Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Winter Haven commission on traffic and access at Spring Lake Apartments presentation
Summary
City staff reviewed the Spring Lake Apartments project and the land‑development process; neighbors raised safety and traffic concerns — especially pedestrian crossings on US‑17/6th Street Northwest — and questioned why FDOT was not requiring an access permit. Staff said entitlements date to 2006, the site plan was approved in Sept. 2025 and outside permits were issued.
City planning staff presented a step‑by‑step primer on land development and an update on the Spring Lake Apartments project at the Winter Haven City Commission meeting on March 9, 2026. Staff said the property’s entitlements date to 2006, the site plan was approved in September 2025, construction has begun on a 168‑unit market‑rate apartment development with a maximum building height of 45 feet and 257 parking spaces, and all required outside agency permits had been issued.
The presentation, delivered by Eric Lavey, outlined the regulatory sequence for annexation, future‑land‑use designation and zoning, and explained that established entitlements “run with the land” regardless of ownership changes. Lavey said staff’s review found the project met code requirements, the required traffic analysis showed de minimis impacts to nearby intersections, and concurrence (water, sewer, schools, transportation) was satisfied.
During public comment, residents pressed elected officials about traffic safety and emergency response. Maureen “Muffy” English, who lives adjacent to the site, said heavy traffic on 6th Street Northwest (US‑17) makes it dangerous for older residents to cross and forces some to rely on costly rideshare trips. “We have to take our life in our hands to cross 6th Street Northwest,” English said, urging commissioners to consider the safety of current residents before additional development.
Mary Maccovic raised concerns about the traffic study’s timing and methodology, noting counts were taken in June 2025 and questioning whether the analysis accounted for school traffic and seasonal residents. She said the study’s executive summary nevertheless showed SR‑544 (Haven Dale) operating at level‑of‑service F and asked why the city would allow more units when arterial segments are already failing.
When asked about state involvement, Lavey and the city manager explained that the developer participated in the city’s Development Review Committee and submitted a traffic analysis; staff determined the project did not require an FDOT access permit because the projected additional trips at the Haven Dale/US‑17 intersection were less than 1 percent of total intersection traffic, constituting a de minimis impact under applicable state standards. “Where the bottleneck happens is at the intersection,” Lavey said, and noted Florida statutes limit what the city may require of a developer to remedy an intersection already failing before a project begins.
Other public commenters asked about mailed notifications, DEP shoreline/lighting guidelines near lakes, erosion‑zone monitoring, and whether the city would seek signalization or other intersection improvements. The city indicated that public notice for zoning occurred when entitlements were established (roughly 2006) and that routine development of already‑entitled property does not require new mailers. Staff said questions from commenters would be followed up after the meeting.
No formal action on the Spring Lake Apartments was taken at the March 9 meeting; staff emphasized that the zoning and entitlements were already in place and that site‑plan approval and permits had been issued. The presentation and public comments served as an informational update and a record of community concerns; staff will follow up with residents on the specific technical questions they raised.
