 211 "pull apart" units (150
with 2-car garages; 61 with one car garages) are predominant throughout the project. The 127
town home units (52 with 2-car garages; 75 with one-car garages) have garages that open onto
alley-ways and are arranged in a U-shape at the southern end ofthe site, near the storm water
ponds, the sewage treatment plant site, and the southern exit onto Florida Avenue. The "pull
apart" units utilize 22' long driveways between the garage door and the sidewalk. The plan states
there are 361 driveway parking spaces, in conjunction with 212 on-street parking spaces, for a total
of 843 parking spaces. The 136 single car garage units comprise 40 percent ofthe units (75 town
homes/park homes and 61 patio homes/pull-aparts = 136; 136/338 = 40 %).
A recreation area is located on the east side of Boat Lake and is connected to a perimeter green-
space and walking trail. Although no units front on the recreation area, it has been designed so that
4
November 7,2007
Regular Item 504
Page 5 of9
only 6 driveways directly face the recreational area. There appears to be a good connection to and
from the proposed open space/trail facility under the power line.
The plan includes deviations from the City Code, such as on-street parking (both parallel and 90
degree), narrow right-of-way (ROW) and travel lane widths. Deviations from the Code maybe
granted if enabling language exists for inclusion in an amendment to the existing development
agreement.
The plan also proposes to modify the provision in the existing development agreement for a buffer
wall along the western property line in lieu of the 5 foot tall berm and 6 foot tall wall combination
in the approved but not executed development agreement.
TRANSPORTATION CONSIDERATIONS:
Ingress / Egress:
The development proposes to have all of its direct ingress through the main entrance located on the
south side of Shepard Road. Shepard Road is a City collector road.
Egress is proposed onto Shepard Road at the main entrance and onto Florida A venue, located at the
south end of the site. Florida Avenue is a County controlled local roadway. County approval will
be required for any access off of Florida Avenue to or from the site. Both the Shepard Road and
Florida Avenue access points are proposed to be gated, and all streets within the subdivision will
be privately owned and maintained.
Transportation Element, Policy 1.6.2 requires residential developments greater than 200 units to
incorporate a bus stop location. Policy 1.6.5 states that bus stops are to include benches, signage,
lights, protection from the elements, and are to be convenient for the handicapped. The
Transportation Element contains other policy requirements for bike and pedestrian paths as well as
consideration of public transit. Policy 1.5 .13 requires new residential development with densities
of one or more dwellings per acre to provide sidewalks on both sides of every street.
Traffic Impacts:
A traffic study has been submitted by the developer's traffic engineer for Staff review. At
buildout, the 338-unit development generates a total of2,853 daily trips, 283 PM peak-hour trips,
and 220 AM peak-hour trips. For calculating trip generation, the 211 "pull-apart" units have been
considered to be single family detached units generating 9.79 daily trips per unit, while the 127
townhome units use the standard townhome trip generation rate of 6.19 daily trips per unit.
The traffic study indicates that US 17-92 from Shepard Road to SR 419 is a constrained roadway
segment under existing conditions. This segment of 17-92 currently operates at level-of-service
(LOS) F under both average daily and PM peak hour conditions. The City's Comprehensive Plan
(Policy 1.1.1) requires a minimum of LOS D to be maintained on all arterial streets, based on the
FDOT LOS Handbook. The table below summarizes the current and proposed operating
conditions on US 17-92 from Shepard Road to SR 419.
5
November 7, 2007
Regular Item 504
Page 6 of9
US 17-92 from Shepard Road to SR 419
Summary of Existing and Proposed Traffic Conditions
Average Average Surplus PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Surplus
Daily Daily (Deficit) Peak Direction Volume (Deficit)
Capacity Traffic Capacity at
at LOS D Volume LOSD
Existing Traffic 35,700 45,481 (9,781) 1,860 2,351 (491 )
Existing + Growth
+ Project Traffic 35,700 47,239 (11,539) 1,860 2,454 (594)
Seminole County is planning a project to widen US 17-92 from Shepard Road north to Lake Mary
Boulevard from four to six lanes. When completed, this widening project is expected to restore an
acceptable level-of-service (LOS D or better) to the segment from Shepard Road to SR 419.
However, this project is not funded for construction within the next five years and thus cannot be
used to satisfy concurrency requirements at this time.
Concurrency refers to the availability of public facilities and services at acceptable levels-of-
service at the time of development. The City Staff performs a concurrency evaluation for all
development applications in the areas of water, wastewater, transportation, stormwater, solid
waste, parks, and school capacity. Winter Place fails to meet transportation concurrency due to the
constrained roadway segment at US 17-92 from Shepard Road to SR 419. City Staff will be
meeting with Seminole County and FDOT to determine the available mitigation options. Until an
acceptable mitigation plan is identified, Winter Place does not meet concurrency and any
preliminary or conceptual approvals by the City should not be considered as issuance of a
concurrency certificate.
Right-turn Deceleration Lane at Shepard Road:
The traffic study indicates that there will be a total of 150 PM peak-hour right turns into the
development off of Shepard Road. A right-turn deceleration lane is required at this location, in
accordance with City Code Section 9-206.b.
Bus-stop Location:
The current plans show a bus stop immediately adjacent to the roundabout near the main entrance
to the development. The bus stop should be moved away from the roundabout for better pedestrian
safety and roundabout operation. First, pedestrians should not be located at the outer edge of a
roundabout's circulatory roadway, which would occur with the proposed bus stop. Vehicles
entering the roundabout at too high of speed may put pedestrians at the bus stop at unnecessary
risk. Second, pedestrians should be directed away from a roundabout's circulatory roadway and
central island. Having a bus stop adjacent to a roundabout encourages pedestrians to cross through
the roundabout at unsafe locations. Finally, no vehicles should be stopped in roundabouts,
6
November 7, 2007
Regular Item 504
Page 70f9
including buses, to maintain free-flow operating conditions and to prevent vehicle queuing within
the circulatory roadway.
Pedestrian Refuge at Main Entrance:
The main entrance at Shepard Road consists of four lanes and a center median. To improve
pedestrian safety, the center median should be extended towards Shepard Road to the extent
possible to create a pedestrian refuge area within the crosswalk across the main entrance.
STORMW A TER CONSIDERATIONS:
Stormwater for the developed portion of the property will be collected and piped to a single wet
detention pond located at the southeast comer ofthe site. The proposed wet detention pond has a
proposed outfall pipe that connects to an existing 29" x 45" City stormwater pipe in Meadowbrook
Drive. The applicant will need to demonstrate in the stormwater report (to be provided with the
final engineering submittal) that the downstream offsite stormwater facilities have sufficient
capacity. The post-development stormwater discharge rate must be equal to or lower than the pre-
development discharge rate for the 25-year, 24-hour design storm. The stormwater system will be
required to meet all City and SJRWMD requirements, including the requirement for post-
development phosphorous discharge to be equal to or lower than the pre-development phosphorous
discharge.
ST AFF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
The existing development agreement requires a 5-foot tall berm with a 6-foot tall wall along the
western property boundary. At a 3:1 horizontal to vertical slope, the berm would extend at least 30
feet inward from the western property line. A flat area on top of the berm (where the wall will be
located) would require the berm to be even wider. The proposed concept layout does not provide
enough width along the western property boundary for this berm. In fact, given the scale of the
plan, 30' extends over the trail and into the buildings and vehicle accommodation areas. The
applicant has proposed to replace the berm, wall, and plantings buffer proposal with a wall and
plantings. Staffis of the understanding that the wall is proposed to be eleven (11) feet tall. The
Commission heard the proposal as part of the non-binding conceptual review.
The applicant has stated a decision to pursue the Part "A" PUD (sections 20-251 thru 20-362),
which currently requires planned residential communities to provide complimentary and
compatible supportive commercial or industrial uses. Although industrial and commercial uses are
adjacent to the site, it is questionable how complimentary, compatible, or supportive they are to the
residential development. Further, the Part "A" PUDs currently allow a density of7.0 patio homes
(at 2 stories) and 10.0 townhomes (at 3 stories), while Part "B" PUDs allow a density of 6.0 patio
homes (at 2 stories) and 8.0 townhomes (at 2 stories). Staffis concurrently proposing a text
amendment to PUD "A" requirements to make the regulation consistent with current residential
trends.
7
November 7, 2007
Regular Item 504
Page 8 of9
Staff advised the applicant that the May 30, 2007 Commission vote included documentation from
Progress Energy stating what is and what is not allowed in the power line (transmission line)
easement. Attached is a print-out from the Progress Energy website, stating what is allowed in
their easements.
FINDINGS:
1. The proposed development has a Medium Density Residential future land use designation,
which allows a residential density range of 3.6 to 9.0 dwelling units per acre.
2. The majority of the parcels (7) have PUD zoning; the other 4 parcels have C-2 zoning and
are in the process of being rezoned to PUD.
3. There is an existing draft development agreement on the Dittmer parcels; Commission
directives for a development agreement were given related to the Elsea and Florida A venue
properties, but a development agreement has not been drafted or executed. The applicant
proposes to amend the development agreement to provide a wall and landscaping in lieu of
a 6' tall wall on a 5' tall berm and plantings.
4. Any deviations from the Code must be addressed through a development agreement, special
exception, variance, or some other appropriate mechanism.
5. The City Attorney has opined that the applicant's choice to pursue the Part "A" PUD is
appropriate.
6. Both PUD sections (Part "A" and Part "B") of the City Code set forth maximum density for
different housing types and disallow certain areas from the density calculation. The
densities and areas allowed for density calculation are different in the Part "A" and Part
"B. "
7. Certain areas of the subject property were voluntarily excluded by the applicant's counsel
from density calculations on June 26, 2006 at the public hearing.
8. The City Attorney and staff propose a Code amendment to change the density and mix of
residential unit types allowed under the City's PUD requirements.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The bus stop shall be moved away from the roundabout for better pedestrian safety and
roundabout operation (this is being addressed this with the pertinent entities - e.g. Lynx).
2. A right-turn deceleration lane shall be provided on Shepard Road at the main entrance.
3. The stormwater treatment facilities shall be designed to have the post-development
phosphorous discharge equal to or lower than the pre-development phosphorous discharge,
using current SJRWMD design criteria.
4. At the Shepard Road entrance, the median shall be extended toward Shepard Road to
provide a pedestrian refuge area for pedestrians crossing the four lane entry road.
5. A transportation concurrency mitigation plan addressing the roadway capacity deficiency
on US 17-92 shall be identified and approved by the City Commission before or at the time
of final engineering approval.
6. Adoption of the proposed PUD text amendment (Ordinance No. 2007-29).
8
November 7,2007
Regular Item 504
Page 9 of9
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Board consider, provide comment on, approve with the
above-listed conditions, the PUD master plan, preliminary development plan, and preliminary
engineering/ subdivision.
A TT ACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - June 26, 2006 Commission Minutes
C - July 24, 2006 Commission Minutes
D - May 30,2007 Commission Minutes
E - July 23, 2007 Commission Minutes
F- Development Agreement, executed on June 14,2006
G - Progress Energy Easement print-out
H - PUD Master Plan, Preliminary Development Plan, & Preliminary Engineering/Subdivision
Plan
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD ACTION:
9
H
ATTACHMENT A
~. -_._.._--~_....._-
----..----
--------.---
--.--.----...--- - --- --"--
7//---------
-~~~Dl1I _----
G
----1
F
_J
c
B
875
A Ju'~".
1 Contin~ed Pg 2404
3
4
5
7
8
/{J.:
NN.
~:
rv:
"~ NOTES:
'.~
'.1P
Municipal Address Map Book
PRlNlED: REVISED:
Apr 2005 1:
City of Winter Springs, FL
o 200
~-......-.?-
400
. Feel
2:
3-
ap
Page
Developed By: Southeastern Surveying & Mopping Corp.
2401
H
'N II I
_.,~" . .
.... . .-
~.~
" .0-.
.'
G
F
1
0
~
i G U 0
'"
~
~ .JL...I)
0 u n D
n o D
I
I
C I
,
I
I
I
I
I J
,
I
,
B II
II
I
I
I
I
,.....
--
A 531
1 .. 2 ... 3 ...
~: "t-> NOTES:
~. ".~
~: '.~
t\t. '. \P
...
6
...
7
.11
\1\
\\\
\\'
\\ ~
, ;,\ ~
8
...
400
. Feel
Municipal Address Map Book ~........_.......:OO
PRINTED: REVISED:
Apr 2005 1: 2 : 3 .
City of Winter Springs, FL p:;e 2404
Developed By: Southeastern Surveying cl Mapping Corp.
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26.2006
PAGE30F31
AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
100. Office Of City Commissioner Joanne M. Krebs
Requests That The City Commission Listen To City Of Winter Springs Resident
Katie Tortosa's Presentation On Issues Related To Preserving The Beautiful
Environment Of The City or Winter Springs, Florida.
As noted earlier in the Meeting, this Agenda Item was to be rescheduled to a July 2006
City Commission Regular Meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS
200. Community Development Department - Planning Division
Requests The City Commission Hold A Public Hearing For First Reading Of
Ordinance 2006-05, A Small Scale FLUM (Future Land Use Map) Amendment
Which Changes The Future Land Use Map Designation Of Two (2) Parcels Totaling
1.17 Acres, Located On Lake Lucerne Circle From (Winter Springs) "Industrial"
To (City Of Winter Springs) "Medium Density Residential".
Ms. Eloise Sahlstrom, AICP, ASLA, Senior Planner, Community Development
Department presented this Agenda Item.
"MOTION TO READ BY 'TITLE' ONLY." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER
MILLER. SECONDED BY DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE. DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Deputy City Clerk Fra.!lklin read Ordinance 2006-05 by "Title" only.
Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "This did go before the Local Planning Agency. Their
recommendation for this Land Use action was to disapprove it. Their concerns were
related to the loss of Industrial land which was also their concern with the Large Scale
Amendment. Then also, compatibility with the adjacent Wastewater Treatment Plant.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINlITES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26, 2006
PAGE40F31
I will make mention at this time that [Mr.] Kip Lockcuff [P .E., Director, Public
WorkslUtility Department] has indicated a concern relating to the use of this property ifit
were to have townhomes built on it. Because of incompatibility with the Wastewater
Treatment Plant, but if it were to remain as retention or common area, he would not have
a concern.
Staff does support the change of the Land Use. We don't know how the Applicant would
intend to use it at this time as we have not seen any projected Site Plans or anything like
that. So, Staff does recommend approval of the Land Use Amendment based on the
Findings that we've included in the Agenda packet."
Discussion.
Deputy Mayor Blake asked, "Kip [Lockcuff], you are talking about a concern of the
adjacent Uses over here? Where exactly in this triangle is the most intensive part of the
Wastewater Treatment Plant?" Mr. Lockcuff stated, "The package plants are located
generally right here, we have some storage tanks here. We do have a holding pond here,
that we do at some point foresee using that access as an egress and ingress to the plan."
Furthermore, Deputy Mayor Blake asked, "Is that Florida A venue? Is that a County road
or do we have - an Interloca1 [Agreement] on that to maintain it? And, what is the status
there?" Mr. Lockcuffstated, "It's a County road."
Deputy Mayor Blake asked, "Would the City be taking over this portion back here? Or,
would that continue to exist or is the Applicant envisioning a request to vacate the right-
of-way?" Mr. Lockcuff commented, "They've requested to vacate the right-of-way.
We've requested that we retain an egress and ingress Easement and a Utility Easement
over that fifty foot (50') right-of-way." Deputy Mayor Blake then inquired, "Or, if not
there, some place within that corridor? Have there been any discussions there?" Mr.
Lockcuff answered, "No, we have existing utility lines serving Kia, but the egress and
ingress could move though."
Further discussion.
Mayor Bush opened the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item.
Ms. M Rebecca Furman, Attorney, Lowndes Drosdick Doster Kantor & Reed. P.A.. 215
North Eola Drive, Orlando, Florida: representing the Keewin Real Property Company,
Ms. Furman commented that "These properties were put under contract and then we've
made this Application in order, really in response to the Staff's concern over this little
piece being left as an Industrial enclave. It really didn't make a lot of sense to have this
Industrial, these two (2) small Industrial properties right next to the Single-Family. So,
that's why we brought them in; it's not to increase our density. I know that some of our
applications have shown that our intention was somewhere in the number of three thirty
four (334).
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA
MlNlITES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26. 2006
PAGE S OF 31
We'll bring a Site Plan and the PUD (planned Unit Development) back before you all,
but it's not our intention to increase that. It was actually to respond to the Staff's
concerns. We would like to be able to put retention or open space, something like that,
but having not gone as far as to understand the hydrology yet and the topography of how
you could actually put it there, we don't know if anything would go there, if nothing
would go there, but we certainly are intending on having units all the way down there."
Commissioner Gilmore asked, "Does that apply to both [2006-]05 and [2006-]06, or just
[2006-]05?" Ms. Furman replied, ''Not to '06 and I'll speak to that or I'll speak to it then.
That actually squares out the property and with the Staff's suggestion we agree that
makes a lot more sense to bring that in. So, it wouldn't increase, we're not asking for an
increase of the density, but it may be spread out over that parcel."
Deputy Mayor Blake asked Attorney Garganese, "This parcel that's under consideration
currently - if we had a different designation on that, that wasn't low-density or some
Residential Land Use, say for instance, if it was required to be left in either conservation
or open space or could only be used for green space or retention, would those acres be
included in the overall density development?" Attorney Garganese stated, "We can
address that, those issues in a Development Agreement."
Deputy Mayor Blake asked, "But would it change the actual Future Land Use designation
that we might put on it today? What I am looking for is some level of surety that this
parcel or these two (2) parcels aren't actually going to be developed with units, but would
act as a buffer, as green space, it would provide the issue with utilities, it would provide
some sort of a green space buffer for the residents that live there and still can provide the
open space requirements that they might have or retention without. Because - we are
talking about tonight, not the Site Plan, we are talking about the Land Use designation."
Attorney Garganese noted, "And this issue came up this afternoon. I talked to Becky
[Furman] about it and I was looking through the Comprehensive Plan to see if there was
something we could do by changing the Future Land Use designation, but given the
amount of time we discussed it today, one thought I had was doing a Unity of Title
Agreement which would require the Property Owner to unify all of this property as one
Development project and then place limitations. Because they're going to be going
through - a PUD (Planned Unit Development) process. In the Unity of Title Agreement,
we can place limitations on this property, for example, saying it could be used for
Stormwater purposes, perhaps. And - if you have some green space requirements, we
could certainly put that in the Unity of Title Agreement. And - with respect to density
calculations, I guess you want to exclude those, right?"
Deputy Mayor Blake stated, "Well, that is the question - how it would normally be done
if we didn't go through the steps that you were just talking about. Now, would it be part
of the density calculations?" Attorney Garganese answered, "I would think we can agree
to that beforehand." Ms. Furman stated, "We'd be happy to agree to that. That's not our
purpose."
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS. FWRIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26. 2006
PAGE60F31
Ms. Furman added, "I looked at your open space requirements because 1 didn't want to
agree to open space and then find out that if it's designated open space we can't give you
all access across open space. Certainly, not across Conservation. We wanted to be able
to put Stormwater because, 1 mean, economically we are purchasing these pieces of
property and we're not just purchasing them to be a buffer, and if they do have some use
that's not intrusive to those neighbors, we'd like to be able to use it to benefit the
property. "
Attorney Garganese stated, "So, the answer is, 1 mean if you want to condition this
approval on putting a Unity Title or Development Agreement together in advance of their
PUD (planned Unit Development) submission, we could go ahead and do that between
now and Second Reading."
Commissioner Sally McGinnis stated, "What would be the Future Land Use designation-
that's what you're just dealing with?" Attorney Garganese stated, "You would keep it as
proposed at what Staff is supporting, however it's going to come with limitations that
would be in the form of a Development Agreement."
Ms. Furman stated, "Well, PUD's (Planning Unit Developments) even have several Uses
- different Comp[prehensive] Plan designations also get a little tricky. Again, we're just
talking about the -05, 1 mean, we are planning on putting units on -06."
Ms. Helga Schwarz, 720 Gal/away Court, Winter Springs, Florida: as a resident and
representing the Highlands Homeowner's Association, Ms. Schwarz mentioned historical
references and expressed opposition to this project.
Mayor Bush closed the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item.
Regarding comments from Ms. Schwarz, Commissioner Robert S. Miller commented that
"Mayor, 1 just wanted to point out that all of these Hearings on these discussions have all
been in an open forum and the Highlands have been invited to all of these. So, I think the
fact that the statement was just made that, you know, their contribution has been totally
ignored or they don't have any say in this matter, I don't think that's appropriate. I
would like to make sure the Record reflects that - they have been notified about all these
issues and they've attended them all. And, this thing about the Golf Course, I find very
troubling because I think the City has bent over backwards to try and make that an issue
that is going to turn out well for the City of Winter Springs and for the Highlands.
So, 1 don't really understand what their issue is with regard to the Golf Course. I'm as
interested in making sure that either stays a Golf Course or if it doesn't, that the City
purchases that property and turns it into park property of some form that the entire City
would get to benefit from.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26, 2006
PAGE 7 OF 31
And, we've had that discussion here one or two times, I've raised that several times, but
yet it - continues to be ignored and presented to the people of Highlands as if this City
Commission is only interested in developing that as residential property and that is not
the case. So, I'd like that to be put on the Record very clearly. And, I hope that we don't
get more criticism for abandoning the Golf Course because that is not the case."
Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "This piece of property has been cleared. It's got a few trees on the
perimeter, but primarily it's been cleared - it could act as a buffer from distance point of
view, but it would have to be re-vegetated to be a visual buffer."
"I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE TO A - SECOND READING FOR
ORDINANCE 2006-05..." MAYOR BUSH ASKED, "...COMMISSIONER, DID
YOU WANT TO INCLUDE WHAT ANTHONY [GARGANESE)
RECOMMENDED ON UNITY OF TITLE...?" COMMISSIONER MILLER
STATED, "YES, WITH THE UNITY OF TITLE..."
ATTORNEY GARGANESE STATED, "...NO RESIDENTIAL UNITS; STORM
WATER WOULD BE OKAY, BUT NOT INCLUDED IN THE DENSITY
CALCULATION FOR THE OVERALL PROJECT..." COMMISSIONER
MILLER STATED, "...TO INCLUDE NOTICE, ISSUES, THOSE QUESTIONS."
ATTORNEY GARGANESE STATED, "YES, SIR." MOTION BY
COMMISSIONER MILLER. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GILMORE.
DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: NAY
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
PUBUC HEARINGS
201. Community Development Department - Planning Division
Requests The City Commission Hold A Public Hearing For First Reading Of
Ordinance 2006-06, A Small Scale FLUM (Future Land Use Map) Amendment
Which Changes The Future Land Use Map Designation Of One (1) Parcel Totaling
1.72 Acres, Located At 1228 Florida Avenue From (Winter Springs) "Industrial" To
(City Of Winter Springs) "Medium Density Residential".
Mayor Bush said, "Can we have a Motion to read by 'Title' only?"
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26, 2006
PAGE 8 OF 31
"SO MOVED." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GILMORE. SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER MILLER. DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Garganese read Ordinance 2006-06 by "Title" only.
Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "This Item also went to the Local Planning Agency and for the
same reasons as previously stated or the other one was recommended for denial with a
Vote of four to one (4-1) and concerns were related to the loss of Industrial property
particularly related to the Large Scale Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendment as
well.
Staff does, however, recommend approval of this, given that it does square qff - a
development that you've already approved for an Amendment - that completely
surrounds it on three (3) sides and we would not want to see an enclave of Industrial in
the middle of all of that. And, the Camp [prehensive ] Plan supports removal of
incompatible Uses and we would feel that this would remain as an incompatible Use and
therefore it's very much justified; and the Findings are included in your Staff Report
based on the Criteria stated in the Code and we believe this property does meet the
Criteria for a change of Land Use."
Commissioner Gilmore asked Ms. Sahlstrom, "In the Findings, and this appears in most
of them, it says, 'At such time as the site develops the proposed Development will be
required to meet Concurrency standards'. If the State passes the Concurrency law, let's
say in early [20]'08 and this project doesn't go until [20]'08, does that mean that they
would have to meet the School Concurrency standards at that time?"
Ms. Sahlstrom answered, "We do have Concurrency standards in place now, if you are
speaking to the School one year, right, it will not be passed until [20]'08. We will have
to meet the Concurrency standards that are implemented in our CompLorehensive J Plan. as
part of that [20]'08 requirement. Whatever those requirements are - this would need to
be met, if this is not approved as the Site Plan prior to that Comp[prehensive] Plan
language being implemented."
Commissioner Gilmore asked, "The word was 'site develops'. What does 'site develops'
mean?" Ms. Sahlstrom replied, "Well, when it comes through Development Review and
it comes to you for Final Engineering approval, then it's given the 'Okay' to develop
according to those plans."
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FWRIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26, 2006
PAGE 9 OF 31
Continuing, Commissioner Gilmore then inquired, "So if they don't have that all done by,
let's say the time the State puts through Concurrency, they may have some difficulties?"
Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "I think you have a good point, the word 'develops' is not the best
word to be used."
Manager McLemore stated, "I appreciate Eloise's [Sahlstrom] statement, but this is a
legal question and 1 think that the City Attorney should answer this question. I would
like to reiterate what the School Board said the other night, is that Concurrency, based on
the way they have developed an Ordinance at this point in time, would involve either
them being able to meet their enrollment requirements or some type of mitigation."
Tape lIS ide B
Attorney Garganese stated, "There's no clear answer right now on which properties get in
under the wire and which properties don't. 1 mean you're in the process of putting
together an Interlocal Agreement on School Concurrency and - it's going to be very
factual - which properties get in and which properties don't, under what's going to be
adopted eventually. Can't give you a clear answer right now."
Deputy Mayor Blake stated, "I just want to clarify something. Eloise [Sahlstrom], you
mentioned that the property is surrounded on three (3) sides by a separate or a different
Land Use." Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "Right, based on your Action at the last Meeting
where you Approved the Large Scale Amendment..." Deputy Mayor Blake replied,
".. . But, all we Approved was the Transmittal." Ms. Sahlstrom stated, "You Approved
the Adoption of it and it's being transmitted to the State for final 'Letter of Intent of
Compliance' which has not been put forth by the State yet."
Discussion.
Continuing, Deputy Mayor Blake stated, "My only concern is that if one of the basis for
which we're changing the Future Land Use of this Item which doesn't go through that
same Large Scale process, that I would want to make the actual effective date of this
change, one that would coincide with the removal of the challenge period on the Large
Scale plan. That would avoid a reverse situation problem where if the other one for some
reason was challenged, was overturned, for whatever reason, then we don't have - the
same Residential Land Use surrounded by Industrial."
Attorney Garganese, "So, you're willing to have an additional, Conditional Effective
Date language in there for 2006-06..." Deputy Mayor Blake added, "... Yes, instead of
thirty-one (31) days after Adoption, have it coincide..." Attorney Gargarese said,
"... With the effect, when the Ordinance 2005-29 becomes effective." Deputy Mayor
Blake replied, "Yes."
Brief discussion.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26, 2006
PAGE IOOF31
Mayor Bush opened the "Public Input" portion o/the Agenda Item.
Ms. Helga Schwarz, 720 Gallaway Court, Winter Springs, Florida: representing the
Highlands Homeowner's Association and speaking as a resident, Ms. Schwarz noted
opposition to this project.
Mayor Bush closed the "Public Input" portion o/the Agenda Item.
Discussion.
"MOTION TO MOVE TO SECOND READING." MOTION BY
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MILLER.
DISCUSSION.
"MOTION TO AMEND - I MOVE WE AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE
THE NEW DESCRIPTIVE LANGUAGE FOR THE 'Effective Date' THAT THE
ATTORNEY WILL CRAFT AND BRING BACK ON SECOND READING."
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. DISCUSSION.
VOTE: (ON THE AMENDMENT)
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: NAY
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
DEPUTYMAYORBLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: .NAY
MOTION CARRIED.
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE STATED, "THE MOTION THAT IS ON THE
FLOOR CURRENTLY AS AMENDED IS TO BRING THE ITEM BACK TO A
SECOND READING AS PRESENTED WITH THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE
THAT WHEREBY THE 'Effective Date' OF THIS LAND USE CHANGE WILL
COINCIDE WITH THE ULTIMATE 'Effective Date' OF A LARGE SCALE
AMENDMENT THAT WAS PRESENTED..." COMMISSIONER KREBS
ASKED, "...UNITY OF TITLE...?" DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE STATED,
"THAT HAS NOT BEEN PART OF THE MOTION."
ATTORNEY GARGANESE STATED, "THE APPLICANT IS SAYING, 'NO,
THEY CAN'T DO THAT."
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 26, 2006
PAGE 11 OF31
MS. FURMAN STATED, "WE CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE IT'S A DIFFERENT
PROPERTY OWNER AND WE HAVE DIFFERENT OBLIGATIONS AS TO
CLOSING THAT PROPERTY. SO, WE WILL NOT OWN TITLE ALL AT THE
SAME TIME TO THESE PROPERTIES. WE WILL AS TO THE LARGE
SCALE AND WE WILL AS TO THE SMALL. AND WE CAN PUT THOSE ALL
TOGETHER, BUT IT MAY BE A COUPLE OF YEARS."
ATTORNEY GARGANESE STATED, "THAT WAS A TECHNICAL DETAIL
THAT I WANTED TO WORK OUT WITH THE APPLICANT, BECAUSE WE
NEED TO KNOW WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO BE CLOSING ON THESE
PROPERTIES. BECAUSE IN ORDER FOR THEM TO DO UNITY OF TITLE, I
DON'T WANT TO BOG THE COMMISSION DOWN WITH THAT ISSUE. BUT,
I THINK IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO DO UNITY OF TITLE, SO IT'S ALL ONE BIG
DEVELOPMENT PARCEL AND COINCIDES WITH THEIR CLOSING, WE'LL
PUT THAT IN THE AGREEMENT."
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE STATED, "IT'S REALLY RELEVANT TO THIS
PIECE AS WELL, MAYOR, BECAUSE THE PURPOSE OF DOING THAT WAS
REALLY TO PROTECT AGAINST ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PARCEL
RIGHT THERE, BUT TO USE IT FOR GREEN SPACE..." MS. FURMAN
INTERJECTED, "...1 AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BLAKE..." DEPUTY
MAYOR BLAKE CONTINUED, "...OR THE DRAINAGE, OR YOU HAVE TO
MAINTAIN THE ACCESS EASEMENT FOR mE CITY'S USE FOR THE
CITY'S BENEFIT."
VOTE: (ON THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED)
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: NAY
MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
202. Not Used
PUBLIC HEARINGS
203. Community Development Department - Planning Division
Requests The City Commission Hold A Public Hearing For Second
Reading/Adoption Of Ordinance 2006-09 Which Rezones 2.85 Acres (More or Less),
Located At 1057 U.S. Highway 17-92 North From "C-2 General Commercial"
(Winter Springs) to "1-1 Light Industrial" (City Of Winter Springs).
Attorney Garganese read Ordinance 2006-09 by "Title" only.
ATTACHMENT C
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MTNlITES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JULY 24, 2006
PAGE 5 OF 39
Mr. Ron Ligthart, 1036 Winding Waters Circle, Winter Springs, Florida: presented the
City with a way to save the City money by providing a step for the men's restroom; along
with a sign.
Mr. Brian Buholtz, 106 Trace Point, Winter Springs, Florida: inquired about the status
of funding for the extension of Orange A venue, and noted that it would provide an
alternate access point.
Ms. Helga Schwarz, 2200 Shepard Road, Winter Springs, Florida: representing the
Highlands Homeowner's Association's, Mayor Bush stated, "She did not want to address
the Commission; she is submitting Highland HOA's [Homeowner's Association's]
continued objection to Ordinance 2006-05, 2006-06."
PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS
200. Not Used.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
201. Community Development Department - Planning Division
Requests The City Commission Hold A Public Hearing For Second Reading I
Adoption Of Ordinance 2006-05, A Small Scale FLUM (Future Land Use Map)
Amendment Which Changes The Future Land Use Map Designation Of Two
Parcels Totaling 1.17 Acres, Located On Lake Lucerne Circle From (Winter
Springs) "Industrial" To (City Of Winter Springs) "Medium Density Residential".
Attorney Garganese read Ordinance 2006-05 by "Title" only and stated, "There is a
revised Ordinance per the Commission's direction on the last time this was considered.
Section 9. Effective Date will include a sentence that reads, 'In addition, even if this
Ordinance is found to be in compliance per a fmal order as provided above, this
Ordinance shall only take effect at such time that Ordinance - 2005-29 becomes
effective' ."
Ms. Eloise Sahlstrom, ASLA, AICP, Senior Planner, Community Development
Department spoke on this Agenda Item.
Mayor Bush opened the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item.
No one spoke.
Mayor Bush closed the "Public input" portion of the Agenda Item.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JULY 24, 2006
PAGE60F39
"I WILL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM '201'." MOTION
BY COMMISSIONER MILLER. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS.
DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: NAY
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
202. Community Development Department - Planning Division
Requests The City Commission Hold A Public Hearing For Second Reading I
Adoption of Ordinance 2006-06, A Small Scale FLUM (Future Land Use Map)
Amendment Which Changes The Future Land Use Map Designation Of One Parcel
Totaling 1.72 Acres, Located At 1228 Florida Avenue From (Winter Springs)
"Industrial" To (City Of Winter Springs) "Medium Density Residential".
Attorney Garganese read Ordinance 2006-06 by "Title" only.
Ms. Sabstrom brief addressed the City Commission on this Agenda Item.
Mayor Bush opened the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item.
No one spoke.
Mayor Bush closed the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item.
"I WILL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM '202'." MOTION
BY COMMISSIONER MILLER. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS.
DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: NAY
DEPUTY MAYOR BLAKE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Garganese said, "Just for the Record, that will include the Conditional Effective
Date I read into the Record for the prior Ordinance!'
ATTACHMENT D
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING - MAY 30, 2007
(CONTINUATION FROM TIlE MAY 29, 2007 SPECIAL MEETING)
PAGE 140F23
REGULAR
606. Community Development Department
Requests The City Commission Consider A Conceptual Development Plan For A
348 Unit Town-House And Patio Home Development On Approximately 47.09
Acres, Located On The South Side Of Shepard Road, North Of Florida Avenue,
East Of Boat Lake, And Immediately Adjacent To The West Side Of The Wildwood
Residential pun (Planned Unit Development).
Mr. Baker presented this Agenda Item and displayed an aerial view of the property site
and .said, "We do recommend Approval subject to a lot of our Staff Conditions."
Deputy Mayor McGinnis said to the Applicant, "You may not be aware of this, but the
Attorney sometime in our past, did say that they would be willing to have a charette. Are
you aware of that? Are you still willing to do that?"
Mr. David Evans. Evans Engineering, 719 Irma Avenue, Orlando, Florida: stated, "Yes,
we are very aware of the Public Meeting that we intend to have just following this
Meeting. "
Mr. Stevenson addressed this proposed project.
With regard to the Easement, Mr. Evans said, "Under that power line Easement, what we
intend to do is to provide some walking areas, some dog parks. There is a - nature trail
that runs through there and actually surrounds the entire piece of property so it's part of
that. It will be green and open and obviously because it is a power Easement, we are not
allowed to build any structures underneath there."
Mr. Randy Stevenson, AS LA, Director, Community Development Department noted for
the Record suggestions from Staff on this project.
Mr. Steve 0 'Dowd. Engineered Homes and Communities. 1 155 Semoran Boulevard.
Winter Park, Florida: addressed the City Commission on this project.
Tape 2/Side A
Discussion.
Mr. O'Dowd said, "So, our concept took a look and as I show you these concepts, I do
want to put one caveat here. The one's you are going to look in these concepts, right
there and right here, is not the architectural style. These are buildings that we're able to
put in - we have not determined yet the finished style of what we're going to do. But,
you can at least, as we're looking at this, see the concept and the way things fit together.
~
~
~
c:':)
s::d
c:.L.t
a:::t.....
~
:,..~
~
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING - MAY 30, 2007
(CONTINUATION FROM lHE MAY 29, 2007 SPECIAL MEETING)
PAGE IS OF 23
Continuing, Mr. O'Dowd noted, "We can also provide Workforce Housing and our
definition of Workforce Housing is, where do we put our civil servants? Where do we
put our teachers? We're very involved as a company with Seminole County Schools,
with Seminole County Sheriffs Department and Fire Department in offering incentives
for their people to come and live in our communities. So, we want to be able to have that
type housing so that they can live there. We also want to have premium open space."
Mr. O'Dowd commented, "On the three (3) story product, the townhouse product, this is
a product that you're very much used to across the street. And what our proposition is
with that, different than they're built across the street, is we're looking at these products,
the fronts of these products, as not fronting a road; like you would have at a heavy, large
city, say Chicago or somewhere. We're looking at this forming a green - area or a garden
area or whatever, where front doors are walked up to through a beautiful landscaped area,
and then there's an adjoining alley between every group of units. And again, this cluster
right here, just flips and just flips again and flips again so that people can enjoy this."
Discussion.
Mr. O'Dowd remarked, "And so as that paseo makes its way through between those
houses, what we're planning on doing is actually building, with each of these groups,
building different looking park settings in the center. Different configurations, squares,
curves, ovals, diamonds; and landscaping these to where these residents can actually
share these and interact with each other.
Further comments were made.
Mr. Q'Dowd then explained, "Each unit, each home, has it's own driveway. And that's
very important. Each home has it's own garage and each home has it's own driveway.
And each driveway is designed set back from the front of the home. And this is how we
get away from having this be nothing but a scene of front garage doors, front doors and
roof - is we push that back in all cases, every case where you see a driveway; we push it
back allowing enough room for cars to park on the driveway, in front of the sidewalk, so
we don't have any sidewalks that are impeded. And we have every home having its own
area to park. We also have auxiliary parking that's planned in the development that we'll
see later on."
Mr. O'Dowd pointed out, "We allow - twenty-two feet (22') from the sidewalk to the
garage door, in every case minimum."
Furthermore, Mr. O'Dowd explained, "And you can see, we have planned trash
receptacles. So, we don't have problems with these just stacking up in the front and have
it look undesirable from the very beginning. The other thing is air conditioning
compressors are already placed so we don't have a problem with that."
...i'. ...'I";;<..:;./,~
~~"iJ
Po.. ..~.:..I
I~;:'~-;~
~;~
tf:::::,
~
~
~
~
;;;;;;>>
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING - MAY 30, 2007
(CONTINUATION FROM THE MAY 29, 2007 SPECIAL MEETING)
PAGE 16 0l'23
Mr. O'Dowd continued, "This is a shot of a concept of the Central Park that you saw.
This is that lake called Boat Lake. And we have houses that are surrounding it. We're
using traffic controlling devices for central, kind of eye pieces. We've been asked by
Staff to do certain things to slow the flow of traffic down, but not hinder it to the point of
causing problems. And what we have planned out here is a significant club house. This
club house that you see right here that we've designed is a little over four thousand
(4,000) square feet. It's about - forty-five hundred (4,500) square feet, I believe. Large
pool, tot lot and we've also incorporated behind and along the perimeter and along the
lake, a series of walking trails or biking trails, for the residents to use. They can pretty
much stay safely contained within the community and live their lifestyle."
Additionally, Mr. O'Dowd added, "These are renderings of the club house. This club
house is actually designed at this point. So, you can see the architectural style that -
we'd like to incorporate into that. This is one that - really kind of tells the picture." Mr.
O'Dowd continued, "This would be the rear of the clubhouse; this would be the front of
the clubhouse and then this is an area that shows what our plan is for these residents to be
able to have and that would be to entail an available exercise room - with equipment for
the residents to use. Bathroom facilities that are adequate for that pool and something of
this size.
Offices that could be used for property management or however it would need to be used
or just the Homeowner's Association. Storage, kitchen area, large gathering area and
then our hearth room, which we thought was kind of nice. This is planned to be a central
fireplace location and this is kind of the reading room for lack a bridge room or whatever
they'd want to use it for - gathering room, covered outside and patio - and depending on
how it fits and how the situation ends up in the final configuration of the park, we'd
either have the pool behind it or somewhere on the side of it, but located right off to the
rear, as with the tot lot."
Mr. O'Dowd continued, "If you think about the entrance to this community, it has a very
narrow throat as you come off of Shepard Road," Mr. Evans continued, "This is an
actual photograph of a community, I believe this is in Tampa, but this is very similar to
what we'd like to off of Shepard [Road], to be able to enter in. Because we have to enter
in off of Shepard [Road]; we have two (2) lanes. We want to gate the community and we
have to come and merge under power lines that run right across this and then basically
start the houses in the - back, beyond this area Now if you go to any of our 'Engineered
Homes communities', that are built really anywhere in the area, you'll see that we put a
lot of landscape in our entrances because we really feel that has a lot of impact for buyers
making a location decision."
~--i
:::::a.
c:::.
~
C~-"
~~~
~~::~
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS. FWRIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING - MAY 30. 2007
(CONTINUATION FROM TIlE MAY 29, 2007 SPECIAL MEETING)
PAGE 17 OF 23
Furthermore, Mr. O'Dowd said, "This is very similar to what we have and what we're
planning on the actual entrance and the medians to look like in this area." Continuing,
Mr. Dowd noted, "But this shows the twenty-two feet (22') for the parking that does not
interfere at all with the sidewalks; it does have the green space and then it has the street
areas. And we've worked with staff in order to have the proper widths of the right-of-way
on all of these - streets that you see laid out."
Continuing, Mr. O'Dowd commented, "These are some statistics, in case you have any
questions. 1 think you might have these stats; if not, I'm going to give them to you in just
a little while. What this does incorporate is the fact that we have fifty-seven percent
(57%) of open space, total green space on the property. And we have parking spaces per
unit of2.51, when we average that out."
Discussion continued.
Mr. O'Dowd noted, "Our plan, at this point, would be that this would be maintained by
an Association."
Regarding Progress Energy, Commissioner Donald A. Gilmore asked, "Are they going to
give you permission to put trees under their power lines?"
Commissioner Gilmore remarked, "This is what bothers me and 1 apologize to going this
before you had your presentation, I thought it was our time and that was the question 1
had. Because a considerable portion of this green space that we're seeing there is in fact
power line Easement; and I would think that before this Commission approves this thing,
we see some evidence that the Utility is going to allow you to do this thing."
Mr. O'Dowd remarked, "The first thing going back to your power line Easement - I'd be
happy to come back for you and set up a caravan for you and take you and show you
under the Hunters Creek lines, or I can bring you photographs back with that; because
they really did make great use of this area."
Commissioner Gilmore commented, "I appreciate that, but I think we need a statement
from - the Utility that is going, what they will allow you to do it under there," Mr.
O'Dowd replied, "Understood."
Mr. O'Dowd stated, "We had a charette with the wuawooa aeveiopmem wmcn IS
immediately - and we have a letter that we'll pass out that states that they're totally
favorable, unanimously for this development and its concept." Commissioner Gilmorepasked, "I thought that you said earlier that you were going to have it." Mr. O'Dowd
noted, "We're going to have one (1) more with the other Homeowner's Association.
~
~
~
c::=>
~
~
~
~
~
~
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING - MAY 30, 2007
(CONTINUATION FROM mE MAY 29, 2007 SPECIAL MEETING)
PAGE 18 OF 23
A letter was handed out by Mr. Evans related to the Homeowner's Association.
Tape 21Sidc B
Commissioner Brown said, "In the conversation about the high voltage Easements; when
we were going through the discussion of the cell tower in Tuscawilla, there was a huge
outcry regarding the safety of our children and the safety of the high power Easement and
the cell tower and the impact that that had on the community. And I don't know whether
now we're saying that when you cross a certain parallel, in the City of Winter Springs,
those concerns and that hazardous high voltage area suddenly becoines a park; and I think
we need to be careful about making that transition."
Commissioner Brown asked Attorney Garganese, "Given the nature of these buildings
and where they're going and the density that we're looking at, and the concerns that
we've seen in another development here in Winter Springs that was used in the
presentation - do we have the opportunity to limit the sales to owner-occupied and
restrict investors to keep them from turning into rentals? Because if you talk to our
Police Department, they'll tell you that in the area that we've done a similar development
like this, it has been investors sales and they've turn into rentals, they have a larger
numbers of incidents occurring - disproportionate to the other areas of the City."
Attorney Garganese replied, "I don't believe that requireme~t, we've imposed it. But
possibly; as part of the development plan, I mean, they can show us certain requirements
are set forth in the Development Agreement. I'd have to look at that issue."
As to the type of construction, Mr. O~Dowd explained, "The plan is concrete block
construction on the fIrst floor; frame on the second and the third." Regarding the
pricepoint for these units, Mr. O'Dowd noted, "We're looking at starting at about a
hundred and sixty thousand [dollars] ($160,000.00) and going up to about three hundred
thousand [dollars] ($300,000.00)."
Discussion followed on Workforce Housing.
Mr. Dean Jennings, Vice President, Keewin Real Property Company, 1031 West Morris
Boulevard, Winter Park: addressed the City Commission.
Regarding two (2) car garages, Mr. Jeru-Jngs iemarked, "I think that's somet.'....ing we need
to talk about then." Commissioner Krebs commented, "I actually have her flyer that she
sent out, if you'd like a copy of that; we can get you one."
Commissioner Krebs asked, "Did you say there was a pet park in this as well?" Mr.
Jennings replied, "Yes."
~'z~~~1l
:;":;~:~-~
~!,.
~
C'~
~
~1
~
_ --
;::.:;:J
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING - MAY 30, 2007
(CONTINUATION fROM THE MAY 29, 2007 SPECIAL MEETING)
PAGE 19 OF 23
Regarding the sizes of the units, Mr. O'Dowd remarked, "The unit sizes - start at about a
thousand (1,000) square feet and would go up to about twenty-two hundred (2,200)
square feet." Commissioner Krebs asked, "So, the average size would be?" Mr.O'Dowd
replied, "Sixteen hundred (1,600)."
With further discussion, Commissioner Krebs asked, "Landscaping buffer on the left
side, is that it?" Mr. O'Dowd replied, "Yes, this will be up against the industrial area.
And we're still planning on doing exactly what the development order said. I think it was
a combined berm and..." Commissioner Krebs interjected, "...A five foot (5') berm and a
six foot (6') wall, actually." Mr. O'Dowd continued, "Eleven feet (11') total." Mr.
Jennings added, "Plus, of course, landscaping and trees would be very much higher than
that. That's actually a pretty good size berm and visual as well as a sound break."
Commissioner Krebs then asked, "What kind of improvements to Shepard Road were
you planning?" Mr. Jennings responded, "We have intersection improvements - at
Shepard Road and (Highway) 17-92. Also, at the front entry of the unit, there's a double
lane boulevard of the community." Mr. Jennings added, "We are willing to do
improvements there on Shepard Road."
Regarding density, Mr. Jennings commented, "As a matter of fact, this property, under
the Future Land Use, is allowable for a significantly more density than what we're
asking. And so the 334 versus the 348 is, if! may say, to some degree, inconsequential
because the - Future Land Use allows significantly more than that."
Discussion.
Mr. Evans remarked, "With respect to what the Staffhad to say and then come back with
a comprehensive plan with all the comments addressed."
Mayor Bush asked, "Staff's recommendation; you've said you had six (6) meetings with
Staff, and yet, you've got all of these recommendations - what happened? I mean, why
weren't they addressed? Did Staff make them up after you had the meeting? Why are
you so far apart at this point after six (6) meetings?" Mayor Bush continued, "Did they
not want to do what you asked them do; is that - what you're saying?"
Mr. Stevenson replied, "Again, as they've said, we have had numerous meetings. Staff
did make these recommendations. I think they did address some of them, Mayor. Some
of them obviously, we've detailed for you tonight that have not been addressed that we
feel, again we're excited about the product; we're excited about the concept, the way they
laid out. But we feel there are some ways to make it a better product; understanding that
they also have the necessity for the project to go forward, to make it financially viable.
But we feel that there some issues that we still need to work on."
E"""""'"'''''''''
f.;:..i_~~....~.l~
!i!'"":,,..:,,,,"'J
~Oj;:D1'.\l
~~~'!
c.,~
~
~
t=t1""",
~
~..:
;:.=~
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING - MAY 30, 2007
(CONTINUA nON FROM TIlE MAY 29, 2007 SPECIAL MEETING)
PAGE 20 OF 23
Further discussion.
Deputy Mayor McGinnis commented, "I think what we would like to see is maybe an
Agreement with Progress Energy; some kind of an Agreement."
With further comments, Deputy Mayor McGinnis asked, "If you are going to have -
another charette, would you contact me please? I would like to work with you on that."
Discussion.
Commissioner Robert S. Miller commented, "I have a feeling that Staff is onto a good
idea with the larger park, central park. I think you ought to seriously look at that - they
way they laid it out. And then the last point is, I would be interested in the power
Easement issue also, because I think some of us need to be reassured."
Next, Commissioner Krebs asked, "Is there a gazebo over by - that lake?" Mr. Evans
replied, "Yes. That's part of the central park area including the roundabout that's in front
of that. So, you have got a little landscaped area as well as the park itself."
On the issue of parking, Mr. Baker commented, "We disagree with ninety (90) degree
parking - backing out into a street, whether it's public or private." Commissioner
Gilmore asked, "And what's your proposal?" Mr. Baker replied, "Parallel parking."
Regarding Progress Energy, Commissioner Gilmore commented, "Let them come back
here with what the power company says is allowed. Because, believe me, if they come,
they have the right; they will put a fence right up along there and say, we don't want your
people under our power lines or even on our Easement."
Commissioner Miller said, "You are right." Commissioner Krebs commented, "Right."
Mr. Evans stated, "We can do that."
"APPROVE THE CONCEPT PLAN - MOVE TO APPROVE." MOTION BY
DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS. COMMISSIONER MILLER SAID, "WITH
COMMENTS. DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS REMARKED, "JUST THE
CONCEPT PLAN."
DEPUTY MAYOR McGiNNIS REITERATED, "i MOVE WE ACCEPT Till.;
CONCEPT PLAN AND WIm CONSIDERATION THAT COMMENTS FROM
STAFF WILL BE WORKED ON AND mERE WILL BE A FINAL
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN BROUGHT BEFORE US AFTER
mEY HAVE WORKED WITH STAFF."
MOTION DIED FOR A LACK OF SECOND.
P"'''~
~.:::.;~:o
:;.-.......; .~
~f.::!.~
~
~;.
~
C:;&'n!J
~"""l!I
~
~
;;;;;;;.>>
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FlORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING - MAY 30, 2007
(CONTINUA nON FROM THE MAY 29, 2007 SPECIAL MEETING)
PAGE 21 OF 23
Discussion.
"I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE CONCEPT AND APPROVE THE
CONCEPT PENDING FURTHER WORK BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND
STAFF TOWARD THE PRESENTATION OF A FINAL CONCEPT PLAN."
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BROWN. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
KREBS. DISCUSSION.
"I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT THAT WE REQUIRE TIlE
APPLICANT TO COME BACK WITH A STATEMENT FROM - THE UTILITY
AS TO THE USE CAPABILITY OF THAT EASEMENT AREA." AMENDMENT
TO THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GILMORE. SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER KREBS. DISCUSSION.
VOTE: (ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION)
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE
COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
VOTE: (ON THE MOTION AS AMENDED)
COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE
COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Bush commented, "I am hoping that next time it comes back that Staff and the
Applicant have worked out everything so that we, or if you just can't work it out, tell us.
Just say, we can't agree on this. Because when we see that you haven't done Staff's
recommendation, as you can tell, it causes problems."
In other City business, discussion ensued on 'REDFLEXlasercam' which was discussed
the previous evening.
"I MOVE THAT WE DO AN RFP (REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL) FOR A
~YSTEM, TRAFFIC, RED LIGHT..." MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR
McGINNIS: MANAGER McLEMORE INTERJECTED, "...TRAFFIC CAMERA
DEVICES." DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS SAID, "RIGHT."
~;j;~;5.?1
~-;;...."';!':i'.:)':?<
;\:. '.. )
~;::;,.::
r:;i\."",
~'7f.f:':~C
~!!~
~
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA
MINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING - MAY 30. 2007
(CONTINUATION FROM THE MAY 29. 2007 SPECIAL MEETING)
PAGE 22 OF 23
MANAGER McLEMORE COMMENTED, "AND WHAT TIDS BASICALLY
SAYS TO YOU IS HOW - THIS HAS CAUSED TROUBLE IN OTHER
COMMUNITIES WITH THIS PRODUCT. AND WE JUST NEED TO BE VERY,
VERY CAREFUL."
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BROWN. DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE
COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
REGULAR
607. Information Services Department
Requests City Commission Review And Consider For Approval The City's New Cell
Phone Policy; If Approved, Authorize Supplemental Appropriation In The Amount
Of $4,091.00 For Equipment Stipend; And Authorize City Manager To Make Any
Future Revisions As Necessary To The Policy.
Ms. Joanne Dalka, Director, Information Services Department introduced this Agenda
Item.
"MOVE TO APPROVE." MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BROWN. DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER KREBS: AYE
COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Manager McLemore commented on comments he had made.
Discussion followed on a date for a Workshop on Workforce Housing, which was
previously considered for May 7th, 2007 and then on Thursday, June 14, 2007, Mayor
Bush said, "Four o'clock on the 11th [June 2007]." No objections were voiced.
~
;;;c.~
C=>
~
~
=""""
~
.~~
~...
~
ATTACHMENT E
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
NINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JULY 23, 2007
PAGE 18 OF 23
Discussion.
"I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT WHAT IS WRITTEN ON THE PAPER -
SETTING THE CAP AT 4.2919." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BROWN.
MAYOR BUSH SAID, "AND ALSO THE DEBT SERVICE MILLAGE AT -
.1022." MS. GRECO ADDED, "AS WELL AS THE ESTABLISHING THE DATE
AND THE TIME OF THE PUBLIC HEARING TO SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2007 AT
5:15 P.M. AT CITY HALL." SECONDED BY DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS.
DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Tape 3/Side A
REGULAR
602. Community Development Department
Requests The Commission Consider A Conceptual Development Plan For A 338
Unit Town-House And Patio Home Development On Approximately 47.09 Acres,
Located On The South Side Of Shepard Road, North Of Florida Avenue, East Of
Boat Lake, And Immediately Adjacent To The West Side Of The Wildwood
Residential PUD (Planned Unit Development).
Mr. John Baker, AICP< Senior Planner, Community Development Department addressed
the City Commission regarding this Agenda Item.
Mr. David Evans, Evans Engineering, 719 Irma Avenue, Orlando, Florida: addressed
the City Commission and provided the City Commission with a document from Progress
Energy.
Commissioner Miller asked, "How many vehicles do you think will be going out of the
development everyday onto Florida A venue? What did the traffic estimates show?"
Mr. Evans replied, "We did do some preliminary estimates of what traffic would do.
Obviously we compared it to when we were going through the Land Use process to the
industrial development and showed a significant decrease in the residential versus
industrial.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
NINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JULY 23, 2007
PAGE I90F23
But we still need to run our study for both Florida [ Avenue] and the split between Florida
[Avenue] and Shepard [Road] and then the connections to [Highway] 17-92 and the other
way to make sure that everything does work on the two (2) roadways. I couldn't make
any preliminary estimates at this time; I haven't run those numbers."
Discussion.
Deputy Mayor McGinnis said, "This is the first time I have heard commercial being
developed." Mr. Evans stated, "We don't propose Commercial in this community, inside
the community."
Further discussion.
Mayor Bush asked, "You would rather do 'B' than 'A'?" Mr. Evans replied, "Reviewing
both, 'A' was our choice intentionally." Deputy Mayor McGinnis stated, "It clearly
states in 'A', requires planned residential communities to provide complimentary and
compatible support commercial or industrial uses." Mr. Evans commented, "We have
and we talked with Staff about that and that may - force us to the PUD 'B' option, but
whichever option matches the current concept that we're proposing, will be the one we
choose." Mr. Evans continued, "PUD either way."
Mr. Baker continued addressing the City Commission regarding this Agenda Item and
stated, "I noted that the Applicant proposes to modify their previous commitment on the
western boundary to have a wall and I believe it was an eleven foot (11 ') wall in lieu of
the berm and the wall. So, that is something we need to look at."
On the Power Line Easement, Commissioner Gilmore said, "I don't see anything in here
that allows you to use that as a playground. I see you can use it as a walking path."
Mr. Evans replied, "We had a communication with Progress Energy, up until this
afternoon. It takes them a little while to run through this process in a Conceptual review.
Their - review typically is a formal application for a Permit - it's an agreement with
them and I kind of gave you the form, the guidelines that they give you to do that. And
what was explained to me is - what we're talking about here is usable open space so
when you consider it a walking path or a dog path or even, when I was discussing it - and
I'd refer to the name of the person at Progress Energy in the Report. But in - that you
could use soccer fields, but - with plastic goals; not metal goals.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
NINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JULY 23, 2007
PAGE 20 OF 23
You can do open areas where you have - playground - not tot lots with structures
sticking up vertical. You can have landscaping, bushes, shrubs, and trees; and I think
they even give you the list in the guidelines of the type of trees and the things they allow
in the easement area. So, under the Easement, as a passive recreation area, we feel
confident that it will be developed that way, And it's just going through the process of
getting Progress Energy's application for the use of that Easement to do so."
Commissioner Gilmore added, "I look at potentially - to 500 kids in there. Where are
they going to play?" Continuing, Mr, Evans explained, "That's not the only areas in the
community that they have." Furthermore, Mr. Evans noted, "That large area in the center
now, upwards of two (2) acres with the community center and that with the pool with a
tot lot will contain all the amenities also for children to play. And then you're connected
directly to Boat Lake and the perimeter of that, so we have those areas plus the
Easement. "
Additionally, Commissioner Gilmore inquired, "Is Boat Lake considered in this acreage
to get your density?" Mr. Evans responded, "No."
Commissioner Brown asked, "Is there going to be an HOA (Homeowner's Association)?
A mandatory HOA (Homeowner's Association)?" Mr. Evans replied, "Yes. Absolutely.
All the grounds including the areas in the paseos, and all the common areas are
maintained by an HOA (Homeowner's Association)."
Discussion ensued on a buffer.
Deputy Mayor McGinnis inquired, "As we go through the Staff recommendations, each
one of these items at the end, they say this item has been partially met. Have there been
any changes in that, Staff, since this was prepared? Have any of these been totally met?"
Mr. Baker replied, "No, ma'am, I don't believe so."
Discussion continued.
Mr. Stevenson commented, "I think Staff would lean on the side of asking you to
recommend approval for this project." Manager McLemore asked, "As a Concept?" Mr.
Stevenson replied, "As a Concept." Regarding options 'A' and 'B', Mr. Stevenson
remarked, "Those items we will have to address before we get to Final Engineering on
the project. We're talking about Concept tonight."
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
NINUTES
CITY COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - JULY 23, 2007
PAGE 21 OF 23
Regarding the eleven foot (11') wall, Manager McLemore asked, "Does this suggest that
that wall terminates at this point? That it starts and terminates..." Mr. Evan stated,
". . . No - it terminates at the lake."
Further discussion.
"I AM PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION. AS I UNDERSTAND IT WE ARE
ACCEPTING THE CONCEPT, APPROVING THE CONCEPT - THAT IS MY
MOTION." MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS.
MOTION DIED FOR A LACK OF SECOND.
Discussion continued.
Commissioner Brown asked, "If we approve this Concept, will you and the Applicant
eventually bring something back to us we can Vote on?" Mr. Stevenson replied, "This
will come back to you when it is in - basically in concrete, if you will; and a Final
Engineering Plan."
Further discussion.
"I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE CONCEPT PLAN AS PRESENTED TO US
FOR WINTER PLACE; WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT ALL THE
DETAILS WILL COME BACK TO US AT A LATER DATE." MOTION BY
DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GILMORE.
DISCUSSION.
VOTE:
DEPUTY MAYOR McGINNIS: AYE
COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE
COMMISSIONER GILMORE: AYE
COMMISSIONER MILLER: AYE
MOTION CARRIED.
Further discussion.
REGULAR
603. Community Development Department And Public Works Department
Requests The City Commission Consider Proposed Modifications To The Jesup's
Reserve Final Engineering Plans And Developer's Agreement Related To The
Construction Of Roberts Family Lane.
Mr. Brian Fields, P.E., City Engineer, Public Works Department addressed the City
Commission regarding this Agenda Item.
ATTACHMENT F
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS PREPARED BY:
AND SHOULD BE RETURNED TO:
Anthony A. Garganese
City Attorney of Winter Springs
Brown, Garganese, Weiss & D'Agresta, PA
225 E. Robinson St., Suite 660
Orlando, FL 3280 I
(407) 425-9566
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
. iWS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the II Agreement") is made and executed
this I~ day of June, 2006, by and between the CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, a
Florida Municipal Corporation (the "City "), whose address is 1126 East S.R. 434, Winter
Springs, Florida 32708, and THE KEEWIN REAL PROPERTY COMPANY, a Florida
corporation ("Developer") whose address is 1031 West Morse Blvd., Winter Park, FL
32789.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer is the contract purchaser of that certain real property
located in Seminole County, Florida consisting of approximately 47 acres, as more
particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (the
"Property"); and
WHEREAS, Developer desires to develop townhomes or condominiums on the
Property (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, Developer has applied for an amendment to the Winter Springs
Comprehensive Plan in order to accommodate the Project; and
WHEREAS, at this stage in the development review process, the City and
Developer have agreed to certain conditions of development related to, among other things:
(i) buffers; (ii) notices to potential purchasers; (iii) school mitigation; and (iv) recreational
land; and
WHEREAS, the Developer acknowledges and agrees that as the Project is taken
through the City's development review process, the City may require that this
Development Agreement be modified to incorporate additional terms and conditions in
order to safeguard the public's interests; and
WHEREAS, the City and Developer desire to execute this Agreement in order to
more fully set forth the conditions of development.
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page lof9
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants
contained herein, the parties mutually agree as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this
reference.
2. Buffer. Since the properties to the west of the Project are zoned commercial and
industrial, the Developer has agreed to build a 'buffer between the Project and those
properties to the west. The buffer will include a 6' high wall on top of a 5' berm. The
buffer shall also include trees, shrubs and irrigation in accordance with a landscape plan
deemed acceptable to the City.
3. Notice to Purchasers. The Developer will include in the Covenants, Conditions and
Restrictions for the Project a notice to all potential purchasers that the properties adjacent
to the west have zoning designations of industrial and commercial. Said notice shall be
subject to the approval of the City Attorney.
4. Parks and Recreation. In accordance with Winter Springs Code Section 20-354 and
other applicable provisions of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code, the Developer
agrees to dedicate an appropriate amount ofland as a park for the residents of the Project.
Such park shall have recreational facilities built in accordance with the standards of the
National Recreational Association. In addition, such park shall be protected through deed
restrictions recorded in the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the Project which
shall ensure the preservation of its intended use, the payment of future taxes, and the
maintenance of the park and facilities for a safe, healthy and attractive living environment.
The park shall be included in the phasing plan, if any, and shall be constructed and fully
improved by Developer at an equivalent or greater rate than the construction of the
residential structures for which it serves.
5. School Mitigation Payment. In order to mitigate the potential impacts of the Project
on the Seminole County Public Schools, Developer has agreed to pay One Thousand Two
Hundred Thirty-Five Dollars ($1,235.00) for each residential unit in addition to the School
Impact Fees charged for each residential unit. The Mitigation Payment shall be paid to the
School Board upon the date that the City grants the first vertical building,permit for the
Project. The School Board shall be considered a third party beneficiary under this
Development Agreement for the limited purpose of enforcing the provisions of this
paragraph against the Developer. Nothing herein shall be construed as obligating or
requiring the City to pay, or otherwise enforce the payment of, the Mitigation Payment to
the School Board. Developer agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any
action, dispute, claim, or litigation directly or indirectly involving the Mitigation Payment.
6. Notices. Any and all notices, elections. demands, requests and responses thereto
permitted or required to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing, signed by or on
behalf of the party giving the same, and shall be deemed to have been properly given and
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 20f9
shall be effective upon being personally delivered, or upon being faxed to the number set
forth below to the appropriate party, or upon being deposited in the United States mail,
postage prepaid, certified with return receipt requested, or upon being deposited on a paid
basis with a nationally recognized overnight delivery service, to the other party at the
address of such other party set forth below or at such other address as such other party
may designate by notice specifically designated as a notice of change of address and given
in accordance herewith, provided, however, that the time period in which a response to any
such notice, election, demand or request must be given shall commence on the date of
receipt thereof; and provided further that no notice of change of address shall be effective
until the date of receipt thereof. Personal delivery to a party or to any officer, partner,
agent or employee of such party at said address shall constitute receipt. Rejection or other
refusal to accept or inability to deliver because of changed address of which no notice has
been received shall also constitute receipt. Any such notice, election, demand, request or
response, shall be addressed as follows:
If to Developer:
The Keewin Real Property Company
1031 West Morse Blvd., Suite 325
Winter Park, FL 32789
AUo: Jay Folk
Phone: 407-645-4400
Fax: 407-645-0340
With a copy to:
Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed, P.A.
215 N. Eola Drive
P.O. Box 2809
Orlando, FL 32801
Attn: M. Rebecca Furman, Esquire
Phone: 407-843-4600
Fax: 407-843-4444
If to City:
City of Winter Springs
1126 East S.R. 434
Winter Springs, FL 32708
Attn: City Manager
Phone: 407-327-5999
Fax: 407-327-4753
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 3 of9
With a copy to:
Anthony Garganese, Esq.
City Attorney of Winter Springs
Brown, Garganese, Weiss & D'Agresta, P.A
225 E. Robinson St., Ste. 660
Orlando, FL 32801
Phone: 407-425-9566
Fax: 407-425-9596
Either party may change the address provided hereinabove by giving written notice
of such change to the other party or parties as herein provided.
7. Entire Agreement. The making, execution and delivery of this Agreement by the
parties hereto have been induced by no representations, statements, warranties or
agreements other than those expressed herein. This Agreement embodies the entire
understanding of the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof, and there are
no other written or oral agreements in effect between the parties hereto relating to the
subject matter hereof. This Agreement or any part thereof may only be amended or
modified by an agreement in writing by both of the parties hereto.
8. Severabilitv. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement shall be
interpreted in such a manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law, but should
any provision of this Agreement be prohibited or invalid under such law, such provision
shall be ineffective to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity without invalidating the
remainder of such provision or the remaining provisions of this Agreement.
9. Binding Effect. Except as provided hereinabove, this Agreement shall be binding
upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and
assigns.
10. Waiver. A waiver of any provision hereof or any default hereunder by either party
shall be effective only in writing. A waiver of one provision shall not constitute a waiver of
any other provision hereof, and a waiver of default shall not apply to any other default
whether occurring simultaneously or at a later date.
II. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each
of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which if taken together shall constitute one
and the same Agreement.
12. Governing Law. The laws of Florida shall govern the validity, performance and
enforcement of the Agreement.
13. Headings. The headings of these several paragraphs contained herein are for
convenience only and do not defme, limit or affect the contents of such paragraphs.
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 4 of9
14. Authorization. Each of the parties represents that this Agreement has been duly
executed by a partner or officer authorized to bind such party and that this Agreement
constitutes the valid, binding and enforceable obligation of such party.
15. Attorney's Fees. Any party to this Agreement who is the prevailing party in any
legal proceeding against any other party brought under or in connection with this
Agreement or the subject matter hereof, shall be additionally entitled to recover court costs
and reasonable attorney fees, and all other litigation expenses, including deposition costs,
travel and expert witness fees from the non-prevailing party.
16. Construction. The parties acknowledge that each party and its counsel have
reviewed this Agreement and the parties hereby agree that the normal rule of construction
to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be
employed in the interpretation of this Agreement or any addendums or exhibits hereto.
17. Venue. Venue for any legal proceedings under this Agreement shall lie solely in lhe
state courts in and for Seminole County, Florida, or in the United States District Court for
the Middle District of Florida.
18. Representations of the Parties. The City and Developer hereby each represent
and warrant to the other that it has the power and authority to execute, deliver and
perform the terms and provisions of this Agreement and has taken all necessary action
to authorize the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement. When title to
the Property is vested in Developer and when duly executed and delivered by the City,
then this Agreement will be recorded by the City in the Public Records of Seminole
County, Florida, and will constitute a legal, valid and binding obligation enforceable
against the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
Developer represents that it has voluntarily and willfully executed this Agreement for
purposes of binding the Property to the terms and conditions set forth in this
Agreement. In the event Developer does not acquire title to the Property pursuant to
the Contract for Sale and Purchase or within one year of both parties signing this
Agreement, which ever occurs sooner, then this Agreement shall be of no force and
effect unless both parties agree in writing that Developer will be given additional time
to acquire the Property. Developer represents and warrants that they will notify the
City Attorney, in writing, within three (3) business days of closing on the Property.
19. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall automatically be binding upon
and shall inure to the benefit of the City and Developer and their respective successors
and assigns.
20. Amendments. This Agreement sha!! not be modified or amended except by
written agreement duty executed by both parties hereto (or their successors or assigns)
and approved by the City Commission.
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 5 of9
21. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon approval by
the City Commission and execution of this Agreement by both parties hereto.
22. Relationship of the Parties. The relationship of the parties to this
Agreement is contractual and Developer is an independent contractor and not an agent
of the City. Nothing herein shaH be deemed to create a joint venture or principal-agent
relationship between the parties, and neither party is authorized to, nor shall either
party act toward third persons or the public in any manner, which would indicate any
such relationship with the other.
23. Sovereign Immunity. Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this
Agreement, nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of the
City's right to sovereign immunity under Section 768.28, or other limitations imposed on
the City's potential liability under state or federal law. As such, the City shall not be liable,
under this Agreement for puni(ive damages or interest for the period before judgment.
Further, the City shall not be liable for any claim or judgment, or portion thereof, to any
one person for more than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00), or any claim or
judgment, or portion thereof, which, when totaled with all other claims or judgments paid
by the State or its agencies and subdivisions arising out of the same incident or occurrence,
exceeds the sum of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000.00). This paragraph shall
survive termination of this Agrec~ment.
24. Citv's Police Power. Developer agrees and acknowledges that the City
hereby reserves all police powers granted to the City by law. In no way shall this
Agreement be construed as the City bargaining away or surrendering its police powers.
25. Third-Party Rights. Except as provided in paragraph 5, this Agreement is
not a third party beneficiary contract and shall not in any way whatsoever create any
rights on behalf of any third party.
26. Soecific Performance. Strict compliance shall be required with each and
every provision of this Agreement. The parties agree that failure to perform the obligations
provided by this Agreement shall result in irreparable damage and that specific
performance of these obligations may be obtained by a suit in equity.
27. Develooment Permits. Nothing herein shall limit the City's authority to
grant or deny any development permit applications or requests subsequent to the effective
date of this Agreement. The failure of this Agreement to address any particular City.
County, State and/or Federal permit, condition. term or restriction shall not relieve
Developer or the City of the necessity of complying with the law governing said permitting
requirement, condition, term or restriction. Without imposing any limitation on the City's
police powers, the City reserves the right to withhold. suspend or terminate any and all
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 6of9
certificates of occupancy for any building or unit if Developer is in breach of any term and
condition of this Agreement.
28. Termination. The City shall have the unconditional right, but not obligation, to
terminate this Agreement, without notice or penalty, if Developer fails to receive building
permits and substantially commence vertical construction of the Project within three (3)
years of the effective date of this Agreement. If the City terminates this Agreement, the
City shall record a notice of termination in the public records of Seminole County, Florida
ifthis Agreement is recorded pursuant to paragraph 18.
[SIGNATURE BLOCKS BEGIN ON NEXT PAGE]
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 7 of9
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seal on the
date first above written.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
I:~
By:
Andrea L
(
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
For the use and reliance of the City of Winter Springs.
Florida only.
CITY SEAL
Date:
By:
Anthony rganese, City Attorney for
the City of Winter Springs, Florida
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF SEMINOLE
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority, John F. Bush and
Andrea Lorenzo Luaces, well known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk respectively,
of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, and acknowledged before me that they executed
the foregoing instrument on behalf of the City of Winter Springs, as its true act and deed,
and that they were duly authorized to do so.
Witness my hand and official seal this Jfl1 day of -.J\U\t ,2006.
~
SANDI BOWKER \
~ tl'f COMMISSION #00223479
'" EXPIRES: JUN 16. 2007
,~ Bonded IhrOU~ Advantage NDWY I
J JhrdlJlv<
1k1~y Public .\
My commission expires: \J UM Iq I tOO 1
(NOTARY SEAL)
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page8of9
Signed, sealed and delivered in the
presence of the following witnesses:
(NOTARY SEAL)
~"." SHERRY MCOOPBR
\... . .JI MY COMMISSION {1 DD529'NO
.....~ exPIRES: .....23,2010
(407') IIN1M ........"*Y .......
mE KEEWlN REAL PROPERTY
COMPANY, a Florida c:orporatioD
~~
~~~~ ~ ~~~
Title: L { 11.\ l cCt, '?qUI ~
Date: Co It:U c Co
Development Agreement
City of Winter Springs and Keewin Real Property Company
Page 9of9
Exhibit 'A'
I
o
I
230 .460
I
9Jl Feet
PARCEL NUMBERS
26-20-30-5AR-OCOO-0210 28-20-30-5AS-OBOO-015A
28-20-30-5AS-OBOO-0170 33-20-30-503-0S00-0000
33-20-30-503-0000-0150 33-20-30-503-0000-0240
33-20-30-503-0000-025A
LESS AREAS 1 & 2 AS DESCRIBED:
Area 1
A parcel of land being a portion of Lot 18, Block "B" of OAK GROVE PARK, according to the
plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 83, Public Records of Seminole County, Florida.
BeIng more partIcularly described as follows:
BEGIN at the Northwest comer of WILDWOOD according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat
Book 19, Page 7 through 10, Public Records of Seminole County, Florida; thence South
03057'20" East, along the Westerly line of said WILDWOOD, for a distance of 166.02 feet to a
point of curvature of a curve concave Westerly, having a radius of 175.00 feet and a delta angle
of 29059'46"; thence, continuing along the Westerly line of said WILDWOOD, run Southerly
along the arc of said curve for a distance of 91.62 feet to the point of tangency; thence,
continuing along the Westerly line of said WILDWOOD, South 26002'26" West for a distance of
126.10 feet; thence, departing said Westerly line of said WILDWOOD, South 86002'40" West for
a distance of 94.04 feet; thence North 03057'20" West for a distance of 362.73 feet to the
Southerly right of way line of Shepard Road and Northerly line of said Lot 18; thence North
86002'40" East, along said Southerly right of way line, for a distance of 180.52 feet to the POINT
OF BEGINNING.
Area 2
A parcel of land being a portion of Lot 18, Block "B" of OAK GROVE PARK, according to the
plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 83, Public Records of Seminole County, Florida.
Being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCE at the Northwest corner of WILDWOOD according to the plat thereof as recorded
in Plat Book 19, Page 7 through 10, Public Records of Seminole County, Florida; thence run
South 86002'40" West, along the Southerly right of way line of Shepard Road and Northerly line
of said Lot 18, for a distance of 260.52 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, departing
said Southerly right of way line of Shepard Road and Northerly line of said Lot 18, South
03057'20" East for a distance of 298.01 feet; thence South 86002'40" West for a distance of
113.09 feet; thence North 04049'25" East for a distance of 301.55 feet to the Southerly right of
way line of Shepard Road and Northerly line of said Lot 18; thence North 86002'40" East, along
said Southerly right of way line, for a distance of 67.07 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Prime Utility Rights of Way through north and central Florida
Page 3 of7
ATTACHMENT G
Wood Distribution Pole
Transmission with Distribution
Underbuild
Where do I find Progress Energy structure numbers?
All Progress Energy transmission structure numbers are located on the
pole or on one of the legs of the towers. The numbers are usually located
chest high or at the top of the pole and have a letter and number
designation. For example: ANL-67.
Are there uses which are prohibited?
No item shall be allowed on the right of way that violates the National
Electric Safety Code (NESC). Prohibitions include, but are not limited
to, non-moveable buildings, swimming pools, vegetation, mobile homes,
airstrips, satellite dishes, dumpsters, septic tanks and related drain fields,
absorption pits, wells, burial grounds and underground vaults. Burning
activities are prohibited on the right of way. Hunting is also prohibited
on Progress Energy fee owned lands.
Will I be required to hold Progress Energy harmless from my acts
or negligence in using the property?
Before work begins on Progress Energy fee owned lands, you must
provide proof of insurance with Progress Energy named as an additional
named insured on your company's form or on an equivalent acceptable to
Progress Energy. The minimum required amount of general liability and
bodily injury is $200,000 each person and $500,000 each occurrence,
up to $1,000,000 each person and $3,000,000 each occurrence, and a
minimum of $50,000 in property damage each occurrence and $100,000
http://prgnprojectsolutions.comllanduseguide/faq.htm
10/29/2007
Prime Utility Rights of Way through north and central Florida
Page 4 of7
aggregate up to $500,00 in property damage each occurrence and
$1,000,000 aggregate. Proof of insurance must be updated annually.
Failure to provide a certificate of insurance may result in the cancellation
of your agreement.
What type of authorization will I receive for use of Progress
Energy's fee owned land?
License Agreement - A license agreement is a bilateral agreement
renewable on an annual basis. An annual fee is associated with a license
agreement. License agreements are typically granted for unimproved
parking areas, signs, grazing, farming, etc.
Easement Agreement - An easement agreement is more permanent in
nature and only ceases when the improvements to the easement area are
removed or abandoned. Easement agreements are personal to the holder
and cannot be assigned or transferred without the written permission of
Progress Energy. Easement agreements give the applicant permission to
use the land for a particular purpose. Easement agreements are typically
granted for unimproved ingress and egress crossings, private roadways
and utility crossings. There is a one time fee associated with an easement
agreement.
Underground Pipeline Right of Way Utilization Agreement-
This type of agreement is used for major linear collocations such as a
pipeline, utility lines, communication lines, water lines and sanitary
sewer lines. Fees are paid annually or a one time payment based on the
net present value. Certain studies may be required before this type of
agreement can be issued. Permit - A permit is a bi-Iateral agreement for a
temporary use. Permit agreements are used on both fee owned and
easement held properties. A fee is associated with a permit on lands
owned by Progress Energy.
What type of authorization will I receive for use of a Progress
Energy easement?
Encroachment Agreement - A bilateral agreement which outlines your
specific rights and limitations to use the land. The applicant, if other than
the fee owner, must obtain permission from the owner to use the land. A
one time fee may be associated with this type of agreement.
Letter of No Objection - A letter which states Progress Energy has no
objection to your use of the land. A letter of no objection is used when
the use has minimal impact to Progress Energy facilities. There is no fee
associated with a letter of no objection. However, you must obtain
permission from the underlying fee owner.
Permit - A permit is a bilateral agreement for temporary use. Permit
agreements are used on both fee owned and easement held properties. A
fee may be associated with a permit on lands held by easement.
http://prgnprojectsolutions.com/landuseguide/faq .htm
10/2912007
Prime Utility Rights of Way through north and central Florida
Page 5 of7
Underground Pipeline Right of Way Utilization Agreement - This type
of agreement is used for major linear collocations such as a pipeline,
utility lines, communication lines, water lines and sanitary sewer lines.
Fees are paid annually or a one time payment based on the net present
value. Additional studies may be required for your project.
Can trees be planted on the right of way?
In general no trees that are greater than twelve (12) feet at maturity are
permitted on the right or way. All landscaping must meet the current
guidelines and be reviewed and approved by an Encroachment
Representative as to size, species, and placement within the right of way.
Trees and shrubs are prohibited from being planted beneath the overhead
wires and must maintain a fifteen (15) foot setback from the outermost
conductor (wire). All vegetation must maintain a fifty (50) foot clearance
from any pole and fifteen (15) foot clearance from all guy wire(s). No
plants shall be planted in locations that may impede truck access for
emergency repairs and general maintenance of facilities. Any tree or
shrub exceeding these limitations will be removed during routine
vegetation management activities.
Progress Energy is firmly committed to providing our customers with the
most reliable and efficient electric service possible. Should you have any
questions about planting the "right tree in the right place", please contact
your local Progress Energy Transmission Forester. The following is a list
of plants suitable for planting in the easement area:
Arrow Wood *
Ashe Magnolia*
Button Bush*
Chickasaw Plum*
Crape Myrtle
Eastern Redbud*
Flatwoods Plum*
Florida Anise*
Florida Azalea*
Florida Privet*
Hammocksweet Azalea *
Japanese Maple
Lead Plant*
Ligustrum
May Haw*
Necklace Pod*
Oleander
Parsely Haw*
Piedmont Azalea*
Possum Haw*
Red Buckeye*
Rusty Blackhaw*
Sandankwa Viburnum
Viburnum dentatum
Magnolia asheii
Cephalanthus occidentalas
Prunus angustifolia
Lagerstroemia indica
Cercis canadensis
Prunus umbel/ata
Illicium floridanum
Rhododendron austrinum
Forestiera segregate
Rhododendron serrulatum
Acer palmatum
Amorpha fruticosa
Ligustrum japonicum
Crataegus aestivalis
Sophora tomentosa
Nerium oleander
Crataegus marshallii
Rhododendron canescens
Viburnum nudum
Aesculus pavia
Viburnum rufidulum
Viburnum suspensum
http://prgnprojectsolutions.com/landuseguide/faq .htm
10/29/2007
Prime Utility Rights of Way through north and central Florida
Page 6 of7
Sea Grape*
Simpson's Stopper*
Snowbell *
Sparkleberry*
Summer Hawthome*
Sweet Acaia*
Sweetshrub*
Walter's Vibumum*
Wax Myrtle*
Wild Coffee*
Wild Lime*
Yaupan Holly *
Yellow Anise*
Coccoloba uvifera
Myrcianthes fragrans
Styrax americanum
Vaccinium arboreum
Crataegus jlava
Acacia farnesiana
Calycanthus jloridus
Viburnum obovatum
Myrica cerifera
Psychotria nervosa
Zanthoxylum fagara
flex vomitoria
Illicium parviflorum
*Native Plants are recommended.
The following list of trees are probibited in tbe rigbt of way and will
be
routinely removed:
Birch
Ash
Australian pines
Bay
Black Cherry
Black Walnut
Camphor
Carolina Cherry Laurel
Carrotwood
China Berry
Chinese Tallow
Common Persimmon
Cypress
Ear tree
Elms
Eucalyptus
Golden Rain
Hickory
Jacaranda
Magnolia
Maples
Mimosa
Mulberry
Norfolk Island Pine
Oaks
Palms All over 12 ft.
Pines
Punk
Royal Poinciana
Betula spp.
Fraxinus spp.
Casuarina spp.
Persea spp. & Gordonia lasianthus
Prunus serofina
Juglans nigra
Cinnamomum camphora
Prunus caroliniana
Cupaniopsis anacardiodes
Melia azedarach
Sapium sebiferum
Diopyros virginiana
Taxodium ascendens & T. distichum
Enterolobium contorfisiliquum
Ulmus spp.
Eucalyptus spp.
Koelreuteria elegans
Carya spp.
Jacaranda mimosifolia
Magnolia spp.
Acer spp.
Albizia julbrissin
Morus spp.
Araucaria heterophylla
Quercus spp * ALL
Pinus spp. *ALL
Melaleuca quinquenervia
Delonix regia
http://prgnprojectsolutions.comllanduseguide/faq .htm
10/29/2007
Prime Utility Rights of Way through north and central Florida
Page 7 of7
Silk Oak
Sweet Gum
Sycamore
Grevillea robusta
Liquidambar styraciflua
latanus occidenta/is
Where can I obtain an aerial?
Your local county Property Appraiser's office will have aerials available
for purchase for a nominal fee. Some county Property Appraiser's have
aerials available online. Aerials are also available at
terraserver .homeadvisor .msn. com.
http://prgnprojectsolutions.comllanduseguide/faq .htm
10/29/2007