The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001 03 07 Regular Item E -I CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS'l FLORIDA 1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434 WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708-2799 Telephone (407) 327-1800 Community Development Dept. Planning Division LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR AGENDA ITEM: II. E. ELIZABETH MORSE GENIUS FOUNDATION PROPERTY LARGE SCALE PLAN AMENDMENT (LS-CPA-I-OO) STAFF REPORT: APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY: The provisions of 163.317 4( 4) Florida Statutes which state "Be the agency (Local Planning Agency) responsible for the preparation of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment and shall make recommendations to the governing body regarding the adoption or amendment of such plan. During the preparation of the plan or plan amendment and prior to any recommendation to the governing body, the Local Planning Agency shall hold at least one public hearing, with public notice, on the proposed plan or plan amendment." The provisions of Sec. 20-57 of the City Code which state in part ". .the planning and zoning board shall serve as the local planning agency pursuant to the county comprehensive planning act and the local government comprehensive planning act of the state. . ." It is City Administration policy that the applicant must provide the data, inventory and analysis in support of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and provide the response to the ORC Report. APPLICANT: OWNER: Henderson Planning Group, Inc. 112 South Lake Avenue Orlando, FL 32801 (407) 872-3025 Casscells Trust 907 Old England Ave. Winter Park, FL 32789 ~.~ LOCAL PLANNlNG AGENCY Mareh 7, 200] Morse Foundation Traet Plan Amendment LS-CPA-1-00 Page] of 4 REQUEST: PURPOSE: For the Local Planning Agency to review and recommend adoption of the plan amendment taking into consideration the Response to the ORC Report provided by the consultant. The property owner of the 67.58 acre Morse Foundation land desires to develop the property for mixed use, taking advantage of the new "GreeneWay Interchange" Future Land Use Map designation, designed by the City to take advantage of the commercial opportunities provided by the transportation nexus of S.R. 417 (The GreeneWay) and S.R. 434. The Future Land Use Map designation provides for higher density residential and higher intensity commercial than allowed under the City's other Future Land Use Map and zoning designations. OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT (ORe) FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS: The consultant for this proposed plan amendment is Henderson Planning Group, Inc. The consultant received a copy of the ORC Report and has made the responses. [ See Attachment 2 ] FINDINGS: . Henderson Planning Group, Inc. has provided the response to the ORC Report relating to the proposed plan amendment LS-CP A-I-00. . Wetlands do exist on the subject property although the exact location and extent of these wetlands are not known at present because a jurisdictional wetland boundary has not been established by the appropriate governmental agency. . Wetland delineation on the City's Future Land Use Map and the County's Future Land Use Map are understood to be approximations and only at the time of site development review are they required to be accurately delineated. [ref.: Goal 2, Objective A, Policy 3)b. of the Land Use Element and in Goal 1, Objective C, policy 5)a. of the Conservation Element] . The Future Land Use Map should be modified to reflect the presence of wetlands on the subject property. [ref.: Goal 1, Objective B, Policy 1 of the Conservation Element] LOCAL PLANNlNG AGENCY Mareh 7, 200 I Morse Foundation Traet Plan Amendment LS-CP A-] -00 Page 2 of 4 . There is well established permit application process in the development of property, whereby a detailed analysis is conducted by the St. Johns River Water Management District (and sometimes other agencies) to determine the location, extent, and type of on-site wetlands. [ref.: Goal, Objective C, Policy 5)a. of the Conservation Element] . The Florida Department of Community Affairs recognizes the permit application process of the St. Johns River Water Management District for preservation of wetlands. . The City's Comprehensive Plan provides for preservation of environmentally sensitive areas through creation of an environmental easement either indicated on the plat for the development or by a separate instrument approved by the City. [ ref.: Goal 2, Objective A Policy 3)c. of the Land Use Element] . The "GreeneWay Interchange" Future Land Use Map designation allows for flexibility of mixed use development and provides a range of development densities but does not determine specifically the mix of uses or densities. The City has the authority at the time of development review to require a traffic impact study that can specifically relate to what the development is proposed, rather than request a traffic impact studies based a any number of mix of uses and densities. . The City has a Concurrency Management requirement in its Comprehensive Plan that can ensure adequate public facilities and services are available or programmed at the time of development. STAFF RECOMMENDA lION: Staff recommends that the Local Planning Agency make the following recommendation to the City Commission: That the City Commission hold a second (adoption) public hearing and adopt the large scale comprehensive phm amendment (LS-CP A-I-OO) incorporating the City staff and the Local Planning Agency's Findings, and the Response to the ORC Report as the basis for the adoption of the plan amendment. LOCAL PLANNlNG AGENCY Mareh 7, 2001 Morse Foundation Traet Plan Amendment LS-CPA-]-OO Page 3 of 4 ATTACHMENTS: 1. ORC Report for Proposed Plan Amendment (LS-CP A-I-DO). 2. Response to the ORC Report for LS-CPA-I-00. 3. LS-CP A-I-00 Plan Amendment Original Data & Analysis Submission. LOCAL PLANNlNG AGENCY Mareh 7, 200 I Morse Foundation Traet Plan Amendment LS-CP A-1-00 Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENT 1 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS FORTBE .CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS . AMENDMENT 01-1 January 26,2001 Division of Community Planning Bureau of Local Planning This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 9J-l1.0 10 I. AMENDMENTS WITH OBJECTIONS A. Future Land Use Map Amendments 1. Amendment LS-CP A-I-OO: a. Suitability Based on Natural Resources and Facilities: The City proposes a Land Use Map Amendment Annexing and Redesignating 67.58 acres from Seminole County (Suburban Estates 1 du/acre) and Conservation to Greeneway Interchange (5-10 du/acre,Open Space and 1 FAR non-residential). The City has not demonstrated that the natural resources on-site will be protected. It appears that a portion of the site is currently in a conservation category under the Seminole County Plan. The data also indicate the presence of wetlands over approximately 1/3 of the site and proximity to the Lake Jessup shoreline. There is no indication how the current proposal for a Greeneway Interchange designation will protect resources such as wetlands. The Department also has questions regarding the impacts to roadway facilities and services since the analysis provided does not indicate the current 'and projected capacity and availability for roadway facilities. FDOT commented the City lacked an adequate analysis. Recommendation: Revise the amendment to retain the wetland and floodplain areas in a conservation land use designation or other designation to. protect the natural resources on-site. Revise the amendment to include an adequate transportation analysis. The analyses should include: 1) An assessment through the planning period of the impacts to facilities based on the most intense use including cumulative impacts (traffic) generated by proposed amendments herein; 2) Data and analysis demonstrating coordination of facilities with the proposed land uses; and 3) An assessment of the timing of provision of services such that all services are provided at the adopted level of service. . The analyses should assess the demand for services with regard to available capacity of services. For example, the City should assess traffic generation with regard to available capacity on existing roadways based on both the peak hour and the daily average trips; and should take into account the traffic generated by proposed amendments contained within this package. All analyses should be based on the most intense use proposed for development as identified and guided by the future land use map and future land use element policies, and should assess impacts in the short-term within five years and through the planning period (to 2015). Again, using the transportation example, the analysis should identify current operating LOS for SR 234 and 417, as well as any applicable local roadways. Include any FIHS facilities. The analysis should then factor in anticipated impacts from any proposed amendment such that a comparison of before~amendment and after-amendment conditions can be made. The analyses should then identify if and where deficiencies will be realized based on the LOS maximums as established by the local comprehensive plan and FDOT. This procedure should be repeated for a projected LOS through 2005 and 2015. For any identified deficiencies within five years, the City should,identify how the deficiency will be remedied through capital improvements planning including the amount and source of funding necessary, the type of project, and tl)e expected timing .of the project to coincide with anticipated demands. If it is for a facility that is not within the City's funding jurisdiction than the applicable work prognim . (FDOT, and/or County) should be used to identify pertinent projects. Any projects needed should then be reflected through a change to the comprehensive plan and/or corresponding capital improvements schedule. For deficiencies identified beyond five years, the City should identify the types of planning strategies that will be used to alleviate facility challenges including any revisions to the plan that may be necessary. The strategies should address the overall service network countywide and take into account the anticipated operational levels through the planning period. . b. Internal Consistency: Because the amendment has not demonstrated consistency with statutory requirements for protection of natural resources, and for coordination of land uses with transportation facilities and services, amendment has not demonstrated internal consistency with the City's goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan as listed: Traffic Circulation: Objective B, Policy 1 and 6, requiring coordination, Objective C, and Policies 1 through 7 requiring level of service maintenance, Objective D, Policies 2 and 3; Future Land Use Element: Goal 2, Objective A, Policies 1 through 3, requiring protection of natural resources; Conservation: Goal 1 , Objective B, Policies 1, 2, 4, and 5, protecting natural resources, . Objec;tive c, Policies 6 and 7, regarding protection of floodplains and coordination; Capital Improvements: goal 1, Objective C, Policy 1, Transportation LOS Recommendation: Retain the conservation areas as recommended and perform the necessary analyses for transportation as recommended. Revise the amendment as necessary to be supported by the conservation and transportation data. Sections: 163.3177(1), 163.3177(6)(a), 163.3177(6)(c), 163.3177(6)(d), 163.3177(6)0),163.3177(8),163.3187(2), F.S. . Rules: 91-5.005(2),91-5.005(5), 9J-5.006(2)(b) and (c); 9J-5.006(3)(b)3, (b)6, (b)lO and (c)2; 91-5.006(4); 91-5.006(5), 91-5.013(2), F.A.C. 2 ATTACHMENT 2 II. STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY A. OBJECTION 1. The proposed amendments are not consistent with the following goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan: . a Goal (8) Water Resources, and Policies (b)2, (b)4, (b)8, and (b)10; b. Goal (10) Natural Systems, and Recreational Lands and Policies (b)1, (b)3, (b)6, and (b)7; c. Goal (12), Energy, and Policy (b)3; d. .. Goal (16), Land Use, and Policies (b)1, (b)2, (b)3, and (b)6; e. 'Goal (18), Public Facilities, and. Policies (b)l, and (b)6; f. Goal (20), Transportation, and Policies (b)2, (b)3, (b)13, and (b)15; and g. Goal (26), Plan Implementation and Policy (b)7. B. RECOMMENDATION The City should revise the proposed amendment, as necessary, to be consistent with the above-referenced goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan. Specific recommendations can be found following the objections cited elsewhere in this ORCreport. 6 I I I I I I. ELIZABETH MORSE FOUNDATION . . ii II! ORC REPORT RESPONSE LS-CPA-I-OO FEBRUARY 19,2001 I I I I I I I I I I ELIZABETH MORSE FOUNDATION AMENDMENT LS-CPA-I-OO ORC REPORT RESPONSE 1. FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS a. Suitability Based on Natural Resources and Facilities: The City proposes a Land Use Map Amendment annexing and redesignating 67.58 acres from Seminole County (Suburban Estates 1 du/acre) and Conservation to Greeneway Interchange (5 - 10 du/acre, Open Space a 1 FAR non-residential). The City has not demonstrated that the natural resources on-site will be protected. It appears that a portion of the site is currently in a conservation category under the Seminole County Plan. The data also indicate the presence of wetlands over approximately 1/3 of the site and proximity to the Lake Jessup shoreline. There is no indication how the current proposal for a Greeneway Interchange designation will protect resources such as wetlands. I I The Department also has questions regarding the impacts to roadway facilities and services since the analysis provided does not indicate the current and projected capacity and availability for roadway facilities. FDOT commented the City lacked an adequate analysis. I I I Recommendation: Revised the amendment to retain the wetland and floodplain areas in a conservation land use designation or other designation to protect the natural resources on-site. I Response: The Future Land Use Map Amendment will be modified to reflect the presence of wetlands on the property. Exhibit A identifies the preliminary jurisdictional wetland limits on the subject property. It is important to clarify thatthe final determination of the limits and I Elizabeth Morse FOUl/dation -1- ORC RejJurr Respo/lse I I I I I I I I a conservation land use designation of anyon-site wetlands is subject to a detailed analysis by the governing environmental agency which shall include the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJR WMD). The extent of and location of on-site preserved wetlands will be established as a result of a SJR WMD permit application addressing wetland limits, preserved wetlands, wetland buffers and a mitigation for any wetland impacts. Upon approval of the Master Wetland Conservation/Mitigation Plan, the preserved wetland areas will be identified and a conservation easement established. I I Through this action, the DCA should be satisfied that the preliminary wetland/conservation area designation and the subsequent final designation will address the concerns and recommendations outlined above. I Revised the amendment to include an adequate transportation analysis. The analyses should include: 1) An assessment through the planning period ofthe impacts to facilities based on the most intense use including cumulative impacts (traffic) generated by proposed amendments herein; 2) Data and analysis demonstrating coordination of facilities with the proposed land uses; and 3) An assessment of the timing of provision of services such that all services are provided at the adopted Level of Service (LOS). I I The analyses should assess the demand for services with regard to available capacity of services. For example, the City should assess traffic generation with regard to available capacity on existing roadways based on both the peak hour and the daily average trips; and should take into account the traffic generated by proposed amendments contained within this package. I I I I All analyses should be based on the most intense use proposed for development as identified and guided by the Future Land Use Map and Future Land Use Element Policies, and should assess impacts in the short-term within five years and through the planning period (to 2015). Again, using the transportation example, the analysis should identify current operating LOS for SR 234 and 417, as well as any applicable local roadways. Include any FIHS facilities. The analysis should then factor in anticipated I I I Elizabeth Morse Foundation -2- ORC Report ResponsE:' I I I impacts from any proposed amendmcnt such that a comparison of bcforc-amendmcnt and after-amendment conditions can be made. I The analyses should then identify if and where deficiencies will be realized based on the LOS maximums as established by the local comprehensive Plan and FDOT. This procedure should be repeated for a projected LOS through 2005 and 2015. For any identified deficiencies within five years, the City should identify how the deficiency will be remedied through capital improvements planning including the amount and source , of funding necessary, the type of project, and the expected timing of the project to coincide with anticipated demands. If it is for a facility that is not within the City's funding jurisdiction than the applicable work program (FDOT, and/or County) should be used to identify pertinent projects. Any projects needed should then be reflected through a change to the Comprehensive Plan and/or corresponding capital improvements schedule. For deficiencies identified beyond five year, the City should identify the types of planning strategies that will be used to alleviate facility challenges including any revision to the plan that may be necessary. The strategies should address the overall service network countywide and take into account the anticipated operational levels through the planning period. I I I I I I I I I I Response: The Greeneway Interchange District is a mixed use land use category which provides for flexibility in the mix ofland uses. Inasmuch as the subject of this amendment is to establish a generalized land use category and the specific land use mix is to be addressed in a subsequent zoning application, it is not possible to accurately identify the specific mix of uses at this time. The Greeneway Interchange District offers a variety of detailed guidelines and controls to ensure that development of the subject property reflects the desires of the community. This zoning district has been developed to clearly establish the design standards applicable to this property and thereby provide assurances that development of this property will properly reflect the character of the land and its importance as a gateway into the City of Winter Springs. I I I I A fundamental philosophy of the City Comprehensive Plan is the compliance with the Concurrency policies as contained in the adopted plan. The Concurrency Regulations provide Elizabeth Morse Foundation -3- ORC Reporr Response I I I I I adequate assurances that prior to development approvals, the developer must demonstrate that there are adequate public facilities and services available or programmed at the time of development to accommodate the intensities of the planned development. Inasmuch as the Future Land Use Designation is not a development approval and the mix of land uses are not identified at this stage of the land planning process, it is not appropriate to conduct a theoretical traffic analysis based on a fabricated development program that is most likely unrelated to the final development program. I I I Prior to granting the Greeneway Interchange Zoning approval, the developer will be required to: 1) Establish a specific land use mix with corresponding development intensities; 2) Conduct a full Concurrency Analysis including transportation to demonstrate to the City the ability of the infrastructure either current or planned; and 3) Establish the appropriate conditional zoning conditions to ensure a direct relationship between infrastructure and any improvements necessary to accommodate the specific development program. Ifnecessary, the development program will be appropriately reduced to establish the proper balance between infrastructure capacity and development intensities. I I I I It is clearly understood by the City and the land owner that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Future Land Use Designation does not establish a specific development intensity. Further, prior to development, the property must be rezoned under the Greeneway Interchange District which shall include a specific development program and a corresponding Concurrency analysis and infrastructure mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate public facilities and services are available to accommodate the proposed development. I I I I b. Internal Consistency: Because the amendment has not demonstrated consistency with statutory requirements for protection of natural resources, and for coordination of land uses with transportation facilities and services, amendment has not demonstrated internal consistency with the City's goal, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan as listed: I I , I Elizabeth Morse Foundation -4- ORC Report Respollsl' I I I Traffic Circulation: Objective B, Policy 1 and 6, requi,'ing coordination, Objective C, and Policies 1 through 7 requiring Level of Service maintenance, Objective D, Policies 2 and 3: I I Response: The mandatory compliance of the development intensities under the Greeneway Interchange District, the City Concurrency Management System and the fundamental requirement of ensuring that development intensities do not exceed established Levels of Service herein demonstrate that the City has established adequate controls to satisfy the concerns represented in the ORC Report such that a traffic study is not necessary prior to adopting this amendment. I I I Future Land Use Element: Goal 2, Objective A, Policies 1 through 3, requiring protection of natural resources; I I Response: The inclusion of a conservation designation over the on-site wetlands combined with the policies in the Future Land Use Element are sufficient to address the ORC Report. I Conservation: Goal 1, Objective B, Policies 1, 2, 4, and 5, protecting natural resources, Objective C, Policies 6 and 7, regarding protection of floodplains and coordination; I I Response: Development of the subject property shall confoml wit the City Conservation Policies as well as the permitting requirements of the St Johns Ri\"er Water Management District. I I I Capital Improvements: Goal 1, Objective C, Policy 1, Transportation LOS I Recommendation: Retain the conservation areas as recommended and perform the . ., necessary analyses for transportation as recommended. Revised the amendment as necessary to be supported by the conservation and transporta"tion data. I -5- ORC Report Respol/se E!i::lIheth Morse Foundation I I Section: 163.3177(1), 163.3177(6)(a), 163.3177(6)(c), 163.31 77(d)(d), 163.3177(6)(j), 163.3177(8), 163.31876(2), F.S. Rules: 9J-S.OOS(2), 9J-S.006(2)(b) and (c); 9J-S.006(3)(b)3, (b)6, (b)10 and (c)2; 9J- 5.006(4); 9J-S.006(5), 9J-S.013(2), F.A.C. MORSE/ORC/4135 Eli::abeth Morse Foundation -6- ORC Reporr ReSpIJ/lsl' r I I~~ I U I:: I.'. I.": I I I I I I I I I I I I I u;t~oB J.1/../ WI ~~t/ '. . .:.::r. '. ..... ...." 'D ,'r;~ . .' '." '. ;:"'::-:~:/~"'.~~':~::~.>:;~'l;':~.~i:)?-;~~.:::. . . ..":: ...... ......,.. ~:\".:T'>.:Y}}.~t~~:~::;;,;.7:'.:.. . . ,. . ...~J."v~. ....J....j....... .;:)~:7.V I. J ._ ,:'::.....~.;:.~:Z>,.. · .",. . .-. . .~ .... .J..+- I..t J.. ... ). d.. (/) Potential Conservation Areas ~m;~g Lotspeich and Associates, Inc. l!. ECOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS en W.'I F~ A......... s.... 201. v.w.. Po-\. n. 31719 (~7)140-~ Fa:6-IS.l~ o-M..I:l~"".""" File: 96164-B.CDR Drawn By: JM Job No : Lake Jessup Grove Property Boundary Map " +/- 70 .era In SOClion 31. Townohip 2\ SouUl. FW1g. JI EMt S~ CO<IT1y. Flotido Scale: 1'=4:0' ~ North 98164.33 Date: 12 January 1999 Figure 1 ATTACHMENT 3 ; ) < ., ( J :'1 ._\ .J MORSE FOUNDATION TRACT ,. '.~I }t J ! J J- .. J I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA Prepared for: \ i oJ Margaret Casscells and Pizzuti Development Co. J , ) .1 ... J ! ~J .J Prepared by: I HENDERSON PLANNING HPG GROUP, INC. August 2, 2000 \) ') :J i J ~ '. .. '.J. ......:,.. .~J . . ... r: (] ,OJ ~ P') MORSE FOUNDATION TRACT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I - APPLICATION AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1.1 Application and Legal Description 1.2 Agent Authorization P ART II - LAND USE AMENDMENT NARRATIVE , I. . f 2.1 Subject Property 2.2 Adjacent Land Use 2.3 Area Zoning 2.4 Approved Future Land Use 2.5 Proposed Future Land Use Amendment Request 2.6 Statement of Compatibility 2.7 GreeneWay Interchange District 2.8 Urban Sprawl 2.9 Future Land Use Element 2.9.1 Goal 2 Review 2,9.2 Goal 3 Review 2.9.3 Goa14 Review 2.1 0 Infrastructure 2.11 Wetlands 2.12 Soils 2.13 Flood Hazard Areas 2.14 East Central Florida Regional Planning Council and State Comprehensive Land Use Plan () ':.1 ;} I. :J J , I J !J PART I APPLICATION and ,.. ~~i.. LEGAL DESCRIPTION J '.J , } ~: ) (J ;';'1' . .~ \:.;.:- 'T) jj : ] ~J :J '.1 Part 1.1 Application & Legal Description . . \ :;::.1 LJ ,. } : { .."V 'n . j \] "} ..1 . .1. ..\ j :] J J '] .:].... :~, .;}~ ~....... ......' .:k; ~ SiA :;'] :1 iI .-D ~:....:-: ,..... '.'J 1:." .:~ ~:... "<i;": :;..;:. ".f'. "-'': 'T..'l :~ "J ..J 1.'- ]} :j..'.' ::n : .:~ 'q :J~ !.) j ] CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434 WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708-2799 Telephone (407) 327-1800 APPLICATION FOR COl\1PREHENSIVE PLAN AMEND:MENT TO MAPS (OTHER THAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP) APPLICANT: Henderson Planning Group, Inc. Last First Middle ADDRESS: 112 South Lake Avenue -Orlando City FL State 32801 Zip Code PHONE: 407-872-3025 This is a request for change to Future Land Use Map in the Future Land Use EI~ment in Volume~of ~of the city of winter Springs Comprehensive Plan as adopted April 27, 1992 and as amended from time to time. Reason for request of change of Future Land Use Designation: To establish a Future Land Use Designation on the Morris Foundation property recently annexed into the City of Winter Springs. TO BE SUPPLIED AT TIME OF SUBMISSION OF APPLICATION: * Copy of proposed map Comprehensive Plan. * .Comprehensive Applicant/ow~nature: Date: Henderson Planning Group, Inc. August 2, 2000 - ) l -- j -J J -:-:-, :J M.-.' ~~~ .-] ~ J J -\ j I I. -' -' J -} J ]. 1 \ l .~ ) J J MORRIS FOUNDATION TRACT LEGAL DESCRIPTION Page 1 of2 DESCRIPTION AS FURNlS/-' LoIs 1,2,J,4,5 and 6, Secrion J2, Township 20 South, Range 31..Eosl. ALSO Lots 1,2.3,7, und 8 of Section 5, .Township 21 South, Range 31 Eosl,. (Less' beginning .... 20 feet East of and 274,1 feet South of the NW corner of Lol. J, Section 5; rur.. East 366.6 feet (346.6 field), N 06'. 05'. E,: 507.J feet; N 0'..'2' E, 32".7 feet, . S. 87' J2'U',': 19J leet, N 04' JO' W, 269.1 feet, "S 89' '04' E, 652.1 feet, S "89' 56'[," .'. '.: ". . 420 feel, N 241.9 feel 10 shore of Lake "Jessup, WeslerOr' along shore" 1.286 .. . . .. f~el 10 the Eosl line of Spring Avenue; South 1,173 feet 10 beginning),. being 9.1 . :Jcres, more or less: All above real property being 0 pert of. the' Phil/[p R. .:. . . Young Grant occordmg to the plot thereof: os recorded In Pial Book.'I,. Page J5,. PlIblic Records of Seminole County, Florida::.... . ALSO' . '," A righl of ingress and egress over that. 1 O-(oot. strip of land adjoining.. and' running along the Northerly side of 0 line' commencing 20 feet East and 275.1 feel South of the NW corner of Lot'J of Seclion 5, Township 21 Soulh, Ronge'JI" East, run EostJ66.6 feel and a right' of Ingress. and egress' over Ihol 10-foot . slrip of land adjoining and running along' the; Westerly side of. line commencing. . J66.6 feet East of 0 point 20 feet East. and 274.1 . feet .South of the MY: corner"f . ..; Lot J,. Section. 5; Township 21 South, Range .Jl "East, :run. N.06', 05':E,:: 507.J :< :.:." .::..-: feet; thence N.OO' 12' E,.J21.7 feet,'!;oid Lot.:J.:oppears'in the.plot 0(.:.:.:....::.:..<..:....:. Phittip R. Young. Grant os .recorded..in. Plot ..Book 1, .Page-:J5' of the"Public Records'. .... of Seminole County, Florida.. ... . . . .'.. . Less Ihe East 25 feet of LoIs 2-. and 8 ot'soid See/ion 5; less' West 25 feet. of Lots 1,3 and 7 of said Section 5 and less West 25. (eel .of Lot 2" and. E05t25 feel' ... of Lot J of .said . Section 32. . ,". . LESS . ".".. ." ".' A port of Lol 1, Section 5, Township.21.South.,:.Ra~~e'.j/':~~st, an.d'Lo;~ .1.2:. and.: .. .3, Section .32, Township 20 South, Range J 1 East. of the. Phillip R.' Young Gront,.. . occoraing to the plot tf!ereof os: recorded. in Plot. Book'.I, Page: 35. of. the Public' Records of Seminole County, Florida, being' more particularly . described. os fotlows: . ..... Commence at Ihe NE corner of said Section. '5; thence" run S. 88' 49' J9".' \v: olong the North line of said Section 5, 0 distance. of .189.88. feet to the NE corner: oJ. sqid Lot 1, Section 5 af the Philtip R. Young Giant for 0 point of beginning; .. thence run S. 04' 42' 40" W along the East. line of said. Loll,. Section 5,. a. distance of 665.23 feet 10 Ihe SE corn>?r of said Lot 1,. Section 5; thence "run S 88' 49' J9" IV along the Soulh line of'said Lot 1,. Section 5,.' 0 distance. of 204.J9 feel; Ihence. depor/ing said Soulh tine run N 25' 45' 00" W,..a' distonce. .. . of I,J86. 79 f~r!I 10 a puint on the East line of the. West 25.00 feet of said Lot 2, S~cti,jn J:'. 11I~1l1:t: rl.1l tI I)" 17'. 12" W along said East line. 0 . distance. of . .JUB.flO fcd Iv J pu;ol .Jf/ tilt: lI.:Jrlh lif/e of said .Lol 2; Section 32;. thence. : :. d~fJ(}r1jnoJ soi.J i'"., I 1;:1t: "In S.. B.r of 7' .20~ Eo. along'. ~bidNorfh line' 0. distance. .:.. of 9.1~.OJ f~et tu the tiE caner 'of SJIJ l.ot .1;' SectIon 32;. tIJence run>:.', :: '.' S 04' 42' ., C/' IV olong the fils I line. ojf SJiu. Lot ,... Section J2. 0 dislonce Of . 391.00 feet to the point of beC}inning. \, ...J '~~1 :'J t:J J ..,J 11........ .8! '~.J I", ~ . .,.) ~..:.: \ ,"' ~- ,,-:I '."} '..:. .1 J :).\ '.1. ,,',: ':8;. I..J... , . "..J. . .. .J ..'1' J \ J ~.J 'J. .. MORRIS FOUNDATION TRACT LEGAL DESCRIPTION Page 2 of2 AND ALSO LESS \. , I.... Cummence at the N[ corner. of saId Sec'tion 5 ~/so being. 'the Sf:.' co':~er. 'of scJid Seclion 32;. thence run S 88' 49'. J9" 'W olong the North line. of. said Section 5, . . also. being the South line of said. Section 32; a distance 'of '1,088.05. .feet to'o." : point on lhe Wesl line of the. East 25.00 feet of said Lot. 3; .Seclion 32; lhi:.ncc. '. deporting the South line of said Seclion 5 and .the. South -line' of. said. See lion .: ...,. .' . 32, run N or 17' 12" IV olong said West line, 0 distance of 709.22 fee! lor.o. '. point of beginning; thence deporting, soid West .Iine run N. 25' 4~'OO". .IV' O' " . distance of 103.97 feet; thence run.S 88' 46' 48", W. 0 distance 0{.69.93, feet , to. 0 pOint on-'. the [asl line of' Amended Plot of First. Addition 10: MiJ;eral .: '.' '. . , . Springs, according to the plat !herf;l';'{, as. recorded. in Plct. Boo.k. 8, PClges AS 'o"rl. ...... . .4/ of the ?ut.li9. Records of Seminole Counl)';. Florido;' tlicnco nJ~..'.N (.1' C-~"~2": \i along' said [ost line cJ distance of 225.66. feel 10 0 poinl. on the North lil/e of... . ' soid Lot 3, Section 32; thence deporting said [ost line. ru" S' 83' 47".20':-: [ ,..... oJlong said North line, 0 dislance of 113..13 fee! 10 0 point of Ihe of ores aid. .:. . \Vesl line of lhe [osl 25.00 {eel 01 soid Lol J, "Seclion .J2; Ihence deporting said North line run S 0 r .17' 12". [ along said \Vesl line' 0 dislance'..o{' J05,58 {eel to the point of beginning. ALSO L[SS .:r A port of Ihe West 25.00 feet of Lol 2 o~d Ihe [os'i 25.00..fe'et .of Lot 3, Seclion .32, Township 20 Soulh, Ronge 31. [oslo" Ihe Phillip R, Young Grant, according to lhe plot lhereof, os recorded in. Plot Book .1, Page J5 of lhe. Public Records c(. Seminole County, Florida,. being more. pa:-Ucularly described os follolVs::. . Commence at the S[ corner of said Section j2; thence. run S 88' 49' 39" W along. the South line of said Section 32, 0 dislance of 1,038.05 feet to ci point 0(1 the [osl line of the West 25.00 feel of soid Lol 2; thence deporting said Soulh. line run N 01' 17' 12~ W a/ong'soid [ost line.a dislance of 599.42 feet for 0 point. of beginning; thence deporting said Easl line run N 25' 45' 00" W a. dislonce .. 'of 120.74 {eel to 0 point on' the Wesl line of Ihe. fast 25.00. feet of soid Lol .J: lhence run N 0 l' 17' 12~ W along said West line 0 distance of. 305.58. feet lei 0 point on Ihe North line of soid Lol 3; thence. deporting said West . line.. run . S 8J' 47' 20" E along the North line of said. Lot" 2 and 3. a . dislonce of 50.43 feet to 0 point on the East line 'of .lh6 West 25,00 feel of said Lot. .2; thenc6 deporting said North. line run S 0 l' . 17' 12" E along said East line a. dislance.' of 408.90 feet to the polnl. of beginning.. ;. - . ..,...;.'., ,. ... ", '. . I. , . " .... .'.", .:'.:-:. :.. ~. . ", r ".". . "\ ) -1 .J' 'J .,,-1 ~..:j '~...". ..:/ r I .J ~ ,J 1 .f :I ...t .J .. 1 -"J ] J .J ] 67.850 TOTAL ACRES (NOT E:XCLUDINC) ANY INTE}?/OR PLA rrm P./w OR LESS OUTS FER DESCRIPTiON ~ iJ ::b ~ C0 :h. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J \ VJ. ~ ~ ~ ~ "'- ~ --::l GRAPHIC SCALE T.. ., 1~ . Jbf~~~~~~ _~: <S ~...... ~__~~=--~.~::- 6rL ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 300 (I. [. r , r ! r t Part 1.2 . I. i Agent Authorization ~ ~\' !~. [ ~ L 1 l l_ f :} } .[.] Cl. f.;"..' ""u'. ....u.. " .~,' _.',: '.:.C'].. . . J "] 1'1 :) .gj il ,..J ~ "; -;~ ~-]- :'t"". '.:1. ~J J July 21.l000 TO WHOM 11' MAY CONCER."J: Thi. )e~l is to serve u Olu1horiunon fOt J. Scott Hender$OnofHendersoD Plmning Group, Inc. to ~~c as ugcnt OD my behalf on matten related to the Annexation into the City of Wj1\t~- Springs, Compreba'!si\lt PIW'\ Amendmenl, Planned O~elopmcnl zoning and ADAlDIll ~prav?Js for lbc Ca.ss~clls site which is a 325 AC! trut 10calaS in Seminole Counly, Florida known as the Genius. Morris Property. ~#~~ MargICCt Cass~ells PropertY Owner The forrgoing instrument W~ acknowledged before me thii'.J \_ day of JuLy 2000 by Margar~t CiWe,lls wh" is personally known to me or has prodllccd identilication unl did/did not take an onth. ~P^^ \I\^-<0~l ~ No /public ffij, eN r\J\ DSO(~\() (Prim ClJ' T~ Name of Notaly) C~tli:1~b~~~. - . O . ~, KAAVl II. OSORIO rJ-1 \(";. ,:.; "'YCOWl&SlON'CC7J4~l LJr. - h . EXPlRES:~ 10.2002 ~u...-.. ;"'), ;J .~Ol .~ t ;~l \1. I n.] <]. .. . .. ..-: t . .Q.-:: II':": ....:-...-. -m.'. :01 :.]. .... .. .~ -'.;l j "1 '.. -,..' ,.: ~~J "J.. ,; .:J :~-J t. : '.-..J ' . I:" ~..J. ,.: t -~:.,.. ;.: F tj. : .~, h 0. PART II LAND USE AMENDMENT NARRATIVE ') .J PART II - LAND USE AMENDMENT NARRATIVE ] J' 2.1 Subject Property The Morse Foundation tract is a 67.85 acre parcel located on the west side of the GreeneWay/SR 417, north ofSR 434, south of Lake Jessup and east of Spring A venue. The Location Map (see Exhibit I) identifies the subject property in relation to the surrounding physical and natural features. - ~ :1 ] TI ~:l ]. ~1... ~ J ] ...:1 ;.);.. 1 .~J ] J J J J 2.2 Adjacent Land Uses The aerial photograph (see Exhibit I) identifies the adjacent land uses which are more specifically defined as follows: North - Single Family/Conservation East - SR 417 /Greene Way West - Single Family/Conservation South - Vacant The Site Aerial (see Exhibit I) identifies the land uses adjacent to the Morse. Foundation Tract. 2.3 Area Zoning The Zoning Map (see Exhibit I) identifies the existing zoning on the surround properties which include: North - R-I (Seminole County) South - PUD & RU East - SR 417 & PLI (Seminole County) West - R-l & RM-l(Seminole County) Morse Foundation Tract Page -1- Comprehensive Plan Amendment J J ,n i"~ '{: ~ I/~ 'T1j iilil .;.,. i{ ',' ,11 ~ ~~J I...... .~. ."1 ~.:~) .~... ::~H , 2.4 Approved Future Land Uses The subject property does not have an established future land use designation within the City of Winter Springs. The annexation ofthe Morse Foundation tract into the City of Winter Springs was completed in 1999. However, the annexation approval was separated from the Future Land Use designation which occurred due to a pending purchase and sale agreement wherein the prospective buyer was to pursue the Future Land Use and Zoning designation. That agreement has since been cancelled which resulted in the City completing the annexation of the subject property and the Future Land Use/Zoning application being withdrawn. The Future Land Use Map (see Exhibit I) identifies designations of the surrounding property as follows: East - Low Density Residential Mixed Use SR 417, GreeneWay/Public LandsIMixed Use North - South - West - Low Density Residential/Conservation/Mixed Use The subject property is currently an enclave within the City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan with no Future Land Use designation. The amendment presented herein will establish a Future Land Use designation consistent with the current mixed use designation to the south and southwest. :~ \1' ' .:~.: .i~'; ; I ~~~ I 3 ! iJ ';) J ~.J 3 There is existing residential along the perimeter ofthe subj ect property to thenorth and west. This is historic residential with older homes that are approximately 30 years or older with a number of mobile homes and a few newer homes. These residential areas remain within the jurisdiction of Seminole County and are a remaining enclave of County lands. Page -2- Comprehensive Plan Amendmelll Morse Foundation Tract 1 ...1 2.5 Proposed Future Land Use Amendment Request The request to amend the City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use is to establish a Mixed Use designation on the subject property. This request is based on the existing Mixed Use designation on the Casscells tract to the south of the subject property as well as discussions with the City staff directing this application for a Mixed Use designation. Through this request, the staffs desire is to see the subject property and the Casscells tracts developed as a compatible and cohesive development under the GreeneWay Interchange District. It is the applicants' intent to comply with the staff request and, towards that end, the two properties (Morse Foundation and the Casscells parcels) are being evaluated to provide coordinated planning to present a cohesive development approach. .1 .) ~'f ~J (~ "'1m.... '\.'., ',', ,.. ". ~;- :] J ;] ....J .. ...:> ]..\ d .'] jJ. .')} .~ .~ iJ ~..:. ~} :\1 '.'J. .cr J'"7.:;' .. ! . :] LJ' 2.6 Statement of Compatibility The City has viewed the subject property and the Casscells tract to the south as an important area to the future growth of the City in view of its location at the SR 434/ GreeneWay interchange. The City has evaluated the desired development of this area and implemented the GreeneWay Interchange District to provide strict guidelines on the development to occur in this area. The Greene Way Interchange District regulations are identified in Exhibit II. Once the Future Land use designation is established, the owner will pursue a GreeneWay Interchange zoning application. The application of the GreeneWay Interchange Zoning District will provide the necessary assurances of compatibility between the higher intensity commercial/office uses and the residential on the adjacent properties. Page -3- Comprehensive Plan Amendment Morse Foundation Tract I J 2.7 -J "} '::1 ;.J ~:-J '~ ,jj J :? ~ ;J . l. , 1 ;] J ...J ., ..1 '..1 ;~J ; J J ,..~ U GreeneWay Interchange District The City of Winter Springs has recognized the importance of the subject property (in combination with the Casscells tract to the south) as a part of the eastern gateway to the City of Winter Springs off the GreeneWay and SR 434. As a result, the City has established goals and design guidelines to set the direction for this key property. The City's vision of a mixed use development was the first step in providing guidance to the future development of this area. To ensure the development is properly implemented, the City has established the Greene W ay Interchange Zoning District (see Exhibit II). This district incorporates a variety of development requirements to ensure that the new development implements the City's intent. The design standards present the guidelines to provide for the appropriate compatibility between the various uses within the district as well as the adjacent properties. 2.8 URBAN SPRAWL 9J5.006 (5), Future Land Use Element, of the Florida Administrative Code pertains to the review of plans and plan amendments for discouraging urban sprawl. The following is a list of urban sprawl indicators with respective responses as to why this proposed Plan Amendment does not promote urban sprawl. Question A: Promotes, allows or designates for development substantial areas of the jurisdiction tQ develop as low intensity, or single-use development or uses in excess of demonstrated need. Response: The subject property is within an area designated by the City of Winter Springs for urban development. Although the property is at the eastern edge of the City, the property is adjacent to the Greene Way and directly associated with the Morse Foundation Tract Page -4- Comprehensive Plan Amendment .~.\ :..} ..' J \ I SR 434 corridor which serves as a major development node for the area. Urban development is planned and is occurring to the east, south and west thereby establishing this an infill area. The intensity of development on the subject property, under a mixed use designation, is consistent with the intent of the City at the time of annexation. Questions B: Promotes, allows or designates significant amounts of urban development _ to occur in rural areas at substantial distances from existing urban areas while leaping over undeveloped lands which are available and suitable for development. .J ,=> "..J..." ~ . .- . ;] J tgJ U .J ] '1 i] ,] J Response: The subject property and the proposed development are within the area identified by the City for compact development. Through the proposed mixed use program, development of the property will provide for a higher concentration in a desirable location thereby reducing the influences of sprawling development to accommodate the growth demands in the City. Question C: Promotes, allows, or designates urban development in radial, strip, isolated or ribbon patterns generally emanating from existing rural developments. Response: J J J The subject property is contiguous to the mixed use land use designation along SR 434. The configuration of the property offers a logical extension of the mixed use designation to the north along the GreeneWay. The existing conservation lands to the west create a natural limitation of any westerly strip expansion of the mixed use area. The development pattern on the south side Morse Foundation Tract Page -5- Comprehensive Plan Amendment Question D: As a result of premature or poorly planned conversion of rural land to other uSes, fails to adequately to protect and conserve natural resources, such as wetlands, floodplains, native vegetation, environmentally sensitive areas, n;ltural groundwater aquifer recharge areas, lakes, river, shorelines, beaches, bays, estuarine systems, and other significant natural systems. . .J .: I I. I ~J iJ ,] Response: .J ~ ...,- . . IJ of SR 434 is a compatible land use pattern for higher intensity land use along the GreeneWay. The location ofthe subject property is outside the pIimary conservation areas of Lake Jessup as indicated on the current Future Land Use Map (See Exhibit I). There is existing single family and mobile home development between the subject property and Lake Jessup. By remaining outside the conservation lands associated with the lake, the proposed land use does not conflict with this policy. Question E: Fails to adequately protect use of existing public facilities and services. Response: '- \ ',~l I ._ J i ! \,} Question F: Response: J 1 J The proposed land use is in direct response to the change in the land use pattern for the area created by the construction of the GreeneWay and the interchange with SR 434. Adequate public facilities and services are existing or planned to support urban qevelopment in this area. Fails to maximize use of future public facilities and services. I . By clustering higher intensity land uses in proximity to existing and planned public facilitiJs and services, this proposal reduces the sprawl character of Morse Foundation Tract 1 :.J Page -6- Comprehensive Plan Amendmel1/ \ i ..1 development that would occur if the intensities of this proposal would not be approved. '] . 'j ". .J ] Question G: Allows for land use patterns or timing which disproportionately increase the cost in time, money and energy, of providing and maintaining facilities and services, including roads, potable water, sanitary sewer, stormwater management, law enforcement, education, health care, fire and emergency response, and general government. ~ '.1 \.. .-. ] ~ J J 'J l j, ] J J .1 j 1 j .Respons~: The proposed development will not adversely impact the availability of capacity in the supporting infrastructure. Development of the subject property will comply with the City of Winter Springs Concurrency Management System ensuring that there will be adequate capacity for roads, sewer, water and stormwater. The subject property is located in close proximity and within urban response times for the City services for law enforcement, health care, fire and emergency servIces. Question H: Fails to provide clear separation between rural and urban land uses. Response: The location of the subject property between SR 434 and the GreeneWay provides a clear separation between the urban land uses of the area and any rural areas occurring a considerable distance to the east and outside the City. Question I: Discourages or inhibits infill development or redevelopment of existing neighborhoods and communities. Page -7- Comprehensive Plan Amendment Morse Foundation Tract .: ) J : .1 I Response: The proposed land use will encourage infill development by shortening the distances from commercial and office land uses that are otherwise located in the Oviedo Mall area, or other areas outside the City. Question J: Fails to encourage an attractive and functional mix of uses. : ~ .-] Response: By definition, the project will be a mixed use development that is the focus of this policy. !""i\ J :) J-- ..- J 1 : I' II .1 Questioq K: Results in poor accessibility among linked or related land uses, Response: The subject property is linked by proximity to the adjacent mixed use land use and is intended to be developed in a manner to ensure compatibility and an inter-relation of land uses. Question L: Results in loss of significant amounts of functional open space, Response: Development of the subject property will comply with applicable regulations and criteria relating to the functional open space. The Greene Way Interchange District has specific open space criteria to ensure compliance and an adequate provision of functional open space. .t- .../ ""} I . ..J .J 2.9 Future Land Use Element 2,9.1 Goal (2) To preserve the natural drainage features within Winter Springs as assets complementing the residential and commercial area. Morse Foundation Tract Page -8- Comprehensive Plan Amendment \ I \ Comment: The natural drainage character of the area focuses on the wetlands associated with Lake Jessup. Development of the property will evaluate these characteristics and comply with applicable City and State criteria related to this natural feature. ';J ; J 1 1 Objective (A): Perpetuation of the existence and benefit of natural drainage features, excluding them from uses that require the support of urban infrastructure. ,-'1 ~_ .J I] : } ~J 'J . r P.olicy A 2: The precise boundaries of land to be permanently classified Conservation shall be those jurisdictional lines prescribed by State agencies at the time of field review preparatory to engineering contiguous property for development. Comment: Development of the property will comply with all City and State Water Management District criteria to ensure that the area drainage is properly addressed and protected from adverse impacts that could occur in association with development. : .~ I: J ,.J Policy A 2 B: Require all wetlands to be accurately identified at the time of site development review. Alternation of wetlands may be permitted, however specific mitigation standards in accordance with policies of the St. Johns Water Management District will be established to ensure no net loss of wetlands either by functional value or extent. ..]1 'J :..1 'J . J './ J Comment: Development ofthe property will comply with the St. Johns River Water Management District criteria for identification of wetlands, preservation and/or mitigation per the Water Management District criteria. Page -9- Comprehensive Plan Amendment Morse Foundation Tract I \ . J Policy A 2 F: Wetlands shall be delineated on the site plan according to DER, SJRWMD, and US ACOE definitions, whichever standard is more restrictive, Wetlands shall mean those areas established as jurisdictional by the above agencies. .1 :.l f\ ,.... r-) C '~J ': I , . ~1 :J 'J . r Comment: The project will comply. Policy A 2 G: Developments adjacent to Lake J~ssup shall not be permitted to - .. - ... .. ..include Light -Industr-ial,. Industrial,- or .Commercial Land Uses. Comment: The location of the subject property is not abutting Lake Jessup. The . . existing residential lands provide a buffer between the lake and the proposed mixed use. 2.9.2 GOAL 3 '] ! ], .... Once the preceding goals are satisfied, land uses assigned to the balance of the undeveloped property will reflect priorities of unmet needs for residential and civic-commercial construction determined by on-going review and analysis of population projections and residents' demographic characteristics and the feasibility of commercial growth. The siting ofland uses will be amended as necessary over time to adjust to changes in these variable factors. : ) -.\: '.I 'j :] iJ J :J Objective C: Allocation of acreage and diversity of land uses sufficient for civic, commercial, and industrial activity, either separately or within a mixed use classification. Morse Foundation Tract Page -10- Comprehensive Plan Amendment -1 Policy 1: Mixed use classifications are created to allow flexibility and efficiency to development design. The reviewed land development regulations, to be adopted by the statutory deadline, shall contain specific standards relating to density and intensity provisions for each mixed land use category, minimum requirements for allocation of residential, commercial, industrial and open space land uses, impervious surface ratios, and landscaping and buffering. Development standards for the Mixed Use classification shall include: --1 .J. Densitv: No mixed use development shall exceed a gross residential density of 1 0 dwelling units per gross acre. OJ ~ J 'J ( ProDortion of Uses: No mixed use shall have a non-residential use exceeding 50% of the gross land area. Open space shall not be less than 20%, and public uses, utilities or wetland conservation easements not less than 5%. Residential uses may take up to 75% of the gross land area. 1 J .l J ../ J I Impervious Surface Ration. Maximum Hei2ht and Floor Area Ratios: In the mixed use category, for commercial uses, intensity of use shall be limited by a maximum impervious surface ratio of 70%, maximum height of 50 feet and a FAR of 1.0. Comment: Adoption by the City of the GreeneWay Interchange Zoning District, establishes the specific criteria under which the subject property will be governed. Development of the subject property will comply with the GreeneWay Interchange District. .j _J Morse Foundation Tract Page -11- Comprehensive Plan Amendment ] I . 1 2.9,3 GOAL 4 :1 '--J . - CI ' . "r,h. (,1 1m" .~r. ~..: . "'-:.". To verify that all development adheres to Concurrency requirements based on the relevant levels of service established for public services and facilities in this plan. Objective B: Prior to granting a development order for non-Residential projects, the City must be assured that at the time of impact of a new development or phase thereof, all Concurrency requirements are met ~nd no level of service set by a relevant jurisdiction will be degraded below its standard or before its budgeted timetable for improvement. I;,~ ;~J Policy 1: Determination shall be made that the traffic generated by non- Residential development can be accommodated both on-site and off-site. ;l ,jtl ~., '. I ....1 Policy 1 a: The criteria established in the Transportation Concurrency Ordinance being drawn up at present shall guide the City's decision that a development mayor may not be permitted. n Policy 1 b: Standards to be included in revised land development regulations will be applied to new development to provide internal traffic circulation, adequate parking, pathways, access to adjacent property if appropriate, and control of access to major roads. ;J "J '::\. .. ] Policy 2: All non-residential projects shall be landscaped according to standards to be drawn up relating quantity of green area to intensity of activity and including xeriscaped areas. \-:-1 LJ :. J J J Morse Foundation Tract Page -12- Comprehensive Plan Amendment , '1 .~ Policy 3: Adherence to regulations on signage, lighting, and outdoor display and storage will be determined. (] . .'J -. ".J i] I~" '.:-0:. -,\. . "'J: , ' . i~ \"'1 .~'f . . '. ,~; .;~.: I ill <1 .I;J '3' 12. ..( J 81... '/: ~;; . i :'f .,. ',' ;u ~ Q Policy 4: Review by any applicable citizen board of business owners' association with respect to architectural control or community appearance standards adopted by the City shall be concluded. Policy 5: Provision shall be made for proper soli.d waste storage and collection. Policy 6: Plans for potable water and sanitary sewer service will have been reviewed and approved by the City, as well as for stormwater management and for irrigation through reuse of wastewater effluent. Comment: Development of the subject property will comply with all applicable City regulations. 2.10 Infrastructure 2.10.1 Roads: The subject property is accessed off SR 434 which recently been improved as a 4-lane divided arterial highway. The SR 434 improvements, combined with the GreeneWay and the Interchange with SR 434, provide adequate capacity to accommodate development ofthe property. 2.10.2 Wastewater: Service to accommodate development of the property is available along SR 434 with adequate service capacity to accommodate development. 2.10.3 Water: Water service is available along SR 434 with adequate capacity to serve the project. Morse Foundation Tract Page -13- Comprehensive Plan Amendment :. j ':1 I 2.11 Wetlands .,...,. _ .1 :-'1 d The subject property contains some wetland areas as identified in the environmental assessment prepared by Lotspeich & Associates, dated March 30, 1999 (see Exhibit III). The site analysis is limited to an inventory of potential site wetlands. The limit of the wetlands has not been configured by the St. John River Water Management District or the US Anny Corp of Engineers. .~~ '] Development of the subject property will take into account the site conditions, the ... character.ofthe wetlands; .proposed development .and the .alternative of on-site or off- site mitigation as appropriate and permitted by the St. Johns River Water Management District and the US Anny Corp of Engineers. ':M": I.,:n F. ';."j' . . .' ' .,," ~ J -, ..,,1 .] .;i. 2.12 Soils The on-site soils, as identified by the Soils & Conservation Service, are identified in Exhibit I. These soils identify both suitable and unsuitable soil conditions. The development application for the property will further evaluate the site soils and provide guidance into the master site planning. Impacts in areas with unsuitable soils, if any, will be addressed in the development process. .J :;.J , ~J 8 iJ J ~J 2.13 Flood Hazard Area A portion of the subject property is located within the 1 OO-year flood hazard area (see FEMA Flood Map Exhibit I). Development of the property will address this existing condition and properly mitigate for any encroachments within the flood hazard areas. The development plans and mitigation of flood impacts shall comply with the S1. Johns River Water Management District criteria. Page -14- Comprehensive Plan Amendment Morse Foundation Tract .j 2.14 East Central Florida Regional Planning Council Regional Plan and State Comprehensive Land Use Plan The application to amend the Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan is consistent with both the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council Regional Plan and the State Comprehensive Land Use Plan. '1 .' 1 '1' ., J ,] " .:.:) ,. --1 ~ :'] ] ] J. ., ", ] ;] Cl ] t] Morse Foundation Tract Page -15- Comprehensive Plan Amendment I L... i C ...,. I ,. EXHIBITS f.... f" I. ~ ~ L. r. I I..: r~ r: I L ! .- I i --) 1 J J J ) J J I J J I J J EXIDBIT I MAP SERIES j J LOCATION MAP J --1 --J J ] t :",,'.. ..'] ~ ] J ]'. .' ~ J .1 ..J AERIAL .;;l:~' '.:~l?~""~ J ZONING MAP LEGEND pun - Planned Unit Development R-U - Rural Urban . ~:J. A- II A-I 0 - Agriculture __ R-U - Rural Urban .. PLI - Public Lands and Institutions\ RM-I - Residential Mobile "orne . R-I - Residential Dome ] ..J ] ~ ..--_.. ------...- 11 ] J '.. ~'M.._M'~~""","", --"_M'" pun - "] C-I J J. .... ] J J J J M./....',. . ..... ..__..M_.--.7-.1............-.' ....... _-,:. :YTfr.r.r;-i !! i: :-hTjT :;". 1 LU..J--,--'.J...L..__L.LLLL1J..-'- // j rt' [I i f \ /#),\ ,,_~\; i \ d/('-<;:,---:>., ~ t\___. /'. " ).. I . ._:/' \, ./ ') J .-1 L-i 'c<, " ." "- . I /}:. " './,- /II ~rI_-ll~r-- ,j_ '\' ..A. . 1 -.- ";/::-(\), - I i...j" -J Ys~:~r=j :~f.~ ~~ ......._.-~.1 .......-..........-......- , \ K-U .p"un j pun - - ~~~4T91454,~::::: ;l, L.._._..~' F i--'-~.4..._- ~-~.~._.,~ A-IO A-I f... ...... " --n[ '. I ! .~ 1, , . :i; ;...- \{ I ~~ . :_. I ;J ..;.:: LEGEND T.l LDR - Low Density Residential J]COMM . Commercial Mixed Use ITl.. R-IO - Resi~ential max. I 0 DUlAC iD PUBO - Public Other Govt. Owned .. CONS. Conservation ~'l'.. ilii '\:" MIXED USE RIO ':( i~~ ~ \~ I :1fiI CONS JIll .Tl." ~ LDR Jr.,." -~I .'\: :~~ .:;-~ I ..V I I ':::]1 :~ I .', I ,~l \ 'jl ~i ,;E :.COMM ~. h I ! \ MIXED USEl l : ) r i i C~MM: ,-----1 ! i r--'-~ ~'":" :\:: :~~. SOILS MAP ,. .1 LEGEND ; 2 - Adamsville-Sparr fine sands .~:; 4 - Astatula f'me sand 6 - Astatula-Apopka fine sands Thj 1 ~ : :::::::~, ~~~:~~y an~~=::n I 1 - Basinger and Smyrna rme sands 13 - EauGallie and Immokalee fine sands .....J 19 - Manatee mucky fine sands 20 - Myakka and BauGallie rme sand 27 - Pomello fine sand ,...J.: 29 - St. Johns and BauGallie f'me sands 31 - Tavares-Millhopper rme sands j:; '3.:,: Jill \ \. , , \ \ \. \\ \ \ \ w 'f."]. ,,:.: ;~i ' n.. li 10 ~,. ....:.- :~ :.: "';.'. 10 ~~ . _ ~i~ i ~~I---~h4 ~k~ ~l .! --- ~ ~ oob ZONE 1,1 ' 0 YEAR fL \ ! , . -1_1\ "--~\I~-----i J~T- i J' I,) Iii - : 'II . . /. 'Ii. I _ f----- I Ii !_-L---- 1 : TI · 'I 1------ I ! / i L_... ~/ -/Il _~_~: i:=-:~~_ "'j , "--- -~ --. "In" '. 'I!:\ j , ---:- 41\9/4b i LJ...-'_-+-'i '~r \ ~ S'l1 RD., ill ~F' f-, J~=:~\.------ . "'-I'::dT . ,'~~\,\ : . ! 1~' ,If#Ni i \ .. ',_,. U :._ ___ '..__, ,...... .-; ,.~_ ,.., . . . i , -Yr. .--l . I ^"'J,, ;--, _~I :.ee" , .- ,"" rf 1_ .\ / / r('j~l 'r m H"i t:1 I ", ] .L.,~I I . . ^ /' I ""Y "" . __ I:' . '. ~ ' ./\ lW.z);"<-( }/ "^$f<;;>;, , lLllJ+S'l:/,/ " -~ 1---' ~c\ V-- --TTn>N~ /\ ';).---- .""~ J,> /.e: / I I , :: ,--j t- -, -'-("\' ~~------ "'("'-"<0,.\.>;, ~0\'i ("<:i'l " ~"'-T-" :-! r:i1T\ \ C9\~ \ . Y/\ 'v ~/ / '- r:, ,",.v-; '/:/' , ! : . : J LL-nn"'" / ~-~" , I C;Y','>>-..,,,,, ''"' . '.. . '-. l, '/ ". """.., '//', '" -'i -~ 'f--. I ____" , .',. "'"'' \_...... ,-" ." . ,.....L "'~--'!>--:.~ ", ':.-Li----/~.~..u.,<____<"~. i II ,_.___; . \' i--!...<- f-"'~ Ll.LL _,_ \ , ,--,~ ~_"__"",___. ......, , , , , .......... . --I' <:: ~.lJ- -..//-./~ '~<~:":Ciy:'y~J?:~:\~1~~=-.. - -<A::::. ., '-, 'v" ^ _ _, '^ """'" '<..__. ' 'I , /', -.., ,.' . '~-'--" '''I, _'--~ .. -.. , ' ". A... / .'!. .'~, '. . '" .. '._ ~ ". i 'lii..l"'...____-^ "'.~,__~_.~___~ J-' ,.:~-::::.---:\ /(-;~~J:C< .. ~L-_j----r--- 1_ - M_~-=::~_ kn_-i /~ $ ~ . ~ ~ j ;' ~ _____.-r _._". ...-~ ;.:::.:..:- 1_-7"--"'_--- I ;_...... k_';"'._f.... l_.j;_,::~:( U~X::).:~~;j.~ ~-"-'."'-..:"'_"_:""_'A_"___' I..:::; \---i ~_._.-t :......._y._. ~,-... - , J ./ u '] 0] TI 1m. ]] ....j .. ..~ . ~ n LJ "'] ~~,: IJ illJ ~ ."1 ... .t ] 11 11 .J ] J EXHIBIT II GREENEW A Y INTERCHANGE DISTRICT l . GREENEW A Y INTERCHANGE ZONING DISTRICT DIVISION 3. DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS Sec. 20-483 Purpose. -1 The GreeneWay Interchange District is designed as a mixed-use category which combines a strategy to attract J higher density residential and commercial enterprises oriented toward a major transportation nexus of an expressway and arterial road and minimize urban sprawl. This district is specifically designed to: : 1 l -.1 j .'} J ] ] J 1 J J j J a. Provide high density residential development in close proximity to economic centers for employees. b. Discourage urban sprawl by clustering economic development activities along growth corridors. c. Promote business development in close proximity to the regional road network providing high visibility and convenient access. d. Ensure sufficient availability of land to realize the economic development needs of the City. e. Provide for choice and diversity in living arrangements and work environments. Sec. 20-484 General Uses and Intensities. (1) The GreeneWay Interchange Development District is designed to provide a variety of land uses, development intensities, and target industry development. The uses are: a. Planned commercial developments, corporate business parks, office complexes, commercial, service and hotel uses. b. Planned medium to high-density residential developments. c. Planned mixed-use developments. (2) Development Intensities: The City shall apply the following development intensities. The criteria for establishing appropriate intensities include, but are not limited to, compatibility with surrounding existing and planned uses, adequacy of existing and programmed City services and facilities, economic development objectives, and consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan and site characteristics. Residential Uses: Medium Density 5-10 Dwelling Units per net acre High Density 11-20 Dwelling Units per net acre Non-Residential Uses: ) 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Adoptcd August 23, 1999 Grccncway I ntcrchangc District - I - ) .1 -1 oJ ] J 111.':' iJ VI J T) D ":1 :.,: -ill .,.... ;;'" ] ,! , . "] " J ... : I ) .J ] (3) Land USl: Mix: The Greene Way) nlerchange District shall be developed to accommodate an overall mix of land uses as described below: Land Uses Minimum Maximum Residential Non-Residential 0% 75% 25% 100% (4) Open SpacelRecreation: A minimum of twenty-five percent (25%) of the overall site must be designated as recreation and common open space. Individual land uses may have more or less than twenty-five percent (25%) of its area devoted to common open space. Recreation areas are not required within non-residential areas. In non-residential areas, landscaped pedestrian connections between buildings, parking and adjacent development is required. Sec. 20-485 Permitted Uses, Conditional Uses, Accessory Uses & Structures, Prohibited Uses. (1) Medium Density Residential: ) Single-Family AttachedIDetached Patio Homes Duplex Multi-Family (2) High Density Residential: (3) Office: Variety of office uses from single-tenant professional offices to corporate office parks. (4) Commercial: Alterations and tailoring Automotive accessory sales Bed and Breakfast inn Bicycles sales and service Bookstores, newstands Cleaners Community, Regional and Sub-Regional Shopping Centers Computers, hardware, software sales and service Convention center Convenience store without gas pumps Daycare Nurseries Drug store Electronic equipment sales and service Financial institutions Florist Govcrnml:nt service facilities Adopted August 23, 1999 -"2 - Grceneway Interchange District -1 : } I ] ~] 0- J J .;..; J ) ] J J J J I ) I J J I-Iardwarl: SieHl: HOlel, mOld Medical clinics Medical laboratories Medical supplies <lnd renlals Neighborhood Convenience Stores Offices - (general) Offices - (regulated professions) Parking garages Parks and recreation facilities Personal services Physical fitness and health clubs Private clubs and lodges Public utilities and service structures Residential - multifamily Restaurants Sidewalk cafes Theaters (5) Conditional Uses in Commercial Areas: Before a conditional use may be granted within the GreeneWay Interchange District, the Development Review Committee must find that the use or uses are consistent with the general purpose and spirit of the district and with the public interest. Alcoholic beverage sales (package) Alcoholic beverage sales (on-premises consumption) Amusement enterprises Automobile and truck rental Automobile Gasoline Service Station Automobile repair Child care facilities Drive-in restaurants Hospitals Mini-warehouses Nursing Homes (senior independent living) Schools (public or private) Any other retail store or business enterprise not listed that in the judgement of the Development Review Committee is consistent with those included above, and further, that will be in harmony with the purpose and spirit of the GreeneWay Interchange District. (6) Permitted accessory uses and structures. . Accessory uses customarily associated with, dependent on, and incidental to the permitted prinCipal uses. (7) Prohibited Uses. Check cashing establishments (other than banks) Flea markets Funeral homes Pawn Shops Adopted August 23, ] 999 Greeneway Interchange Dislricl - 3 - Strip centers All uses listed in Sec. 20-252 in the C-2 General Commercial and Industrial District of the City Code, except 20-252(1) uses permilled in the C-1 "Neighborhood Commercial District" . ) _ J DIVISION 4. GENERAL DESIGN STANDARDS .J Sec. 20-486 Building Height. .1 No building shall exceed seventy-five (75) feet in height. Sec. 20-487 Setbacks. ] (1) No improvement shall be located on any property closer to any property line than the minimum setbacks set forth below: J J S.R. 434 Collector Street Internal Street Side (a) Rear (a) Buildings 25 feet 25 feet 15 feet o feet 10 feet Parking 15 feet 15 feet 10 feet 5 feet 5 feet (a) Unless abutting a residential area. See Section 20-491. J (2) The narrowest dimension of a lot adjoining a road right-of-way shall determine its front for the purpose of establishing yard requirements. (3) On corner lots, the front yard shall be considered as abutting the street upon which the lot has its least dimension. The rear lot, in this case, shall be opposite the front yard. J (4) The following structures are specifically excluded from the setback restrictions: J a. Steps and walks. b. Landscaping and landscape berms. .J c. Planters three (3) feet in height or less, or ] d. Other improvements as may be permitted under applicable regulations of the City. J - The Board of Adjustment will consider any request for the placement of such other improvements within a setback, only after a Development Review Committee review and recommendation. In determining whether to recommend City consent, the Development Review Committee may consider, without limiting the scope of their review, the following: (1) the extent to which any hardship exists that would justify a variance from the normal setback requirements; (ii) the aesthetics of the proposed improvements and their visibility from common roads and adjacent properties; (iii) the consent or objections of adjacent property owners; and (iv) the nature and use of the proposed improvements. IL is the owner's burden and responsibility to provide such information and documentation as may be requested by the Development Review Committee in order to J 1 I .J Adopted August 23. 1999 - 4 - Greeneway Interchange District J ..1 J ~1 I ~\. J n ..: } J J ) .J d -. J ..l -j J .\ J J justify 10 the Develo[1menl l~eview Committee lhal tht: intrusion of additional improvt:menls within tht: normal setbacks is beneficial to lhe corridor and willnol adversely affect adjacent propt:r1y owners. Sec. 20-488 Land Coverage. The overall site shall contain 25% open space or recreation. Individual sites within a planned development may have more or less than 25% open space. Stand alone single commercial or office sites may contain a minimum of 15% open space. Open space includes pervious surfaces, landscaped or natural areas, recreation areas and stormwater retention/detention areas. Open space does not include designated conservation areas. Sec,20-489 Off-Street Parking and Driveway Requirements. (1) Paved Driveway and Parking Spaces: All driveways and parking spaces shall be paved with asphaltic concrete and/or concrete and shall be curbed. (2) On-Site Parking: All parking areas shall be on-site and shall be adequate to serve all employees, visitors and company vehicles. (3) Rights-Of-Way: Parking is prohibited on rights-of-way or along driveways. (4) Parking Space Size: Each off-street parking space shall be a minimum of two hundred (200) square feet, 10' x 20', in addition to space for access drives and aisles. The minimum width of each space shall be ten (10) feet. The two (2) foot area of paving at the end of each parking space may be omitted provided the area is landscaped with sod or another acceptable ground cover. The two (2) foot landscaped area shall not be counted toward any other greenspace requirement or setback. Lines demarcating parking spaces may be drawn at various angles in relation to curbs or aisles, so long as the parking spaces so created contain within them the rectangular area required. (5) Handicapped Spaces: Handicapped spaces shall be provided and sized in accordance with 316.1955, 316.1956,316.1958,320.0843,320.0845,320.0848 Florida Statutes. (6) Access drive Width: Each access drive shall have a minimum width of twenty-four (24) feet. (7) Number of Access Drives: If a site has less than two hundred (200) feet of frontage on a right-of-way, one (1) access drive shall be permitted unless there is a joint access drive, in which case two (2) may be permitted. If . a site has more than two hundred (200) feet of frontage on a right-of-way, F.D.O.T permit guidelines (found in 1496-7 Florida Administrative Code) and restrictions shall apply. . (8) Turning Radius: The minimum turning radius shall be thirty (30) feet. (9) Coordinated joint use of parking areas during off -peak hours shall be encouraged to be incorporated into the design of projects to reduce the total number of required parking spaces. (10) Whenever practical, vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems shall be separated. A system of multi-purpose walkways connecting buildings, common open spaces, recreation areas, community facilities and parking areas shall be provided and adequately lighted for nighllime use. The intent is to create a pedestrian oriented system to connect all properties within the Greeneway Interchange District. Adopted August 23, 1999 - 5 - Grceneway Interchange District -1 . I J. .( I ] l ,J ;J J ] j J .j ] J J ) I .J J Sec. 20-490 Landscaping. The following landscape standards establish the minimum criteria for the development of the roadways, parking areas, and other features to ensure continuity in aesthetic values throughout the corridor. (1) All areas requiring landscaping shall meet or exceed the following general landscape requirements. Such Landscaping Requirements are required for: a. That part of the site fronting a public or private right-of-way that is within the designated corridor. b. Around and within all off-street parking, loading and other vehicular use areas within each site. Loading areas shall be screened with the intent to block the view of such loading areas from public streets or adjacent properties to the greatest extent practicable. Loading areas shall not front on public streets. c. Along the outside of screening walls and fences. d. Adjacent to buildings on the site to complement the architectural style. (2) All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted commercial planting procedures. Fertile soil, free of lime rock, pebbles or other construction debris shall be used in all planting pits. (3) The owner of a site shall be responsible for all landscaping so as to present a neat, healthy and orderly appearance free of refuse and debris. Any dead or dying plant material, including sod, shall be promptly replaced or shall be treated to restore healthy growth to achieve a uniform appearance. (4) All landscape areas shall be adequately irrigated, with reclaimed water if available, based on the following criteria: a. An automatic sprinkler irrigation system shall be provided for all landscaped areas. b. The irrigation system shall be designed to provide full coverage of all landscaped areas and shall be equipped with rain sensors. c. The irrigation system shall be designed and operated to prevent or minimize run-off of irrigation water onto roadways, driveways, and adjacent properties not under the control of the owner of the site. d. The irrigation system shall be maintained so as to be in optimum working order at all times. (5) All plant material shall meet or exceed standards for Florida No.1 plants, as specified in Grades and Standards for Nursery Plants. Parts I and II. 1973, published by the State of Florida, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Trees shall be selected from the Recommended Tree Pallet found at the end of these design standards. (6) The preservation and utilization of a site's natural trees and shrubbery is strongly encouraged. Existing vegetation shall be incorporated into the landscape concept for a site wherever practical. (7) Natural growth may be used to satisfy specific landscape requirements. Relocation of onsite landscaping material is encouraged. Adopted August 23, ] 999 - 6 - Greeneway Interchange District J l "/ .J ,:.! :-':1 "J ~: ;-~ 'I J ~"t', ] ) J .-] ~. J 'J . 1 .J ] \ .J J (8) When an accessway intersects a right-of-way, landscaping may be used to define the intersection provided however that all landscaping within the triangular area described below shall provide unobstructed cross-visibility at a level between two (2) feet and six (6) feet above finished grade. Pedestrian sidewalks may cross the triangular area. Landscaping, except grass and ground cover, shall not be located closer than three (3) feet from the edge of any accessway pavement. The triangular area shall be defined as: a. The areas of the site on both sides of an accessway which lie within a triangle formed by the intersection of each curb of the accessway with the street right-of-way with two (2) sides of each triangle being ten (10) feet in length from the point of intersection and the third side being a line connecting the ends of the two (2) other sides. b. The area of the site located at a corner formed by the intersection qf two (2) or more streets with two (2) sides of the triangular area being measured thirty (30) feet in length along the right-of-way lines from their point of intersection; and the third being a line connecting the ends of the other two (2) lines. (9) All landscape plans and specifications shall be prepared by a landscape architect licensed to practice in the State of Florida. (lO)AlI parking areas and vehicular use areas shall be screened from the public right-of-way by a landscape screen. This screen may be composed of a berm not less than three (3) feet in height and not more than five (5) feet in height or a maintenance free wall at least (3) feet in height, or a screen of landscaping at leas t three (3) feet in height twelve (12) months after planting. If a wall or hedge is used, a meandering berm a minimum of one and one-half (1%) feet in height, with a maximum slope of 3:1 shall be required. Berms shall not be used where coverage conflicts with existing vegetation. This screening requirement may be combined with other requirements within the landscape easement. Berm slopes shall vary in order to provide visual interest; however, the maximum slope shall be 3:1. The berm shall be Completely covered with grass or other living landscape materials. A berm shall not be constructed around existing vegetation where the grade will be raised more than six (6) inches. Walls and shrub screens shall be setback a minimum of ten (10) feet from the property line. NOTE: For the purpose of this ordinance hedge, screen and landscaping are to be used interchangeably. (11) Concrete walkways shall be a minimum five (5) feet wide and shall be encouraged to meander, where appropriate, to create visual intert:;st. The construction of the walkways shall be coordinated with adjacent properties to ensure continuity of design. Where a sidewalk intersects a street or driveway, a curb ramp shall be installed. (12)Landscaping shall be installed' to screen parking areas from adjacent and proximate properties as follows: a. Where vehicular use areas are adjacent to properties assigned a zoning classification which allows only residential uses or properties assigned a residential land use designation, the provisions of Section 20-491 active/passive buffer. and setback design standards shall apply. ) b. A hedge or other durable landscape screen at least thirty (30) inches in overall height above grade when planted, to grow to thirty-six (36) inches within twelve (12) months under normal growing conditions, shal] be used between the common property lines. When two (2) hedges occur along a common property line, use of the same plant species is required. If a hedge exists on an adjacent property along a common Adopted August 23, 1999 - 7 - Greeneway Interchange District -'I J .J '] "j J J J J I 1 J ~ .J J properly line, ,I duplicate hedge is not required; however, in all cases, tree planting requirements for each property shall apply. c. Live screening m<llerial shall be planted in are<lS not less than five (5) feel in width. Planling areas shall be mulched a minimum of two (2) inches Ihick wilh cypress mulching or other organic mulch. d. At least one tree shall occur for every seventy-five (75) linear feet, or fraction thereof, along side (non-street side) and rear property lines. These trees shall be any canopy trees selected from the recommended plant pallet found at the end of this section. (13)Landscaping shall be provided for all vehicular use areas so as to provide visual and climatic relief from broad expanses of pavement and to channelize and define logical areas for pedestrian and vehicu lar circulation. The requirements for landscaping in vehicular use areas are as follows: a. Parking areas shall include landscaped curbed islands at the ends of each row of parking. These islands shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet wide and as deep as the combined parking space(s) plus median, if any and shilll include at least one (1) canopy tree. b. Each parking bay shall have no more than ten (10) continuous parking spaces unbroken by a landscape island. Shade trees shall be provided. c. Parking bays shall have a maximum of forty (40) spaces. Where total parking requirements for a parcel exceed forty (40) cars, parking lots shall be broken into distinct areas separated by continuous landscaped islands at least five (5) feet wide. Landscaped islands shall contain one (1) tree for every thirty (30) linear feet of island. d. Each separate required landscaped island shall contain a minimum of one hundred sixty-two (162) square feet with a minimum interior dimension of nine (9) feet and shall include at least one (1) tree. e. As an option, a six (6) foot wide landscaped island may be constructed between rows of parking which shall count towards the required open space. If this option is used, the parking spaces abutting the island may be shortened to nineteen (19) feet in length and the unbroken rows of parking may be extended to twenty (20) spaces. The landscaped island shall contain one tree for every thirty (30) linear feet of island. (14) A landscaped unpaved area shall surround each non-residential building, occurring between the facade of the building and paved areas whether a parking area, drive or sidewalk as described below. a. Along the front and side of a non-residential building a minimum landscaped area of ten (10) feet for the first floor plus three (3) feet for each additional floor shall be maintained. Sidewalks are not considered part of the landscaped area. b. Along the rear of a non-residential building a minimum of five ( 5 ) feet of landscaped area shall be maintained. Loading areas may be permitted along the rear or side facade of a building. c. For retail buildings, paving may be allowed up to the fa<;;ade of a continuous storefront building if landscaping is provided intermittently along the fa~ade of the building consistent with the following: ]. A minimum of fifty (50) percent of the front or side with continuous storefront must be landscaped. ) 2. Each landscaped area must have a minimum width of three (3) feel. Adopted August 23, 1999 ,8, Grccncway Interchange District J - I ':1 ,:.1 ~'J .., ::~~: I ~ ';1;. 'J ' . J ] ..., J .' j .J J :1 ) I .J J (15) Foundation and acccnt planling shall bc provided around all structures for the purpose of enhancing and complementing the architectural character of the structurc. (16) Wet retcntion/dctention ponds along S.R. 434 shall be designed so as not to require fencing. Wet retention/detention ponds in the rear of buildings shall be fenced if required by slope. No dry retention/detention pond shall be located along S.R. 434. (17) All stormwater management areas shall conform to the design criteria promulgated by the City of Winter Springs and the St. Johns River Water Management District. \ (18) A tree survey shall be submitted with any applicationfor site plan review showing all trees over four (4) inches in caliper consistent with Chapter 5 of the City of Winter Springs Code of Ordinances. Prior to any site clearing activities all existing trees required to remain by the Dev,elopment Review Committee shall be tagged in the field for inspection and approval. Barriers shall be erected at the dripline of trees for protection against construction activities. (19) Any existing tree(s) indicated to remain on construction plans approved by the Development Review Committee that are damaged or removed shall be replaced with new tree(s) Consistent with Chapter 5; Section 5.5 of the City of Winter Springs Code of Ordinances. (20) All areas not otherwise landscaped, including the right-of-way, shall be sodded with St. Augustine solid sod by parcel owners. Other suitable sod may be permitted in low visibility areas or areas subject to periodic water inundation. (21) Pedestrian access through the perimeter wall and buffer may be provided at the abutting resident's or homeowners association's option to provide convenient pedestrian access to non-residential uses such as commercial areas, office parks or schools. (22) Additional green space and landscaping shall be required at access drives. Sec. 20-491 ButTers and Walls. (1) Unless otherwise specified, the following active/passive design standards shall apply to all commercial, office, and multi-family development adjacent to properties assigned a residential zoning classification or a residential land use dcsignation. Buffers and setbacks required by this section are intended to separate incompatible land uses and eliminate or minimize adverse impacts such as light, noise, glare and building mass on adjacent residential uses. The Development Review Committee shall make the final detennination of active and passive edge (s) during the site plan review process. (2) Front setbacks shall comply with the requirements of Section 20-87. Side and rear setbacks shall comply with Table 1 of this Section. (3) Passive buffcrs: The use of passive buffers may occur only on the passive edges of a building site. In u,sing passive buffers, the following requirements shall be met: a. Buffcr Width: Minimum fifteen fcct (IS') b. Buffers shall contain a pcrimeter brick or masonry wall six feet (6') in height. Adopted August 23, 1999 " 9 ' Grcencway Intcrchange District ,', I (4) ~ '1 '! r} Ii. ~J ,,' (5) ;;.,;.. J J' ~ J ) "j ". ~ ',:' ] jJ ':J:, , ::~<> ..,., J J : ,:! .. J J c, Buffers shall conlain fOlll (4) canopy Irees a minimllm of two and one half inches (2.5") in diameter (dbh) for everyone hundred (100) linear feel of buffer. Trees may be clustered or planted at regula r intcTV<l)s. Active buffers: In using active buffers, the following requirements shall be met: a. Buffer Width: Minimum twenty-five feet (25') for one-story buildings. Minimum fifty feet (50') for buildings two (2) story and over. b. Buffers shall contain a perimeter brick or masonry wall six feet (6') in height. c. Buffers shall contain 'eight (8) canopy trees a minimum of two and one half inches (2.5") in diameter (dbh) for every one hundred (100)linear feet of buffer. Trees may be clustered or plante d at regular intervals. The following table prescribes the landscape buffer and setback requirements relating to the height of buildings when the following uses are adjacent to existing residential land uses and/or properties assigned a residential zoning land use classification or land use designation. Table 1 Passive/Active Landscape Buffer and Side and Rear Setback Requirements Building Height and Use Passive Side of Building Buffer Setback Active Side of Building Buffer Setback One Story Office Commercial Multi-Family 2 or more stories Office Commercial Multi-Family 15' 15' , 15' 50' 50' 100' 50' 50' 50' 100' 100' 100' a. On internal streets, no existing or dedicated public or private right-of-way shall be included in calculation of the buffer widths. b. Existing vegetation shall be used where possible to meet these requirements. (6) Walls: All freestanding walls, sound barriers, ground sign enclosures, planters, man -made structures fronting along the designated roadway or its major intersections shall be of brick decorative or split -faced concrete block. When these materials are used for a visual screen, they shall conform to the architectural style, materials, and color of the development. Adopted August 23, 1999 ,]()- Grecneway Intcrchange District 1 \ ) \1 ....... ':"1 , f .---.' :";1 I" ...::.. i-: I : I ,;/ t~~ ,::::} .,.... ~'. :"::/ "f 'J ,~, d 'OJ '~ ,-t: j] \.;. ~ 'J .., J ' ' f".' I J ) 2J ., 1": .] Sec. 20-492 Signs. AJI signs and sign elements, including shapc, form, lighting, matcrials, sizc, color and location shall bc subjccl 10 approval by the Dcvclopment Rcvicw Committec if such signs or sign elcments are visiblc from adjacent properties or a street right-of-way. ' (1) Ground Mounted Multi-Tenant or Project Identification Sign: For each multi-tenant development under separate ownership, one (1) wide-based monument style permanent sign with landscaped base identifying the name of the development and businesses within the development shall be permitted. For developments with five hundred (500) feet of frontage or more on a major road, one (1) additional sign may be permitted. The minimum separation for all signs on an individual ownership parcel shall be 200'. a. Shall only advertise the name of the commercial development companies, corporation or major enterprises within the commercial development. The primary address of the building shall be incorporated into the sign with numerals/letters a minimum of eighi (8) inches in height, but the address shall not be counted against allowable copy area. b. Shall be located no closer than fifteen (15) feet from S.R. 434 right-of.:-way and ten (10) feet from internal streets and side and rear setbacks if setbacks are not adjacent to S.R. 434. c. Shall have a maximum of two (2) faces. d. Shall be consistent in design, format and materials with the architecture of the proposed building(s). e. A wall sign shall not be higher than eight (8) feet above the closest vehicular use area. f. Signs shall be in an enclosed base a minimum width of two-thirds (2/3) the width of the sign. Landscaping shall be incorporated around the base to include low growing shrubs and groundcover and/or annuals to promote color. g. Signs shall be in accordance with the following schedule: Fronting on S.R. 434 the following shall apply: Building Size (Gross Floor Area) Under 75,000 square feet 75,000 - 250,000 square feet over 250,000 square feet Maximum Copy Area 32 square feet 48 square feet 64 square feet Maximum Height 12 feet 14 feet 16 feet Fronting on internal streets the following shall apply: , Building Size (Gross Floor Area) Under 75,000 square feet 75,000 - 250,000 square feet over 250,000 square feet Maximum Copy Area 56 square feet 84 square feet 150 squarefeet Maximum Height 14 feet 14 feet 16 feet h. Multi-tenant centers arc permitted additional signs for anchor tenants according to the following schedule: Adopted August 23, 1999 - 11 - Grecncway Intcrchange District ,\ \ J \, I I r J (2) 1 I , , ~] '] " ,;....~ , 1 \~, ".01 ) J 'H u; g ,] (3) .. '] '] I, :: I 1 ' ) ]j , , :] Building Size (Gross Floor Are;l) Undcr 75,000 squarc fcct 75,000 - 250,000 square feCI over 250,000 squarc feet Anchor Tenant Additional Signs 2 of ] 2 square fcel 3 of 12 squarc feel 4 of 12 square fcet NOTE: An anchor tenant is defined as the major retail store(s) or office tcnant in a ccnter that is in excess of 100' front feet and a minimum area of 10,000 squarc feeL Ground Mounted Single-Tenant Identification Sign: One (1) wide-based monument style, permanent project identification sign shall be permitted 'per single-tenant parcel. One additional permanent 'wide-based monument style project identification sign may be permitted for parcels in excess of one (1) acre with more than one (1) ingress/egress serving more than one (1) building. The minimum separation for all signs on an individual ownership parcel shall be 200'. a. . Shall only advertise one (1) person, firm, company, corporation or major enterprise occupying the premises. b. Shall be located no closer than fifteen (15) feet from S.R. 434 right-of-way and ten (10) feet from internal streets and side and rear setbacks if setbacks are not adjacent to S.R. 434~ c. Shall not exceed two (2) faces. d. Sign copy area shall not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet per face for signs fronting on S .R. 434 and forty-eight (48) square feet for signs on internal streets. For parcels in excess of 4.0 acres, the project identification sign face fronting S.R. 434 may be increased to forty-eight (48) square feet. e. Shall be consistent in design, format and materials with the architecture of the proposed building. f. When fronting on S.R. 434 the sign shall not be more than eight (8) feet in height above the closest driveway or vehicular use area. Internal signs shall not be more than twelve (12) feet in height above the closest driveway or vehicular use area. g. Signs shall be in an enclosed base that is at a minimum the full width of the sign. Landscaping shall be incorporated around the base to include low growing shrubs and groundcover and/or annuals to promote color. h. A matching entry sign may be placed on either side of the primary entrance to a development if enhanced landscaping at the entrance is provided. Building Mounted Multi-Tenant Identification Sign for Buildings with Separate Exterior Tenant Entrances: In addition to the ground mounted identification sign, tenant signs shall be permitted on the exterior walls of the building at a location near the principal tenant entrance, and be consistent with the following criteria: a. Shall only advertise one (1) person, firm, company, corporation or major enterprise occupying the prcmises. b. The sign(s) shall be clearly integrated with the architecture of the building. Shall be consistent in design, format, and materials with Ihe architecture of the proposed building. c. The sign(s) shall not project above any roof, canopy elevations, or top of parapet wall. Adoptcd August 23, 1999 , 12 - Grceneway Interchangc ~istrict J ] "/ ".'J "'J t . '-:.". ,] c9 ~/~ or ~ J J J J J:' " ] ]" " .;; J J , ~l ....J u. Wall signs shall display only one (J) surfacc and shall not be mounted more than six (6) inchcs from any wall. e. When more than one (1) tcnant sign is used on one (1) building, each tcnant sign shall be consistent in size, materials, and placement. f. The maximum size of sign letters and logos, including any sign backgrounds, shall be 24" in height for individual tenants other than anchor tenants. The maximum of letters and logos for anchor tenants in a retail center shall not exceed 25% of the building height. An anchor tenant is defined as the major retail store(s) or office tenant in a center that is in excess of one hundred (100') front feet and a minim um area of 10,000 square feet. g. The length of the sign may occupy up to seventy (70%) percent of the linear feet of the storefront the business occupies. The anchor tenant may have the sign age permitted for a Building Mounted Single , Te'nantldentification Sign. h. For office buildings without separate exterior tenant entrances, one wall sign not exceeding two (2) square feet shall be permitted identifying each individual tenant. The sign shall be located adjacent to the building entrance. (4) Building Mounted Single Tenant Identification Sign: In addition to the ground-mounted identification sign, a building mounted identification sign may be permitted consistent with the following criteria: a. Shall only advertise one (1) person, firm, company, corporation or major enterprise occupying the premIses. b. The identification sign is located on the exterior wall of a building. c. The sign shall be clearly integrated with the architecture. d. The sign shall not either project above any roof, canopy elevations or top of parapet wall. The top of the sign shall not be higher than fourteen (14) feet above the main entry floor with the exception of signature buildings as described in these regulations. e. The sign shall display only one (1) surface and shall not project more than six (6) inches from any wall. f. Signs shall conform to the following schedule: Building Size (Gross Floor Area) Less than 50,000 square feet 50,000 to 100,000 square feet Over 100,000 square feet Maximum Copy Area 16 square feet 32 square feet 48 square feet The maximum height of letters and logos shall be as follows: Building Height 3 stories in height and under: 4 stories (signature building) 5 stories and up (signature building) Letters 17" 19" 21" Logos 22" 24" 26" Max. Sign Size Per max. copy area above 60 square feet 76 square feet Adopted August 23, 1999 , 13 ' GreeneW<lY Interchange District I ,1 :..1 ;,.1 Cl J:~.J ,mIl .ill '] J J "') f:l, illJ S),r .,.. ," <;J :JJ ] Tl.: J ..1 ,] J For signature buildings the following shall a1?l2ly (iI) The overall size of the sign shall nOl exceed fifleen (15) percenl of a signable wall area to which the sign is altached or the maximum allowable sign size, whichevcr is less. Signablc wall arca is defined to bc a continuous portion of a building unbroken by doors, windows, columns, trim or other architcctural details. (b) If a sign consists of a boxed display, the total area of the display, including copy, logo and background must be no greater than the maximum size allowances. (c) If a sign consists of individual letters and a logo, the total area of the letters and logo, the negative space in the letters and the spaces betwecn thc letters, logo and words shall be included in determining compliance with maximum size allowances. (d) The sign shall not project above any roof, canopy elevation, or top of parapet wall.. (e) The sign shall be clearly integrated in design and materials with the architecture of the building. The sign shall be carved into the fabric of the building or securely attached to it and mounted so as not to project more than two (2) inches from the wall surface to which it is attached. The maximum thickness of the sign shall be two (2) inches. (f) The sign shall display the name of one (1) signature business and its identifying logo if applicable. (5) Additional SignsNariances: Under special circumstances, such as for parcels on corner lots, additional signs consistent with these design standards may be approved, upon a request granted by the Board of Adjustment pursuant to Sec. 20-82 and 20-83 or the City Code. The Board of Adjustment shall recommend variances of this sign code in specific cases where such variances will not be contrary to the public interest and where, owning to special conditions, a literal translation of this sign code would result in unnecessary hardship. All requirements, procedures, findings and appeals of sign code variances shall follow those provisions for zoning variances. (6) Commercial Outdoor Advertising (i.e. Billboards) ) Off-site advertising signs such as billboards are prohibited. (7) Changeable Copy Signs: In order to create continuity throughout the corridor all changeable copy signs shall be as follows: a. The sign cabinet shall be all aluminum extrusion or better as approved by staff. Changeable copy signs may be incorporated into permitted signs and shall be included as part of the permitted sign area as described below: I. Changeable copy signs shall not comprise more than twenty-five (25) percent of the permitted sign area; II. Movie theaters and other performance/entertainment facilities may utilize up to 80% of the permitted sign area for display of films, plays or other performances currently showing. Such copy area shall be included as part of the permitted sign area. 111. Movie theaters may use up to 80% of permitted wall sign area for display of names, films, plays or other performances currently showing. IV. One changeable copy sign adyertising the price of gasoline is permitted on gasoline station sites provided it shall not exceed 12 square feet per sign face. ' b. The sign face shall be acrylic Pan X 15 or Equal. Adopted August 23, 1999 , 14 ' Grccneway Interchange District UJ ] ,J j ] ~-j \..:..," .".;\ ,;1 :7 iJ :] ...'1 .. -1 -d ].'~, d J J 7) jf J OJ J c. The !crIers and track shall he Wagner Zip-Change or [qual. (8) Backlit Signs: Backlighting of signs, including awning signs, shall be permilled. (9) Window Signs: Window signs may be permilled under special circumstances for retail establishments such as signs inside and on a window or in a display of merchandise when incorporated with such a display. The total area of all window signs, shall not exceed twenty (20%) percent of the window glass area to be calculated separately for each separate storefront. Window signs shall count against total allowable copy area if they are permanently attached. (lO)Construction Signs: One (1) construction sign, denoting the owner, architect, landscape architect, engineer, financial institution, contractors, or containing any statement pertaining to the project for which a building permit has been obtained, will be permitted during construction. The construction sign shall not exceed sixty-four (64) square feet in area and shall not exceed fourteen (14) feet in height or sixteen (16) in width. The construction sign shall be removed from the site by the owner upon substantial completion of all construction, or upon the issuance of a final Certificate of Occupancy, whichever is sooner. If the sign is not removed when required, it may be removed by the City at the owner's expense. (ll)Marketing Signs (e.g. "Space for Rent" sign): a. Only one (1) marketing sign shall be permitted on each parcel during the building's "leasing period". At the end of the leasing period, marketing signage shall be removed from the site by the owner of the site. b. All marketing signs shall be submitted to the City for approval and location prior to the sign's installation. c. Marketing signs shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet on S.R. 434 and fifteen (15) feet from the front, side and rear property lines. They shall not create a visibility obstruction to vehicular traffic. d. For parcels in excess of five (5) acres or with frontage on more than one (1) road, one (1) additional marketing sign may be permitted. Signs must be a minimum of 200' apart. e. Marketing signs may be double faced. Sign faces shall be parallel and mounted on the same poles. The copy area shall not exceed sixty-four (64) square feet and no more than ten (10) fee t in height. The total of a single sign face shall not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet. f. Marketing sign age may be incorporated within the construction signage, but the sign age shall not exceed sixty four (64) square feet in area. g. Marketing signs may be lighted so as to illuminate the lettering on the sign. (12)Political Signs only by permit. (13)Prohibited Signs: The following signs and/or devices are prohibited in the corridor. a. Any sign or part of a sign which is designed, devised, or constructed so as to rotate, spin, gyrate, turn or move in any animated fashion. Signs shall not incorporate reflective materials so as to create the appearance of motion or neon. b. Any sign painted directly on any exterior wall. Adopted August 23, 1999 , 15 - Greeneway Interchange District " I :'''1 .,. ~ .J ,'J ,::1 J ~ ~1::; ::~ . ') " J ] ) '1 '-' ] J ,] -J J " I ..J J c. Signs projecting more Ihan six (0) inches in deplh. d. Roof signs. e. Bench signs. f. Snipe signs (e.g. signs attached to trees and poles). g. Freestanding signs unless otherwise provided for herein. h. Trailer signs. J. Signs attached to temporary structures. J. Billboards k. Any vehicle'with a sign or signs attached thereto or placed thereon with three exceptions as follows: (a) ,any vehicle when parked or stored within the confines of a building, or (b) any vehicle upon which is placed a sign identifying a firm or its principal product if such vehicle is one which is operated during the normal course of business and shall be parked in the least visible spot from the road, or (c) a trailer placed on a job site during construction. 1. Pole signs. m. Balloon signs. n. Ribbon signs. (14)Permanent Flags: Only project flags or governmental flags shall be permitted in conformance with the following standards: a. One (1) flagpole and one (1) flag may be permitted per parcels of two (2) acres or more. b. The maximum width from top to bottom of any flag shall be 20% of the total distance of the flag pole. c. Flagpoles shall maintain the same setback requirements as project identification signs. d. Flagpole heights shall be between twenty (20) and thirty-five (35) feet in height above grade. e. A project flag shall only contain information permitted on the project identification sign. A project flag shall be submitted to the Development Review Committee for approval. (15)Temporary signs for special events. a. Permits for temporary signs, such as pennant and banner signs, not otherwise prohibited are allowed for such purposes as auctions, special events, notice of opening of new businesses, and going out of business sales. Permits for temporary signs shall authorize the erection of the signs and maintenance thereof for a period not exceeding fourteen (14) days; and permits cannot be renewed on the same sign, nor shall another temporary permit be issued on the same location, within 90 days from the date of expiration of any previously issued temporary permit. Adoptcd August 23, 1999 - 16 - Grecne\V<lY Interch<lnge District h. Signs for specific cvents shall be rcmoved wilhin two (2) working days after conclusion of the event. A freestanding temporary sign shall bc no larger than a maximum of thirty-two (32) square feet, and may be double sidcd. Banner signs may bc sized to extcnd across roads. (16)Maintenance: All signs and associated apparatus shall be maintained by the owner of the sileo Violations shall be processed through the City's Code Enforcement Division. (17)Nonconforming Signs. 'j a. Any sign, other than billboards, having an original cost in excess of one hundred ($100) dollars ~nd which is nonconforming as to permitted sign area or any other reason which would necessitate the complete removal or total replacement of the sign, may be maintained a period of from one (1) to five (5) years from the effective date of these design standards. The term of years to be determined by the cost of the sign or of renovation, including installation cost, shall be as follows: J Sign Cost or" Renovation' Cost Permitted Years from Effective Date of Design Standards $ 0 - $3,000 $ 3,001 - $ 10,000 Over $10,000 2 3 5 J b. Violations shall be subject to Chapter 2. Article 3. Division 2. Code Enforcement. City of Winter Springs Code of Ordinances. J (18)Greeneway District Gateway Identification Sign: One (1) architectural feature may be located adjacent to the Greeneway right.-of-way within the northeast quadrant of the District that identifies the overall Greenway Interchange development consistent with the following: ] a. Maximum height of thirty-five (35), feet as measured above existing grade without a special exception being granted by the City Commission. J b. Copy area can only identify the name'of the overall development and the City of Winter Springs. .J c. Consistent in design and materials with the architecture of the overall development. ] d. No part of the architectural feature may be designed, devised, or constructed so as to rotate, spin, gyrate, turn or move in any animated fashion. The architectural feature shall not incorporate reflective materials so as to create the appearance of motion. ] e. In no way shall this architectural feature resemble an outdoor advertising sign (billboard). P.:u f." The words "Winter Springs" shall be incorporated into the sign. J ,- ! J Adopted August 23, ] 999 - 17 - Grecncway Interchange District .J "I ~'-l .. ] "J J mJ," ] 1 Scc. 20-493 Utilit)' Lincs. All ncw or relocated utility Jincs within Ihe district shall be constructcd and inslallcd bcneath the surfacc of thc ground unlcss it is dctermined by the City Ihal soil, topographical, or any othcr compelling conditions, make the underground installation of such utility lincs as prescribed herein unreasonable and impracticable. (1) It shall be the developer's responsibility on-site to make the necessary arrangement with each ut;lity in accordance with the utility's established policy. (2) The underground installation of incidental appurtenances, such as transformer boxes, switch boxes, pedestal mounted boxes for the provision of electricity shall not be required. However, such appurtenances where not rendered impractical by the determination of the City shall be installed on the site of any development approved after the adoption of this section. The necessary easements to allow the utility company access and service to such appurtenances shall be dedicated to the service provider by the developer prior to issuance of a building permit. (3) All transformers and switch boxes related to development approved after the adoption of this section shall be set back a mininium of fifteen (15) feet from any right-of-way and visually screened using landscape materials or masonry construction in conformance with these land development regulations. Sec. 20-494 Cross-access Easements (1) All development except single family residential and duplex uses, with parking lots or direct access to a public road shall, as part of the development approval process, establish cross-access easements which provide for the internal connection of the parcel to adjacent parcels unless the City Engineer makes a finding that such joint-access is not feasible or practicable based upon circumstances unique to the properties. J (2) Shared parking areas shall be permitted a reduction in required parking spaces if peak demand periods for proposed land uses do not occur at the same time. :J J J J J J " J ; "J J, Sec. 20-495 Building and Screening Design Guidelines (1) Projects shall use materials consistent with materials used in the area. Acceptable materials include stucco, split-faced or decorative concrete block reinforced concrete with tile, and brick and terra coma accent material. Inappropriate materials are river rock unfinished timber (unpainted), shake roofs, reflective/mirror glass, and metal siding. Materials should be high quality and well crafted. (2) Mechanical equipment and appurtenances, including but not limited to air conditioner units, ventilation equipment, refrigeration systems, heating units, must be screened so that they are not visible from any public right-of-way. The screen shall consist of a solid wall, facade, parapet or other similar screening material which is architecturally compatible and consistent with the associated building. Such screening material shall extend at least one (1) foot above the object to be screened. If landscaping is utilized, the plantings must be , high enough within one year of planting to provide a screen which will screen the entire unit with a minimum of seventy- five (75%) percent opacity. In the case of satellite dishes, they shall be screened from view from ground level of adjacent rights-of-way and propcrties by buildings, dense landscaping or screen walls. The Development Review Commillee may permit dishes on buildings if no pari of the dish is visible from the ground of surrounding properties. Setbacks for antennas and satellite dishes shall be the same as the building setbacks. Adopted August 23, 1999 , ] 8 ' Grecncway Interchange District ,.,1 :1 '''l , '1 ", ~J ~ .. ~ ,". ;..~:. :1 ~ ;":'.:<, J ) ., 'J .. J J ') :':~ ] J ,,1 ) J J (3) Dumpsters amI similar facililics shall be screened on all four (4) sidcs from public view. BOlh sidcs and the rear of such facilities sh<lIJ be screened hy an opaque concrete wall, or similar ma teri<J1. Dumpsters shall be placcd in an arca thai is least visiblc from a public righl,of-way. (4) All storage areas shall be scrcened from vicw from the right-of-way and from adjacent rcsidential zoning districts. Screening enclosures may consist of any combination of landscaping and opaque building materials. If building materials are utilized, such material shall be consistent with the architectural design of the principal structures. (5) Side and rear elevations of buildings visible from a public street or adjacent property shall be designed in the same architectural style as the main facade. (6) All doors for service entrances or bays shall not face a public street unless they are screened to obscure service activities. (7) Outparcels shall conform to the architectural, signage, and landscape theme of the overall project and must share an internal access with the overall project. (8) Newspaper, magazine and other such vending machines, ATM's, pay telephones, and trash receptacles shall be encased in a structure that is architecturally compatible and consistent with the adjacent building and other site details and must meet building setbacks. (9) Exterior lighting shall be a cut-off light source to protect adjacent properties from glare. All exterior lighting shall be consistent and compatible throughout the project. (10) Buildings with multiple storefront entries are encouraged to incorporate overhangs in the design of front facades as appropriate to promote pedestrian activity. (11) Backflowpreventers and other above ground valves shall be screened so they are not visible from the street right-of-way using either landscaping or an opaque building material and. shall be subject to buffer setback requirements (12) Drive-thru pick up windows shall not be permitted on the front or sides of a building fronting on S.R. 434. Sec. 20-496 Developer's Agreement Any developer may propose to enter into a developer's agreement with the City designed to set forth terms and conditions appropriate to meet the circumstances-of the specific proposed development. Such Development Agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the City Commission. The City Commission may vary the standards of this ordinance, including building or perimeter setbacks, parking standards, signage, and other standards. If an increase in building height beyond fifty-five (55) feet is requested, the City Commission must find the Fire Department capabilities areadequate t9 address the change. Such consideration shall be based on building site constraints or physical characteristics of the property; provided specifically, however, that any such concessions for a constrained site shall only be considered by the City Commission in a Development Agreement if enhanced perimeter landscaping or buffering is provided to assure that the objectives of this ordinance are achieved. Adopted August 23, 1999 , ] 9, Grecncway Interchangc District LARGE SHRUB --I COMMON NAME . ) Cherry Laurel Anise Sweet Viburnum 1 Wax Leaf Ligustrum* Photinia * Wax Myrtle J MEDIUM SHRUB COMMON NAME J Pittosporum 'J Variegated Pittosporum Sandankwa Viburnum Hetzii Juniper J Pfitzer Juniper Shrub Holly Silverthorn J Azalea Yew Podocarpus .1 SMALL SHRUB COMMON NAME J DwarfYaupon Holly Indian Hawthorn J Dwarf Pittosporum Evergreen Giant Border Grass J Azalea Thyrallis Yew Podocarpus ] GROUND COVER COMMON NAME J Liriope Border Grass Mondo Border Grass I Dwarf Confed. Jasmine Parsonii Juniper Dwarf Shore Juniper I African Lily ,.1 I .J TABLE I RECOMMENDED SHRUB pALLET BOTANICAL NAME MINIMUM HEIGHT REQUIRED Prunus caroliniana Illicium anisatum Viburnum odoratissimum Ligustrum japonicum Photinia spp. Myrica cerifera 30" 30" '30" 30" 30" 30" BOTANICAL NAME MINIMUM HEIGHT REQUIRED Pittosporum tobira 24" Pittosporum tobira "Variegata" 24" Viburnum Suspensum ' 24" Juniperus chinensis var. chinensis "Hetzii" 24" Juniperus chinensis "Pfitzerana" 24" I1ex spp. 24" Elaeagmus pungens 24" Rhododendron indica 24" Podocarpus macrophyllus 24" BOTANICAL NAME MINIMUM HEIGHT REQUIRED lIex yomittoria "Nana" 18" Raphiolepis indica 18" Pittosporum tobira "Wheeleri" 18" Liriope muscari "Evergreen Giant" IS" Rhododendron indica 18" Thyrallis glauca 18" Podocarpus macrophyllus 18" BOTANICAL NAME MINIMUM HEIGHT REQUIRED Liriope muscari "10 Pips/clump 9" o.c. Ophiopogon japonicus 10 Pips/clump 9" O.c. Trachelospernum jasminoides "Nana" IS" Spread 18" o.c. Juniperus chinensis IS" Spread 18" O.c. Juniperus conferta "Compacta" 12"-15" Spread 18" O.c. Agapanthus africanus 10 Pips/clump 18" O.c. ) "J \ , i . '! I u I -1 ::J cl -,) I J J ) I ] J I ] J ,J J 1 .J DayLily umtana African Iris Holly Fcrn Hcmcrocallis spp. Lantana monteyidensis Oictcs ycgeta Cyrtomium falcatum English Ivy Hcdcra helix *Must be used with a row of lower growing shrubs in front. 10 Pips/clump "11)" a.c. 15 "spread ]8" a.c. 10 Pips/clump 18" a.c. Gal. can 12"-15" spread 24" a.c. 4" pots - 2-3 plants/pot 12" O.c. Note: Plant list subject to administrative amendment from time to time. 2 I "1 '''1 " I ~,l 1 , I .] 18',',: ,', ~\".:.. ,j J J J J :.'~:l Jl .~; " :~. j '1) JJ J J J ') Crape Myrtle Yaupon Holly Chickasaw Plum Flowering Dogwood Redbud Tabebuia ACCENT PALMS COMMON NAME Canary Island Date Palm Washington Palm Pindo Palm Cabbage Palm Lagcrslorcmia indica IJcx vomitoria Prunus anjustifolia Cornusflorida Cercis canadensis Tabebuia spp. S' S' 8' 8' 8' 8' BOTANICAL NAME HEIGHT REQUIRED Phoenix canariensis Washingtonia robusta Butia capitata Sabal palm 5' 5' 5' 6' Pruning of trees shall be allowed to maintain appropriate clearance for access and minor pruning shall be allowed to promote healthy growth. The intent is to allow trees to achieve a natural tree canopy. Note: Plant list subject to administrative amendment from time to time. ) ) 4 I \ ;;1 -'1 "l I ~J .J il ~ ] J 3 ] ] l J ] ] J EXHIBIT III . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT "", , I J J J ~l n ] TI. TI if ~ ] J ], l 1 ]~ " ] d 11 J~, .' J [fa k~,~'~~~~!~u~~~~1 Associates,Ine. t '\ f . ! ~: : :.: ~:.:"] MEMORANDUM TO: Interested Parties Michael J. Howe -'1#1H DATE: 30 March 1999 L&A No. 98184.23 L&.A Doc: \JMHD\98184C30.MEM FROM: PROJECT: Lake Jessup Grove Property SUBJECT: St. Johns River Water Management District Site Revie~ A site review was conducted with the SI. Johns'River Water Management District (SJRWMD) on the Lake Jessup Grove property on 16 March 1999. Present for the site review were: Anthony Miller; SJRWMD Michael Howe; Lotspeich and Associates, Inc. (L&A) The purpose of this site review was to field verify the landward extent of wetlands within the subject property which had been previously flagged by L&A in accordance with the Unified Wetland Delineation Methodology for the State of Florida dated July 1995. The review was limited to the wetland areas within the forested southern section of the site. Two wetlands had been flagged in the forested southern area. Mr. Miller agreed with most of the wetland boundaries as flagged by L&A. Additional flags were added to the line around the wetland in the western portion of the site as shown in the attached figure. This additional area (0.6:1: acre) was determined to be jurisdictional based on the presence of hydric soil indicators. These new flags should be located by a surveyor and included on all permit plans submitted to the SJRWMD. Also noted during the field visit was an adult and juvenile bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalis). The two birdS were observed roosting in a large pine. tree on-site. No nests were found in any of the trees in the area. As noted during our preliminary evaluation, there are numerous bald eagle nesting sites in the vicinity of the site, but none are known to occur on-site. We would recommend that the site be monitored prior to the beginning of the next nesting season (:t September - October) to determine if any new bald eagle nests have been built on-site. This is the writer's opinion and interpretation of the site review. Unless advised in writing to the contrary, it is assumed tllOse in attendance are in agreement with the statements set forth and work will proceed on this basis. Distribution List: Tim Grusenmeyer; Grusenmeyer, Scott & Associates, Inc. Dick Strous; Elizabeth Morse Genius Foundation File/Carol S. Lotspeich 422 West Fairbanks Avenue, Suite 201, Winter Park, Florida 32789 (407)740-8482 FAX (407) 645-1305 0/.,...' J \-.<.} J !'''l ;j r~k' 1,..'.. .. m,'(' ill] 1"1 ,',' .... q ~ ill ',....] , ' .~,: . n Ll ;} iil ") .,,':.' I::' :'~ Q 2J VI o CIl ~ '" ~" ~ ~ ~i~ ~~~ ~~: ~~{ ~ ~ ~ .', 1f~:::O ~, r/ffTf"m ON ~ ^" II'" S1"OIUltTlOH ""PAKfWa-tT or .. IM/>. $t!c::TTr>N Nt>. ,.;;:, '7770-.2.J()2, 1lo4Tr.D 01-80) ~ ~ /,/ ;/ / /' : ;/ ': ; \ I \ I \ i , . . \ \ i I .J } ..J . . -. - - _.- ... . 3.8'" ' ----- --- - -, -~.:~ -......... -" fT" .f.O.o.'. ._L'._;'~. -.-.-....... ..... - --.-.. -- - - ..-........ --- - .. ............. ._._- ...... . '.O.fj; I W,-I i , ... 0. . ~ ~ CON"'" ~ '- t WI-P ~ wl-5~ S 2.. . "",11 n . ./........... SJ ~fA.. .J...) .'" .. _ .... In' '7 WI- 5L.J /. ~to~ 'D. \ z: . Et>) t~-" ~. .~~~; cE"'i'J)" ~ 4 ~-" ~ (go (PI fD.t , If -.. . WI-I ~ f(e/l'r1.od, I : ~."I~ : I W )-1 1. 1'1 20 1"'-'D v..fLAND WI~Jf~ J .J (1.."''Ie ( ~ 1. . I ",,".,, ~ ,(".)1-1-' -lo : I wl-l.,2.. \ ~II"I-U WIDU.y R/W UN! r,-' ~ \ -;"-J ~~'''~'''_e -A.. WI-' ~ ~... re€.~cve.. C~,,","~c.-t. w\-'3, \..r.> WI-S I..J )- 5" ~o u\- 8' -Vi S c.~"V\r.' c.l , W\ -'~ *'0....... WI- '1 ( 0 "'<",t: Ct.. L..J I-G) la W\. l,;O t-.. ,"'-'" - --lr !- 11"1"'" :a: ,..~ ~~ .~ ~ ! ,~;l :Jcr;;slAf (~" 0>1(. Propt::1 tJ ]f'. ,?P/f'/ sn,}fl; ~~ . -v 1.0-, :-;jj ~~ Ie $."'.~. or Lor '6. sr.c. II (P.8. I. PC. .15) AS ~ OH ~O~MTliO'{T " . TIWlSPO/fTATlON ff./W WJ'. SfCTrOH No. , '777o-2J01. P47ID 01-00 c",~~~ c.-t L--1 I - ::2..\ t:. C> '-.>\-so ",~" ~ ~ "'-If ,- ,- ~ rn-Zl / "\. "'-IJ ./J. ~ .' WI-'" 'f W'-l~ Itfl-~ I {A.",_~ ..,-" I .~ It1-JO lJNJ ~ - .;;.~ ". ". WI-JI d. -6' ..' Wl-JI ~. .- l'1"oH 1l'I-'" . GRAPHIC SCALE 120 [, o eo L~l~lr~. 120 r~ '40 ~~-4 uJi~ ( IN FEET ) 1 1noh = 120 !L R'ECEIVED MAR 2 L 1999 LOTSPEICH AND ASSOC. JNC.. ...I -] / .' \ 28 June 1999 L&A No. 98184.23 Doc. \JMHD\98184F28.LET '-1 ..I Mr. Dick StrollS Elizabeth Morse Genius Foundation 400 N. New York Avenue Winter Park, Florida 32789 ,J ] 9 2] "-/ J J 1 ] ] ] J ,'1 J! J ] RE: Lake Jessup Grove Property 70:1: acres in Sections 37, Township 21 South, Range 31 East . Seminole County, Florida U.S. AnDy Corps of Engineers Wetland Jurisdictional Determination Dear Mr. Strous: JUN 3 (j 1999 Please fmd enclosed for your files a copy of the verified wetland survey from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the accompanying correspondence from the USACE. The jurisdictional determination has been assigned number 199900781 (JD-TI:I), and is legally binding for a period of five years. The acquisition of the jurisdictional determination completes Lotspeich and Associates Inc. (L&A) scope of services contracted in the Memorandurn,of Agreement dated 1 December 1998. Please feel free to call us if you have any questions regarding this jurisdictional determination or other related land use issues regarding the project site. L&A looks forward to working with you as the development of this property progresses. Sincerely, LOTSPEICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC. .-%4.-/-----/? ~ Michael Howe Research Scientist II Enclosures cc: File/Carol S. Lotspeich 'I -.1' 422 West Fairbanks Avenue, Suite 201, Winter Park; Florida 32789 (407)740-8482 FAX (407)645,1305 "1 "J '] 'J J :] J "1 J J J J .J ] J 1 I . I - j J .....EPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACKSONVlLLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS, PALAT'KA REGULATORY OFFICE eo2 NORTH PALM AVENUE PALATKA, FLORIDA 321n-2502 June 9, 1999 Regulatory Division Atlantic Permits Branch 199900781 (JD-TH) Ms. Ann M. Hague ~otspeich & Associates, Inc. 422 West Fairbanks Avenue Suite 201 Winter Park, ,Florida 32789 Dear Ms. Hague: . Reference is made to'your request for a jurisdictional validation, submitted on behalf of your client Lake Jessup Grove. Enclosed is a copy of a survey showing the approximate Department of the Army jurisdiction of the property in question. The property.is located in Section 37, Township 21 South, Range 31 East, Seminole County, Florida. A Department of the Army permit will be required in the area marked as wetlands or waters of the United States. The ju~isdictional determination has been assigned number 1999007"81 "(JD-TH). Please refer to this number in future correspondence. Please be advised that the jurisdictional delineation shown is based on the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987) and is valid for a period of no longer than five years from the date of this letter. Additionally, this delineation has been based on information provided by your office. Should we determine that the information was incomplete ~r erroneous, this delineation would be invalid. If after a five-year period this jurisdictional delineation has not be specifically revalidated by the Corps of Engineers, it shall automatically expire. Any reliance upon jurisdictional correspondence beyond that time frame may lead to incorrect planning and design efforts, as well as possible violation of current Federal laws and/or regulations. You may revalidate or upd~te the jurisdictional delineation as appropriate for youi project d~ration. AnY revalidation or updating will then reflect current Federal laws. If there is any proposed encroachment into wetlands within the Department of the Army jurisdiction, a joint permit application should be submitted. 'RECI:I'~~!.e~' JUN 2 5 1999 LOTSPEICH AND ASSOc. me.. q81dtt . ~ I __ -";'"'\. t:>... ,,.D \ , I ::-\ :,1 '"l , I J TI" " ~: .:- 'I ~ J'" " ,] J j ,I ] J J ] J -2- You are cautioned that work performed below the mean high water line or ordinary high water line in waters of the United States, or the discharge of dredged or fill material into adjacent wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit could subject you to enforcement action. Receipt of a permit from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection does not obviate' the requirement for obtaining a Department of the Army permit for the 'work described above prior to commencing work." Thank you for your cooperation with our permit program. If you have any'questions concerning this matter, please contact me at the letterhead address of by telephone at 904-325-2028. Sincerely, ~J?~ Thaddieus L. Hart Environmental Protection Specialist .I "1 t iJ ] ] ,-'J ~ ..J l 'Hj J ~ .1 :J } I 1 ~J u;t~B ~/~I WI--It/ ~~r~ Lotspeich and Associates, Inc. I!. ECOLOGICAl CONSULTANTS 422 w..t Flirtril A~. Slito 201. \\Inter Pn, Fl. mag (407) 740-8-432 Fox 604S-1305 ~ L~acI,,,,,", File: 98184-B.CDR Drawn By : 'D:r;~ LI ). ... ). d-. Lake Jessup Grove Property Boundary Map +,.70.era In Seclion 37. Townollip 21 SOUlI\, Range 31 Eat Seminole CO<n1y. Florida Scale: 10=400' . North Figure 1 JM Job No : 98184.33 Date: 12 January 1999