BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
January 12, 2016
The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held at 9:30 a.m., on Tuesday, January 12, 2016, in Room 1028 of the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.
Chairman John Horan (District 2)
Vice Chairman Brenda Carey (District 5)
Commissioner Robert Dallari (District 1)
Commissioner Lee Constantine (District 3)
Commissioner Carlton Henley (District 4)
Clerk of Circuit Court and Comptroller Maryanne Morse (late)
County Manager Nicole Guillet
Deputy County Attorney Lynn Porter-Carlton
Deputy Clerk Kyla Spencer
Pastor Ward Hodges, Lighthouse Baptist Church, Sanford, gave the Invocation. Commissioner Dallari led the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Business Spotlight video for Xtreme Dance was presented.
Maryanne Morse entered the meeting at this time.
AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
Agenda Item #1 – 2015-264
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2016-R-1 recognizing Jim Robison for the work and contributions he has made to the citizens of Seminole County and honoring him for his unique historical, cultural and civic contributions.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Jim Robison addressed the Board to express his appreciation.
Agenda Item #2 – A-1666-15
Motion by Commissioner Constantine, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2016-R-2 in support of the Innovative Traffic Signal Technologies Pilot Project.
Chairman Horan noted for the record that there will be one change in the last "Whereas" clause, the word "under" will be submitted between "Whereas" and "the".
Commissioner Constantine clarified that this resolution has nothing to do with red lights or red-light ticketing, so for anyone speculating what the ordinance might have in it, it does not have anything like that.
Commissioner Carey reminded that the county already has 40 to 50 adaptive signals which mostly operate off of a loop versus a camera system. She noted she is someone who doesn't support cameras and wants to make sure that as the project continues to evolve, the Board gets a briefing every quarter or so, so that the Board can be apprised of what's going on and how the project is developing because she believes that would be helpful.
Chairman Horan stated that he thinks this project will be a topic of conversation in a series of workshops that the Board is going to have concerning mobility and circulatory traffic as the project moves forward. He noted that several Board members are on boards regionally where this particular topic comes up so the Board will have some briefings on that and they'll be able to assemble the scholarship on it. Chairman Horan confirmed this with County Manager Nicole Guillet.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Win Adams, 646 Fellowship Drive, Fern Park, 32730, addressed the Board in regard to Agenda Items 9 and 20 to question the logic behind providing $50,000 out of the Garbage Fund to the citizens. Mr. Adams does not live in the particular section of the county that Item #9 covers and questioned why his money should be going towards it.
Chairman Horan clarified for context that Mr. Adams wanted to comment towards Agenda Items 9 and 20, which deal with two programs related to the Urban Bear Ordinance that the Board passed in December. Chairman Horan expressed that the first program is a program to assist people who are economically disadvantaged to purchase bear proof or bear resistant cans and the other item is a public education program.
Nicole Guillet, County Manager, explained that when the Board discussed the Bear Management Ordinance in December, one of the items that staff indicated they would bring back to the Board would be a hardship-relief program. Ms. Guillet indicated that under the Bear Management Ordinance there is a requirement that garbage be secured either in a bear resistant can, or within a garage, or a shed, or some other secured structure. She stated that staff recognizes that there are some citizens who may not have a garage, or a shed, or some other opportunity to secure their garbage and their only option would be a bear resistant can. Ms. Guillet detailed that the cost associated with those cans run between $150 and $200, as well as an ongoing service fee with the haulers associated with the collection of those garbage cans.
Ms. Guillet explained that the program is intended to provide citizens that have financial hardship an opportunity to comply with the ordinance, and the criteria would be that they do not have another alternative for securing their garbage and that they meet the same income requirements that the County uses for some of their other low income assistance programs.
Ms. Guillet disclosed that $50,000 was an arbitrary number and that staff isn't exactly sure what the demand is going to be under the program. She explained the intent is to ensure that everybody has the opportunity to comply with the ordinance and that they didn't have a regulation that was going to create an undue financial hardship on any citizen.
Ms. Guillet commented that the other item of Mr. Adam's concern is the $25,000 that is requested for public education. Ms. Guillet expressed that one of the primary objectives is to educate people as to how they can avoid human-bear conflicts and that there are some very specific provisions under that ordinance, such as regulations that citizens are required to follow within bear-management areas, and staff wants to assist with compliance. Ms. Guillet further expressed that the intent of the ordinance is to protect the public, so staff wants people to understand what they need to do in order to comply and in order to be safe; and there is a cost associated with that.
Ms. Guillet admitted she does not think that they are going to need to utilize as much as they've requested, but they want to make sure that they didn't have to come back to the Board should staff determine that there is additional public education that is necessary. Ms. Guillet stated that on the other hand, the Board may decide to expand or create a new bear-management area based on circumstances and this would give staff the opportunity to have some educational opportunities with respect to that as well.
Chairman Horan informed Mr. Adams that if he had questions concerning the particular issue, he should pose those questions to the staff; but if Mr. Adams has additional comments, the Board will give him another minute. Mr. Adams questioned which fund the money is coming out of, and Chairman Horan replied that the agenda item itself indicates the money is coming out of the Solid Waste Fund. Mr. Adams then questioned if the Solid Waste Fund is broken into regions or if it is one pot and expressed why he is against funding through the Solid Waste Fund. Ms. Guillet pointed out that any recipient of the hardship relief fund also contributes into the Solid Waste Fund.
Commissioner Constantine disclosed he had discussions with Mr. Adams at a particular meeting and believes his concern is that when it came to the $50,000, that the individuals have "skin in the game." Commissioner Constantine added that after discussions with the County Manager, Ms. Guillet has indicated why citizens have to apply, how citizens would have to apply, and what citizens would have to do to receive the assistance for bear resistant containers, which therefore satisfied Commissioner Constantine’s inquiry as far as "skin in the game". Commissioner Constantine then talked about the $25,000 for a public education campaign and stated that the County has HOAs in the area that will disseminate information. Commissioner Constantine added that the County has available a number of reader signs as well as being fully covered by the press, making $25,000 an arbitrary number. He explained that everybody contributes into the Solid Waste Fund and the County uses it as they need to, to improve the solid waste services. Commissioner Constantine continued that in the past the County has used funding in areas that not necessarily the entire county received benefit from. Commissioner Constantine stated that like everything else, they do things because it is for the greater good. He admitted he was also concerned at first like Mr. Adams, but the County Manager satisfactorily answered all of his inquiries and he is supportive of the funding.
Ms. Guillet advised the real beneficiaries of compliance with the ordinance are the overall neighborhoods, explaining that if you have one person that is not able to comply, it sort of defeats the effectiveness of the overall ordinance. She stated that it is a benefit to the community as a whole, not just the recipient of any hardship relief.
Chairman Horan clarified for the record that the money is coming out of the Solid Waste Fund Reserves, which is an enterprise fund that is not created by ad valorem taxes.
Nicole Guillet, County Manager, stated there is an add-on, Item 20A, regarding a request to submit a grant for funding from FEMA for some driving simulators for the fire department.
Commissioner Dallari stated he would like to pull Item #14 regarding a Cost-Share Agreement with St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) for a separate vote.
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Constantine, to authorize and approve the following:
County Manager’s Office
3. Approve travel and mileage reimbursement to Commissioner Lee Constantine for travel during November through December of 2015. (A-1616-15)
4. Approve the Seminole County and Sanford Airport Authority Mutual Economic Incentive Agreement, providing a $100,000 incentive to retain TUI Airlines at the Orlando‑Sanford International Airport for a five-year period. (A-1651-15)
5. Approve and accept the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) monthly snapshot/report and properties acquired by Seminole County Government. (A-1645-15)
6. Approve and authorize the Community Services staff to submit to Florida Housing Finance Corporation the Substantial Plan Amendment to the 2013‑2016 LHAP and adopt appropriate Resolution #2016-R-12 for the Substantial Plan Amendment. (A-1655-15)
Planning & Development Division
7. Authorize the Chairman to execute a Release of Lien for the Code Enforcement Board lien of $11,600, for Case #12‑52‑CEB filed against Errol L. Greene, Successor Trustee, c/o John V. Baum, on property located at 850 Campello St., Altamonte Springs, Tax Parcel #01‑21‑29‑5CK‑770F‑0190; Vladislav Blashishin, Owner and Applicant. (A-1656-15)
8. Authorize release of the Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 68046562 for Performance and Payment (Roads), Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 68046420 for Performance and Payment (Water and Sewer), and approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the related Termination of Agreements; Christopher Roper for Rockefeller Group Corporate Center, Applicant. (A-1668-15)
Solid Waste Management Division
9. Approve the Urban Bear Management Low‑Income Assistance program and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2016-R-3 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #16‑021 using Solid Waste Fund reserves in the amount of $50,000. (A-1631-15)
Tourism Development Division
10. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute an Agreement with Central Florida Softball Organization, Inc. in the amount of $2,500 for the 2016 Orlando Meltdown Charity Softball Tournament to be held January 15‑17, 2016. (A-1574-15)
11. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2016-R-15 renaming Country Side Drive to Countryside Drive. (A-1639-15)
12. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute an Interlocal Agreement between Seminole County and the City of Longwood to provide funding in the amount of $230,000 to the City of Longwood for landscaping SR 434 from I‑4 to Rangeline Road. (A-1608-15)
13. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2016-R-4 and authorize the Chairman to execute a County Deed providing for the sale of county surplus property to the City of Oviedo for $10, providing for the release of mineral rights on the surplus property. (A-1597-15)
14. Commissioner Dallari requested this item be pulled for discussion.
15. Approve submittal of an application to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women (OVW), in partnership with SafeHouse of Seminole and the Seminole County Bar Association Legal Aid Society, requesting up to $600,000 in grant funding through the Justice for Families Program; and authorize the County Manager or her designee to execute the Memorandum of Understanding and any documents associated with the Grant Application pursuant to the application requirements. (A-1601-15)
Budget and Fiscal Management Division
16. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2016-R-6 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #16‑014 through the Libraries Donation Fund to bring forward fund balance in the amount of $6,726. (A-1558-15)
17. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2016-R-7 implementing the Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #16‑016 through the General Fund to reallocate $32,630 of budget for renovations to the Emergency Communications Center from Reserves. (A-1563-15)
18. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2016-R-8 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #16‑017 through the Neighborhood Stabilization Program Fund in the amount of $162,151 for appropriation of program income and 2nd mortgage provided/forgiven. (A‑1564‑15)
19. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2016-R-9 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #16‑018 through the Solid Waste Fund to establish budget in the amount of $3,762,639 for the purchase of property located on U.S. 17‑92 adjacent to the Central Transfer Station by the Solid Waste Program. (A-1598-15)
20. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2016-R-10 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #16‑020 through the Solid Waste Fund to establish budget in the amount of $25,000 for a public education campaign for the Urban Bear Management Ordinance. (A-1646-15)
20A. Approve submittal of an application to U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), through the FY 2015 Assistance of Firefighters Grant Program requesting up to $325,000 and authorize the County Manager to execute any documents associated with the Grant Application. (A-1697-15)
Purchasing & Contracts Division
21. Approve SS‑602456‑16/BJC and waive the procurement process to procure legal services for Environmental Services through Manson Bolves Donaldson, Attorneys At Law, Orlando; and authorize the issuance of yearly purchase orders in an amount not‑to‑exceed $50,000. (A-1566-15)
22. Award RFP‑602390‑15/GCM, Term Contract for Specialty Floor Topping Installation and Maintenance Services to Premus of Orlando, Inc., Clermont, with an estimated annual usage of $150,000; and authorize the Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute the Agreement. (A-1612-15)
23. Approve Amendment #3 to RFP‑602065‑14/TLR, Information Services Service Desk & Desk-Side Computer Support Services, with Vitil Solutions, Inc., Sarasota, in the additional amount of $9,000 annually; and authorize the Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute the Amendment. (A-1562-15)
24. For information purposes only, RFP‑601666‑13/TLR, Parks and Events Concession Services assignment and services provided by Michael Dublin, previous owner of Hot Dog Beach, will not be executed. (A-1644-15)
25. Approve Amendment #1 to SS‑601067‑11/BJC, Telestaff and Webstaff software upgrades, maintenance, and support, with Kronos Incorporated, Chelmsford, MA, in the not‑to‑exceed amount of $85,888.58; and authorize the Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute the documents. (A-1609-15)
26. Approve ranking list, authorize staff to negotiate rates in accordance with F.S. 287.055, the Consultants Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA); and authorize the Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute three (3) Master Services Agreements (MSA's) for PS‑0426‑15/AEH (Trail Projects Miscellaneous Engineering Services, Estimated Annual Usage $800,000). (A-1628-15)
27. Award SS‑602461‑16/TLR, Electronic Text Notification System Services to Cooper Notification, Inc., Long Branch, NJ, with an annual amount of $40,500; and authorize the Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute the Agreement. (A-1600-15)
28. Award CC‑0559‑15/RTB, Master Services Agreement (MSA) (Public Works Minor Construction Projects with Costs Less Than $2,000,000) to C. E. James, Inc., Oviedo; Central Florida Environmental Corp., Inc., Winter Springs; Prime Construction Company, Inc., Orlando; and Southland Construction, Inc., Apopka; and authorize the Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute the MSA's. (A-1615-15)
29. Approve Amendment #1 to Work Order #1, Five Points Complex Connector Roadway under PS‑0009‑15/RTB (Design of Minor Projects with Construction Cost Less Than $2,000,000) in the amount of $32,775.89 with Pegasus Engineering, Inc., Winter Springs; and authorize the Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute the Work Order Amendment. (A-1585-15)
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Agenda Item #14 – A-1632-15
Regarding Item #14, Cost-Share Agreement with St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and Resolution #2016-R-5, Commissioner Dallari stated that from the conception of the project he has been opposed to it. He has not supported the alum system because he believes it is too costly for the operation maintenance for years to come and that there are other systems that can be used that would do a far better removal as well as be more cost effective. Commissioner Dallari would like to vote against this project and that is why he asked for it to be under a separate vote.
Commissioner Carey voiced that even though Commissioner Dallari has not supported this project from the beginning, staff has indicated that this is the best process for the Board to use.
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Constantine, to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the Cost-Share Agreement between the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and Seminole County (Contract #28483); and authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2016-R-5 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #16-019 through the Public Works Interlocal Fund in the amount of $800,000 in conjunction with the Soldiers Creek Nutrient Reduction Facility.
Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Dallari voted NAY.
CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS’ CONSENT AGENDA
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to approve the following:
30. Approve Expenditure Approval Lists dated November 23, 30, December 7 and 14, 2015; Payroll Approval Lists dated November 19 and December 3, 2015; and the BCC Official Minutes dated November 10, 2015. (A-1654-15)
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s “Received and Filed”:
1. Pet Rescue Cooperative Service Agreement for Sunshine Corgi Rescue.
2. Pet Rescue Cooperative Service Agreement for Internet Miniature Pinscher Service.
3. Pet Rescue Cooperative Service Agreement for Mastiff Rescue of Florida.
4. Pet Rescue Cooperative Service Agreement for Central Florida Weimaraner Rescue (CFWR).
5. Pet Rescue Cooperative Service Agreement for Florida Keeshond Rescue, Inc.
6. Assistant Tennis Pro Agreement for Leonard Louis Lopez.
7. Third Amendment to IFB-602048-14, Term Contract for Purchase of EMS/Fire/Rescue Uniform Agreement, with Design Lab, Inc.
8. IFB-602367-15, Term Contracts for Fire Fighter Equipment with the following: TEN-8 Fire Equipment, Inc.; Fisher Scientific Company, LLC; Dana Safety Supply; Team Equipment, Inc.; NAFECO; Municipal Equipment Company, LLC.
9. IFB-602396-15, Term Contract for the purchase of Potable and Reclaimed Water Meter Boxes, with Ferguson Waterworks.
10. Amendments to Conditional Utility Agreements for sewer service and potable and reclaimed water service with ZDA Land Investments, LLC for the project known as Serenity Cove.
11. Bill of Sale accepting potable and reclaimed water and sewer systems within the project known as Bliss Medical Center.
12. Conditional Utility Agreement for water and sewer service with O’Reilly Auto Stores, Inc.
13. Bill of Sale accepting the potable and reclaimed water and sewer systems within the project known as Bellevue.
14. Bill of Sale accepting the water system within the project known as I4 Industrial Park Section 5 – Lot 22 (Spaceport USA).
15. Addendum #1 to the Amended & Restated Greenway Pointe PD Tract A, Aloma Walk Final Development Plan DCA.
16. Maintenance Bond #1961796M for water and sewer facilities for Bellevue in the amount of $36,052.67.
17. Cash Maintenance Bond for water and sewer improvements with Escrow Agreement for I4 Industrial Park Lot 22 (Spaceport USA) in the amount of $247.
18. Subrecipient Agreement Program Year 2015-2016 with Seminole County Coalition for School Readiness, Inc. d/b/a The Early Learning Coalition of Seminole, as approved by the BCC on July 28, 2015.
19. ESG Subrecipient Agreements Program Year 2015-2016 with Seminole County Victims’ Rights Coalition, Inc., d/b/a Safehouse; Recovery House of Central Florida, Inc.; and Rescue Outreach Mission of Central Florida, Inc., as approved by the BCC on July 28, 2015.
20. First Amendment to PS-8148-12, Master Services Agreement with Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc.
21. Second Amendment to PS-8047-12, Geotechnical and Construction Material Testing and Inspection Services Agreement with Professional Service Industries, Inc.
22. Approval Development Order #04-300000159, Variance, Bungalow Boulevard, Philbert Payne.
23. Approval Development Order #15-27000057, General Permit for Gunsmithing, 315 E. Osceola Road, Nancy Shelton.
24. Approval Development Orders as follows: #15-30000073, Variance, 3113 Floral Way E., John & Barbara Rzepiennik; #15-30000074, Variance, 5480 N. Woodcrest Drive, Mary Dixon; #15-30000075, Variance, 349 Camellia Street, Joshua Williams; #15-30000076, Variance, Willow Creek Cove, Robert F. and Heidi J. Coyne; #15-30000077, Variance, 9449 Belmont Terrace, Barbara Serra.
25. Denial Development Order #15-32000013, Special Exception for an Assisted Living Facility, 2825 Waldens Pond Cove, Ahsan Raza.
26. Development Order #15-27500045, Alcoholic Beverage License, 1390 E. Altamonte Drive, Wawa.
27. Amendment #2 to Work Order #58 to RFP-5465-10 with Site Secure, Inc.
28. Work Order #3 to RFP-9601-14 with Revere Controls Systems, Inc.
29. Change Order #6 to CC-9140-13 with Sawcross.
30. Work Order #7 to CC-9184-13 with Central Florida Environmental.
31. Amendment #1 to Work Order #10 to CC-9192-13 with Black Street Enterprises, LLC, d/b/a BSE Construction Group.
32. Closeout to CC-6877-11 with Middlesex Corporation for Red Bug Lake Road Flyover at SR 436.
33. Closeout to Work Orders #29 and #30 to CC-8199-12, C.E. James, Inc.
34. Work Order #1 to PS-0157-15 with S2L, Inc.
35. Amendment #3 to Work Order #8 to PS-0219-05 with Singhofen & Associates, Inc.
36. Amendment #1 to Work Order #75 to PS-4388-09 with RS&H, Inc.
37. Amendment #2 to Work Order #18 to PS-5438-10 with Reiss Engineering, Inc.
38. Work Order #13 to PS-6865-11 with S2L, Inc.
39. Work Order #34 to PS-8047-12 with PSI.
40. Work Order #38 to PS-8047-12 with Nodarse, a Terracon Company.
41. Work Order #39 to PS-8047-12 with Universal Engineering Sciences.
42. Amendment #1 to Work Order #11 to PS-8146-12 with CDM Smith, Inc.
43. Amendment #1 to Work Order #12 to PS-8146-12 with CDM Smith, Inc.
44. Amendment #2 to Work Order #11 to PS-8148-12 with CDM Smith, Inc.
45. Work Order #36 to PS-8148-12 with Keith & Schnars, P.A.
46. Work Orders #37 and #38 to PS-8148-12 with Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc.
47. Work Order #39 to PS-8148-12 with CDM Smith, Inc.
48. Amendment #1 to Work Order #20 to PS-8148-12 with CDM Smith, Inc.
49. Amendment #3 to Work Order #13 to PS-8186-13 with Reiss Engineering, Inc.
50. Amendment #2 to Work Order #1 to PS-9092-13 with HKS Architects, Inc.
51. Work Orders #8 and #9 to PS-9738-14 with Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.
52. Amendment #2 to Work Order #1 to PS-9742-14 with CH2M Hill Engineers, Inc.
53. Recording of Plats for the project known as Tierra Verde Preserve by Jochen Schmausser.
54. Certificates of No Recall of the Racing Permit for Penn Sanford, LLC and SOKC, LLC.
55. Letters from Chairman Horan to various committees regarding Board liaison appointments.
56. Bids as follows:
CC-0482-15 from Sieg & Ambachtsheer, Inc.; Proshot Concrete, Inc.; Southland Construction, Inc.; Gibbs & Register, Inc.;
CC-0559-15 from C.E. James, Inc.; Central Florida Environmental Corp.; Prime Construction Group, Inc.; Southland Construction, Inc.;
IFB-602336-15 from Stryker Sales Corporation, through its Medical Division;
IFB-602344-15 from Global Tire Recycling of Sumter Cty Inc.; Progressive Waste Solutions of FL Inc.; and
IFB-602367-15 from TechnicalRescue.com, Inc.; Dana Safety Supply; Fisher Scientific Company, LLC; Municipal Equipment Co., LLC; North America Fire Equipment Co., Inc. (NAFECO); Team Equipment, Inc.; South Florida Emergency Vehicles; Ten-8 Fire Equipment, Inc.; Municipal Emergency Services (MES).
Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to approve the following:
31. Approve the expenditure of $1,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund for a contribution to Central Florida Dream Center in support of their mentoring and educational programs for at‑risk youth. (A-1595-15)
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Agenda Item #32 – A-1583-15
Pamela Lynch, Business Development Manager with Economic Development, addressed the Board to state that this item considers the Resolution recommending Jeteezy, Inc. for the Qualified Target Industry (QTI). Ms. Lynch reminded that the QTI program is administered by the State of Florida, is implemented in partnership with the State of Florida, and requires 20% local financial support. She explains that the incentive is paid out after the jobs are created, and all monitoring activities are performed by the State.
Ms. Lynch detailed that Jeteezy, Inc. is an aviation company that manufactures and assembles six-seat amphibious airplanes that operate from both land airports and water bodies and are fully certified by the Federal Aviation Association.
She notes that the company is looking to move its headquarters operations from Singapore and establish Jeteezy, Inc. in the United States with locations under consideration in Washington, Kansas, New York, and Florida. Ms. Lynch stated that Jeteezy, Inc. proposes to enter a long-term lease for two hangers located at the Orlando-Sanford International Airport totaling an approximate 42,000 sq. ft. Additionally, the company proposes to lease office space estimated at 1,750 sq. ft. in downtown Sanford for its administrative and marketing functions.
Ms. Lynch reported that Jeteezy, Inc. intends to create 50 new jobs over the next two years, which pay an average annual wage of $61,145, and that the project is estimated to result in a total capital investment of $5,430,000. Ms. Lynch stated that Jeteezy, Inc. is eligible for a tax-refund incentive of $4,000 per new job. She noted that the City of Sanford approved their equal participation in the amount of $20,000 at their November 16th city commission meeting.
Ms. Lynch stated she is seeking approval of the Resolution recommending that Jeteezy, Inc. be approved as a Qualified Target Industry (QTI) business and to approve the County's required local financial support of $20,000 over Fiscal Year 2016/17 to Fiscal Year 2020/21.
Ms. Lynch informed the Board that she will address any questions the Board may have and pointed out that Anup Murthy, Chief Executive Officer for Jeteezy, Inc.; Bob Turk, City of Sanford; and Nate Groover, Orlando Economic Develop Commission, are all present.
Commissioner Constantine thanked Ms. Lynch and the Economic Development team for putting together the eight-point presentation. Commissioner Constantine expressed that those are the eight points that he continually brings up every time the Board is talking about one of these incentives, and he believes this one achieves all eight.
Chairman Horan affirmed the annual salary of Jeteezy, Inc. employees is $61,145 with Ms. Lynch, which is 150% of the county's average annual wage.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Constantine, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2016-R-11 recommending that Jeteezy, Inc. be approved as a Qualified Target Industry (QTI) business; and approve the County’s required local financial support of $20,000 over Fiscal Year 2016/17 to Fiscal Year 2020/21, as local participation in the QTI tax refund program.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Agenda Item #33 – A-1573-15
Tony Matthews, Planning & Development, addressed the Board to state that this item is for an annual event at Wekiva Island. Mr. Matthew's mentioned he knows the Board is familiar with the event but noted that this year the event will begin on February 29th and run through March 28th and will include artists, music and various activities throughout that time period. Mr. Matthews stated that staff is recommending approval of the special event permit with the staff's conditions as contained in the agenda memorandum.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to approve the Special Event Permit for the Wekiva Paint Out & Spring Kickoff Special Event at Wekiva Island, 1014 Miami Springs Drive, Longwood, from February 29 through March 28, 2016.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Dallari reminded that last year the Board talked about how they could partner with Wekiva Paint Out since it is such a great artisan event showcasing the community where artists come in from around the country. Commissioner Dallari stated he wanted to make sure that staff has reached out to Wekiva Paint Out over the past twelve months and wants to see what they have come up with. Ms. Guillet advised that staff has been talking with Wekiva Paint Out and there may be some opportunities through the Tourism group to help with promoting the event, and assured Commissioner Dallari the Board will be informed as to what that is at some point before the event. Commissioner Constantine stated he believes that helping with promotion would be something that is beneficial to the county and mentioned that the Wekiva Paint Out is a wonderful event that showcases the river and the whole area.
Commissioner Dallari stated that he attended the event last year as well as Commissioner Constantine, and some of the proceeds actually go to the Wekiva Trust and some of it goes to Keep Seminole Beautiful. Mary Sue Weinaug, Keep Seminole Beautiful and Wekiva Island, addressed the Board to explain that after everything is paid, Keep Seminole Beautiful and Wekiva Wilderness Trust split the profit 50/50. Upon Commissioner Carey’s inquiry, Ms. Weinaug indicated that last year’s total proceeds were $12,000. Commissioner Carey noted that while there are some limitations, since it is not just a one-day event she thinks that the Tourist Development group should help promote it just as they do all other events that could benefit the community.
Chairman Horan stated it is a multifaceted event because there are environmental and natural benefactors from the event and it is also a great showcase for artists. He noted that Commissioner Constantine is the new representative on United Arts, and presumes Commissioner Constantine will give the event appropriate publicity through that organization.
Commissioner Henley mentioned that since it has become an annual event, it may do well if the Board asked public TV to do some recordings at the event for future promotions. Chairman Horan agreed and suggested to have SGTV out there to not only help promote the event but record the great times had. Commissioner Carey noted SGTV was present at the event last year.
COUNTY MANAGER AND STAFF BRIEFINGS
Agenda Item #34 – A-1610-15
The Board noted, for information only, the Informational Budget Transfer Status Report for Fiscal Year 2014/15 (October and November 2015).
Agenda Item #35 – A-1611-15
The Board noted, for information only, the Informational Budget Transfer Status Report for Fiscal Year 2015/16 (October and November 2015).
COUNTY MANAGER’S REPORT
Ms. Guillet noted for the benefit of the public, that Item #36, Nuisance Abatement Proposal, has been pulled from the agenda because staff needs to do more work on it so it will not be considered by the Board during the afternoon meeting.
Chairman Horan reminded that there were some publication issues at the last meeting and wanted to clarify that they do not have the same issues for the afternoon meeting. Ms. Guillet assured him there were no publication issues.
The Board recessed the meeting at 10:05 a.m., reconvening at 1:30 p.m., with all Commissioners and all other Officials with the exception of Clerk of Court Maryanne Morse, who was absent, and Deputy Clerks Kyla Spencer and Terri Porter who were replaced by Deputy Clerk Jane Spencer, who were present at the Opening Session.
PROOFS OF PUBLICATION
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to authorize the filing of the proofs of publication for this meeting's scheduled public hearings into the Official Record.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
3000 EAST STREET, OVIEDO
Agenda Item #36 – A-1578-15
Ms. Guillet stated that Item #36, Adoption of a Resolution issuing an Order to declare the existence of a Public Nuisance at 3000 East Street, Oviedo, is being pulled from the Agenda and advised the item will be re-advertised.
3072 Weston Street, Oviedo
Agenda Item #37 – A-1577-15
Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider adoption of a Resolution issuing an Order to declare the existence of a Public Nuisance at 3072 Weston Street, Oviedo; to require corrective action by March 14, 2016; and to authorize necessary corrective action by the County in the event the nuisance is not abated by the record owner, received and filed.
Liz Parkhurst, Building Division, addressed the Board to present the request as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum. Ms. Parkhurst stated that on November 10, 2015 the Board of County Commissioners issued a Notice of Determination of Public Nuisance for the unoccupied structure at 3072 Weston Street, Oviedo. The Notice ordered that the structure be repaired or rebuilt in compliance with the Florida Building Code or abated through demolition; and to date, no corrective actions have been taken and there continues to be steady decline in the condition of the property.
Ms. Parkhurst advised that the purpose of today’s hearing is to provide the record property owners the opportunity to appear before the Board to state why the subject structure does not create a public nuisance and the property should not be abated. She noted that the required notice of this hearing was received by the record property owners, Stephen Ben Brooks, II and Carla Walker, and advised that staff recommends approval of this item.
With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition and public input was closed.
Commissioner Carey referred to the photograph of the structure being displayed and discussed the fact that while the property does have conditions and issues, it looks pretty secure and even has some new windows. She stated that she knows there are limited funds allocated to nuisance abatement every year and they like to spread the funds around through the districts; but she noted District 5 has nine out of eleven of the pockets of poverty and disadvantaged communities in it and a lot of these structures tend to be in those areas. She requested that the structures be prioritized, going forward, based on condition, need and damage to the rest of the community. She asked that they consider that a larger number of these types of nuisances are not spread throughout the county but concentrated in one district and she would like to have some consideration for that.
Ms. Guillet agreed with Commissioner Carey that this structure does not look as bad as some of the other structures they have on the list. She noted in particular there has been some criminal activity at this structure and they do work in concert with the Sheriff’s Office. This was targeted as a priority for reasons other than condition.
Commissioner Henley agreed with Commissioner Carey as to where most of these structures are located but stressed that he would not want the others in the county to be neglected because he does have several in his district also.
Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2016-R-13 issuing an Order to declare the existence of a Public Nuisance at 3072 Weston Street, Oviedo; to require corrective action by March 14, 2016; and to authorize necessary corrective action by the County in the event the nuisance is not abated by the record owner; as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
3248 Main Street, Sanford
Agenda Item #38 – A-1576-15
Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider adoption of a Resolution issuing an Order to declare the existence of a Public Nuisance at 3248 Main Street, Sanford; to require corrective action by March 14, 2016; and to authorize necessary corrective action by the County in the event the nuisance is not abated by the record owner, received and filed.
Liz Parkhurst, Building Division, presented the request as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum. Ms. Parkhurst stated that on November 10, 2015 the Board of County Commissioners issued of a Notice of Determination of Public Nuisance for the unoccupied structure at 3248 Main Street, Sanford. The Notice ordered that the structure be repaired or rebuilt in compliance with the Florida Building Code or abated through demolition; and to date, no corrective actions have been taken and there continues to be steady decline in the condition of the property.
Ms. Parkhurst advised that the purpose of today’s hearing is to provide the record property owners the opportunity to appear before the Board to state why the subject structure does not create a public nuisance and why the property should not be abated. She noted that the required notice of this hearing was received by the record property owners, Latrell Barfield and Barbara Witherspoon, and advised that staff recommends approval of this item.
With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition and public input was closed.
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2016-R-14 issuing an Order to declare the existence of a Public Nuisance at 3248 Main Street, Sanford; to require corrective action by March 14, 2016; and to authorize necessary corrective action by the County in the event the nuisance is not abated by the record owner; as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
SUNTERA PARK LARGE SCALE FUTURE LAND
USE AMENDMENT AND REZONE/Robert Horian
Agenda Item #39 – PH-2015-246
Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider a request for a Large Scale Future Land Use Amendment from Suburban Estates to Planned Development, and the associated Rezone from A‑1 (Agriculture) to PD (Planned Development) for light industrial uses on 13.5 acres, located at the corner of Celery Avenue and N. Beardall Avenue, Robert Horian, received and filed.
Joy Giles, Planning & Development Division, addressed the Board to present the request as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum. Ms. Giles stated that the Applicant proposes to develop an industrial park of 11 lots permitting those uses listed under the M‑1A, Very Light Industrial, zoning classification. The subject property has been identified in the Seminole County/City of Sanford Joint Planning Agreement as an area suitable for transitional non‑residential uses such as commercial or light industrial uses. Ms. Giles noted that the BCC authorized the transmittal of the request to the State of Florida on November 10, 2015 for review, and staff received response comments and no letters of objections were received from State agencies. She added that staff is recommending approval of this item.
With regard to public participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition and public input was closed.
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to adopt Ordinance #2016-1 enacting a Large Scale Future Land Use Amendment from Suburban Estates to Planned Development; adopt Ordinance #2016-2 enacting a Rezone from A‑1 (Agriculture) to PD (Planned Development); and approve the associated Development Order and Master Development Plan for 13.5 acres, located at the corner of Celery Avenue and N. Beardall Avenue, as described in the proof of publication, Robert Horian.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
Agenda Item #40 – PH-2015-238
Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider adoption of an Ordinance repealing Part 51 (FP-1 Flood Prone Classification) of Chapter 30 (Zoning Regulations), Land Development Code of Seminole County; creation of a new Part 51 (Floodplain Management Ordinance of Seminole County); adoption of flood hazard maps; designation of a Floodplain Administrator; and adoption of procedures and criteria for development in flood hazard areas and for other purposes, received and filed.
Kim Fisher, Development Review Engineering Division, addressed the Board to present the request as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum. Ms. Fisher advised that the adoption of this Ordinance will repeal the County’s current Floodplain Ordinance. She explained that the primary goal of this new Ordinance is to implement rules that are consistent with both the National Flood Insurance program and the Florida Building Code. FEMA is the originator of the model ordinance and the County has worked with FEMA on a few minor additions and adjustments. Since FEMA has approved the adjustments, the Ordinance allows the County to be consistent with the Community Rating System (CRS). Staff is recommending adoption of the Ordinance.
Commissioner Constantine confirmed with Ms. Fisher that there are no substantive changes other than what FEMA has recommended in the new 2014 Florida Building Code.
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to adopt and authorize the Chairman to execute Ordinance #2016-3 repealing Part 51 (FP-1 Flood Prone Classification) of Chapter 30 (Zoning Regulations), Land Development Code of Seminole County; create a new Part 51 (Floodplain Management Ordinance of Seminole County); adopt flood hazard maps; designate a Floodplain Administrator; and adopt procedures and criteria for development in flood hazard areas and for other purposes, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
SERENITY COVE SMALL SCALE LAND
USE MAP AMENDMENT AND REZONE/Dave Schmitt
Agenda Item #41 – PH-2015-237
Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider a Small Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment from Suburban Estates to Planned Development and a Rezone from A‑1 (Agriculture) to PD (Planned Development) for a seven-lot single‑family residential subdivision on approximately 4.94 acres located on the west side of Orange Boulevard, approximately 1,800 feet north of Markham Road, Dave Schmitt, received and filed.
Brian Walker, Planning & Development Division, addressed the Board to present the request as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum. Mr. Walker explained that the Applicant is requesting a Small Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment and a Rezone to develop the site as a seven-lot single‑family residential subdivision with a maximum density of 2.5 units per net buildable acre. The minimum lot size proposed is 9,750 square feet with a minimum width at the building line of 75 feet. He then discussed the consistency of this proposed project with the Land Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Walker stated that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval and advised that staff also recommends approval.
Commissioner Carey thanked staff for amending the Development Order and adding the language regarding the new bear management ordinance. She recommended that going forward they only need to include language that the development must comply with the bear ordinance and reference that ordinance number, so they won’t need to kill an entire tree by putting every criterion in the Order.
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to adopt Ordinance #2016-4 enacting a Small Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment from Suburban Estates to Planned Development and adopt Ordinance #2016-5 enacting a Rezone from A‑1 (Agriculture) to PD (Planned Development) for a seven-lot single-family residential subdivision on approximately 4.94 acres located on the west side of Orange Boulevard, approximately 1,800 feet north of Markham Road, as described in the proof of publication, Dave Schmitt; Development Order.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
CAVLAN VOLUNTARY BILLBOARD AGREEMENT/Outfront Media, LLC
Agenda Item #42 – PH-2015-225
Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider a Voluntary Billboard Agreement between Seminole County, Outfront Media, LLC f/k/a CBS Outdoor, and Cavlan Properties, LLC, for a proposed billboard to be located on the south side of SR 436, approximately 300 feet west of Bear Lake Road, and more specifically known as 3468 East Semoran Boulevard, Outfront Media, LLC, received and filed.
Brian Walker, Planning & Development Division, presented the request as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum. Mr. Walker stated the Applicant desires to enter into a Voluntary Billboard Agreement with Seminole County to allow for the construction of one dual‑faced outdoor advertising sign or billboard; and the new billboard will replace an existing billboard on the same property, in the same general location, and with the same dimensions. The reason for this request is because the structural components of the existing billboard cannot be used to support the weight requirements of new digital faces. Mr. Walker described the proposed billboard and pointed out that the proposed billboard would be located on property that is zoned C‑2, which is Retail Commercial and allows billboards. The proposed billboard would meet the minimum setbacks required in the C‑2 zoning district.
Mr. Walker explained that Section 30.1253 of the LDCSC states, “Any consideration of an outdoor advertising sign agreement should include removal of at least four existing outdoor advertising signs or faces in unincorporated Seminole County in exchange for one sign to be reconstructed, constructed or relocated in unincorporated Seminole County.” The Applicant is requesting an alternate sign‑removal‑to‑sign‑replacement ratio to allow the new sign to be approved without removing any other signs or faces. He discussed Section 30.1253(c), which allows the Board of County Commissioners to enter into an outdoor advertising sign agreement with an alternate sign‑removal‑to‑sign‑replacement ratio. Mr. Walker explained how the Applicant proposes to make the billboard available for use by Seminole County, at no expense, for periodic public service announcements. He then detailed the reasons why staff has no objections to the Applicant’s request.
Wayne Rich, 390 N. Orange Avenue, addressed the Board to state he is here today representing the Applicant, Outfront Media. Mr. Rich noted that the owner of the property, Ms. Fisher, is also present today. Mr. Rich stated there is an existing sign on the property that advertises the business, which is a two-faced sign and will be coming down. He noted that several years back, CBS (now Outfront Media) had a sign location where the current Wawa is located on U.S. Highway 17-92 and that sign was voluntarily removed. He advised that would be another two faces. He believes that overall, they have met the spirit and intent of the regulation.
Commissioner Carey commented that if the County demolishes a building with sinks and toilets in it, the owner of the business can get a letter stating that he has a vested interest. With regard to a billboard being removed, Commissioner Carey wondered if the County issues a letter to the owner to have a vested interest so in the event they come back to the Board in the future, they would have the ability to use that. Ms. Guillet stated the County does not typically do that, and she does not believe it has ever come up. Commissioner Carey pointed out that when demolishing buildings, owners want to get the credit for the impact; and if there is a billboard that is demolished, there should be some kind of record for that.
Commissioner Henley asked Mr. Rich whether he believes that he has met the removal-of-four-billboards requirement already. Mr. Rich stated they are taking the position that they are meeting the requirement with four faces because of the way the ordinance reads “signs or faces.” He believes they could legitimately argue they have met the intent of the ordinance. He stated there are not four independent structures but rather two and two. Commissioner Henley stated he believes he is the only Commissioner who was present when that ordinance was adopted, that none of the staff people were around at that time; and he fully understands what the intent of the motion was. He does not believe it states in the policy that it is dealing with faces.
Commissioner Henley described the intent of the motion when it was passed, which was to eliminate non-conforming billboards because of the significant number of them that the County had when the ordinance was adopted. He discussed the lucrative market for advertising on the electronic billboards. Commissioner Henley cautioned that if the Board starts to waive this policy, they might as well eliminate it; and then the County would have no way to get rid of non-conforming billboards until a storm tears them up so significantly that the policy will not allow them to be replaced. He advised for that reason, he will not be supporting the motion as it is. He stated he will support the part of the motion regarding putting up the electronic billboard, but he is not in favor of waiving the policy regarding the removal of non-conforming boards.
Mr. Rich stated he believes with the way regulations read, this is a negotiated issue; and the fact there is an additional public purpose that is folded into the application which gives the County the opportunity to communicate with the public on a short notice emergency basis should help mitigate some of the concerns. Commissioner Henley stated he does not agree. He reiterated that he will support the electronic billboard portion of the request but not the waiving of the policy on the removal of four boards.
Commissioner Carey confirmed with Mr. Walker that the policy has a flexible provision which allows the Board to waive the requirement if there is a public purpose, such as AMBER and Silver alerts on the readable billboards. Commissioner Carey questioned Mr. Walker concerning FDOT and County regulations on how many times the billboard can change. Mr. Walker stated that he is not familiar with FDOT’s requirements and advised the County Code does not speak to exactly how many times the sign can “flip” within a given period of time. He stated staff has spoken with the sign companies to determine what the industry standard is and that is what they put into their agreements. Commissioner Carey advised that she believes they should put something in the County’s policy in the future about how many times a sign can “flip” and the fact that it can’t be flashing so the sign is not a distraction. She advised they need to make sure that is managed somehow, whether by County ordinance or State law.
Discussion ensued with regard to electronic billboards being distractive.
Chairman Horan stated if he understands it correctly, there is a provision in the County Code which allows the Board to enter into an outdoor advertising sign agreement with alternative sign‑removal‑to‑sign‑replacement ratio if such alternate ratio is determined to be in the best interest of the public. He confirmed with Mr. Rich that he is saying he already eliminated a sign. Commissioner Horan confirmed with Commissioner Henley that his concern is that he does not want that section of the code to be used arbitrarily as a means of getting rid of the policy of eliminating non‑conforming signs.
Commissioner Carey reiterated there should be some way to track when a sign is taken down so when someone does come back to the Board, a piece of paper can be produced that says on a certain date CBS removed this billboard and they get some credit for that. She confirmed with Mr. Rich that the business sign, which is there, is coming down as well. Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Rich clarified there are currently two signs on the property and that one is coming down. Mr. Rich indicated with regard to the sign in the picture being displayed, the head is being replaced and converted to digital. He reiterated that additionally they had a sign on the Wawa property that came down and he has a demolition permit for that sign. He stated they are taking the position from the regulation perspective that they have met the spirit and intent.
Commissioner Carey advised that she would like to have some type of documentation other than a demo permit, like a letter from the County, so someone could come back to the Board ten years from now when none of the Commissioners are here and say we had signs that were removed. It should be some kind of document from the County that there is vesting.
Ms. Guillet advised with regard to the particular sign that is coming down and being replaced, those two faces would count toward the four that are required. If the Board wanted to give consideration for the sign that was at the Wawa Station, that was another two faces. She pointed out the Board has not typically done that, but it is within the Board’s discretion. She noted this is in addition to the other sign on the site, the business sign that is coming down.
Brian Tannock, 3513 Mayflower, addressed the Board to state he is not too much opposed to the sign and he believes it is good for the community, business‑wise and everything like that; but it is going to be more money for the property owner who has had barking dogs for the last six years since the business opened. He is afraid that it is going to make the dogs more agitated and bark even more. He pointed out that the owner has pulled permits to move the kennel from the back to the front and all they did was expand.
Mr. Tannock cautioned that they say they will pull one sign down, the business sign; he does not know if the owner will do that because the property owner has never followed through with anything they said they were going to do for the last six years. He stated he has had over 100 phone calls to the police department dealing with the barking dogs and has called his County Commissioner over 30 times. He advised the property has been nothing but a nuisance property to the residents behind it and he requested the Board take that into consideration. If they want to put up a billboard, that is fine with him; but he believes they should hold the permitting until she finishes with what she is supposed to do and complies with the community and does what is right for the community.
With regard to public participation, no one else in the audience spoke in support or in opposition and public input was closed.
Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.
Chairman Horan stated he believes the issue that was raised by Mr. Tannock is being separately cited through some other vehicle of the County and is an issue that is being addressed. Ms. Guillet stated the County has been working with the property owner to mitigate that circumstance and advised they are moving towards resolution of that issue although it is not directly related to the application for a billboard. Mr. Walker stated the property owner did meet with the County in response to the issues with the dogs and the noise that was generated in the back of the property. A site plan was done in an effort to move the dog runs and artificial turf to the front of the property. The site plan was done and has been approved. The latest inspection done by the County's inspectors shows that all of the conditions of the site plan have been complied with except for some landscaping that needs to be completed. He stated he can't speak to whether or not there is still activity being done in the rear but the site plan has been complied with except for some vegetation.
Commissioner Dallari asked if this was an expansion or a relocation on the site to have sound abatement. Mr. Walker stated the result at this point has been that some of the activities have been moved to the front but obviously there are still things that are being done in the rear. Commissioner Dallari questioned whether with the site plan, the property owner was supposed to do away with what was happening in the rear. Mr. Walker advised that the site plan did not stipulate that all activity in the rear had to cease. What was stated by the Applicant was that she wanted to try to ameliorate the problem by moving some of the activity of the dogs to the front.
Commissioner Constantine stated when he first got into office, there were a number of different unresolved phone calls that had been made about this property. At the time in talking to Code Enforcement staff, he felt that through citing, they had taken care of the problem. He stated this is difficult because the issues are not related, but they are about the same property; and the opportunity to try to resolve a concern of the neighborhood, and specifically Mr. Tannock, is something that should be taken advantage of.
Commissioner Constantine commented that one of things that is important and a sign of doing the right thing is being a good neighbor. It seems that this is an ongoing problem that has continued; and although there has been site plans and approval, the ultimate design has not been completed. He knows they cannot do one subject to the other, but he thinks they should take advantage of the opportunity and ask the owner to do the right thing and do everything they can to mitigate this particular concern of the neighbors. He stressed if that is not being done, maybe they need to look at more Code Enforcement in that area. He noted it is separate from the sign but pointed out that at the same time since it has been presented to the Board, they can heighten the knowledge of it and ensure that Code Enforcement is doing everything they can when it comes to noise abatement.
Commissioner Constantine stated he, like Commissioner Henley, would love to see as much enforcement as they can when they are talking about the faces of those non‑conforming signs. In this case, he does believe in looking at the situation and going to the location and looking at the current sign and looking at the requirements. The Board does have, as Commissioner Carey has indicated, the flexibility to decide if it is in the best public interest. Commissioner Constantine explained why he would not be in favor of automatic vesting of other signs that might have been taken down at some other point. He does believe, in this case, the particular sign being replaced and the sign at the other location being taken down should be taken into consideration.
Motion by Commissioner Constantine, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Voluntary Billboard Agreement between Seminole County, Outfront Media, LLC f/k/a CBS Outdoor, and Cavlan Properties, LLC, for a billboard to be located on the south side of SR 436, approximately 300 feet west of Bear Lake Road, and more specifically known as 3468 East Semoran Boulevard, as described in the proof of publication; Outfront Media, LLC.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley stated he will be opposing the motion as stated and added that if they are not going to enforce the policy, they ought to get it off the books so they don’t waste time discussing it. Chairman Horan stated he shares Commissioner Henley's concern that they not use that particular provision of the ordinance as a catch‑all to try to bypass the general requirement of getting rid of the non‑conforming faces. However, with that being said, he stated he would like to make it part of the record that his vote in favor of this should not be interpreted as dispensing with that particular provision of the Code. Commissioner Carey stated she does not believe that was anybody's intent and noted the Code has a provision that allows the Board to evaluate each one of these signs on a case-by-case basis.
Commissioner Dallari reiterated that the Applicant took down a sign previously and used a demolition permit. He stated at that point there should be some type of avenue if they want to use that as a future credit. It would not be a right, not automatic, but should be included for consideration. Ms. Guillet stated they will begin to track billboard removals and that can be something the Board considers, again case by case depending on the circumstances. Commissioner Carey stated if it is part of the documentation, that is one way for the Board to know in fact it did happen and it isn't just someone coming into the office and saying that it happened. Chairman Horan and Commissioner Constantine agreed.
Districts 1, 2, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Henley voted NAY.
Commissioner Constantine stated he would like to make a point directed at the property owner to please do everything they can to abate this noise and to become good neighbors. He is not placing blame but is simply saying this is something that has been ongoing and he will be watching and he hopes Code Enforcement will be watching also.
Chairman Horan recessed the meeting at 2:30 p.m., reconvening at 2:37 p.m.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL/Jim Clifton
Agenda Item #43 – PH-2015-224
Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider the appeal of the Board of Adjustment decision to approve the request for a special exception for an assisted living and memory care facility with 154 units in the A-1 (Agriculture) district, for property located on the north side of Howell Branch Road, approximately 1,400 feet west of Grand Road, and more particularly known as 4501 Howell Branch Road, Jim Clifton, received and filed.
Mark E. King, Court Reporter with Kerr & Associates, was present (business cards were received and filed).
Denny Gibbs, Planning & Development Division, addressed the Board to present the request as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum. Ms. Gibbs explained that on September 28, 2015, the Board of Adjustment (BOA) approved a special exception with conditions as set forth in the approval Development Order, which is Exhibit A in the staff report; and she briefly reviewed the conditions of that Development Order. She noted that on October 13, 2015 Paul Hinckley, representing Country Lane Homeowners Association, filed a Notice of Appeal of the BOA decision.
Ms. Gibbs advised that based on the information, findings and conclusions included and referenced in the Agenda Memo prepared in association with the original action taken by the BOA and testimony presented at that meeting (minutes were attached as Exhibit D), staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners uphold the decision of the BOA to approve the special exception for the assisted living and memory care facility with 154 units.
Randy Morris, 323 West Trotters Drive, addressed the Board to state he is representing the Applicant on behalf of David and Dawn Green (property owners) and the contract builder for the Assisted Living Facility (ALF). Mr. Morris advised today's item is in a different kind of format than the Board typically has. This is an appeal of an approval from the Board of Adjustment and is a de novo hearing. He stated even though the record carries from the BOA, he needs to present this item for the record today. He pointed out that the appeal letter (in the agenda backup) from the HOA and Mr. Hinckley determines a different presentation entirely because of assertions being made in that letter. Mr. Morris requested that the Chairman give him some advice as to whether he should do both presentations at the same time and pointed out that he would need to rebut if there is new information. Chairman Horan stated as long as Mr. Morris is expeditious, he has every intention of giving him an opportunity to rebut and there will also be a surrebuttal if, in fact, the Appellant needs one. Mr. Morris confirmed with the Chairman that there would be a dual rebuttal and that he can "hold back" until they hear if there is any new evidence presented that was not in the letter.
Mr. Morris stated he is requesting that the Board uphold the determination of the BOA and the Development Order. He noted that they have some changes to the Development Order based on what has occurred.
Mr. Morris began his presentation entitled “Crystal Living Senior Care Special Exception Appeal of Board of Adjustment Approval.” He discussed the Public Meetings and Outreach that have occurred. Mr. Morris referred to the Assisted Living Facility Master Site Plan and indicated where the one-story memory care building, one-story common building and two-story assisted living buildings will be located. He next discussed the Project Team, Crystal Living Florida, LLC. Mr. Morris reviewed The Project (two slides) and discussed the cost, size, employees, parking, buffers, deliveries, and the fact there will be no lake access. Transportation Impact was discussed.
Mr. Morris displayed Project Examples and described the quality of the development. He noted the Development Order calls for this development to be residential in design and nature. With regard to price point, this ALF for minimum service will run about $4,500 a month. Memory care will run about $7,500 a month. He reviewed six pages of photographs of various examples of other projects.
Mr. Morris advised they completely agree with staff recommendations that this is compatible zoning in A‑1 and meets all criteria under the County's code. In terms of community impact, he spoke to the County's Department of Public Safety and it is their policy to arrive at an ALF with sirens and lights off since they do not want to disturb the residents. He noted that this is a commercial project but he pointed out it is a residential commercial project. He stated that almost every concern that the Board will hear or has been registered by Mr. Hinckley is exactly the same concern there would be with a residential neighborhood because the ALF residents have the same impact as a residential neighborhood. It is commercial just like the Walden School in the front is commercial. Mr. Morris concluded by stating this particular facility has no impact on Seminole County schools as a residential R‑1A would have.
Chairman Horan clarified with Mr. Morris that the only issue at the Board of Adjustment was the granting of a special exception and that all of the facts that were adduced at that hearing met all of the criteria of a special exception under the County's code. Mr. Morris added that A‑1 zoning allows for the special exception for ALF's or memory cares to be there. So knowing that and meeting those criteria means this type of residence is a permitted use by special exception.
Paul Hinckley, representing Country Lane HOA, addressed the Board to state Country Lane is the subdivision immediately adjacent to the subject property. Mr. Hinckley remarked that he hoped the Board had an opportunity to review the letter of appeal submitted by Country Lane and the arguments contained therein. He explained it was not their intent to show up today with additional evidence that was not presented at the Board of Adjustment hearings but advised he would like to reiterate some of the arguments set forth in the letter.
Mr. Hinckley stated they disagree that the proposed use is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood and it would be their position that it would be detrimental to the character of this neighborhood to allow an ALF facility of this size. This is a highly residential area with dozens, if not hundreds, of single-family homes surrounding the subject property. He pointed out there are no other comparable commercial facilities in close proximity to the subject property and allowing this proposed use would have a significant detrimental impact on the residential character of the surrounding neighborhoods.
Mr. Hinckley stated it does not appear that any inquiry was made, as required by Seminole County's Code, by the Board of Adjustment into the effect that the addition of yet another assisted living facility would have on the quality of care provided by other assisted living facilities already in operation or already approved by Seminole County that are in the vicinity of this proposed assisted living facility. He stated he viewed both of the hearings conducted by the Board of Adjustment and does not recall any such examination taking place. Numerous other assisted living facilities operate in the area and others have been approved by Seminole County but not yet constructed. Considering the importance of insuring that the quality of care does not suffer at these facilities as a result of increased competition from an oversupply of such facilities, it would appear prudent for the Board of County Commissioners to uphold Country Lane's appeal and reverse the decision of the Board of Adjustment in order to allow an examination of this issue.
Mr. Hinckley stated with regard to the experience level of the developers, he does not believe it matters if they have developed a thousand of these commercial facilities, it doesn't change the residential character of the neighborhood. With regard to the Seminole County Code and the special exceptions list that is allowed in A‑1, he stated this is not the kind of assisted living facility that was contemplated as an exception to an A‑1 zoning designation. Other facilities in the area are essentially single-family homes that have been converted into assisted living facilities. He believes that is what was contemplated by the code provisions that allow for a special exception for an assisted living facility. He then discussed how the size and location of the facility will disturb the folks next door. He discussed the lake and stated that it is Country Lane's position that a facility of this size is not going to have a positive impact on the aesthetics of the lake. Mr. Hinckley stated if the Board has any questions, he will do his best to address them.
Commissioner Carey asked Mr. Hinckley if he was suggesting that the more ALF's there are in existence, the more the quality would decline because of competition. Mr. Hinckley stated that his recollection is that is essentially the reason for the code provision in question. He stated he has not looked at it in the past couple of weeks but when he drafted the letter, his recollection is that it specifically says the Board of Adjustment should take into consideration other assisted living facilities in the area and the impact another facility would have on the quality of care with the idea being that the quality would be detrimentally affected by increased competition in the area. Commissioner Carey stated her experience has been just the opposite; that the more competition there is, the better people try to compete.
Commissioner Carey referred to Mr. Hinckley's comment that he thought the County's code provision was there because it was to address homes being converted to assisted living facilities. She explained how she has spent a lot of time trying to understand the different levels of care and at what point someone goes to memory care. When she looks at homes that have been converted to assisted living facilities, that is the lowest level of care and has some of the biggest challenges. She does not believe the County's code anticipated that at all. She thinks that is one consideration and something that some people choose, but she believes people also want to keep their loved ones close by. Mr. Hinckley stated he believes the larger the facility is, the more risk there is of there being what the code referred to as an institution character. The smaller the facility is, the more individual attention the patients received. As it relates to the A‑1 exception, the single-family home model makes more sense in an A‑1 zoning category than a facility of this size. He questioned if the Board allows a facility of this size, where is the line drawn for future developments.
Commissioner Carey referred to Mr. Hinckley's letter and all of the attachments and stated that he alluded to the fact that it is a real concern to have these types of facilities near residential areas and that it could be detrimental to them. She questioned if that was Mr. Hinckley's intent, to try and convince the Board of that. Mr. Hinckley stated he believes what he said is that if somebody accidently wandered away from the facility, which he thinks happens more often than the Applicant wants the Board to believe, that that person might be noticed a little bit more quickly in an area that was less residential in character. Commissioner Carey stated that after she read all of the evidence that Mr. Hinckley submitted, she called law enforcement, the Sheriff of the county, and asked if he had ever seen this to be an issue. The Sheriff advised that never to his knowledge has there been anyone that wandered from an assisted living facility and harmed someone in the community.
Commissioner Henley stated that Mr. Hinckley mentioned in his presentation and in the backup material the Board has that this is a commercial venture. He asked Mr. Hinckley to tell him something about the school that is located nearby where there is concern about the children's safety with these people wandering off. He asked what the size of the school is and what age the students are that attend. Mr. Hinckley stated his understanding is that it is a grade school with younger children. He does not know the size of the school. Upon further inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Hinckley stated he believes it is a private school. Commissioner Henley questioned whether that makes the school a commercial venture and Mr. Hinckley responded that he thinks it is a commercial venture. Commissioner Henley questioned what security measures the school campus has in place. Mr. Hinckley stated he does not know but assumes the children are supervised all day by adults because it is a school.
Commissioner Henley stated he appreciates the evidence that Mr. Hinckley submitted to the Board to support his contention in regards to these people in these types of facilities wandering off. He pointed out there were a substantial number of newspaper articles about folks who had wandered off. He read all of them but noted that in not one of them did he see where they harmed anyone. Commissioner Henley asked whether there is any record that says they harmed anyone. Mr. Hinckley responded no, not physically other than the one instance of indecent exposure.
Claire Brothers, 1610 Lawndale Circle, addressed the Board to state she has petitions (received and filed) that have been signed by the Seminole County residents who have asked that the Commissioners overturn Development Order #15-32000006. Ms. Brothers believes allowing a large ALF to be built in the center of a residential community is most certainly out of place and would be detrimental to the character of the neighborhood.
Ms. Brothers remarked that she has lived in Country Lane Estates for the last six years and her property backs up to Winter Park Dairy. It is a very quiet, peaceful lakefront property. She stated she has put $100,000 into her house over the last six months, and she believes this project will kill her home value. Ms. Brothers discussed the proposed six‑foot fence and pointed out that ambulances and fire trucks are taller than six‑foot fences. She believes to have a depressing sight on a daily basis of ambulances and fire trucks is just horrific. She noted that the developer has talked about 28 other homes taking up the same amount of space. She stated that is what should go there, 28 other homes. Ms. Brothers discussed her concerns with the two‑story building and with 52 employees coming and going. She wondered how she will get her home value back after this enormous institution is built.
Commissioner Henley referred to the displayed Site Plan Map and asked Ms. Brothers to point out where her house is located. Ms. Brothers referred to a map (copy received and filed) of the neighborhoods with the site plan inserted and indicated the location of her home along with three of her neighbors' homes. At Commissioner Henley's requested, Ms. Brothers pointed out where her home is in location to the parking area. Commissioner Henley stated he is trying to understand the relationship to where they have designated parking. If he understands the design, parking is in a specific area in relationship to the entrance and so forth. Ms. Brothers stated that the parking is not in the middle of the property, which would be quieter if the buildings were surrounding it as opposed to on the rims of their property lines.
Commissioner Carey requested that Ms. Gibbs circle the four homes on the map. She asked if there is a boat dock or common area for that subdivision down in the open area between those houses and the lake. Ms. Gibbs stated there is a park that is for this community but she does not know if there is a dock. An audience member confirmed there is a dock.
Dr. Elliot Mausner, 1412 Pelican Bay Trail, addressed the Board to state he is the president of the Pelican Bay Homeowners Association. Dr. Mausner stated he has three pages (copies received and filed) of signatures of homeowners who are opposed to the project. He emphasized that he does not know of anyone who thinks that home values will go up with this project next door. He explained that he lives around the corner on the lake and noted the neighbors have not been good property stewards; they allow their animals in the lake. Dr. Mausner pointed out that there are 143 residents; and on every holiday and every visiting day, there might be as many as 70 visitors. He wondered if they have the parking for the 70 cars plus the 30 employees. Dr. Mausner requested the Board find out from the developer where they expect to find parking.
Rick Burroughs, 1584 Lawndale Circle, addressed the Board to state his house directly abuts the proposed development. Mr. Burroughs stated he and his partner just purchased this house in June; and if they had known there was going to be a commercial building directly behind their house, he would never have purchased the property. Their property value will be drastically affected. Mr. Burroughs explained they spent thousands of dollars redoing their pool and backyard; and on Halloween, his neighbors decided to take down a fence panel adjacent to his pool and patio and began dumping cow manure. He wondered how neighborly that was just because he spoke in opposition to this project.
Mr. Burroughs advised that this assisted living facility does not meet aesthetically what this neighborhood has. It is too large for the property and is a 24‑hour commercial structure. They are not talking about a neighborhood where people get off work, come home, and go to bed at 9:00 or 10:00. There will be shift changes. Mr. Burroughs remarked that with a six‑foot fence directly behind his pool, anyone can peer over into his backyard and into his pool area. The service entrance is directly behind his fence so there will be vehicles coming in from probably 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. making deliveries. There will be 20‑foot tall lights with a six‑foot privacy fence. He pointed out that most of their bedroom windows face the back. With regard to the lighting, there will be lighting back there 24/7 and it will interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of their property. Mr. Burroughs stressed that he hopes the Board will deny this development.
Jeff Amato, 1588 Lawndale Circle, addressed the Board to state he bought his house this past August. He has a two-story home with a new pool in the backyard and all three of his bedroom windows upstairs face the property. His stated his pool deck is three feet above the driveway on the other side of the fence which means if there is a six-foot fence, that fence will be less than three feet. Mr. Amato noted he has three grandchildren and each could hop over a three-foot fence, which is a safety issue. His dogs could jump over a three-foot fence. He explained that he has put $50,000 into this house over the last four months and this project will kill his property value. Mr. Amato requested that the Board consider the safety issues and what the project will do to the neighborhood. He does not believe it is a well thought out plan with the fencing and buffer zone and thinks it will hurt the entire community.
Joan Toth, 1444 Auburn Green Loop, addressed the Board to state she lives in Country Lane but her property does not abut the proposed facility. Ms. Toth stated she is on the Board of Directors of Country Lane and feels that she has her property owners’ interest to consider. She believes the main reason her community is opposed to this project is not because it is an ALF per se but the size, 154 units. If 24 or 29 homes were put in, there would not be the density or problems that there will be with 154 units. With regard to the deliveries being limited to daytime, there will be staff around the clock and they will be coming in at various hours closing car doors with lights. She stressed there is a lot more to consider than just the building and the units; they need to consider all of the peripherals.
Ms. Toth stated there is not sufficient parking when there is a holiday or visitors. She noted they have said they will provide offsite parking. That will become a problem on Howell Branch, which is a very busy four-lane road. She believes eventually they will ask for a traffic light because there will be a lot of people going in and out. Ms. Toth explained how there are just too many concerns for Seminole County to allow this large of a proposed facility. Ms. Toth discussed people that do wander from assisted living facilities. She reiterated that she believes there are too many concerns to put a huge ALF at this spot.
Joe Johnson, 1614 Lawndale Circle, addressed the Board to state his house is one of the four houses that were discussed. Mr. Johnson remarked that the first time he and his wife heard about this was when they received a notification from the County that this was going to happen. Then they received a letter from the Greens, but they only had two days of notice and could not attend. He stated he is not sure whether half of the people in the communities were notified. Mr. Johnson stated this facility is something that will affect the values and he wishes the Board will take into consideration the value of their property and what it will do to the residents of all of the communities around Lake Florence.
John Jones, 1595 Lawndale Circle, addressed the Board to state his property does not abut up to this project but is across the street. Mr. Jones discussed the light at their tennis court and how the light goes across the lake and bothers the people. He pointed out the lights at this facility will be on all night and those lights will go across the lake and into the backyards and the back of the houses that are opposite the area.
Linda Mayfield, 1612 Lawndale Circle, addressed the Board to state she was one of the early members of the community and has watched it grow. Ms. Mayfield stated that while she understands the need for facilities like this, she believes they should not be here. It is her understanding there are facilities like this on the books right down the road so her concern is why must they take this parcel of land on this beautiful lake affecting all of the homes around the lake. She discussed her concerns about green space, parking, the height of the facility, and the buffers. If indeed the facility is approved, she suggested that they build a buffer that is a buffer and not a fence that you can see through or climb over easily. She asked the Board to consider what they have heard today. She also pointed out that approximately half of the people that live in the Country Lane development did sign the petition.
Commissioner Carey confirmed with Ms. Gibbs that the County ordinance regarding notices was met. Ms. Gibb stated she believes the notice that was being referred to was the community meeting notice. Upon inquiry by Commissioner Carey regarding the buffer on this particular site plan, Ms. Gibbs stated that there is a buffer ordinance and after doing the calculations, the result was 15‑foot landscape buffers. Commissioner Carey confirmed with Ms. Gibbs that the buffer was down the sides and from the edge of the parking. Upon inquiry by Commissioner Dallari regarding what the buffers consist of, Ms. Gibbs described the process for selecting different plant units in the code.
Commissioner Carey referred to the site plan being displayed, the east side closest to the bottom where it appears that the building goes close to a green line. She asked how far that building sits from the property line and if it was a bigger buffer. Ms. Gibbs indicated the buffer is the same all of the way down; and while it appears wide, she believes it is just the artist’s rendering. Mr. Morris stated it has the ability to get wider as they go further back because they are beyond the building line. That would be determined at final site plan. He noted there are no complaints from anyone on the other side.
Commissioner Carey requested Ms. Gibbs speak about the lighting and the County ordinance regarding lighting. Ms. Gibbs responded that in this case, it is restricted to 20 feet and cutoff fixtures, which controls the lighting going up. There is also a requirement that the spillage onto adjacent properties can be no greater than 0.5 foot-candles. She believes these will be pole lights. They can have building lights on the building, wall packs on the building. Mr. Morris advised they can take that up in the Development Order if the Board would like. Discussion ensued with regard to wall packs. Commissioner Carey stated it sounds like the light fixtures will be on the inside of the parking areas and not on the edge of the property. Ms. Gibbs stated there is a setback requirement for lights from adjacent properties, and she believes that is 25 feet.
Mr. Morris stated that a Florida Bar Journal article entitled "ABCs of Local Land Use and Zoning Decisions" (copy received and filed) indicates there needs to be competent and substantial evidence submitted in the record. Mr. Morris indicated that Mr. Hinckley stated on the record that besides his submittal of the letter that he wrote and the comments made at the Board of Adjustment meetings, he had nothing to add, no new evidence.
With regard to Mr. Hinckley's letter (copy received and filed), Mr. Morris stated while it is a well‑written document, it is virtually all opinion; there is no substantial evidence. They have consistently heard the issue of property values declining because of this project, but they have had no authority tell them that property values will decline. The county commissions and cities have approved scores of ALF's that are in residential areas. They have approved more than a dozen that are on major arterial roadways or immediately off of a major arterial roadway. He pointed out that to his knowledge the Board has never heard and staff has never heard of any diminution of property values because of this residential use next to single-family housing. Mr. Morris further discussed Mr. Hinckley’s letter and stated this area is not a rural area and pointed out the Future Land Use is R-1A, which is four units to the acre. If they developed four units to the acre on this property, there could be 28 units.
Mr. Morris remarked that the green space requirement that they are adhering to is 25% and the buffers they are adhering to are greater than what is typically done. He referred to the Master Site Plan and discussed the buffers. With regard to the testimony about the two-story building, he stated that no portion of the two-story building’s edge is less than 100 feet from the property line of any of the four properties that people spoke about. Mr. Morris discussed the increase in traffic and stated it would not be a significant increase but rather a minimal affect and less than if it was the Future Land Use of R-1A. He noted that ALF’s are quiet facilities and the external noise is minimal. He discussed the air conditioning units for this facility. He advised there will be shoebox lighting, 20 feet high with a spray pattern of less than 0.5 foot-candles going over the property line and stated that is far more minimal than an alternative project.
With regard to the second point in Mr. Hinckley’s letter, that the proposed use is not consistent with the general zoning category and plan of A-1 Agriculture, Mr. Morris stated that argument is directly in opposition to the opinion of the County’s expert staff and directly opposite of what the code says. He pointed out that the Land Development Code specifically says that this type of facility can go here, that this type of residential housing can go there. He discussed the sight distance lines and stated the views from these buildings cannot look into anybody’s backyard.
Mr. Morris referred to the third page of Mr. Hinckley’s letter which states in the first line, “individuals that suffer from Alzheimer’s, schizophrenia, and other serious behavioral and mental health problems.” Mr. Morris stated this facility will be an ALF with memory care and by statute is not permitted to have individuals who have mental problems such as schizophrenia. In fact, they are restricted from having them. He stated that memory care means memory care with Alzheimer’s or growing to Alzheimer’s potential. Mr. Morris stated he believes this is alarmist language; and if he was a neighbor and read this, he would be concerned if there were going to be schizophrenics next door.
Mr. Morris displayed an aerial map (copy received and filed) of the area and pointed out where La Amistad adult facility is located and indicated it is just over 2,000 feet away. This La Amistad adult facility treats mental health victims and dual addicted; mental health drug addicted patients. He noted when they tried to find complaints regarding this facility, they were unable to find any. A printout of the website was received and filed. Mr. Morris stated they do not have those kinds of patients under critical care, psychological and drug dependent. He advised that this facility is talking about senior citizens with memory care; and he rejects Mr. Hinckley’s third assertion, talking about this type of element being in this neighborhood and not being compatible.
Mr. Morris addressed Mr. Hinckley’s fourth point, consideration not given to existing commercial assisted living facilities. He stated this is the economic argument that shouldn’t the BCC and the BOA be looking at what the economic realities of ALF’s are and is there a need to build such a facility. Mr. Morris explained that that is not something this County Commission does and not something that the code directly calls for.
Mr. Morris noted that several months ago during a public hearing the Board was presented with some data (copy received and filed) from the University of Central Florida regarding a senior living facility with an ALF educational component on Old Lockwood Road. The Board accepted this data in the public hearing and approved that development. The development was multi-component with senior independent living, an ALF component, and memory care. The issue was whether there was a need for such a facility. Mr. Morris displayed the Projected 75+ Population Florida chart and discussed the 35% growth rate in the 75+ group from 2015 to 2025. He next displayed the Projected 75+ Population Seminole County chart and advised in Seminole County the numbers are bigger, a 44% growth rate in the senior population. He stated he has submitted by way of evidence that there is a critical shortage for ALF needs and memory care in the future.
Mr. Morris displayed an information packet (copy received and filed) regarding Assisted Living Market Notes and discussed the existing ALF’s in the 32792 zip code and the number of seniors in that zip code.
In response to some of the comments that were made today, Mr. Morris discussed how the larger facilities compare to the smaller facilities. With regard to home values, Mr. Morris reiterated there is no evidence of home values declining because of ALF’s and emphasized that no evidence has been submitted into the record. With regard to the two-story building, he stressed that the building line itself is no less than 100 feet and sometimes up to 150 feet from the neighbors’ property lines.
Mr. Morris displayed the Proposed Development Order Changes and requested that when the Board votes on this issue, they include these changes to the Development Order. He discussed the objections Walden School had at the Board of Adjustment meeting. He has met with representatives from the school and they no longer wish for denial of the project but he cautioned he is not saying they support it. Mr. Morris explained how they have all agreed to the following language: “Developers of ALF will engineer and construct a stormwater stub out at property line to receive one-half-foot acre of stormwater from Walden School site and agree to receive such stormwater after Walden School has appropriate Seminole County engineering and land use approvals are in place.” He pointed out they have voluntarily asked that this be included in the Development Order.
Mr. Morris commented that at the same time, they discussed with Walden School the nature of fencing and privacy and advised there needs to be 100% opacity. He explained they are asking that Item f in the Development Order be modified, with the agreement of Walden School, to state the following: “Perimeter fencing on east and west property lines shall be 100% opaque six feet in height vinyl fencing or appropriate substitute material. Fence height for adjacent property line of Walden School shall be eight feet in height.”
Mr. Morris continued to address some of the comments that were made and stated that he believes he has dealt with public notification. He believes there has been a major outreach to the public on these issues. He addressed the lighting issue and stated the lighting will not shine across the lake like the tennis court lighting because it is shoebox lighting at a limited height. He stated if the Board wants to further limit the height of the lights, they can further limit the height of the lights; but they would need to put more in if that is done.
Mr. Morris stated that someone referred to this project as a hotel. He stressed this is not a hotel. These units are for residents and their visitors. With regard to people coming to visit on holidays, Mr. Morris stated the Development Order anticipates that and states overflow parking must be offsite and any offsite will not be parked on Howell Branch Road. They will be set up with another facility when they need that kind of parking and have a shuttle bus that brings people over. He noted that this same problem exists at every other ALF during holidays and is commonly handled nationally on that basis. With regard to a median cut, Mr. Morris stated under no circumstances will they qualify or need a median cut or a traffic signal.
Mr. Morris submitted into the record the five support letters from lakefront residents, which are marked in yellow; a notification from Anthony Nelson, Seminole County Public Works, which discusses the roadway issues and level of service; and the August 24, 2015 Board of Adjustment meeting minutes.
Commissioner Dallari referred to the facility on Dodd and Howell Branch, La Amistad, and asked whether the County had received any complaints regarding that facility. Ms. Gibbs responded that Planning & Development has not received any complaints. Commissioner Dallari questioned the values of the subdivision built two subdivisions behind the facility and asked if that subdivision had been built out. Ms. Gibbs stated it is almost built out but she was unaware of the values. With regard to property values, Commissioner Carey stated that in her district and in her neighborhood, they have a facility (Oakmonte) with independent living, ALF, and memory care. She pointed out that area continues to have single-family residential development come in and build adjacent to that facility and the values have not been hurt at all. Another facility (Atria) is right across from Lake Forest and they have continued to have people come in and develop high‑end homes around it.
Mr. Morris stated the ALF that Commissioner Carey is referring to was built prior to the subdivision going in next to it and the lowest priced home in that neighborhood is just over $800,000 and he believes they exceed $1 million. Commissioner Carey stated that when Ms. Mayfield commented that this is an area that she has lived in, an area that is her home and she wants to be able to stay here, that is what Commissioner Carey is experiencing and seeing in the industry. People do want to be close to their home and to the area they know. In an assisted living facility you are not there as a prisoner; you are there by choice. It is a choice of a lifestyle for many people who don't want to drive or live alone. Having one close in proximity either for your loved ones or to move into and still be in your neighborhood is helpful.
Commissioner Dallari stated that going through the Development Order, he had some additional questions. With regard to Item i, Commissioner Dallari questioned when the Applicant would have to submit parking agreements. Ms. Gibbs responded they would need to submit them at the time of the site plan. With regard to Item j, Commissioner Dallari asked when the earliest deliveries could be made. Ms. Gibbs commented that it is not actually established by a number. Upon inquiry by Commissioner Dallari, Mr. Morris recommended they take deliveries in two parts and handle all commercial traffic, which would include garbage pickup. Mr. Morris felt it would be reasonable between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. With regard to garbage pickup, Mr. Morris stated that they will only have one pickup a week and occasionally two pickups a week. He stated they will volunteer to include two pickups a week in the Development Order. Commissioner Dallari stated that two pickups would be adequate. He added that the dumpster or trash compactor needs to be enclosed as well. Mr. Morris stated it will be a trash compactor and confirmed that enclosed means three walls and a gate. Commissioner Carey suggested that with the fourth wall being a gate, it can be slatted so the dumpster cannot be seen. Mr. Morris stated the way this area is set up in this proposal, which might not be the way that it will be at final site plan, it is surrounded by three walls of the building. He confirmed the garbage area will be walled on three sides with a decorative gate.
Commissioner Dallari submitted various emails that he received prior to the meeting into the record and he advised that he met with the property owner and several members of the HOA, as well as touring the school. He stated his decision is based on the evidence that he has received at today's meeting.
Commissioner Henley stated he has received a number of letters in support and one in opposition which he is submitting into the record. He advised he has not had a conversation with the representative of the owner nor with the Appellant.
Commissioner Constantine stated he had a meeting with the owner of the property and a phone conversation with Mr. Morris prior to this meeting.
Commissioner Carey stated she has had emails from staff, correspondence from Mr. Hinckley and also a meeting with David and Dawn Green. She then submitted her ex parte communications for the entire meeting.
Chairman Horan stated he had ex parte communications similar to the rest of his colleagues, receiving emails and phone calls to his office. He stated he will not duplicate what has already been submitted into the record. He stated he had a meeting with the representative of the Applicant and also several phone calls referencing questions that he had about the proposal.
Chairman Horan confirmed with Mr. Morris that he had concluded his presentation.
Mr. Hinckley stated with regard to the fact that this is a de novo hearing, he appreciates that. His concern is that there are procedural requirements contained in the Seminole County Code that weren't adhered to and read a portion of Section 30.1356 into the record. He pointed out there was no determination or examination made as to what effect this approval would have on existing foster care facilities by the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Hinckley stated if the Board is going to treat this as an evidentiary hearing and accept the contention made by the Applicant that this facility is required, that is the Board's prerogative; but he suggested they should not do it based on the fact that 7.9% of Seminole County's population is over 75. He stated his grandmother is 93 and still lives on her own. Being 75 or over does not make someone require assisted living facility care. With regard to the other facility down the street that apparently treats drug addicts and other individuals with behavior or health problems, Mr. Hinckley stated there may not have been other complaints about that facility but his guess is if it was also 115,000 square feet, additional complaints probably would have been received by the County.
Ms. Guillet addressed one of the points that Mr. Hinckley made, specifically with respect to the assertion that the Board of Adjustment did not consider everything that it was required to consider. She noted that the section that was referred to, Section 30.1356(a), speaks specifically to group homes and foster homes and does not speak to assisted living facilities. Section 30.124(b)(3), which is the section in the A‑1 zoning that addresses special exceptions, treats group homes and assisted living facilities as discreet uses as does Paragraph B of Mr. Hinckley's reference, Section 30.1356. Ms. Guillet stated it is staff's position that the paragraph that Mr. Hinckley references in his letter, Paragraph A of that section, is not applicable to assisted living facilities and as such, it was not a required consideration when the Board of Adjustment considered the item.
Commissioner Carey confirmed with Ms. Lynn Carlton‑Porter, Deputy County Attorney, that she agrees with Ms. Guillet's conclusion. Ms. Carlton‑Porter stated what Mr. Hinckley read was Section 30.1356(a)(1) and it doesn't refer to this type of facility, an assisted living facility. It refers to foster care and group homes. She pointed out that the provision that Mr. Hinckley read into the record is not applicable.
With regard to public participation, no one else in the audience spoke in support or in opposition and public input was closed.
Speaker Request Forms were received and filed for Paul Hinckley, Claire Brothers, Dr. Elliot Mausner, Rick Burroughs, and Jeff Amato. No Speaker Request Forms were received for Joan Toth, Joe Johnson, John Jones, and Linda Mayfield.
Chairman Horan noted that this is, in fact, an appeal of the granting of a special exception; and the legal requirements of the special exception as reflected on pages 1157 through 1159 of the Agenda Memorandum, which he is incorporating by reference, seem to support the granting of the special exception. Even though they are here on a de novo hearing, he does not believe the Board has heard any additional evidence.
Commissioner Dallari stated he believes that any issues that could possibly affect the surrounding neighborhoods have been addressed here today. Based on the evidence that has been presented; the decision by the Board of Adjustment, which he believes was correct; and the fact they have also been following the required regulations of the Land Development Code, he believes all of these things have been met. He feels there has been no evidence that has been presented here today that would be contrary to that effect.
Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to uphold the Board of Adjustment decision to approve the request for a special exception for an assisted living and memory care facility with 154 units in the A-1 (Agriculture) district, for property located on the north side of Howell Branch Road, approximately 1,400 feet west of Grand Road, and more particularly known as 4501 Howell Branch Road, as described in the proof of publication, Jim Clifton; Decision on Appeal and Approval Development Order.
Commissioner Dallari clarified that the Development Order should include the changes that were discussed with the Applicant and the two additional changes that he has presented.
Under discussion, Commissioner Dallari stated the changes that were presented were (1) Item f, Perimeter fencing on east and west property lines shall be 100% opaque six feet in height vinyl fencing or appropriate substitute material; and fence height for adjacent property line of Walden School shall be eight feet in height; and (2) a new item, Developers of ALF will engineer and construct a stormwater stub out at property line to receive one-half-foot acre of stormwater from Walden School site and agree to receive such stormwater after Walden School has appropriate Seminole County engineering and land use approvals are in place. He advised that in addition they talked about Item j, that deliveries would be from 7:00 a.m., trash pickup will be a maximum of two times a week, and either the trash container or trash compactor will have three sides with a decorative gate in front of it.
Chairman Horan stated that information will amend the motion and confirmed with Commissioner Carey, as the seconder, that she agrees with the amendment.
Chairman Horan stated that one of the questions posed was why must they take this land and use it this way. He explained that the answer to that question is because the law allows it. There are private property rights that relate to how a person can use their land. The County has developed rather extensive codes and planning future land uses. The future land use of this particular land is low density residential; and pursuant to public policy that comes from the State in Statute 429.01, assisted living facilities should be operated and regulated in residential environments. There is a lot of evidence that has been pointed out that very well-run assisted living facilities identical to this don't detract from the quality of the neighborhood and in fact they enhance it. Chairman Horan stated he believes the legal requirements have been met in this particular situation, and he will be voting to deny the appeal.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman Horan recessed the meeting at 4:00 p.m., reconvening at 4:25 p.m.
DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS
Commissioner Dallari reported that MetroPlan has moved to its new location next to the SunTrust Building.
Motion by Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to appoint Desta Horner to the Historical Commission to serve from 2016 until 2018.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Dallari requested that Chairman Horan provide an update regarding the CR 426 paving (since he had dialogue with Mr. Creedon) as well as the meeting that he attended in Lake Mary regarding the bear management plan. Chairman Horan stated he will cover that in his Chairman’s report.
Commissioner Constantine thanked each of the Commissioners regarding the item in the Consent Agenda where they agreed to keep the name Countryside Drive. He noted that meant a lot to the citizens.
Motion by Commissioner Constantine, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to reappoint Rob Wolfe to the Planning & Zoning Commission, to appoint Fonda Cerenzio to the Parks & Preservation Advisory Committee to replace Jim Vickaryous (who is resigning from that board), and to appoint Jim Vickaryous to the Code Enforcement Board.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Constantine advised that Jeanne Morris, who was a long‑time member of the School Board, passed away and noted that she will be missed.
Commissioner Constantine reported that there is an open house tomorrow at the new facility for MPO and all are welcome to attend. He announced there will be a joint meeting of Leadership Seminole on January 15. The Regional Planning Council will be meeting on January 20.
Commissioner Carey reported that domestic travel was up 13% and international travel was up 4% in December at the Orlando Sanford International Airport. She added that year to date, the passenger count is 2,487,000.
Commissioner Carey announced two upcoming Martin Luther King events in Sanford. The MLK Memorial Banquet will be on January 16 at 6:00 at the Sanford Civic Center and the Annual Parade will be on January 18 at 10:00 a.m. in the Goldsboro community.
Commissioner Carey explained why she believes the bear sighting map that the FWC (Fish and Wildlife Commission) publishes is a little misleading. She wondered what calls the FWC has gotten that were of a nature that required them to take an action and noted she has asked Ms. Lung to ask that question of FWC. She would like to know the level of what happened and whether it is just someone calling and saying, "I saw a bear walk through my yard" or is it someone calling with a serious issue with a bear and they need assistance.
Commissioner Carey stated when she first started to discuss this issue two years ago, the FWC's representatives and biologists and bear experts stated they needed to focus on west of I‑4. She explained how FWC has indicated maybe they should go east of I‑4. Commissioner Carey stated she would like County staff to have a serious discussion with FWC about what really needs to be the line because sometimes the County does something and there are unintended consequences. She noted there are bear sightings all across the county but pointed out that the significance of the problem is on the west side of I‑4, between the Interstate and Wekiva Springs. If there have been one or two calls on the east side, she does not believe that is enough justification for taking maybe a step too far and does not want the County to overreact.
Commissioner Constantine agreed with Commissioner Carey and stated he believes staff needs to have discussions with FWC. He stated with regard to the boundary, other than the east side of SR 46 and some of the commercial, the vast majority of the concern is on the west side of I‑4, which he thinks is a natural boundary. He believes they should consider that being the proper location.
Chairman Horan reported on a meeting with FWC in Lake Mary last Wednesday. He advised they have drawn a line and given themselves the flexibility to move that line. Of course, that line that defines the urban bear management area is a line that was established in consultation with the experts in the field because obviously none of them are bear biologists. He explained how the line drawn by the Florida Wildlife Commission may, in fact, create certain incongruous situations, especially on the east side and advised they have taken that into account. He stated the County Manager and staff are dealing with the Florida Wildlife Commission concerning that particular line and whether they should recommend moving it or not and whether the cities want to legislate themselves.
Chairman Horan stated since they have been so proactive on this and since they are treading on untilled soil where others have not tread before, they are certainly open to suggestions as to how they can make this work. He believes the education program is very important. The whole idea is to encourage people to engage in behaviors with regard to their refuse that puts them in the best position to protect themselves and also puts them in the best position to protect each other.
Commissioner Constantine thanked Chairman Horan for the information. He stated when the County Manager brought forth the ordinance, and the Board concurred, she indicated there would be tweaking. He thinks they are just trying to address some of the concerns they have heard. Commissioner Constantine reported that he had a conversation with the City Manager of Altamonte Springs and they are sending a budget adjustment to modify their trucks to pick up the containers. He emphasized that is a very positive step.
Commissioner Carey stated in her discussion with Mayor Mealor, who called her about this issue, Lake Mary has no objections to the west side of I‑4. She noted that when they started this discussion, the west side of I-4 is what was talked about. She stated the people at FWC keep pushing for more, which is their job. The County is doing more than anybody else in the state of Florida about this particular issue. Sometimes when an ordinance is passed, they have the right to tweak it because of the unintended consequences. She reiterated that she wants to have some real clarification from FWC about what the dot on the map represents. She discussed some subdivisions who have adopted their own ordinances fashioned after the FWC model. She believes the citizens all understand the situation and are all trying to help, but she believes they have impacted some citizens a little more than they intended to and she wants to get to the bottom of that with FWC.
Motion by Chairman Horan, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to reappoint Heather Smith, as the Sheriff's representative, and Dr. Stephen Wiseman to the Animal Control Board for one‑year appointments.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Chairman Horan, seconded by Commissioner Constantine, to reappoint Michael Sasso to the Law Library Board for a three‑year term.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Chairman Horan, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to reappoint Susie Dolan to the Value Adjustment Board for a one‑year term.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman Horan advised they will be getting a recommendation from CALNO this month concerning the member representative of CALNO on the TDC. Commissioner Constantine advised that since the CALNO meeting was cancelled, the recommendation probably won’t come until February.
Regarding follow‑up matters arising out of the last BCC meeting, Chairman Horan reported that a letter went to District 5 DOT concerning the bear management movement across I‑4. Upon inquiry by Chairman Horan, Ms. Guillet stated that Mike Orlando, FWC, has coordinated a meeting with them and County staff has been invited to attend. Chairman Horan advised that a letter was sent to FDOT regarding an Oviedo downtown land swap and there has not yet been a response on that. He stated a letter was sent supporting the Enterprise Florida funding to their legislative delegation.
Chairman Horan announced there are appointments to the Oviedo CRA coming up. The Oviedo CRA will have its first meeting in March. According to the formative document, the County is entitled to have two representatives on that CRA. The five representatives are the City Commissioners of the City of Oviedo. He stressed that the County needs to get two representatives appointed and requested that the Commissioners who have recommendations funnel those recommendations through the County Manager's Office and they can make those appointments at the next meeting.
Commissioner Carey confirmed with Chairman Horan that there are no criteria to live in the city; they just need to live in the county.
Chairman Horan advised there have been some concerns about the improvements the County is doing on CR 426 with regards to the size of the shoulders, whether or not bike lanes were contemplated, and things like that. That was going to be addressed today; however, staff is meeting with Mr. Creedon on behalf of the Geneva Citizens Association concerning that project and the size of the shoulders and the restrictions, practical and otherwise, of what the project entails. They are meeting on Thursday and he will report back to the Commissioners after that meeting.
Chairman Horan discussed the BCC meeting schedule and work plan for the year. He noted the Commissioners had received an email concerning this. Unlike last year, there is no conflict in the months of September and May with Labor Day or Memorial Day so it would be contemplated that there would be two meetings in May and two meetings in September. For July, Chairman Horan proposed that they continue as they have in the past by having one meeting and that one meeting would be July 26. That meeting is the deadline for setting the millage since the millage has to be set by July 26. Public hearings on the budget are scheduled for September 14 and September 27. He noted that he has been informed by the County Manager that workshops and briefings on the budget are going to begin in July tentatively. Chairman Horan advised that on some of those dates in July that they are talking about not having a meeting, they probably will have some workshops in that particular area. The normal workshops are in August in preparation for the public meetings.
Chairman Horan explained that since there is an election on November 8 and the second Tuesday of November is November 8, his proposal would be to have the one and only meeting on November 15, which would be the third Tuesday; and also at that time, they can have swearing‑ins. Discussion ensued with regard to the date for the reorganization of the Board. Commissioner Carey stated that having the meeting on November 15 and doing the swearing in that morning and the reorganization at the end of the meeting is historically when they do it and then the new Chairman takes over in December. She stated that whoever is elected to office officially becomes elected the Tuesday after the election, which would be November 15. Chairman Horan requested that if anyone is in disagreement with that, let him know. No objections were voiced.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Horan, Ms. Guillet stated there is an informational work session scheduled for the next meeting to talk about a sales tax update as well as a SunRail recap. There will be an I‑4 Ultimate work session at the first meeting in February.
Chairman Horan announced this weekend is the Scottish Highland Games in Winter Springs, which is the number one tourist generating event in the county all year.
Commissioner Henley stated in view of the latest happening with the Central Florida Sports Commission, should this Board want to take time to assess the situation in the agreement, he would like to know the “if” and “when” they want to have that dialogue. Chairman Horan stated he learned yesterday that there have been some personnel changes at the Sports Commission. Ms. Guillet stated John Bisignano, who was president and CEO, is no longer affiliated with the Sports Commission. They have named Mike Stone, who is a member of their executive committee, to serve as interim until such time as they can recruit a new leader for the organization. She noted that staff has requested a meeting with Mr. Stone as soon as possible so they can talk with him about what these changes mean with respect to the County’s arrangement with the Commission and the contract with them.
Ms. Guillet stated her recommendation would be to let staff meet with the Sports Commission and then come back and brief each of the Commissioners individually. At that time, the Commissioners can give staff feedback and determine if there needs to be a formal work session on that. Commissioner Henley stated if the Sports Commission is going to do a national search, there is no telling how long that will take; and the County has a significant interest in what happens and the impact that it will have on the County's concerns and investments. Chairman Horan agreed and stated it is really a vital time given the County's partnership with the Sports Commission and the opening of the Sports Complex in May. He believes this is something they need to concretize and understand all of the effects of it because obviously there are four new employees in the Sports Commission that are working with the County. They need to know what the plan is to comply with the contract. Commissioner Carey stated those are the people that are dedicated to the County's account anyway; and she would think that even under temporary leadership, they would meet their contract obligations.
COMMUNICATIONS AND/OR REPORTS
1. Letter and enclosures dated November 30, 2015 from Leon Byerley, Lightning Protection Technology, to Chairman Mike Hattaway, Seminole County Board of Adjustment, and Chairman Horan RE: proposed telecommunications tower at the First Baptist Church in Seminole County, Florida.
2. Letter dated November 30, 2015 from D. Ray Eubanks, Administrator, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO), to Former Chairman Carey RE: Seminole County’s Plan Amendment No. 15-2ESR adopted by Ordinance No. 2015-29 on November 10, 2015. (Copies to Andrew Landis, Regional Planner III, East Central Florida Regional Planning Council, and Rebecca Hammock, Planning & Development Division Manager, Seminole County.)
3. Letter and enclosures dated December 1, 2015 from Miles E. Anderson, Mitigation Bureau Chief, State of Florida Division of Emergency Management, to Chairman, Board of County Commissioners, RE: Annual request for update per 27P-22, Florida Administrative Code. (Original to Alan Harris for action.)
4. Letter dated December 1, 2015 from Jason Brodeur, President/CEO Seminole County Regional Chamber of Commerce, to Chairman Horan RE: list of accomplishments.
5. Letter dated December 8, 2015 from Chairman Horan to Brian Volk RE: reappointment by Commissioner Carey to the Sanford Community Redevelopment Agency.
6. Copy of letter dated December 11, 2015 from Alan Sakole, Environmental Supervisor, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, to Seminole BCC RE: Notice of Funding Availability for Assessment. (Original to Facilities Division for action.)
7. Cover letter only dated December 11, 2015 from Petrina Tuttle Herring, Bureau Chief, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, to Former Chairman Carey RE: Contract No. 2016-JAGC-SEMI-6-H3-110 awarding an Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant in the amount of $14,087 for Night Vision Goggles. (Enclosures sent to Seminole County Sheriff’s Office.)
8. Letter dated December 14, 2015 from Flora Maria Garcia, President & CEO, United Arts of Central Florida, to Chairman Horan RE: supporting UACF with a grant in the amount of $132,706 for the 2016 Fiscal Year.
9. Letter and enclosures dated December 14, 2015 from Harold Barley, Executive Director, MetroPlan Orlando, to Chairman Horan RE: Board Resolution No. 15-19 that was approved by the MetroPlan Board on December 9, 2015 to conduct one or more pilot projects using adaptive traffic signal technology on major arterials to improve traffic conditions as proposed by Congressman Mica at a MetroPlan hosted workshop on November 9, 2015.
10. Letter dated December 15, 2015 from Lori Griffith, Sr. Administrative Assistant, St. Johns River Water Management District, to Board of County Commissioners RE: 2016 Governing Board Meeting Schedule.
11. Letter dated December 16, 2015 from Chairman Horan to Noranne Downs, FDOT District 5 Secretary, RE: I-4 Bear Crossings.
12. Letter dated December 18, 2015 from John Meyers, Administrative Services Director, Seminole County Health Department, to Chairman Horan RE: FY 2015-2016 Contract between the Seminole County Board of County Commissioners and the Department of Health for operation of the Seminole County Health Department.
13. Letter and enclosure dated December 18, 2015 from Julie A. Dennis, Interim Director, Division of Community Development, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, to Former Chairman Carey RE: completed review of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for Seminole County (Amendment 15-3ESR). (Copies to Rebecca Hammock, Manager, Planning & Development Division, and Hugh Harling, Executive Director, East Central Regional Planning Council.)
14. Letter and enclosures dated December 21, 2015 from Donna G. Gardner, City Clerk, City of Casselberry, to Chairman Horan RE: City of Casselberry Annexation Ordinance No. 15-1432 annexing Parcel ID: 27-21-30-501-0000-0020 into the corporate limits of the City of Casselberry.
15. Letter dated December 23, 2015 from Marva Johnson, Bright House Networks, to Chairman Horan RE: notice of upcoming changes to cable programming.
16. Notice of Public Hearing dated December 24, 2015, City of Casselberry Planning & Zoning Commission, January 13, 2016, 6:30 p.m., Casselberry Commission Chambers RE: request to grant a variance to Article X, Section 3-10.2(6)(C)(2)(d)(3), “Specialty Lighting” to allow sports field lighting poles to exceed 20’ in height.
17. Letter dated December 28, 2015 from Parnie Peters to Commissioner Constantine with copies sent to all commissioners RE: opposition to requirement of bear-proof garbage cans.
18. Letter dated December 29, 2015 from Florida Department of Economic Opportunity to Former Chairman Carey RE: completed review of the comprehensive plan amendment adopted by Seminole County on November 10, 2015; Amendment No. 15-2ESR, Ordinance No. 2015-29.
19. Letter and enclosures dated December 30, 2015 from the Office of the City Clerk, City of Sanford, to the Board of County Commissioners RE: Notice for Ordinance #4362 annexing 0.90 acres between E. 26th Street and E. 28th Street between Sanford Avenue and Magnolia Avenue.
20. Letter dated January 2, 2016 from Corbett Koehler to Chairman Horan with a copy to Mayor Teresa Jacobs RE: Proper Resolution of Bear Encounters.
21. Letter dated January 4, 2016 from Chairman Horan to Representative Scott Plakon, Chairman, Seminole County Legislative Delegation, RE: Governor’s Proposed Economic Development Legislation.
ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA
Annette Sims, 1604 Bear Crossing Circle, addressed the Board to discuss panhandling. Ms. Sims submitted a packet of information for each Commissioner into the record. She stated she is here today representing Taking Seminole County Back and is here to speak for the communities and business owners in unincorporated Seminole County. Ms. Sims explained that their community is not against homeless individuals or those that have needs but rather to expose the impostors that they found on their corners taking advantage of their communities. They spent weeks speaking with each individual person panhandling in the area and discovered they are not homeless. She stated it is an organized group of people who are very content with deceiving neighbors and taking advantage of their generous hearts.
Ms. Sims displayed several photos (copies received and filed) of panhandling. She explained that these panhandlers refuse jobs from direct employers because they claim they make more on the street than what they could be paid. They communicate on their cell phones and change corners with precision so the community is less aware of the scam. Ms. Sims emphasized this has been an ongoing problem for over two years and is getting worse. The aggressive panhandling amendment has not worked. She discussed the behavior of the panhandlers.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Horan, Ms. Sims indicated the photo being displayed was taken at Montgomery and SR 434.
Ms. Sims stated these are not inner-city panhandlers just looking for something to eat and a place to sleep for the night. They are not truly homeless or needy. They know they can’t panhandle in Apopka or Altamonte Springs so her area is sitting right in the center and has turned into a collection pool for all of the individuals coming to take advantage of the area.
Ms. Sims stated the residents are asking the Commissioners to amend the ordinance and require that the right-of-way solicitors must file, be approved, and have a permit. This does not impede on anyone’s freedom of speech and allows anyone to solicit for a donation as long as they have a permit in place. She stressed that this is not to hold down the impoverished or anyone that is hurting but is a way to make the community safer, the streets safer and to increase the flow of traffic and make traffic safer. She concluded by stating this has worked in the Altamonte and Apopka area and advised her community is asking the Commissioners to consider this as an option.
Chairman Horan explained when the ordinance was passed one or two years ago, the Board was trying to hit that sweet spot between the people who were truly needy, who they can assist, and trying to drive the professional panhandlers and organized panhandlers out of the county. He advised they are taking a close look at the ordinance itself and a close look at the way the ordinance is being enforced as to whether or not it is actually being enforced the way that it was intended to be and whether the Board needs to do some tweaks on the ordinance.
Commissioner Carey stated usually the Sheriff has a pretty good handle when there is a problem going on and the County has had great partnerships working with the Sheriff to address concerns like this in the community. She advised that she has reached out to him and has passed on some information to the County Manager. This is one of those sensitive situations where there are some legal implications that they have to be careful about. Commissioner Carey remarked that the community has taken a very active role in trying to deal with the homeless situation and there is an independent group that is trying to write a plan on addressing homelessness. That is a business group that is doing that through Leadership Seminole. The expectation is that the draft of that plan will be written by the end of March, so there are a lot of different pieces coming together that will be addressing homelessness. She would like to see it addressed as a package deal because there is not going to be one fix or one solution for any of this. Commissioner Carey encouraged the County Manger to continue to look at this issue, look at it holistically and also pull it all together as a general recommendation from the homeless coalition. She noted that this issue is on all of their radar screens and she believes they will probably be addressing it in the short near future.
Commissioner Constantine stated that last week he had the occasion to meet with a number of citizens who have contacted his office about this concern and the Sheriff's Department. He was suspicious of the fact that they were isolating the truly needy and homeless and that there was the possibility the citizens were being cold‑hearted. He stated he met with these people because they were mostly from his district out in the Springs area; Hunt Club, Bear Lake, 434/Montgomery. He advised that the Sheriff's Office commended these people for their professionalism and the way they approached this. It was not to be punitive or negative but these folks were not the truly needy; these folks were people taking advantage of the situation.
Commissioner Constantine stated in meeting with these people and with the Sheriff's Office and discussing some of the other things that some of the other communities and counties have is why they brought forth the idea of the permit. He noted that the Sheriff's Office came up with the idea that they would present a pamphlet the first time as opposed to a citation, with the pamphlet containing all of the various opportunities an individual could have for services in the area. He then discussed some of those services. He stated he did present to the County Manager some of these ideas. He believes what is being done with regard to the approach of Leadership Seminole as well as the Central Florida Coalition for Homeless dovetails together; and potentially, the Board can look at their ordinance to see if there are other opportunities they could have.
Chairman Horan summarized that they want to help the needy and chase away the ones that are taking advantage of Seminole County.
Ms. Sims described the information that is in the packet that she submitted into the record.
The names of Mike Sanservino and Austin Beeghly were called and it was determined they were not in attendance.
Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.
Urban Bear Management Area
Pam Hendricks, 127 Eastern Fork, addressed the Board to state she is a member of the Woodlands Civic Association. Ms. Hendricks stated they heard a lot of comments about the boundary for the bears so they decided to put a poll out. About half of the members of the Woodlands belong to the Civic Association and about 94% of the people are opposed to having the Woodlands in the boundary since they haven't seen a bear in years. Commissioner Carey pointed out that if you look at that bear map, there are several dots from that area and that is why she wants to know what really constitutes a dot on the map.
Ms. Hendricks stated she is not opposed to the boundary if it is going to help. Commissioner Carey explained that the Woodlands is one of those neighborhoods where the road that got picked splits the neighborhood. Ms. Hendricks submitted the polling letter from Todd Burnett into the record.
Ellis Morris, 103 Foxridge Run, addressed the Board to state he lives in the Woodlands. Mr. Morris explained that his community is bordered by I‑4, E.E. Williamson Road and Highway 434. Their front entrance is about nine‑tenths of a mile from I‑4. The group that is in the half that is affected by the bear ordinance wants to ask for the Board's help. He submitted a petition that has been signed by 364 people so far. Mr. Morris stated they are very sympathetic to the residents on the other side of I‑4 that do have a bear problem but they do not now and never have had a bear problem in their subdivision. He explained how the sound barrier next to their neighborhood, which is 20 feet tall, protects their community from bears coming in. He stated they feel it is unnecessary for them and would be a financial hardship for quite a few of their residents and adversely affect their property values. He requested the Board's help in moving the bear boundary from Tollgate Trail back to I‑4. Mr. Morris discussed planting vegetation in the areas where they want the bears to be.
Commissioner Carey commented that a lot of people have a misunderstanding of this ordinance and they think that it requires someone to get a bear proof garbage can, which it does not. It only requires someone to secure their garbage. If the garbage is going to be put out before 5:00 in the morning, then it needs to be in a bear proof garbage can. She reiterated that there are some unintended consequences with the ordinance and they need to look at them, but they need to also consider public safety.
Dick Harkey’s name was called and it was determined he was not in attendance.
Antoinette Giunta, 133 Stoney Ridge Drive, addressed the Board to state she is the vice president of the Woodlands Civic Association. Ms. Giunta discussed the poll that was taken and the high percentage of folks that responded that they were opposed and believe the boundary should be moved from Tollgate Trail back to I-4. She pointed out that only one side of Tollgate is included in the boundary. She stressed that many of the residents are original owners (from the early ‘70’s) and believe this ordinance will impose an unnecessary and unfounded burden on them. She pointed out there have not been any sightings of bears in her community.
Ms. Giunta wondered why the money that was captured from the bear hunting permits can't go towards subsidizing the barrels for the residents. Chairman Horan advised they are talking to their legislators about that. Ms. Giunta stated given the results of the poll and the overwhelming signatures gathered from the petition in such a short time, the community respectfully requests that the boundary lines be redrawn back to I‑4.
Ms. Giunta questioned whether the tweaking of the ordinance that the Commissioners have talked about will be before February 7 because she would hate to see the residents be fined. Commissioner Constantine responded that “tweaking” was the County Manager's word when the ordinance was brought forth. The Commission knew when they put forth something like this ordinance, they would be looking at it. He stated he has talked to the FWC since they established the boundaries and asked them to relook at them. He knows the County Manager has done that. He emphasized they are hearing the residents. Commissioner Constantine pointed out, as they said when they put the ordinance into place, the County is not going to go out with bear police the day that the ordinance goes into operation. Even if someone is not abiding by the ordinance, if there is not a problem in the area (the County Manager's words, not his), they are not going to run out there. They are going to be very selective in what they do and how they do it and they will give time to get the ordinance implemented. He requested that people be patient and they will get this worked out.
Commissioner Carey stated she believes with the comments made here today the direction for the County Manager is pretty clear, that they don't intend to fine anyone or do anything until things are straightened out that is east of I‑4. Ms. Guillet stated they have been actively working with FWC since the ordinance was adopted. She noted at that meeting this was new territory for the County and they knew they would have to come back and make some tweaks, either in content or in specifically looking at the map. She explained that they have been actively engaged with the FWC to see what made sense. None of them at the County are bear experts so they are relying on the folks who know about bear activity.
Ms. Guillet stated her hope is to bring a revised map back to the Board at the first or second meeting in February. When the Board adopted the ordinance, it gave the County Manager the authority to establish guidelines and procedures for enforcement. She promised that unless someone is blatantly and flagrantly feeding bears and attracting bears and creating a danger to their neighbors, the County will not engage in any active enforcement and will simply try to educate.
Ms. Giunta advised that not everyone in the affected area received notice and they don't know about the ordinance. Chairman Horan stated the primary idea is to make sure that the population in the county understands the public safety risk, understands what behavior can protect them and what behaviors can protect each other. The County's intention is not to raise revenue and not to be punitive.
Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m., this same date.