Loading...
4570 Amend the Planned Development Zoning Approx. 5 acres 2306 W 1st StOrdinance No. 2020-4570 An ordinance of the City of Sanford, Florida relating to the rezoning of approximately 5 acres of real property located at 2306 West 1st Street (Tax Parcel Identification Number 26-19-30-300-0070-0000) to create the Monroe Place Planned Development (PD) (map of the property attached); rezoning the property to a PD, zoning district/classification master plan; providing for approval of the Monroe Place 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, Peggy J. Nestor, as trustee, is the owner of certain real property which land totals approximately 5 acres in size, which real property is located at 2306 West 1st Street and is assigned Tax Parcel Identification Number 26-19-30-300-0070- 0000 by the Property Appraiser of Seminole County; and Whereas, the applicant on behalf of the property owner is Adilia Richemond of Cottle Enterprises LLC, whose sole manager is Isaiah I. Cottle, doing business as Green Slate Land & Development; and Whereas, the property is located just north of State Road 46 along the small spur of West 1 st Street; and Whereas, the subject property is not located within the Downtown Commercial Historic District; and Whereas, on January 12, 2015, the City Commission enacted Ordinance Number 4330 rezoning the subject property from AG, Agriculture, zoning classification/district to the PD, Planned Development, zoning classification/district for a multi -family residential use with 104 units and 1.1 parking spaces per unit in accordance with the City's Land Development Regulations (LDRs), and _ __ _ __1IPage Whereas, the PD approved in 2015 has expired in that no application to extend the PD was received by the City; and Whereas, the subject property is assigned the WDBD, Waterfront Downtown Business District, future land use designation within the City's Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, the purposes of the WDBD are to: (1). Generate a revitalization effort that attracts private sector investment and strengthens the City's economy. (2). Establish the district as a regional center. (3). Strengthen public/private partnerships. (4). Enhance the livability of North Seminole County by encouraging improved residential, retail, educational, cultural and entertainment opportunities. (5). Provide the framework for redevelopment and infill. the WDBD is located in Seminole County's Urban Service Area, and is comprised of those areas that are in close proximity to, and have historically, been most influenced by the St. Johns River and Lake Monroe and is designated as the City's central business district with the western portion of the WDBD containing commercial uses based upon the railway line, as well as significant institutional, residential, and recreational facilities located therein; and Whereas, the property owner has proposed revising and amending the PD to reestablish uses as specified on the Monroe Place PD Master Plan which are compatible with the WDBD future land use designation; and 2 1 P a g e Whereas, the Monroe Place PD provides for a 4 -story apartment building consisting of a maximum of 100 units; and Whereas, the applicant has stated that the development will be age restricted, but it is recognized that that statement does not affect the land use entitlements provided for herein and is no binding as to the approval of the Monroe Place PD as set forth herein; and Whereas, the comparative development standards of the Monroe Place PD Master Plan vis-a-vis the other pertinent provisions of the City's LDRs are set forth in the below table: Development Required Proposed Code Section Standard Parking Space No more than an average of 10 No more than 10 spaces Sch E, Sec 16C, Separation spaces of uninterrupted of un -interrupted parking Item 5 parking Garage and 50% of units require attached None Sch E, Sec 16D Storage Units garages and 20% detached Recreational 200 square feet per unit 200 square feet per unit Sch E, Sec 16C Facilities Carwash Facility Required over 20 units Carwash area proposed Sch E, Sec 16 Units per No more than 8 units per 1 Building - 100 units Sch E, Sec 16D, building building Item 1 Building Height Maximum 3 stories 4 stories Sch E, Sec 161),Item 4 Private exterior entry for each Interior hallway for Sch E, Sec 161), Dwelling Access unit dwelling access tp Item 3 Balcony/Porch Balcony, porch, deck, or patio None Sch E, Sec 161), for each unit Item 5 Open Space 50% open space 25% open space Sch E, Sec 16C,Item 6 Project Entry The entry shall be gated No gated entry proposed Sch E, Sec 16C, Item 1 ; and Whereas, Brett Green with Archway Partners, LLC, of Miami, was responsible for completing the required modified Citizen Awareness Participation Plan (CAPP) 3lPage process and, according to the CAPP summary, three interested parties sought additional information on the proposed PD, but they did not express any questions or concerns relative to the proposed Monroe Place PD; and Whereas, on October 1, 2020, the City's Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing and, by a vote of five to one, recommended that the City Commission approve this Ordinance; and Whereas, 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; and Whereas, the City Commission of the City of Sanford has taken all actions relating to the Monroe Place PD rezoning action set forth herein in accordance with the requirements and procedures mandated by State law. 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). (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; Monroe Place PD. 41 Page (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 Monroe Place 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 Monroe Place PD rezoning action set forth herein action taken herein with regard to the Monroe Place 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: (1). Pursuant to Section 4.3.G of the City's LDRs, 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 Monroe Place PD Master Plan, dated September 2, 2020, 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 Monroe Place PD Master Plan, any required elements missing from or not shown on the Monroe Place PD Master Plan shall comply with the City's LDRs. (4). A comprehensive signage plan in accordance with the City's 5 1 P a g e Land Development Regulations is required and is subject to City approval. (5). Tree mitigation in accordance with Section 4.2, Criteria For Tree Removal, Replacement And Relocation, of the City's LDRs is required and is subject to City approval prior to development of the site. (6). The following elements shall be considered during the engineering plan review: (i). Site improvements shall include the incorporation of low impact development (LID) techniques and crime prevention through environmental design (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. (iii). All sides of the multi -family building shall display a similar level of quality and architectural interest and must have a minimum of 2 differentiated planes to relieve flat, monotonous facades as determined by the City in applying sound and generally accepted architectural standards and principles. (iv). Pedestrian entry to the project shall be emphasized through landscaping, special paving, gateways, arbors and other similar features as approved by the City. (v). Screening enclosures for mechanical and utility equipment and for trash receptacles shall use at least one of the predominant 6 1 P a g e materials and colors used in the primary structure and enclosures for trash receptacles shall be a minimum of 6' in height. (vi). Air conditioning and heating units and other appurtenances shall be shielded from view at the property lines. (7). A school capacity availability letter of determination and a school impact analysis used to determine school impact fees and proportionate share mitigation shall be submitted prior to final engineering approval and issuance of any permits. (8). The Property Owner shall coordinate with Seminole County as it relates to traffic mitigation strategies, traffic calming, pedestrian connectivity and sidewalk safety as well as work with staff during the development plan review process to incorporate said elements into the project. (9). If City staff and the Property Owner are unable to agree to the details of this Ordinance and its implementing development order in any way, the matter will be submitted to the Planning and Zoning 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. Section 3. Incorporation of map and Monroe Place PD Master Plan. 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 Monroe Place PD. 7 1 P a g e 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 Monroe Place PD with all past actions of the City relative to the property being hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 5. Severability. 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 Monroe Place PD property's zoning classification shall revert to an un -zoned property status. 8 1 P a g e Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon enactment. Passed and adopted this 26th day of October, 2020. Attest: City Commission of the iy of Sanford, Flotida N 6 %F GI QI rw. Traci Houchin, MMC, FCRM A o City Clerk m 'Maur Approved as to form and legal su 'ci f William L. Colbert, City Attorney 91 Page EZF171M%� , WS RM X LJ CITY OF Item No. el y rSkNFORD I FLORIDA CITY COMMISSION MEMORANDUM 20205 OCTOBER 26, 2020 AGENDA TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission PREPARED BY: Sabreena Colbert — Senior Planner -1-21 % SUBMITTED BY: Norton N. Bonaparte, Jr., City Marer SUBJECT: Amend The Planned Development (PD) Hing Of Approximately 5 Acres To Establish Land Use And Design Stan rds For Monroe Place PD, A Proposed Multiple Family Residential Deve ment; 2306 W. 1st Street. THIS IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTER AND, AS SUCH, REQUIRES DISCLOSURE OF ALL EX -PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, INVESTIGATIONS, SITE VISITS AND EXPERT OPINIONS REGARDING THIS MATTER. STRATEGIC PRIORITIES: ❑ Unify Downtown & the Waterfront ❑ Promote the City's Distinct Culture ❑ Update Regulatory Framework ® Redevelop and Revitalize Disadvantaged Communities SYNOPSIS: A request to amend the Planned Development (PD) zoning of approximately 5 acres to establish land use and design standards for Monroe Place PD, a proposed multiple family residential development at 2306 W. 1 st Street has been received. The property owner is Peggy J. Nestor. The applicant is Adilia Richemond with Green State Land and Development. Brett Green with Archway Partners was responsible for completing the required modified CAPP process. 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. F"ISCALISTAFFING STATEMENT: Based on the 2019 property tax roll of Seminole County, the subject property has an assessed value of $203,760. The total tax bill for the property in 2019 was $3,784.74. Rezoning the property will further facilitate new commercial construction will generate ad valorem and utility revenues for the City. No additional staffing is required if the PD is amended. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located just north of State Road 46 along the small spur of W. 1st Street. There is an existing 2,835 square feet 2 -story single family dwelling located on the property, constructed in 1924. The site is located east of the Sanford SunRail station and the Lynx bus route. On January 12, 2015, the City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 4330 to rezone the subject property from AG, Agriculture to PD, Planned Development, for a multi -family residential use with 104 units and 1.1 parking spaces per unit. The Monroe Place PD Master Plan proposes a four-story age restricted apartment building consisting of a maximum of 100 units with development standards specific to the type of multi -family development proposed. Schedule E, Section 16 multiple family housing design guidelines are used as a reference to assist in understanding the city's goals and objectives for high quality, multiple -family residential development. The Monroe Place PD Master Plan outlines the proposed development standards for the project. The applicant is also requesting deviations from the Land Development Regulations as noted on the PD Master Plan including Schedule E as follows: Development Standard Required Proposed Code Section Parking Space No more than an average No more than 10 Sch E, Sec Separation of 10 spaces of spaces of un- 16C, Item 5 uninterru ted parking interrupted parking Garage and 50% of units require Sch E, Sec Storage Units attached garages and None 16D 20% detached Recreational 200 sq ft/unit 200 sq ft/unit Sch E, Sec Facilities 16C Canvash Required over 20 units Carwash area Sch E, Sec 16 Facili ro osed Units per No more than 8 units per 1 Building - 100 Sch E, Sec building building units 16D, Item 1 Building Maximum three stories Four stories Sch E, Sec Height 16D, Item 4 Dwelling Private exterior entry for Interior hallway for Sch E, Sec Access each unit dwelling access 16D, Item 3 Balcony/Porch Balcony, porch, deck or None Sch E' Sec patio for each unit 16D, Item 5 Open Space 50% open space 25% open space Sch E, Sec 16C, Item 6 Project Entry The entry shall be gated No gated entry Sch E, Sec proposed 16C, Item 1 As outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, the Waterfront/ Downtown Business District is designed to provide centralized residential, governmental, cultural, institutional, and general commercial activities within the downtown and waterfront urban area, while preserving the City's historic character and cultural heritage through context -sensitive design. The designation provides a planning and management framework for promoting the revitalization, development and redevelopment of the historic downtown commercial area. The purpose of the WDBD is to: • Generate a revitalization effort that attracts private sector investment and strengthens the City's economy; • Establish the district as a Regional center; • Strengthen public/private partnerships; • Enhance the livability of North Seminole County by encouraging improved residential, retail, educational, cultural and entertainment opportunities; and • Provide the framework for redevelopment and infill. The WDBD is located in Seminole County's Urban Service Area, and is comprised of those areas that are in close proximity to, and have historically, been most influenced by the St. Johns River and Lake Monroe. The Waterfront/Downtown Business District is designated as the City's central business district. The western portion of the WDBD contains commercial uses based upon the railway line, as well as significant institutional, residential, and recreational facilities located therein. Amending the PD to reestablish the proposed use as specified on the Monroe Place PD Master Plan is compatible with the WDBD future land use designation. The consistency review of the request with the Comprehensive Plan predominantly assesses whether the request is consistent with the intended designation, discourages urban sprawl, creates neutral or minimal concurrency impacts and has minimal impacts to natural systems. Policy FLU 1.11.2: Apply Performance Criteria Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan states that all new development shall comply with the following criteria, all of which shall be implemented through mandatory site plan review of new development: • Parking Provisions: New development within the WDBD shall be served by adequate parking resources. New development shall provide off-street parking sufficient to serve each proposed new development either on site or through the provision of a shared parking agreement. • Urban Design Amenities: Proposed new development shall provide a higher level of urban design amenities including landscaping, compatible signage, and pedestrian linkages together with a broader mix of land uses attractive to potential users of the downtown area. • Strategic Parking Resources: Promote development of adequate parking resources in strategic areas of the WDBD and pedestrian walkways linking major retail activity centers, as well as social, civic, recreational, or cultural attractions within the downtown and waterfront area. • Mix of Land Uses: Achieve a higher level of urban design amenities together with a broader mix of land uses attractive to potential users of the downtown and waterfront area. The development is proposed to have adequate onsite parking with a minimum of 1.5 spaces per unit. The design also promotes pedestrian connectivity to the public right of way allowing residents greater access to the neat -by Terwilliger Trail as well as areas for onsite recreation and gathering. Policy FLU 1.11.1: Maintain Density/Intensity Standards. Intensity and density standards within the WDBD have been designed to attract quality private investment and stimulate the vibrant atmosphere of mixed-use activity that is typical of a thriving downtown. The maximum density for residential development shall be 50 units per acre. A maximum of 20 dwelling units per acre is proposed. The traffic impact has also been evaluated as part of the concurrency review for the project. The Monroe Place PD is projected to generate 377 daily trips for the proposed age restricted residential use, which is below the 500 trips per day identified in the traffic analysis and methodology outlined in Schedule Q — Level of Service Requirements and Methodologies. Based on the projected trips for the project, the study finds that all roadway segments will continue to have excess capacity and operate within the adopted Level of Service (LOS). A modified CAPP process was completed by the applicant. Based on the attached CAPP report, the applicant was contacted by three interested parties seeking additional information on the proposed development but they did not express any questions or concerns. This project will facilitate a diverse housing option which is an initiative associated with the strategic priority listed as "Update Regulatory Framework" in the Imagine Sanford strategic plan adopted by the City Commission. Staff finds that the proposed multiple family residential development and associated master plan are consistent with the criteria noted and the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan. On October 1, 2020, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing and, by a vote of five to one, recommends the City Commission approve an ordinance to amend the Planned Development zoning of approximately 5 acres to establish land use and design standards for Monroe Place PD, a proposed multiple family residential development at 2306 W. 1st Street. The City Commission approved first reading of Ordinance No. 4570 on October 12, 2020 and requested the applicant provide additional information including architectural elevations, traffic mitigation strategies and pedestrian connectivity for review at the second Public Hearing. LEGAL REVIEW: 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 Live 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 permits. (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 [ofj 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: The Planning and Zoning Commission, along with staff, recommends the City Commission approve the request to amend the Planned Development zoning of approximately 5 acres to establish land use and design standards for Monroe Place PD, a proposed multiple family residential development at 2306 W. 1 st Street based on consistency with the goals, objectives and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The following conditions should be considered to accompany any approval in an associated Development Order: 1. Pursuant to Section 4.3.G of the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) 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 Monroe Place PD Master Plan, dated September 2, 2020, 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 referenced PD Master Plan, any required elements missing from or not shown on the PD Master Plan shall comply with the City's LDRs. 4. A comprehensive signage plan in accordance with the City's Land Development Regulations is required and is subject to City approval. 5. Tree mitigation per Section 4.2 Criteria For Tree Removal, Replacement And Relocation is required and is subject to City approval prior to development of the site. 6. The following elements shall be considered during the engineering plan review. If staff and the applicant are unable to work out enhancement details, the request will be returned to the Planning and Zoning Commission for consideration. a. Site improvements shall include the incorporation of low impact development (LID) techniques and crime prevention through environmental design (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. c. All sides of the multi -family building shall display a similar level of quality and architectural interest and must have a minimum of two differentiated planes to relieve flat, monotonous facades as determined by the City in applying sound and generally accepted architectural standards and principles. d. Pedestrian entry to the project shall be emphasized through landscaping, special paving, gateways, arbors and other similar features as approved by the City. e. Screening enclosures for mechanical and utility equipment and for trash receptacles shall use at least one of the predominant materials and colors used in the primary structure. Enclosures for trash receptacles shall be a minimum of six feet in height. f. Air conditioning and heating units and other appurtenances shall be shielded from view at the property lines. 7. 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 shall be submitted prior to final engineering approval and issuance of any permits. 8. If City staff and the Property Owner are unable to agree to the details of this Development Order in any way, the matter will be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Board, whichever is appropriate, for resolution at a public hearing, and the matter will be adjudicated by means of a development order or denial development order relating thereto. Based on the discussion of the Commission at first reading, staff recommends the following additional condition be considered: 9. The applicant shall coordinate with Seminole County as it relates to traffic mitigation strategies, traffic calming, pedestrian connectivity and sidewalk safety as well as work with staff during the Development Plan Review process to incorporate said elements into the project. SUGGESTED MOTION: "I move to enact Ordinance No. 4570." Attachments: (1). Project Information Sheet. (2). Site Vicinity Map. (3). Site Aerial Map. (4). Affidavit of Ownership. (5). CAPP Report. (6). Traffic Study. (7). Exhibits to Memo. (8). Traffic & Access Memo. (9). Monroe Place PD Master Plan, Dated September 2, 2020. (10). Ordinance No. 4570. PROJECT INFORMATION — 2306 W. 'I sT STREET PD REZONE Requested Action: Amend the Planned Development zoning of approximately 5 acres to establish land use and design standards for Monroe Place PD, a proposed multiple family residential development at 2306 W. 1st Street. Proposed Use: Multiple Family Residential Current Zoning: PD, Planned Development (expired) Current Land Use: Single Family Residential Legal Description: BEGINNING ON THE NORTH LINE OF ST. GERTRUDE AVENUE 81.97 CHAINS WEST OF THE EAST LINE OF THE INTERSECTION OF HOLLY AVENUE AND FIRST STREET, IN THE CITY OF SANFORD, RUN WEST 5 CHAINS, NORTH 10 CHAINS, EAST 5 CHAINS, SOUTH 10 CHAINS TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, LYING IN SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANGE 30 EAST, SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS AND EXCEPT RIGHT-OF-WAY ON SOUTH. Tax Parcel Numbers: 26-19-30-300-0070-0000 Property Owners: Peggy J. Nestor, Trustee PO Box 118 Winter Park, Florida 32790-118 Applicant/Agent: Adilia. Richemond Green State Land and Development 1427 Alden Road Orlando, Florida 32803 Email: adilia@greenslateland.com CAPP Meeting: A CAPP notification letter was sent to all property owners within a 500 -foot buffer on September 4, 2020. A Final CAPP report is attached. Commission District: District 2 — Kerry S. Wiggins, Sr. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE 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: WDBD, Waterfront Downtown Business District Existing Land Use: Single Family Residential Surrounding Uses and Zoning: Zoning Use North AG, Agriculture Wat Navararn Buddhist Temple South MR -2, Multiple Family Residential Vacant East MR -2, Multiple Family Residential Vacant West Single Family Residential A-1 (County) TADevelopment Review\03-Land Development\2020\2306 W. lst StreetTroject Info - 2306 W Ist Street.doc 'tm I Imw =~= plop M G AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND DESIGNATION OF AGENT Please use additional sheets as needed. If any additional sheets are attached to this document, please sign here and note below: I. Ownership I. Peggy J. Nestor Tax Parcel Numberfs): 26193030000700000 Address of Property: 2306 1st Street Sanford, FL 32771 hereby attest to ownership of the property described below: for which this Planned Development 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 information contained in the application is accurate and complete to the best of my personal knowledge. Applicant's Agent (Print): Brett Green Signature: Agent Address: 475 Brickeli Ave. Apt 2215 Miami FL 33131 Email: bgreen@archway-partners.com Phone: 321-689-8197 til. Notice to Owner Fax: A. All changes in Ownership and/or Applicant's Agent prior to final action of the City shall require anew 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) o Individual o Corporation o Land Trust o Partnership o Limited Liability Company it Other (describe): Trust 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: Peggy J Nestor 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. 5. For each list the name, oddeao. and Uda of each manager ormanaging member; and the name and address each additional member with two percent (2%) or more membership interest. If any member with two percent (2%) or more membership intems(, manager, or managing member is a uorpomUon, trust orpartnership, p|aosa provide the information required inparagraphs 2.3and/or 4above, Name of LLC: 6. In the circumstances of m list the name and address of each contract purchaser. If the purchaser is a corporation, trust, partnership, or LLC, provide the information required for those entities in paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and/or 5 above. Name cfPurchaser: Archway Partners, LLC Date of Contract: 7/21/2020 NAME TITLE/OFFICEJTRUSTEE OR BENEFICIARY ADDRESS %OF INTEREST Brett Green MGR 475 Brickell Ave. Apt 2215 Miami FL 33131 100 (Use additional sheets for more space.) l As to any type of owner referred to above, a change of ownership occurring subsequent to the execution of this document, shall be disclosed in writing to the City prior to any action being taken by the City as to the matter relative to which this document pertains. 8. | affirm that the above representations are true and are based upon my personal knowledge and belief after all reasonable inquiry. I understand that any failure b»make mandated disclosures isgrounds for the subject rezone, future land use amendment, special excapUon, or variance involved with this Application to become void orfor the submission fora procurement activity to be non- responsive. | certify that | am legally authorized to omanuto this Affidavit and to bind the Applicant orVendor m the disclosures herein. Sworn to (or )and subscribed before nmby onthis _22n_'_day of 3,J, 20.ZDL' ^~ Molly Hudson Watson _V;_t' fkl �;_� �_i � I NOTARY PUBLIC Monroe County Signature of Notary Public Personally KnownFI0RProduced Identification ��J Type of Identification Produced ee_� Affidavit of Omership - January 2015 2 a PARTNERS September 16, 2020 Sabreena Colbert Senior Planner Planning and Development Services City of Sanford 300 North Park Avenue Sanford, FL 32771-1244 Re: Monroe Place Rezone to Planned Development 2306 West I" Street Sanford FL Parcel ID: 26-19-30-300-0070-0000 To whom it may concern, This letter shall serve as our Final Report under a modified CAPP for the Rezone to Planned Development Application as required for the parcel listed above. A letter explaining what is being done with the subject parcel was sent vial US Mail on September 4, 2020 to the property owners within a 500' buffer allowing 10-14 day response time. A copy of the letter and the list of property owners is attached for your reference. We have received question regarding the letter that we sent out from the following parties: PARTY PARCEL ID DATE Natalya Rzharova 2219305AD0000048C 9/9/2020 Denise Hurley 2219305AD0000048A 9/14/2020 William Holler/ 261930300004A0000 9/15/2020 JOBI PROPOERTIES LLC The parties that contacted our team had only general questions as to what was being proposed and the timing of the proposed development. None of the parties that contacted us had any comments or concerns with the proposed development. To date we have had no other correspondence, either verbally or written with any other parties that received the CAPP letter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Brett Green President Archway Partners �nz-Itn7o*03t77orn`-'zmrn-Ivz"x-ox m �''10xx0 OmDxcO DDm3' CHrn<DrnD<CmoOD o =G7-iOtn07�<vva-<�tonzrnHz-i-IH<MXmm0XDI�0 zrD-<Drn-�O�p3z-HIT.mrDnD�=z-oHmz�� m vrn Z �r-Hpz�m D�OmZ:K>zD-<H7�-v-<�zX "y�D;gym =n0-0 =0�-=oCQor(n>3nOxSpmtop D3,)x>zxmn70 3mmnrn �o� 70U'13�N >x—monhm px<oip i rzOOD3�'rn zT' 3-r>C-r0 —' gx >mx ><-a O rn p=>z$z°a�Q°m 03p-izz =-t��3D� 3rr-Xc0 _ 90 D m -v rn < z N Qo = O Z z w m O O rn X D N D rn n m= C n m D X 90 O CD3 tn7oD z� D3 �Xn rrn�rno �n O z LnX> m 03 LnT'H'^^3' _ SpDDm r -o y V) H ztn—� rn m m O m m r r_rn zT �, O3 r > n 3 z m m 0 O m r = r r F- N V F1 m -P "0 M M V M .41 -j -4, M V M -0 N-0 W N M N N O N F -i V N M N F•-+ F-+ Q tp F-+ 4 Ln 4 t-+ 0 Ln Ln M W 0 0 W M M PQ 0 M 0 A -P 0'-J 4 Ln 4 0 M W W N W F- 00 O F-+ F- F- F- O r W P O V F- O O 01 O 4 w m m O N O O Fj Ln O O t0 W N co F.. FA 0) F- C) -r-, i- 03 Z PO �v�073� ��X0 03 0o X m X `nrnrn rn D< <()X <<<< O<_<<< X y X D D -D< O D< D z* D< 0 tXtrzv O����n zn x} n=rn cn rn M< <rn w<<<< n H rn x' rn rnrnmrnr-mrnrnLnU)o �rn(n-0 ��rntnz�� ���c�� ���cr z���toc►jDc c*cmxc*-�o m z� �. M> l D D D D O D m D D D � NX X� -v m m m m m m0<0<<< < < 0>< � rn C< m X to r to cn to rn � to cn Cn cn D to to to cn to o to o to to o to to u7 0 r cn to to n to Q D O D D D c m D D D D r D D D D D m D rn D D m D D D X O D D D r D zzzzztn�z- zzzIzzzzzzz�o�zzczzzDzzzzmz� -n�-n-n-n-i3-n-n-n-n>-n-n-n-nm<mM>mm -n-n-nzn-n-nMXmz O* O O O (D O O o 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 z x 0 0 z O 0 0 n* 0 0 o z O m Op0o0-n-zi0000z00000,o0 000�oo00�0� -n © m -n -n r 0 rn -n -n -n m -n -n -n -n rn 0 -n 0 r -n -n r -n -n -n'-' o rn -n -n' � m;4 r` r-rr-ro*r-rr-r-(nr-r-ri-r rOwr-i- Lor-rr-�� rr- r--nr.� N r N N N raj z N N N N G7 N N N N N N N -n N N V N N N r N N N W N -� V W V V V Q� V V V V V V V V V �. V r w V V N V V V W V V V p V D V N V V V H V V V V -n V V V V V V V V V O V V V W N V V V V V W V to ► F-+ f-+ N r- F-+ t-+ I - f - F -i F- 'W t-+ W F ` h+ N "i F ` F-+ �` E + m O N VP W OLn w M N V �J N O F- (h) PARTNERS August 25, 2020 Dear Current Property Owner, Archway Partners would like to inform you of a proposed Planned Development Rezone Application for the property located at 2306 West 15Y Street. The Planned Development Rezone is a request to modify the zoning of the subject property to Planned Development for up to 100 units Senior Community. A map of the property is located below, and the proposed land use plan is attached. Due to CoVID-19 virus, we are asking that if you have any questions or comments please email Brett Green at b rg_een c archway-partners.com with any correspondence or contact us directly at (321) 689-8197. Archway Partners would like to address concerns or comments that you may have regarding this rezone to Planned Development. Sincerely, Brett Green President Archway Partners na>ria Jan�xom,, cr�a N mi r rLJ—LJZS lSWAM R0001DM35 0.07 0.10E SERaNh4O"..E COUNTY, hLOfRYDA rnt.,,c�:ro. mormma,+�rmoa:..erry,oa�ro�o�.wna ro�o�mf,�k �m i.w�•re�+..�.caae..rno o�,cma. Date: OP5r2020 i.n ion m. as L_ ll— NVId1131SVW ---_-=-------- lu� C NVId N31SVw - 30Vld 3O21NOW pp�:'u'N1TLL �WVIIIY r" �'/- Z3F So 1=1 (IUO=INVS NV 7d 3Sn ONVl " a„ (%OOJvsiou°Izw0nw°: ° o0 --------- �— 1 c i L 6 g p"rso o.�E w G o - s� a �sa;a z400 ogno o owo� Ohow _ °R p� y.g:zpLLF b 8arnzn »roc Hlgoj3'"gWi°o.. ga mso 0 3" 3z=g�op'mms7sw �°'aY� w,w�w_.. N�o�ui"LL NGS��Gw�G"'�= GGGLLpha 7 �05 0 Y =g pyg6 w5 d8j` p� HA 18 =ranaw �u>aoir"a«i�a f" E� k' Ih M TnTn, --� t I I 1 1 b Z a 1 � & F �A /a 0. W O w rwl I Y I O 1 w a� 36 Traffic Analysis Monroe Seniors Sanford, Florida Submitted to City of Sanford Sanford, Florida Prepared for Archway Partners Miami, Florida Prepared by VHBNanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. Landmark Center Two 225 E. Robinson Street, Suite 300 Orlando, Florida 32801 September 2020 Van assellangen BruslUn,-I c... Introduction VHB has been retained to conduct a traffic analysis in support of the Planned Development Rezoning for the proposed Monroe Seniors development located in Sanford, Florida. Figure 1 shows the project location. This traffic analysis was prepared in accordance with Schedule Q — Level of Service Requirements and Methodologies of the City's Code of Ordinances, Found in Appendix A. The traffic analysis quantifies both the existing traffic conditions along area roadways surrounding the site and the projected future traffic conditions expected for the Build condition (including development of the proposed site). The site plan can be found in Appendix B. Project Description The proposed Monroe Seniors project consists of 100 attached units of age -restricted senior housing development. The 4.7± acre site is located on parcel 26-19-30-300- 0070-0000. The subject parcel is currently wooded land and is located on the north side of SR 46. Access to the site will be provided via driveway connections located along SR 46. \Whb\gbMr0i10daodo\63717.00 Archway -Monroe Sen 1 Introduction TIAUeWMonroe Seniors_ Traffic Analysis 08312020.do" w b .y i, Ol PeIesdn 0 AllV m 0 o MO _no z r� O -a if Pd Vodj!V AA VATATll „ aAV'Ma1A.l4jtj .. , , .WAR MoT, ASTO TWA", any uouNuusaad mg its till -n r`n' CQ C X O C, Z6IL L Sn of Ann, W, PIPWITOR tootef-, W, G'rau�xa,�se..Il�xagerx �rusflrxf�'xxr�. Study Methodology and Study Area of Influence The focus of this study is to evaluate the traffic flows and operating conditions on the roadways likely to be used by motorists to and from the site and the potential traffic impacts on these roadways. Consistent with the City of Sanford's methodology for traffic analysis for planned development (Schedule Q), the study area for this traffic assessment includes roadways impacted by more than ten percent (10%) of the projected traffic. Based on this review, roadway segments that are within the traffic impact assessment area include the following: • SR 46 from I-4 to Rinehart Road • SR 46 from Rinehart Road to CR 15 (Upsala Road) • SR 46 from CR 15 (Upsala Road) to Airport Boulevard • SR 46 from Airport Boulevard to US 17 & 92 • Rinehart Avenue from S. Mall Entrance to SR 46 • US 17 & 92 from SR 46 to W 13t" Street 1W hb%gb4roJ%Orlando\63717.00 Archway -Monroe Sen 3 Introduction TlMtech\Monroe Seniors_Traffic Analysis 08312020.docx l` passe-Uarigeii-Brusdlrrt,i.ic:. Existing Conditions Existing Roadway Segment Analysis Table 1 summarizes the PM peak existing conditions roadway segment analysis within the analysis area. Consistent with the City of Sanford's methodology for traffic analysis, all roadway shall operate at LOS "D" or better. The roadway volumes were obtained from the 2019 FDOT Traffic Counts Program, found in Appendix C. The service volumes or service capacities for the adopted LOS "D" were obtained from the 2013 Quality/Level of Service Handbook. Table 1 shows that all roadway segments within the analysis area currently have excess capacity and operate within the adopted LOS "D" standard. Table 1 PM Peak Existing Conditions Roadway Segment Analysis Source: FDOT Traffic Count Program and 2013 Quality/Level of Service Handbook \\vhb\gbr%proj10dando163717.00 Archway -Monroe Sen 4 Existing Conditions TWkecMMonroe Seniors 7raff�c Analysis 08312020.docx Adopted Pk. Hr./Pk. Total Pk. Hr./ Meets No. of LOS Dir. Serv. 2019 K D Pk. Hr. Pk. Dir. LOS From To Lanes Standard Capacity AADT Factor Factor Volumes Volume Standard? SR 46 1-4 Rinehart Road 6 D 3,020 31,500 9.0% 51.9% 2,835 1,472 Yes Rinehart Road CR 15 6 D 3,020 36,000 9.0% 51.9% 3,240 1,682 Yes CR 15 Airport Boulevard 4 D 2,000 30,500 9.0% 51.9% 2,745 1,425 Yes Airport Boulevard US 17 & 92 4 D 2,000 19,400 9.0% 51.9% 1,746 907 Yes US 17&92 SR 46 W 131h Street 4 D 2,000 23,500 9.0% 51.9% 2,115 1,098 Yes Rinehart Road SR 46 CR 46A 4 D 2,000 18,500 9.0% 51.9% 1,665 865 Yes Source: FDOT Traffic Count Program and 2013 Quality/Level of Service Handbook \\vhb\gbr%proj10dando163717.00 Archway -Monroe Sen 4 Existing Conditions TWkecMMonroe Seniors 7raff�c Analysis 08312020.docx Vima.5se,-Hatigeri.Brustltra, .l *zc. 3 Future Conditions To determine the impacts of the site -generated traffic volumes on the surrounding roadway network, future traffic conditions were analyzed for 2021, when the development is anticipated to be completed. Anticipated site -generated traffic volumes were added to the existing background traffic volumes (2021 No -Build) to reflect the Build conditions in the study area. Background Traffic Growth Trip Generation Traffic growth on area roadways is a function of the expected land development, economic activity, changes to the transportation network, and changes in demographics. A frequently used procedure is to identify estimated traffic generated by planned major developments that would be expected to affect the study area roadways. An alternative procedure is to estimate an annual percentage increase in traffic and apply that increase to study area traffic volumes. Based on the historical traffic volumes within the analysis area, traffic volumes generally increased between -16.2% to 1.4%. To provide a conservative analysis, a two percent (2.0%) annual growth rate was applied to estimate the 2021 No - Build conditions. The growth rate calculation can be found in Appendix D. Table 2 summarizes the trip generation for the proposed development. The daily and peak hour trips are calculated based on equations in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trip Generatior2, 10th Edition'. This methodology is consistent with the City of Sanford and FDOT's guidelines. The ITE Land Use Code 252 — Senior Adult Housing — Attached was deemed the most appropriate for the proposed development. As shown in the table, the proposed Monroe Seniors development is expected to generate 377 new daily trips, and 27 new PM peak hour trips. The 377 trips per day are within the 500 trips per day guideline established by the City. 0 ' Trio Generation, 10'" Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); Washington, D.C.; 2012. Archway -Monroe Sdo\63717.00 5 Future Conditions Archway -Monroe Sen TlAltechlMonroe Seniors_Traffic Analysis 08312020.docx Vaxzasse.[tartgeiz B ustLirt lizc. Table 2 Project Trip Generation ITE Rinehart Road Rinehart Road PPA Peak TripS2 Land Use Size Total Daily US 17 & 92 Code Land Use Code Description Units Trips' Total Enter Exit 252 Senior Adult Housing -Attached 100 377 27 14 13 2,000 Total New External Trips 377 27 14 13 Sources: ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition; ITE Trip Generation Handbook 1 expressed in vehicles per day 2 expressed in vehicles per hour Trip Distribution and Assignment The directional distribution of site generated traffic is a function of population in surrounding towns, competing shopping opportunities, existing travel patterns, ease of access to the site, and traffic conditions on area roadways. In consideration of these factors the distribution of primary trips to and from the site is shown on Figure 2. SR 46 is the primary route for vehicles accessing the proposed development. The site -generated traffic was assigned to the roadway network based on the above trip distribution. The 2021 Build traffic volumes were calculated by adding the site -generate trips to the 2021 No -Build traffic volumes. Roadway Segment Analysis Table 3 summarizes the future conditions roadway segment analysis with the addition of project traffic. As seen in the table, all of the roadway segments will continue to have excess capacity with the addition of project traffic. Table 3 PM Peak 2021 Build Conditions Roadway Segment Analysis From To SR 46 14 Rinehart Road Rinehart Road CR 15 CR 15 Airport Boulevard Airport Boulevard US 17 & 92 US 17&92 1,682 SR 46 W 13t' Street Rinehart Road 9 SR 46 CR 46A 2021 Pk. 1,472 Pk. Hr./Pk. 2019 Pk. Annual Hr./Pk. Dir. Project 2021 Pk. Dir. Serv. Hr./Pk. Dir. Growth No -Build Trips Project Pk. Hr./Pk. Dir. Meets LOS Capacity Volume Rate Volume Distribution Dir. Trips Build Volume Standard? 3,020 1,472 2.0% 1,532 48.0% 7 1,539 Yes 3,020 1,682 2.0% 1,750 61.0% 9 1,759 Yes 2,000 1,425 2.0% 1,483 63.5% 9 1,492 Yes 2,000 907 2.0% 944 75.5% 11 955 Yes 2,000 1,098 2.0% 1,143 18.5% 3 1,146 Yes 2,000 865 2.0% 900 17.5% 3 903 Yes Source: FDOT Traffic Count Program and 2013 Quality/Level of Service Handbook \lvhb\ObBpr0jk0rlando\63717.00 Archway -Monroe Sen 6 Future Conditions TIAltech\Monroe Seniors Traffic Analysis 08312020.dou w cr t/7 00 �,.. pa � 11,19Ul, p8 ejesdn %S. Ac A5 o �a O O r, z v�X .� �, m -h o 0 ¢oma _. -'I r� 0 W Ln , cs �„ a P8 Jaodary M %0'8 v VI Lq .CR DAV MZ)lAA9AI8 ,00 s � p Ln No any UOWWisaad %0*1 '4 o vi OO " ?I ,_. lD ._.CD (D C1 n r+ r, r-r CD X Q Z6/L L �sn rn o o %0'Tt C� 0 ,, Vrxxzasse., aiige i,Brustliac,lnc. Conclusions This study has been prepared to evaluate the traffic impacts associated with the proposed 104 attached units of age -restricted senior housing development, known as the Monroe Seniors project, that will be located on the 4.7+ acre site with access off of West 1St Street. The following is a summary of study findings: ➢ The existing conditions analysis shows that all roadway segments within the analysis area have excess capacity and operate within the adopted LOS "D" standards. ➢ The proposed development is projected to generate 377 daily trips and 27 PM peak hour trips. The 377 trips per day are below the 500 trips per day guideline established by the City. ➢ With the addition of project traffic, all the roadway segments will continue to have excess capacity and operate within the adopted LOS "D" standards under the 2021 Build conditions. \\vhb\gbRprol0rlandol63717.00 p Archway -Monroe Sen O Conclusions TIA\tech\Monroe Seniors_Trafliic Analysis 08312020.doca Roadway Count By Speed Bin Summary Start Date: April 18, 2019 (Thursday) Start Time: 00:00 Stop Date: April 18, 2019 (Thursday) Stop Time: 24:00 County: Seminole Location: Riverview Av: Nof River landing Dr Direction: Two-way Total nnrKn17nla trhuS Speed (MPH) 1-5 5-10 ) 10-15 15-20 ' 20-25 E 25-30 30-35 1 35.40 4045 1 45.50 50-55 55-60 60-65 65.70 >74 Total Endtlme 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 is 56 387 1721 20:15 0 0 0 7 24 23 6 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 62 20:30 0 0 2 9 21 19 i 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 20:45 0 0 0 10 17 18 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 21:00 0 0 0 9 26 15 5 1 2 0 0 0 00 44 u 58 Hourly Total 0 0 2 35 88 75 29 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 235 21:15 0.00 0 0 2 16 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 21:30 0 0 t 1 5 18 12 9 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 21:45 0.00 0 1 2 14 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 22:00 0 0 1 13 16 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 Hourly Total 01 0 2 10 61 59 20 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 153 22:15 0 0 0 2 7 8 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 22:30 0 0 1 0 8 11 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 22:45 0 0 2 7 11 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 23:00 0 Et1 1 0 4 9 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 Hourly Total 0 0 2 4 26 39 32 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 23:15 0 0 0 0 2 4 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 23:30 0 0 0 0 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 23:45 0 0 0 1 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 00:00 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6� ,Hou.-fy Total 0 0 0 1 11 11 12 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 38 Speed (MPH) 1-5 1 5-10 10.15 E 15-20 20-25 1 25-30 l 30-35 35.40 40-45 45-50 50-55 55-60 1 60.65 1 65-70 1 170 Total Group 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 0 Grand Total 0 9 56 387 1721 1566 567 122 22 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 4454 Percentages 0.00 1 0.20 1.26 8.59 38.64 35.16 12.73 2.74 0.49 0.09 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 Total A,,gSpd 15%ile _ 50%iEe T° 54bi�e+ Speed >35 Summary >40 >45 >50 >55 >60 >65 >70 10 MPH Pace 4454 25.97 1 21.50 26.14 31.33 1--148 26 4 0 0 0 0 0 20- 30 center 3.32 _ 0.58__ ._ 0.09 ._„ 0.00 0.00 031, 0.00 0.00 Peak Hour Totals Speed (MPH) 1-5 5.10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 1 30-35 3540 40-45 45-50 50.55 55-60 60-65 ____T 65-70 _._ >70 Total Group 1 2 3 4 5 b 7 8 9 10 11 12 14mmTy 15 0730-08:30 0 1 9 44 177 62 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 308 Percentages 0.00 0.32 2.92 14.29 57.47 20.13 4.55 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.92 16:30-17:30 0_ E 1 13 ! 48 215 : 82 58 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 527 Percentages 0.00 N 1 0.19 2.47 t( y( 9.11 f1 40.99 34.54 11.01 __ 1.52 T. 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.83 Roadway Count By Speed Bin Summary Start Date: April 18, 2019 (Thursday) Start Time: 00:00 Stop Date: April 18, 2019 (Thursday) Stop Time: 24:00 County: Seminole Location: Riverview Av: Nof Palm Dr Direction: Two-way Total 04118/2019 (Thu) Speed (MPH) 1-5 5-10 10-15 IS -20 20-25 25-30 1 30-35 35-40 40-45 45 -SID 50-55 SS -60 60-0 65-70 1 -70 60-65 65-70 End Time 1 2 3 4 5 6- J- ---7--- -8 9 10 11 12 13 14 is Total 20:15 0 0 1 2 20 20 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 20:30 0 0 0 2 17 16 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 20:45 0 0 -0 2 11 15 14 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 50 21:00 1 0 1 0 0 009 1. 9� 23.6� 24.08 44.90 23.6 :)7 7 22 13 2 0 1 -0 0 0 0 0 0 1 47 Hourly To to f 1 0 0 1 6 57 73 46 76 1 1 0 0 0 Q 2 201 21:15 0 0 0 0 5 15 8 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 21:30 0 0 0 0 11 17 11 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 44 21:45 0 0 0 1 9 11 4 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 22:00 0 0 0 0 5 15 10 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 35 Hourly TOW 0 0 0 1 30 58 33 11 1 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 139 22:15 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0_ 0 20 22:30 0 0 0 1 2 8 133 5 0 0 0 0 0 32 22:45 0 10 0 0 0 1 10 5 2 0 0 0 0 26 23:00 0 0 0 1 1 8 1 11 2 2 2 2 �2 -.0- 0 E 0 0 0 27 Hourly Totil 0 0 3 5 32 40 0 1 12 11 'JE! 2 0 0 0 0 0 105 23:15 0 0 0 0 2 4 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 23:30 0 0 D 0 0 4 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 23:45 0 0 0 0 1 4 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 00:09 0 0-0 0 0 1 3 2 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 7 Howiy Totet 0 0 0 0 3 13 17 5 2 0 I 7 1 0 0 0 0 41 speed (MPH) 1-5 5 10 10-15 1 15-20 1 20-25 1 25-30 1 30-35 1 35410 1 4045 1 45.50 1 50-55 1 55-N 60-65 65-70 >70 Group 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 10 11 1 12 13 14 15 Total Grand Total 0 2 is 161 - 1080 1498 8 71 402 75 1 13 1 2 1 0 0 0 Percentages 0,001 0.05 0.45 4.02 26.96 37.39 217 1 7. 1*4 1.87 0.32 0.05 1 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 Total jAnSpdj 15%11. 1 50%ile jeIIS"v 4006 1 28.34 1 22.56 1 27.9811 33.97 Speed Summary >35 >40 >45 >50 377 91 16 3 9.41 2.27 0.46 007 >55 1 >60 1 >65 1 >70 10 MPH Pace 11 20- 30 0.02--1 0,02� 0.02 0.00 Speed (MPH) 1-5 5.10_ 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45-50 50-55 SS -60 60-65 65.70 >70 Group 1 _10-15 T -2 3 4 5 6 7 9 9 10 1 13 14 15 Total 06:45-07:45 0 0 2 17718- 106 90 2S 11 1 -0 0 0 0 0 0 253 Percentages O.00 0.00 0.79 1 7.11 41.90 35.57 9.88 4.35 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 6.32 16:45-17:45 0 j_ 13 118 200 116 3 0 0 0 0 0 490 Percentages 0.00 2.65 1. 9� 23.6� 24.08 44.90 23.6 :)7 7 4.08+ 0.61 Ono or, 0.00 00 0.00 12.23 1 U T LO HSMV_Ref Crash_Date Crash Time City County Crash_Stre lntersectin Crash_Type 85499875 12/17/2017 4:35 PM Sanford Seminole STATE ROA W IST STR Left Turn 88927543 2/7/2019 2:13 PM Sanford Seminole W 15T ST OAKAVE Sideswipe 89138315 8/16/2019 2:44 PM Sanford Seminole W IST ST TERWILLIG Rear End 89137894 5/30/2019 2:20 PM Sanford Seminole W IST ST SR 46 Angle 87366308 4/25/2019 8:05 PM Unincorpoa. Seminole WIST ST Rear End 86104216 9/2/2015 12:09 PM Unincorpo. Seminole FIRST ST SR46 Sideswipe 88928108 5/8/2019 8:20 AM Sanford Seminole W IST 5T 1ST ST Left Turn 88928076 5/2/2019 4:51 PM Sanford Seminole W IST ST Rear End 86604474 7/11/2017 10:50AM Sanford Seminole SR 46E 1ST DRIVE Rollover Vehicles Non_Moto Fatalities Estimated- Weather_(Light_Conc Crash_Typ, Crash_Typ, Crash_Sev� Manner - 2 0 0 $20,000 Clear Daylight Left Rear 5 Injury Angle 3 0 0 $6,000 Clear Daylight Same Direi E Property DSideswipe, 2 0 0 $5,000 Clear Daylight Rear End E Injury Front to RE 2 0 0 $5,500 Clear Daylight Right Angh SW Injury Angle 2 0 0 $1,000 Clear Dawn Rear End S Property D front to RE 2 D 0 $1,300 Clear Daylight Opposing! NS Property D Sideswipe, 2 0 0 $1,300 Clear Daylight Left Rear S Property DAngle 2 0 0 $5,000 Clear Daylight Rear End E Property D Front to RE 1 0 0 $0 Clear Daylight Rollover E Property DOther Exhibit C Roadway Count Summary Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. County Seminole City Sanford Intersection 1st street & SR 46 Date Thursday, October 15, 2020 7:00 All Vehicles Time Period 7:00 to 9:00 VHB Project #: 63717 Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Left Through Right 7:00 7:15 0 0 0 5 0 11 7:15 7:30 0 0 0 6 0 8 7:30 7:45 0 0 0 8 0 7 7:45 8:00 0 0 1 7 0 15 8:00 8:15 0 0 0 4 0 25 8:15 8:30 0 0 0 7 0 20 8:30 8:45 0 0 0 7 0 16 8:45 9:00 0 0 0 6 0 7 0 0 1 50 0 109 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Left Through Right 7:00 7:15 8 291 0 0 285 4 7:15 7:30 16 235 0 0 233 6 7:30 7:45 16 261 0 0 262 4 7:45 8:00 11 249 0 0 237 5 8:00 8:15 12 348 0 0 341 9 8:15 8:30 11 295 0 0 288 12 8:30 8:45 12 276 0 1 273 6 8:45 9:00 12 306 0 4 235 4 98 2,261 0 5 2,154 50 68 0 24 1_ 31 North / South 1st street 4- 1,137 East /West 41 � 5 SR 46 Peak Hour 8:00 - 9:00 47 Peak Hour Factor 1,225 -� 0.86 0 0 0 0 Total Pk Hr Voume 2,537 Roadway Count Summary Vanasse Hangen Brustlrn, Inc. County Seminole Eastbound City Sanford Westbound Intersection 1st street Through Right & SR 46 Through Right Date Thursday, October 15, 2020 4:00 0 All Vehicles 316 Time Period 16:00 to 18:00 0 0 259 8 16:30 16:45 21 238 0 VHB Project #: 63717 5 16:45 17:00 Northbound 227 0 Southbound 262 Time Period Left Through Right Left Through Right 16:00 16:15 0 0 0 6 0 12 16:15 16:30 0 0 0 7 0 it 16:30 16:45 0 0 0 6 0 8 16:45 17:00 0 0 1 6 0 15 17:00 17:15 0 0 0 3 0 23 17:15 17:30 0 0 0 9 0 18 17:30 17:45 0 0 0 8 0 13 17:45 18:00 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 0 1 48 0 105 2,571 39 1,261 5 0 0 0 59 0 23 Eastbound 1st street Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Left Through Right 16:00 16:15 11 266 0 0 316 6 16:15 16:30 21 215 0 0 259 8 16:30 16:45 21 238 0 0 290 5 16:45 17:00 16 227 0 0 262 6 17:00 17:15 16 317 0 0 378 13 17:15 17:30 16 269 0 0 319 13 17:30 17:45 15 251 0 1 303 9 17:45 18:00 21 279 0 4 261 4 137 2,062 0 5 2,388 64 2,571 39 1,261 5 0 0 0 59 0 23 North / South 1st street East / West 41 L SR 46 Peak Hour 17:00 - 18:00 68 Peak Hour Factor 1,116 -I► 0.86 0 Total Pk Hr Voume 2,571 39 1,261 5 0 0 0 State of Florida Department of Transportation TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT SUMMARY City: Sanford Engineer: County: 77 — Seminole Date: District: Five Major Street: SR 46 Lanes: 2 Minor Street: W 1st St Lanes: 1 MUTCD Electronic Reference to Chapter 4: http:(/mutcd.fhwa.dot.govlpdfs/2009r1 r2/part4.pdf Form 750-020-01 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 10/15 VHB October 19, 2020 Major Approach Speed: 45 Minor Approach Speed: 25 Volume Level Criteria 1. Is the posted speed or 85th -percentile of major street > 40 mph (70 km/h)? Q Yes No 2. Is the intersection in a built-up area of an isolated community with a population < 10,000? ❑ Yes 2 No 70%" volume level may be used if Question 1 or 2 above is answered "Yes" F-,� 70% ❑ 100% WARRANT 1 - EIGHT-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME Warrant 1 is satisfied if Condition A or Condition B is "100%" satisfied for eight hours. ❑ Yes F,-, 1 No Warrant 1 is also satisfied if both Condition A and Condition B are "80%" satisfied ❑ Yes No (should only be applied after an adequate trial of other alternatives that could cause less delay and inconvenience to traffic has failed to solve the traffic problems). Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume Condition A is intended for application at locations where a large volume of 100% Satisfied: ❑ Yes Q No intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control 80% Satisfied: ❑ Yes No signal. ° 70 /° Satisfied: ❑Yes n No -Basic Minimum hourly volume b Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures `Mav be used when the maior-street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated communitv with a population of less than 10.000 Record 8 hiohest hours and the corresoondinq maior-street and minor -street volumes in the Instructions Sheet. Number of Lanes for moving Vehicles per hour on major - Vehicles per hour on minor - traffic on each approach street (total of both street (one direction only) ¢ approaches) 5; Major Minor 100%a 80%b 7011/6` 100%a 80%b 70%° 1 1 500 400 350 150 120 105 2 or more 1 600 480 420 150 120 105 2 or more 2 or more 600 480 420 200 160 140 1 2 or more 500 400 350 200 160 EO:J -Basic Minimum hourly volume b Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures `Mav be used when the maior-street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated communitv with a population of less than 10.000 Record 8 hiohest hours and the corresoondinq maior-street and minor -street volumes in the Instructions Sheet. Existing Volumes WARRANT 1 - EIGHT-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME Page 1 of 2 Eight Highest Hours g ¢ °- 5; 5; O Street 0 c o 0 0 0 0 00 07 , cl' t[y 45 h O O o O o <? 0 0 0 0 r- 00 61 Major 1,036 1,173 1,152I;fll Minor 51 47 69 Existing Volumes WARRANT 1 - EIGHT-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME Page 1 of 2 State of Florida Department of Transportation TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT SUMMARY Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic Condition B is intended for application where Condition A is not satisfied and the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that traffic on the minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or conflict in entering or crossing the major street. Applicable: n Yes 100% Satisfied: ❑ Yes 80% Satisfied: n Yes 70% Satisfied: ❑ Yes Number of Lanes for moving traffic on each approach Vehicles per hour on major- street (total of both approaches) Vehicles per hour on minor - street (one direction only) Major Minor 11 100%a 1 809/67 70%` 100%a 80%b70%` 1 1 750 600 525 75 60 53 2 or more 1 900 720 630 75 60 53 2 or more 2 or more 900 720 630 100 80 70 IL 1 2 or more 750 600 525 100 80 70 Form 750-020-01 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 10115 'Basic Minimum hourly volume b Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures `May be used when the major -street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000 Record 8 hiahest hours and the corresnondina maior-street and minor -street volumes in the Instructions Sheet. Eight Highest Hours 4 °- <t ¢ o O a a a 0. Street00 5; O O O O o O O O O O O r— co 4% M ^cF t1y t0 Major 1,036 1,173 1,152 1,305 Minor 51 47 69 68 Existing Volumes No No n No Q No WARRANT 1 - EIGHT-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME Page 2 of 2 mmollu IM'' ✓V�lll�'YM hTDi' - �m/.r/n f ✓ , /� in ✓ ✓/t ✓ I ✓✓ryBl✓y✓�,n ✓+l�'� it?P✓',�✓ - lnr i,✓,,, r1r�'� -r � ,, ,. .. '+..... .. '. ✓, . _ .. , it �✓i„�,,. ✓ i ✓, v "J ”%✓ BT QERTRUDEAVENUE Wl9T tTREEI'(WtR48}. a ✓ 100' »w,� 100,_^ PROPOSED NEWS �r ASPHALT PAVEMENT STATE ROAD 46 PROPOSED TURNLANE �? EXTENSIONS �r % qqp �✓ ,�� ✓gdlm�t ��. . �p ,,, I( :y�✓ 41 1i✓���/�/ ��- w,✓ fi/ �,,,✓;,,,,, Ri wml TURNLANE FIGURE CADD NAME DATE PROJECT NO. APP, DESIGNED BY CMH 10/20 p^y / GS K F1y� a l<li pay I ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SURVEYORS 6106 I_ELTINE NATIONAL DRIVE, STE.118 ORLANDO, FL 328221 TEL£PIIONE(407)416A624 CERTIFICATE OF AUTNO-TION: 32059 DATE OCTOBER, 2020 SCALE DRAWN BY CAT 10/20 MONROE PLACE CHECKED BY CMH 10/20 APPROVED BY RMM 10/20 Brett Green From: Bonilla, Leandro <Ibonilla@seminolecountyfl.gov> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 3:35 PM To: Brett Green Subject: Re: Sidewalks Along Riverview in Sanford Brett, Now that you show me the area, yes Seminole County is proposing sidewalks along the East side of Riverview (ending at Narcissus) and along 1st street. The project is at 100% Design, almost complete, and anticipate to start construction in March 2021. Thanks, Leandro Bonilla, PE Project Manager Seminole County Public Works Department Engineering Division 100 East 1St Street Sanford, Florida 32771 Phone: 407-665-5655 Email: Lbonillo@serninolecountyfl.gov From: Brett Green <bgreen@archway-partners.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 3:22 PM To: Bonilla, Leandro <Ibonilla@seminolecountyfl.gov> Subject: Sidewalks Along Riverview in Sanford Leo, Nice talking with you earlier today. As I mentioned, 1 am proposing to develop a 100 -unit Senior housing development at 2306 West 1St Street in Sanford. Some of the neighboring residents live in Unincorporated Seminole County expressed safety concerns for pedestrians along Riverview from West 1St Street to Narcissus due to the lack of sidewalks. I wanted to see if Seminole County had any plans to put sidewalks into this community. If not, I wanted to see what the process would be to work collectively with the county to facilitate sidewalks in this community. Attached is an aerial of the area I am referring to. I am trying to get an understanding of the process as soon as possible, ideally in the next few days. Thanks for your help, let me know if you have any questions. Thanks!! Brett Green Archway Partners 475 Brickell Ave, Suite 2215 Miami, FL 33131 C:321-689-8197 BGreen@Archway-Partners.com ****Florida has a very broad Public Records Law. Virtually all written communications to or from State and Local Officials and employees are public records available to the public and media upon request. Seminole County policy does not differentiate between personal and business emails. E-mail sent on the County system will be considered public and will only be withheld from disclosure if deemed confidential pursuant to State Law.**** Exhibit E ARCHWAY PARTNERS October 20, 2020 Mayor Woodruff Commissioner Britton Commissioner Wiggins Commissioner Austin Commissioner Mahany 300 N. Park Ave., Sanford FL 32771 Re: Monroe Place — PD Approval Dear City Commission, Thank you for your willingness to move the PD Approval for Monroe Place forward on 1" reading at City Commission. We understand this was approved with the clear understanding that Archway Partners, LLC ("Archway") would study the potential traffic and safety concerns presented by the neighboring residents and the Commission. Archway does not take these concerns lightly and our team is committed to ensuring this development is completed without creating safety hazards or concerns of any kind. We have studied the surrounding roadway network, observed traffic patterns and discussed options and alternatives with City of Sanford and Seminole County staff in order to propose a development that provides a benefit to the community. We have studied and confirm the following: Traffic Signal on West 1st Street. VHB traffic engineers, as consultant retained by Archway for the specific purpose of studying traffic and safety, reviewed the necessary information to determine whether a traffic signal would be warranted at the intersection of West 1st Street and SR 46. Seminole County Traffic Engineer, Mark Bevis provided a Roadway Count from a study performed by Seminole County in 2019 on Riverview Avenue. See attached Exhibit A. This count did not show enough demand on Riverview to warrant a traffic signal on West 1st Street. VHB also performed a visual site inspection on the evening of October 15, 2020 to confirm current peak usage. This visual inspection indicated normal traffic patterns with occasional platooning caused by the signal locations east and west of the subject intersection. Turn lane and side street queueing was minimal with no spill out into other lanes. Occasionally, side street traffic would utilize the median opening as refuge, however, conflicts were not present. See attached Exhibit B. This level of trips does not warrant the necessity for a traffic signal. Additionally, VHB obtained crash data forthis intersection which showed 9 accidents overthe last 5 years, fortunately, none of which were fatal. All accidents wish to be avoided, however this number of accidents Archway Partners 475 Brickell Avenue, Suite 2215, Miami, FL 33131 over a 5 -year period would not warrant the installation of a traffic signal. Usually, 5 correctable crashes during a 12 -month period is considered a possible candidate for a signal to be warranted. This is not the case for this intersection. See attached Exhibit C VHB is an expert in performing traffic studies to determine roadway impacts and has worked with City of Sanford and Seminole County many times on traffic signals. Very specific criteria must be met in order for a traffic signal to be warranted. Unfortunately, this intersection does not meet the criteria that must be present to warrant a traffic signal. Although a traffic signal is not warranted here, our team is proposing the following to assist in traffic related inconveniences. As mentioned previously, there was no evidence of spill out from turn lanes into through traffic, extension of turn lanes do provide additional available queue. Extend Right and Left Turn Lane Access from West 1" Street on to SR 46. At the sole expense of Archway, we will coordinate with the appropriate jurisdictions to extend the dedicated right and left turn lanes which provide access to SR 46 by 100 feet. This would allow for better turn access and permit additional vehicles to queue. See attached sketch in Exhibit D Pedestrian Connectivity on Riverview Ave from Nacissus to Terwilliger Trail. Archway is committed to pedestrian safety and creating connectivity for the residents of the Riverview Avenue community. We are committing to ensure sidewalks are installed on Riverview Avenue from Narcissus Avenue to the Terwilliger Trail and Terwilliger Lane. Archway communicated with Seminole County Engineering Division on October 13, 2020. See attached correspondence as Exhibit E. Seminole County has already completed the design of sidewalks along Riverview Avenue and along West 1St Street with construction expected to commence in March 2021. In the event that Seminole County does not complete the proposed sidewalk project as indicated in the attached correspondence and site plan, Archway will pay for the costs associated with installing the sidewalks from Terwilliger Trail to Narcissus Avenue. See attached Exhibit E Traffic Calming on Riverview Avenue. Archway spoke with Mark Bevis at Seminole County Traffic regarding the installation of traffic calming speed bumps. Mr. Bevis indicated that at the 10/27/20 Seminole County Board of County Commission meeting a countywide traffic calming program will be considered. The ordinance would allow traffic calming to be studied at the request of the residents. If speed bumps are warranted, the costs are typically absorbed by the community. However, in this instance, Archway is willing to pay the costs associated with the installation of traffic calming speed bumps if requested by the residents. Additional Signage on West 1St Street and Riverview Avenue. Based on detailed inspection of the roadway from Narcissus to SR 46, we did not locate any speed limit signs or signage indicating Riverview Ave is a local street. Archway will coordinate with governing jurisdictions and pay for the costs associated with installing new speed limit signs, street signs that indicate Riverview is for local traffic only and "No Thru Traffic" signage will be installed. Archway Partners 475 Brickell Avenue, Suite 2215, Miami, FL 33131 The commitments above outline a concerted effort by our team to ensure the Riverview Avenue community is not negatively impacted by the development of Monroe Place. The traffic study, which was prepared VHB traffic engineers in September 2020, indicates that only 6% of the daily vehicular trips will utilize Riverview Avenue. The proposed Senior, Attainable Housing Development is a much less intense development than what is permitted based on the current Waterfront Downtown Business District ("WDBD") underlying Future Land Use. The WDBD permits 50 dwelling units per acre which is significantly higher than the 20 dwelling units per acre we are proposing. Additionally, WDBD permits Commercial and Industrial uses that would likely be substantially higher density and intensity than what is currently being proposed. Thank you very much for your consideration and we are excited about the opportunity of bringing this high-quality development to the Sanford community. Sincerely, Brett Green, President Archway Partners, LLC Archway Partners 475 Brickell Avenue, Suite 2215, Miami, FL 33131 RIVYAVENUE � 8 E� 7 0 x ° n Ste` ON GMil+f-fi NOt_EC O11 I ------------- �- -M IIH III b — a - �' ftn I __ 8 III f c ` o f _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ j T ------------"� ------ — — 8 _ o H N m m � g u fLV. v,000 (GN Of SnNfbaol p 20N'MG: fA 3lC iv Of SnNiORoI N n � 5� Ii�HPµtVntlOBf�A/�El m na a� a IsrAvmrye ,,.... ..,,, 111111 memg mEoi�fg� CCm H�IE8� 2a�ag�'$m' a° € 11 �"f g= a a8 §sgs„">°= >�� g o s"al :isx mo! z -n.. m Ord $� > <gc a im ° ,� � 7 ;� 6 �$�� o_'E€ � og¢ oxox o g g > € Sm RHj P'Fn`H _ H m� °zymv�; �� �� �r HID 1 m� oUna � m8 U li °P H s! _"Its �'�ffi�j �y 1�,P" s m€ ..m= 1 sem° 1�' mm EvR m mo 8"m�o 1 51 L ~_ Nrl LAND USE PLAN a i .. e ~3 K �H m s MONROE PLACE SANFO MASTER PLAN (rill „ SANFORD FL w- a, 7`R ms MASTER PLAN I