Winter Springs Commission flips, requires $227,000 tree fee for project

The Winter Springs City Commission has changed course, and will require a developer to pay a $227,000 fee to clear trees on a development in the Winter Springs Town Center.

The split vote ends months of prolonged debate on the topic, and helps clear the way for it to move forward. Ultimately, the vote was 3-1 in favor of requiring Tuskawilla Retail Partners II – an affiliate of Catalyst Development Partners – to pay the fee. Commissioner Victoria Bruce voted against requiring the fee, and Commissioner Paul Diaz was absent.

Commissioner Mark Caruso was the key vote, switching from the first meeting.

“When this item was first brought to our attention at the commission meeting, all supporting documents should have been provided to commissioners at that time,” Caruso said. “And of course, we didn’t table it. So I think that’s partially our fault as well.”

Sea Hawk Cove is an 8-acre site along State Road 434, east of Michael Blake Boulevard in the Winter Springs Town Center. The project calls for an extension of Sea Hawk Cove, and inside there are planned to be multiple projects. On the commercial side, there’s a 7-Brew drive-through coffee shop and a 10,000-square-foot child care center called The Learning Experience. There’s also plans for 82 townhomes at Sea Hawk Cove; the project is expected to cost an estimated $50 million to build. 

 Winter Springs City Commissioner Sarah Baker said the project could end up in court. 

“I think it’s possible that it could go to court,” Baker said. “I think, ultimately, we will win in that court battle.”

Oviedo Community News reached out to the developer, their attorney and former Mayor Paul Partyka after the meeting. It’s unclear if there will be a lawsuit over the fee, but the prospect was brought up at the commission meeting. 

Partyka, the realtor representing the project, met with commissioners before the June meeting. He argued that when the arbor fees were paid for The Blake apartments, the arbor fee also covered the entire 45-acre project.

Partyka said originally, the project called for more apartments – and limiting that “hurt” the developer. He said it was “very disappointing” that the mayor went on TV and Facebook to rail against the project. 

”The mayor’s action caused unnecessary delays in getting permits to start construction, which in turn delayed the start of our tenants’ projects,” Paryka said. “This also put another black eye on the city of Winter Springs as being a city not friendly to quality development.”

Allison Turnbull Jones, an attorney representing the project, said the contract was “clear” that the fees were for the whole 45 acres. 

“If we go to court on this, all of the evidence that you have presented that allegedly – I don’t even know if it shows what you’re trying to make it show – it is inadmissible to interpret this contract, because the plain language of this document is what’s going to govern,” Jones said. “And the plain language says that the arbor fee was paid for the project.

Winter Springs City Attorney Anthony Garganese disagreed, saying the evidence rules cuts “both ways.” 

“To the extent that there’s a fuzziness as to what this definition of project is … that fuzziness leads to an ambiguity, that ambiguity is the basis under which all those additional documents would be admissible into court,” Garganese said. 

Garganese said that there’s a risk because the contract would require the loser in court to pay for attorney’s fees. 

“And the risk (is), of course, to both sides, not just the City Commission is that there is a prevailing party attorney fees provision in that contract, so the extent that you lose on the interpretation, there’s a risk of attorney fees,” Garganese said.  

Mayor Kevin McCann said the developer was “playing victim” and omitting key information. 

“It’s really nice to be playing victim,” McCann said. “We’ve done our part. I am not against this project, but the dishonesty is appalling.”

McCann went on. 

“This isn’t two parties disagreeing about a contract,” McCann said. “This is ignoring the contract for financial gain. This is cutting and pasting and then doing it again. I’m appalled.”

The week before the vote, city officials worked out an agreement that allowed Catalyst Development Partners to apply for permits to clear the land and start development after putting the arbor fee into an escrow account, pending a city commission vote, and providing other documentation. City officials said the money was put in escrow, but not all of the documentation had been provided. 

The project has not started construction yet.

Want to contact your elected leaders and weigh in on this topic? Find their contact information here. Have a news tip or opinion to share with OCN? Do that here.