The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held at 1:35 p.m., on Tuesday, March 10, 1998, in Room 1028 of the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.

Present:

Chairman Randy Morris (District 2)

Vice Chairman Win Adams (District 4)

Commissioner Dick Van Der Weide (District 3)

Commissioner Grant Maloy (District 1)

Commissioner Daryl McLain (District 5)

County Manager Gary Kaiser

County Attorney Robert McMillan

Deputy Clerk Sandy Wall

The Invocation was given by Commissioner Grant Maloy.

County Manager, Gary Kaiser, led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Carl Hallberg and Joe Dalton, representing the U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team (1996 Gold Medal Winners), addressed the Board to express their appreciation for the County’s support. They presented to the Board a large autographed team photograph.

The Chairman expressed the Board’s thanks for the photograph.

-------

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner McLain to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-45, as shown on page _________, commending the Palm Springs Homeowners Association members for their beautification of the Raymond Avenue Project.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

-------

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Adams to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-44, as shown on page ________, commending Jon Robert Christian, Chief Fire Investigator, Department of Fire/Rescue, upon his retirement.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

The Resolution was presented to Mr. Christian who expressed his thanks.

--------

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Adams to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-46, as shown on page ________, proclaiming the week of March 15-21, 1998, as "Juvenile Justice Week".

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

The Resolution was presented to Dr. Hortense Evans who expressed her appreciation to the Board for their commitment and dedication to the youth of Seminole County.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to authorize the filing of the proofs of publication for this meeting’s scheduled public hearings.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider the City of Sanford Joint Planning Agreement which is designed to provide multi-jurisdictional land use and zoning areas that would provide future adult entertainment site locations; and Ordinance adopting the agreement as Land Development Code Regulations, received and filed.

Acting Director of Planning & Development, Frances Chandler, addressed the Board to advise during the October 28 BCC meeting, the Board directed staff to develop with the City of Sanford an agreement to provide multi-jurisdictional zoning for AEE’s. She further advised the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval of the JPA finding it consistent with the Comp Plan.

Bill Simmons, Sanford City Manager, addressed the Board to advise the City did take action to approve at their first reading the ordinance to facilitate the signing of the interlocal agreement. The second reading is scheduled for March 23, 1998. He stated this action was done in anticipation that the BCC will complete action tonight with regard to the ordinance grandfathering the AEE’s throughout the County.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Adams to approve the City of Sanford Joint Planning Agreement, as shown on page ________; and to announce that the second public hearing for consideration of the Ordinance will be held on March 24, 1998 at 7:00 p.m.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a request to rezone from R-1AA (Single Family Residential) to RP (Residential Professional) to allow the operation of a law office for property located on the east side of Maitland Avenue and north of Faith Terrace, Gary R. Dorst, received and filed.

Senior Planner, Don Fisher, addressed the Board to give an overview of the request, advising that based on staff analysis, prior to all public hearings, staff recommends that the subject request: (1) Is in compliance with the provisions of the Seminole County Comp Plan and the Land Development Code; (2) The request would be compatible with surrounding development; (3) Is considered in the 20-year services analysis as part of the County’s adopted plan and no development is authorized without meeting Concurrency requirements; and (4) Would be able to meet all environmental standards. Therefore, the staff has no opposition to the rezoning subject to: (1) Provide a cross access/joint use driveway easement with the property to the south; (2) Install a six foot high stockade fence on the easterly property line; (3) Install trees, where necessary, to equal one tree every 25 feet on center; (4) Save existing trees where possible; and (5) Submit for, and obtain, site plan approval prior to permit issuance.

No one spoke in support or in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve rezoning, by Ordinance #98-14, as shown on page ________, from R-1AA (Single Family Residential) to RP (Residential Professional) to allow the operation of a law office for property located on the east side of Maitland Avenue and north of Faith Terrace, as described in the proof of publication, Gary R. Dorst, with staff recommendations, and approval of Development Order, as shown on page ________.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider a request to rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1A (Single Family Residential) and R-1AA (Single Family Residential) for lots adjacent to the lake; property located on the south side of Red Bug Lake Road, east of Eagle Circle, and on the north side of Lake Howell, Bowyer-Singleton & Associates, received and filed.

Mr. Fisher gave an overview, advising based on staff analysis, prior to all public hearings, staff recommends that the subject request: (1) Is in compliance with the provisions of the Seminole County Comp Plan and Land Development Code; (2) The request would be compatible with surrounding development; (3) Is considered in the 20-year services analysis as part of the County’s adopted plan and no development is authorized without meeting Concurrency requirements; and (4) Would be able to meet all environmental standards. Therefore, staff has no opposition to the rezoning to R-1A and R-1AA on lots adjacent to the lake subject to: (1) Dedicate additional right-of-way on Red Bug Lake Road as necessary to accommodate required off-site improvements; (2) Install a signal at the project’s entrance if warranted at the time of plan approval; (3) Limit boat access to the lake to only those lots with lake frontage; and (4) Rezone only those areas above the post development 100 year flood prone elevation.

Judy Stewart, representing Bowyer-Singleton & Associates, addressed the Board to advise they concur with staff comments and will answer any questions.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner McLain to approve rezoning, by Ordinance #98-15, as shown on page _________, rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1A (Single Family Residential) and R-1AA (Single Family Residential) for lots adjacent to the lake; property located on the south side of Red Bug Lake Road, east of Eagle Circle, and on the north side of Lake Howell, as described in the proof of publication, Bowyer-Singleton & Associates, with staff comments and the adoption of a Development Order, as shown on page ________.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a request to rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1AA (Single Family Residential) for property located on the west side of Miami Springs Road and south of Wekiva Springs Road, Conklin, Porter and Holmes, received and filed.

Mr. Fisher gave an overview, advising approximately 5% of the site appears to be flood prone and is located within the Wekiva Riparian Habitat Zone. The remainder of the site is located in the Water Quality Protection Area. If approved, the motion must include a statement of finding of consistency with each review criteria. The criteria has been added to the staff recommendation. Furthermore, approval from the SJRWMD must be granted in order to plat the area in the habitat zone and water quality area. Additionally, only those areas located above the post development 100-year flood prone elevation should be rezoned. Based on staff analysis, prior to all public hearings, staff recommends that the subject request: (1) Is in compliance with the provisions of the Seminole County Comp Plan and the Land Development Code; (2) The request would be compatible with surrounding development; (3) Is considered in the 20-year services analysis as part of the County’s adopted plan and no development is authorized without Concurrency requirements; (4) Would be able to meet all environmental standards; and (5) Is consistent with the Wekiva River Protection Act Review Criteria.

Mr. Fisher continued that the staff has no opposition to the rezoning, subject to the finding of consistency with each of the Wekiva River Protection Act Review Criteria as listed in the staff report.

Ken Steeves, Conklin, Porter & Holmes, representing the developer, E. Everette Huskey, addressed the Board to advise they understand staff’s comments concerning the flood prone and they will stay out of it. He submitted into the Record photographs of the property in question.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner McLain to approve rezoning, by Ordinance #98-16, as shown on page __________, from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1AA (Single Family Residential) for property located on the west side of Miami Springs Road and south of Wekiva Springs Road, Conklin, Porter and Holmes, as described in the proof of publication, with staff comments and approval of Development Order, as shown on page _________.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Proof of publication, calling for a public hearing to consider an Ordinance amending the Parks Ordinance, received and filed.

Acting Director of Library & Leisure Services, Suzy Goldman, addressed the Board to request adoption of the ordinance with revised language (copy received & filed) concerning concealed weapons and firearms.

The Board briefly discussed equestrian usage of the trails.

No one spoke in support or in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner McLain to adopt Ordinance #98-17, as revised, as shown on page _________, amending the Parks Ordinance, as described in the proof of publication.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider adoption of the Seminole County Natural Lands Ordinance; Natural Lands Inventory and Fee Schedule Resolution; and Natural Lands Property Use Inventory Resolution, received and filed.

Acting Comprehensive Planning Manager, Colleen Rotella, addressed the Board to advise the purpose of the ordinance is to set regulatory provisions relating to the public safety and management of designated wilderness areas purchased by the Natural Lands Program. She further advised the ordinance was developed in coordination with the Sheriff’s Office and will provide the necessary tools for enforcement actions to be taken should they be necessary. Revised ordinance language concerning firearms and concealed weapons was received and filed.

Commissioner Maloy stated this was a taxpayer’s funded program to purchase this land and questioned why the County would charge folks to use the property.

Ms. Rotella advised the Natural Lands Program does not have a funding source for long term maintenance. The proposed fees would offset some of those maintenance costs.

Chairman Morris suggested coordinating with the cities for permitting of the camp sites.

William Daniel addressed the Board to object to the camping fees for the use of the Natural Lands. He suggested only implementing a fee for non-County residents.

Discussion ensued with regard to the proposed camping fee and the restrictions for the number of times and length of stays.

Chairman Morris recommended not charging County residents.

Commissioner McLain stated he believes the fee is reasonable. However, he would support a two-tier program.

County Attorney, Robert McMillan, advised there are issues relating to public parks and he feels some research is needed.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to adopt Ordinance #98-18, as revised, as shown on page ________, Seminole County Natural Lands Program; to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-50, as shown on page ________, Natural Lands Property Use Inventory Resolution; and to continue consideration of the proposed Natural Lands Inventory and Fee Schedule Resolution until the next meeting.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider the enactment of an Ordinance pertaining to Temporary Idle Speed/No Wake Zone for a portion of the St. Johns River and related areas, received and filed.

William Daniel read into the Record his statement (copy received & filed) in opposition to the proposed ordinance. He stated he believes the Sheriff’s Office practices selective enforcement. He said the people that live on the river have removed natural aquatic vegetation and are the primary cause of shoreline erosion. He expressed his concern that the ordinance will give the Sheriff’s Office too much power. He suggested instead of taking 10 to 12 miles of river, establishing a no wake zone only in front of those areas that need it and allow the boat operator to monitor his or her wake and be responsible beyond that point.

Under discussion, Chairman Morris stated for the Record that he is not a member of the "Boars Nest Hunt Club". Whereupon, Commissioner McLain also stated that he is not a member.

Commissioner McLain stated there is a substantial amount of the ten miles of river that is not developed which would probably not be reasonable to implement a no wake zone. However, he stated he believes those areas where there are houses need to be protected.

Chairman Morris stated he does not like the proposed ordinance and would like to see some way to deal with temporary emergencies.

Commissioner Maloy left the meeting at this time.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Assistant County Attorney, Greg Hass, addressed the Board to advise the request for the no wake zone came from the Sheriff’s Office and he has not looked at the issue with regard to what is developed versus what is undeveloped.

Commissioner Maloy reentered the meeting at this time.

Mr. McMillan stated he believes his office can meet with the Sheriff’s office to "fine-tune" the request.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to continue until March 24, 1998 consideration of the enactment of an Ordinance pertaining to Temporary Idle Speed/No Wake Zone for a portion of the St. Johns River and related areas, as described in the proof of publication.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Chairman Morris stated he would like to see Section 190.120 concerning the County Manager’s authority to create emergency no wake zones deleted.

Commissioner Van Der Weide suggesting having a provision for declaring a state of emergency like what was done after the tornado.

The Board, by consensus, directed revision to Section 190.120 which would parallel the declaration of emergency procedures. Whereupon, Mr. McMillan advised with that much of a revision to the ordinance, he believes it would need to be readvertised.

Upon inquiry by the Chairman, Commissioners McLain and Van Der Weide agreed that this item will be brought back at the next available meeting after the readvertising.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Adams to approve and authorize the following:

-------

The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s
"received and filed":

No report.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Adams to approve and authorize the following:

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

-------

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Adams to adopt appropriate Budget Amendment Resolution #98-R-48, as shown on page _______, ($485,000), OMB Fund 13300 - 17-92 Corridor CRA Fund; to establish the 17-92 Corridor CRA Fund; $100,000 will finance the County share of the entranceway project to be administered by the City of Maitland and $385,000 will fund landscaping enhancements.

Under discussion, Commissioner Maloy stated the Board is not seeing what they are buying.

Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he will not be able to support this item the way it was thrown together.

Districts 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioners Maloy and Van Der Weide noted NAY.

-------

Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to authorize adoption and implementation of the Employee Award and Recognition Package; and authorize amending the Personnel Policies Section 504.0, Holidays, to include a Work/Life Day.

Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioner Maloy voted NAY.

-------

Ms. Rotella advised she has met with Ms. Berlee of the Wyman Foundation who discussed Item #22, Tornado Damage Recovery - Housing Reconstruction, at this morning’s Briefing. She advised the County has been approached by the Mennonite Disaster Services (MDS) of Sarasota who have offered to provide volunteer workers to build homes that were completely or substantially destroyed because of the tornadoes, and owned by low income uninsured homeowners. She said this is a unique situation; however, staff does not know whether the funds used for building supplies will be reimbursed by FEMA. She added that the bottom line is that this is a unique situation and staff feels it would be appropriate to use these funds in this situation for low income housing.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to authorize up to $200,000 for Mennonite Disaster Services (materials only); authorize the County Manager to redirect an additional $282,042 for other volunteer groups, if necessary; authorize the County Manager to contract with Seminole Community Volunteer Program ($6,000) to coordinate the home rebuilding effort; waive the bid process for procuring building materials; and amend the SHIP AHAP (resolution to follow) to waive RFP process for SHIP dollars, if necessary.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve and authorize the following:

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

The Chairman advised he is in receipt of a letter with an attached copy of the House of Representative Congressional Record (copy received & filed) from Congressman Mica commending Gary Kaiser and staff for dedicated service during the tornado disaster period.

-------

Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Adams to reappoint Dr. Joseph Vaughan (Veterinarian) and Bill Shaffer (Sheriff’s Office representative) to the Animal Control Board for a term ending January 1, 1999.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

--------

Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Adams to appoint Jeff Cashatt, Executive Director, The Humane Society of Seminole County to the Animal Control Board for a one-year term ending January 1, 1999; and to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-51, as shown on page _________, commending Steven G. Mason for his services.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

--------

The Chairman discussed with the Board procedural changes for non-public hearing BCC meetings, suggesting that non-controversial items be approved by the Board during a morning session. He stated he believes this will cut down the amount of time staff sits around waiting to present items. The Board voiced no objections to testing this new procedural change.

The following Communications and/or Reports were received and filed:

DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide to reconsider the CSX Corridor for Light Rail, and to consider the I-4 Corridor as an option.

Chairman Morris stated FDOT has already said they would not support the I-4 Corridor.

Commissioner Maloy seconded the motion.

Commissioner McLain advised the record shows that the Cities of Sanford, Longwood, Casselberry and Lake Mary, and 12 to 15 homeowners associations are all opposed to the I-4 Corridor and have endorsed the CSX route. Discussion ensued.

Districts 1 and 3 voted AYE.

Commissioners Morris, Adams and McLain voted NAY, whereupon, the motion failed for the lack of a majority vote.

--------

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner McLain to appoint Don Epps to the Seminole County Historical Commission.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

--------

Commissioner Adams advised he will be traveling to Tallahassee on March 11, 1998 after the MPO meeting in order to discuss transportation and Expressway Authority issues.

-------

Commissioner Adams advised he will be traveling to Tulsa, Oklahoma, on March 25 - 28, 1998, representing the International Council of Central Florida and will be meeting with State Department Officials. He stated that the International Council will be paying for the trip.

--------

Commissioner McLain advised he will be on vacation March 12 through 23, 1998.

--------

Chairman Morris advised County Manager, Gary Kaiser, has been invited by Harvard University to attend a three-week management program at the John F. Kennedy School of Government July 5 through 24, 1998.

The Board, by consensus, approved Mr. Kaiser attending the course at a cost of $5,000 to $7,500.

-------

The Board, thereupon, recessed at 3:55 p.m., reconvening at 7:10 p.m., this same date, with all Commissioners and all other Officials, with the exception of Deputy Clerk Sandy Wall, who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Eva Roach, who were present at the Opening Session.

Proofs of publication, as shown on page _________, calling for a public hearing to consider Land Development Code Amendments relating to tabled items, administrative items, design standards for Adult Entertainment/Sexually Oriented Businesses, and grandfathering of Adult Entertainment Establishments/Sexually Oriented Businesses, received and filed.

Don Fisher, Senior Planner, addressed the Board to review the following proposed changes to the Land Development Code: Numerous proposed changes that have been in the review process for a long time that were tabled so that additional research could be performed; Design Standards for the newly created M-2 zoning classification; Design Standards for lawfully operating and licensed adult entertainment establishments (AEEs) which includes the potential of grandfathering AEEs; Prohibiting outdoor advertising signs by AEEs and Sexually Oriented Businesses (SOBs); Prohibiting sexually explicit advertising by AEEs and SOBs; and Miscellaneous administrative matters. At the first public hearing, staff was directed to make the following changes to the proposed ordinance: Delete the proposed provisions placing additional limitations on parking recreational vehicles in residential zoning districts; Remove the provision that would allow the Board to increase minimum house sizes when considering rezonings in R-1, R-1B, and R1BB. The Board directed staff to include this provision with the review of the lot size compatibility standards and to bring that back at the same time in the summer; Deleting the provisions that would prohibit burning of plant or organic material, for compensation, in all zoning classifications; Modify existing proposal that only allows the logo of the establishment to be placed on the awning to also allow the business name if the signage is permitted under the allowable square footage for the site; Delete the provision that would require the removal of all neon lighting. He stated the deletion just refers to page 63 and staff feels that the deletion of neon lighting should include all sections of the Code. He continued staff has modified the maximum building height from 30 ft. to 35 ft. to conform with the Land Development Code and staff made various typographical and clarification changes as identified by the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) at their Feb. 23 hearing. He stated staff feels that the following issues need further discussion: Grandfathering of AEEs and SOBs (Page 19); Clarification of the maximum height of 35 ft. for amateur radio operator towers (Page 20); and Revisions to the proposed definition for Home Office as it relates to storage, percentage of the dwelling unit, and the extent of who is affected by the definition.

Frances Chandler, Acting Planning & Development Director, addressed the Board to state this ordinance provides for a variety of amendments relative to AEEs in SOB’s. They include the provisions for design standards for AEEs within M-2 zoning, grandfathering existing operating AEEs and SOBs; provides protection for children from outdoor advertising signage relating to adult uses. She stated the City of Sanford held their first public hearing on March 9 relative to the Joint Planning Agreement for multi-jurisdictional land uses regarding adult entertainment. She stated the City of Sanford is requesting that the Board grandfather the existing establishments in the Fern Park area. She stated the City has indicated that this is what they are looking for in order to take action at their second reading. She read into the Record a letter (received and filed) from the Greater Sanford Chamber of Commerce requesting that the Board vote "no" on any attempt to move any adult entertainment establishment facilities from the Fern Park to the Sanford area. She submitted into the Record a map showing billboards located in unincorporated Seminole County and roads with billboards that are used as school bus routes.

Lonnie Groot, Deputy County Attorney, addressed the Board to advise a Memorandum dated March 3, 1998 is included in the agenda packet and he would like the three additional "whereas clauses" and Section 11 be modified and included in the ordinance. He explained what the clauses and Section 11 consist of. He stated he submitted format changes (received and filed) to pages 41 and 42 of the ordinance and a reference to Section 39 to adopt the findings that are set forth in the "whereas clauses". He introduced Assistant County Attorney, Rob Gebaide, and advised he will review what type of adult entertainment services he has found on the internet. He submitted a booklet (received and filed) showing the type of graphic material Mr. Gebaide has found on the internet.

Rob Gebaide, Assistant County Attorney, addressed the Board to state he is here tonight to address the availability of other avenues of erotic entertainment. He commented on the availability of the types of adult entertainment services on the internet and the procedures to gain access to these sites. He stated with the advances of today’s technology and the decrease in price to the consumer, it is affordable and easy to obtain a wide range of adult entertainment services in the privacy of your home.

Commissioner Adams stated he would like to know what happened with the relationship of the ACLJ and Florida Family Association as they were a part of the team fighting this industry. He asked Mr. Groot to give the Board a brief history of how the County got involved and where they are today.

Mr. Groot advised the Florida Family Association organization was basically involved in drafting the public nudity ordinance. He stated Mr. Cortman, American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), was very much involved in helping the County draft Ordinance #97-28. He said he and representatives from Shutts & Bowen communicated with Mr. Cortman numerous times and he told Mr. Cortman that once the applications were denied and once the appeals were filed, the County’s ordinance would be challenged. At that point, he felt it would be logical for one of the drafters to defend the ordinance across-the-board. He stated Mr. McMillan directed him to manage the litigation and he was attempting to manage it in a way of pushing Shutts & Bowen out of the deal and having ACLJ take over the litigation.

Mr. McMillan clarified that Shutts & Bowen would take lead in the litigation that involved Sassy Merlot’s and VIP Gold cases and the County would tender to ACLJ the defense of the new ordinance.

Mr. Groot stated Mr. Cortman indicated that he would need to review all of the pleadings. He said he tried to contact Mr. Cortman several times as he hadn’t heard from him. He added when he finally was able to reach Mr. Cortman, he indicated that he was not sure that he would open the box of pleadings sent to them. Ultimately, the ACLJ returned the box of pleadings unopened and Mr. Cortman indicated that ACLJ was not going to participate in the litigation. Discussion ensued.

Commissioner Maloy stated the ACLJ informed him that too many lawsuits were made with the County and those should be cleaned up, suing under moratorium was a mistake and that this whole issue should have been handled with one lawsuit or a declaratory judgment. He added their offer was sincere, but when the County no longer followed their advice, why would they work for free and put their name on the line on a product they could not be proud of.

Commissioner Van Der Weide stated the question is why didn’t they open the box. The information he received from that organization was they didn’t like the direction the majority of the Board was taking on this, and they didn’t want to be a part of it for fear of their reputation throughout the country.

Chairman Morris stated he spoke to Mr. Cortman personally, and he indicated that he doesn’t feel the County should sue under the moratorium. Upon the lawsuit under the moratorium, Mr. Cortman indicated that was the wise thing to do. He stated the ACLJ did not want to participate in the lawsuit of VIP Gold and Sassy Merlot and they said there were certain elements in the County’s ordinance that may be too restrictive to defend. There was a difference in the strategy at one point and there is a fundamental question that was debated extensively by this Board and was dealt with head-on relative to public nudity. He stated this Board has consistently moved aggressively in litigation against the two clubs that opened illegally. The County has multiple lawsuits that can never be combined because there are too many litigants. The ACLJ has never offered to defend the County on everything they are doing. Discussion ensued.

Commissioner Maloy stated it sounds like the Board is getting different interpretations on this. He stated he would be happy to send the ACLJ a letter asking them to provide their position.

Chairman Morris stated the appropriate way to do this is allow him, Mr. Groot and Commissioner Maloy to draft a letter to ACLJ so that all questions will be answered. The Board voiced no objections.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Morris, Mr. Groot advised the clubs the Board has jurisdiction over that relate to grandfathering are the following two clubs: Circus Circus and House of Babes; and the following three bookstores: Erotic Emporium, Bob’s Video and Excitement Video. He stated there are no sexually-oriented businesses licensed or operating illegally at this time. The County has no jurisdiction over Club Juana, Rachels, or Cabaret. Those clubs are in the city limits of Casselberry.

Jack Simmons, representing English Estates/English Woods Homeowners Association, addressed the Board to state the homeowners association is against any adult entertainment in their neighborhood and they are opposed to the grandfathering of existing establishments. He stated they understand and appreciate the probability of long and costly litigation, but how can the County require new establishments to locate in some remote area and allow existing establishments to remain in operation unabated.

Sandy Gonzales, 2520 Osage Tr., addressed the Board to state the County is going to improve a section of Seminole County under the CRA improvement that has been down in the dumps for quite some time. The County is improving it without removing the cause. He added if the Board insists on keeping these establishments in the area, then the residents should be allowed a hearing. He said New York City is going through a big court case and it may go to the higher courts. He stated he feels if the Board grandfathers these clubs in, they may regret it in the future.

At the request of Chairman Morris, Mr. Groot explained what New York City is doing with their litigation and the outcome of same.

Chairman Morris stated the City of Sanford has indicated that they are willing to do an interlocal agreement, if the County agrees to not move the existing clubs. Discussion ensued.

Stan Bessmer, 1301 Glastonberry, addressed the Board to address the number of arrests that occurred in these businesses over the last year. He read excerpts from Commissioners Morris, Maloy, Van Der Weide and Adams, and the Orlando Sentinel. He read comments from staff condemning Fern Park into the war zone. He stated he feels the Board has failed in their duties to find locations for these sites. If the clubs are allowed to stay in the existing location, he is planning to rent a billboard stating "Porn City, courtesy of the Seminole County Commissioners".

Commissioner McLain stated he feels the City of Sanford and the northern end of the County have done well to come up with sites to make this ordinance constitutional.

Discussion ensued between the Board, Mr. McMillan and Mr. Groot relative to what would happen to the ordinance if the ordinance was sustained with only 15 sites, declaring the sites unconstitutional, and the number of sites in the unincorporated area.

William Gildart, 2205 Winnebago Trail, addressed the Board to refer to and review Orlando Sentinel’s articles written by Mary Brooks and Robert Perez. The Board seems to be headed to be either allied with the porno kings or to incur intolerable legal expenses. There are better ways: one is piggy-back on the New York City case of cleaning up Time Square and another way is to unite with the citizens. In the 1950’s, the City of Boston took over sleaze places by eminent domain, tore them down and erected a government center. The Board can replace these buildings with County offices. He stated he would recommend delaying grandfathering unless the Board finds their decision is in conflict with Superior Court decisions and study all of the alternatives.

Edith Gildart addressed the Board to state she would like to congratulate Commissioners Maloy and Van Der Weide for their courage in not supporting the grandfathering at the last meeting. She said when sin came into the world, the first thing that God did was to clothe Adam and Eve. She said she is glad that the Board is taking notes and they are sitting there in suits.

Beverly Bragg, 2031 Sepler Ct., addressed the Board to state 20 years ago there were a few of these establishments in the area. She stated the only thing she would compare this to is a cancer and that is something you need to take care of. She said she is requesting that these establishments be eradicated and she doesn’t believe the Board should vote tonight to grandfather these establishments.

Sharon Carveth, 3214 Tall Tree Lane, addressed the Board to discuss the definition of office showroom. She stated she is not real happy with the definition of this as it appears in the Land Development Code (LDC) change because you can have a 200,000 sq. ft. warehouse with an office showroom in front of it and it would meet the definition. She added she would prefer the ordinance reflect the fact that you can have storage and an office showroom, but there is a limitation on the number of square footage. She said she also has a problem with the six zoning classifications relative to prohibiting burning of organic material.

John Sauls, 824 Escambia Dr., addressed the Board to state he feels these establishments should be grandfathered in and not bring them to Sanford. He stated these types of businesses were created in Orange County and since they want to reap the benefits, they should have some of these establishments. None of the citizens in Sanford want these establishments in their area and he would strongly urge the Board to vote against closing them down and bringing them to Sanford.

Susan Doerner, 211 S. Embrey, addressed the Board to state there are a lot of people who basically want to improve their environment. If Sassy’s and VIP stay, there will be approximately 10 establishments in the area. She asked the Board to reassess the situation and do not grandfather these establishments.

Don Gergick, 215 Graham Rd., addressed the Board to state over the past few days he has thought and thought to try to come up with something new and profound in order to convince the Board to say no to grandfathering. The basic issue is the residents do not want adult entertainment businesses in their community. The residents should have the right to set their own standards in their community. The people in the community have spoken. He asked if the Board has the courage to fight for the residents and say no to grandfathering.

Bob West, 113 Shady Court, Longwood, addressed the Board to state he is a member of the citizens’ committee to fire Randy Morris. He read some quotes from the New York State Court of Appeals he found on the internet.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. West advised the Board put themselves into a position where they have no way out but to grandfather. If they were kept at the end of the runway, all of the adult entertainment establishments could have been there and no one would have to worry about it. Whereupon, Commissioner McLain stated those sites would have to be annexed. Discussion ensued.

Chairman Morris read comments from John Towers; Bob Coccagna; Jean Kelley; Robert Kelly; Donna Murphy; Arthur Fitton; Nicholas Mazzei; Rosa Perry; Mike Tuan; Martha Henry; Charles Henry; David Henry; Don Renner; and Susan Doolittle.

Harry Lackey, 2550 S. French Ave., addressed the Board to state he supports grandfathering the existing establishments. He stated moving these establishments does not eliminate the problems that are associated with these establishments. A lot of people have moved into that area before a lot of these establishments opened and they should have checked the area out before they moved in. This situation is like a hornet’s nest and if you try to remove the nest you get stung. He stated he would suggest leaving the hornet’s nest where it has been for the last 25 years.

Chairman Morris read comments from Harry A. Bertram; James Hillebrandt; Ken Cleare; Teresa Armstrong; Judy Quinton; and Hazel Delong.

Patte Smith, 476 Club Dr., addressed the Board to state all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. She stated even with all the opposition and difficulties, their children need to see that their standards are set. Their community does not want the bad and the ugly.

Howard Martin, 211 Graham Rd., Fern Park, addressed the Board to state he opposes this drastically and he thought the Board was the voice of the people.

Commissioner Maloy left the meeting at this time.

Larry Fairbrother, representing the Northland Community Church, addressed the Board to state the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) received the proposed changes to the LDC on February 20 and they were to take action for same on February 23. At that meeting, the P&Z spent four hours on unrelated items and grandfathering was not discussed. The citizens of the community were not forewarned, by advertising, that this item would be coming up. He stated Mr. West indicated at that time this was too much material to handle at one time. He added the notice for the BCC Feb. 24, 1998 meeting did not mention grandfathering. The P&Z hearing and the Feb. 24 BCC meeting were not properly advertised for what they were. He is requesting the Board to consider getting their procedures in order.

Commissioner Maloy reentered the meeting at this time.

Chairman Morris advised that the February 24 advertisement did mention grandfathering. He submitted a copy of the February 24 notice (received and filed).

Chairman Morris read comments from Howard Martin; Charles Williams; Atherden Michelle; and Leigh Steinke.

Charles Shafe, 167 Lakewood Cr., addressed the Board to encourage the Board to make the right decision regarding the overall issues. He stated he and his teenage daughter were riding through the area and she indicated that it is disgusting and she is embarrassed that she has to live in this area. He encouraged the Board to do what is right, stating it is never wrong to do what is right.

Mark George, representing Seminole County Citizens for Decency, addressed the Board to state the question being asked is for whom will the Board make their decision. Is it the local pornography industry who stands to gain everything or is it the tax paying voting citizens. He stated he finds the term "adult entertainment" is somewhat repulsive and offensive as it suggests that this type of activity is "entertaining to the general adult population". If it is, where are the paying customers of these clubs that should be here begging the Board not to relocate their favorite hot spot. He stated he would like to know how does grandfathering existing establishments eliminate any of the secondary adverse effects of the already blighted Fern Park corridor. The $800,000 the Board is suggesting to jump start the Fern Park’s redevelopment would far better be spent in legal defense by amortization of these joints into a single industrial area war zone. If the Board is going to grandfather these establishments, then put the $800,000 plus to the good work of rehabilitating those men and teenagers addicted to pornography. The Board can move these clubs with a minimal amortization time schedule.

Jon Piacentino, 2100 SR 434, Longwood, addressed the Board to state he is a small businessman and he is being affected by this. He stated he is appalled that such a big deal is being made over this.

Chairman Morris advised that Tom M. Saunders is not in attendance, but is in support of the request.

Chairman Morris read comments from Duane Atherden and Chuck Wallace.

Commissioner Paul Lovestrand, City of Longwood, addressed the Board to state in 1994 he was under the impression that the City of Longwood did not have any adult entertainment businesses until a constituent complained about one. After inquiring with the police department, he found that there were three in the area. He stated he immediately introduced an adult entertainment ordinance which has been very successful in eliminating the existing businesses. That was done through zoning. The City worked with the F.D.L.E. and the results of their efforts resulted in these businesses to move out of the area. Adult entertainment is allowed in the industrial area of Longwood, but it is so undesirable from a profitability standpoint, it is not feasible for them to locate. He stated he feels the Board can take the same kind of action.

Mayor Larry Dale, City of Sanford, addressed the Board to state the solution to the problem is a war zone, but where do you put it. He stated the Board chose a site for a combat zone, but the City of Sanford vehemently opposed that site. The City said they would do everything in their power to hasten annexation of that entire area. The Courts have indicated that these businesses cannot be eliminated. Therefore, the City has agreed to work with the County to come up with the best ordinance to regulate this industry.

Attorney David Wasserman, representing Circus Circus, addressed the Board to state he feels the Board or staff should contact the Lee County Board to find out what happened when the Federal court ruled against the ACLJ and the ACLJ walked away with the County owing a six figure judgment. He submitted and reviewed pictures (received and filed) of his client’s establishments pointing out practical difficulties with some of the criteria. He referred to the driveway sign causing a safety hazard along the north side. He requested the Board to grandfather the existing businesses.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Morris, Kevin Fall, Capital Program Analyst, addressed the Board to advise the intent of the design standards apply to all flags.

Attorney Bob Fisher, representing Rachel’s & Club Juana, addressed the Board to state he is here to speak with regard to grandfathering of the existing legally-operating adult entertainment establishments in the County. He stated if everyone agrees that the Constitution protects the activity of freedom of expression, the issue is what do they do about it. He said Circus Circus has been in existence for 27 years and Club Juana has been in existence for 32 years. The bottom line is, is it fair to move clubs near someone’s back yard or to leave them where they have been in existence for so many years. He added he feels that grandfathering these establishments is the right thing to do.

Joseph Hiser, 1532 Villa Nova, addressed the Board to state he reads the newspaper everyday and the featured items are about bank robberies, murders, car jackings and other acts of mayhem. The point he is leading up to is there are so many other problems in society and he believes his tax dollars are being wasted away by the relentless attacks on these clubs. It is absurd and a big waste of time and tax dollars. He said he feels that this money should be used to hire more law enforcement officers. When you take away certain rights, it turns into a snowball effect.

Don Fisher stated staff met with members associated with the amateur radio operators and they had difficulty coming to an agreement on the issue of a minimum height requirement. He stated they did come to an agreement on the issue of when a special exception is considered for towers over 35 ft. He advised the following be added to Section 17 of the Code: "In addition to the criteria for special exceptions set forth in this Code, the Board of Adjustment shall, in considering applications for special exceptions relating to amateur radio towers, perform a reasonable accommodation analysis as may be required by the F.C.C." He added 35 ft. is the maximum height for any structure in all zoning districts in the County. Staff asked the industries what height towers they had in other jurisdictions and two indicated they had 35 ft. towers, one had 64 ft. towers and the other did not have a tower. A memorandum to the Board relative to the changes of the amateur radio towers was received and filed.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Greg Hass, Assistant County Attorney, addressed the Board to advise the F.C.C. has preempted zoning as it pertains to satellite dishes. The Courts left the preemption for ham radio towers vague and they do not set a limit at which the counties cannot regulate. Discussion ensued.

Chairman Morris read comments from Anne Schneider relative to the height limitations.

Robert Cumming, representing the Quarter Century Wireless Association, addressed the Board to state without the towers and the height of the antennas, the radio operators could not have provided the type of communication that was needed throughout the County for the tornado victims. Even though the existing QCWA repeaters are grandfathered, he is worried that the operators will not have a guarantee on these sites. Most of the manufactured towers today start at 40 ft., therefore, how can you modify that tower to 35 ft. He stated he doesn’t feel there is a need to restrict the height to 35 ft.

Chairman Morris read comments from Gloria Jones opposing the height limitations and opposing the filing fee.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Morris, Mr. Fisher advised the operators have requested that the $370 filing fee for a special exception be waived anytime an application is made. He stated staff would not support waiving the fees.

Chairman Morris questioned if the Board determines that ham radio operators are providing a public service, does a fee have to be charged.

Mr. Groot advised from a legal standpoint, he believes the fees can be waived if the Board recites a rational basis in the fee resolution that a public benefit is derived.

Keith Kotch, representing Seminole County Amateur Emergency Services, addressed the Board to state one thing that was not mentioned was the lack of willingness from staff in discussing modification to this ordinance. He stated the proposed changes does nothing for the operators’ cause except for putting words in it reminding the Board that this has to be done. The Florida State Antenna Law Statute indicates that a municipality nor a County can enact an ordinance that would go against the Federal preemption. The Amateur Radio Emergency Service (ARES) still opposes the 35 ft. limit even though a variance procedure is offered. The proposed ordinance does not meet the intent of what the Federal government has asked the local governments to do, and that is to accommodate communications in the emergency mode. The proposed fees will put an undue burden on amateur operators who donate their time, equipment and expertise to provide emergency service to the public and government. He stated the ARES is asking that the Board consider waiving or reducing the fees as this eliminates some of the problems.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. Kotch advised he is requesting a 65 ft. height limitation.

Lenard Persin, 501 Brookside Cir., addressed the Board to read Norwood Nutting’s comments into the Record.

Mr. Persin spoke with regard to reasonable accommodation and the requirements.

Karl Lambert, 1201 Wolverine Trl., addressed the Board to state he spent over 450 hours helping the people who were devastated by the tornado. He stated the operators need a tower in which they can communicate when a disaster happens. The staff has indicated that they received only two complaints. The radio operators can communicate even if there is no electricity. He said the PRB1 states that a tower cannot be more than 200 ft. high within a mile of an airport and he would like to know where does staff come up with 35 ft.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Adams, Mr. Lambert advised about eight years ago, he paid about $200 for his transceiver. He stated when the amateur radio operators hold their field day for practicing emergencies, they use a tower that is provided by the County and it is 65 ft. high.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. Fisher advised if a tower falls, there are no restrictions on how much clearance they have to have to the property line. He stated that’s covered under the Southern Building Code requirements. There are certain wind load requirements up to a mile per hour wind.

Mr. Dwyer stated that issue has been one of staff’s concerns relative to placing tall towers in residential areas.

Commissioner McLain stated he doesn’t have a problem with 65 ft. assuming it would fall, it would stay on the property owners’ property. Discussion ensued.

Mr. Hass stated one of the purposes of having a special exception is to allow the County to study to see how tall the proposed tower would be, what the lot lines are and how close are the homes.

Chairman Morris stated due to the fact there are few applications pending and the unique nature of the services provided by these individuals, he would recommend levying a fee of $25.00 for any appeal applications to the Board of Adjustment.

Harry Lackey stated he feels that Commissioner McLain’s recommendation of having the height of the tower regulated by the size of the property is a good idea. He stated he doesn’t see anything wrong with having wires or an antenna in a tree as long as it is camouflaged.

Roda Rowland addressed the Board to speak with regard to the 35 ft. height.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Comment Sheet from Sharon DeBerry was received and filed.

Speaker Request and Written Comment Forms were received and filed.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve a 65 ft. height limitation with a free fall zone, and any requests that do not provide the free fall zone up to 65 ft. would need a special exception.

Mr. Fisher referred to revision home office definition and submitted replacement page #5. He stated staff was directed to revise the definition by removing the 20% requirement, to allow storage and to clarify that if an individual had a fax come to their home, that would not be affected by the ordinance. He said with regard to towers, staff contacted the Amateur Electric Supply Company and they advised them that pre-manufactured towers start about 38 ft. and the cost is around $1100 to $3500. The Amateur Electric Supply Company also indicated that the best tower they have, cost-wise, is a 72 ft. tower with a motor and is retractable. It can retract down to 20 to 25 ft. and it costs $3900.

Chairman Morris stated there seems to be some agreement of having a case-by-case analysis of a Board of Adjustment procedure and reducing the fee to a reasonable level. Discussion ensued.

Commissioner Maloy stated he has heard the residents say that the 35 ft. will interfere with the neighborhood TVs and he believes staff should take a more technical look at this.

Commissioner McLain stated he has no objections with the technical staff checking into this further.

Mr. Fisher stated because of engineering aspects and locational criteria, there is not going to be one perfect answer. He stated with the property rights issue, staff feels it would be better going with 35 ft. at this time and then discuss 65 ft. at a later date.

Commissioner Adams stated from a practical standpoint, he doesn’t like to see anything over 35 ft. without going to a special exception, but on the other hand, these people provide a public service. He added he feels staff should take a cold, hard look at the fee schedule and get it down to a reasonable level.

Commissioner McLain stated he has no problem with the $25 special exception fee and believes it is a reasonable way to go.

Chairman Morris stated if the Board places this in the Code, they can still look for more information.

Commissioners McLain withdrew his motion and Commissioner Van Der Weide withdrew his second.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve the $25 special exception fee with findings that staff will come back with additional studies.

Under discussion and upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Chairman Morris advised staff can have until the Land Development Code fall cycle to allow them an opportunity to study this issue further.

Commissioners McLain and Van Der Weide agreed to include that in the motion.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

- - -

The Board unanimously consented to the changes of the Home Office definition as submitted.

- - -

Mr. Fisher advised staff did not have any changes to the Office Showroom classification. He clarified that there was a typographical error to Section C2. That section should read C3 and staff will make that correction.

- - -

Upon inquiry by Chairman Morris, Mr. Fisher advised at the first public hearing, staff was directed to delete the burning of material out of certain zoning classifications and leave it in a few districts. He stated staff felt that would be a taking from the other properties and that should be left the way it is.

The Board had no objections.

A memorandum dated March 10, 1998 from Don Fisher to the Board relative to the 1998 LDC Update Property Rights Analysis was received and filed.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Adams to adopt Ordinance #98-13, as shown on page _________, approving Land Development Code Amendments relating to tabled items, administrative items, design standards for Adult Entertainment Establishments/Sexually Oriented Businesses, and grandfathering of Adult Entertainment Establishments/Sexually Oriented Businesses, with staff recommendations and revisions added this evening.

Under discussion, Commissioner Maloy stated he will not be supporting grandfathering the clubs. He stated if these clubs were not grandfathered in, in his opinion, they would be more likely to move elsewhere than in Seminole County. This is going against the Board’s earlier direction in trying to keep it all to one war zone. He stated he feels this is giving the strip joints a great location on one of the busiest locations in the County and it gives them a protected monopoly. He stated if the Board wants to grandfather them in, then they should do it through the existing adult entertainment ordinance and extend the amortization period. By grandfathering these clubs in, it will give the clubs like Sassy Merlot’s a better argument for staying in the neighborhood. This will have an effect on the redevelopment efforts. He stated he feels the County will be operating from a position of weakness where it may damage any future action of the Board. He added he thinks it is ridiculous to think that by making changes to the building, it is going to help reduce the secondary effects. He said the real issue is does the County buckle in to these strip joints; and he is not prepared to do that. If the Board is going to grandfather these establishments, then, he would suggest putting in an ending date on their current locations. He added he sees this as an operation from a position of weakness as these establishments are getting what they wanted.

Chairman Morris stated the alternative site issues have been discussed extensively. Staff has reviewed this issue and recommend action. The Board has indicated that all future bookstores and establishments must go to the war zones that have been established. The Board believes that under an economic argument, it is unlikely that new places will continue to expand. He reviewed what the Board has done relative to adult uses (copy was received and filed). He stated this ordinance can be changed annually.

Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he is against grandfathering the existing establishments and he supports the other issues relative to antennas, neon lighting, etc.

Districts 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioners Maloy and Van Der Weide voted NAY.

Proofs of publication, as shown on page _________, calling for a public hearing to consider an Ordinance prohibiting commercial straddle dancing and establishing licensing fees for adult entertainment establishments and sexually oriented businesses, received and filed.

Lonnie Groot, Deputy County Attorney, advised this ordinance does two things: increases the fees for AEEs and SOBs, and prohibits any form of straddle dancing. He submitted a memorandum 98-005 from Lt. Gibson to Mary Ann Klein relating to the cost of adult entertainment investigations and enforcement.

Commissioner Van Der Weide left the meeting at this time.

Chairman Morris called Joseph Hiser to speak and was informed that he had left the meeting.

Alleshia Hessenius, 961 Caribbean Pl., addressed the Board to read into the Record her comments relating to the civil rights of the entertainers.

Chairman Morris called the following individuals and they were not in attendance: Susan Doerner; Dorothy Mullins; Onnie Porter; Charles Shafe; David Williams; John Woodard; and Bob Fisher.

Attorney David Wasserman stated the fees have been raised on other adult video establishments and theaters. He asked the Board to reconsider what would be a reasonable fee.

Mr. Groot reviewed the analysis staff conducted relative to the fees established.

Commissioner Van Der Weide reentered the meeting at this time.

Chairman Morris stated he has received 11 written comment forms supporting the proposed ordinance and nine opposing the proposed ordinance. Speaker Request and Written Comment Forms were received and filed.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Adams to adopt Ordinance #98-19, as shown on page _________, prohibiting commercial straddle dancing and establishing licensing fees for AEEs and SOBs.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

County Attorney Robert McMillan left the meeting at this time and was replaced by Deputy County Attorney Lonnie Groot.

Continuation of a public hearing to consider Amendment from Suburban Estates to Planned Development and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); property located west of Banana Lake Road and ¾ mile south of CR 46A, containing approximately 14.4 acres, as described in the proof of publication, Shutts & Bowen.

Cindy Matheny, Senior Planner, addressed the Board to state staff recommended approval of Planned Development land use with zoning conditions outlined in the agenda memorandum. She stated staff has no objections to the rezoning subject to: (1) The applicant maintaining a 200 ft. vegetative buffer, with supplemental plantings where necessary, along the northern property line; and, (2) Building height to be limited to 35 ft. The Local Planning Agency recommended denial of the amendment and rezoning. She added the applicant has submitted a revised plan for the apartments, which includes the 200 ft. setback and buffer, a 6 ft. brick wall with a double roll oaks located on a 2 to 3 ft. high berm. Staff feels that the revised plan addresses their concerns relative to the buffering and the location of the apartments adjacent suburban estates land use. The applicant located some parking garages within the setback and staff felt this should be relocated out of the buffer and setback area.

Attorney Ken Wright, representing the developer, addressed the Board to display an aerial map showing the approximate location of the site. He stated he supports staff’s recommendations and staff’s concern related to the configuration and size of the buffer area. The issues that will be presented tonight relate to compatibility and whether or not the buffer being presented will adequately address the concerns of the previous buffers. He displayed a site plan and advised the existing buffer is within an area that was previously an orange grove. He stated the area that consists mostly of the buffer area is sparsely vegetated and there has been an attempt to try to accommodate the applicant’s interest of developing his property and getting the adequate yield from his property and to address the 200 ft. buffer. Since the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) hearing, he met with a couple of the adjoining property owners to address their concerns. This plan includes a building setback of 200 ft., specific design criteria, 6 ft. brick wall on a berm, a 20 ft. on-center trees with 2½ to 3½ caliber, and elimination of a pond in the center of the property and it has been designed to reconfigure it to maximize and retain some of the existing tall trees.

Cindy Crain, 820 Banana Lake Road, addressed the Board to state both sides have had several discussions and she has two major concerns with this whole project. She stated she is concerned with what appears to be overbuilding of apartment complexes in this particular area of the County and by approving all of these apartments, it will definitely decrease the value of her property and surrounding properties. The area residents’ quality of life will never be the same again if this project is approved. She requested the Board to deny this project.

Joey Ivey, representing Fred Edwards, addressed the Board to state after reviewing the application, he was perplexed and confused about what this is all about. He stated the Local Planning Agency recommended denial of the project at their January 7 hearing. He read the definition of land use designations and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. He displayed and reviewed Table 2.1 relative to appropriate transitional land uses. Based on the Comp Plan, there are a lot of reasons not to approve this project. He displayed and reviewed a chart showing what the Board must do to vote for this project. He stated the residents would like the project to be compatible with the Comp Plan and transitional uses.

Commissioner Maloy left the meeting at this time.

Attorney Cecelia Bonifay, representing Mr. & Mrs. Fred Edwards, addressed the Board to state the issue is not the buffer, but of land use compatibility and consistency. There are two key policies dealing with transitional uses and Table 2.1 as submitted by Mr. Ivey. She stated she doesn’t see what has happened to the residential area that no longer makes it viable with the residents living there.

Janis Ferrell, 874 Banana Lake Rd., addressed the Board to submit a map (received and filed) showing the Heathrow International Center or the Heathrow PUD in pink. She stated when the Board’s predecessors approved the PUD’s, an enclave was created in the Banana Lake area. She discussed the high recharge and environmentally-sensitive area concerns and the devaluation of property.

Laina Ferrell, 874 Banana Lake, addressed the Board to state she wants to keep her neighborhood for future generations.

Wendell Springfield, 770 Banana Lake Road, addressed the Board to speak on behalf of several property owners on Banana Lake Road. He stated he submitted an aerial map (received and filed) of the proposed site and surrounding area. He stated there are some plan developments within the Heathrow project, but those projects shown on the map are for single family housing. What the applicant is proposing to do is a quality type project, but this is not where it belongs. This particular piece of property should remain as individual housing. There are six apartment complexes within a 4 mile area of Banana Lake.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. Springfield advised he believes that single family housing would be more acceptable to the neighborhood, provided it is the right type of single family housing.

Commissioner Maloy reentered the meeting at this time.

Fred Edwards, 748 Banana Lake Road, addressed the Board to state he feels the applicant has worked very hard in making this one of the nicest projects ever. He stated he feels that the main issue is not the quality of what they are trying to do per se, but it is an incompatible project. He said he has a copy of staff’s original report recommending denial of this project.

Gordon Frederick, 756 Banana Lk. Rd., addressed the Board to submit and review a color coded map (received and filed). He stated he is concerned with the nature and density of the proposed development. He reviewed the Colonial development colored in purple and the proposed development in yellow. The residents do not need or want this.

Chairman Morris read comments from Ann Williams and Kailyn Williams.

Attorney Wright stated he concurs with staff’s recommendations. He stated this is a plan that cuts off Banana Lake from further access and it provides a buffer to this project. He added he urges the Board to approve the project.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Morris, Ms. Matheny explained why staff feels that this is an appropriate land use.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. Dwyer stated staff has no changes to their recommendations, but they don’t recommend the parking garage structures being in the buffer.

Chairman Morris stated he feels a solid natural buffer is needed in the project and feels the residents should reconsider that issue in terms of what the real impact will be on the roadway.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Van Der Weide, Mr. Edwards stated he can live with a 200 ft. passive buffer with no retention, no roads or no buildings. He stated he has 16 acres along Banana Lake Road and he doesn’t have access to it except an easement with 7½ ft. on the applicant’s side and 7½ ft. on Mr. Gordon’s side. He said he would access to his property to make it viable if the applicant is willing to give him an easement to allow him to do that.

Mr. Frederick stated the applicant has agreed to install a 6 ft. wall with a 3 ft. berm and a 200 ft. buffer along that area. He stated he has informed the applicant that he can live with the wall, the berm and the buffer. Discussion ensued between Mr. Frederick and Chairman Morris relative to the wall and solid vegetative natural buffer.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to continue the proposed Land Use Amendment and Rezoning request for Shutts & Bowen until after the next hearing to allow the applicant and residents to have a discussion.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioner McLain left the meeting at this time.

Proofs of publication, as shown on page _________, calling for a public hearing to consider Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in approving for St. Mark’s Presbyterian Church a request to amend the master plan of an existing Special Exception for a church and school; to add grassed parking and ingress/egress access to Rolling Oaks Cove (formerly Aldus Drive); property located at the southeast corner of Palm Springs Drive and North Street, Kenneth R. "Kip" Marchman, attorney representing Mr. & Mrs. Mandle and Mr. & Mrs. Hackett, received and filed.

Ginny Markley, Zoning Coordinator, addressed the Board to review the standards for granting a special exception as outlined in the agenda memorandum. She stated staff finds that: (1) The addition of grassed parking area for over-flow parking would not be detrimental to the character of the area or trends of development in area or neighborhood providing that a screen is installed along the east lot line between the church and the single family residences; (2) The ingress/egress access to Rolling Oaks Cove would have an unduly adverse effect on existing traffic patterns, movements, and intensity. Staff would not recommend non-residential traffic utilizing access to a road designed for residential use and where there is existing and adequate access to Palm Springs Drive. Robert Zaitooni, Traffic Engineer, indicated that the wearing course as constructed is below the minimum Seminole County standards and that Rolling Oaks Cove does not appear on the list of active County maintained roads; and, (3) The proposed request would not be in agreement with the provisions of the Seminole County Comprehensive Land Use Plan and the Seminole County Land Development Code insomuch as Rolling Oaks Cove is not constructed in accordance with the design standards for non-residential use. She stated based on the adverse impact to the existing traffic, patterns, movements and intensity, staff cannot recommend the use of Rolling Oaks Cove for ingress/egress to the church property. However, staff would have no objections approving the revised master plan indicating overflow grassed parking subject to the installation of a 4 ft. high hedge, 75% opaque and trees to equal one for every 25 ft. along the east lot line fronting Rolling Oaks Cove.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Adams, Bob Zaitooni, Traffic Engineer, addressed the Board to advise the original developer negotiated with the church relative to the water flow.

Commissioner McLain reentered the meeting at this time.

Kip Marchman, representing the appellants, addressed the Board to state the appeal is based on the allowance of the ingress and egress. He read verbatim minutes of the Board of Adjustment hearing as outlined in his January 16, 1998 letter. He briefly reviewed the history of the site.

Commissioner Adams stated he is concerned how cut-through traffic will be handled and the number of trips. He stated the substandard road is usually based on the type of vehicles traveling on it.

Mr. Zaitooni stated there was an agreement between a person acting as the developer and the church allowing some of the church property to be used for drainage purposes.

John Small addressed the Board to state he is the Scout Master of the Boys Scout troop the church sponsors and his troop is one of the main users of the activity building. He explained the importance of the ingress and egress access to the troop.

Attorney Ken Wright, representing St. Marks Presbyterian Church, stated this access has been used by the church since 1978. He stated the church deeded to the developer allowing them to use their property to handle the water runoff from the paved street, therefore, it is not detrimental to the character or inconsistent with the trends. It does not have an undue effect on the traffic circulation patterns and it is not inconsistent with the Seminole County Comp Plan. He advised a letter was written in 1978 stating the church gave the right and had water put on their property via a structure and a headwall.

Steve Precourt, representing Dyer, Riddle & Precourt, addressed the Board to advise that there is no undue traffic impact.

David D’Amicol addressed the Board to address the drainage.

Mary Mandl, 979 Rolling Oaks Cove, addressed the Board to explain why St. Marks should not have ingress and egress by Rolling Oaks Cove. She stated the church has not complied with the arbitration ruling on accessing the church property and has not been a good neighbor.

Mary Hackett, 983 Rolling Oaks Cove, addressed the Board to state she wrote a letter (not received and filed) addressing the issues that have plagued them for the last 16 years. She stated she lives in the area 24 hours a day and she is concerned with the quality and integrity of life for the future.

Terry Hackett, 983 Rolling Oaks Cove, addressed the Board to state the residents have spent a lot of time and money to protect their neighborhood. He stated none of the church people live on their street and they are not good neighbors.

Chairman Morris read comments from Gilmore Daniel, Meredith Daniel, Marilyn Warnick-Fitzpatrick, Harry Fitzpatrick, Wendy Allen, Carol Czwornog, and Terri Ratchford.

Don Epps, 144 Peacock Drive, addressed the Board to speak in support of the Special Exception. He urged the Board to uphold the Board of Adjustment’s recommendation.

Mr. Marchman submitted a copy of two Quit Claim Deeds (received and filed) and he stated neither of these deeds mention any rights to ingress or egress.

Mr. Wright submitted Petitions, as shown on page __________, supporting the church’s original request and a letter (received and filed) dated February 1978 relating to the access right.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Speaker Request and Written Comment Forms were received and filed.

District Commissioner Adams stated he feels there should be some type of barrier or hedge along the road to block off some of the view. He stated there will have to be some means to control the traffic and to minimize the amount of vehicle trips going on that property before he can approve this type of request.

Attorney Wright displayed the site plan and advised there will be a paved apron at the point of access to the cul-de-sac so that it will prevent any washout of sand. He stated the church will agree to installing the hedge and providing irrigation for same and putting in an iron-type gate at the point of access to the cul-de-sac. The church will limit the access to this gate on Sundays and it will be closed after morning services, reopened during the evening services and reclosed by 8:00 p.m. He submitted a copy of the schedule of services (not received and filed).

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner McLain to uphold the Board of Adjustment and amend the master plan of an existing Special Exception with an ingress/egress access to Rolling Oaks Cove, and uphold the Board of Adjustment’s decision in approving the overflow grassed parking subject to staff comments and recommendations for the plantings, hedge, ornamental gate, traffic to and from the site will be based upon Exhibit A; and all other representations made by Mr. Wright, with a time certain by June 1, 1998.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Continuation of a public hearing to consider Amendment from Suburban Estates to Planned Development and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); property located west of Banana Lake Road and ¾ mile south of CR 46A, containing approximately 14.4 acres, as described in the proof of publication, Shutts & Bowen.

Mr. Ivey stated he agrees with the buffer as long as the roads, stormwater, garages are eliminated. He stated he agrees with the 6 ft. wall with a 3 ft. berm.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. Wright advised he can give the residents everything if they can get the retention in the buffer.

Mr. Frederick stated his property will be the one most affected by this request and he can accept a 6 ft. wall with a 3 ft. berm, the garages will be removed out of the buffer as well as the road, and retain the retention pond.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to transmit Planned Development land use, subject to a 200 ft. buffer with a 3 ft. berm and a 6 ft. wall, the wall to be setback 25 ft. from the property line, right-of-way will be dealt with with Mr. Edwards, with a 50 ft. landscape buffer be allowed within the 200 ft. buffer, with no structures constructed within that buffer, retention pond to be included, and with the District Commissioner to review the site plan when it comes back.

Under discussion, Commissioner McLain stated he would like to make sure that both parties are in agreement when the site plan comes back.

Mr. Springfield stated he is concerned if they expand the PUD what will keep the developer from going to the north end and doing the same thing.

The Board clarified with Mr. Dwyer that this is to be a brick wall.

Mr. Dwyer stated he is working with Mr. Pizzuti in getting trees planted along Banana Lake Road.

Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioner Maloy voted NAY.

Proofs of publication, as shown on page _________, calling for a public hearing to consider Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in approving the renewal of an existing mobile home for a period of one year instead of the five years that she requested; property located at the southwest corner of Saunders Trail and Cochran Road, approximately 1/3 mile west of SR 46, Emma Smith, received and filed.

Ms. Markley advised the appellant indicated that the mobile home is currently rented and her son plans to move to the area and build on the property but she is not sure when. She reviewed the policy for considering extensions for existing mobile homes as outlined in the agenda memorandum. She stated staff finds that the Board of Adjustment followed the adopted policy regarding the renewal of the mobile home. Staff concurs with the Board of Adjustment’s decision in approving the renewal for a one year period based on the age and condition of the mobile home and property and rental status.

Emma Smith, appellant, addressed the Board to request approval of the renewal. She stated she doesn’t feel that the age of the mobile home should have anything to do with it, it should be condition of same. She submitted photographs (received and filed) showing the condition of the mobile home. She stated she has put a lot of work into the mobile home and she would like a five year extension.

Chairman Morris read comments from Mike Hollenbeck, Sieglinda Hollenbeck and Donna Hartsfield. Speaker Request and Written Comment Forms were received and filed.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to overturn the Board of Adjustment, thereby, granting renewal of an existing mobile home for a period of two years; property located at the southwest corner of Saunders Trail and Cochran Road, approximately 1/3 mile west of SR 46, as described in the proof of publication, Emma Smith.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

-------

There being no further business to come before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 2:20 a.m., March 11, 1998.

ATTEST________________________Clerk_____________________Chairman

slw/er