BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
APRIL 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, April
12, 2016, in Room 1028 of the SEMINOLE
COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD,
FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.
Present:
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)
County
Manager Nicole Guillet
County Attorney Bryant Applegate
Deputy Clerk Kyla Spencer
Pastor Wes Tanksley, Riverwalk Church of
God, Sanford, gave the Invocation.
Commissioner Constantine led the Pledge of
Allegiance.
BUSINESS SPOTLIGHT
The
Business Spotlight video for Hohman Health and Wellness was presented.
AWARDS
& PRESENTATIONS
Agenda Item #1 – A-1898-16
Motion
by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to adopt a
Proclamation declaring the month of April as Child Abuse Prevention Awareness Month,
2016.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Debbie Owens, Director of Seminole
Prevention Coalition and Chair of Child Abuse Prevention Task Force (CAPTF),
addressed the Board to show her appreciation.
She noted CAPTF is made up of volunteers from the entire county. She thanked Commissioner Carey and
Commissioner Dallari for attending Light of Hope, which is the opening of Child
Abuse Prevention Month.
-------
Chairman Horan mentioned Commissioner
Dallari has a large fundraising event at Kids House this weekend.
COUNTY
MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
With regard to public
participation, no one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to the
Consent Agenda and public input was closed.
Commissioner Henley
stated he will be filing a Voting Conflict Form for Item #19, an agreement with
Altamonte Hospitality, LP.
Motion by Commissioner Carey,
seconded by Commissioner Constantine, to authorize and approve the following:
County Manager’s Office
Business Office
2. Approve travel reimbursement to Commissioner
Lee Constantine for travel during January through March of 2016. (A-1957-16)
3. Approve travel reimbursement to Commissioner
Carlton Henley for travel during July 2015, November 2015, and January 2016. (A-1987-16)
Development Services
Planning & Development Division
4. Authorize
release of the original Paving and Drainage Cash Maintenance Bond for the
project known as St. James House of Prayer, in the amount of $2,299.50. (A-1925-16)
5. Authorize
release of the original Performance Bond #0182849 for the project known as Lake
Markham Landings Subdivision in the amount of $281,769.49. (A-1915-16)
6. Approve
the replat of lot 38 and Tract C of the Acuera Subdivision, containing one lot
on 0.77 acres and Tract C on 2.40 acres zoned PD (Planned Development), located
on the west side of Hawksbill Lane, west of Longwood Markham Road; Joe Jenkins,
Applicant. (A-1902-16)
7. Approve
the minor plat for the Miller Estates subdivision containing 4 lots on 4.236
acres zoned A-1 (Agriculture), located on the west side of Orange Boulevard,
north of North Road; Zach Miller, Applicant.
(A-1899-16)
8. Authorize
the Chairman to execute the Satisfaction of Lien for Code Enforcement Board
Case No. 10-138-CEB, at 857 Dover Rd., Maitland, Tax Parcel #23-21-29-502-0B00-0110;
Helen J. Wolk Heirs, Applicant. (A-1842-16)
9. Approve
the Special Event Permit Fee Waiver in the amount of $75 for the Farm Share
Special Event, 6405 South U.S. 17-92, Casselberry, on April 2, 2016. (A-2001-16)
Environmental
Services
Utilities
Engineering
10. Approve and
authorize the Chairman to execute the revised Easements with Florida Power
& Light Company (FPL) for the dedication of two Utility Easements and two
Temporary Construction Easements for the installation of new power poles and
realignment of existing overhead power poles at the County’s Yankee Lake
Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility.
(A-1961-16)
Public Safety
EMS/Fire/Rescue Division
11. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
the Agreement with Seminole State College (SSC) for utilization of SSC's Public
Safety Burn Building for new hire training with an estimated annual amount of
$15,000. (A-1977-16)
Resource
Management
Budget
and Fiscal Management Division
12. Approve and
authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2016-R-54 implementing
Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #16‑040 through the HOME Program Grant
Fund in the amount of $8,212 for appropriation of HOME Program Down Payment
Assistance payoff income for the property at 2832 Harbour Grace Court. (A-1928-16)
13. Approve and
authorize the Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2016-R-55 implementing
Budget Amendment Request (BAR) #16‑044 through the various Water and
Sewer Funds in the amount of $181,775 to restructure and reallocate funding in
Fiscal Year 2015/16 for various Water and Sewer Capital Projects. (A-1906-16)
14. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
appropriate Resolution #2016-R-56 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR)
#16-045 through the General Fund in the amount of $1,950 for appropriation of
FDOT Revenue and allocation of Budget for Cross Seminole Trail improvements. (A-1929-16)
15. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
appropriate Resolution #2016-R-57 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR)
#16-050 through the General Fund Reserves in the amount of $65,000 to
appropriate budget for the Aspire Health Partners, Inc. Homelessness Outreach
Partnership Effort Agreement.
(A-1981-16)
16. Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
appropriate Resolution #2016-R-58 implementing Budget Amendment Request (BAR)
#16-051 through the 2014 Infrastructure Sales Tax Fund to appropriate budget of
$1,005,800 from Reserves for the Sand Lake Rd. at SR 434 Intersection
Project. (A-1986-16)
Purchasing
& Contracts Division
17. Award RFP-0672-15/TAD,
Master Services Agreement (MSA), for Landfill Water Quality Monitoring Services
to The Colinas Group, Inc. of Altamonte Springs; and authorize the Purchasing
& Contracts Manager to execute the Agreement. Estimated Annual usage is $200,000. (A-1960-16)
18. Approve Work
Order #30 (NEWW Collection/Transmission System) under PS-8186-13/DRR (MSA for
Continuing Engineering Services for Utility Improvement Projects) with Reiss
Engineering, Inc. of Winter Springs in the amount of $146,196.91; and authorize
the Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute the Work Order. (A-1940-16)
19. Commissioner Henley requested
the item be pulled for a separate vote due to a voting conflict.
20. Award RFP-602489-16/BJC, Purchase of Self-Contained
Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) Compressor/Cascade System, to Fisher Scientific, Tampa
in the amount of $50,975 for each SCBA unit; and authorize the Purchasing &
Contracts Division to execute the Agreement.
(A-1958-16)
21. Award CC-0664-16/AEH, Douglas Avenue
Rehabilitation and West Highland Sidewalk Project, in the amount of $767,780.20
to Florida Safety Contractors, Inc. of Tampa; and authorize the Purchasing
& Contracts Division to execute the Agreement. (A-1959-16)
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Agenda Item # 19 – A-1979-16
Motion
by
Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Constantine, to Award
RFP-602505-16/BJC, Food and Beverage Services for the Seminole County Sports
Complex to Altamonte Hospitality, LP, Altamonte Springs; and authorize the
Purchasing & Contracts Division to execute the documents (Revenue
Contract).
Districts 1, 2, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Henley abstained from
voting and filed a Memorandum of Voting Conflict Form (received and filed).
COUNTY
ATTORNEY’S CONSENT AGENDA
Motion by
Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to authorize and approve
the following:
22. Approve and
authorize the Chairman to execute 6 Satisfactions of Public Defenders Service
Liens for costs against Gerald L. Willmert, each in the amount of $200, which were
imposed in favor of Seminole County. (A-1965-16)
23. Approve and authorize
the Chairman to execute the First Amendment to County Attorney Employment
Agreement for A. Bryant Applegate. (A-1946-16)
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
CONSTITUTIONAL
OFFICERS’ CONSENT AGENDA
Motion by Commissioner Carey,
seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to approve and authorize the following:
Clerk’s
Office
24. Approve
Expenditure Approval Lists dated March 7 and 14, 2016; Payroll Approval List
dated March 10, 2016; and the BCC Official Minutes dated March 8, 2016. (A-1966-16)
Sheriff’s
Office
25. Approve the expenditure of $1,400 from the Law
Enforcement Trust Fund for a contribution to SACSON, a faith-based supported
community organization that provides referrals to services via an Information
Card. (A-2000-16)
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 Services Agreements with A Cause 4 Paws
Rescue and Animal Advocates Florida, Inc.
2.
Parks Contract for Services Agreements with Lyford Ferguson, Frank
Curatolo, Joleen Mekarski, Kenneth Alston, and Manfred Schwartz.
3.
Special Counsel Services Agreement with Nabors Giblin &
Nickerson, P.A.
4.
Conditional Utility Agreement for water and sewer service with
Harrison Realty & Development, Inc.
5.
Bill of Sale accepting the water and sewer systems within the
project known as Turnberry.
6.
Partial Release of Mortgage and Warranty Deed for Clay E. Knight.
7.
Maintenance Bond #58728440 for a private road for the project
known as Aloma Trails in the amount of $80,563.70.
8.
Maintenance Bond #58725889 for streets, curbs, and storm drains
for the project known as Aloma Trails in the amount of $2,603.50.
9.
Third Amendment to RFP-601328-11 with Lake Mary Veterinary Clinic.
10.
First Amendment to IFB-602286-15 with Precision Power Services,
Inc.
11.
Amendment #2 to Work Order #1 to PS-0009-15 with Pegasus
Engineering, Inc.
12.
PS-0426-15 with Horizon Engineering Group, Inc. as approved by the
BCC on January 12, 2016; A-1628-15.
13.
Amendment #5 to Work Order #8 to PS-2051-07 with Environmental
Research & Design, Inc.
14.
Amendment #6 to Work Order #1 to PS-5738-10 with URS Corporation
Southern.
15.
Amendment #5 to M-6607-11 with The Triece Company.
16.
Work Order #11 to PS-6658-11 with S2LI, Inc.
17.
Work Order #45 to PS-8047-12 with Universal Engineering Sciences.
18.
Work Order #46 to PS-8148-12 with Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc.
19.
Work Order #47 to PS-8148-12 with Keith & Schnars, P.A.
20.
Work Order #31 to PS-8186-13 with CPH, Inc.
21.
Work Order #59 to RFP-8312-12 with Chief Inspection Services.
22.
Closeout to Work Order #7 to CC-9184-13 with CFE, Corp.
23.
Work Order #21 to CC-9192-13 with Corinthian Builders, Inc.
24.
Change Order #3 to CC-9859-14 with Gibbs & Register, Inc.
25.
Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC) Order in regard to an
application for amendment of Certificate of Authorization No. 247-W, to extend
water service area to include land in Seminole County, by Sanlando Utilities
Corp.; Docket #01375-15; Order #PSC-16-0107-PAA-WU issued on March 15, 2016.
26.
Audit Report No. 031516 from the Clerk of the Circuit Court &
Comptroller for Investigative Review of possible HIPAA violation by County
Manager’s Office.
27.
Approval Development Orders, as approved by the Board of
Adjustment on March 25, 2002: #02-30000014, 920 Moton Ave., Selina Jackson;
#02-30000015, 336 E. Orange St., Steven Garver; #02-30000018, Cass Ave. (Lot
5), Curtis and Janet Mann; #02-30000019, 1057 Cass Ave., Curtis and Janet Mann;
#02-30000020, 970 Pine St., Curtis and Janet Mann; #02-30000021, 1731 Perch
Ln., Joseph Hudson; #02-30000024, 2017 Linden Rd., Ava Tunstall; #02-30000026,
5690 Autumn Chase Cir., Larry and Nancy Houck; #02-30000027, 315 Needles Trl.,
Richard and Margaret Wyatt; #02-30000028, 2897 Egrets Landing Dr., Ann &
Peter Petino; #02-30000029, 480 Lake Dr., Frank Salzmann; #02-30000032, 3058
Bluffton Cv., Santana Maria; #02-3000008, 1475 Retreat Rd., Robert Heckman;
#02-31000009, 2520 Canvasback Trl., John and Gail Stoppelli; and #02-31000010,
785 Scooter Pt., Richard and Permelia Ehle.
28.
Approval Development Orders, as approved by the Board of
Adjustment: #15-30000096, 728 Silver Birch, Eric McDonald and Katherine Cacho;
#15-30000098, 1920 Winnebago Trl., Gregory and Joy Leinenbach; and
#15-30000003, 2336 Lake Howell Ln., Peter and Bonnie Berry.
29.
Approval Development Order #16-30000011, 957 Red Fox Rd., Randall
Britt.
30.
Development Order #16-27500007, 306 Sunshine Express, T & M
United II, LLC.
31.
Denial Development Order #16-30000002, 7400 Betty Street, Andrew
and Jena Cunningham.
32.
Addendum #1 to the Tusc-Aloma (AKA Tuscaloma) PD, File No.
PZ2015-049, Aloma Investments, LLC, Wendy’s Tusc-Aloma.
33.
Addendum #1 to the Tusc-Aloma (AKA Tuscaloma) PD Developer’s
Commitment Agreement #15-20500041, Aloma Investments, LLC.
34.
Addendum #1 to the Bill Ray Nissan PD Developer’s Commitment
Agreement #15-20500042, R&R Investments, LLC.
35.
Addendum #1 to the East Red Bug PD (AKA Parkdale Place PD) Final
Development Plan, Developer’s Commitment Agreement, East Red Bug Development,
LLC.
REGULAR AGENDA
Agenda Item
#26 – A-1878-16
Tony
Matthews, Planning & Development Division, addressed the Board to present
the request for a Special Event Permit for the Orlando Philharmonic Orchestra
Concert. He reviewed the details as
outlined in the agenda memorandum and advised that county staff recommends
approval with the conditions contained in the special event permit package. He explained that the concert will be between
8:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m., with an estimated attendance of 2,000 to 2,500
guests. The applicant has secured a
location for off-premise parking and also for off-duty sheriff’s deputies to
provide security and traffic control.
David
Schillhammer, Executive Director at the Orlando Philharmonic, addressed the
Board to announce he was present for any questions regarding the event. Commissioner Carey noted it was a great event
that the Board has supported for a number of years. Upon Commissioner Dallari’s inquiry, Mr.
Schillhammer stated the event has taken place for 16 years.
With
regard to public participation, no one else in the audience spoke in support or
in opposition to this item and public input was closed.
Motion by Commissioner Constantine,
seconded by Commissioner Carey, to approve the Special Event Permit for the Orlando
Philharmonic Orchestra Concert at 400 Woodbridge Road, within the Springs
Association recreation area, to be held May 7, 2016, with rain-out day on May
8, 2016; Carl Rendek, Orlando Philharmonic Orchestra, Inc., Applicant.
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Agenda Item #27 – A-1846-16
Patt Hughes, Code Enforcement Project Manager, addressed the Board to
present a request from Newbury REO 2013, LLC, owner, and Steven B. Greenfield,
Esquire, Applicant, for a lien reduction for property located at 2607 Jennifer
Hope Boulevard in Longwood. She
explained that the applicant is requesting a reduction of a code enforcement
lien totaling $13,250 to $3,500 for Case #14-51-CEB. Ms. Hughes expressed that on January 29,
2014, the Code Enforcement Officer observed the following violations located at
2607 Jennifer Hope Boulevard: the
accumulation of trash and debris; uncultivated vegetation in excess of 24
inches in height within 75 feet of a structure; stagnant or foul water within a
swimming pool; and a pool not enclosed with a barrier, in violation of Seminole
County Code, Chapter 95, Section 95.4, as defined in 95.3 (g), (h), (n), and
(o).
Ms. Hughes stated that on January 29, 2014,
the previous owners Mark and Heather Welch were sent a notice regarding the violations
and given a compliance date of February 12, 2014. Mr. Welch requested additional time to
correct the violations and the Code Enforcement Officer granted the request
until March 7, 2014. However, a warranty
deed was issued on January 26, 2014, and recorded in the public records of
Seminole County on February 17, 2014, transferring the ownership to Newbury REO
2013, LLC. Therefore, the existing case
was closed and a new case was opened against Newbury REO 2013, LLC.
Ms. Hughes explained that on April 2, 2014,
Newbury REO 2013, LLC was sent a notice on the violations and given until April
21, 2014, to correct the violations. A
re-inspection was done on April 29, 2014, and found the violations remained on
the property. She added that on May 27,
2014, a Statement of Violation and Request for Hearing was submitted to the
County by the Code Enforcement Officer and a hearing was scheduled for July 24,
2014, before the Code Enforcement Board.
On July 24, 2014, an order was entered by the Code Enforcement Board
giving the respondent a compliance date of July 31, 2014, with a fine of $250
per day if the violations were not corrected.
On August 7, 2014, an Affidavit of Non-Compliance was filed by the Code Enforcement
Officer after re-inspection on August 1, 2014.
Ms. Hughes stated the property was brought
into compliance in late September 2014, and Affidavits of Compliance were filed
by the Code Enforcement Officer on September 25, 2014. The Code Enforcement Board issued an Order Finding
Compliance and Imposing a Fine/Lien in the amount of $13,250 for a total of 53
days of non-compliance from August 1, 2014, through and including September 22,
2014. Ms. Hughes added that on September
30, 2014, a certified copy of the Affidavit of Compliance and a letter advising
the respondent of the total amount of the lien ($13,250) was sent by first
class mail to Newbury REO 2013, LLC. On
February 11, 2016, Steven B. Greenfield, Esquire, submitted a request for a
reduction of the $13,250 lien to $3,500 on behalf of the owner Newbury REO
2013, LLC.
Ms. Hughes informed the Board that staff
recommends that the Board deny a reduction to the Code Enforcement Board lien
from $13,250 to $3,500 or to any other amount for Case #14-51-CEB on the
property located at 2607 Jennifer Hope Boulevard.
Commissioner Carey questioned whether or
not the County secured the pool at the time the violation went out in January
2014, to which Ms. Hughes answered that an orange fence barrier was put
up. Upon Commissioner Carey’s inquiry of
the cost to send a contractor out to secure a pool, Ms. Hughes stated she is
not sure of the process with the abatement.
Commissioner Carey stated this is a situation where there are only five
months of penalties against them, but it was nine months from the time they got
noticed to the time they fixed the problem.
She opined that the community needs to realize if you are going to be an
investment buyer, you need to fix the problems right away so the rest of the community
doesn’t have to endure those types of code violations.
Theresa Fulmer, Attorney for Newbury REO
2013, LLC, addressed the Board to state that the owner acquired the property
subsequent to a foreclosure being filed, which was voluntarily dismissed. They accepted bids when they found out about
the violations, and a bid was accepted in May of 2014. She explained that repairs started on the
property in June of 2014. Newbury REO
2013, LLC was advised by the people they had working for them that all of the
repairs were completed. When they found
out that there was a problem with the screen enclosure, they contacted somebody
to fix that problem; so the pool enclosure and fence were completed on August
31, 2014. Ms. Fulmer opined that Newbury
REO 2013, LLC worked as diligently as they could, and they were not trying to
ignore the rules and code violations.
She believes it was their understanding, a mere five days after the
violation on July 24, 2014, that everything was completed. She noted the property has been in compliance
since September of 2014.
Ms. Fulmer expressed that Newbury REO 2013,
LLC has spent $6,000 in landscaping along the driveway and side of the house
and $2,200 on work on the pool including cleaning and replacement of the motor
pump. They have spent a total of $8,200
to cure the violations. Ms. Fulmer
stated that they are asking for a reduction in the violations.
Commissioner Carey asked if Newbury REO
2013, LLC got the property in January, why it took them until May to get
bids. Ms. Fulmer answered she cannot
include any more facts as to why it took that long. Chairman Horan stated that the letter issued
from the Code Enforcement Board reflects that it is for 53 days of
non-compliance from August 1, 2014, through and including September 22, 2014,
which is calculated out to be $13,250; however, there is an Affidavit of Compliance
filed by the Code Enforcement Officer indicating that the re-inspection was
performed and the property was in compliance as of September 18, 2014. Ms. Hughes explained that the Affidavit of Compliance
filed September 18, 2014, was for some of the violations and the one for the
pool was not done until September 23, 2014.
Chairman Horan clarified with Ms. Hughes that there was a
re-inspection. Commissioner Dallari
confirmed with Ms. Fulmer that there is no hardship, the applicant is just
simply asking for a reduction.
With regard to public participation, no one
else in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to this item and public
input was closed.
Commissioner Constantine stated one of the
things the Board needs to look at is the amount of the lien in comparison to
the value of the property. He pointed
out that the assessed value is $383,308, so the lien is less than 3 1/2 percent
of the value of the property. He noted
he listened intently to hear some sort of hardship, and he did not hear any.
Motion
by Commissioner Constantine, seconded by Commissioner Carey, to approve the request
to deny a waiver to the Code Enforcement Board lien from $13,250 to $3,500, or to
any other amount, for Case #14-51-CEB, on the property located at 2607 Jennifer
Hope Blvd., Longwood, Tax Parcel #05-21-29-5EL-0000-0670, owned by Newbury REO
2013, LLC; Steven B. Greenfield, Esquire, Applicant.
Chairman Horan stated with regard to
reviewing the facts, there was an unsecured pool for 114 days, which is a
public safety issue; so without some kind of material evidence to the extent as
to why the pool was not secured, he believes the lien amount is reasonable.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
COUNTY MANAGER AND STAFF BRIEFINGS
Agenda Item #28 – A-1943-16
The Board noted, for information only, the Informational Budget
Transfer Status Report for Fiscal Year 2015/16 (February 2016).
-------
The
Board recessed the meeting at 10:03 a.m., reconvening at 1:30 p.m.,
with all Commissioners and all other Officials, with the exception of Deputy
Clerk Kyla Spencer who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Jane Spencer, who were
present at the Opening Session.
PROOFS
OF PUBLICATION
Motion by
Commissioner Dallari, seconded by Commissioner Carey, 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.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT APPEAL
Special
Exception for Communication Tower in
Sweetwater
Oaks PD/Allison Yurko, Appellant
Agenda Item #30 – A-1869-16
Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider a request to appeal the Board of Adjustment’s decision to
approve a Special Exception for a Communication Tower in the Planned
Development district for property located on the north side of Wekiva Springs
Road, approximately 280 feet east of Miami Springs Road/North Hunt Club
Boulevard, Allison Yurko, Applicant, received and filed.
Kara Siple, Court Reporter with Orange Reporting, was present
(business card was received and filed).
Kathy Hammel, Planning and Development Division, addressed the
Board to state there is no presentation today because it is her understanding
that there will be a request to continue the item.
Lauralee Westine, on behalf of Florida Tower Partners, addressed
the Board to state they had an approval at the Board of Adjustment and the
Homeowners Association closest to them appealed the approval. Ms. Westine explained that there was a
meeting last week with Commissioner Constantine to get everyone in a room and
talk things through. They were able to
agree on a “build box” or a general location of where the tower can be shifted
to where it makes the HOA happy and her clients are willing to do it and the
church is willing to do it as well. She
stated they do not have any objection to the 60-day continuance; but with the continuance,
they would request the waiver of Section 30.46 which would allow them to put in
a second application while the appeal is pending. She added that they are grateful to
Commissioner Constantine for pulling all of the parties together into one room
and opening up the dialogue again.
Allison Yurko, attorney on behalf of the Sweetwater Springs
Homeowners Association, addressed the Board to thank Commissioner Constantine
for having the meeting last week. Ms.
Yurko stated they have agreed on the parameters of a “build box.” She began to read into the record what the
parameters were and was interrupted by Chairman Horan who advised that all the
Board is dealing with is the continuance.
He questioned if Ms. Yurko agreed that she would like to have a continuance
of the matter. She responded that there
is some language for the motion and she would like it if the motion could
incorporate the parameters and believes it would be good for everyone.
Commissioner Dallari raised a point of order and Bryant
Applegate, County Attorney, stated that all that is before the Board is a
motion to continue and he does not want to get into specifics about locations
or any other matter because if the continuance is granted, this will go back to
the Board of Adjustment and be set for another hearing. Commissioner Carey pointed out that it might
possibly go back to staff. Mr. Applegate
agreed.
Ms. Yurko stated the only reason she would want it read is on
the off chance that it does not come back for a public hearing, there is at
least one forum where they have the language.
Mr. Applegate stated his understanding is that both parties, including
Ms. Yurko, have agreed to the wording of the continuance. Ms. Yurko stated that there was at least one
group that was not at the meeting last week and she is suggesting this in an
abundance of caution so it is on the record.
Commissioner Dallari stated that he has only met with two
residents that were part of the Homeowners Association. He has not met with any attorney and was not
a part of the meeting that was held.
Commissioner Carey pointed out that all they are dealing with
here right now is the continuance. She
stated this would not typically come to the Board and the only reason it is
here is because of the appeal. Conditions
and other matters are really to be settled outside of the Board as she
understands it. She stated she has met
with the attorney and some of the residents but she has not met with the
Appellant who originally applied for the permit.
Mr. Applegate stated if the plan of the two parties is to
continue this matter to either allow time to negotiate a final settlement
approved by staff or if needed, go back to the BOA for a public hearing, he
would strongly recommend the motion be based on the continuance and not get
into any of the merits of the case.
Ms. Yurko stated she is fine with that and thanked Commissioner
Constantine and staff. She looks forward
to getting this resolved and believes they are “pretty much” there.
Joe
Scarpa, 3427 Peace Valley Way, addressed the Board to state he is closer to the
cell tower than the HOA but he is not a part of the HOA. Mr. Scarpa stated he has been notified twice
of this hearing. He went the first time
and it was continued. He is now coming
the second time and it is being continued.
He stressed that if there are going to be discussions amongst the
parties, he is more than happy to attach himself to that appeal so he can be a
part of those discussions as well.
Chairman Horan reiterated that the
only issue in front of the Board right now is whether or not they are going to
grant a continuance of the hearing.
Mr. Scarpa stated he has no
objections to the continuance, but he wants to know why it has been continued
twice. He noted that discussions have
occurred and he has received notices from the County saying to come here today,
but he has not been a part of any settlement discussions. Chairman Horan questioned if it is correct
that even if this is settled, there will be another public hearing; Mr. Applegate
stated there might not be another public hearing. Chairman Horan pointed out there will still
be a public record and suggested that if Mr. Scarpa wants to be part of the
settlement discussions, he should engage the primary parties who are involved
and the staff to keep abreast of what the resolutions are.
Mr. Applegate stated other people
had the right to appeal the hearing as well.
Chairman Horan explained that the parties are the Appellant and the
Applicant. Mr. Scarpa reiterated his
original question, how does he attach himself as an Appellant.
Commissioner Carey stated in layman's terms, this matter went to
the Board of Adjustment and was heard, both sides, and was approved by the
BOA. It was then appealed by Ms. Yurko
on behalf of the Homeowners Association.
She suggested Mr. Scarpa give his name and telephone number to Ms. Yurko
and Ms. Westine, the attorneys sitting behind him, because they are the ones
that will be talking about this settlement.
With regard to public participation, no one else in the audience
spoke in support or in opposition and public input was closed.
A Speaker Request Form and a Written Comment Form were received
and filed.
Commissioner Constantine explained that earlier he called the
Applicant and the Appellant and asked them to sit down to talk one more time
since they had worked on this since 2013.
He thanked Ms. Evelev and Ms. Thornton from the Homeowners Association
and Ms. Yurko and Ms. Westine and Mr. Reinhold from the church for their hard
work. He noted they spent 2.5 hours
working on language and both Ms. Yurko and Ms. Westine have agreed to the
language and he expects they will comply with that language.
Motion by
Commissioner Constantine, seconded by Commissioner Henley, that the appeal of
the Board of Adjustment’s decision of the Sweetwater Cell Tower, File
A-1869-16, be continued to the June 28, 2016 Board of County Commissioner
meeting at 1:30 p.m. The purpose of the
continuance is to provide additional time to the Appellant (Sweetwater Springs
HOA) and the Applicant (Florida Tower Partners, LLC) to 1) provide sufficient
documentation to County staff to analyze the location of the cell tower on the
property located at 3800 Wekiva Springs Road for compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code; and 2) submit a new application
for either the alternative location to be considered by the Board of Adjustment
appeals or for a camouflage tower to be considered by the Planning
Manager. Commissioner Constantine further
moved that a waiver to LDC Section 30.46 be granted to enable the Applicant
to file the new application within 12 months of the original application, and
in the event a new application is not provided to the County and approved prior
to June 28, 2016, the Board shall hold the continuation of the appeal hearing
on that date, June 28, 2016.
Under discussion, Commissioner Dallari stated that in the motion
it talked about location and it talked about the Comprehensive Plan. He questioned how that applies to the
continuance. Mr. Applegate responded
that the main purpose of the continuance is to allow staff time to determine
whether or not what the parties agreed to complies with all of the County's
requirements. Commissioner Dallari pointed
out that depending on what has changed, it may have to go back to the Board of
Adjustment. Mr. Applegate advised that
determination will be made by staff.
Commissioner Dallari stated he wanted to ensure that everyone is aware
of that.
Commissioner Carey clarified if they decide to go with the
camouflage tower, it will not go back to the Board of Adjustment because the
BOA has already approved it as it was submitted. Mr. Applegate stated there are two
options. If it is a camouflage tower, it
goes back to staff. If there is a major
change, it will go back to the BOA. With
regard to the definition of a camouflage tower, Ms. Guillet advised it is
defined in the Land Development Code.
Commissioner Dallari noted that other residents still have the right to
review this.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT APPEAL
303
Brantley Harbor Drive/Kevin Tippett, Appellant
Agenda Item #29 – PH-2016-285
Proof of publication calling for a public hearing to consider a request to appeal the Board of Adjustment’s decision to
deny a side yard (west) setback variance from ten feet to zero feet for a
boathouse in the R‑1AA (Single Family Dwelling) district, and more
particularly known as 303 Brantley Harbor Drive, Sheila Cichra, Streamline
Permitting, Inc., Appellant representing Kevin Tippett, Owner, received
and filed.
Denny Gibbs, Planning and Development Division, addressed the
Board to present the request as outlined in the Agenda Memorandum. Ms. Gibbs displayed the Proposed Boathouse
and Previous Dock Approved with Variance illustration (copy received and filed)
and gave a brief background of the property.
She pointed out that in 2006 the BCC overturned a similar variance where
the Board of Adjustment (BOA) denied a zero setback for a dock on the same
property line that is being discussed today.
The dock that was approved at that time was 18.5 feet in length and the
boathouse that is the subject of this appeal is 24 feet in length.
Ms. Gibbs explained that at the 2016 BOA hearing for the
boathouse, Mr. O'Grady, the most affected neighbor, spoke in favor of the
Tippetts' variance request. She
explained that the subject boathouse will be constructed immediately adjacent
to Mr. O'Grady's boathouse and will be the same length. Ms. Gibbs reported that speaking in opposition
at that BOA hearing was Jim Shepherd, who represents Mr. and Mrs. Smith
who live to the west of the Tippett property.
He spoke about potential impacts to the Smiths' property. There were also discussions at the Board
hearing regarding ownership of the canal.
Ms. Gibbs advised that Mr. Solitro is record owner of the canal and
he submitted a letter of no objection to the variance request.
Ms. Gibbs displayed an aerial photo of the homes on the canal
(page 549 in the Agenda Memorandum) and discussed three side yard setbacks that
have been granted. She 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 on January 25, 2016, and the testimony presented at that meeting (the
minutes are attached as Exhibit C), staff is recommending that the Board uphold
the decision of the Board of Adjustment to deny the variance.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Carey, Ms. Gibbs clarified that
because of the way a dock is situated on the property, they only have a side
setback.
Sheila Cichra, Steamline Permitting, addressed the Board to
state she is representing the Tippetts, the property owners. Ms. Cichra indicated that all they were
applying for was a variance for the side setback. The only truly affected property owners are
the O’Gradys and what is being proposed is a mirror image of what Mr. O’Grady
has. She explained that even though the
boathouse is 32 feet, most of that is up on shore. The slip itself is 22 feet deep and starts
right off the edge of the seawall. Ms.
Cichra added that when the proposed boathouse is built, it would only be a few
feet away from the Smiths’ seawall but it would be at least 14 feet away from
their actual property line because their seawall was extended artificially out
into the canal over 10 feet.
At Commissioner Dallari’s request, Ms. Cichra indicated the
seawall on the aerial photo.
Commissioner Dallari asked who owns the seawall; and Ms. Cichra stated
that it is on Mr. Solitro’s property but it was permitted, built, and “finaled
out” and is there and there is nothing anyone can do about it. Commissioner Dallari questioned how the
seawall could be in conflict if it is not on their property. Ms. Cichra stated it is definitely not on
their property but is on Mr. Solitro’s property and she believes that is a
civil issue. Commissioner Carey confirmed
that the side yard setback is not from the Smiths’ property but is from the
O’Gradys’ property.
Ms. Cichra stated the Smiths are claiming that the construction
of the boathouse would hurt their view but she contends she would rather look
at a boat hanging in a nice boathouse with a cover than look at a boat sitting
in the water with trash floating around.
She emphasized that it is definitely going to look better in that corner
once it is built. She referred to a
picture (page 520 in the Agenda Memorandum) and stated that what they are
looking at right now is the big side wall of Mr. O’Grady’s fence and the end of
the canal which gets a lot of settling trash and weeds. Ms. Cichra explained that the boat can be
there anyway; the boat can be parked in the water and will be in the same position
that a boathouse would, just hanging and covered and cared for.
Ms. Cichra stated the variance for the zero side setback has
actually already been granted so the Tippetts could rebuild a dock like the one
that was there before in the same footprint that was approved before and that
would be closer to the Smiths’ property than what is being proposed. The slip that was originally approved was
shorter but they took the dock away and relocated the seawall and dredged back
into the property to make a functional-sized slip. That was done before the Tippetts took over
the property. Ms. Cichra explained that
now that the seawall is a little further back, the boat slip can slide a little
bit further back, terminate at the same point that the O’Gradys’ boathouse does
and it would not obstruct the canal any further.
With regard to the argument that the boathouse would obstruct
the Smiths’ access, Ms. Cichra indicated on the Previous Dock Approved with
Variance illustration where there is a kayak tied up along the wall and pointed
out that the kayak was only placed there after the variance was applied
for. She stated the Tippetts are not
blocking access to anything and in fact the Smiths are blocking the Tippetts’
access because there is a lot of stuff at the end of the canal. Ms. Cichra explained how the Tippetts’
proposed boathouse is not an oversized structure.
Patrick O’Grady, 301 Brantley Harbor Drive, addressed the Board
to state he owns the property just to the south of the Tippetts. Mr. O’Grady stated his property is really the
only one that has any impact from this requested variance and he is fully in
support of the variance and allowing the Tippetts to build their proposed
boathouse. He explained that the
proposed boathouse is virtually a mirror image of what he has and it will allow
the Tippetts to care for their boat and have access to the canal and then the
lake. The boathouse will not interfere
with the navigability of the waterway and will not impact the Smiths.
Mr. O’Grady stated that the items like the Sea-Doo lift and the
kayaks that were recently placed there were put there to create difficulty for
the rest of the neighbors from using the canal.
He indicated that the Smiths do not own a Sea-Doo and he does not
believe they have paddles for the kayaks; the items were put there to make it
appear that there is a potential for damaging the Smiths’ access to the
lake. Mr. O’Grady urged the Board to
support and allow the Tippetts to build their boathouse, allow them to access
the canal and lake, and take care of their boat just like all of the other
homeowners on the canal.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Horan as to whether Mr. O’Grady was the
owner of the property when the BCC granted the variance, Mr. O’Grady stated he
was not the owner when his boathouse was built and noted that he has been there
about ten years. Ms. Gibbs stated she
believes it was in 1999. When asked by
Chairman Horan if there are any particular facts, conditions, or circumstances
concerning his property that are different than the Tippetts, Mr. O’Grady
stated that he is not aware of any.
Chairman Horan questioned if Mr. O’Grady knows when the filling of the
canal occurred on the Smith property that filled out to the seawall and Mr.
O’Grady stated he does not. Ms. Gibbs
stated it was about 1986.
James Tawn Vigie, 100 Cherry Hill Circle, addressed the Board to
state his property is located on the south side directly across the canal from
the Smiths and next to the O’Gradys. Mr.
Vigie stated he is in support of the boathouse as it was proposed to him. He pointed out that he works from home; and
for six to eight hours a day, he looks out the window at that corner and feels
like he is qualified to answer any questions.
The County plotted the properties to be a mirror image. Mr. O’Grady has about 25 feet of waterfront
and so do the Tippetts. Mr. Vigie stated
when he heard what the Tippetts were building, a mirror image of Mr. O’Grady’s
boathouse, it seemed like the best option for everyone. What has been done previously is far worse
than what is being proposed. He worries
that the Smiths are not considering the alternatives (which are legal and can
be done tomorrow) which are a floating dock or there could be two boats.
Mr. Vigie stated the opposition letter that he read appears to
approve the O’Gradys’ dock and object to the Tippetts’ dock because it is not
similar to the O’Gradys’ but it appears to extend the same distance out into
the canal. He pointed out that the one
difference between the south end and the north end of the canal is that the
property line and seawall in no way, shape or form mimic each other. He stated the Board will hear that Mr.
Tippett is being unreasonable and obstructing but the most obstructive property
on the canal is the Smiths’. Mr. Vigie
explained that the Smiths have extended into the canal as much as 11 feet and
that from the property line to the seawall is 11 feet. The Smiths’ wall is supposed to be the shape
of his but it is not. He concluded by
stating this seems to be a reasonable and fair request and similar to everything
else that has been granted.
James Shepherd, attorney on behalf of Terry and Diane Smith,
addressed the Board to state the Smiths’ property is the property to the east
of the Tippetts. Mr. Shepherd stated
that his clients have not extended the property line and that the property line
was in existence when they bought the house back in 1984, over 30 years
ago. He displayed Exhibit E in his
packet of information (copy received and filed), which is a copy of the survey
that the Smiths received shortly before purchasing their property, and
describes how the Smiths bought the property with the seawall already
constructed. Mr. Shepherd pointed out
that several years later, the Smiths got a permit to build a boathouse and to
refurbish the seawall. He referred to
the survey being displayed and indicated a portion of the property that was
excavated out by the prior owners of the property so they could build a
seawall. He reiterated that the Smiths
have not done anything to unnaturally extend their shoreline. He added that Mr. O'Grady bought his house
with an existing boathouse.
Mr. Shepherd stated the reason this matter is different is
because of the way the lots were platted.
He displayed the aerial photo and indicated the property line for the
neighbor next door to the O'Gradys' boathouse.
He noted the boathouse doesn't really impact the neighbor's use of his
shoreline. He then indicated the
property line for the Smiths and explained how a boathouse put in the proposed
location would impact part of the Smiths' shoreline. Mr. Shepherd stressed that is why the Smiths
are objecting to the building of the boathouse that exceeds beyond the
Applicants' property line. He referred
to the aerial photo and indicated the Tippetts' property line and advised the
Smiths do not object if the boathouse is backed up further into the yard
because then that doesn't impact their use of the shoreline.
Mr. Shepherd discussed the 2006 Board of Adjustment decision and
stated that decision dealt with a dock; and more importantly, the Applicant at
the time had bought the property with an existing dock already on it. He referred to Exhibit D in the Agenda
Memorandum, which are the 2006 BCC minutes, and stated the Applicant clearly
advised Commissioner Morris that this would be a dock, not a boathouse. That was his concern at the time, that it
would stay a dock. He referred to
Exhibit E of the Agenda Memorandum, Decision on Appeal, and stated they reference
the fact that the Applicant had purchased the property with the existing boat
dock so they allowed a boat dock. The
drawing that is attached to Exhibit E clearly states "existing dock to be
re‑decked," not to build a boathouse. He believes this is different because the
boathouse is a structure and will impede more of the view than a dock
would.
Mr. Shepherd stated their position is that this is not a mirror
image. The next door neighbor,
Mr. O'Grady, had to excavate back into his property to make sure the
boathouse that was built did not unduly impact his neighbor and the same thing
should be required by Mr. Smith. Mr.
Shepherd referred to the letter from Mr. Solitro, where they claim
Mr. Solitro approved or had no objection to the variance, and advised that
is not what the letter says. It says he
has no objection to the variance but he does object to a boathouse being built
on his property and that is what the Applicant proposes to do.
Commissioner Carey pointed out that the letter objected to all
of these boathouses that have been built on his property. Chairman Horan stated they do understand that
the "punitive owner" of the canal has stated some kind of an
objection to all of these various structures that have been built in the canal
and the Board understands that may be the subject of either proposed or pending
litigation. Mr. Shepherd stated there
may have been some threats of litigation but he is not aware of any pending
litigation. He stated his clients, back
when they built their boathouse, did get approval from whoever owned the canal. Chairman Horan pointed out the crystalline issue
in front of the Board is whether the variance should be granted to the side
yard setback.
In rebuttal, Ms. Cichra stated she knows that the Smiths did not
artificially change the shoreline of their property; but the fact remains that
it is there. If the Smiths’ property was
sea-walled at their property line, it would 13 feet to 14 feet away from the
boathouse and there would be no obstruction.
Chairman Horan stated that what is obvious to everyone looking at this
is that the benefit of that particular fill is to the benefit of the Smiths'
property and probably not to the benefit of anybody else's.
Ms. Cichra stated if the Tippetts cannot build a boathouse, they
have by every right the ability to rebuild the dock and deck that were there,
which will cover most of that open area.
She pointed out that with regard to the slip, the Tippetts did excavate
back as far as the O'Gradys; so that has been done. They have excavated back in so the slip can
sit back in that area.
At Commissioner Carey's request, the Proposed Boathouse
illustration was displayed. She
questioned what the distance was from the pylon to the corner. Ms. Cichra stated they have a new survey but
it is still just a scale, so she estimated it would be three feet from the
pylon to the edge of the seawall. She
advised if the Tippetts rebuild what was there before and "deck" in
the whole area, it will trap trash underneath the deck. Having a boathouse there gives the area some
movement and keeps it from becoming completely stagnated and allows them to
clean it up and take the weeds and trash out.
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 and a Written Request Form were received and
filed.
Commissioner Carey noted that the variance is not from the
Smiths but is from the other side. The
most impacted person is Mr. O'Grady.
She stated this is at the end of a canal and is a mirror image of what
Mr. O'Grady is doing. She doesn't
see how it really impacts the Smiths although she understands they don't like
it. Commissioner Carey pointed out that
if the seawall was actually built on the Smiths' property line, there would be
plenty of room and they wouldn't be having this discussion. She believes the Smiths got the benefit of
having this seawall built there, whenever it was built; and now Mr. Tippett is
having the issue of trying to deal with a very unique shaped piece of property
at the end of the canal. She believes
that is the hardship for Mr. Tippett, trying to deal with that.
At Chairman Horan's request, Ms. Gibbs pointed out the Smiths'
boathouse on the aerial photo.
Commissioner Carey noted that the Smiths' property was not excavated
back to get to their property line, which would have left the canal more
open. She remarked that this is another
example of where a developer replatted lots without coming through the process
and they end up with odd shapes. In
looking at the survey, between Lots 24 and 25, which would be the Smiths and
the Tippetts, there is an overlap in the remnants of the lots that are all over
the place of the original plat. There
are a lot of platting issues.
Chairman Horan agreed that Commissioner Carey is raising a good
point. He stated in terms of the legal
requirements for this, one of the things that you look at is the special
conditions and circumstances which exist which are peculiar or particular to
the land that they are dealing with.
What they are dealing with here is a historical confluence of a number
of different things; replatting of property, a seawall being built into the
canal beyond the property line, and a number of different things which he
believes would augur in favor of the granting of the variance especially in
light of the fact that the variance only affects the side yard that is
contiguous to Mr. O'Grady and is not a variance that affects the property
of the Smiths in this situation. He
added that he does not mean to suggest that the Smiths do not have standing to
raise the issue; he is saying that it seems to him that the material fact here
is that the variance is granted contiguous to the property that is not
objecting to the variance. Commissioner
Carey stated she believes that is what creates the hardship and reiterated that
if the seawall was built on the property line, there wouldn't be a
hardship. If the plats hadn't been
replatted without a legal process, there wouldn't be a hardship. She believes there have been a lot of things
that have happened that have left this in an odd situation.
Chairman Horan stated one of the legal requirements is that the
conditions that exist were not the results of the actions of the
Applicant. He added in fact, the
conditions were not the result of any of the complainants in this particular
situation but are the result of the people who actually owned the Smiths'
property before.
Commissioner Constantine stated he hears the dialogue between
Commissioner Carey and Chairman Horan and pointed out that he could argue
either case. Since this is in his
district, he advised he looked at the Board of Adjustment and the appeal. He stated he believes the BOA hearing lasted
about two to two and a half hours.
Today, they have heard from three different homeowners although there
were a number of homeowners who were opposed to this. Commissioner Constantine stated the Tippetts
have the ability to build an 18.5‑foot dock as opposed to a 24‑foot
boathouse. He advised that being that
this is very close and that the Board of Adjustment spent more time than the
BCC has, he is inclined to uphold the Board of Adjustment’s decision and deny
the request.
Motion by Commissioner Constantine
to uphold the Board of Adjustment’s decision, thereby denying the request for a
side yard (west) setback variance from ten feet to zero feet for a boathouse in
the R‑1AA (Single Family Dwelling) district, and more particularly known
as 303 Brantley Harbor Drive. Chairman
Horan called for a second to the motion, without response, whereupon the motion died for lack of same.
Motion by
Commissioner Carey, seconded by Chairman Horan, to overturn the Board of
Adjustment’s decision, thereby granting the request for a side yard (west)
setback variance from ten feet to zero feet for a boathouse in the R‑1AA
(Single Family Dwelling) district, and more particularly known as 303 Brantley
Harbor Drive, as described in the proof of publication; Sheila Cichra,
Streamline Permitting, Inc., Appellant representing Kevin Tippett, Owner;
Approval Development Order.
Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Constantine voted NAY.
DISTRICT
COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS
District
1
Commissioner Dallari stated he believes they all received an
email (copy not received and filed) from Mr. Richard Nunis referencing a
public/private partnership. He explained
that the Board has talked about this in the past but unfortunately the price
points were over $1,000 per pound for cleanup of the Lake Jesup area through
Aquafiber. Now they are saying it is
less than $100 a pound for nutrient removal.
Commissioner Dallari requested
that staff research that and get back to the Board.
Ms. Guillet stated since receiving the email, staff has reached
out to Aquafiber to try and understand what they were looking for and try to
determine what sort of action is needed.
Commissioner Dallari stated he is not soliciting or approving anything;
he just wants to know what is going on.
He asked when Ms. Guillet believes the Board will hear something. Ms. Guillet stated she will get back with the
Commissioners this week.
Commissioner Constantine stated there is an alternative that he
believes they have discussed before.
Lake Jesup is so daunting that they could sit there for 40 years and
take out muck, phosphate and nitrates and nobody would see a whole lot of difference. He stated while he does not comprehend this
type of science, he does understand that Mr. Nunis and Aquafiber feel that they
have a product that works and they want to showcase that product.
Commissioner Constantine discussed a similar project in the 80s
when Altamonte Springs was trying to sell the Apricot Project. He wondered if they have collectively, as a
County, reached out to Aquafiber and asked what they would do as far as a
demonstration project in some of the smaller lakes to see that it works. Ms. Guillet stated Aquafiber has a mobile
unit that the County has talked to them about using in some instances. She pointed out that the County's watershed
management folks have had numerous conversations with them about different
options and different opportunities. She
is not sure where they are going with the latest proposal but she will provide
more information. Commissioner
Constantine stated he would like to see that proposed.
Commissioner Carey noted that Aquafiber actually had a demonstration
project on the shores of Lake Jesup. She
suggested that if it is still operating, Commissioner Constantine ought to go
take a look at it because it is clear water coming out. Commissioner Carey agreed that Lake Jesup is
possibly one of those lakes that unless someone goes in and dredges it, which
is not going to happen, and does some significant things to it, there is not
enough time in a lifetime to clear it up.
Commissioner Constantine stated he is looking more at a question
of marketing and public relations. He
remarked if you take that to a small lake in the backyard of citizens that live
there and see the physical results as opposed to a small portion of Lake Jesup,
he believes you would have more of a ground swell of people that want to use it
and try it and be part of it. They have
had discussions and he knows there are some test lakes that would work in
Seminole County, and he just wants the County to pursue that opportunity
potentially and see if they can get some people to see the results in their
backyards.
Commissioner Dallari suggested they have staff research the
issue and bring it back to the Board.
With the TMDL requirements, if they can get the price point as low as
possible, it may be something the County is interested in just for additional
information. He stressed that he is only
looking for additional information.
Chairman Horan stated he believes that is an excellent suggestion. He does not believe anyone ever contended
that the process didn't work. Everyone
saw the demonstration project on Lake Jesup, and the problem was the cost and
price point and the credits. He stated
that as far as this technology is concerned and having somebody from the
private sector that wants to be a willing partner, let's lend them a helping
hand and look at their technology just like they would look at the technology
of anybody else to see if there are applications within the County, either in
the public or private sector, to do it.
-------
Commissioner Dallari referred to an April 11, 2016, memo (copy
received and filed) from Tony Matthews which talks about the crossing or
potential crossing of the Econlockhatchee (Econ) River from a development south
of the county, Lake Pickett North, in Orange County. He stated he would like to talk about that
today and ensure that everyone is still opposed to that. He explained that when Commissioner Carey was
the chairman, she sent a couple of letters to the mayor of Orange County and he
believes Chairman Horan has as well.
There are some questions out there about how that project can move
forward. Commissioner Dallari emphasized
that he is totally opposed to crossing the river and would like to have that
stated. He thinks they need to send
another letter and send a copy to the St. Johns, DEP, Army Corps of Engineers,
Orange County, State of Florida, and even the City of Oviedo. He stated he has heard some mixed dialogue
from them and he wants to make sure they are on the same page as the Board and
would like to have the County Manager reach out to the City Manager of Oviedo
to ensure they understand all of the issues and what the County's standpoint is
as has been articulated in the past.
Discussion ensued with regard to previous letters.
Commissioner Carey advised that the discussion has been going on
for many years about the Econ. She knows
that the Board talked about it in a meeting and asked that MetroPlan look at
these developments and talk about what the impacts are on Seminole County. She pointed out that Commissioner Dallari has
asked, as well, that they look at McCulloch Road for improvements to McCulloch
Road that could relieve this.
Commissioner Dallari clarified that he did not say McCulloch Road but
rather said that region, not specifically McCulloch Road.
Commissioner Carey advised that she would like to understand
what that whole area looks like and how they are going to deal with the
traffic, which is what they asked Mr. Barley to look at. Chairman Horan requested that Ms. Guillet
describe what discussions are taking place with regard to MetroPlan on that.
Ms. Guillet advised that the Board should have gotten an updated
memo yesterday. She explained that staff
is monitoring the activity relative to development in that area pretty closely
and they have been trying to provide the Board with the most updated
information as they receive it. Ms.
Guillet stated a year ago the Board requested that MetroPlan take a look at
this issue because there are extra jurisdiction impacts with respect to
transportation improvements in Orange County, especially in this area. She advised that she met with Mr. Barley
about a month ago and he informed them that Orange County is undertaking a
larger transportation study in this area and it was Mr. Barley's understanding
that they would have a technical committee in which Seminole County would be
invited to participate. She stated they
talked about MetroPlan's potential role in that overall study.
Ms. Guillet advised that if Orange County is doing a study, it
does not make sense for MetroPlan to do a study as well. They are talking with MetroPlan about how
they might be engaged in a different way possibly dealing with some of the
extra jurisdictional impacts of any improvements in that area of Orange County
not only affecting Seminole County but perhaps affecting Brevard County. Ms. Guillet emphasized they are trying to get
their hands wrapped around what is happening.
She knows Orange County is looking at dealing with these transportation
issues and reviewing them very seriously.
They are providing the County with information as requested and the
County will continue to coordinate with Orange County. There are some policies in Seminole County’s
comprehensive plan and in Orange County's comprehensive plan relative to
crossings of the Econ that will have to be addressed for any activity that
might involve a crossing. There are some
mechanisms in place that address this within Orange County's own regulations. She stated they will continue working with
Orange County and working with MetroPlan; and as they have more information and
a more solid plan, they will bring that information forward. Ms. Guillet explained that she believes the
best that the County can do at this point is reiterate their concerns and just
remind Orange County that they are concerned and also coordinate with some of
the other affected entities such as the City of Oviedo. Discussion ensued with regard to the City of
Oviedo's vote to support the crossing of the Econ.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Carey, Ms. Guillet stated the
County restrains the crossing of the Econ by policy and added that Orange
County also does. Commissioner Carey
confirmed that unless the policy is changed, there will not be a crossing of
the Econ in Seminole County. She
expounded that unless the majority of the Board thinks that it is a good idea
to change the policy, they will not be crossing the Econ into Seminole
County. Chairman Horan pointed out that
it is in the comp plan. Commissioner
Dallari stated that for the record, it is also in the City of Oviedo's comp
plan. Chairman Horan stated he thinks
the City of Oviedo may want to nuisance its prior proclamation.
Commissioner Constantine stated the fact of the matter is they
are ignoring the fact of momentum here.
The momentum has been building on and on in Orange County to not only
cross the Econ but build right up against Seminole County's borders which is
clearly in opposition of where they see Chuluota and that area of Seminole
County with the Rural Boundary and everything else. He stated he understands that staff sent a
letter and did this and that; but continually, it seems that Seminole County is
being ignored. He does not see
changes. In fact, he sees more and more
aggression coming from Orange County to do this. He pointed out that Seminole County's
citizens are there all of the time trying to put in their "two-cents
worth" to say this is not what we want.
Commissioner Constantine stated they have to make a strong
stand. He emphasized that continuing to
send letters and staff going there is like looking in with their noses up
against the window pane but not being listened to. He stated this is not against Seminole County
staff but is what he sees to be momentum building slowing but surely over the
course of time that will allow this project and then use that as an excuse to
allow the crossing of the Econ. He
stressed that they, as a Commission, need to protect their citizens and take a
strong stance on this.
Chairman Horan stated that
again the issue is whether the Board should send a letter reiterating their
position.
Commissioner Dallari stated the reason he is bringing this up is
because on April 14, this project goes to the P&Z in Orange County. He wants to make sure they not just have
standing in the past, since this is a new application, but that they have staff
there to defend their standpoint and to articulate it into the record so Orange
County understands where Seminole County is.
Tony Matthews, Development Services, addressed the Board to
clarify that the Orange County’s P&Z meeting is on April 21, next
Thursday. Ms. Guillet added that there
is a community meeting tomorrow, April 13.
Commissioner Carey reminded everyone that the Board has sent a
strong message and not just by sending their staff. She pointed out that she, along with the
County Manager, met with Mayor Jacobs and with Orange County's Manager and
staff and then detailed those discussions.
Commissioner Carey stated the best way to put it on the record from
Seminole County's perspective is to rewrite that letter and have it read into
the record on behalf of the Seminole County Commission at their P&Z
meeting. She does not believe the facts
have changed and the Commission is still opposed to them coming right up to
Rural Boundary. She wants to have
transition and discussed that transition.
It was laid out for Orange County in that meeting and with the letter
that was read into the record. She
stated it isn't like they have had "their nose up against the
glass." They are pushing it as far
as they can because the Board only has authority here in this County, and all
they can do is try to appeal to their colleagues in Orange County.
Commissioner Carey pointed out that the responses from some of
those in Orange County have been pretty ugly, especially the district
commissioner. She explained that while
the Board can ask Orange County to work with them, that is all the Board can do
at this point. She believes they get a
lot more done by trying to work with them rather than telling them “this is
what you will do.” She noted they can
all reach out to their colleagues on the Orange County Commission because she
believes that has more impact than just trying to reach out to one district
commissioner.
Commissioner Constantine advised that as they continue to ask
them to look out for us and ask them to do this and ask them to do that, they
continue to move forward with what they are proposing. He agreed with Commissioner Carey in that
they have gotten some ugly responses, especially from the district
commissioner. The fact of the matter is
that the citizens of Seminole County as well as many of the citizens of Orange
County are very concerned about that development, and Seminole County has not
asked for a joint planning agreement before anything moves forward. Commissioner Carey advised that is not
correct. Chairman Horan stated for decades, Seminole County has tried to pursue
an agreement. He stated he has mentioned
it to representatives of Orange County, including the district commissioner,
dozens of times. Commissioner
Constantine pointed out they should continue to do it.
Chairman Horan suggested that they not just reiterate the fact
that it is policy and drafted into the County's comprehensive plan that they
not cross the Econ in Seminole County but also add to it that the time and
momentum at this particular time is ripe for serious addressing from a regional
planning point of view all of those transportation issues. He does not know why there is a problem
moving on what is known as the Crotty Expressway. He presumes Orange County is going to
seriously take a look at the East/West Corridor. Chairman Horan stated if the Board does not
mind, he would like the letter not to just be a strong reiteration of that
policy but also a further invitation for them to seriously engage with the
Board to address these mobility/connectivity issues so that they can ameliorate
the County's policies and their particular interests because so many of the
interests of the people in Orange County, especially in the eastern part of the
county, are consistent with the interests of the people in the eastern part of
Seminole County.
Commissioner Dallari agreed that they should not only repeat
what they have said but with a stronger message and bring up the two other
facts, the Richard Crotty Parkway as well as the comp plan issues and the
policy issues. He added that more
importantly, the bridge over the Econ would devastate not only Seminole
County's part of the county but Orange County's part as well.
Commissioner Dallari thinks it is important that they also have
been asking for the past year for a joint planning session. Commissioner Carey stated they have
officially asked for a joint planning agreement and what they got was a
consideration for looking at the comp plans and the land plans and aligning
those for protection.
Chairman Horan stated he will send a draft of the letter to each
of the Commissioners. Commissioner
Dallari advised this should all be read into the minutes at the P&Z meeting
on the 21st and there should be a staff member there to read it.
Commissioner Dallari stated they have all signed on the dotted
line regarding "How Shall We Grow" and this project is in direct
conflict with that. Commissioner Carey
pointed out that Seminole County is the only one that adopted any comprehensive
plan to affect that. Commissioner Henley
stated there was a committee set up in order to work jointly on that continuous
green area. He doesn't know whether the
committee is functioning or not.
Commissioner Carey stated she does not think anybody did anything with
"How Shall We Grow" except this County Commission.
Commissioner Dallari reiterated he would like the letter sent to
both St. Johns and DEP. He added that
they have been working to try and get a joint planning agreement with Orange
County for the past year. Chairman Horan
stated he thinks the time has come for them to seriously address not just
transportation and the environment but all of the other issues like
stormwater.
-------
Commissioner Dallari acknowledged that they have all talked
about transit in Seminole County, and in one of the work sessions they talked
about the "last mile" and getting people to and from the SunRail
station. He stated he would like to ask
the County Manager to reach out not just to MetroPlan but to the cities that
have one of these SunRail stations to talk about how they can partner with
either Mears or an organization like Mears to offset some of the costs using
District Directed Revenue (DDR) funds, which can only be used for premier
transit service. Commissioner Dallari requested that the County Manager reach out to
MetroPlan to see what the next step could be as well as LYNX and maybe Mears as
well to see how that can be moved forward with the cities that are
affected. No objections were voiced.
Discussion ensued with regard to DDR funds.
District
3
Commissioner
Constantine announced that he will be attending a meeting tonight regarding the
rest area along I‑4 at 6:00 p.m. at the Neighborhood Alliance Church on
Markham Woods Road. Commissioner Dallari
will also be attending. Commissioner
Constantine reported that the Altamonte Springs Women's Club had their 70th
Anniversary on April 6 and the County's Proclamation was well received.
District
4
Commissioner
Henley announced that beginning tomorrow the LYNX board will begin interviewing
the five finalists for the CEO job. He
added that they have some outstanding candidates and he believes they will
probably have it nailed down by Thursday.
District
5
Commissioner
Carey advised that she received a call from Diane Scaccetti, the CEO and
Executive Director of the Turnpike Authority, to confirm that they have decided
to step back from the “toll within a toll” express project on SR 417. She reported that Ms. Scaccetti said they are
not cancelling the project, just stepping back to evaluate it and look at other
projects that would have community support, and that they had some unusual
requests from their office. Commissioner
Carey stated she would suspect that is Frank Collins, the Governor's staff
person, who was asking a lot of questions about who should have the ownership
of these facilities and that type of information in an effort to continue to
have the discussion about who ends up with SR 417.
-------
Commissioner
Carey gave a brief update regarding the Orlando Sanford International
Airport. She requested that at the next
meeting they have a resolution or proclamation recognizing April as Aviation
Appreciation Month. That was a request
from the Airport Board. No objections were voiced.
-------
Commissioner Carey discussed her participation in the Midway
Safe Alarm campaign on Saturday, March 26, which was a partnership with the
firefighters and American Red Cross Home Fire Safety Program. She noted they installed over 300 smoke
alarms and 12 carbon monoxide detectors.
She thanked the firefighters, the Red Cross, and the volunteers that
came out to help and advised they hope to move the program to other communities
as well.
-------
Commissioner Carey discussed the candlelight vigil she attended
with Commissioner Dallari to bring awareness to child abuse in the
community. She announced there is a Kids
House event on Saturday night to raise money and awareness. Commissioner Carey reported that the Boy
Scout event that she has been doing with the Sheriff for many years was held
last Thursday and they raised over $24,000 for Scouting in Seminole County and
thanked everyone for their participation.
She stressed that all of those funds stay in Seminole County to provide
opportunities to young men that wouldn't have the opportunity otherwise.
District
2
Chairman Horan advised there have been discussions because the
Turnpike Authority needs certain approvals from the City of Oviedo and Seminole
County on the project that may have been deferred right now. One of those approvals generated a discussion
with regard to sound attenuation that is particularly of interest to people in
the Tuscawilla area along the proposed improvement. The residents have expressed an interest in
sound attenuation walls; however, what seems to be more effective in that
particular area is an appropriate buffering and foliage and swales and so
forth, which look better and are cheaper.
He stated he does not know where those discussions go now in light of
the fact that this project may not be going forward.
Commissioner Carey stated from the Expressway Authority's
standpoint, if they were to have the road, there is no need for expansion of it
at this time and possibly well into the future.
She added if they were the policy makers for that road, they would just
be building an additional lane; and landscaping and those kinds of things are
always a priority for buffering from the neighbors. She stated that as long as she is on the
Expressway Authority Board and it comes up, she will make that a known
fact. Chairman Horan stated he will make
sure he copies Commissioner Carey's office with any communications related to
those particular things.
-------
Chairman Horan reported that there is a strange situation in the Geneva area of either wild dogs or possibly coyotes attacking livestock. He pointed out that so far the conclusion is that it is wild dogs because of the nature of the attacks but they still don't have an answer for the problem. He described how the animal control people have been working with the people to try and figure out what is going on.
CHAIRMAN’S
REPORT
Chairman Horan stated he has two appointments that he would like to get confirmed.
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to appoint Matt Davidson to the Sanford Aviation Noise Abatement Committee.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Dallari, to appoint Jim Duby and reappoint Shannon Wetzel as the primary and alternate representatives respectively to Wekiva River System Advisory Management Committee.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Chairman Horan confirmed with the other Board members that they received the follow‑up (copy not received and filed) from the financial update and advised that if they have any questions, they can bring them up with staff.
-------
With regard to the Boys and Girls Clubs, Chairman Horan announced that for a number of years Seminole County has desired to replicate an evening event to supplement its Faces of the Future event, which is its primary fundraiser. He described last year's event and reported that this year's event will be at the Alaqua Country Club on June 4, 2016. He welcomed everyone to attend. Chairman Horan stated other good news regarding the Boys and Girls Clubs is that they are in serious discussions right now for the possibility of having a third Seminole County club in the Oviedo area.
-------
Chairman Horan questioned whether there is a Kittleson and Associates RFP going out regarding mobility and transportation. Ms. Guillet requested that Jean Jreij, Public Works Director, discuss that. Chairman Horan stated he knows this has been in the works for several months, and they have finally finalized the scope of work. Mr. Jreij addressed the Board to state they will be signing a work order next week to go ahead with it. Chairman Horan advised this was discussed months and months ago where the Board approved a study for a consultant to work with growth management and transportation finance strategies. This will be going out next month and Kittleson and Associates will be doing the report. Chairman Horan asked Mr. Jreij when the report will be back; Mr. Jreij stated it will take about six to eight weeks and that will give some options as to which way to go, with mobility or with the regular impact fees.
Chairman Horan stated it is going to address a number of different related and affiliated issues, not just mobility fee versus impact fee but also related issues that deal with the technologies that they all have been talking about and how they fit in.
-------
Chairman Horan advised that he attended the I‑4 Task Force meeting together with Commissioner Dallari and Commissioner Constantine that was led by Mayor Jacobs. He stated the Task Force decided to form a series of subcommittees; and he then discussed the first subcommittee, which will be a subcommittee that deals with revenue and financing resources and options.
-------
Chairman Horan confirmed with the Commissioners that they received a copy (copy not received and filed) of the follow‑up items from the March 22, 2016, BCC meeting and suggested if anyone has any questions, they can ask staff or the County Manager.
-------
Chairman Horan stated he would like to recognize a wonderful organization in Seminole County called the Beta Sigma Phi Sorority that has done some great work. Commissioner Carey stated she was a member for many years and they are going to be contacting her for a Proclamation. This is a women's service sorority which has been in existence since World War II. It is an international group with a local chapter here in Seminole County. Commissioner Carey stated she will forward the request for the Resolution when she gets it. Chairman Horan stated that without objections, they will do the Resolution.
-------
Chairman Horan reported on the Central Florida MPO Alliance meeting that he and Commissioner Constantine attended where there was a discussion concerning the coordination of the proposed improvements on SR 417 and how it coordinated with the work plan of CFX. He stated he was pleased to learn today the FTE (Florida Turnpike Enterprise) is rethinking going forward with that project.
COMMUNICATIONS AND/OR REPORTS
The following Communications and/or Reports
were received and filed:
1. Letter dated March 14,
2016, from Jeffrey R. Oakes, FDOT Project Oversite, to Government Partner re:
Construction Public Meeting on March 30, 2016, at 5:30-7:30 p.m. regarding
widening U.S. 17-92 between Shepard Road to Lake Mary Boulevard.
2. Notice dated March 21,
2016, from Donald W. Kinard, Chief, Regulatory Division, to Sir/Madame re:
Department of the Army Notification of Publication of Public Notice to
discharge 58.58 acres of clean fill material into waters for the widening and
alignment of State Road 46 from Old McDonald Road to Wekiva River Road, also
known as Wekiva Parkway Section 6.
3. Copy of a letter dated
March 23, 2016, from William L. Colbert, Colbert-Cameron Mitigation Bank, to
Tom Mings, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers re: Request for Withdrawal of
Mitigation Credits from Colbert-Cameron Mitigation Bank for Howell Creek
Project.
4. Copy of a letter dated
March 23, 2016, from D. Ray Eubanks, Administrator, Plan Review &
Processing, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, to Chairman Horan re:
Thanking Seminole County for submitting comprehensive plan amendments.
(Original letter transferred to Development Services.)
5. Letter dated March 31,
2016, from Kayla Meyer, Pro Bono Coordinator, Seminole County Bar Association
Legal Aid Society, Inc., to Commissioner Horan re: New free legal services for
low income constituents with housing matters.
COUNTY
MANAGER’S REPORT
Nicole Guillet, County Manager, announced that they have
tentatively set their Memorial Day celebration for Friday, May 27. Right now they have a working time of 11:00
a.m. and are trying to coordinate their efforts with the Sheriff's Office
because he typically does a ceremony the Friday before Memorial Day as well and
it is typically in the morning. She
noted the Sheriff's Office haven't finalized their plans yet but she would like
to immediately follow them since there are many people who want to attend both
events. Ms. Guillet reiterated that as
of now, the working time is 11:00 a.m. and she will let the Commissioners know
when that is finalized with respect to when the Sheriff may be doing his
ceremony as well.
Commissioner Carey pointed out that it was very warm last year
when the Sheriff was doing his ceremony; so hopefully, they will be starting
earlier in the morning and Seminole County will be prepared, if the event is at
11:00, with putting up shade structures for public. Ms. Guillet advised they have a little more
latitude this year since last year they did the event on Memorial Day and there
were a lot of other competing events that day.
She stated they will keep the event as early in the day as they can.
Chairman Horan noted that can be coordinated depending on how
late they go. If they start at 10:00 or
10:30, the County could try to fit theirs in before because they are actually
doing it in a different location and will have shade available.
-------
Commissioner Carey asked Ms. Guillet where they were on the
"space plan" and getting that started so they know how much planning
they need to do. Ms. Guillet indicated
Ms. Lung is working with Mr. Jreij in Public Works to try to put together a
whole game plan for what they need to do to get a plan put together for Five
Points with the "space plan" being one of the first things that needs
to be accomplished. She stated she hopes
in the next couple of weeks she will be able to give the Board a timeline and
outline of what all of the steps are as staff sees them and to discuss that
with each of the Commissioners to see if there is anything that they are
missing and whether they are heading in the right direction.
Commissioner Carey stated they need to be looking at the
Sheriff's space as part of that because the Public Safety building needs to be
analyzed as far as space planning. Ms.
Guillet stated they have been in conversations with the Sheriff over the last
year about what their long‑term needs are and that will be part of the
discussion.
Chairman Horan asked Ms. Guillet if she wanted to talk about the
budgeting program and the CIP as far as Facilities and the space and how that
is going to be melded into the budgeting process. Ms. Guillet explained that with respect to
Facilities, the long‑term Five Points plan will be a factor in how they
proceed with a longer range CIP plan for Facilities. She noted their investments might be
different if they decide they are absolutely going to make the move to Five
Points. Ms. Guillet advised that with
regard to the CIP and planning with respect to sales tax, this year she will be
working with the Board a little differently on the CIP for the sales tax
projects than they have done in the past.
They would like this year's CIP program to be a prioritization of
projects from the Board with respect to the sales tax and also to provide a
more definitive timeline as to when they can expect activity with each
respective project. They have had a more
generalized CIP in the past that addressed sales tax projects, and they want
something to be a little more definitive, and they want to give the Board and
the public an idea of what they can expect to occur each year with respect to
the sales tax projects. She added that will
involve the Commissioners working with staff to prioritize the long list that
they had of projects related to the sales tax and ranking them with respect to
priority and timing as well as discussing other projects that they may need to
consider. Chairman Horan explained they
will be integrating that CIP process more with the budgeting process than they
have in the past.
Commissioner Dallari stated he understands that but there was a
commitment that a lot of projects were supposed to be done this year. Ms. Guillet stated she is talking about the
third gen sales tax projects.
Commissioner Dallari stated that is what he is talking about. Ms. Guillet stated they have projects that
were in the mix for that. Their focus
right now is wrapping up first and second gen projects. She pointed out they haven't had historically
a whole lot of discussion about sales tax projects during the budgeting
process. They have given the Board a CIP
in the past and would like the Board to be more engaged during the budgeting
process with respect to setting priorities and setting schedules for when they
want to tackle each of the different projects that were listed as sales tax
initiatives.
Commissioner Dallari stated they still have to do the annual
report and asked if it is correct that that is still scheduled for July. Ms. Guillet responded correct. She added that Mr. Jreij is scheduling
quarterly reports to give the Board updates on a more frequent basis as to
where they are with different sales tax projects.
Commissioner Carey stated she thinks one of the credible pieces
that is needed is just because a project is starting doesn't mean that someone
will see activity. So what the public
wants to know is when are they actually getting the job done. She offered an example of Southwest
Road. Commissioner Carey stated they
have to have some type of estimate of when construction will start so that the
people are not expecting to see people out there showing up because the County says
they have a project. Ms. Guillet stated
that is exactly what they want to provide.
They want to provide a schedule for design, any acquisition that is
necessary, and construction.
Chairman Horan stated what really generated the desire to
integrate that process with a little more surgical exactitude was the fact that
it became apparent when they did the first work session on the sales tax that
what the staff understood and what was being communicated to the Board was not
the same. Chairman Horan stated it was
very apparent to the County Manager and she came up with the idea and he thinks
it is a really good process and is going to make the Commissioners better
communicators to their constituents and make the staff better communicators to
the Commissioners by doing the process this way. Ms. Guillet emphasized that they really want
to be transparent with respect to how they are managing the sales tax funds.
Ms. Guillet stated they will get a schedule and an outline
together for not just the "space plan" but all of the elements that
they think they need to undertake with respect to the long‑range plan for
Five Points. Chairman Horan discussed
some of the other aspects for doing it this way. He pointed out that if you don’t integrate
that process with your budgeting process, you either don’t know or you don’t
have the ability to communicate with the constituents in a way that is
positive.
Commissioner Carey stated that back when times were good and the
Board started setting this up with the Facility money and several other
categories, they were putting several million dollars a year away for those
projects and programs. She pointed out
that when times got tough, they stopped doing that and she understands that is
also coming back this year. Ms. Guillet
stated they would like to do that especially with respect to Fleet and
Information Technology.
-------
There being no further business to come before the Board, the
Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m., this same date.
ATTEST:______________________Clerk_____________________Chairman
ks/js