Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 12 01 Consent 200 Requesting Approval of the October 13, 2010 (Rescheduled from October 6, 2010) Meeting Minutes CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of Wednesday, October 13, 2010 of the Planning And Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency (Rescheduled from October 6, 2010) was called to Order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman William H. Poe in the Commission Chambers of the Municipal Building (City Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708). Roll Call: Vice Chairman William H. Poe, present Board Member Howard Casman, present Board Member Rosanne Karr, present Board Member Bart Phillips, present Board Member Helga Schwarz, present A moment of silence was held, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. INFORMATIONAL AGENDA INFORMATIONAL 100. Not Used. CONSENT AGENDA CONSENT 200. Office Of The City Clerk Requesting Approval Of The September 1, 2010 Planning And Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency Regular Meeting Minutes. "I PROPOSE THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES AS CIRCULATED" (SEPTEMBER 1, 2010). MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER KARR. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN. DISCUSSION. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 2 OF 23 VOTE: BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS: AYE BOARD MEMBER CASMAN: AYE te a► VICE CHAIRMAN POE: AYE Q6 BOARD MEMBER KARR: AYE BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ: AYE MOTION CARRIED. AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS 300. Not Used. 400. REPORTS No Reports were given. PUBLIC INPUT No one spoke. PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS 500. Community Development Department Requests The P &Z (Planning And Zoning) Board Review The Special Exception Requests For A 108 Unit Senior Apartment Complex With Amenities On 6.95 Acres Within The Town Center And Provide A Recommendation To The City Commission. Mr. Randy Stevenson, ASLA, AICP, Director, Community Development Department stated, "If anyone is in the audience that will be Testifying in terms of expert Witness or giving opinions and anything other than opinions, we might as well swear everyone in at the beginning of the Meeting." Deputy City Clerk Joan Brown swore in those who may be addressing the Board during this Agenda Item. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 3 OF 23 Mr. Stevenson began the presentation and addressed Objective 2.3 as it specifically relates to the Town Center and Policy 2.3.4 relating to the Fiscal Impacts of Development 1 : 5 = from the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Stevenson remarked, "What we covered for you in QG the Agenda Item - 108 units, the Property, some things that were provided by the Applicant in a `Fiscal Neutrality Analysis (& Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida'). Staff is currently still in the process of reviewing that for the future Hearing with the City Commission. We have met a couple of times with the author of that Report. There are some concerns relative to methodology and some assumptions and multipliers. We are working those out at this point in time. I did want to let you know we are proceeding forward with that. We do not have all that information for you here tonight, because that is primarily an issue that we are bringing forward in detail to the City Commission." Next, Mr. Stevenson noted that, "If you have any questions, the author of the Report is here tonight and the Applicant may wish for them and may give you some additional information from their standpoint of the Report. But, I did want to let you know up front that Staff is looking long and hard at this Report in fulfillment of the requirements of this particular Policy within our Comprehensive Plan." Mr. John Baker, AICP, Senior Planner, Community Development Department spoke about this Agenda Item and stated, "A letter was sent out to all the abutting property owners within 150' feet of the site including the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and a sign has been Posted on the site as required by the City Code." Mr. Baker reviewed the history of the Town Center area and displayed the Town Center Master Plan Map and the proposed Town Parke Apartments Site plan. Next, Mr. Baker read the Special Exceptions and Code Deviations and Waivers from the Agenda Item and remarked, "Staff does believe that the Site Plan and Code Deviations listed below satisfies the Criteria for the pedestrian- friendly, multimodal, urban, development that meets the spirit and intent of the Town Center Code." In summary, Mr. Baker added, "We have advertised this according to Code and recommend Approval for these Special Exceptions." Discussion ensued on specifications of the proposed buildings. Mr. Stevenson stated, "Now that we have the Comprehensive Plan and the EAR (Evaluation And Appraisal Report) submitted, I think the next thing as we are able to get to it, is a rewrite of portions of the (City) Code and we would certainly take that under advisement to put in some more explicit language that might deal more with Commercial versus Residential on (State Road) 434." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 4 OF 23 Ms. Rebecca Furman, Attorney, Lowndes Drosdick Doster Kantor & Reed, P.A., 215 North Eola Drive, Orlando, Florida: addressed the Board Members on behalf of her ■i client, Atlantic Housing Partners, LLLP and went through a PowerPoint presentation. M Ms. Furman stated, "I also have with me tonight, two (2) representatives from the Applicant, Scott Culp and Marc Gauthier and also our project team which were - previously Sworn in, but we have representatives from Fishkind and Associates who prepared the Report if you all have any questions about that from our Engineers, Madden Moorhead & Glunt, (Inc.), our Architects Slocum Platts (Architects), our Landscape Architects from Foster Conant (& Associates) and Transportation Engineer from GMB (Engineers & Planners, Inc.) - we don't have Joel Ivey (Ivey Planning Group, LLC) with us tonight, but I do have an Affidavit from him." Next, Ms. Furman added, "What I wanted to enter into Evidence, now that we have everyone Sworn, so they don't have to come up and individually give that Testimony, but I will be happy to read them into the Record, but these are Affidavits from each one of our Consultants that has prepared a Report. It states that the Report was prepared under their supervision. It states their credentials; it states some at length in the ways this plan meets the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan, those requirements of the Land Development Code, and these Special Exceptions." Ms. Furman then stated, "We are not asking for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This is already designated `Town Center'. It allows this Use which is `Multi - Family', it allows up to thirty -six (36) units an acre. We are asking for significantly less than that. It requires a Fiscal Impact Analysis be done which we have done. It requires a neo- traditional design which we have included. It requires that each project be designed and taken into consideration a `Green Network' within the Town Center. It also requires a connected network of streets and blocks and we take your adopted Town Center network and continue it through our project. In addition, when you look at the Housing Element of your City, this Comprehensive Plan Amendment goes to further those deficiencies in the market driven supply especially low to moderate households and elderly that is specifically called out in your Housing Element. Your Housing Element also states that the figures indicate that there will be a need for approximately 3,095 Housing Units for the elderly population and further that the City shall encourage safe, clean and affordable Housing for special needs populations of the City including the very low, low and moderate income households. Similarly, we are not asking for a rezoning tonight. We are already zoned `Town Center'. We are a Permitted Use, we are in Compliance with your street types, with your parking requirements. We meet Transportation requirements; we are in Compliance with the building placement and height. Your Planner pointed out that your Town Center Code is formed based which basically means the envelopes of these have been created in your Code instead of based just simply on setbacks and building heights. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 5 OF 23 We are in Compliance with the Architecture guidelines, we are in Compliance with your signage requirements and your amenity requirements. We do as the Planners pointed out, C7 have a few Variances or Waivers from those requirements that many, we believe, make the project a better project and we believe we create a project that continues to be M consistent with the Town Center Code. A little bit of the project history. Back in 2009, the Winter Springs City Commission Approved a Concept Plan in May of this year. We submitted this Development Plan which is consistent with the already Approved Concept Plan. And the City asked us to hold some Meetings and so for the last several months, that is what we have been doing. We have gone out and we have listened to the neighbors. Because of the feedback that we received in September, we revised the Final Development Plan, and I will go through what those revisions are. Recently, in October we had a Staff Report finding us in Compliance and then we are here tonight. The City approved a Concept Plan in 2009 that allowed this Project to be developed on over ten (10) acres with over 200 units. Our density was nineteen and a half (19 Y2) units an acre. The proposed demographics were to be families with a modest senior component and you can see the amenities listed below. Based on the discussions with the Community, we have agreed to a revised plan significantly reducing the acreage of this, significantly reducing the unit's count, reducing the density, agreeing to limit this to seniors. With even fewer people, we still almost double the size of the clubhouse and add several more amenities which we believe make this a superior project. This is the Approved Concept Plan. It was Approved back in 2009 and you can see the Townhouse Road generally remains in the same place and on the screen. It is to your right, is that area that we have agreed — not to develop and that we have taken out of our plans." Mr. Marc Gauthier, Vice President, Director of Design and Permitting, Atlantic Housing Partners, LLLP, 700 West Morse Boulevard, Suite 220, Winter Park, Florida: addressed the Board Members on the Site Plan conditions. Mr. Gauthier remarked, "As Becky (Furman) had mentioned, the Plan that you are looking at is the Concept Plan that was Approved by City Council in April 2009. It includes a total of 201 units and a mix of three (3) and four (4) story buildings. After meeting numerous times with the neighbors, we have come up with an alternate Plan and this is what you are looking at today. The area that we removed from the Project is right in here and what we have done, actually Townhouse Road is exactly where it was located on the Concept Plan and this is the location that the City has on their Town Center Grid Network. The intent is one day maybe this will continue through and connect to Tuskawilla Road. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 6 OF 23 We have made significant improvements and I have to thank Staff, they have been working with this very, very closely. I always like to say that — we like to do what we like to do, but I found in the last number of years, when we listen to the Staffs plan, the 10:641 municipality's Planning Staff, we really get a lot of input and ends up being a superior community. That is something that has happened here with a lot of the details that we are going to go through. One of the things we did, we found during our study, that there was a jurisdictional wetland in this area, so we redesigned the site and removed this completely out of our site because we didn't want any wetland impacts. We have created not just a normal stormwater pond, but we have created what we believe is going to be a good amenity for the Trail. It is being constructed to sort of enhance the interconnected `Green Network' that is the Cross Seminole Trail. Our approved Concept Plan had a gazebo internally for the use of our residents and we relocated it onto the Trail so that not only our residents can use it, but also people that are using the Trail can also enjoy it. In our initial Concept Plan, this upper end was parking and there was a trash compacter in this area. But, recognizing that as you are using the Trail, you come down this way and you really have a terminal view — we wanted to lower the intensity of the development in this area. So, we have taken the parking out and in its place, we've provided a dog park that is fenced in for our residents, a putting green, we have provided a formal lawn — that we sort of envision people using for croquet and that sort of thing; a community garden where the residents can grow their own plants, flowers and maybe vegetables. We have relocated the compacter from this area, which is fairly visible from the Trail to over here so that it is sort of hidden from view. Our initial plan had no balconies and we have agreed to put balconies on every unit in the development. What that does, it furthers the — principles, crime prevention through environmental design giving the residents in here better eyes on the street. We significantly upgraded the - on site amenities; we have almost doubled the size of our clubhouse. Around the swimming pool, we have created a series of covered walkways and pergolas; we expanded the pool deck to allow for more chairs. There are pergolas on two (2) sides of them that have instead of columns what are called green screens. These green metal mesh columns that you grow plant material in, so ultimately it will be more vegetation, less structure. We also, in order to encourage our residents to use transit more often and make it more convenient for them, we are constructing a bus shelter in this area. It will be the Town Center style bus shelter that you see in some areas in the Town Center where it is an upgraded roof shelter. It will include a bench, a trash can and a bike rack. We have given a lot of accommodations, we believe to the neighbors significantly reducing the intensity of the development, although we sincerely believe that we really do have the right to request Approval of the full site. We are not here to do that this evening. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 7 OF 23 The Concept Plan included a Conceptual Building Elevation as well. This is a typical building that was Approved in April 2009. We have upgraded the building and this is 1:1.4 what we are proposing today. This is the view along Highway (State Road) 434. Although, the Developer's Agreement is not coming in front of you tonight, I wanted to just hit a few points on some items that are going to go into the Developer's Agreement just so that you can use that for a little bit of perspective. We have agreed to in the Developer's Agreement, to restrict the Development for Housing for older persons; we specifically agreed that neither of us or any related entity will develop any of the adjacent properties. We are constructing Townhouse Road and dedicating it to the City as a public road. We have a number of `Green' development commitments and the City of Winter Springs is really big on `Green' development as are we, and the next slide will show you some of the things that we are committing to do. And also, there is an enforcement clause in there that gives the City some teeth in the event that we do not comply with these items." Reviewing some of the "Green" items, Mr. Gauthier noted, "These are some of the things that we have committed to do. There are some other energy efficiency items that we are doing, we just didn't include them in the Developer's Agreements. Let's go through them very quickly. A couple of the items, these are going to be budget permitting. What we would like to do is include carports, and they are in the Site Plan as optional that is before you today. Tape 1 /Side B Solar panels, we have done it in a number of communities, but sometimes construction costs get so high the money runs out. We don't want to have to cut things like landscaping, building design, because we don't think that that would be appropriate. Extensive landscaping - the Town Center has some very, very, very heavy landscaping Codes. We have met those and I believe exceeded them in a lot of areas. We are committing to go after a `Florida Yards and Neighborhood' Certification on our landscaping. We have been working with the `Agricultural Extension' on a number of our communities to get this designation. We have one (1) in Seminole County now. This designation was actually written for single family homes, so it was a little bit tough for us to get it the first few times for a multi - family development, but we have been successful and we have been successful in Seminole County. We partnered with the Florida Solar Energy Center. They are one of our strategic partners out at UCF (University of Central Florida). They have been helping us over the last three (3) or four (4) years improving the energy efficiency of our buildings while maintaining good air quality within them. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER (RESCHEDULED ULL FROM 6, ED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) 010) PAGE 8 OF 23 I don't know if you are familiar with the HERS (Home Energy Rating System) rating ra system. If you build a building the way the average building is built, meets Code and the 1•41 way the average developer builds it, you get a HERS (Home Energy Rating System) rating of one hundred (100). And what that means is you should expect your energy consumption to be a hundred percent (100 %) of what the normal is. We are committing on Town Parke to have our apartment homes at HERS (Home Energy Rating System) sixty five (65) or below. What that means — in the real world is they should have energy consumption sixty five percent (65 %) or less than the average. We use Energy Star appliances and Energy Star ceiling fans, high efficiency air conditioning, digital thermostats, radiant barrier and a roof assembly, dual pane Low -e Energy Star rated windows, upgraded attic and wall insulation, extensively used compact fluorescent lighting within our units. This doesn't go to energy efficiency, but it does go to the air quality. We use only low VOC (Volatile Organic Compound) panes within our units and all of our carpet and padding is Green Level Certified. We use low flow faucets, low flow shower heads and this is one of the items that came from Florida Solar (Energy Center) — we actually have a duct to the outside that brings in a controlled amount of air to the inside when the air conditioning is running. Pressurizes the inside of the unit a little bit and prevents the humid air from migrating through the building. One important thing, our Management Company, we make them change the filters in the air conditioners. People typically don't change them especially if they are renting and they are big, big energy hogs." Continuing with the Powerpoint presentation and referencing Design Waivers, Mr. Gauthier added, "This is the area where we are asking for — eight (8) continuous spaces instead of six (6). It is really important to note that you can have a stretch of spaces that exceeds six (6) if you abut a landscape area. This abuts all the way from the sidewalk — directly abuts the landscape area on our pool." Mr. Gauthier then added, "The vertical separation, the twenty -four inches (24 ") from the sidewalk to the finished floor. Let me explain how our buildings work so that you have a better idea. In order to provide an accessible route for handicap purposes to each unit, we have central corridors, a breezeway as you go through the building. Off of this breezeway, you have four (4) units that have the front doors within the breezeway — because the front doors open up to the same corridor, both of these apartment homes have to have the same finished floor elevation. You can't have a step for accessibility purposes. The challenge becomes, your floor is level, but your roadway slopes. So, using this little module as an example, we have designed it so that at the entrance doors to the apartment homes — we have a minimum of twenty -four inches (24 ") above the sidewalk. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 9 OF 23 But, since the floor is flat and the road slopes upward, when you get to this apartment 0 home your difference is a little bit less. You have a few inches less than a twenty -four Q•= inch (24 ") drop. And on the other side you have a few inches more than a twenty -four inch (24 ") drop. The entrance into the apartment, it is twenty four inches (24 ") or higher and when you are out on your balconies, you are still either two feet (2') or more separation, or really close to it. You can see when you get down towards the Trail, the Site slopes significantly along (State Road) 434. We have a retaining wall here that I believe is five feet (5') in height. So, you have actually on these units, you have something like a five (5) or six foot (6') difference which far exceeds the City's requirements." Reviewing the building length, Mr. Gauthier said, "I believe that the Staff Report said that this was 170 — I think it is about 167, but either way it is a minor deviation. As it was explained to me, this maximum building length in the Town Center was really to prevent big box development. You didn't want a Walmart Supercenter opening in the Town Center, so you said, `Let's make the building smaller.' These buildings have a lot — of recesses and the face of the building does a lot of jogging, so these actually appear as smaller buildings because of the way the building is designed. This is the area where we are showing or requesting a reduction in the window area. We have a retaining wall along the edge of the Trail and then we have landscaping then we have our first floor windows. I am not that concerned in this instance about the first floor windows, I think the first floor residents will have plenty of privacy; but what I am concerned about is people who are going across the bridge. They get to this point and maybe they are fifteen (15') or twenty feet (20') above the ground and they are able to look right into people's windows. And I would say that these people would probably have their best shot looking into the second floor or the third floor of this building. The first floor is going to really be too low for them to see and the fourth floor is likely too high for them to see, but you will have center section where the people's privacy can be somewhat compromised. I think that this is a very good Waiver to request and Staff supports us on this, but I will tell you that if this Board decides that they do not want to provide that Waiver, we just put some extra windows in. We are okay that way too. We were just trying to do something to provide still a good design and at the same time provide our residents with a better sense of privacy. This is the area where we are talking about a separation between the buildings exceeding thirty -five feet (35'). I wasn't here when the Town Center Code was written. I am assuming that it didn't apply to buildings that were across the street from each other. You have a sixty foot (60') right -of -way separating two (2) buildings. Those buildings can't be thirty -five feet (35') apart. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 10 OF 23 Granted, this is not a public right -of -way. It is a private driveway, but we have designed this area to be the same as the street. We have designed it like a public street. We •• designed one (1) lane in each direction, parallel parking on both sides, wide sidewalks and if you go just to the back of the sidewalk, we are already more than thirty -five feet (35') apart." Next, Mr. Gauthier stated, "DOT (Department of Transportation) requires thirty -five (35') on roadway intersections within the right -of -way. The DOT (Department of Transportation) is the Agency here that is going to be permitting the streets. In meetings with Staff, I have been told that this is what is done elsewhere in the City, thirty -five foot (35') radius, and that the Waivers have not had to be requested. We believe in being overly cautious and anything that we believe or the Staff believes could require a Waiver, we are just asking for a Waiver." Mr. Gauthier added, "All our buildings have elevators." Discussion. Board Member Howard Casman asked, "You are adding some wonderful amenities — is there any Federal subsidy or anything to help these people with their rents ?" Ms. Furman replied, "This is an Affordable Housing Project." Board Member Casman added, "I didn't see that here." Ms. Furman responded, "It is not a requirement of your Code to ask us what we are charging for rent." Board Member Casman commented, "I wasn't concerned what you were charging, I am just concerned about who was going to be living there." Ms. Furman added, "We also agreed for it to be part of the FHA's (Federal Housing Administration) Housing for older persons which is 55 (fifty -five) and older, so not necessarily seniors." Further discussion ensued. Board Member Helga Schwarz spoke about her concerns with the location of the Gazebo. Discussion ensued on tenant restrictions. Mr. Scott Culp, Executive Vice President, Atlantic Housing Partners, LLLP, 700 West Morse Boulevard, Suite 220, Winter Park, Florida: addressed the Board Members on this proposed project. Mr. Culp stated, "In regard to the on -going restrictions and the enforceability of those restrictions and we had a lot of those questions in the Community Meetings as well and with the public — the Atlantic Restriction Agreement that is Recorded on the property in the Public Records in Seminole County. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 11 OF 23 It also is Recorded with the Federal Agency and the State Agency governing the programs for this development. We are required to Re- Certify each household on an annual basis and the State does an annual Audit on that and the Federal Government does ■4 an Audit every other year to make sure we are meeting those restrictions. So, with regard �•1.� to that, there is going to be Audits on an on -going basis. The City also has the right to enforce it, just as I explained in a Community Meeting." Further, Mr. Culp added, "We have multiple levels of Government with the authority to restrict it and we have full time on -site management that will maintain and ensure that those restrictions are being met." Mr. Culp then added, "Enforcement would mean they would have to terminate the lease and they would need to vacate the apartment unit until they came into Compliance." Referencing the pool, Mr. Culp stated, "The pool for multi - family communities have to be approved by the Health Department, so our pool Engineer will submit for a Permit through the Health Department and then after it is constructed, the Department of Health does an inspection and gives you your Operating Permit. You first get a Building Permit based upon the plans that the — State Department of Health gives you and then they do the inspection for your Operating Permit, and that inspection is also done on an annual basis." Discussion regarding LYNX bus stops, Mr. Culp stated, "On a bus pull off, we did go through the possibility of a bus pull out with Staff and with LYNX. LYNX was not supportive of a bus pull out and we then drew up what the intersection would be like with a bus pull out and it really gets rid of — kills your sidewalk and so Staff agreed that a bus pull out was not the best thing to do here. The bus stop is after the intersection of the road which is the way LYNX likes to do it. They cross the intersection and then they stop and it forces traffic to go around them rather than put it before the intersection." Continuing, Mr. Culp stated, "I believe on the City's Master Plan this is intended to be an intersection, not a signaled intersection — if it becomes a full intersection, I am sure the City will require who's actually doing the intersection to do some crosswalks, but I can't speak for the City." Mr. Culp pointed out, "I agree that nobody is going to walk down to Tuskawilla Road to cross to come back to here to get a west bound bus, but they always do have the Trail Crossing." Board Member Schwarz added, "Not if you are handicapped because that is an incline." Mr. Culp stated, "It is actually built to ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) Standards. It is designed for handicap accessibility." Further discussion. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 12 OF 23 Vice Chairman Poe opened the "Public Input" portion of this Agenda Item. Ms. Pam Carroll, 865 Dyson Drive, Winter Springs, Florida: addressed the Board Members on her concerns about the "Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & Economic Impact `.S. e Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida" and mentioned that the Market Research Study ( "Market Feasibility Study ") has not been completed and submitted. Mr. Steven Blount, 149 Cherry Creek Circle, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke about his concerns and noted he is opposed to the proposed Town Parke Apartment project. Vice Chairman Poe indicated that Mr. W. Scott Harden did not wish to speak, but wanted his comments stated. Vice Chairman Poe read, "As a member of the Board of the Chelsea Woods Homeowner's Association, I strongly oppose this project and am seriously concerned about the impact to quality future development of the Town Center due to the low rent status of the AHP (Atlantic Housing Partners) project." Mr. Kevin Cannon, 134 Nandina Terrace, Winter Springs, Florida: on behalf of himself as an Attorney and his clients, Mr. Cannon commented for the Record regarding a Binder entitled, "Winter Springs Planning and Zoning Commission, October 13, 2010 Evidence Binder"; and referenced the Affidavit of Mr. Joel Ivey (Tab 5, A, paragraph 11). related to a specific provision of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and asked that this proposed project be postponed. Vice Chairman Poe closed the "Public Input" portion of this Agenda Item. Ms. Furman stated, "We are here tonight as you are beginning to point out procedurally to decide if these Special Exceptions that are allowed for in the Land Development Code are consistent with the intent of the Town Center Code. In doing that, you all have the right to make sure that this is consistent with your Comprehensive Plan which is Town Center and we went through that. Don't believe anyone has presented any competent or substantial Evidence that it is not consistent with the Town Center Code. There seems to be a lot of discussion about the Fiscal Neutrality Analysis (& Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida), so let's see what in your Code required us to do that. And it is your recently adopted EAR (Evaluation and Appraisal Report — Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Element) that requires that a Developer in the Town Center — it is (pages) 1 -14 and it talks about the City Policy regulation decision making process considered design and positive and acceptable economic impacts on the City. In furtherance of this. Policy, the City Commission may require, I believe it may be the first time they required this, may require as a condition of considering the Approval or Denial of a development, that developers provide a written Economic Fiscal Impact Report. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING — OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 13 OF 23 We prepared this by a duly qualified expert and I do believe that Dr. Hank Fishkind is a C' duly qualified expert, that details associated Fiscal Impacts of any proposed new development project on the City or the School District. Nowhere else in your Code does Pond talk about this. Tape 2 /Side A That we have to provide it. We've provided it. We've provided those Consultants that prepared it to explain it but that is not something that is properly pending before you all as something to Approve or not Approve and no where in your Code are we required to bring this Fiscal Impact Study back to you all. With respect to the Developer's Agreement, your City Attorney and your City Staff have a copy of the Developer's Agreement. It's been up on your Website - for months. I think maybe at least six (6) weeks I'll say - Developer's Agreement has been up on your Website. It hasn't been finalized by the City Attorney because he told us the Developer's Agreement doesn't go to Planning and Zoning (Board/Local Planning Agency), they don't Approve it. We simply brought it up to show that we are making certain concessions and those concessions will be in a Developer's Agreement. We're also being told that people have not been provided Due Process because I, as Applicant am submitting Evidence. I am more than happy to go through this. It is your City Code. It is your Comprehensive Plan. It is your City Minutes. It is the Reports that have been on your City's Website and it is the Affidavits of the people that have provided those. There has been no professional Testimony here tonight to give any clear and convincing Evidence that we do not meet the Comp(rehensive) Plan or we do not meet the Land Development Code." Mr. Stevenson provided summary of the items involved with the Agenda and then explained, "The process is to P and Z (Planning and Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency), the Final Engineering comes before you, which is Item `600' and is usually the case when we marry these two (2) together in the same Meeting, the discussion encompasses both items simultaneously. Item `500' is Special Exception for the deviations that have been requested. The reason the Development Agreement — does not come to the Planning and Zoning Board ( /Local Planning Agency) is because it is a Contractual Agreement between the City of Winter Springs and the Developer and the only body that can bind the City in a Contractual Agreement is the City Commission. However, the reason we are talking about the Deviations here tonight is these Deviations will be incorporated back into the Development Agreement. The Development Agreement covers a lot of other information; however, the Deviations will be a portion of that Development Agreement for consideration by the City Commission." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 14 OF 23 Discussion ensued further on the Developer's Agreement. Mr. Stevenson added, "The Minutes are duly noted and they are part of the Agenda Item to the City Commission and will be part of what Staff considers when we do the final Qs Agenda Item to the Commission." With further discussion, Board Member Schwarz referenced the "Fiscal Neutrality M Analysis & Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida" and suggested the City hire a Consultant. Referencing the "Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida ", Ms. Furman commented, "I am happy to read the Affidavit of Dr. Hank Fishkind. It's in there. It said it was done under his supervision and that he read it and agrees with the Analysis." Discussion. Board Member Casman asked for further information. Mr. Stevenson explained, "There'll be two (2) Votes tonight Mr. Casman. One (1) for the Exceptions to facilitate the Site Plan, then one (1) on the Site Plan itself." "I AM GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM `500' AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. I HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEW AND A DIFFERENT OPINION AND THAT IS WHY THEY HAVE DIFFERENT FOLKS ON THE BOARD, BUT I AM GOING TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM `500' AS PRESENTED." MOTION BY VICE CHAIRMAN POE. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. "I MAKE A MOTION THAT ON THE CODE DEVIATIONS AND WAIVERS WE TAKE EACH ONE — FOR WHAT IT IS AND MAKE A MOTION ON EACH ONE." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ ADDED, "THERE ARE PEOPLE IN HERE TRYING TO STOP THE BALL FROM ROLLING AND WE HAVE AN APPLICANT WHO IS TRYING TO KEEP THE BALL ROLLING. THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS IN THESE DEVIATIONS AND WAIVERS THAT I FEEL, ONCE THEY ARE REMOVED, THEY ARE OFF THE TABLE, SO TO SPEAK. WE DON'T HAVE TO COME AND REVISIT THEM, BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO COME BACK." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 15 OF 23 M VICE CHAIRMAN POE STATED, "I AM NOT SURE IF THAT IS GOING TO V ADDRESS THE QUESTION BECAUSE I BELIEVE ALL..." BOARD MEMBER �y SCHWARZ NOTED THAT REGARDING HER MOTION, "...I CAN'T DO A PACKAGE DEAL IN A MOTION. SO MY MOTION IS TO SEPARATE THESE OUT AS SEPARATE MOTIONS." MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Vice Chairman Poe explained, "All of those Exceptions are Exceptions to the Code as it is written so, a package deal would be the only appropriate way to address them." Further comments. "I MAKE A MOTION WE REJECT APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION UNDER ITEM `500'. MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. "I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE CODE AND DEVIATION WAIVERS ON ITEM NUMBER 1. PROVIDING FOR THE CITY COMMISSION TO WAIVE THE FRONTAGE ROAD REQUIREMENT AND ON ITEM NUMBER 2. AND THE ITEM NUMBER 4." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. BOARD MEMBER KARR ASKED, "ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU WANT TO PASS THIS ON TO THE CITY COMMISSION JUST BASED ON THOSE THREE (3) WAIVERS ?" BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ REPLIED, "I AM JUST SAYING FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM THAT THE CODE DEVIATIONS FOR NUMBER 1., 2., AND 4. BE ACCEPTED PER STAFF'S SUPPORT. THE REMAINING ONES, THAT IS NOT PART OF MY MOTION. IT IS JUST TO ACCEPT THOSE THREE (3)." MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. "I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE P AND Z (PLANNING AND ZONING) BOARD." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN. DISCUSSION. MR. STEVENSON ANNOUNCED, "I HAVE INFORMATION FROM THE APPLICANT THAT SAYS RATHER THAN A TABLING, THEY WOULD RATHER REQUEST DENIAL." BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ THEN INQUIRED, "IS IT BETTER TO MAKE THE MOTION A POSTPONEMENT, TO KEEP ANY TYPE OF ADVERTISING? THEN MY MOTION STANDS." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 1=1 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) w PAGE 16 OF 23 VOTE: C> BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS: AYE /1:3= BOARD MEMBER KARR: AYE Qi VICE CHAIRMAN POE: NAY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ: AYE BOARD MEMBER CASMAN: AYE MOTION CARRIED. Ms. Furman commented, "I certainly didn't say this in the beginning of our presentation because I want it to be taken in a very earnest way. There are certain Comp(rehensive) Plan Criteria, Land Development Code Criteria that we believe our Concept Plan that was Approved — on April 27 2009 by the City Commission we believe that we have every legal right to build that. A City does not get to choose who lives in every single house. We came before you all with an accommodation that we thought made the neighbors happy. In order to make that accommodation, we have certain timing criteria financially if this is postponed, if this does not move forward to the City Commission then unfortunately, we will not be able to make those accommodations, but we will have to move forward with the Concept Plan that was previously Approved by the City. I just want to be really clear that a postponement you all will not see us come back with this Plan. You will see us come back with the previously Approved Plan." "I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WHEN ALL INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO THIS BOARD, ANALYSIS FROM THE STAFF REGARDING THE FINANCIAL IMPACT, ANY INFORMATION REGARDING THE VIEW OF THE CITY IN RELATION TO THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO HOLD A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE P AND Z (PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD[/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY]) — THAT THAT MEETING GETS SCHEDULED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, IF WE CAN BEFORE THE NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Mr. Culp remarked, "The two (2) biggest concerns being crime and the impact on the schools, which we think we've addressed with this housing for older persons. Which, yes, there is some opportunity for some families in there, but it is a significant difference from no restriction whatsoever. Significant difference and a significant concession on our part and significant time and efforts spent in making those revisions and working on those approvals through the State Agency. We've tried to move this process forward following your process, following Due Process. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 17 OF 23 What the first Agenda Item tonight, Item `500' was about was Special Exceptions. Those Special Exceptions don't relate to a Fiscal Neutrality Analysis (`Fiscal Neutrality Moe Analysis & Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida'). Those Special Exceptions are specific to those Code items and those requests for Variance to those Code items. I think those Code items need to be addressed as Special Exceptions. Mr. Stevenson raised the issue the Fiscal Impact Analysis so that you are aware that we are following the process. That process requires us to submit that. It does require us to respond to the City as they ask questions as we have been and as we've been meeting at their request. That will continue on to the City Commission. They'll have an opportunity to make a determination on whether that Fiscal Impact Analysis, that submittal was adequate or not. He gave you the status of that. But the item before you on Item `500' was the Special Exceptions not related to the Fiscal (Neutrality) Analysis and the Special Exceptions had a lot to do with trying to address the community concerns that were raised when you had hundreds of people here. I think we are not serving the community of Winter Springs when we look at a vocal minority who are putting us in a position where we are being forced to go back to a Plan that people don't want. We think we've come along way towards meeting with the residents and revising our plans to a place to; although not everybody's ever going to agree, we've come a significant way forward and we've met all the Criteria of your process and at the same time, revised and made concessions to try and address the community concerns. Discussion. "I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THESE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER KARR. BOARD MEMBER CASMAN COMMENTED, "YOU DID MENTION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT EITHER REJECTED OR APPROVED. WELL, I AGREE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT REJECTED AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT GO AWAY. BUT YOU MADE A POINT ABOUT A VOCAL MAJORITY COMING HERE AND TALKING AND THAT UPSETS ME BECAUSE IF YOU WERE TO BUILD THIS FIVE (5) MILES DOWN THE ROAD, THEY WOULDN'T BE HERE TODAY. BUT, THE PEOPLE FROM DOWN THERE WOULD BE HERE. IT IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE A VOCAL MINORITY. IT IS NEVER GOING TO BE THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE OF WINTER SPRINGS REGARDLESS OF HOW THEY FEEL ARE NOT GOING TO BE COMING HERE. IT IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE THE PEOPLE MOST CONCERNED. SO, A VOCAL MINORITY IS ABOUT THE BEST YOU ARE EVER GOING TO GET AND THAT IS ABOUT ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 18 OF 23 lEam NEXT BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ MENTIONED, "I THINK I RESORTED TO THE TABLING BECAUSE THERE JUST DIDN'T SEEM LIKE THIS WAS GOING ANYWHERE. BUT NOW YOU HAVE OPENED UP HOW YOU FEEL Qi ABOUT THESE ITEMS AND I AM A LITTLE BIT PERPLEXED WHY YOU JUST DIDN'T MAKE THAT MOTION. I KNOW HE DID, BUT DIDN'T IT DIE FOR A SECOND ?" VICE CHAIRMAN POE NOTED, "IT DID." BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ THEN SAID, "I THINK IN ORDER FOR US TO ADDRESS WHAT MR. CULP SAID, I MUST RESCIND MY MOTION TO TABLE THE ITEM TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING AND THAT IS MY MOTION." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KARR. DISCUSSION. VICE CHAIRMAN POE THEN STATED, "I HAVE TWO (2) MOTIONS ON THE FLOOR NEITHER WHICH WERE SECONDED. FIRST MOTION I DID NOT RECOGNIZE. WE HAVE MS. HELGA SCHWARZ, YOUR MOTION ORIGINALLY. MS. KARR WAS JUST A MOMENT AGO, IF YOU WILL RESTATE THAT." BOARD MEMBER KARR RESTATED HER MOTION AND NOTED, "THAT WE VOTE TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AS PRESENTED IN ITEM `500' TONIGHT." VICE CHAIRMAN POE THEN COMMENTED, "BEFORE I ENTERTAIN THE MOTION, BEFORE WE CAN DO THAT, THE ITEM'S BEEN TABLED. SO, I AM GOING TO JUST DEFER YOUR MOTION UNTIL I RECOGNIZE MS. SCHWARZ. "I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RESCIND THE ITEM TO TABLE THE MEETING UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING, ITEM `500'." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KARR. DISCUSSION. VOTE: BOARD MEMBER CASMAN: NAY BOARD MEMBER KARR: AYE VICE CHAIRMAN POE: AYE BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ: AYE BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS: AYE MOTION CARRIED. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 19 OF 23 Board Member Schwarz stated, "I make a Motion to deny the Special Exceptions and Waivers as approached and presented in item `500'." Vice Chairman Poe stated, "Before I entertain that Motion, we gave the Applicant an opportunity to provide the other side. We have those that are opposed to it, we need to provide them that same opportunity." Continuing, Vice Chairman Poe added, "The Vote was not to Approve or disapprove, the Vote was just merely to bring it back to the Table." Vice Chairman Poe opened "Public Input". Ms. Pam Carroll, 865 Dyson Drive, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke about the Comprehensive Plan and Affordable Housing. Mr. Gauthier stated, "We do understand that we are looking at engineering here. However, Item `500' does include the Fiscal Impact. Fiscal Impact on the City includes as Ms. Carroll noted taxes. One of our concerns was that our understanding is that the tax basis for this development will be on the rents paid, not on the value of the improvements of the land. Is that correct ?" Mr. Gauthier stated, "My prospective as a citizen and obviously I am paying the same property taxes that you guys do same - is that by taking this prime piece of property off the tax roll, we are now going to forego; there's an opportunity cost here. Another type of development that is taxed for land and improvements would yield far, more in tax revenue to the City than this development would. Now, I realize that there is no such alternative development on the drawing boards at the moment, but that's what was envisioned for the Town Center. I don't believe and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Stevenson, that this was what was envisioned when the Town Center's Zoning was actually inactive." Mr. Stevenson then remarked, "The Town Center Zoning is a `Mixed Use' type of development again based upon a form based Code." Mr. Gauthier stated, "Correct. That however doesn't address our concerns about — a tax rate. And also to go back to one of Pam's (Carroll) points is that the Code does specifically say that it is desirable to disperse Workforce Housing throughout the community. In fact, the research studies that have been since 2002 show the correlation between increase in crime and Affordable Housing diminished as you disperse units as opposed to aggregating them. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 20 OF 23 They have however found threshold effects. Threshold effects meaning when there are C'0 more than `x' units per acre and I believe it is 1.46; then you begin to see crime effects. 1:: There are effects that this, by making these Exceptions and then going on to Approve a Moo Site Plan, you may be Approving a Site Plan that in fact will endanger our tax base and will endanger our schools and is going to endanger, I believe the future of our Town Center development as it stands today. Thank you." Mr. Cannon commented about `Competent Substantial Evidence' and that the Affidavits were not posted on the Website. Mr. Cannon also spoke about the Comprehensive Plan and the Development Agreement. Vice Chairman Poe closed the "Public Input" portion of this Agenda Item. Discussion. Tape 2 /Side B Board Member Karr commented, "We do — make notes as to — what our objections were to this plan when we turn it over to the City Commission." "I WILL MAKE A MOTION WE DENY AND REJECT THE DEVELOPER'S REQUEST." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. "I WILL MAKE THE MOTION I ORIGINALLY MADE, TO APPROVE ITEM `500' AS PRESENTED BY STAFF." MOTION BY VICE CHAIRMAN POE. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KARR. DISCUSSION. VOTE: BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ: NAY BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS: NAY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN: NAY BOARD MEMBER KARR: AYE VICE CHAIRMAN POE: AYE MOTION DID NOT CARRY. Mr. Stevenson suggested to the Board, "I would request, Mr. Chairman that since we have a split Vote on this decision that everyone write a reason behind their Vote so we can include that with the Commission in light of Ms. Schwarz request that the Commission be fully informed." Vice Chairman Poe stated, "Absolutely. So that being the case, Item `600' would not be addressed this evening, Randy (Stevenson) ?" Mr. Stevenson replied, "That's my understanding because the facilitating documents pertained in Item `500' would be what facilitated the design incorporated in `600'." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 21 OF 23 Vice Chairman Poe then commented, "I would ask each of the Members then, at your convenience to write your summary of why your Vote went the way that it did and C� provide that to Joan (Brown) at your earliest convenience." Mut Discussion regarding Agenda Item `600' ensued. Mr. Culp addressed the Board and responded, "You denied — our request and Staffs recommendation with regard to Item `500'. We would request that you take up Item `600' and review that and make a Motion and Vote upon that because it is a separate item that stands alone. You have denied the Exceptions and those, therefore are denied and therefore now we need to look at the Site Development Plan; and we'd like you to take that Item up as it's presented to you with Staff's recommendation and we'd request a Motion on that as well. Thank you." REGULAR AGENDA REGULAR 600. Community Development Department Requests The P &Z (Planning And Zoning) Board Review The Final Engineering Site Plan For A 108 Unit Senior Apartment Complex With Amenities On 6.95 Acres Within The Town Center And Provide A Recommendation To The City Commission. Mr. Baker introduced this Agenda Item and mentioned review of the Final Engineering Plan and stated, "The Site has no hundred year (100) Flood Plain, no Wetlands, but there are Gopher Tortoises that have to be removed." Mr. Baker continued by saying, "The Site meets the City Code except for the deviations and Waivers that we have outlined and we recommend Approval." Next, Mr. Baker explained to the Board Members, "This is looking at the Final Engineering Plan, the Site Plan for Compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the City's Code, primarily the Code Sections that I cited to you. The only deviations from the City Code are those that were brought to you in the Special Exceptions." Mr. Culp addressed the Board Members and stated, "Mr. Phillips asked a question first with regard to whether or not he could proceed with a Vote on Item `600' having denied Item `500'. This Board has the authority to condition their Vote whether it be a Denial or an Approval based upon the conditions they placed on that Denial or Approval. You can condition an Approval or a Denial of this Site Plan on the Denial that you had Voted on for Item `500'. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 22 OF 23 So, if you chose to Approve this Site Plan conditioned upon the Denial of the Exceptions, you could do that. You could chose to Deny or Recommend to the Commission a Denial 4=0 of this Site Plan conditioned upon also your Denial of Item `500'. So, I just wanted to answer your question in that regard. The question in regard to the Valuation, that is a p66 Tax Assessor's determination, they are Constitutional Officers and they are given the purview to be able to use the Market Approach or the Income Approach and they will look at the Income Approach and then they make the ultimate decision. But property that is rental property specifically for rental property and specifically that has restrictions on it for affordability is typically they look at the Income Approach because there are Land Use Restrictions; they are in perpetuity or at least fifty (50) years which from a Tax Assessor's standpoint is perpetuity and they do pay taxes but he does look at the different assessment values." Continuing, Mr. Culp added, "The question on the Fiscal Impact Analysis (`Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida'), we agree that your Comprehensive Plan requires that and gives your - City Commission the authority to request additional information to review that and to request that from us. We presented that and we are reviewing that with Staff and that will go forward to City Commission. We don't believe at this point that that is an item before you today, and we recognize that you want to look at that with the Special Exceptions and the Site Plan before you. We don't believe that Fiscal Impact Analysis (`Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & Economic Impact Study of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida') is before you today. We do believe that properly addresses the development we are currently proposing has been revised for the development we are proposing and has been submitted in accordance with the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and will proceed forward to the City Commission as your Comprehensive Plan says. So, again we would request that Item `600' be addressed as it is presented to you and we are here to answer any questions. We agree with Staff's recommendation and have all the professionals here to answer any questions you have in regard to the Site Development Plan that is proposed in Item `600'." Discussion. "I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE REJECT THE APPLICANT'S APPLICATION FOR ITEM `600'." MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER CASMAN. CHAIRMAN POE ASKED, "IS THAT BASED UPON THAT WE DENIED SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ?" BOARD MEMBER CASMAN REPLIED, "WE CAN ADD THAT — BASED ON THE FACT THAT WE REJECTED ITEM `500'." SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS. DISCUSSION. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 13, 2010 (RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 6, 2010) PAGE 23 OF 23 REFERENCING THE "FISCAL NEUTRALITY ANALYSIS & ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY OF TOWN PARKE IN WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA ", BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ ADDED, "I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GET A CLARIFICATION BACK ON THAT ITEM." Q! MR. STEVENSON REPLIED, "WE WILL REVIEW THAT AT YOUR NEXT MEETING, WHAT THE OUTCOME WAS." VOTE: BOARD MEMBER KARR: AYE VICE CHAIRMAN POE: AYE BOARD MEMBER SCHWARZ: AYE BOARD MEMBER PHILLIPS: AYE BOARD MEMBER CASMAN: AYE MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT Vice Chairman Poe adjourned the Regular Meeting at 9:47 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: JOAN L. BROWN DEPUTY CITY CLERK APPROVED: WILLIAM H. POE, VICE CHAIRMAN PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD /LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY NOTE: These Minutes were approved at the , 2010 Planning And Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency Regular Meeting.