Loading...
3761ORDINANCE NO. 3761 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANFORD, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3117 OF SAID CITY; SAID ORDINANCE BEING A ZONING PLAN; SAID AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ZONING OF 26.458 _+ ACRES OF PROPERTY LYING BETWEEN E. LAKE MARY BOULEVARD AND PINE WAY AND BETWEEN MELLONVlLLE AVENUE EXTENDED SOUTHERLY AND ANDREWS ROAD (595 ANDREWS ROAD); FROM AG AGRICULTURE, TO PD, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, CONFLICTS AND EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF SANFORD, FLORIDA: SECTION 1: That Ordinance No. 3117 of the City of Sanford, Florida passed and adopted July 27, 1992, said Ordinance being the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Sanford, Florida, regulating and restricting the location and use of buildings, structures, land, and water for trade, industry, residence or other purpose, be and the same is hereby amended as follows: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO. be and the same is hereby rezoned to PD, Planned Development zoning district and the Planned Development Master Plan is attached as Exhibit "B" is included herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. SECTION 2: The rezoning action herein is subject to the conditions provided for and agreed to in the Development Order #02-0038. .SECTION 3: Severability. If any section or portion of a section of this Ordinance proves to be invalid, unlawful or unconstitutional it shall not be held to impair the validity, force or effect of any other section or part of a section of this Ordinance. SECTION 4: Conflict~ That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby revoked. SECTION 5: Effective Datc. That this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon the execution and recording of the Development Order referenced above, provided that said Development Order is fully executed and delivered to the City Clerk for recording within ninety (90) days of the date of adoption of this ordinance, otherwise this ordinance shall be null and void and of no force and effect. PASSED AND ADOPTED this?'-~day of ~'~ , A.D., 200~ As the City CommiS~of the City of Sanford, Florida CERTIFICATF I, Janet R. Dougherty, City Clerk of the City of Sanford, Florida, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Ordinance No. 3761, PASSE AND ADOPTED by the Cit~y.~ommission of the City of Sanford, Flor,da, on th~7' ~]S~/da of '--~/?~ ~.A~..,~2,0.0~2', was posted at the front door ' ' -- Y · of the City Hall in the City of Sanford, Florida, odih~.~_.~_ d~y of ~/~ , 200~'..~ A~'the City Clerk of the~ity ~/ of Sanford, Florida Ordinance No. 3761 .CERTIFICATF ~ J..~et R. Dougherty City Clerk of the. City of Sanford, Florida, do hereb celt f onthe :f~, dayof //~,~L,, 20,-,.Z--~ ....... . Y ' y · ,--,~ , u~, ina[ tne fully executed Development Order was received by me within r~hety (90) days of the date of adoption of this ordinance a d said Development Order was recorded by me on (~,,4,/,,c& ,.~/ 2 O.R. Bookg)Z/c~/--/c~ Pa~'e ~7/ P .... " ' O~'-'-~nd u., , uD,c h[ecorc~s of 8em nole County, Flor da, the City Clerk of thi~'City ~/ of 8anford, Florida I:\Sharon~2002\Sanford~Ordinances~3761. pd rezone.wpd Ordinance No. 3761 EXHIBIT"A" THE NORTH ½ OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 20 SOUTH, RANGE 31 EAST, SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS THE WEST 1501.30 FEET THEREOF AND LESS THE EAST 622.35 FEET OF THE WEST 2023.65 FEET OF THE SOUTH 417.00 FEET OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 18 AND ALSO BEGIN AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, R~U.N ?,,E,S,T 8.7 CHAINS, RUN SOUTH 12 98 CHAINS EAST 4 CHAINS, EAST 20 -00 00 NORTH 4 75 CHAIlU.~ ~T~, T~'~-- ' .26 ........... , ...... ,, -~ ~=~INNING, SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA. I Jllll III II III fl Iii # IIIll Iit J J Jllll IIIB II J II III iij ,~_; .... CiTY OF SANFORD DEVELOPMENT ORDER No. 02-0038 On May 27, 2003, City of Sanford issued this Development Order relating to and touching and concerning the following described property: THE N ~ OF THE NW 'A OF SEC 18, TWP 20S, RGE 31E, SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLOR/DA, LESS THE W 1501.30 FT THEREOF AND LESS THE E 522.35 FT OF THE W 2023.65 FT OF THE S 417.00 FT OF THE N HALF OF THE NE ¼ OF SEC 18 AND ALSO BEGIN AT THE NE COR OF THE NW ¼ OF SEC 18, RUN W 8.7 CHAINS, RUN S 12.98 CHAINS, E 4.26 CHAINS, E 20°00'00" N 4.75 CHAINS, N TO BEG, SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA. (The aforesaid legal description has been provided to the City of Sanford by the owner of the afore described property) FINDINGS OF FACT Property Owners: Deborah C. Neukam 723 Cherokee Circle Sanford, Florida 32773 Kenneth A. Burke & Mary K. Mixon & & Patricia B. Vassailo Et Al. 134 Hidden Lake Drive Sanford, Florida 32773 Kenneth A. Burke 134 Hidden Lake Drive Sanford, Florida 32773 Kenneth A. & Rebecca Burke 595 Andrews Road Sanford, Florida 32773 Project Name/Address: Magnolia Club Townehomes / 595 Andrews Road Parcel Number(s): 18'20-31-300-006A-0000/18-20-31-300.006D.0000 18-20-31-300-006E-0000/18-20-31-300.0060.0000 Requested Development Approval: PD Rezone property for use as a residential townhome community The development approval sought is consistent with the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan and will be developed consistent with and in compliance to applicable land development regulations and all other applicable regulations and ordinances. The owner of the property has expressly agreed to be bound by and subject to the development conditions and commitments stated below and has covenanted and agreed to have such conditions and commitments run with, follow and perpetually burden the afore described property. ORDER NOW, THEREFORE, it is ORDERED AND AGREED THAT: m (1) (z) FILE NUM 2003093741 OR BOOK 04848 PAGE 0572 The aforementioned application for development approval is GRANTED. All development shall fully comply with all of the codes and ordinances in effect in the City of Sanford, Florida at the time of issuance of permits including all impact fee ordinances. (3) The conditions upon this development approval and the commitment made as to this development approval, all of which have been accepted by and agreed to by the owner of the property are as follows: Development Order No. 02-0038 - Magnolia Club Townhomes (a) Development of the property shall be in accordance with the REVISED Magnolia Club Planned Development Master Plan dated April 24, 2003 (b) Any development on land considered environmentally sensitive or wetlands shall be mitigated as required by state and local jurisdictional requirements. (c) A Preliminary Subdivision Plan and Subdivision Improvement Plans shall be submitted and approved by the Development Review Team and constructed as approved by the City prior to any use or development of the site; and (d) A Final Plat shall be reviewed, approved and recorded prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy. (e) The existing pond (labeled as Existing Pond Tract-l) shall be bermed up, so that the overflow structure can be elevated to a minimum elevation of 45.5 feet. (/) A drainage pipe of appropriate diameter shall be constructed from the Magnolia Club pond (Tract-l) and stubbed out at the property line with the Rose Hill subdivision. The developer for the Magnolia Club Subdivision will obtain and incur all permits and construction expenses for the connection of the stub out with the Rose Hill pond. (g) Buffer: Buffering between the Rose Hill subdivision should be changed to include the following: (1) A 35 foot wide natural buffer area along the west property line should be retained. All natural vegetation shall remain. (2) A six foot high masonry wall shall be located approximately 38 feet from the west property line, east of the natural buffer to create a solid screen. Climbing vines with irrigation shall be provided on the west side of the wall in order to provide a visual vegetative buffer between Rose Hill Subdivision and Magnolia Club. (3) The internal access road should be shifted easterly of the masonry wall. (4) The proposed units should maintain approximately 105 feet of distance from the western property line. (5) The majority of town home units facing the western property Page 2 of 4 FILE NUM 200309374! OR BOOK 04848 PAGE 0573 (4) (5) line should have minimal windows. (h) Landscaping: Additional trees shall be planted between the western property line and the proposed town homes. Such trees shall fill the blank spots within the 35 foot buffer area. A tree survey that identifies trees of 4 inch caliper or greater shall provide the basis for in-filling the blank areas with evergreen trees and shrubs. These amenities shall be considered as required project improvements and shall be maintained in perpetuity by the Home Owners Association. This Development Order touches and concerns the afore described property and the conditions, commitments and provisions of this Development Order shall perpetually burden, run with and follow the said property and be a servitude upon and binding upon said property unless released in whole or part by action of the City of Sanford by virtue of a document of equal dignity herewith. The owner of the said property has expressly covenanted and agreed to this provision and all other terms and provisions of this Development Order. The terms and provisions of this Order are not severable and in the event any portion of this Order shall be found to be invalid or illegal then the entire order shall be null and void. Done and Ordered on the date first above. As approved and authorized for execution by the City Commission at their meeting of ~Y~,~a Z--/ , 2c:,o'~. By.'~~~' ~ Date: S. 7_'-I. 21DO~ Russ L. {~ibson AICP Interim Director of Planning & Community Development Development Order No. 024)038 - Magnolia Club Towahomes Page 3 of 4 FILE NUN E00309374! OR BOOK 04848 PAGE 0574 .OWNER'S CONSENT AND COVENANT COMESNOW, c'~(r~''3' allZ ,Jr. theowner(s)oftheafore described property in this Development Order, on behalf of itself and its heirs, successors, assigns or transferees of any nature whatsoever and consents to, agrees with and covenants to performa and fully abide by the provisions, terms, conditions and commitments set forth in this Development Order. Shelly McMillen Witness P_ Witness Owner STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF Oro. je I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowledgments, personally appeared who is, personally known to me or who has produced FL ~r;y~C k*~ . identificatio~ ~d who did t~e ~ oath~ as WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this ~_O{q day of _ ~dO~ , _2~o~_. Notary Publi~,~n and for the County and State aforementioned. Development Order No. 0243038 - Magnolia Club Townhomes Page 4 of 4 PD REZONE -NORTH PD Rezone (AG to PD) 595 Andrews Road Parcel I~.~ t~-20-31-300~0060-0000 ( ~"9-20-31-300-006A-0000 /~ ~ ~'9-20-31-300-006D-0000 -!~-20-3 ~ -300-006E-0000 0 SITE EVALUATION REPORT FOR MAGNOLIA CLUB DEVELOPMENT CITY OF SANFORD ENGINEERING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT 300 N. PARK AVENUE SANFORD, FLORIDA 32771 PREPARED BY: CESCivil Engineering Group, Inc. 654 PUTNAM AVENUE ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32801 DATE: APRIL 2003 Magnolia Club Site Dev' pment Evaluation Executive Summary April 2003 Page ES -1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SCOPE OF WORK This report presents the results of an independent evaluation effort to determine the impacts, if any, that a proposed development within the City of Sanford, known as Magnolia Club, has on the surrounding areas. The evaluation effort was divided in three major components; namely, the drainage conditions of the area and the impact that the new development would have on those existing conditions; the traffic conditions of two major intersections near the proposed development, and the impact that the proposed development would have on those two intersections; and the urban planning compatibility of the proposed development with the existing land uses in the area, such as land use, architectural values, and future land use projections for the area. Civil Engineering Group, Inc., (CEG) was tasked by the City of Sanford to perform the independent evaluation analysis and provide the City with recommendations regarding the impacts, if any, that this development would have on existing developments within the study area. BACKGROUND The Magnolia Club Development is proposed on a parcel of land recently petitioned to be annexed into the City of Sanford, where existing zoning regulations define a permitted use of agricultural (AG), with a future land use designation of medium density residential (MDR), with a density of up to 10 units per acre. On November 7, 2002, this parcel of land was brought in front of the City of Sanford's Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) with a petition to rezone from AG (agricultural) to PD (planned development). The P&Z denied the petition, and in a letter to the developer stated that the denial was based on "concerns with increased impacts the proposed development may have on existing storm water and traffic problems in the area". The recommendation from P&Z was brought in front of the City of Sanford Commission on December 9, 2003, and it was decided to postpone their decision until March 10, 2003 to allow for the developer to provide the necessary funds for the City of Sanford to seek an independent evaluation to be funded by the developer to address the stormwater management, traffic, and land planning issues associated with the proposed development. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site Dev, pment Evaluation Executive Summary April 2003 -Page ES -2 Consequently, the Civil Engineering Group (CEG) was selected by the City of Sanford to assemble a team of professional consultants to perform a drainage study, a traffic study and to evaluate the urban planning issues associated with this development The proposed Magnolia Club Development is located north of Pine Way, west of Mellonville Avenue, east of Rose Hill Trail, and south of E. Lake Mary Boulevard. The subdivision is accessed through Mellonville Avenue from the north, via E. Lake Mary Boulevard. The subdivision is located within Section 18, Township 20 South, Range 31 East. The project area lies within the Lake Jessup drainage basin and within the jurisdiction of the City of Sanford through the ongoing annexation process. A location map for the project area is included as Figure ES -1 of this report, PROJECT APPROACH The project included the collection of existing data to help in the development of an existing conditions model to define the capacity of the stormwater management system. This included review of archived construction plans for Rose Hill subdivision, Magnolia Park Subdivision, Baker's Crossing Subdivision, and industrial sites located south of East Lake Mary Boulevard. Also, the update model of the Lake Jessup Master Stormwater Management Plan prepared by Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. (CDM) for Seminole County was obtained to be uses as the basis for this independent evaluation. The CEG Team consists of- • Leftwich Consulting Engineers, Inc. (LCE) as the traffic engineers who performed an independent study to evaluate the impact that this development would have on critical intersections near the development. • JCR Consulting, Inc., Urban Planners, who evaluated the compatibility of 4 the proposed development with the surrounding areas, as well as school capacity, architectural values, etc. * Traffic Count Resources, Inc. who performed the updated traffic counts for the traffic evaluation. * A Natural Balance Environmental Consultants, who established the Normal High Water Elevation for the existing pond that will be part of the Magnolia Club development. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 20 SOUTH, RANGE 31 EAST SCALE. NTS IAmok � Idmilk 6"Eff Engineering Enginring Group, Inc. I -am— — lqm� DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION Fig. No. PPR1L 2003 Magnolia Clob Site Det pment Evaluation Executive Summary April 2003 Page ES -3 Since the City of Sanford had sought a truly independent assessment of this development, and its potential impacts to the surrounding areas, the CEG Team decided to undertake this project as a new project, as opposed to reviewing the information that had originally been submitted to the City. The traffic evaluation was done with new traffic count data perforrned for this project, and using Seminole County's latest traffic data to update the model. The urban planning component was based on proposed site development plans, and the drainage evaluation was also done using the CDM Master Plan as the basis for the hydrologic and hydraulic models with the Normal High Water Elevation for the Magnolia Club retention pond established by a biologist. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT The land where the Magnolia Club development is proposed is a L-shaped parcel of land that could be defined in two parts, with natural topography flowing from northwest to southeast, as does most of the land in this area. The north part (Magnolia Club North) consists of 13.5 acres of land draining to an existing pond, with outflow to the southeast, towards the south part of the parcel. The south portion (Magnolia Club South) consists of approximately 12 acres of land, and it sheet flows to an existing wetland located to the east. This wetland is defined by the Magnolia Park Subdivision on the east and north, the Baker's Crossing Subdivision to the south, and the proposed Magnolia Club to the west, and receives runoff from over 260 acres of land. The watershed for this wetland starts north of E. Lake Mary Boulevard, and west of Lake Silver, and drains to the roadside swales along Mellonville Avenue from E. Lake Mary Boulevard to the entrance to Magnolia Park, and includes a couple of industrial sites on both sides of Mellonville Avenue. This wetland outfalls into an existing 84 -inch Concrete Box Culvert located along the east end of the Baker's Crossing Subdivision, which conveys runoff to the roadside ditch on the west side of Mellonville Avenue, south of Pine Way, from where it flows into Lake Jessup. Figure ES -2 shows an aerial view of the area with the different drainage features and connectivity within the model. Under existing conditions the runoff from Magnolia Club North reaches the existing pond (Pond North) until it reaches its overflow elevation around 43.5. At that point it overflows to Magnolia Club South, CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. li 11, Magnolia Club Site Dev, pment Evaluation Executive'Sdirnmal'y' April 2003 Page ES -4 from where it joins the runoff generated by Magnolia Club South, and sheet flows to the existing wetland. The City of Sanford Land Development Code requires that any proposed development must meet two primary drainage requirements; namely, retention of the first flush of runoff, and attenuation of peak rates of runoff outfalling from the site. The former is accomplished by providing enough volume between the Normal High Water Elevation and the control elevation (i.e. elevation at which a body of water is allowed to outfall). The latter is accomplished by demonstrating that the peak rate of outfall for post -development conditions is equal to or less than the peak rate of outfall for pre -development conditions. For the purpose of this evaluation CEG developed an existing conditions model by updating the Stormwater Master Plan developed by CDM for the Lake Jessup Drainage Basin. This model was updated by replacing the model's undeveloped sites with the development features of the Magnolia Park and the Baker's Crossing Subdivisions, with both being built after the model was developed. This updated model was then defined as Pre -Development Conditions, since it does include approved developments that are under construction, but only includes the Magnolia Club parcel as an undeveloped parcel of land. Using the Normal High Water Elevation determination report attached as Section 7 of this report, the model is used to predict that under existing conditions there would be a total outfall of 7.1 cubic feet per second of stormwater runoff from the Magnolia Club parcel to the wetland. The hydrologic/hydraulic model was then revised by subtracting the undeveloped land where Magnolia Club is proposed, and adding the proposed "developed" Magnolia Club site. This model is considered as the t Pos De Conditions. In addition a modification to the existing pond is proposed to berm up its overflow to the southeast to a minimum elevation of 45.5, with an overflowdirectly into the wetland. Another retention pond is proposed to retain runoff from the Magnolia Club South basin and attenuate the peak flow even further. With the recommended adjustments to the proposed drainage system, the post development model predicts a total outfall rate of 1.68 cubic feet per second from the developed site to the wetland. This translates in a total reduction of almost 77% on the peak rate of outfall. Therefore, this report concludes that the Proposed development would not cause any adverse impacts to the stormwater management conditions of this area. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site Da', 9ment Evaluation Executive Summary April 2003 Page ES -5 TRAFFIC IMPACTS The Magnolia Club Development is located in Seminole County off of the Lake Mary Boulevard extension south of Mellonville Avenue. A land use of 114 single-family dwelling units were originally proposed for the development but has been reduced to 108 units to accommodate the additional buffer. Access for the site will be served via an extension of Mellonville Avenue at the intersection with Lake Mary Boulevard. Leftwich Consulting Engineers, Inc. (LCE) was retained to prepare a traffic analysis as requested by the City of Sanford. This was done to determine the traffic impacts on the surrounding roadways and intersections that are associated with the proposed development. LCE was asked to review a previous study of the project and to conduct an independent analysis. The results of this study produced similar conclusions as that of the previous study regarding the traffic impacts on surrounding roactways, and intersections. Based on the existing conditions observed on the surrounding roadway network and the increase in traffic flow on these roadways, the following conclusions can be made: * Lake Mary Boulevard, Airport Road, Sanford Avenue and CR 427 function at an adequate level of service in the year 2005 without the need of widening. * From Table 4 (see traffic evaluation on Section 5 of this report), Year 2005 Background Roadway Conditions and Table 6, Year 2005 Roadway Conditions Total (with Project); The Magnolia Club project trips do not cause any roadways to fall below the Adopted Level of Service of the roadways. * From Table 5, Summary of Intersection Level of Service - Year 2005 Background (without Project) and Table 7, Summary of Intersection Level of Service - Year 2005 Total (with Project); The CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnoliia,Club S7de Dei, pment Evaluation Executive Summary April 2003 Page ES -6 Magnolia Club project trips do not cause any intersections to fall below the acceptable Level of Service. This traffic study shows that the Magnolia Club Development will not adverselyJRqIct ,,_te surrounding roadways in the build -out Xear di roadways and intersections . The surrounding roa ons are projected to operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS) in the year 2005. URBAN PLANNING ISSUES JCR Consulting was retained to review various elements of the "Magnolia Club PD" second phase application submitted to the City of Sanford pertaining to compatibility and buffering to the surrounding area. The evaluation report is included in Section 6 of this report. The applications are for annexation and zoning designation change. The four elements that were requested to be investigated by JCR Consulting were as follows: 1. Land Use Compatibility; 2. School Capacity; 3. Architectural Compatibility; and 4. Buffering to Rose Hill Subdivision an existing development. Project Description The original Magnolia Club development application proposed to annex and rezone from Agriculture (AG) to Planned Development (PD) for a proposed 114 unit townhome community. Gross density of the original application was at 4.98 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) and7.7 du/ac of net density per staff calculations. A revised Master Plan provided by the applicant proposes 108 units, a reduction of 6. Gross density of the revised Master Plan is approx. 4.7 du/ac and net density of 7.3 du/ac utilizing staff assumptions. Included on the plan beside the townhome lots are tracts include: existing lake; jurisdictional wetland; right-of-way; treatment pond; natural landscape & conservation easement and open space which include some recreational facilities. Sole public access to this project is via "Magnolia Park PD", phase one of this entire collection of parcels. An emergency access is provided to CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site Deli-.)pment Evaluation Executive Summary Apri1'1003 Page ES -7 Andrews Road via the proposed intemal roadway of the townhome project. It is our understanding that this is road connection is to be gated and is not for public use. Refer to Master Plan, Attachment "A". A summary of our findings on the above areas of concern is as follows: I Land Use Compatibility: Project Area (4.7 du/acre gross density and 7.3 du/ac net density): Seminole County Future Land Use Designation for the site: Medium Density Residential (Max. 10 du per acre) and Conservation (wetlands) Sanford Future Land Use Designation proposed for the site: Medium Density Residential (Max. 10 du per acre) and Resource :Protection (wetlands). Surrounding Areas: West: (Sanford) Medium Density Residential (Max. 10 du/ac). "Rose Hill Subdivision" approx. 6 units/acre on typical 50'x137' lots. East: (Sanford) Low Density Residential Single Family (Max. 6 du/ac) South: (Sanford) Low Density Residential Single Family (Max. 6 du/ac) "Baker's Crossing PD" North: (Sanford) Industrial Although gross density is used to determine permitted density, even the net density is below the max. of 10du/ac criteda for the Medium Density Residential future land use designation. In addition, the net density of this project, of approx. 7.3 du/ac is only slightly over that of "Rose Hill" which is at approx. 6 du/ac net density per staffs calculation. The proposed Land Use from County to City is consistent with the current future land use designation as well as compatible to the adjacent land use designations properties. Sources: Sanford Future Land Use Map and Seminole County Future Land Use Map CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site De4%,- pment Evaluation Executive Summary April 2003 Page ES -8 School Capacity: We were able to obtain the latest statistics from Seminole County School Board. Although there was an increase to the current student enrollment figures from those used in the original staff report, dated 8-16-02, the proposed development generated school age children for the elementary, middle and high schools will not exceed the Florida Inventory School House Capacity (FISHCAP). Refer to Attachment "B" for current school enrollment statistics chart The current school capacity would not restrict development of the proposed project. Architectural Compatibility; The Magnolia Club applicant has provided elevations for the proposed townhomes. Attached units range from two to six units. The units are a maximum of two stories for the interior units and one story for the exterior units. It would also appear that there are limited windows on the front elevation. The building materials appear to be siding, stone accents, shutters, shingle roofs and arcl*mctural treatments on the front face of the buildings at the roof peaks. This type of constructoni. s elearriy residential in character. Refer to Building Elevations, Attachment "C" (four units); "D" (five units); and "E" (six units). The building architectural character is compatible with the surroundli-ig, resideratial developments. Buffering to Rose Hill Subdivision: Since the original submittal by the applicant, refer to the Master Plan, Attachment "A", the proposed buffering adjacent to the Rose Hill Subdivision has been changed to include the following: 1. Retention of a 35' wide natural buffer area along the west property line. All natural vegetation shall remain. 2. X"s'ix foot high masonry wall to be located approx. 38' from the west _property ,Iine, east of the natural buffer to create a solid screen. t. 3. The internal access road has been shifted easterly of the masonry wall. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site Do.. opment Evaluation Executive Summary April 2003 Page ES -9 4. The proposed units have been shifted easterly to maintain approx. 105' of distance from the western property line. 5. The majority of townhome units facing the western property line have no windows on the second story elevation. 6. Additional trees are proposed to supplement the area between the western property line and the proposed town homes. .M There are five buildings facing the west property line. Only five units, one in each of the five buildings, located on the second floor have window openings. There is one building with the side elevation facing the west property line. No windows are located on this face. Along this same distance is approximately thirteen (13) residential lots located in the Rose Hill Subdivision. Currently, the Rose Hill Subdivision configuration provided for a road right-of-way adjacent to the west property line of the Magnolia Club development. A minimum front setback for Rose Hill is 25 foot front setback. It is estimated that there would be between 170 to 180 feet between actual residential structures of these two developments. The Developer commitments listed above along the west property line in the current proposal will provide sufficient buffering between the Magnolia Club and Rose Hill developments. It is recommended that the following conditions for approval be added for this development to supplement the vegetation buffering along the "Rose Hill" subdivision common property line: 1. In order to identify the existing screening effectiveness within the proposed 35' natural buffer area strip, a tree survey be conducted along the western property to identify species and caliper of all trees greater than 4". Others may be listed as clusters. 2. That supplemental tree planting along the western property line inside or outside the natural buffer area be located to fill in any existing tree vegetation gaps along the western property line. All trees planted within the natural buffer area shall be of evergreen species consistent with that already present or, as approved by staff, to provide a screening quality. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site Doi, -,pment Evaluation Executive Summary April 2003 Page ES -10 ORGANIZATION OF REPORT The report is divided into 4 major sections, with supporting documentation included in other sections. These sections are as follows: SECTION 1— DRAINAGE EVALUA110N - METHODOLOGY OF ANALYSIS Discusses the purpose and objectives of the project. Provides a site description and history, along with an overview of the stormwater infrastructure present in the area. This section describes the data collection process, identifies the methodology utilized, and describes the software used for the evaluation of the area. SECTION 2 — DRAINAGE EVALUATION - EXISTING CONDITIONS This section describes the infrastructure assessment phase; summarizes the findings of the evaluation project; identifies and describes drainage areas and features; identifies political boundaries, permitting jurisdictions, design criteria, and flow patterns; and provides a detailed description of the watershed, its drainage system, hydrologic and hydraulic parameters, and computer modeling. SECTION 3 — DRAINAGE EVALUATION - PROPOSED CONDITIONS ANALYSIS This section describes alternative analysis, design criteria, hydrologic and hydraulic modeling, basins and sub -basins characteristics, critical drainage features and their proposed modifications, maintenance issues associated with development, environmental impacts, jurisdictional concerns and permittability challenges. SECTION 4 — DRAINAGE EVALUATION - RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS The primary objective of this section is to outline the findings of the study, and identify recommendations to eliminate any potential impacts that this development may have on the surrounding areas. SECTION 5 — TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ANALYSIS SECTION 6 — URBAN PLANNING EVALUATION SECTION 7 — NORMAL HIGH WATER ELEVATION DETERMINATION REPORT SECTION 8 — SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. DRAINAGE EVALUATION CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS sa'SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . PC ADY 1?;7-X INI'llf- Magnolia Club Site Dei—jpment Evaluation Section 1 April 2003 Page 1-1 METHODOLOGY OF ANALYSIS DATA COLLECTION The data collection for this project was achieved by review of old archives on the watershed and its vicinity, review of aerial photography, review of the Stormwater Master Plans for the Lake Jessup Drainage Basin, by Camp, Dresser & McKee, and topographic survey of existing facilities. Previous studies, publications, and construction plans included: • City of Sanford Land Development Regulations • Topographic survey of drainage systems by LSTS (March 2003) • Construction Plans for Rose Hill Subdivision Construction Plans and Supporting Calculations for Baker's Crossing Subdivision • Construction Plans and Supporting Calculations for Magnolia Park Subdivision • City of Sanford Planning & Zoning Agenda Item on Annexation and Rezoning Petition for Magnolia Club Development • Lake Jessup Drainage Basin Stormwater Master Plan by CDM • Myrtle Street Special Area Study – Draft Report by WSA All information compiled as part of the data collection effort was field verified for accuracy, and where necessary, re -surveyed. For the development of the existing condition model, a few assumptions were The wetland and ditches are assumed clean and functioning as intended. • Stormwater Management calculations for existing development are taken as approved by the local jurisdiction, with no effort to evaluate its accuracy. • Tailwater elevations are obtained from Stormwater Management Master Plan for Lake Jessup Drainage Basin, by CDM. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site Dei. ipment Evaluation Section I April 2003 Page 1-2 The hydrologic calculations were performed using the SCS Unit Hydrograph Method with a peak rate factor of 323, which is consistent with the Master Plan and typical of this type of terrain. Consistent with the City of Sanford's Land Development Regulations, the storm event used was the 25 year — 24 hour storm event Tailwater elevations from the CDM Master Plan were utilized for the calculations. The Natural Resources Soil Conservation Service (NRSCS) Runoff Curve Number method was utilized to predict runoff volumes and rates, and the kinematic wave method was used to predict the time of concentration through overland flow, with shallow concentrated flow/velocity computations used for Miami Curb and gutter flows. The hydrologic and hydraulic models were developed using the Advanced Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Program, and flood stages were predicted for existing conditions and the alternatives developed to alleviate the flooding. Using the aerial photography with one -foot contours, the routings were also used to predict depth of flooding, and duration of flooding for each applicable node. Once the hydrologic/hydraulic model was developed for existing conditions, flooding elevations are predicted by estimating the hydraulic gradeline at the key nodes of the system (i.e. curb inlets, ditch, etc.). These elevations are compared to the one -foot contour maps to estimate the extent of the flooding, and using the Node -Time series summary of the modeling software, durations of flood are established. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site Deily ,pment Evaluation Section 2 April 2003 Page 11-1 EXISTING CONDITION ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION The hydrologic and hydraulic model for the study area consists of the watershed that drains to an existing wetland located in the middle of several residential developments, and is defined by the Magnolia Park Subdivision on the east and north, the Baker's Crossing Subdivision on the south, and the proposed Magnolia Club on the west This wetland receives runoff from over 260 acres of land, starting north of E. Lake Mary Boulevard, and west of Lake Silver, and draining through the roadside swales along Mellonville Avenue from E. Lake Mary Boulevard to the entrance to Magnolia Park. The basin also includes a couple of industrial sites on both sides of Mellonville Avenue. This wetland outfalls into an existing 84 -inch Concrete Box Culvert along the east end of the Baker's Crossing Subdivision, which conveys runoff to the roadside ditch on the west side of Mellonville Avenue, south of Pine Way, from where it flows into Lake Jessup. Figure 11-1 shows an aerial view of the area with the different drainage features and connectivity within the model. Since the Magnolia Club Development discharges into this wetland, this analysis focuses on establishing the rate of flow from the undeveloped land where Magnolia Club is proposed, and comparing it to the rate of discharge from the developed Magnolia Club site. The headwater components were included as part of a detailed hydrologic modeling of the 260 acre watershed; this included, but was not limited to, its connectivity, runoff computations, and prediction of flood levels, extent, and duration. The tailwater system was only analyzed to establish the backwater levels and their effect on the headwater drainage pattern. The scope of the project was to establish the impacts, if any, that developing this parcel of land would have on the surrounding areas. The proposed Magnolia Club Development is located north of Pine Way, west of Mellonville Avenue, east of Rose Hill Trail, and south of E. Lake Mary Boulevard. The subdivision is accessed through Mellonville Avenue from the north, via E. Lake Mary Boulevard. The subdivision is located within Section 18, Township 20 South, Range 31 East The project area lies within the Lake Jessup drainage basin and within the jurisdiction of the City of Sanford through the on going annexation process. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site De4,, ipment Evaluation Section 2 April 2003 Page 11.2 DRAINAGE CONDITIONS Figures 11-2, 11-3, and II -4 in this section of the report, depict the soils classification for this area, the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Map, and the United States Geological Service's Quad Map for the study area, respectively. A review of existing topography and supporting calculations, and field investigation, indicates that the existing system conveys the runoff through the wetland, and creates localized flooding at the downstream discharge point, south of Pine Way. The Lake Jessup Master Plan had identified these deficiencies earlier, and Seminole County is in the process of acquiring land to construct a regional pond to alleviate this situation. The area south of Pine Way is drained by roadside ditches that do not have the conveyance capacity to handle the rate of runoff that flows out of the wetland, thus causing the localized flooding. The existing condition model confirms these flooding areas, where flooding is to be expected for the 25 year — 24 hour storm event for the properties around Palm Way and Oak Way. Table II -1 of this section of the report show a summary of the predicted peak stages for pre -development conditions for key locations within the study area, and Figure 11-5 shows a Nodal Diagram describing each location, and its connectivity with other drainage features on the area. NORTH MAGNOLIA CLUB NODE The land where the Magnolia Club development is proposed is a L-shaped parcel of land that could be defined in two parts, with natural topography flowing from northwest to southeast, as most of the land in this area. The north part (Magnolia Club North) consists of 13.5 acres of land draining to an existing pond, with outflow to the southeast, towards the south part of the parcel. This parcel is predicted to overflow upon reaching elevation 43.5 where it would flow to the south basin, and then to the wetland. On the hydrologicthydraulic model this node is named POND1 and shows a total outfall rate of 0.71 cfs for existing conditions. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. _404-101- _711 J3 00, �4 OR ' 073 0111, SOILS: SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 20 SOUTH, RANGE 31 EAST SCALE: NTS mmm� Civil Engineering Group, Inc. SOILS MAP DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION Fig. No. 11-2 APRIL 2003 1 NUMBER SOIL NAME 17 BRIGHTON, SAMSULA, AND SANIBEL MUCKS 20 MYAKKA AND EAU GALLIE FINE SANDS 31 TAVARES-MILLHOPPER FINE SAND, 0 - 5% SLOPES SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 20 SOUTH, RANGE 31 EAST SCALE: NTS mmm� Civil Engineering Group, Inc. SOILS MAP DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION Fig. No. 11-2 APRIL 2003 1 Seminoic Countv' . ninuox _-- =I �. .CnRNWA"..�^~~~�~ 120289 m SEMINOLE COUNTY ZONE X SEMINOLE COUNTY orvopsAmrono ^ ' . SOURCE: FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP NUMBERS 12117C[045E&12117CO135E(APRIL 17,1995 SECTION 18.T0VVN8H|P2OSOUTH, RANGE 51EAST � 11-3 MAGNOLIA CLUB APRIL DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION 2003 SOURCE: U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, 1988 SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 20 SOUTH, RANGE 31 EAST SCALE: NTS CES Civil Engineering Group, Inc. DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION Fig. No. 11-4 2003 77 ca 0 cu cu cu ca cu cc ca ce) co 00 co C\l to 'cr (0 I w z 0� "It r- LU (P W Cf) 7S Ci co cn W a) co to� tL 11 04tNU w (D (D �> cu z w E — JO " E 0 at Q) 4) UJ 0) < w 0) z Q- C) 0 0) tm 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) (a ca cu m to 0 0 0 0 It 0 0 0 I 0 0 (6 C5 IZ rl-: wi r-� ui ui vi L6 It IT m It m N N N N N Ili I r- 0 0 0 IT m 0 0 0 ca cc cu cu cu ca cu cc ca ce) co 00 co C\l to 'cr (0 I w R 0� "It r- 4) (P Ci Cf) Ci co IT 00 6 co to� tL 11 04tNU z (D (D Cc6D to 0 0 0 0 It 0 0 0 I 0 0 (6 C5 IZ rl-: wi r-� ui ui vi L6 It IT m It m N N N N N Ili I r- 0 0 0 IT m 0 0 0 (1) U) U) 07 U) U) U) U) C/) U) ca cc cu cu cu ca cu cc ca 'o a) 0 0 0 w R 0 T 4) 2 0 0 co -r 0 00CL 11 z z z F- 0 0 z U- 0 " 0) at Q) 4) 0) 0) (1) (1) 0) z C) 0) 0) tm 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) (a ca cu m m ca ca cu m m (1) U) U) 07 U) U) U) U) C/) U) 0 CL co cli CL .2 (D 0 c ca E ui (n ca co 0) (D tm 2 cn 75 w 0 Z Z z w —i m w LO w -i EZ co -r 0 0 z z z F- 0 0 z U- , o z 0 0 0 Z) ca — m 0 M — cu U. C) U) a- 0 a_ a- IL 0 U) o 0 CL co cli CL .2 (D 0 c ca E ui (n ca co 0) (D tm 2 cn 75 w 0 Z co -r z F- 0 R w Z) ca — M — cu C) U) 0 0 < < <GCI U) w w a 0 v. Z. z z z z O o o z 0 cL cL w (L <z w z Q: z U') w 0 C\l 0 0 -j 0 < — 0 z z z 0 C� < z U- 0 0 — Cl) co 0 V* z — 0 0 0 — CL CV) (L CL 0- (n o0 0 CL co cli CL .2 (D 0 c ca E ui (n ca co 0) (D tm 2 cn 75 w 0 Z WOMO 'QN 030 SOOZ *IlNdV 9-11 38nE)i3 VORJOIA'060zINVS 30 ,UID aX6.gep (lop) mi - OWOVP (400 401 VWItIP!0j'DP-eIjO'�anVwevjnd Ogg NOliV!,-"VA3 31IS 9mo VIION!DVN '0. luawdotwa Puel * swomae Alm IN"OVIG -IVGON IN3NdOIDA3G3ZJd E 0. LU Q z 0 0 10 "W X V UA W Z 0 0 z 0 0 M u 0 -j C) Zz ^ z Ae < tn Sco u a. < 0 U1. u 00. V a. 0, 0 z z < 11 o 0 < 2E in P m CA 3 0� < u ul 09 C3 t z z < 0 UII II 7, j OZ M < QJcu C3w 11 A, z z `<; < u 11 1u x �e < 0 j z -, 046, to QW w x co 9 w 0 Z 0 z u 0 -j C) Zz ra u tn Sco u a. < 0 U1. u 00. V a. co P) 0 z z < 11 o 0 wzuz in P m CA 3 0� < u ul 09 0 z C5 w m 0 L) m W z Li < w x PP aQ —Z C, a. ra qA Z a U CL < LJO!C, Ix Sco u a. < 0 U1. u 00. V a. ui 0 0 US w m <u z z in P m j ul 09 C3 t z z < 0 UII II 7, j OZ M C5 w m 0 L) m W z Li < w x w ¢z ui 0 0 0� a_ <u z OU j C3 t z z < 0 UII II 7, j < < O�z u � 5 < u h C5 w m 0 L) m W z Li < w x Magnolia Club Site DeV jment Evaluation Section 2 April 2003 Page 11.3 SOUTH MAGNOLIA CLUB NODE The south portion (Magnolia Club South) consists of approximately 12 acres of land, and it sheet flows to an existing wetland located to the east of the development. Table 11-1 shows that for existing conditions, the total outfall from this basin (named MIDDLE on the model) to the wetland is 7.1 cls. SURROUNDING AREAS AND BOUNDARY CONDITION Tailwater boundary condition was obtained from the CDM Master Plan for Lake Jessup, which computed backwaters from Lake Jessup to this area. CEG extracted the nodes within the master plan that included the study area, and updated the information so it would reflect the new development that has taken place in Baker's Crossing and Magnolia Park, to establish what is considered as Pre - Development Conditions for this evaluation. There are two developments that were looked at as part of this report. The Rose Hill Subdivision is currently experiencing some unusual high stages on its pond, which is landlocked with no outfall. CEG had the water elevation surveyed for this pond at the request of some of the developments homeowners, and found the water elevation to be at 44.55 fmsl. The Seasonal High Water Table had been established as part of the design of the subdivision at Elevation 43.0, and the 100 year storm peak stage was determined to be at 45.45 Imsi. The Rose Hill Subdivision is hydrologically located upstream of the proposed Magnolia Club development, so no impacts are anticipated from the proposed development. The Baker's Crossing Subdivision has experienced some localized flooding since its construction started a year ago, but their problems seemed to be associated with some deficiencies on the construction of the development and some underdrains that were not bed properly. The City of Sanford is currently addressing these issues, and this development does not receive drainage from the Magnolia Club development, so no impacts could be associated with the proposed improvements. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site Dei pment Evaluation Section 3 April 2003 Page 111-1 PROPOSED CONDITION ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION The proposed conditions model simply take the existing conditions model, subtracts the undeveloped parcel where Magnolia Club is proposed, and adds the proposed stormwater management features identified with the development. Since the Magnolia Club Development discharges into this wetland, this analysis focuses on establishing the rate of flow from the undeveloped land where Magnolia Club is proposed, and comparing it to the rate of discharge from the developed Magnolia Club site. If this approach finds that the rate of outfall from this development is less under proposed conditions than it was under existing conditions, then it would be concluded that this development would not have an adverse impact on the drainage conditions of the surrounding area. The headwater and tailwater components of the hydrologicthydraulic model were not changes since the proposed development does not affect them in any way. The proposed Magnolia Club Development consists of modifying the Magnolia Club Pond (POND1 on the model) to allow it to retain a greater amount of runoff before it discharges to the wetland, and adds an additional retention pond (POND2 on the model) to retain water quality runoff and attenuate the peak for the southern portion of the development. Figure 111-1 in this section of the report depict an aerial view of the study area, showing the proposed conditions. DRAINAGE CONDITIONS The proposed conditions model also routes runoff flows through the wetland, and results in localized flooding at the downstream discharge point south of Pine Way. However, the proposed Magnolia Club Development reduces the rate of outflow into this system, and while it does not represent a significant decrease in the overall scheme of this model (23 acres in a 260 acre watershed), it clearly shows that no adverse impacts would result from this development CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Magnolia Club Site Devt Section 3 -April 2003 Page 111.2 Figure III -2 depicts the proposed modifications that are recommended to the drainage system from the original submittal to the City of Sanford. These changes consist of. • Increase the berm elevation for the North Magnolia Pond so it would retain runoff at least until Elevation 45.5. • Construct an overflow structure from the North Pond to outfall directly to the wetland, without connecting it to Pond 2. Grade the upper area of the parcel to drain directly to the north pond, and the south area to drain to the south pond. Outfall Pond 2 directly to the wetland. Table III -1 of this section of the report show a summary of the predicted peak stages for post - development conditions for key locations within the study area, and Figure 111-3 shows a Nodal Diagram describing each location, and its connectivity with other drainage features on the area A review of Table 111-1 reveals that the rate of outfall from the proposed development for post- development ostdevelopment conditions is 1.68 cfs, which represents a decrease in outfall rate of almost 77% from existing conditions. CIVIL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. f • ' PROPOSED MAGNOLIA CLUB WOL9£0'dN 4030 d01801:1 "OaOdNVS dO AIAO rxAnau(soul:o1d• Dornnru(tool.ra COOZ Tiaa� N011V'"VA"q 311S amo VI]ONDWY _" puel-9 IlosaymeM ,�.u� taus n�ro nu aan.ou MAn10n�1S M0-ij ij= 10 o3SOdOHd .gut 'et., eut �\ _._ -. 1 w . �1 U R pti I� u 1 ga N y !1 �/ r141111I QF'� EIY •..� ,., `` �� \ \ Hilt — a Nou J� 8dVJ5 7VN(IS.VN .S& Jlti `GT_ _ �{ Nil \ �\ f�0\ day ZV -V Tfi 'SOd `6S -8d NOISIARIGnS 11111 SSOU 6. W H fJ) Im J O z r V Q F-- d U) O °) J w W i'-. WCo E E O CL c ro n 6 Q. 0 .a C: ro N CL O a) O c ro E coi fa O .c N C U ro c c w m ay ro co a> rn ro as U U WOM0'ON 030 VOIUO1:J 'GUO:INVS 30 UIO 626 IMP (10POW.) • VA 00Irml p11 Saaz Made NOON` , "VA3 31IS amo VIl0N!DVN a„ .' ` uwWw-o "-,W tjm-m { 09 -949E -m 3NnJld umwmc)win '1!/nrw 1 AlalAI-Jn'I=ln=Ifl 10f -is 6uNaau16u311^!D Q p2 6 1 z Y Q 30 O � R Y A I- N. x o_ j GO t W m M q'Q" Ifs M a o` a l yj tiZ Q 11 It Z Sa OZ so y .... 0 2 00 Q m z u 3: Zh � U paq Q W� � Q O so Q nM -z as Qw Q v N ..._.. A i x0 .........aa C] Gi C v N II t'MW ca a Q O zz Qtt II ® UQ QZ �x m p"LG QUN C1 w3: W K J x0� Z �a U F A_ Z z Q 1 z Y Q N. m d hN = 6 q'Q" Ifs M yj tiZ Q 11 It Z OZ y .... 0 2 Q m z u 3: paq Q W� 6a. Q Q nM -z as xm ..._.. .........aa C] ca a Q O m Ct y W K J x0� Z �a U F A_ 3 �u 0 C3 M , $ -Z O 0r� oz Qw Zy3 Laa a LD IL 3e y 0 QO ¢ z z �� a o� YI AO qy to 2Q � ti WM yY W II it oz = QZ MZ U WO W a qO Of QCQA w m x N V ¢ Z z W ❑ cc a Z Qz J s 1- w ¢3 a Wx cex �$ �s m Z DJ z v x � Cf Ia O o N h+ M z z it II 6 z W 19 9 QVFU C z {Y O J ¢ 2 yW _Q o O II h M Q II It rZi tZ, yQ W wz u �< I 10 cl LIVING - ROOM vnT e:r'. P: T BASTER BEDROOi f p,:� . ,:,e•>or.n• n I vA,,r. rr.D cl.n. 01- � ILJI - _ hf N r" j . n1nN rtle _ i OI (' I 1'�ek e'.O' • 1 1 �'..• CL6. 1•' n^e I' ' _ I MASTER _ BA T N �" io• Y ,•..• CLV- TDA — aOCH•R1D o l li'YJ�'' VAI' trRr. asr�arau ? (`W ■ j Jai UTIL.TZAW i j �I ..,t• ^� ._ '.<•CL6. e A ii 28 A I Ip co.r> 3 i::• io Tr. ONE-CAc.R f =p ERI 1 lJ I TALL GARAGE �1I h b i "' I — VCT, G.` uE ADER � A'•+' CLM _ . 3. _ :�1 V lo•.lo• �, t_rt� cP o,,E to�ua?ace Dc, -a ' — I I- -- s _ S BEDROOi 1 7 < TCD cl6. 9 is .i -- ----I I�� r •! t I I a-�+-----i t Ik I -F I I� `� 4I %�` F'TPgT 17, T nnTD nT n N. TT,TT � I I b • , Y.I° • P V a rra ct I- �I I� 1 ARE II '1117V 2 17 1 I � ------_ 1 I 1 IRAtDC�J //. ICCV.R � ii OI d ex. a>x v ©� I; n a r e e r waov¢ Rar t, 1 KITCHEN � 1l e �-- �i_ j t o• b l ..- . Ell b 2 i � 1 TUO LL' vnT e:r'. P: T BASTER BEDROOi f p,:� . ,:,e•>or.n• n I vA,,r. rr.D cl.n. 01- � ILJI - _ hf N r" j . n1nN rtle _ i OI (' I 1'�ek e'.O' • 1 1 �'..• CL6. 1•' n^e I' ' _ I MASTER _ BA T N �" io• Y ,•..• CLV- TDA — aOCH•R1D o l li'YJ�'' VAI' trRr. asr�arau ? (`W ■ j Jai UTIL.TZAW i j �I ..,t• ^� ._ '.<•CL6. e A ii 28 A I Ip co.r> 3 i::• io Tr. ONE-CAc.R f =p ERI 1 lJ I TALL GARAGE �1I h b i "' I — VCT, G.` uE ADER � A'•+' CLM _ . 3. _ :�1 V lo•.lo• �, t_rt� cP o,,E to�ua?ace Dc, -a ' — I I- -- s _ S BEDROOi 1 7 < TCD cl6. 9 is .i -- ----I I�� r •! t I I a-�+-----i t Ik I -F I I� `� 4I %�` F'TPgT 17, T nnTD nT n N. TT,TT � C)i � I L -" L �\ \, � � y g \) \ ) / (� } � . \�\/ \ { \/�§\\ \ )\ m C)i � I L -" L -% 1% m 012 u I 3I b >l 13 C1�0 gyp) — Z — — — Z — — -- 3 771 Tl_. 1 4 FWE). 0 FAMILY FROOM I'— CM cc), 01 I KITCHEN IL-. 01 X WT OEI. - - - - - - - - - - - _iMD O'l AIR= 4 CL: Y.5* � < wit tm IVING cer P OINE -CAR �J_ AA � _T I F YER (r T Boors N — — — — — — — — — --- T- a is x k l w 12 �01 E RE E) b 4, ER 3I b >l 13 r------ � 01 \ ( \ )� ( �/ / §� § () \} ( ( \) \� �( \\ ) ,� / / ) � $� � ` o 4 L �[ , � { ( §§ w � / 4 i � � )/ / � / , ( \ �� § /\( \ \ §}\5�% \ ( e§ 01 \ ( \ )� ( �/ / §� § () \} ( ( \) \� �( \\ ) ,� / / ) � $� � ` o 4 L �[ , TT onY ■ LIVING MASTER ■ BEDROOM 04 Gko5m DINING I AREA T- 101.0. , 7LAY C� BATH' �n Ter. v, t GR. O of UP KITCHEN lb ax. bnrc ly 1 UO3 + Tic + ul-11 BREAKFAST ONE -CAR FOYER Y AER C- RAG E FAI COVERED PORCH i�� SII I ly u• -r m•.p• �I u BF�RGGiii 3 ��o•x a'-+• y, aaT BEDROOM i v •:L:CJ GAG. p �y i— FI Q NR DEP. -------- HALL p•.o• CLG. D'•o' 4L4 i ------- -- I R,D � >� n 1 i�� SII I ly u• -r m•.p• �I BF�RGGiii 3 ��o•x a'-+• �•:T" I I I ROOF CL BELOW'rrcz FI NR DEP. -------- HALL p•.o• CLG. D'•o' 4L4 i ------- -- I R,D a i�� SII I ly u• -r m•.p• �I ROOF CL BELOW'rrcz FI NR DEP. -------- HALL p•.o• CLG. D'•o' 4L4 i ------- -- I R,D E n 1 — Ya�W �'H"4 DRY LAV. G•'1.'u BATH 7 >c• A a a! i i p o• D n 4 Tit T i ' P -D• n r.o• ,•.r I r _ i f l pH is '4^✓/ �G\ d { • } ,' D D �� 4 j ' al DC r. D•..^x aaT M"r'•O• -0. GLG. R..Rnq (TVP, w i�� SII I ly u• -r m•.p• �I N1) 111,C 01), !�1(;A�i _ ����I ,�, I ROOF CL BELOW'rrcz /EOLO I I j) jl N1) 111,C 01), !�1(;A�i _ ����I ,�, I M.- ul U) w w Lni jUJ M0i x > Ux FL t. M.- ul w Lni jUJ M0i x > Ux ----------- 1011 3h' _ -- -- ----- -- u ■ o_ * m _. _ — aa t I I III I Ila --- . 1 1 1 1 ■ _ .Y. LIVINC- I i IA5IcR V' -C.. r" -o• v-a•x r..o• I A y,.,.. .'. G• HE d DINit AR A tI II � .n,-----pb — - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — X ------ ik- u a• a V1' '7 •'-i N' r -l• I O �T'tt. •,e eG�bb S i [ ♦ p"4 -- Ifi a _— / ♦ i �, LAV. �• t p;y I a Q11O + M.tOo I IA I):R jWtT RCr. l..% ll BA I � P+^Yyp• IY ,+B�DRGOt-1 � , uvo,r. .) !'-.•uo Tly (j ..•— t� -- + KITCHEN �� �p .� �Ia;+�°I•r:o I'�.� q n.o•x n•.o• + r.ar1 aL— —f-- :� T. I l l � l l iI iI. i 1 i d orrr ��1�a wo; •. c"`"^ s 'C...i 1 h6ki�` `✓ v� COat6 s{ GLG. /y —I-- — { • k, > A u I = GAR h— ., FOYcR IHALL :(=.,e4 ( ax,:•a` �� a ,C IR I t t _�.._...__.._ I CNT LU w ul �. a. )\ ( ? ( ` )` §/ j } $ \ � ( \ ( /\ (( \//\/ (/ \ ) \ IL FIRST FLOOR PLAN — UNIT E Z -ALE� . 1,011 =—NED �,N[75 ONL'�' �_ 114 11 . C, 11 1, 7 NAETTER LIVINC- - IN AREA _�L,!d xi All Nil, Q! oI 0 ■ 6__L. <ITCHEN r1A5TmR W CLG. BATH -'-4* 1 31, 3'-7" Y-t' C.L&. 51.1. 4 n. 13'- 2" ho U L. 5- O i CL x \2" ,ATHiitt -;0 _45, 7' -C �Lu cc T y r•- — — — — — MCI :.I BEIDROO�'i 2 104 Infix ft all I Mill iml FIRST FLOOR PLAN — UNIT E Z -ALE� . 1,011 =—NED �,N[75 ONL'�' �_ 114 11 . IL lo ILI � LZ -j 43 °a o Sm IL lo � LZ 0 43 °a Sm U`, FIRST FLOOR PLAN - UINIT F 1, - U / "' - 1' - ENO NIIT5 C:,�'Ly 1, 5C qac. I 1- -V IN, WE "I. \ �� / - } } LU (� k/ \ lu ul / m ws�, ci\ { \= Li \ �( 32 > /e IN, WE "I. \ \ � )} ci\ { u \ \\ $ j IL \ { \ / \( \ ( \j/\ � \ \)/j% \� � uo� D -'RACONG� PATIOAREADCDROOKITCWaN10bjV I I m'jl- M1, Na,\ LJFORGpGARAGEyj - - - - - - - - - - - M 2NIT FLOOR PLAIN, - UNIT G 4L=-: 1/-"' = V-0" BED -3 r) / rto CLC" ■ � J- CA HIAL L 4) BATH 2 A. 0 3 11 Lc - .1 :1 I� 3'-0f• T"' ILI M-45TER BEDROOM ROOF LOW - - - - - - - - - - - M 2NIT FLOOR PLAIN, - UNIT G 4L=-: 1/-"' = V-0" I z \� �� / / § \ e ) : } \ \\ :2 g » ) \ 2 \ / ( / 10 . , /i\ \I\ \ /(//\\ � ` I z \� �� / / § \ e ) : } \ \\ :2 g » ? / 10 \ 2 / \ .!.: S(\ \ƒ 6: 1ST FLOOR PLAN - UNIT H 2ND FLOOR PLAN - UNIT H Ir IT UT Y -G CL IT DEN 14T b Roo CO E BELOLU W /�-L 2ND FLOOR PLAN - UNIT H PID Rezone (AG to PD) Parcel |O� 19-20-31-300-0060-0000 19-20'31-300-006A-0000 \ 19'20'31'300-008D-0000 19'20-31-300-086E'0000 Representative: Berry J.Walker T—' ---!'-----�------ ' | . � ' Seminole County � IM �24 7. 1 -1.1 \1 v I ci 0 A i \� v Al ...... * 1-11 " -, , , � -=�zI.m. " .- s�sse Ellrl'13 VI'10i\-TDV.T/V lsa.Lvi;Doss�:,?,Taxsiva z n :j r� opo 2 2 0 z z i ld 9 I 11 J L z Nwz ----------------------- - Ci P+OI < E - z z z z zo ddd < m� - Li 0 z z 0 ui �24 7. 1 -1.1 \1 v I ci 0 A i \� v Al ...... * 1-11 " -, , , � -=�zI.m. " .- s�sse Ellrl'13 VI'10i\-TDV.T/V lsa.Lvi;Doss�:,?,Taxsiva z n :j r� opo 2 2 0 z z i ld 9 I 11 J L z Nwz ----------------------- - Ci P+OI < E - z z z z zo O 0 z z < M cn > 0 z z i ld 9 z u 11 z Nwz ----------------------- - < E - z z z z zo < < m� - Li 0 z z 0 ui Q. ,0 ul z F, ul 11 zo-o c Mg iz p z i. 0 z < z z te M, 1 T 0 tg m I O 0 z z < M cn > 0 z z i ld 9 z u 11 z Nwz ----------------------- - < E - z z z z zo < < m� - Li 0 z z 0 ui Q. O 0 z z < M cn > Q 0 z z i ld 9 z u 11 z Nwz je < z z z z zo < < m� - Li 0 z z 0 ui Q. ,0 ul z F, ul 11 zo-o c Mg iz p 0 z < z CL 0 te M, 1 0 tg m I cj a- 20 MAS w .2E Z ~ l< z MAS 'M ::i z S Q Nv �v KH Q 0 z z i ld 9 z u 11 z Nwz y z -z Li W Z Z z ui Q. ,0 ul z F, ul 11 z < z CL 0 -Z z -Z uj z cl CZ4 7 LJ L-1 z u U. -� z - R � 0 < z z �u . z d n Q 0 z ld 9 d 11 Q :tiv :a MOTMM ,'H � \ � \ �_ -A\,,o 1V id drjl1 ,VW ... - .,. .. a�ue�Insczo�siF�F�•ptss-yT "•3FSWJNt SH3323IJt3'� r j� Z z TAT S�E� X 3511 N.�: if NSA ��Cee �Tv� t y �� .� . -, �g 3 . .�• T N11f9N ------,........."tom �� g � �' � 9 Y � o � Y 1 i}ll i7 �5 tI 'S fi xif.itl°i Y a $� 98 � tl� : � tq of �(3 gill I I e19 r :tiv :a MOTMM ,'H � \ � \ �_ -A\,,o r j� X 3511 N.�: if NSA ��Cee �Tv� t y 1 I � i tI :tiv :a MOTMM ,'H � \ � \ �_ -A\,,o a C1 r j� NSA b. a C1