SUBSCRIBE

Winter Parkers Respond to Mayor’s “Thank You” Survey

by | Jul 19, 2015 | News

Winter Parkers Respond to Mayor's "Thank You" Survey

Read Results Here


Leary Mailer-2

Remember about two weeks after the March 10 election? Newly elected Mayor Steven Leary sent a questionnaire out to some Winter Park residents asking for their opinions about the City.

At that time, the Voice published an open letter to Mayor Leary, asking questions that many of you had posed to us. Mayor Leary has, so far, not responded to our questions, but 1,107 of you responded to Mayor Leary’s questions. The Voice obtained your responses to the Mayor’s questionnaire through a public records request.

We know you’ve been wondering . . . so here it is. This is what you told the mayor.

More Than 1,000 Survey Responses

While not all of you responded to every question, many of you gave more than one response to a single question. Note that Question #1 had more than 1,300 responses – although we received only 1,107 survey forms. Some commented that the questions were confusing or called for a response that did not reflect the true feelings of the respondent.

Not All WP Residents Received Survey

When asked, the Leary campaign said that one survey was mailed to each household in Winter Park – either electronically or by U.S. Postal Service. The campaign did not confirm or deny that all survey recipients lived in Winter Park. The Voice heard from a number of readers who live in Winter Park who did not receive surveys. The Voice does not know the total number of surveys mailed or how criteria for the mailing were established. We could not, therefore, determine the sample size or the demographic used.

City Doing a Good Job

Most of you who did respond think the tax structure is about right and that the City is doing a good job – especially the Police and Fire Departments. More than half of you expressed concern about over-development, traffic and congestion.

Comments Not Included

More than half of you responded “other” and added comments on the survey forms. Because of the individual nature of the comments, we were not able to tabulate them and have not included the comments in the results.

“Protect Winter Park”

The type of comment we saw most often is summed in this respondent’s plea to the new mayor: “Please – keep your campaign promises. Protect Winter Park’s uniqueness. Once it is gone – too late!”

But the devil is in the details, and the details are all here in the charts.

 

 

To comment or read comments from others, click here →

DPAC Donation Rankles

by | Jun 13, 2015 | News

DPAC Donation Rankles

It’s Coming Around Again

 

As Budget Season approaches, the specter of nine more annual $100,000 contributions to Orlando’s Dr. Philips Performing Arts Center (DPAC) remains a bone of contention among Winter Parkers. At the June 9 Utilities Advisory Board (UAB) meeting, a group of citizens voiced their opposition to using the Utilities Fund for any portion of the City’s charitable contributions in the coming 2015-16 fiscal year. In Fiscal 2014-15, two-thirds of the City’s contributions to charitable organizations came from the Utilities Fund, and the Utilities Advisory Board members did not find out about it until April 2015 when they read it in the paper.

UAB member John Reker, who was rotating off the board after the June 9 meeting, spoke as a concerned citizen. He stated that utility rates are determined by the Cost of Service and said he does not believe it is appropriate to charge customers for anything other than the cost of delivering water and electricity.

Reker was replaced by former Commissioner Barbara DeVane, who was on the Commission when the City purchased the utilities company. At this meeting, DeVane said, “When we bought the utility, we promised the utility money would stay in the utility.”

According to the City website, the board’s mandate is to advise “the Mayor and City Commission on matters regarding the capital needs, rate structures and policies related to the operation of the city’s utilities system.” In other words, the UAB determines how much we pay for water and electricity, and they are responsible for all capital improvements to the system, like undergrounding.

How much we pay for our utilities determines how much is in the Utilities Fund to make repairs in the event of equipment failure or power outage, and how long it will take to complete the undergrounding process. The only money the utility company has comes from the rate-payers. Diversion of funds from the Utilities Fund necessarily hinders the performance of their charge.

The Winter Park City Charter states: “Transfer or use of collected sewer fee funds for other than sewer purposes must be approved by a voter referendum.” The City Charter was written in 1983, predating the City’s purchase of the utility company. At the time, the only utility Winter Park had was sewer. Since the Charter has not been updated to reflect the current situation, there is no current proscription on diverting electric or water revenues to the General Fund.

City Manager Randy Knight pointed out that the UAB operates solely as advisors and that only the City can spend money.  He went on to say, just because the City dipped into the Utilities Fund for the FY 2014-15 charitable contributions, that did not mean the City would utilize this fund in future years. Knight acknowledged that he was responsible for using the Utilities Fund for a portion of the charitable donations in last year’s budget, clearly subscribing to the “ask-forgiveness-not-permission” school of thought.

UAB Chair Katherine Johnson had prepared a draft memo titled “Proposed Guidance Regarding the Use of City of Winter Park’s Electric Utility and Water/Wastewater Revenues.” She stated that the board was “agnostic” on the subject of the individual donation recipients, but was concerned about the precedent it set. She told the Observer, “This raiding of the utility funds for other purposes is a problem that is systemic in other jurisdictions that I’m familiar with.”

She told the Voice that she wanted to ensure that the priority for the utility funds remains focused on long-term capital projects that will improve the safety and reliability of utility operations and that will benefit the utility’s customers.

“We already give 6 percent of the utility revenues to the City for the general fund,” said Johnson. “This past year they appropriated another quarter percent,” (amounting to approximately $175,000) “and the funds were redirected without the opportunity for a discussion among UAB members and City staff about the long-term impacts of this decision.”


 

To comment or read comments from others, click here →

P & Z Thwarts West Side Zoning Change

by | Jun 8, 2015 | Zoning and Development

P & Z Thwarts West Side Zoning Change

Approves Comp Plan Change for Lakeside Crossing

 

Lakeside Crossing Wins More Parking

 

On June 2, Unicorp’s request to the Planning & Zoning (P&Z) Board for a Comprehensive Plan change, unlike many of their previous efforts, sailed through. Unicorp was requesting permission to add 75 parking spaces at the Lakeside Crossing project on the site of the former Mt. Vernon Inn. The additional spaces will change the garage from two to three levels, amounting to a 3.4 percent increase in Floor-Area Ratio (FAR). According to developer Chuck Whittall, half the spaces will be for Lakeside Crossing use and the other half will be for public parking.

 

Comp Plan Change to Affect 17-92 Corridor

City Planner Jeff Briggs stated that the change in the Comp Plan would apply to all developments along the 17-92 planning area. Most unusual in this context was Briggs’ smiling countenance as he enthusiastically recommended that P&Z approve the Comp Plan change. P&Z approval was unanimous.

 

 

Applicant Seeks West SideUp-Zoning

In an all-too-familiar scenario, the next applicant, land planning consultant Javier Omana, requested a zoning change for a single-family lot on West Lyman Avenue in the Hannibal Square neighborhood. Omana and his partner, Chris Hite, plan to build a single-family dwelling  and wanted the lot re-zoned from R-1 to R-2 to enable them to build a larger house. R-2 zoning would allow them to build a duplex on the property if they chose, and would allow greater square footage.

The subject property is in the middle of a block that is zoned R-1. The Comprehensive Plan specifically prohibits rezoning lots smaller than 50 by 150 feet, which this lot is. Granting the request would set the stage for other lots in that area to be up-zoned.

 

“No Multi-Family”

Omana assured city staff that he had no intention of building a duplex on the land, that he simply needed an additional 220 square feet in order to complete a two-car garage at the rear of the property. City staff and P&Z Board members suggested possible remedies for the 220-square-foot shortfall and offered to help the applicant obtain a variance, which would require no zoning change.

Omana and Hite insisted on their demand for up-zoning. As part of their justification, they presented an ‘Urban Design Plan’ for the entire neighborhood to show what the area could look like — if only the zoning were different. There was liberal use of buzz words like context, connectivity, place-making, new urbanism, and TOD (Transit Oriented Development). Omana regretted the City’s lack of “institutional and regulatory framework to allow us to do what we’re doing. However,” he said, “we appeal to the City’s sense of doing the right thing.”

Bellows Weighs In

Speaking on behalf of the applicant, developer Dan Bellows supported the application for R-2 zoning, insisting that the City “amends the Comp Plan all the time.” He failed to mention his own experience before this board, which repeatedly turned down his requests for up-zoning in the Hannibal Square neighborhood, finally resulting in a project that is compliant. The Orlando Business Journal reports that Omana has served as a consultant to Bellows on the Ravaudage project.

Neighbors Aren’t Buying

One Winter Park resident approached the podium, somewhat sheepishly admitting that this was “the most awkward way” he had ever found to meet a new neighbor. His back yard adjoins the back of the lot on which Omana plans to build. He stated that he and his wife had made a substantial investment in their home and hoped that the single-family, low-density character of the neighborhood would not be disrupted.

The remarks of Christina Hite’s son brought into sharp relief the difference in perspective between those who live in the Hannibal Square neighborhood now and those who would move in. He stated his belief that history should not be a concern, because there was really “not much there.” In his view, the block is largely empty and up-zoning would create an opportunity for others to move in to the area and improve it.

 

P&Z:“NO”

Once again, P&Z was unanimous in their decision, this time to deny. Tom Sacha argued for maintaining current zoning, citing previous attempts to change the zoning. In each case, the applicants eventually came back with plans that fit within current zoning requirements. While Sacha did not name the applicants, it was clear that at least one project he referred to had been proposed by Dan Bellows.

Pete Weldon summed up the board’s stance in the interest of the City. “The City should be patient,” he said. “It shouldn’t be stubborn and it shouldn’t be dogmatic, but it should be patient. I don’t see anything here that says we should become less patient than we are.”

To comment or read comments from others, click here →

HP Ordinance – Path to Preservation or Slippery Slope?

by | May 22, 2015 | Historic Preservation

HP Ordinance - Path to Preservation or Slippery Slope?

WP Residents Duke It Out on Facebook

 

For more than a year, the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) has worked to craft an Historic Preservation Ordinance that would be a big step on the city’s path to becoming a “Certified Local Government” (CLG). CLG status would qualify the City for state and federal funds to protect and promote the City’s historic assets.

HPB & Ad Hoc Committee Lead Parallel Lives

During the same time frame, an ad hoc committee of Winter Park citizens with diverse points of view formed to work toward a consensus on Historic Preservation. Committee members were Attorney Frank Hamner, Casa Feliz Director Betsy Owens, Attorney and Developer Dykes Everett, Architect and President of Mead Botanical Gardens, Inc., Jeffrey Blydenburg, Real Estate Broker Scott Hillman and Landscape Architect Stephen Pategas. Together they sought to understand Winter Park’s current regulations, the inventory of historic structures, trends regarding those assets and how Winter Park compares in these respects with other Florida cities.

 

HPB Includes Committee Suggestions in Draft Ordinance

Early this year, the ad hoc committee offered their suggestions to the HPB.  Although the HPB did not incorporate all the committee’s suggestions, they did adopt many of the recommended changes and, in February 2015, HPB voted unanimously to approve the draft ordinance.

The next step in the process was to present the draft ordinance to the citizens and receive their input. Two meetings – morning and evening –were scheduled Thursday, May 7, at the Chamber of Commerce Welcome Center.

 

Facebook Lights Up

Once the meetings were announced, the internet lit up. On Wednesday, April 29, Peter Weldon sent a “Winter Park Perspective” blast email urging residents in bold type to “Take Action to Protect Your Rights.”

“Small Group of Extremists”

“This proposal is being promoted by the Winter Park anti-development lobby,” wrote Weldon, “a small group seeking to impose their values without regard to your values . . . . We cannot let a small group of extremists limit our freedoms or put our equity at risk.”


“First Step Down the Slippery Slope . . .”

And with that, they were off and running. The lively debate that began on the internet spilled into the Welcome Center on the morning of May 7. The first speaker to take the podium was Winter Park resident Brian Thomas, who called the draft ordinance “The first step down the slippery slope.”

Peter Weldon spoke next to express his support for historic designation of individual properties, explaining that his opposition was to the designation of historic districts.

 

 


Frank Hamner: “Property Rights Guy”

Frank Hamner, a member of the ad hoc citizens’ committee, rose to explain that the focus of his group was on the educational value of their effort. He identified himself as “a property rights guy,” but said he believed there are historic assets in Winter Park that do need to be preserved. 

WP Ordinance Weakest in FL



Casa Feliz Executive Director Betsy Owens, also a member of the ad hoc committee, pointed out there are fewer than 10 districts in Winter Park that would qualify for historic designation. She went on to compare Winter Park’s proposed ordinance with those of other Florida Cities, noting that the proposed ordinance would lift Winter Park from having the weakest ordinance in the state to being “simply among the weakest.”

 

Commissioners Resist Move to Change HPB

Less than a week later, at the May 11 City Commission meeting, Historic Preservation was again at the forefront. Mayor Steve Leary brought forth nominations for all the boards that had members rotating off. Three of those nominations were for the Historic Preservation Board. Former Orange County Commissioner Bill Segal and Winter Park architect Phil Kean were nominated for regular board seats, and Winter Park resident Laura Armstrong was nominated as alternate.


Commissioner Tom McMacken requested that all board appointments be approved except for the Historic Preservation Board. The Commission voted 3 to 2 to approve the other board appointments and to discuss the HPB nominations separately. Mayor Leary and Commissioner Sarah Sprinkel cast the dissenting votes.

 

McMacken Urges: Delay HPB Appointments

McMacken then requested that the Commission delay any appointments to the HPB until the proposed ordinance had been brought before the Commission and had been voted either up or down. “I just hate to change pitchers at the bottom of the ninth inning,” said McMacken. “Putting new people on there now sets the dial back, and I don’t want to see [the ordinance] delayed any further.”

A lively discussion ensued in which the Mayor said, based on public comments at the May 7 meetings, he thought perhaps the ordinance should not move forward. Leary argued that the two nominees, Kean and Segal, would contribute to the process.

Commissioners: Don’t Derail a Year’s Work

Commissioners McMacken and Carolyn Cooper emphasized that their objections to the appointments had nothing to do with the appointees. They simply wanted the HPB to have the chance to bring more than a year’s work on the ordinance to a conclusion.


McMacken and Cooper argued that one important component of the proposed ordinance has to do with specific criteria for board composition. Compliance with board composition criteria set by state and federal agencies would be necessary for Winter Park to achieve CLG status. Preserving the present composition of the board, even if the number is reduced from 7 to 5, would avoid the possibility of appointing someone who might not fit the revised criteria.

Phil Kean and Bill Segal Turned Down

At the end of the day, the Commissioners voted separately on each of the three nominees. Phil Kean and Bill Segal were voted down, 3 to 2, with Leary and Sprinkel again casting dissenting votes.

 

Laura Armstrong Appointed to HPB

In a surprise turn, Commissioner Greg Seidel voted in favor of the alternate candidate, Laura Armstrong, whose qualification was that she had once placed her home on the historic register. So Ms. Armstrong took a full board seat, leaving one vacant full board seat and one vacant alternate seat.

Asked why he had voted for Ms. Armstrong, Commissioner Seidel said that she was the only candidate who had mentioned historic preservation on her application.

 

Back to Facebook

Once again, the internet lit up. Phil Kean and Bill Segal both posted their disappointments on Facebook. Kean wrote in his post,“If you are a citizen of Winter Park, please reach out to the three commissioners that voted me not qualified and let them know that I would make a great board member. They are Carolyn Cooper, Greg Seidel and Tom McMacken. MayorSteveLeary andSarah Sprinkelsupported me. I want to thank you in advance for your help in this.”

Bill Segal had a somewhat more philosophical view on the matter, though he did acknowledge that he was disappointed. He wrote on Facebook, “. . .just remember life is a two way street, everything doesn’t have to be all one way or the other, and when you find yourself so passionate about an issue that is not life or death, often it is a good time to listen to new voices, and new ideas. Sounds like the same people have been battling over the same stuff for far too long.”

Steve Leary, still insisting that the vote was ‘about the people’, posted on May 12: “I do not believe it productive to criticize my fellow commission members or theorize on their rationale for voting against Phil and Bill. Rather, I am hopeful that Commissioner(s) Seidel, McMacken, and/or Cooper will reconsider Mr. Kean and Mr. Segal for appointment to the HPB.”

And perhaps they will reconsider – after the ordinance has come before the Winter Park City Commission and has either passed or failed.

To comment or read comments from others, click here →

Do we need a new library?

by | May 8, 2015 | Library

Do we need a new library?

If so, where shall we put it?

library2-2

Next month, the Library Task Force, which has been in existence since June 2014, will present their findings to the Commission and leave it to the City and its citizens to determine the answer to these questions.The Library Task Force will “sunset” out of existence in what Commissioner Tom McMacken called “the end of the beginning. ”

 

A Little History

Relocating the library is not a new concept. The current location is the fourth in the library’s history. The original library was founded in 1885 on the porch of the Lamson House at 503 Interlachen. In 1886, it moved to an enclosed building owned by the Winter Park Co. In 1902, it moved again to a new one-room building, which was expanded in the 1930s when the city was persuaded to provide free electricity. At that time, the library went from being more or less a private club to being a true public library. (Indoor plumbing would follow.)

That library outgrew its home and, in 1976, the city acquired the current library site on New England Avenue. After 20 years, in 1995, a third floor was added and floors one and two were remodeled.

Another 20 years has elapsed. Once again, growth and demand for services have exerted pressure on the current library. Last year, the City Commission decided it was time to explore alternatives. They assembled a nine-member Library Task Force, which came together in June 2014 in the service of our city.

Their task:  to make recommendations regarding the need, location, costs and funding strategies for a new or remodeled library facility.

Task Force Goes to Work

The nine are Sam Stark, Gary Barker, Daniel Butts, Bruce Douglas, Jeffry Jontz, Nancy Miles, Joel Roberts, Jan Walker and Chip Weston. Each City Commissioner chose one, and the remaining four were chosen by the Board of Library Trustees. Bruce Douglas resigned from the Task Force in April 2015, leaving eight members.

 

Individually, the Task Force members span the political spectrum, and most say they came to the Task Force as skeptics, with preconceived notions about whether Winter Park even needs a new library.

As a group, however, they are united in their sincerity, diligence and sense of purpose —  proof that a diverse group of citizens can work together effectively for the greater good of the community. For six months, they have listened to experts, reviewed library trends, examined site plans, toured other libraries, both in Florida and as far afield as Cedar Rapids, IA and Little Rock, AR. They have held 30 public Task Force meetings, hosted five public forums, presented at two Commission workshops and at the December 8, 2014, regular Commission meeting. A full account of their activity can be found at www.wppl.org.

ISO the Library of the Future

The Task Force has found the current library no longer keeps pace with the needs of the community, either for space or for technology — not surprising if you recall that in 1976, when the library was built, computers still used punch cards.

 

Technologies have emerged over the past two decades that have had a profound effect on our lifestyle, economy and community. For citizens and businesses alike, the library of the future may be the only affordable source for artificial intelligence and the confluence of maturing technologies and social applications.

The Printed Word is Here to Stay

Then why do we need shelf space when everything is moving to the internet?

 

In reality, only about 12 percent of all books published have been digitized. People will continue to rely on the printed word – and not just older people. Studies show that between 60 and 75 percent of young people, aged 16 to 24, prefer print books over e-books. Child development experts strongly recommend that print books be used to teach early literacy skills.

Library Fails to Meet City Code

The existing building predates the current City Code. Library Executive Director Shawn Shaffer explains, “If we touch the building,we have to bring it up to code.”

 

Currently, parking is deficient by 33 spaces. Stack widths are too narrow to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. The current building cannot meet the electrical needs of today’s technology, and because of the way it was constructed, it cannot be rewired.The library’s only elevator is too small to accommodate a gurney with a patient on it, a situation that has required first responders to carry a patient down the stairs in a life-or-death situation.

Dec, 2014: Commission Says,‘Not So Fast!’
On December 8, 2014, the Task Force brought their initial163-page report to the Commission in the reasonable belief that they had fulfilled their mission. They recommended either building a new library on the Post Office site on New York Avenue or demolishing and rebuilding the library in its current location. Rebuilding on the current site, however, was too expensive, and the city had failed to reach an agreement with the U.S. Postal Service to acquire the Post Office site.

The Commission congratulated the Task Force on a job well done and sent them back to the drawing board. After more miles of travel and more hours of meetings, they are now preparing to present their revised recommendations to the Commission June 22.

Will the City Relinquish Two Acres of Parkland to Relocate the Library?

The alternative sites studied by the Library Task Force are all on land now owned by the city. They include the current site on New England Ave., a site adjacent to City Hall, and the Rachel Murrah Civic Center site. Task Force members seem to favor the Civic Center site, but suggest leaving the Civic Center as it is. Instead, they suggest building the new library at the east end of that block in Martin Luther King, Jr., Park (MLK Park), at the corner of Morse and Denning.

They plan to recommend a 50,000-square-foot, two-story building with a wide porch featuring ceiling fans and indoor-outdoor reading spaces. If it’s sited in MLK Park, the porch will overlook a reconfigured lake. There will be glass, natural light and flexible spaces. The walls will move – literally.

Library Site Could Be a Hard Sell
It is not unusual for libraries to be located in municipal parks,but there is opposition to the MLK Park location. Michael Poole, chairman of the Keep Winter Park Beautiful and Sustainable Advisory Board, said at a Public Forum held April 28, “If I were to rate that site on a scale of one to ten, it would be a fifty!” 

In an April 13, 2015, memorandum to Jeffry Jontz and David Torre of the Board of Library Trustees, Poole wrote, “I believe you need to quickly demonstrate the ‘Need.”Poole charged them to, “Explain how each increase in space is needed, will meet an unmet need, and how the required space was determined. CLICK HERE for the text of the entire memorandum.

Comments during the April 28 Forum indicated concern that if MLK Park is recommended as a possible library site, the park would be eliminated. Task Force member Daniel Butts explained that MLK Park includes approximately 27 acres of playing fields, lake and open parkland. The library, he said, would occupy just over two acres, leaving the rest of the park intact.

Commissioner Carolyn Cooper also opposes the loss of green space and worries that the building will block pedestrians’ and motorists’ view of the park. She said she was concerned that relocating the library would necessitate selling the current library site in order to pay for new construction, and she does not favor selling any land in the downtown core that now belongs to the city.

Commissioner Tom McMacken said he is looking forward to reading the full report. “This is only the beginning of the process,” said McMacken. “More research and discussion need to happen before we can put this on a ballot,” he said. “The [Board of Library Trustees] has a big job to do, to make sure everyone is fully informed and in agreement. The Commission can put the question on a ballot for people to decide, but the Commission is only a conduit between the Library and the citizens. Ultimately, the citizens must decide.”

To comment or read comments from others, click here →