4524 Rezone 2901 W. 1st St. Transit Properties LLCOrdinance No. 4524
An ordinance of the City of Sanford, Florida relating to
the rezoning of approximately 12.37 acres of real
property located at 2901 West 1st Street (Tax Parcel
Identification Number 26-19-30-5AE-4900-0000) to create
the Sanford/SR 46 Planned Development (PD) (map of
the property attached); rezoning the property to a PD,
zoning district/classification master plan; providing for
approval of the Sanford/SR 46 PD Master Plan;
providing for the taking of implementing administrative
actions; providing for conflicts; providing for
severability; providing for non -codification and
providing for an effective date.
Whereas, Transit Properties, LLC, is the owner of certain real property which
land totals approximately 12.37 acres in size consisting of 5 vacant parcels, which real
property is located at 2901 West 1st Street and is assigned Tax Parcel Identification
Number 26-19-30-5AE-4900-0000 by the Property Appraiser of Seminole County; and
and
Whereas, the sole manager of Transit Properties, LLC is Kevin M. Wydra;
Whereas, the applicant on behalf of the property owner is Reginald Wallace
with DeBartolo Development, LLC; and
Whereas, the property is located on the south side of State Road 46 (West
1st Street) between Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard and West Airport Boulevard; and
Whereas, the City Commission enacted Ordinance Number 4007 on
September 11, 2006 annexing the real property into the City and on October 12, 2015,
the City Commission enacted Ordinance Number 4353 with an associated
Development Order Number 15-15 that rezoned the 12.37 acre property from RI -1,
Restricted Industrial, and SR1-A, Single Family Residential, establishing a mixed use
Planned Development with a split of uses providing for commercial development along
11Par v
State Road 46 (West 1St Street) with multiple family residential on the southern portion
of the real property; and
Whereas, at the time of the original PD adoption, the site was approved with
an floor area ratio (FAR) of 2.0 and a maximum of 50 dwelling units per acre as it was
running concurrent with City/County discussion of establishing a Transit Oriented
Design (TOD) corridor, but the regulations for a TOD were never adopted, but, pursuant
the executed Development Order Number 15-15 and Article IV, Section 4.3(G) of the
City's Land Development Regulations (LDRs), the PD expired 3 years from the date of
the original approval; and
Whereas, the City amended Article IV of the City's LDRs as it relates to
projects previously approved and the amendment would extend PDs which relate to
TOD or had elements of the development, which pertained to a TOD until April 1, 2020;
l+ f
Whereas, the City's Planning and Zoning Commission (P&ZC), as the City's
local planning agency, held a public hearing on September 19, 2019 to consider
amending the zoning district/classification assigned to the property and recommended
approval of the proposed PD for the subject property as requested by the Property
Owner; and
Whereas, the Citizen's Awareness Participation Plan (CAPP) requirements of
the City relative to the proposed PD rezoning action set forth herein have been met by
the applicant to the satisfaction of the City and the CAPP procedures of the City have
been adhered to and honored with the applicant holding a CAPP meeting on August 25,
2015 relative to the prior PD rezoning action and the applicant has communicated with
21Page
the adjacent property owners as part of a modified CAPP process with the current
process; and
Whereas, the City's Planning and Development Services Department has
conducted a thorough review and analysis of the demands upon public facilities and
general planning and land development issues should the subject application be
approved and has otherwise reviewed and evaluated the application to determine
whether it comports with sound and generally accepted land use planning practices and
principles as well as whether the application is consistent with the goals, objectives and
policies set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan and determined that the proposed
PD rezoning action set forth herein is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan
and the controlling provisions of State law; and
Whereas, the real property is not within a Planning Sub Area of the 2015
Seminole County/City of Sanford Joint Planning Agreement (JPA); and
Whereas, the pertinent goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive
Plan support the approval of the SANFORD/SR 46 PD rezoning action set forth herein;
MM
Whereas, additionally, this Ordinance is enacted pursuant to the home rule
powers of the City of Sanford as set forth at Article VIII, Section 2, of the Constitution of
the State of Florida; Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, and other applicable controlling law;
Ems
Whereas, the City Commission of the City of Sanford has taken all actions
relating to the Sanford/SR 46 PD rezoning action set forth herein in accordance with the
requirements and procedures mandated by State law.
3 1 P a
Now, therefore, be in enacted by the People of the City of Sanford, Florida.
Section 1. Legislative findings and intent.
(a). The City Commission of the City of Sanford hereby adopts and
incorporates into this Ordinance, as legislative findings and intent, the above recitals
(whereas clauses) and the City staff report and City Commission agenda memorandum
relating to the SANFORD/SR 46 PD rezoning action set forth herein.
(b). The approval set forth in this Ordinance is subject to the specific
conditions that are set forth subsequently in this Ordinance and the Property Owner has
agreed that no requirement herein lacks an essential nexus to a legitimate public
purpose and is not roughly proportionate to the impacts of the proposed use that the
City seeks to avoid, minimize, or mitigate.
Section 2. Rezoning of real property/implementing actions; Sanford/SR
(a), Upon enactment of this Ordinance the property, as depicted in the map
attached to this Ordinance shall be rezoned from the zoning classification resulting from
a separate and distinct Sanford/SR 46 PD consistent with the provisions of this
Ordinance.
(b). The City Manager, or designee, is hereby authorized to execute any
documents necessary to formalize approval of the SANFORD/SR 46 PD rezoning
action set forth herein action taken herein with regard to the Sanford/SR 46 PD and to
revise and amend the Official Zoning Map or Maps of the City of Sanford as may be
appropriate to accomplish the action taken in this Ordinance.
(c). The conditions to be incorporated into the pertinent development order
relating to the action taken in this Ordinance include the following:
4iPage
(1). Pursuant to Section 4.3.G of the Land Development Code of
the City of Sanford, this SANFORD/SR 46 PD rezoning action set forth
herein shall expire 3 years from the effective date of this Ordinance if all
improvements have not been completed or an extension granted.
(2). All development shall be generally consistent with the
Sanford/SR 46 Master Plan, received June 6, 2019 by the City, as
determined by City staff, unless otherwise specifically set forth in any
associated development order; provided, however, that all subsequent
development orders shall be consistent with the provisions of this
Ordinance which Master Plan has added commercial parcel to the
concept plan (which is attached hereto as an exhibit to this Ordinance),
included a pedestrian and vehicular connection between the commercial
and residential parcels, provided a 70' wide building setback along the
east and south property lines for buildings over 35' in height, reduced the
maximum FAR for the commercial to 0.5, and decreased the maximum
height to 35' for the commercial and 70' (4 -story maximum) for the
residential part of the development.
(3). All land use activities conducted on site shall be in
accordance with Schedule "B", Permitted Uses, of the City's LDRs for the
GC -2, General Commercial, zoning district with the additional permitted
use of multiple family residential in the areas depicted on the Sanford/SR
46 Master Plan.
51Pace
(4). All activities shall be conducted indoors and no vehicular
uses shall be permitted.
(5). Light source setback shall be no less than 75% of the width
of the buffer depicted along the property lines of the parcel or any
outparcel.
(6). Hardscape elements that complement the overall site layout
and architecture shall be provided as follows:
(i). Architecturally compatible wing walls on all monument
signs fronting West 1St Street (State Road 46) and Martin Luther
King Jr. Boulevard.
(ii). An architecturally compatible knee wall located between
any surface parking and West 1St Street (State Road 46).
(iii). Hardscape elements including decorative pavers, colored
concrete and/or stamped concrete deemed acceptable by the City
Commission shall be provided at the primary entrances and
pedestrian nodes within the development.
(iv). Established pedestrian connectivity as required between
parcels shall be appropriately defined and delineated with landscaping
and hardscaping similar to that which is installed at the pedestrian
nodes and entrances noted above.
(7). A comprehensive signage program meeting the standards of
the LDRs shall be required for the entire development including, but not
limited to, the commercial and multiple family residential uses.
61Pa
(8). Cross access easements shall be provided such that all
parcels within the Sanford/SR 46 PD can be accessed internally and shall
provide for future connectivity to adjacent parcels in appropriate locations
to maximize infrastructure, reduce impacts on adjacent roadways and limit
the number of driveways onto the external road systems.
(9). Unless specifically requested and approved on the
Sanford/SR 46 Master Plan or the associated SANFORD/SR 46 PD
development order, all development shall comply with:
(i). The Multiple Family Housing Design Guidelines within
Schedule "E", Section 16.0, of the City's LDRs.
(ii). All setback and buffer requirements set forth in the JPA,
as may be applicable to the project; provided, however, that:
(A). The setback on State Road 46 shall be 25' for
the residential development and 15' for commercial
development with a minimum landscape buffer of 15 feet'.
(B). With regard to Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
a landscape buffer, 10' in width, shall be installed and
maintained for both residential development and commercial
development, with a setback of 10' for commercial
development and 25' for residential development (subject to
any and all conditions that may be applicable relative to the
property line, water line and the easements placed upon the
subject PD property).
71Pa
(C). Interior lot lines can be established at 10' (5 feet
on either side) to facilitate for more interconnected sites.
(D). All areas where the buffers are reduced from
standards shall have enhanced landscaping as approved by
the City.
(E). The concept plan provided by the application
shall be a condition of approval as set forth herein.
(iii). All commercial elements of the development shall be in
accordance with Schedule "G", Architectural Design Standards, of
the City's LDRs.
(10). A preliminary subdivision plan and subdivision improvement
plan shall be submitted and subject to approval by the City with all
construction activity being subject to approval by the City, and a
subsequent subdivision plat being reviewed, approved and recorded, in
accordance with the provisions of Chapter 177, Florida Statutes, prior to
the issuance of any certificates of occupancy.
(11). A decorative and functional fountain shall be installed in all
wet retention ponds as part of development approval which approval shall
provide for ongoing maintenance requirements and responsibilities upon
the appropriate party, but not the City.
(12). A dog walk area with waste collection receptacles shall be
provided by the Property Owner in a common amenity area.
(13). All requirements relating to tree mitigation as established in
Schedule "J" of the City's LDRs shall be met prior to development of the
site.
(14). Development plans including final plats shall note and
stipulate that the subject property is located in the Westside Industry and
Commerce District (WIC) under the City's Comprehensive Plan and
LDRs. The WIC allows commercial and industrial uses. Commercial and
industrial uses may be developed in proximity to the property subject to
then existing LDRs of the City.
(15). Stormwater design requirements may be increased by the
City if warranted on the basis of technical requirements and generally
accepted engineering practices and principles and the stormwater system
shall be constructed to urban design standards, as approved by the City.
(16). Any proposed residential component shall submit to and
shall obtain a school capacity availability letter of determination (SCALD)
and a school impact analysis (SIA) used to determine school impact fees
and proportionate share mitigation as deemed necessary for a proposed
development prior to final engineering approval and issuance of any
permits.
(17). The following design elements will be considered during the
development plan review process of each building and surrounding
infrastructure:
(i). Site improvements may include the incorporation of low
impact development (oftentimes referred to as "LID") techniques and
crime prevention through environmental design (oftentimes referred
to as "CPTED") guidelines.
(ii). Elements of buildings may be constructed incorporating
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (oftentimes referred
to as "LEED"), Florida Green, or such other equivalent energy
savings standards as may be approved by the City.
(18). With regard to the right of way status of Bevier Road,
located to the west of the property and east of Martin Luther King Jr.
Boulevard; City Ordinance Number 2015-4359 to an action to vacate
the 30' wide Bevier Road Right of Way, but the information on
Seminole County base maps indicates that 15' of the right of way
was granted to the Property Owner on the east and the other 15'
was vested in the property ownership on the west side, which
appears to have been Seminole County. Thus, this approval is
subject to all property vesting in the Property Owner and no
construction shall be permitted within an established easement or
other property owned lands unless otherwise vacated or lines
relocated, etc. In that respect, an existing 10" water main runs north -
south along the west property line of the PD Property, which is
located within an easement, 30' in width, as described in Ordinance
Number 2015-4359. Thus, any reduced setback on the western
10 1 P a < w
property line with any improvements, including landscaping and
vertical construction not occurring within the easement. The exact
location of the line must, accordingly, be confirmed by an
underground utility survey provided by the Property Owner during
Development Review with the possible relocation being subject to
City approval.
(19). If City staff and the Property Owner is unable to agree to
the details of these conditions, in any way, the matter will be
submitted to the City Commission, for resolution at a public hearing,
and the matter will be adjudicated by means of a development order
or denial development order relating thereto without a
recommendation being provided by the Planning and Zoning
Commission..
Section 3. Incorporation of map and SANFORD/SR 46 PD Master Plan for
Sanford/SR 46 PD.
The map attached to this Ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed and
incorporated into this Ordinance as a substantive part of this Ordinance amending the
Sanford/SR 46 PD.
Section 4. Conflicts.
All ordinances or part of ordinances in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby
repealed. City staff shall harmonize the approval and actions set forth herein together
which those taken relative to the Sanford/SR 46 PD with all past actions of the City
relative to the property being hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 5. Severability.
111Pa,a e
If any section, sentence, phrase, word, or portion of this Ordinance is determined
to be invalid, unlawful or unconstitutional, said determination shall not be held to
invalidate or impair the validity, force or effect of any other section, sentence, phrase,
word, or portion of this Ordinance not otherwise determined to be invalid, unlawful, or
unconstitutional.
Section 6. Non -codification; Implementation.
(a). This Ordinance shall be not be codified in the City Code of the City of
Sanford or the Land Development Code of the City of Sanford; provided, however, that
the actions taken herein shall be depicted on the zoning maps of the City of Sanford by
the City Manager, or designee.
(b). The City Manager, or designee, shall implement the provisions of this
Ordinance by means of a non -statutory development agreement which shall be
executed by the Property Owner, or their successor(s) in interest within 60 days of the
effective date of this Ordinance or the Sanford/SR 46 PD property's zoning
classification shall revert to an un -zoned property status.
Attest:
Section 7. Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon enactment.
Passed and adopted this 28th day of October, 2019.
City Commissiono the City of
Sanford, Florida
&0 /,kf X. A,/Y , ), 0 W �a�t
Traci Houchin, CMC, FCRM Jeff Triplett
City Clerk Ma
Approved as to form and legal sufficiency
t9*7 1 t
121Pag
William L. Colbert, City Attorney
131 P a g
Ci?
CITY COMMISSION MEMORANDUM 19.233
OCTOBER 28, 20"19 AGENDA
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission
PREPARED BY: Eileen Hinson, AICP — Development Services Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Norton N. Bonaparte, Jr., City Manager
SUBJECT: Rezone. 12.37 acres to establish standards for a PD, Planned Development
for a proposed Multiple Family Residential Development with a
Commercial outparcel at project address 2901 W. 1st Street.
STRATEGIC PRIORITIES:
❑ Unify Downtown & the Waterfront
❑ Promote the City's Distinct Culture
® Update Regulatory Framework
❑ Redevelop and Revitalize Disadvantaged Communities
SYNOPSIS:
Rezone 12.37 acres to establish standards for a PD, Planned Development for a proposed Multiple
Family Residential Development with a Commercial outparcel at project address 2901 W. 1 st
Street has been received.
The property owner is Transit Properties, LLC. The applicant is Reginald Wallace with DeBartolo
Development. A CAPP meeting was held on August 25, 2015 with the previous Rezone request.
The applicant has communicated with the adjacent property owners as part of a modified CAPP
process with the current Rezone request.
The Affidavit of Ownership and Designation of Agent forms are attached and other information is
available in order to ensure that all potential conflicts of interests are capable of being discerned.
FISCAL/STAFFING STATEMENT:
According to the Property Appraiser's records, the subject property is currently vacant. Based on
the 2018 property tax roll, the existing properties have an assessed value of $2,105,522. The total
tax bill for the property in 2018 was $40,338.54.
No additional staffing is anticipated if the PD Rezone is approved.
BACKGROUND:
The 12.37 acre site, consists of five vacant parcels and is located on the south side of SR 46 (W.
1st Street) between Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard and W. Airport Boulevard. The City
Commission adopted Ordinance No. 4007 on September 11, 2006 annexing the properties into the
City. On October 12, 2015, the City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 4353 with an associated
Development Order No. 15-15 that rezoned the 12.37 acre property from RI -1, Restricted
Industrial and SRI -A, Single Family Residential establishing a mixed use Planned Development
with a split of uses providing for commercial development along SR 46 (W. I` Street) with
multiple family residential on the southern portion of the property.
The underlying Future Land Use for the site is WIC, Westside Industry & Commerce, a mixed use
designation intended to promote the development or employment centers in the vicinity of the
West SR 46 corridor and the commuter rail station. The WIC designation permits both a vertical
and horizontal land use mix of industrial, commercial, office and residential with a maximum
intensity for commercial, office and industrial development at a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.50 and
a maximum residential density not to exceed 20 dwelling units per acre.
At the time of the PD adoption, the site was approved with a FAR of 2.0 and a maximum of 50
dwelling units per acre as it was running concurrent with City/County discussion of establishing a
Transit Oriented Design (TOD) corridor. The regulations for a TOD were not adopted. Pursuant
to the executed Development Order No. 15-15 and Article IV, Section 4.3(G) of the Land
Development Regulations, the Planned Development Zoning expired three years from the date of
the original approval.
At this time, the City is considering concurrent modifications to Article IV as it relates to two
projects previously approved under the above unadopted regulations. The proposed modification
would automatically extend any planned development order that has expired which relates to a
TOD or had elements of the development, which pertained to a TOD until April 1, 2020. The
language proposed to automatically extend an expired Planned Development with elements of
TOD is as follows:
"...any planned development order that has expired prior to the effective date of this
Ordinance and which related to a transit -oriented development (TOD) or had elements of the
development which pertained to a TOD, shall be automatically extended until April 1, 2020 within
which time the property owner may apply for a revision to the development order or implement
the development order, as previously approved; provided, however, that the densities and
intensities of the development order are approved if the development order is extended and shall
be approvable if an application is filed to revise the development order and the revised
development order is approved prior to April 1, 2020."
Per Policy FLU 1.12.1, new development shall be required to address infrastructure needs,
provisions of services, development phasing, development intensity and land use compatibility as
part of an integrated design scheme which includes very detailed strategies and techniques for
resolving development impacts. PD proposals in the WIC area may be subject to negotiated
development agreements and no development order shall be granted prior to approval by the City
of the development agreement.
As the site is located within one half mile of the Sanford SunRail station, the future development
of the PD should be designed to utilize TOD principles. A TOD is generally defined as a mixed -
used residential and commercial area designed to capitalize on access to public transit. It often
incorporates activities and design features proposed to generate ridership for a transit system. A
design that is safe, pedestrian friendly and convenient are critical aspects of a quality TOD
development that depend on having the right mix of land -use types, compact development and
properly designed parking locations.
The applicant is proposing to amend the PD and establish a PD Master Plan with entitlements to
include Multiple Family Residential (rental or sale), Assisted Living Facility (age restricted or
medical) and one commercial outparcel large enough for a single use consistent with those
permitted in the GC -2, General Commercial zoning district while eliminating the remainder of the
commercial outparcels which were previously approved. Although the Planned Development that
is being presented allocates various uses, it does not create a positive TOD development. TODs
come in various sizes and shapes but they share common elements which include the following:
TOD Elements
Compact ':" - Transit -supportive
�1
Development ��' �' ,�,F development:
medium to high
e
u density housing and
r �°
employment.
- TOD locations within
comfortable walking
distance of transit
station or stop
(approx. 1.4 mile).
- Diverse and
Mix of Uses
complementary
r J
high -activity uses,
iwmn'�m�+2ry ,wa.mx�n ,a�,wa �r �rr �„ r:
9i� such as retail,
w
�t t professional
services, housing and
� b "k. employment within
the central area of a
TOD and adjacent to
transit.
Pedestrian '' "r '° ' "� - Attractive pedestrian
Oriented �- ��`��� environment with
�4 street facing
buildings and a
network of
pedestrian -scaled
streets connecting
the transit stop or
station with the
TOD's commercial,
civic and residential
areas.
Transportation - Transit facilities -
Tnterfaces rail and bus stations
�_. and stops -tailored
Vol
to the level of transit
servic
Parking i
, - ing to
Q
accommodate transit
and TOD customers.
The development standards and thresholds proposed are provided in the table below. The
Sanford/SR 46 Master Plan also identifies deviations to Schedule E, Section 16.0 — Multiple
Family Housing Design Guidelines.
Development Required Difference
Standards
(Equivalent Std. Proposed o (�) Staff Recommendation
Zoning)
Setbacks:
A minimum 25 foot setback is
required in commercial zonings and
30 feet is required in multiple family
zonings. Staff recommends a
Front Yard
25 feet
15 feet
40% decrease
minimum setback to be equal to the
5t
(W.1 Street)
buffer as determined acceptable
and approved by the Commission.
Staff recommended 25 feet to the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
A minimum 25 foot setback is
required in commercial zonings and
30 feet is required in multiple family
zonings. Staff recommends a
Front Yard (MLK)
25 feet
10 feet
60% decrease
minimum setback to be equal to the
buffer as determined acceptable
and approved by the Commission.
Staff recommended 25 feet to the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
A minimum 20 foot setback is
required in commercial and multiple
family zonings. Staff recommends a
minimum 20 feet on any buildings
Side Yard (South)
20 feet
10 feet
50% and 90%
over 35 feet high and can support
decrease
10 feet for any structure less than
35 feet high. Staff recommended 20
feet to the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
The required setback is based on
the adjacent single family uses.
Minimum setback of 20 feet
required in multiple family and
commercial zonings without
adjacent residential. Staff
10 feet for buildings
recommends a minimum 50 feet
Rear Yard (East)
100 feet
35' high or less;
30% decrease
from the nearest residential
70' otherwise
property line regardless of building
ht. with a type one visual screen.
Staff supports the 70' setback from
the project property line for
buildings over 35' high with a type
one visual screen.
Recent approvals in PD's established
internal setbacks to be 10 feet
100%
combined (5 feet on each lot line,
Interior Lot Lines
20 feet
0 feet
decrease
landscaped). Staff recommends the
above as consistent with recent
approvals.
Buffers:
Front Yard
25 feet
1
15 feet
1
40% decrease
A minimum 25 foot buffer along SR
(W. V Street)
46 in the LDR and Comprehensive
Development Required Difference
Standards
(Equivalent Std. Proposed o (/) Staff Recommendation
Zoning)
The Urban Land Institute (ULI) is an independent and recognized organization in sustainable and
smart growth. ULI provides a multitude of national and international studies to substantiate
standards for a multitude of subjects. One such study is the fifth edition for "The Dimension of
Parking". Per the ULI, the parking for the residential with low turnover could be as low as 8'-6"
and for moderate turnover 9' and the recommended length of 18 feet. The proposed 9'x18' parking
dimensions is consistent with the ULI study for the multiple family residential use, which is a
Plan. Staff recommends a minimum
25 feet.
A minimum 25 foot buffer along SR
46 and adjacent rights of way for
properties within the gateway
corridor. Staff recommended 25
Front Yard (MLK)
25 feet
10 feet
60% decrease
feet to Planning and Zoning
Commission, but due to the excess
right of way, would support a
decrease.
Side Yard (South)
10 feet
10 feet
No deviation
Staff originally recommended a
minimum 50 feet with a type one
50 feet w/ Type 1 Visual
visual screen. Staff would
Rear Yard (East)
10 feet
90% decrease
recommend a minimum 20 foot
Screen
buffer in addition to the 30 foot
right of way separating the
residential to the east.
Recent approvals in PD's established
internal setbacks to be 10 feet
100%
combined (5 feet on each lot line,
Interior Lot Lines
--
0 feet
decrease
landscaped). Staff recommends the
above as consistent with recent
approvals.
Residential: 2 per unit;
Residential: 1.75 per
Residential
Staff recommends a mix of no less
10'x20'
o
than 50/ of the required minimum
Non -Residential
unit; 9'x18'
12.5%
at 10' x 20' (City standard) the
Parking:
Retail: 1/200 sf; 10'x20'
Non -Residential:
decrease
remainder and any overflow may be
Office: 1/200
General overall
Commercial:
9'x18'. Staff can support the ratios
Restaurant: 1/3 seats
1/250 sf; 9'x18'
Varies
proposed.
Staff recommended to the Planning
and Zoning Commission, no higher
than 50 feet internal and no greater
Building Height:
35'
70 feet
than 35 feet within 100 feet of any
single family residence. Staff can
now support consistent with the
above setbacks and buffers noted.
Anything over 20 DU/acre is not
consistent with the WIC Land Use;
however, concurrent modifications
10 to 20 dwelling units
15 to 30 dwelling
33.3%
to Article IV are being considered to
Density:
per acre
units per acre
increase
automatically extend any PD which
relates to a transit -oriented design
or had elements of TOD until April 1,
2020.
Floor Area Ratio:
0.50 maximum
0.20 min. to 0.50
No deviation
max.
The Urban Land Institute (ULI) is an independent and recognized organization in sustainable and
smart growth. ULI provides a multitude of national and international studies to substantiate
standards for a multitude of subjects. One such study is the fifth edition for "The Dimension of
Parking". Per the ULI, the parking for the residential with low turnover could be as low as 8'-6"
and for moderate turnover 9' and the recommended length of 18 feet. The proposed 9'x18' parking
dimensions is consistent with the ULI study for the multiple family residential use, which is a
moderate turnover use. However, the reduced parking dimensions for high turnover uses such as
the commercial uses proposed is inconsistent with Schedule H of the Land Development
Regulations.
A CAPP Meeting was held on August 27, 2019 as part of the PD Rezone request. A summary of
the CAPP meeting is attached to this report. In addition, staff has met with a concerned adjacent
neighbor, who has requested that the standards for Multiple Family to Single Family be enforced.
The property is not within a Planning Sub Area of the 2015 Seminole County/City of Sanford Joint
Planning Area. In addition, the project is located within the WIC future land use designation and
this and future approvals will include language noting that development permitted around the
subdivision may include higher intensity uses.
The applicant has modified the PD by increasing the residential and reducing commercial, but still
proposes to utilize the previously approved TOD Intensities and Densities. If approved, these
densities and intensities would be permitted to continue subject to the adoption of the
modifications to Article IV and relevant conditions in an associated Development Order.
Comprehensive Plan
Development with the Westside Industry and Commerce Future Land Use designation shall be
compatible with the goals and objectives identified in the Comprehensive Plan and consistent with
supportive research and analysis. Per Policy FLU 1. 12.1 of the Future Land Use Element of the
2030 Comprehensive Plan, PD proposals in the WIC area may be the subject of negotiated
development agreements. Staff has identified Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan
relevant to this application below:
Future Land Use Element
Objective 1.12: Promote Westside Industry and Commerce (WIC). The "Westside Industry and
Commerce" (WIC) area is a mixed use designation intended to promote the development of
employment centers in the vicinity of the West SR 46 corridor and the commuter rail station. The
corridor's proximity to I-4 as well as SR 417 and the SunRail commuter line provides access to
Regional markets and a substantial labor force. The CSX Main Rail Line also provides a
transportation amenity of Regional significance.
The proposed development does not generate or promote an employment center, but will provide
residential housing to support other centers of employment.
Policy 1.12.1 Establish parameters for development within the WIC. The WIC designation shall
be limited to that area of Sanford generally bound by the CSX railroad to the north and SR 417 to
the south. The WIC designation permits both a vertical and horizontal land use mix of commercial,
office, residential, and the maximum intensity for commercial, office, and industrial development as
a floor area ratio is 0.50. The residential density shall be a minimum of 10 dwelling units per acre
and a maximum of 20 dwelling units per acre, where compatible with adjacent uses.
New development shall be required to address infrastructure needs, provision of services,
development phasing, development intensity and land use compatibility as part of an integrated
design scheme which includes very detailed strategies and techniques for resolving development
impacts. PD proposals in the WIC area may be the subject of negotiated development agreements.
Distribution of specific densities and intensities for this district shall be in accordance the table below:
Westside Industry
WIC
0.50 FAR
0.50 FAR
10 / 20 du/acre
& Commerce
15%150%
30%175%
10%140%
No development order shall be granted prior to approval by the City of the development agreement.
All new development in the Westside Industry and Commerce Area shall comply with the
performance criteria outlined in Policy FLU 1.1.7, as well as the following:
• Requirements and procedures for obtaining a WIC mixed use Future Land Use
Map designation and appropriate zoning;
• Standards for controlled access and internal circulation, including cross access
easements and joint use of driveways;
• Development standards for Gateway Corridor Development Districts, including
requirements for buffer yards, landscaping, and screening, off-street parking,
and signage; and
• Planning and management criteria regulating the land use mix, intensity, and
qualitative standards for assuring land use compatibility and consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan.
The residential density threshold proposed is inconsistent with the established parameters
of development within the WIC land use. The mix of uses proposed is 17.1 % commercial
and 82.9% multiple family residential. In addition, the proposed setback and buffer
reductions, primarily along W. I" Street (SR 46) do not meet the development standards of
the Gateway Corridor or comply with the performance criteria noted in the policy.
Modifications to Article IV, Land Development Regulations regarding TOD Intensities and
Densities has been proposed and is being presented to the Commissions for review.
Policy FLU 1.1.4: Promote Orderly Land Use Transition. Where it is infeasible or undesirable
to physically separate residential from non-residential land uses, buffering shall be required to
promote a smooth land use transition. Buffering may take the form of:
• physical separation such as distance (building setbacks), vegetative berms, hedges or other
landscape cover; walls or fences aesthetically designed for screening purposes; and open
space systems with dense native vegetation and tree canopy; and/or
• the development of a transitional use between the incompatible uses (such as low intensity
office development between general retail commercial centers and residential areas).
Schedule .J Landscape, Buffer and Tree Requirements has established Land Use Compatibility
Standards. If a multiple story multi family building is proposed adjacent to an existing single
family, it is required to have a 100 foot setback and a 50 foot buffer with a 6 foot high block wall.
The adjacent neighbor is requesting to maintain the 6' wall but is flexible on the depth of the
setback and buffer. The project as proposed includes a 6' wall with a 10' buffer between the
existing single family and multi family buildings as well as along the north side of the retention
pond. A 6' aluminum picket fence with a 10' buffer is proposed between the retention pond and
the single family residences to the east.
Policy FLU 1.1.16: Provide Access to Goods and Services and Protect Residential Areas from
the Adverse Impacts of Transition in Land Use. Residential land uses shall be protected from
encroachment by incompatible nonresidential development. This policy does not preclude
necessary community facilities from locating within residential areas when such activities satisfy
established criteria of this plan and the City's LDRs. Any potential adverse impacts caused by
non-residential land uses shall be minimized by landscaping, including vegetated berms with tree
canopy, and other appropriate screening and buffering techniques. These landscaping techniques
shall be incorporated into the design of new or redeveloping non-residential projects located
adjacent to existing or planned residential development. Similarly, perimeter landscaping
techniques shall be applied in multiple family residential developments in order to appropriately
screen and buffer existing and planned single family home sites from residential development
having differing structure types and density.
Minimal buffer areas are being provided for perimeter landscaping between the multiple family
residential and the existing single family. Reduced screening and buffers are proposed along the
existing single family home sites not meeting minimum code requirements.
Policy FLU 1.1.13: Reinforce and Enhance the City's Community Appearance. The City shall
reinforce and enhance the City's community appearance requiring new development and
redevelopment to incorporate the following principles into site plans and be required as a condition
of development approval:
• Landscaping.
• Visual Screening and Buffers.
• Open Space Preservation.
• Signage.
• Screening.
• Scenic Views.
• Structure Appearance.
• Historic Compatibility.
The reduced buffers, landscaping and setbacks do not meet the intent of the Gateway Corridor
standards and open space provisions for Multiple Family residential.
Transportation Element
Policy 2-1.3.5: Assess Traffic Impacts of New Developments. The City shall require the submittal
of a traffic impact study for new development that is anticipated to generate at least 500 daily trips,
100 peak -hour trips, or at the discretion of City Staff.
The proposed PD Rezone is estimating a maximum trip generation rate of 4,040 daily trips and a
minimum trip generation rate of 2,79 7 daily trips. A traffic impact study has not been provided to
date to determine impacts on the surrounding road systems.
Infrastructure Element
Policy 4-1.1.1: Enforce General Performance Standards. The City of Sanford shall maintain land
development regulations that include performance standards requiring that public facilities be
provided concurrent with the impacts of new development. The City shall enforce performance
standards ensuring that the location, scale, timing and design of development shall be coordinated
with public facilities and services in order to prevent the proliferation of urban sprawl and achieve
cost effective land development patterns.
Water, sewer and reclaimed water would be provided by the City of Sanford for the proposed
PD.
Policy 4-2.4.2: Require Reclaimed Water Connection. All new development shall be required to
hook up to the existing central water and wastewater system and reclaimed water system.
Irrigation on the subject site would be provided by the City of Sanford reclaim service.
Conservation Element
Policy 5-1.2.4: Regulate Wastewater Treatment Discharge to Preserve Water Quality. The City
of Sanford shall incorporate the following performance standards in order to protect water quality:
a. All new residential subdivisions as well as multiple family and nonresidential development
within the City of Sanford which are served by existing or planned future expansions to
the City of Sanford wastewater collection and disposal system shall be required to connect
to the public wastewater system.
The proposed development will be connected to City sewer.
Policy 5-1.2.7. Protect Floridan and Surficial Aquifer Recharge Areas and Public Wellfields.
The City shall prohibit mining, resource extraction, junkyards, outdoor storage of hazardous
material and waste in "most effective" recharge areas. The City shall also incorporate aquifer
recharge standards which regulate excavating groundwater runoff, as well as changes in
topography and shall restrict the amount of impermeable surface allowed within effective recharge
areas. The regulations shall be designed to mandate retention of open space in recharge areas in
order to preserve the quality and quantity of groundwater resources within the surficial and deep
aquifers.
The proposed PD is not located within a well field protection zone or aquifer recharge area.
Establishing a PD Master Plan to include a 17.1 % commercial and 82.9% multiple family
residential mix with a proposed maximum density of 30 dwelling units per acre in residential areas
and 0.5 FAR for the commercial outparcel is not consistent with the standards established by the
Comprehensive Plan for the Westside Industry and Commerce; however, concurrent modifications
to Article IV are being considered to automatically extend any PD which relates to a transit -
oriented design or had elements of TOD until April 1, 2020. Per Policy FLU 1. 12.1 PD proposals
in the WIC area may be the subject of negotiated development agreements, which can further
address these variations.
Due to a lack of quorum at the September 5, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the
item was continued to a special Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on September 19, 2019.
At the September 19, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, citizen participation during
the public hearing included concerns relating to traffic impacts and the types of businesses
potentially proposed. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning and Zoning
Commission's actions were as follows:
Ms. Greene made a motion to recommend the City Commission deny the request to amend
a 12.37 -acre PD, Planned Development to establish a proposed Multiple Family
Residential Development with a Commercial outparcel at 2901 W. 1st Street based on
pages three through five of the staff report, specifically the reduced setbacks, buffers and
lack of TOD elements. Ms. Buie seconded the motion, which carried 6 to 0.
Following the motion, Mr. Mills requested the board call for a reconsideration of the action.
Ms. Greene motioned to reconsider the vote. Ms. Buie seconded the motion, which carried
6to0.
Ms. Greene then moved to recommend the City Commission deny the request to rezone
12.37 acres to establish standards for a PD, Planned Development for a proposed Multiple
Family Residential Development with a Commercial outparcel at 2901 W. 1St Street citing
the same deficiencies as the previous motion.
Ms. Buie seconded the motion, which carried 5 to 1. Mr. Mills opposed the
recommendation to deny.
Since the September 19, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the applicant has
modified the PD Master Plan and associated concept plan to more accurately reflect the
development program and provide TOD elements based on feedback from staff and
comments/concerns expressed by the Planning and Zoning Commission board members. The
notable modifications are as follows:
• Added commercial parcel to the concept plan
• Included a pedestrian and vehicular connection between the commercial and residential
parcels
• Provided a 70' building setback along the east and south property lines for buildings over
35' in height
• Reduced the maximum FAR for the commercial to 0.5
• Decreased the maximum height to 35' for the commercial and 70' (4 -story max) for the
residential
Staff has adjusted some of the recommendations within the table provided to the Planning and
Zoning Commission to reflect their recommendation on these changes.
On October 14, 2019, the City Commission held a public hearing to consider the first reading of
Ordinance 4524. At the hearing, the Commission and the applicant discussed modifications to the
Master Plan. After conducting the public hearing, the City Commission approved the first reading
of the ordinance, subject to the following:
1. The setback on SR 46 shall be 25 feet for the residential and 15 feet for the commercial
with a minimum landscape buffer of 15 feet for both.
2. The setback and buffer for both residential and commercial on Martin Luther King Jr.
Boulevard shall be 15 feet.
3. The interior lot lines can be established at 10 feet (5 feet on either side) to facilitate for
more interconnected sites.
4. All areas where the buffers are reduced from standards shall have enhanced landscaping.
5. The concept plan shall be tied to the approval.
As directed at the meeting, staff researched the Right of Way status of Bevier Road, located to the
west of the property and east of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. City Ordinance 2015-4359,
vacated the 30 foot Bevier Road Right of Way. The information on Seminole County base maps
indicate that 15 feet of the right of way was granted to the Transit Property on the east and the
other 15 feet went to the property on the west, which appears to have been Seminole County. It is
the understanding of staff that the applicant is in pursuit of obtaining the remainder of the 30 foot
right of way, currently under the control of Seminole County.
In addition, an existing 10 inch water main runs north -south along the west property line of the
Transit Property, which is located within a 30 foot easement as outlined in the vacate ordinance.
The applicant has requested a reduced setback on the western property line. A zoning setback may
be established as part of the PD as deemed appropriate by the City Commission; however, any
improvements, including landscaping and vertical construction will be restricted from occurring
within the easement. The exact location of the line will need to be confirmed by an underground
utility survey to be provided by the applicant during Development Review. The applicant may
work with the utility department to possibly relocate the line as the Utility Department deems
appropriate.
Based on the discussion of the Commission, the following condition regarding Bevier Road should
be considered:
1. A minimum (10 or 15 or 25) foot setback shall be required for the west property line
along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard for both residential and commercial uses;
however, no construction shall be permitted with an established easement unless
otherwise vacated or lines relocated.
LEGAL REvmw:
The City Attorney has reviewed the staff report and has noted the following: Section 166.033,
Florida Statutes, provides as follows (please note emphasized text):
"(1) When reviewing an application for a development permit that is certified by a professional
listed in s. 403.0877, a municipality may not request additional information from the
applicant more than three times, unless the applicant waives the limitation in writing. Before
a third request for additional information, the applicant must be offered a meeting to attempt
to resolve outstanding issues. Except as provided in subsection (4), if the applicant believes
the request for additional information is not authorized by ordinance, rule, statute, or other
legal authority, the municipality, at the applicant's request, shall proceed to process the
application for approval or denial.
(2) When a municipality denies an application for a development permit, the municipality
shall give written notice to the applicant. The notice must include a citation to the
applicable portions of an ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority for the denial
of the permit.
(3) As used in this section, the term "development permit" has the same meaning as in s.
163.3164, but does not include building pen -nits.
(4) For any development permit application filed with the municipality after July 1, 2012, a
municipality may not require as a condition of processing or issuing a development permit
that an applicant obtain a permit or approval from any state or federal agency unless the
agency has issued a final agency action that denies the federal or state permit before the
municipal action on the local development permit.
(5) Issuance of a development permit by a municipality does not in any way create any right on
the part of an applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create
any liability on the part of the municipality for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails
to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency
or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. A municipality shall
attach such a disclaimer to the issuance of development permits and shall include a permit
condition that all other applicable state or federal permits be obtained before
commencement of the development.
(6) This section does not prohibit a municipality from providing information to an applicant
regarding what other state or federal permits may apply."
The above -referenced definition of the term "development permit" is as follows:
"(16) 'Development permit' includes any building permit, zoning permit, subdivision approval,
rezoning, certification, special exception, variance, or any other official action of local
government having the effect of permitting the development of land." (Section
163.3164(16), Florida Statutes).
Thus, if this application is denied, a denial development order must be issued which must cite to
the applicable portions of each ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority supporting the
denial of the application. For example, if a goal, objective or policy of the Sanford Comprehensive
Plan were to be the basis for a denial, then such goal, objective or policy must be part of the motion
proposing the denial. A denial development order would be drafted to implement the actions of
the Planning and Zoning Commission in the event of such occurrence. Accordingly, any motion
to deny must state, with particularity, the basis for the proposed denial.
The term "development order" is defined as follows and, as can be seen, refers to the "granting,
denying, or granting with conditions [of] an application"
"(15) `Development order' means any order granting, denying, or granting with conditions an
application for a development permit." (Section 163.3164(15), Florida Statutes).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommended that the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the request to Rezone the
12.37 acres to establish the standards proposed on the PD Master Plan at 2901 W. 1 st Street based
on the fact that the standards proposed do not meet the minimum requirements to protect the
existing adjacent and proximate residential properties, the proposed reduced buffers within the
Gateway Corridor, and the lack of mixed use components within the Westside Industry and
Commerce Land Use Category. Transit Oriented Design components are also not being reflected
in this layout.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Commission deny the request to
rezone 12.37 acres to establish standards for a PD, Planned Development for a proposed Multiple
Family Residential Development with a Commercial outparcel at 2901 W. 1St Street based on pages
three through five of the staff report, specifically the reduced setbacks, buffers and lack of TOD
elements.
At this time, staff recommends the City Commission conduct a public hearing to determine if the
proposed rezoning to establish standards for a PD, Planned Development for a proposed Multiple
Family Residential Development with a Commercial outparcel at 2901 W. 1St Street is consistent
with the goals, objectives and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
If after conducting a public hearing, the City Commission finds the request meets the required
standards for consideration and is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the City's
Comprehensive Plan, the following conditions should be considered to accompany the approval in
a Development Order to be recorded in the Seminole County Public Records:
1. Pursuant to Section 4.3.G of the Land Development Regulations (LDR) of the City of
Sanford, this rezoning shall expire 3 years from the effective date of this Ordinance if all
improvements have not been completed or an extension granted.
2. All development shall be consistent with the Sanford/SR 46 Master Plan, received June 6,
2019, unless otherwise specifically set forth in any associated development order;
provided, however, that all subsequent development orders shall be consistent with the
provisions of this Ordinance
3. Unless specifically requested and approved on the Sanford/SR 46 Master Plan or the
associated development order, any required elements missing from or not shown on the PD
Master Plan shall otherwise comply with the City's Land Development Regulations, LDR.
4. All development shall be designed, generally consistent Concept Plan presented as
part of this public hearing, such that any dispute shall be resolved by the Planning
and Zoning Commission, after a public hearing, by means of a development order or
denial development order relating thereto.
5. A minimum (10 or 15 or 25) foot setback shall be required for the west property line
along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard for both residential and commercial uses;
however, no construction shall be permitted with an established easement unless
otherwise vacated or lines relocated.
6. The setback on SR 46 shall be 25 feet for the residential and 15 feet for the
commercial with a minimum landscape buffer of 15 feet for both.
7. The interior lot lines shall be a minimum five (5) feet on each side to facilitate for
more interconnected sites.
8. Any areas within the PD where the buffers are reduced from established standards
shall have enhanced landscaping.
9. All land use activities conducted on site shall be in accordance with Schedule B —
Permitted uses, Sanford LDR for the GC-2, General Commercial zoning district with the
additional permitted use of multiple family residential in the areas depicted on the plan.
All activities shall be conducted indoors and no vehicular uses shall be permitted.
10. Light source setback shall be no less than 75 percent the width of the buffer depicted along
the property lines of the parcel or outparcel.
11. Hardscape elements that complement the overall site layout and architecture shall be
provided as follows:
a. Architecturally compatible wing walls on all monument signs fronting W. 1St Street
(SR 46) and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard.
b. An architecturally compatible knee wall located between any surface parking and
W. 1St Street (SR 46).
c. Hardscape elements including decorative pavers, colored concrete and/or stamped
concrete deemed acceptable by the City Commission shall be provided at the primary
entrances and pedestrian nodes within the development.
d. Established pedestrian connectivity as required between parcels shall be appropriately
defined and delineated with landscaping and hardscaping similar to that which is
installed at the pedestrian nodes and entrances noted above.
12. A comprehensive signage program meeting the standards of the Land Development
Regulations shall be required for the entire development including, but not limited to, the
commercial and multiple family residential uses.
13. Cross Access easements shall be provided such that all parcels within the PD can be
accessed internally and shall provide for future connectivity to adjacent parcels in
appropriate locations to maximize infrastructure, reduce impacts on adjacent roadways and
limit the number of driveways onto the external road systems.
14. Unless specifically requested and approved on the Sanford/SR 46 Master Plan or the
associated PD Development Order, all development shall comply with:
a. The Multiple Family Housing Design Guidelines within Schedule E, Section 16.0
of the City's LDR.
b. All setback and buffer requirements set forth in the Sanford — Seminole County
JPA, as they apply to this project.
c. All commercial elements of the development shall be in accordance with Schedule
G — Architectural Design Standards, of the City's Land Development Regulations
as defined therein.
15. A preliminary subdivision plan and subdivision improvement plan shall be submitted and
subject to approval by the City with all construction activity being subject to approval by
the City, and a subsequent subdivision plat being reviewed, approved and recorded, in
accordance with the provisions of Chapter 177, Florida Statutes, prior to the issuance of
any certificates of occupancy.
16. A decorative and functional fountain shall be installed in all wet retention ponds as part of
development approval which approval shall provide for ongoing maintenance requirements
and responsibilities upon the appropriate party, but not the City.
17. A dog walk area with waste collection receptacles shall be provided by the Property Owner
in a common amenity area.
18. All requirements relating to tree mitigation as established in Schedule J of the City's LDR
shall be met prior to development of the site.
19. Development Plans including Final Plats shall note and stipulate that the subject property
is located in the Westside Industry and Commerce District (WIC) under the City's
Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations. This district allows commercial
and industrial uses. Commercial and industrial uses may be developed in proximity to the
property subject to then existing planning and zoning codes and ordinances and land
development regulations of the City of Sanford.
20. Stormwater design requirements may be increased by the City if warranted on the basis of
technical requirements and generally accepted engineering practices and principles. The
stormwater system shall be constructed to urban design standards, as approved by the City.
21. Any proposed residential component shall submit for and obtain a School Capacity
Availability Letter of Determination (SCALD) and a School Impact Analysis (SIA) used
to determine school impact fees and Proportionate Share Mitigation as deemed necessary
for a proposed Development prior to final engineering approval and issuance of any
permits.
22. The following design elements will be considered during the development plan review
process of each building and surrounding infrastructure:
a. Site improvements may include the incorporation of low impact development
(oftentimes referred to as "LID") techniques and crime prevention through
environmental design (oftentimes referred to as "CPTED") guidelines.
b. Elements of buildings may be constructed incorporating Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (oftentimes referred to as "LEED"), Florida Green, or such
other equivalent energy savings standards as may be approved by the City.
23. Any dispute relative to the aforementioned matters shall be resolved by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, after a public hearing, by means of a development order or denial
development order relating thereto.
A
If after conducting a public hearing, the City Commission finds the request is not consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan, a motion to recommend denial shall be made citing the specific sections
with which the inconsistency is found. Specific Comprehensive Plan Policies not met as referenced
in the report include:
1. Policy FLU 1. IA: Promote Orderly Land Use Transition.
2. Policy FLU 1.1.16: Provide Access to Goods and Services and Protect Residential Areas
from the Adverse Impacts of Transition in Land Use
3. Policy FLU 1.1.13: Reinforce and Enhance the City's Community Appearance
Additional comments or recommendations may be presented by staff at the meeting
SUGGESTED MOTION:
"I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4524, to rezone 12.37 acres to establish standards for a PD,
Planned Development for a proposed Multiple Family Residential Development with a
Commercial outparcel at 2901 W. 1" Street subject to a Development Order (containing the
conditions as recommended by staff and modified by this Commission).
X)
"I move to Deny Ordinance No. 4524, to rezone 12.37 acres to establish standards for a PD,
Planned Development for a proposed Multiple Family Residential Development with a
Commercial outparcel at 2901 W. 1" Street as recommended by City staff and the Planning and
Zoning Commission."
Attachments: Project Information Sheet
Site Vicinity Map
Aerial Map
Applicant's Affidavit of Ownership and Designation of Agent
Email Communication with Neighbor
CAPP Report
Response to DRT Comments Letter
Property Survey submitted by Applicant
PD Master Plan received October 16, 2019
Concept Plan received October 1, 2019
Ordinance No. 4524
TADevelopment Review\03-Land Development\2019\2901 W 1 st Street -Transit Properties Multi-Family\CC - 2nd Reading\CC Memo -2901 W
1st Street 10-14-19.docx
Requested Action
Proposed Use:
Project Address:
Current Zoning:
Proposed Zoning:
Current Land Use:
PROJECT INFORMATION -- 2901 W. 'I ST STREET
PD REZONE
Rezone and amend a 12.37 acre PD, Planned Development to establish a proposed
Multiple Family Residential development with a Commercial outparcel at project
address of 2901 W. 1St Street.
Multiple Family Residential with Commercial outparcel.
2901 W. 1st Street
PD, Planned Development
PD, Planned Development
Vacant
Tax Parcel Numbers: 26-19-30-5AE-4900-0000, 26-19-30-5AE-490A-0000,
27-19-30-501-0000-0080, 27-19-30-300-0040-0000 and
26-19-30-5AE-660A-0000
Site Area:
1.2.37 Acres
Property Owners: Transit Properties, LLC
1205 Stellar Dr.
Oviedo, FL 32765
Phone: 407.482.4646
Email: kwydra@transitpropertiesgroup.com
Engineer: Madden, Moorehead & Stokes, Inc.
Chadwyck H. Moorehead, P.E., Vice President
431 Horatio Avenue, Suite 200
Maitland, FL 32751
Applicant/Agent: DeBartolo Development
Reginald Wallace, Development Manager
4401 W. Kennedy Blvd. 3rd Floor, Tampa, FL 33609
Phone: 813.386.1836
Email: rwallace@debartolodevelopment.com
CAPP Meeting:
No formal CAPP meeting was held
Commission District: District 2 — Commissioner Kerry S. Wiggins
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLL&NCE REVIEW
Planning staff has reviewed the request and has determined the use and proposed improvements to be consistent with
the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Future Land Use: WIC, Westside Industry & Commerce
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Surrounding Uses and Zoning:
Zoning Uses
North PD, Planned Development, M-1, Industrial (County) Wayne Densch, Vacant Industrial
South AG, Agriculture, RI -1, Industrial Vacant, Industrial
East R -IA and R-2, Single Family Residential (County) Single Family Residential
West A-1, Agricultural (County) Vacant
CONCURRENCY
Concurrency is a finding that public facilities and services necessary to support a proposed development are
available, or will be made available, concurrent with the impacts of the development. The concurrency facilities
evaluated by the City of Sanford include the following:
Drainage: The project shall comply to and be engineered to the adopted 25 Year, 24 Hour
LOS/Storm Event. Note, the Land Development Regulations allows the Administrative
Official to increase the design frequency standard if deemed necessary.
Roadways: Applicant has not provided concurrency information for roadways/traffic.
Water & Sewer: Water and Sewer services will be provided by the City of Sanford. Utility design will
meet City of Sanford and FDEP specifications.
Multi -Family Water Average Daily Demand= 55,300 to 184,450 Gal/Day
Multi -Family Sewer Average Daily Demand= 47,400 to 158,100 Gal/Day
Non Residential Water Average Daily Demand = 2,837 to 28,365 Gal/Day*
Non Residential Sewer Average Daily Demand = 2,269 to 22,690 Gal/Day*
Solid Waste: Solid waste services will be provided by the City of Sanford.
The City's Utility Department tracks water and wastewater capacities for all projects once a Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP) permit has been obtained. The available capacity for a proposed project is
verified but will not be reserved until a FDEP permit is obtained. Below is a breakdown provided by the City of
Sanford Utility Department for current usage within the City:
Potable Water Sanitary Sewer
Recorded 3 -month 6.73 MGD
Average daily flow:
Recorded 12 -month 7.504 MGD --
Average daily flow:
Projects with FDEP 0.806 MGD 0.624 MGD
permits (not in service):
* Based on the LOS Standards per the City's Comprehensive Plan
* * As provided by the City of Sanford's Utility Department. (CUP — Consumptive Use Permit)
TADevelopment Review103-Land Developmenfi201%2901 W Ist Street -Transit Properties Multi-Family\Project Info Sheet -2901 W I stStreet.doc
CITY Of
S. KFORD AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND DESIGNATION OF AGENT
I LORIDA
Please use additional sheets as needed. If any additional sheets are attached to this document, please sign here and note below:
1. Ownership
1_ Kevin Wydra, Manager of Transit Properties LLC hereby attest to ownership of the property described below:
Tax PArr.PI Number(s):
26-19-30-5AE-4900-0000, 26-19-30-5AE-490A-0000, 27-19-30-501-0000-0080, 27-19-30-300-0040-0000 & 26-19-30-5AE-660A-0000
Address of Property: southeast comer of W. SR ea^� nnartln I other Kina Jr. Blvd.
for which this PD Amendment / School Capacity
application is submitted to the City of Sanford.
11. Designation of Applicant's Agent (leave blank if not applicable)
As the owner/applicant of the above designated property for which this affidavit is submitted, I designate the below named individual
as my agent in all matters pertaining to the application process. In authorizing the agent named below to represent me, or my
company, I attest that the application is made in good faith and that all informationcontained in the application is accurate and
complete to the best of my personal knowledge.
Applicant's Agent (Print): Reginald Wallace, Development Manager Signatur6
Agent Address: DeBartolo Development, 4401 W. Kennedy Blvd. 3rd Floor, T
Email: rwallace@debartolodevelopment.com
Ill. Notice to Owner
FL 33609
Phone: (813) 386-1836
Fax:
A. All changes in Ownership and/or Applicant's Agent prior to final action of the City shall require a new affidavit. If ownership
changes, the new owner assumes all obligations related to the filing application process.
B. If the Owner intends for the authority of the Applicant's Agent to be limited in any manner, please indicate the limitations(s)
below. (i.e.: limited to obtaining a certificate of concurrency; limited to obtaining a land use compliance certificate, etc.)
The owner of the real property associated with this application or procurement activity is a (check one)
❑ Individual o Corporation ❑ Land Trust o Partnership ii Limited Liability Company
o Other (describe):
1. List all natural persons who have an ownership interest in the property, which is the subject matter of this petition, by name and
address.
2. For each corporation, list the name, address, and title of each officer; the name and address of each director of the corporation:
and the name and address of each shareholder who owns two percent (2%) or more of the stock of the corporation. Shareholders
need not be disclosed if a corporation's stock are traded publicly on any national stock exchange.
3. In the case of a trust, list the name and address of each trustee and the name and address of the beneficiaries of the trust and the
percentage of interest of each beneficiary. If any trustee or beneficiary of a trust is a corporation, please provide the information
required in paragraph 2 above.
Name of Trust:
4. For partnerships, including limited partnerships, list the name and address of each principal in the partnership, including general
or limited partners. If any partner is a corporation, please provide the information required in paragraph 2 above.
Colbert, Sabreena
From:
Charlie Madden <charlie@madden-eng.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, June 11, 2019 9:59 AM
To:
jerrywilliams6059@gmail.com
Cc:
Reggie Wallace; Chad Moorhead; Gibson, Russell
Subject:
FW: Pending PD Amendment to attached property - 294 units and a commercial out -
parcel
Attachments:
2019-02-22 Concept site plan compressed.pdf
From: Charlie Madden
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 1:04 P
Subject: Pending PD Amendment to attached property - 294 units and a commercial out -parcel
Good Morning Mr. Williams,
Per our phone conversation please find attached our latest concept plan (294 units). As we discussed and consistent
with the current PD , we are not proposing any access to Williams Street and we will be doing a fence or wall along our
common property line.
Let us know if you have any questions.
Thanks, Charlie
Charles M. Madden, P.E.
President
Madden, Moorhead & Stokes, Inc.
431 E. Horatio Ave., Ste 260
Maitland, FL 32751
(P) 407-629-8330
(F) 407-629-8336
charlie(@madden-eniz.com
1
=" MOORHEAD & STtJKES, INC.
r �
To: Eileen Hinson, AICP
Development Services Manager
City of Sanford
EILEEN.H INSON(r-)Sanfordfl.gov
From: Charles M. Madden, P.E.
President
Madden, Moorhead & Stokes, Inc.
charlie camadden-gng.com
407-629-8330
RE: Community Meeting Summary
Sanford/SR 46 Property
Planned Development Rezone
PDR19-000005
On Tuesday 8/27/2019 a community meeting was held for the proposed Transit property
Planned Development containing approximately 294 apartment homes and a 2+/- acre
commercial parcel. Besides the applicant, the applicant's lawyer, the seller's broker, and
Madden, Moorhead, & Stokes staff, the following neighbors attended:
Sean & Flo Culhane silverdarooyahoo.com 2971 West Airport Blvd.
Jerry Williams
Larry & Patsy Moore
Generally, the meeting was very positive, and several stated they liked the plan because
the proposed pond and parking areas adjacent the east property line provided for a large
setback to the nearest building. A few of them offered to attend the public hearings in
support of the project. We did agree that along our common east property line we would be
installing a continuous 6' high aluminum style picket fence with landscaping.
They absolutely did not want us to use the 15' strip of land extending from our proposed
retention pond to Airport Blvd. for anything and especially pedestrians. Mr. Williams was
concerned about potential alligators getting into the large retention pond. We assured him
that this was very unlikely and that the full-time apartment maintenance person would
monitor any wildlife in the pond and take appropriate action if needed.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Chad Moorhead or Charlie Madden at
407-629-8330.
H:\Data\19014\Cor\CAPP Report - Community Meeting Summary.doc
431 E. Horatio Avenue ■ Suite 260 ■ Maitland, FL 32751 0 407-629-8330 0 FAX 407-629-8336
MOORHEAD & STOKES, INC. j
City of Sanford
Attn: Sabreena Colbert
300 N. Park Avenue
Sanford, Florida 32771-1244
RE: Sanford/SR 46 Property
Planned Development Rezone
PDR19-000005
Dear Sabrina:
For historic perspective relative to the existing PD, we suggest a meeting including Mr. Russ Gibson.
Below please find responses to city comments:
Review Comments
Fire Plan Review
Comment 1: All Fire Prevention inspections shall be scheduled by calling our inspection request
line at 407.562.2786. Once the Fire Inspector calls you back, they will confirm date
and time of inspection.
Response 1: Acknowledged.
Comment 2: The maximum actual travel distance between hydrants in single family and duplex
residential areas shall be 800 feet and for non-residential and multiple family areas,
the distance shall be 500 feet apart. The maximum actual travel distance between the
principal building and the first hydrant shall be 400 feet for single family and duplex
residential areas and 250 feet for non-residential and multiple family areas. Hydrant
shall be on the same side of the street as the principal building. Maintain 36 inch
clearance around all hydrants.
Response 2: Acknowledged.
Comment 3: If facility is gated, a 20 foot minimum gate width is required for FD access and
motorized gates shall include an S.O.S yelp siren activation, an emergency key code
for FD access, and a Knox override emergency key control (application can be
obtained by contacting Fire Marshal Matt Minnetto at 407.688.5052).
431 E. Horatio Avenue 0 Suite 260 ■ Maitland, FL 32751 0 407-629-8330 ■ FAX 407-629-8336
Response 3: Acknowledged.
Continent 4: Dead end roads cannot exceed 150 feet. 110 foot diameter for all cul-de-sac's and a
minimum radius of 50 feet of pavement is required for all turn around points.
(information can also be found in schedule N of our planning and zoning department
codes).
Response 4: Acknowledged.
Comment 5: All buildings that are 8,000 square feet or larger shall have a monitored fire alarm
and fire sprinkler system installed.
Response 5: Acknowledged.
Engineering Plan Review
Comment 1: Please add the address "2901 W. 1 st Street" to the cover page. The City files/tracks
projects based on address.
Response 1: Added address to title block (sheet MP -1).
Comment 2: Please provide an ITE (latest edition) trip generation calculation based on the use(s).
ADT above 500 requires a traffic study be submitted for review. Refer to Schedule Q
for methodology.
Response 2: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, the traffic study was deferred to
final engineering when an exact development program is known. The possible ranges
of ADT/peak hours were added to the Master Plan.
Comment 3: Please provide a biological assessment report of the subject property.
Response 3: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, the biological assessment was
deferred to final engineering. Also, the City of Sanford Map: 1-13 wetlands map
(attached) shows no wetlands on the subject property. Also, see note 20 on sheet
MD -1.
Comment 4: Please identify the vertical datum used (NGVD29 or NAVD88).
Response 4: NAVD 88.
Comment 5: All drainage and stormwater systems shall be designed in compliance with Schedule
O of the City's Land Development Regulations (LDR). A conceptual drainage plan is
required to be part of the Master Plan. An exception to the requirements can be
granted by the Administrative Official subject to an official request.
431 E. Horatio Avenue 0 Suite 260 ■ Maitland, FL 32751 0 407-629-8330 ■ FAX 407-629-8336
Response 5: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, the conceptual retention pond
locations are shown on the submitted concept plan. If more detail is being requested,
we request this being deferred to the site plan submittal stage.
Comment 6: Any off-site drainage shall be conveyed through or around the project and must not
have any adverse impacts on the surrounding properties.
Response 6: Acknowledged.
Comment 7: A Seminole County right-of-way permit is required for all work within Martin Luther
King Blvd. ROW prior to the issuance of a Site Development permit.
Response 7: Acknowledged.
Comment 8: A FDOT permit is required for connection to U.S. Highway 17-92 (SR 46) prior to
the issuance of a Site Development permit.
Response 8: Acknowledged.
Planning and Zoning Compliance Review
Comment 1: A traffic study is required at time of rezone. Include the AM/PM peak trips on the
master plan for concurrency.
Response 1: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, we request that this be deferred to
final engineering, where a traffic study could be based on an actual development
program. The potential ranges of ADT/AM/FM trips were added to the master plan.
Comment 2: Review the requirements of Schedule E for multiple family residential. Please note
any deviations to the code on the master plan and written justification. The current
design does not meet the requirements of Schedule E and this should be addressed on
the plan and during the rezone process.
Response 2: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, we will meet Schedule "E"
requirements except where the existing PD and this amendment addresses specific
site requirements. Deviations have been added to the Master Plan.
Comment 3: Staff has concerns over all of the parking being reduced to 9x18 spaces. It is
recommended that a mix of 10x20 and 9x 18 be provided; include a breakdown on the
plan.
Response 3: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, the parking sizes shown exceed
the suggested ULI parking study (submitted with existing PD) requirements. This
was approved in the existing approved PD- see note 34 on sheet MP -1.
Comment 4: The commercial/multi-family use is required to meet the Architectural Design
Guidelines per Schedules G and E.
431 E. Horatio Avenue ■ Suite 260 0 Maitland, FL 32751 0 407-629-8330 0 FAX 407-629-8336
Response 4: We will meet "Schedule G & E" requirements except where the existing PD and this
amendment addresses specific site requirements.
Comment 5: The maximum FAR allowed in the WIC land use is 0.5 per the Comprehensive Plan.
Revise the master plan accordingly.
Response 5: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, the existing PD is approved as a
TOD project, and the .2 to 2.0 max FAR is already approved.
Comment 6: The maximum density allowed in the WIC land use is 20 dwelling units per acre per
the Comprehensive Plan. Revise the master plan accordingly.
Response 6: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, the existing PD is approved as a
TOD project and the 15 to 50 du/ac is already approved. The 20 du/ac applies to the
entire WIC area and not to individual parcels.
Comment 7: A CAPP meeting is required for all public hearings including an amendment to a PD.
If a CAPP meeting was already completed, please upload the summary. Otherwise
please schedule a meeting and send the City a draft of the invite letter prior to
distribution. A list of addresses for the 500' buffer can be provided upon request.
Response 7: On 8/17/15 we held a CAPP meeting (see attached summary). We are still honoring
the 10' LB against Mr. Williams property and now have no access to Williams
Avenue; therefore, we do not think another CAPP meeting is warranted. Per the
direction of Russ Gibson will each out to Mr. Tom Ball and Mr. Williams.
Comment 8: Staff does not support the reduced front yard setbacks and buffers along west 1st
Street and MLK Blvd. A minimum 25' setback and buffer shall be provided along
both right of ways. In addition, the required buffer between commercial and
residential is 25' with a 6' masonry wall or 50' with landscaping/screening. The
master plan proposes a 10' setback and buffer adjacent to the single family residential
properties. Provide a justification for the reduction as part of the request.
Response 8: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, we have matched all setbacks and
buffers already approved in the existing PD.
Comment 9: The WIC land use is a mixed use land use designation that allows no more than 40%
residential use. The thresholds established in the comprehensive plan cannot be
exceeded. If maximums and minimums are established in a given land use, i.e. WIC,
they must be adhered to for the mix of uses; revise the master plan accordingly.
Response 9: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, during the previous PD process it
was established that the 40% pertains to the entire WIC area and not to individual
sites.
431 E. Horatio Avenue ■ Suite 260 ■ Maitland, FL 32751 ■ 407-629-8330 ■ FAX 407-629-8336
Comment 10: Provide a table of justification of the deviations/variances requested on the master
plan.
Response 10: Per our meeting with Russ Gibson and Mike Cash, as an existing approved TOD/PD
development, specific site requirements are shown on sheet MP -1, and any deviations
to Schedule E are shown.
Utility Site Review
Comment 1: The 212,815 GPD of water usage is equal to 709 single family homes. The existing
lift station on 5th street will not support these capacity requirements. A new lift
station with generator will be required and will need to be sized for the total building
out capacity. Because this is multifamily the lift station will be private.
Response 1: Acknowledged. This and the potential to utilize a gravity system tie-in to the existing
5t" Street namhole will be fiirther evaluated at final engineering once a specific
development program is known.
Comment 2: At this time, it has not been determined that the water capacity requirement for this
project can be supported in this area without required utility piping improvement by
the developer.
Response 2: Acknowledged.
Pre -Treatment Review
Comment 1: At each unit, install a separate line for kitchen waste and a separate line for
bathroom/laundry waste. In an effort to minimize grease build-up, the City
recommends installing the largest possible diameter piping for all kitchen waste line
discharges. If the clubhouse/leasing office will have a kitchen then it will also be
required to connect to a grease interceptor.
Response 1: Acknowledged.
Comment 2: If there is a dumpster pad proposed and it has a drain, it must connect to the grease
interceptor. The drain must be protected from storm water at all times. May require a
raised platform, drain cover and/or storm gutter.
Response 2: Acknowledged.
Comment 3: Include the required grease interceptor (125 or less units=750 gallons; 126 to 300
units=1250 gallons) prior to the sampling box or lift station (if feasible). If not
feasible, then multiple interceptors will be required. A two way cleanout must be
included before/after the interceptor(s). Grease interceptor(s) must be installed in a
location that is accessible for inspection/cleaning at all tunes. Include grease
interceptor(s) spec on plans.
431 E. Horatio Avenue ■ Suite 260 ■ Maitland, FL 32751 ■ 407-629-8330 ■ FAX 407-629-8336
Response 3: Acknowledged.
Comment 4: Add a sampling box (if no lift station is proposed) just prior to connection to City
sewers and ensure that all sources of wastewater wye together PRIOR to entering the
sampling box. Sampling box must receive flow from both the sanitary and the grease
waste line(s). Include sampling box spec on plans. Sampling box must have only one
inlet. Sampling box must be accessible all times. The sampling box will be used for
collection of surcharge samples at least once yearly and if elevated results are
returned, the apartments/condos will be required to pay additional fees on utility bill.
For further information on the Surcharge Program and other applicable information,
follow this link:
https://www.municode.com/library/fl/sanford/codes/code_of_ ordinances?nodeId=PTI
ICOOR CH102UT ARTIXSEUSDIRE DIV5OIGRPRPR
Response 4: Acknowledged.
Comment 5: Facility is required to obtain a wastewater discharge permit. Complete and submit a
residential establishment application.
Response 5: Acknowledged.
Comment 6: The Florida Plumbing Code states "Where food waste disposers connect to grease
interceptors, a solids interceptor shall separate the discharge before connecting to the
grease interceptor. Solids interceptors and grease interceptors shall be sized and rated
for the discharge of the food waste disposers." It is recommended that a solids
interceptor be installed prior to any grease interceptors when food waste disposers are
proposed. The City does not have a spec for solids interceptors.
Response 6: Acknowledged.
Comment 7: City Code (Chapter 102, Article IX, Division 2, Section 102-271) states ???Use of
storm sewers and sanitary sewers. No person shall discharge or cause to be
discharged stormwater, groundwater, roof runoff (including runoff from
downspouts), subsurface drainage (including drainage from foundation drains),
swimming pool drainage, condensate, deionized water, or noncontact cooling water
to any sanitary sewer??? Thus, since discharges from elevator pits are technically
ground water and rain water runoff from the building, the pit can???t discharge to
City sewers. It must be routed elsewhere.
Response 7: Acknowledged.
Public Works Review
Comment 1: Approved subject to that the City of Sanford Public Works is of the understanding
that ALL roads, sidewalks and drainage within the planned development are to be
privately maintained upon completion and that The City of Sanford shall bear no
431 E. Horatio Avenue 0 Suite 260 ■ Maitland, FL 32751 ■ 407-629-8330 0 FAX 407-629-8336
responsibility for the maintenance of the roads, sidewalks and drainage upon
completion. Public Works has no objection to the planned development.
Response l: Acknowledged.
If you have any questions or need further information please do not hesitate to call our office at 407-
629-8330.
Sincerely,
Chadwyck H. Moorhead, P.E.
Vice President
DAS:nwm
H:\Data\19014\Cor\City of Sanford Comments-1.doc
431 E. Horatio Avenue 0 Suite 260 ■ Maitland, FL 32751 0 407-629-8330 ■ FAX 407-629-8336
ISV3 OE 3E)NVU'HinOS 6T diHSNMOi'LZ N01ID3S 10 N011'dOd V
S3111:13dOUd ilSNVU
JO A3Mns AUV(]Nnoo
5H
N,
vel
i4I§ A
2 F mh�
ng - I
mg t;R
Mill
61,1.
RH x
a
'ff na r� - i
-gig 1 A,j MN
e. k6.0. .11 H '! I
Y�,5t , �[ if, ;7
R!
2 HIRay-s}"-x 2
IN gI . ! :3 qi . or ! ! " 1 1!
,,- p _Rar I ad oe
16Y 'j '. M
Y�yREfl o
42 2
o
9 u v� m H
pull §2";;H'to4 3 1 r,
19xv - !b 2 5;gg '2
— - — - — - — - — - —
- — - —
it
Ily
L — — — — — — — L
3111KI&V syfymvA f,
WIN
Z— — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
—
Jj
1 4
GUVA3VM W ONX Nat Ol%Vyn
gdg
b
J_
6
— — - — — — — — —
—
(8).ZZIZGZ 3.157,91.00u
gig
if
I til
ci
GUVA3VM W ONX Nat Ol%Vyn
gdg
b
J_
6
Z U)
W W 0
w�
N
• ZW
f_ n 0
n I
z zo� I
• N
0
Q IJ 0
w 0^'0
Q L—J
� J O O O
• > Q ZLW�
/'
• 0O gZO x
Lj
Q=
jag
E
:CS 2'p i �h� •• �� er����� �j bnn��,'�
esK "s ° y �tgag UMN., N c W
H3 g�< �" �P ",•ham R'y §RKEFR�a
5 y 5 0 c " ins hbn no
iy Ii
e Pig
L�K 3•'� „«`. �`R � h Ken h Q ��E,. �§
ASS .. 3"
=nraRn•ao
W g $h xoofi ,aa 4p 3 H s aa�ea$ a�n�==eh s
g �� 7 $"sI WNW tt INH
0
z
5
V
i
Vir�r^
z
e:
=�@�
w
VM
..
.:
4 ,
Z
CCQ
a
a
O
0LL
cr-
0
��
00
O0
�CO
_
Z
q
z
N
LL
0
Z
CDEms,,
u e
�'
O
°ate
w
Z
i
OD
Cf)
Oo
Z
lu
s
i
=
W
�
W
yy
U)
Z U)
W W 0
w�
N
• ZW
f_ n 0
n I
z zo� I
• N
0
Q IJ 0
w 0^'0
Q L—J
� J O O O
• > Q ZLW�
/'
• 0O gZO x
Lj
Q=
jag
E
:CS 2'p i �h� •• �� er����� �j bnn��,'�
esK "s ° y �tgag UMN., N c W
H3 g�< �" �P ",•ham R'y §RKEFR�a
5 y 5 0 c " ins hbn no
iy Ii
e Pig
L�K 3•'� „«`. �`R � h Ken h Q ��E,. �§
ASS .. 3"
=nraRn•ao
W g $h xoofi ,aa 4p 3 H s aa�ea$ a�n�==eh s
g �� 7 $"sI WNW tt INH
0
Vir�r^
z
w
VM
• //•
4 ,
Z
CCQ
a
W
dry•
o
O
0LL
cr-
0
��
00
O0
�CO
_
Z
q
z
N
LL
0
Z
CDEms,,
0o
LL
�'
O
°ate
w
Z
�-
0«.
Q
OD
Cf)
Oo
Z
O
U
zz
W
�
W
U)
Z U)
W W 0
w�
N
• ZW
f_ n 0
n I
z zo� I
• N
0
Q IJ 0
w 0^'0
Q L—J
� J O O O
• > Q ZLW�
/'
• 0O gZO x
Lj
Q=
jag
E
:CS 2'p i �h� •• �� er����� �j bnn��,'�
esK "s ° y �tgag UMN., N c W
H3 g�< �" �P ",•ham R'y §RKEFR�a
5 y 5 0 c " ins hbn no
iy Ii
e Pig
L�K 3•'� „«`. �`R � h Ken h Q ��E,. �§
ASS .. 3"
=nraRn•ao
W g $h xoofi ,aa 4p 3 H s aa�ea$ a�n�==eh s
g �� 7 $"sI WNW tt INH
0
z
x
�
oe
Z
zz
a
O
<
o
Mi
i D p.Fq�]US M 'M 106Z4,..b.bq„US aUO�NdSl
Z=1N3NdOl3A30 O'01tlVH3UQ
.
w]c4OUc1 917
~
�:�•: d 8'°N:�` Ms u° g � �.
F
gag
a 3Utg "e ; ag 0 e s 3 ag' �� ; s x � $� � ° {�� gg � �� gg
8 x e
it, ryr x e kw $� bg` g^ a �kA R
N s 6 s s
M' qg aw g e xx a =mss s
V g- x g a@ "i a .. g +
; e� � � o �'°$ 3 e. �� g � dg N o:: 9"" " _as x'
m a• - a�; § sYVs ffi g x� � °x �e ;g �. ° g5 s e s " "a ggg ap eR
< § gy $33 RRA a _Rabb ��g 3< Mpg aFP E o 5sfi" 'gg Sugg
�g
;aat""�
fly
���
gam:
p t x gg g x"R a 9 9 y g .pno p 3 a .9 9v All AA eY 3y ' a x: �5 g j$�s ; o Q$= a"= e'- a _-
°"s�� s s x� 'fry
Y d gH €8 3g"5 a
P y �Rce ;:r a
V. � g ��"a4 F r 3rd g �� � �� Aga}e -� s °
C c g s .§a� g o. s `a x�e g gene i gi g n� R ®"
®®
NL
®®
s
z
`--------- �� §s, Y
OnlB 160d81V M � gt _
1 I� t %fie Y da4r K. :z
}IT
R �svVv.S�lun� � I Ylf.i t����°
3
i f l
fis §s is
1
i I
.p 4
$ F
x 3g I }
c- 'c--------� "
tl 1 pw
k I
aFi(
1 ;
i QnlB 2f(` IN 8jHi ll NLLSVVi
upy
88{ Ei
tl
T ( f5
i g
gg9g e
��
g
I 3nvvsrl
qti �ppy�
pe� gp�
iEyp ge�
Qt�-ygs§�ji
F£ [E
i Ita
I� d
7PiFT
4i
F 4r
EC
4 Fir
YF
i fiz
9
§T.
F
Y y
6
r
Fri
YY
�
Yif
`gg
�i !
F} i
� YiY
§ �iY
i �
5� 6
Y p}�
e 66pF it
4$9
�� i3§
IiYC
4crq
gj2
it
§F
���
d
iY¢-ys
:
s qiq�r
� a
� �ifls�$
�
�• je�i
:3�"ip#
i�'i
s
qpY }e'
(����i
[�
a € y
¢¢�
�xii
FsFp°��-°��
�� �
� 55181
9
� ��prrYYBH�•iF]-14
y
�iY
78���pq
i iT�
{t4�
�€,'.,y
i�.F
�! yV
j !�j
6
3iFY�YBYe§�
g6g i
11 FYF ySjgl@3gi
���
g YS�
CD
c�
04
r��
w