BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
OCTOBER 9, 2001
The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held at 9:34 a.m. on Tuesday, October 9, 2001, in the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.
Chairman Dick Van Der Weide (District 3)
Vice Chairman Randy Morris (District 2)
Commissioner Grant Maloy (District 1) (Late)
Commissioner Carlton Henley (District 4)
Commissioner Daryl McLain (District 5)
County Manager Kevin Grace
County Attorney Robert McMillan
Deputy Clerk Sandy McCann
The Invocation was given by Pastor Stephen Binkley, Grace United Methodist Church, Lake Mary.
County Attorney, Robert McMillan, led the Pledge of Allegiance.
AWARDS & PRESENTATIONS
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Henley to approve Certificates of Appreciation to the following outgoing members of the Sick Leave Bank Review Committee: Ira Barrow, Bill Gregory, Diane Eswine, Don McKenna, and Evelyn Santos.
Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
The Board presented the Certificates to the members.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Morris to approve proposed settlement relating to Parcel #120.3 of the Sanford Avenue road improvement project, located at the corner of Sanford Avenue and Rose Drive, in the amount of $5,413.95 inclusive of attorney’s fees and costs, Counelis property.
Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Maloy entered the meeting at this time.
County Manager, Kevin Grace, advised of add-on, #38A, requesting confirmation of Robert Frank as Deputy County Manager.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Henley to approve and authorize the following:
10. Approve acceptance of grant award from Environmental Protection Agency (EMPACT Grant No. R-82932001-0) in the amount of $351,700; and authorize Chairman to sign Letter, as shown on page _______, authorizing and appointing Mark Flomerfelt as the certifying official for reimbursement and report actions for the EPA Grant Program Award No. R-82932001-0, grant agreement letter, and Form 4700-4.
11. Approve acceptance of grant award from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Grant No. EMW-2001-FG-06887 in the amount of $42,490; and authorize Chairman to sign Letter, as shown on page ________, authorizing and appointing Chief Terry Schenk as the certifying official for reimbursement and report actions for FEMA’s Firefighters Grant Program Award No. EMW-2001-FG-06887.
12. BCR #01-141 – $40,000 – Judicial – Court Appointed Counsel – Fund: 00100 – General Fund. Request transfer of funds to adequately cover year-end expenditures for Court Appointed Counsel.
13. BCR #02-1 – $150,000 – Community Services – Administration – Fund: 00100 – General Fund. On August 14, 2001 the BCC approved emergency mosquito spraying. A medical alert has been declared in Seminole County, necessitating an increase of $150,000 for services related to mosquito control. Transfer is from General Fund reserves.
14. Board authorization to schedule and advertise a public hearing for the purpose of reestablishing the budgets for previously approved capital projects and other specific items and to establish appropriate budgets for the new infrastructure sales tax. The budget amendment request represents various funds. Its purpose is to carry forward FY 2000/01 budgeted funds into FY 2001/02 for specific items or projects that were not completed in FY 2000/01, and to establish CIP project budgets from the rebudgeted projects in the Finance accounting system. Date requested for public hearing is October 23, 2001 at 1:30 p.m.
15. Award FC-1159-01/BJC Contract, as shown on page _______, Lake Mary Boulevard – Phase III and East Lake Mary Boulevard – Segment I, to Bergeron Land Development, Inc., Kissimmee ($7,993,947.35).
16. Accept and authorize the Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion, as shown on page ________, for FC-1124-00/BJC - Lake Mary Blvd./Bear Gully Road - 2000 Water Main Extension with Prime Construction Group Inc., Orlando.
17. Accept and authorize the Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion, as shown on page _______, for FC-1128-00/BJC - Midway Community Center Repairs with R. L. Haines Construction, Inc., Winter Park.
18. Approve ranking list for PS-591-01/BJC – Construction Engineering and Inspection Services for Greenwood Lakes/Heathrow Water Transmission Main & Reclaimed Water Main project, authorize staff to negotiate and award a Contract, as shown on page _______, to Inwood Consulting Engineers, Inc., Orlando (Not-to-Exceed $250,000).
19. Approve Amendment #1, as shown on page _______, to PS-501-97/BJC – Construction Engineering and Inspection Services for C.R. 427 – Phases III and IV project, with Earth Tech Consulting, Inc., Orlando ($177,606.38).
20. Approve Amendment #1, as shown on page ________, to PS-524-98/BJC – Construction Engineering and Inspection Services for Grantline Road project, with AB/G&R, Orlando ($123,637.00).
21. Approve the First Renewal to RFP-488-00/BJC – Marketing Consulting Services for Seminole County, with Bennett & Company, Orlando (Not-to-Exceed $190,000.00) (October 26, 2001 through October 25, 2002).
22. Approve Amendment #2 to M-168-00/BJC – Child Protection Team services, to Orlando Regional Healthcare System, Child Protection Team, Orlando (Not-to-Exceed $32,000.00 per year), as shown on page __________.
23. Approve the appointment of the following employees: Algerine Miller, Stephanie Kobrin, Pat Fergerson, David Santiago, and Carol Hunter to the Sick Leave Bank Review Committee.
29. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute a Subrecipient Agreement, as shown on page ________, with The Center for Affordable Housing, Inc., for the provision of Transitional Housing for abused spouses.
31. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute School Window Protection Agreement, as shown on page _______, between the State Department of Community Affairs and Seminole County.
32. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2001-R-176, as shown on page ________, and authorize Chairman to execute a Local Agency Program Agreement (LAP), as shown on page _______, with the Florida Department of Transportation to construct the Connector Trail between the I-4 Trail Overpass to Rinehart Road.
33. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute two Temporary Access and Construction Easements, as shown on page _______, (1) HIBC 1001 LLC to Seminole County, and (2) HIBC Development Company to Seminole County, for property necessary to access and construct the I-4 Trail Overpass.
34. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute the Seminole County and City of Winter Springs Transportation Plan Interlocal Agreement, as shown on page _______, relating to funding of design through construction of certain City streets including the construction and maintenance of the Tuskawilla Road Stamped Asphalt Project.
38a. Confirm appointment of Robert D. Frank as Deputy County Manager, effective November 5, 2001.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris to approve and authorize the following:
1. Expenditure Approval Lists, as shown on page ________, dated September 18 & 25, 2001; and Payroll Approval List, as shown on page _______, dated September 13, 2001.
2. Chairman to execute Satisfactions of Judgment for $40 Public Defender Application Fees for Aaron Kenneth Howard, Case #98005570MMA and Diane White, Case #00003254CFA.
3. Chairman to execute Satisfactions of Judgment for Court Costs for Christopher Dea Budny & American Bankers Ins. Co. - $1,538; and Tyesha Grant & Lexington National Ins. Co. - $1,038.
4. Approval of Official Minutes dated September 11, 12 and 18, 2001.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s “received and filed”:
1. The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s “received & filed”: Letter From Gary Moyer, Manager, Dovera Community Development District to Maryanne Morse, Clerk of Circuit Court and Kevin Grace, County Manager, relating to Fiscal Year 2002 meeting dates.
2. Letter from Debbie Newton, Management Review Specialist, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services, to All Clerks of Circuit Court relating to Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity.
3. Letters to Mike Hattaway, Chairman of Board of Adjustment, from Lonnie Groot, Stenstrom, McIntosh, Colbert, Whigham & Simmons, relating to Appeal of Interpretation of Land Development Code; Home Occupation.
4. Work Orders #13, #15 and #16, as shown on page _______, to FC-1139-00.
5. Work Order #6, as shown on page _______, to PS-557-00.
6. Work Orders #34, #35 and #36, as shown on page _______, to PS-522-98.
7. Work Order #1, as shown on page ________, to PS-590-01.
8. Work Orders #14 and #15, as shown on page ________, to PS-356.
9. Work Order #6, as shown on page _______, to PS-574-00.
10. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #20 to PS-538-99.
11. First Amendment, as shown on page ________, to Work Order #13 to PS-555-00.
12. Third Amendment, as shown on page ________, to Hazardous Waste Disposal, Bid #207-98.
13. First Amendment, as shown on page ________, to Work Order #5 to FC-1139-00.
14. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #3 to PS-572-00.
15. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #5 to PS-586-01.
16. M-255-01 Consultant Services Agreement, as shown on page _______, McCullough and Associates.
17. M-261-01 Appraisal Services Agreement, as shown on page _______, Diversified Property Specialists.
18. First Amendment, as shown on page ________, to Work Order #8 to PS-145.
19. M-259-01 Engineering Services Agreement, as shown on page _______, Professional Engineering Consultants.
20. Change Order #1, as shown on page _______, to FC-1142-00.
21. Change Order #1, as shown on page _______, to FC-1149-01.
22. Memorandum from Gary Johnson, Public Works Director, to BCC submitting an updated Public Works Capital Projects Map Book FY 01/02.
23. Bids for FC-1163-01, as shown on page _______.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner McLain, to approve and authorize the following:
44. Ratify the approval of Grant Application, as shown on page _______, to the Florida Department of Transportation for the Seminole County DUI Enhancement renewal project; and authorize the Chairman/Vice Chairman to execute associated grant documents.
45. Authorize expenditure in the amount of $1,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to contribute to Sheriff’s Office Explorer Post 517.
46. Authorize expenditure in the amount of $1,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to contribute to the Boys and Girls Club of Central Florida, West Sanford Branch.
47. Authorize expenditure in the amount of $1,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to contribute to Brothers Keepers, Inc.
48. Authorize expenditure in the amount of $2,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to provide funding in support of the 2001 Red Ribbon Campaign.
49. Authorize expenditure in the amount of $1,000 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to contribute to the New Hope Center.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Economic Development Director, Rob Nixon, addressed the Board to present request for approval to provide a $20,400 economic development incentive award to B2B Brands Group, LLC (T. Shipley), a mail order catalog company expansion project. He advised T. Shipley is located in Altamonte Springs and employs 25 people and anticipates $10 million in sales this year. It is an umbrella company of B2B Brands Group LLC, which has two other divisions located in Chicago and New Jersey. They wish to consolidate all three divisions to one location and house their corporate headquarters together. The project would require an additional 50,000 square feet and a total of 68 new jobs would be created because of the relocation/expansion.
Tracy Grygiel, EDC of Mid-Florida, addressed the Board to advise the City of Altamonte Springs did approve a matching award of $20,400 on September 4, 2001. She stated that New Jersey is also under consideration for relocating the business. She introduced Tom Shipley and Toni Vanelli from T. Shipley to the Board.
Tom Shipley addressed the Board to express his appreciation to the Board for putting this item on the agenda. He stated his roots are here in Central Florida and he is excited about the prospect of expanding his company.
Commissioner Maloy questioned how many of the new 68 jobs will be filled by moving people down from New Jersey and Chicago and how many will be new positions.
Mr. Shipley advised there will be about four people moving down and the remainder of the positions will be filled from people here.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Nixon advised the staff realizes that there is no “bricks and mortar” for this project, but the company does expect to make a $1 million capital investment, which does meet the requirement for the JGI Program.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to adopt appropriate Resolution #2001-R-173 as shown on page _______, recognizing B2B Brand Group, LLC (T. Shipley) as a Qualified Targeted Industry; and to approve an economic development inventive award (JGI) of $20,400 to match the award approved by the City of Altamonte Springs to participate in the State’s Qualified Targeted Industries Tax Refund Program (QTI), contingent upon reauthorization of Seminole County’s JGI Program.
Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Maloy voted NAY.
David Medley, Community Services, addressed the Board to present staff’s recommendation regarding distribution of the Community Service Agency Funds. He stated staff worked under the Board’s directive to retain the same amount of funding ($1,168,000) as last year. He advised that Mary’s Shelter did request that their application be removed from consideration because they have not obtained their license. Funding is recommended for three new agencies - Good Samaritan Home of Sanford, Special Olympics and Harvest Time International. Staff also recommends elimination of the following agencies from last year: Mary’s Shelter (withdrawn application), Tajiri Arts (under United Arts program), Volunteer Enterprises of Seminole County (application did not meet deadline), and GoldenRule Housing (due to scoring process).
Commissioner Henley stated he believes staff greatly improved this process. Commissioner Maloy concurred.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Henley to accept staff’s recommendation for distribution of the Community Service Agency Funds in the amount of $1,168,000; and authorize the Chairman to execute Contracts, as shown on page _______, with approved agencies.
Under discussion, Commissioner Morris commended staff for their work on this. He questioned why the SWOP funding was reduced by $1,500.
Mr. Medley explained that staff approached this by holding the line on the amount of funding expended last year. Because they were $3,000 over, they took $1,500 away from the two lowest scoring agencies. Those were SWOP and the Seminole Volunteer Program.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. Medley advised Mary’s Shelter did not receive funds allocated for them last year because they did not obtain a license. That money was part of cash forward in the budget.
Commissioner McLain stated he would suggest the Board fully fund those two agencies. Whereupon, Commissioner Maloy stated he would not be opposed to that.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris to amend the main motion by adding funding in the amount of $1,500 each to SWOP and Seminole Volunteer Program.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley stated the fact that he will be voting against this amendment does not mean he is against the organizations; but the $3,000, as part of cash forward, has already been budgeted.
The amendment to the motion was voted upon and carried with Districts 1, 2, 3 and 5 voting AYE, and Commissioner Henley voting NAY.
The main motion, as amended, was then voted upon and carried with Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voting AYE.
Mr. Medley advised, for the Record, that change will come from the General Fund.
Director of Fiscal Services, Cindy Hall, addressed the Board to advise Moody’s Investor Services has upgraded the County’s sales tax rating to an AA-3. She requested direction with regard to refunding of Local Option Gas Tax Bonds, Series 1992A.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Morris to proceed with the development of the forward refunding of Local Option Gas Tax Bonds, Series 1992A; and to select Solomon Smith Barney as Senior Manager.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Colleen Rotella, Manager, addressed the Board to request approval of land donation by Dan Silvestri for the Natural Lands Program. She advised the County has been approached by Mr. Silvestri offering the donation of approximately 28.4 acres of land adjacent to the Spring Hammock Preserve. In exchange for the property, they are requesting the County place a plaque on the site to commemorate the donation in memory of Paola Silvestri. They also are asking the County to cover all costs associated with closing the donation including payment of back taxes in the amount of $26,000, and to provide an appraisal of the fair market value of the property for use in tax preparation.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Ms. Rotella advised 50% of the property is wetlands.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Henley to approve Land Donation Agreement, as shown on page _______, between Seminole County and Dan Silvestri for donation of approximately 38.4 acres to the Natural Lands Program.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Purchasing Manager, Ray Hooper, and Fire Chief Terry Schenk, addressed the Board to present request for direction with regard to the EMS billing function. Mr. Hooper stated that the contract with Medical Claims Processing Group (MCPG) expires on November 13, 2001. During the contract, the performance of MCPG has been less than satisfactory due to the collection rate accomplished by the contractor. The Public Safety staff has taken steps over the past year to assist MCPG in their efforts in order to enhance revenue collection. The revenues subsequently improved. An RFP was advertised and the three responses were received. Only one proposal, Advanced Data Processing, Inc., meets the County’s requirements. He said the staff is seeking Board direction as to whether to proceed to award the contract to ADP or to bring this process in-house, which would require hiring two staff members and procuring appropriate billing software.
Chief Schenk explained that when the County took over the ambulance service, they did not have experience in billing and, therefore, contracted that service out. However, after four years, staff has learned how the process works, and has “bird-dogged” the current provider to try to increase the collection rate. He said County staff is actually doing the work the billing company is supposed to do.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Grace advised he directed staff not to bring this to the Board until the bid process was complete.
Commissioner Henley stated he has not seen the RFP and he questioned if the bid specifies exactly what the services are. He also questioned what policy or procedures does the County have to take this function over. He added that he is unwilling for the County to take this over until those policies and procedures are in place and there is an audit trail.
Mr. Grace advised the current contract expires in the middle of November. He said if the Board opts to bring this function in-house, staff will come up with detailed procedures on how they are going to operate.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated it appears there is no incentive or requirement in the contract for the provider to follow up with a second and third party. He said that he does not see how the provider can do this at the current rates.
Commissioner Maloy stated this was designed for failure. He said he believes the problem was in charging a flat fee to send out a bill; and before this is brought in-house, he wants to look at combining collections and billing together, and see what the marketplace brings.
Commissioner McLain stated that he is shocked that he was not aware of the lower collections before now. He said last year the collection rate was 32%.
Commissioner Morris stated the company should have been fired and the contract should have been suspended. He said he sees this as a management oversight and believes the Board should have been made aware of this last year. He added that he does not believe the report is comprehensive. He stated he believes the Board needs to see more information on this. He questioned what happens if the Board does not complete this process in a month before the current contract expires.
Mr. Hooper advised it is staff’s desire not to renew the contract, but they can ask for an extension.
Commissioner Morris stated the Board has been put in a box because there is a short timeframe to make this decision.
Mr. Grace stated there is an RFP, but staff believes they can bring this in-house and do a better job.
Commissioner Henley stated he wants to see the proposal that was submitted and see exactly what they are going to do. He also wants to make sure staff has done a good job of checking references.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated he would like to know whether ADP can bring in some of the past due collectibles.
Commissioner McLain stated he is opposed to the County taking this function over.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Commissioner Henley stated he would not be opposed to staff responding to the Board’s questions at the next meeting; however, the Board is up against the wall as far as time is concerned.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner McLain to direct staff to proceed with Advanced Data Processing, Inc. (ADP), including as part of the contract, negotiations on outstanding collections; and to direct staff to come back at the next meeting with additional information pertaining to staff’s proposal to bring the EMS billing function in-house.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner McLain, to authorize the filing of proofs of publication for this meeting’s scheduled public hearings.
District 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Continuation from September 11, 2001 and September 25, 2001 of a public hearing to consider the release of a 2.8-acre portion of an approximate 246-acre conservation easement located off Sweetwater Island Circle in the Sweetwater PUD, David Stimmell.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated the Board will not hear public input and this hearing was continued pending further review. Commissioner McLain noted that the Board had the public meeting at the previous Board meeting.
Chairman Van Der Weide passed the gavel to the Vice Chairman for the purpose of making a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to deny the release of a 2.8-acre portion of an approximate 246-acre conservation easement located off Sweetwater Island Circle in the Sweetwater PUD, Sections 29 and 32, Township 20 South, Range 29 East; as described in the proof of publication, David Stimmell.
Under discussion, Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he had been leaning in favor of granting this request but after he saw some brochures with this home and it is in the development he lives in. The area he bought in didn’t have a lot of assurances that this area has. The flyer that sold the public on purchasing in this area and building a home clearly stated the number of homes and the fact it was going to be gated and in actuality they already have one more home than what they promised. He said, based on advice of the County Attorney, the information he received is that this is not going to be a wide-open access to anyone. He asked the County Attorney to expound on this.
County Attorney, Robert McMillan, addressed the Board to state his understanding is that this is a conservation easement and there is nothing in the easement that grants access. He said there is no right to access across the property and it is the property owner’s property.
Commissioner Henley stated he will support the District Commissioner recommendation because he thinks it was clearly the intent that there be open space all along. The brochure spelled out the number of houses to be built. That was additional reassurance that there was no error committed and, therefore, the Board is not justified in making the change.
Vice Chairman Morris stated the record of the prior meeting will be kept, and he has received numerous correspondences that will be kept as a part of the permanent record. He pointed out at the last meeting there was a point of contention over the fire and emergency access to this parcel. He said Commissioner Van Der Weide and Mr. McMillan have clearly outlined that the Board is not getting into any public access or homeowner access issue.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
The gavel was returned to Commissioner Van Der Weide to resume the duties of Chairman.
Written Comment Form from Diana McConnell was received and filed.
VACATE AND ABANDON/CHARLES AYERS/
WOODROW COMMUNITIES, INC.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider vacating and abandoning approximately eight square feet of a 15’ drainage easement on Lot 41 in the Alaqua Lakes Phase II Subdivision; property located on the north side of Winding Pine Trail within the Alaqua Lakes development, Charles Ayers/Woodrow Communities, Inc., received and filed.
Ian Ratliff, Development Review, addressed the Board to state the applicant is trying to clear up the title for their home. He said staff recommends approval of the vacate.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to adopt Resolution #2001-R-172, as shown on page _______, vacating and abandoning approximately eight square feet of a 15’ drainage easement on Lot 41 in the Alaqua Lakes Phase II Subdivision; property located on the north side of Winding Pine Trail within the Alaqua Lakes development; as described in the proof of publication, Charles Ayers/Woodrow Communities, Inc., with staff recommendations.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider Ordinance reauthorizing the Seminole County’s Jobs Growth Incentive Program (JGI), received and filed.
Rob Nixon, Economic Development Manager, and DCM Sally Sherman addressed the Board to present the request for reauthorization. Mr. Nixon gave a PowerPoint presentation on the JGI Program, reviewing the Goals and Objectives; Program Requirements; Program Participants; Program Impact; and Conclusion.
Commissioner Henley said they commonly refer to “brick and mortar” and if that is true, that ought to occur somewhere in the Resolution that “brick and mortar” is a key factor. He said it is not addressed that one of their major criteria or concerns is actual construction of plants and buildings. He pointed out this is not in the Resolution or Ordinance. He asked does the Board want to include that to make sure that future boards want to maintain that as consideration.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated that has always weighed heavily with the Board and was a selling point.
Commissioner Maloy said he thinks the last two projects have not had “bricks and mortar” so they are getting away from that. He thinks it is wrong for government to be handing out payments to certain specified industries. When this program was started in 1991 and it was true there was going to be a cost vs. benefits analysis done. He’s not aware of what happened, but the Board never sees the cost of the equation. He asked whatever happened to the idea of looking at the cost and benefits analysis, such as schools, roads and utilities.
DCM Sally Sherman stated she was a part of the original team that worked on the program and the ordinance before the Board is the original one with modifications and did not specifically say “bricks and mortar,” but that was the emphasis placed because the initial targeted area was the Lake Mary, I-4 corridor where there was going to be “bricks and mortar” and they looked at what “bricks and mortar” was going to add to the tax base and to the school system. The exact formula is still used even if the project is not “bricks and mortar” new structures. She said emphasis was placed, but staff also had the commitment to insure they were able to retain the small businesses and help them to grow within the area.
Chairman Van Der Weide discussed with Mr. Grace and staff economic incentives approved that did not involve bricks and mortar. Chairman Van Der Weide stated he has supported every initiative they have had but he is hoping they are not wandering too far away with the taxpayers’ money. He wants to give staff the sentiment of the Board on how they approach these things. They are more interested in making a deal that makes sense with the money than just making a deal.
Mr. Nixon advised Commissioner Maloy that he thinks staff does a good job to analyze the projected return on investments. They also make sure the companies provide an annual report of the jobs they created, retained, and other forms of capital investments made over time.
Commissioner Morris stated he concurs with Commissioners Henley and Van Der Weide. He thinks the Board has been a very good steward over the program. “Bricks and mortar” became a new emphasis over time. The issue is relative to what the return on investment is and the numbers are clear. These are basically tax rebates. The taxpayers wouldn’t earn the money if the businesses didn’t come. Regarding growth, he said they have impact fees for everything the businesses affect except schools. These things are supposed to pay their way. He would second the motion if Commissioner Maloy wants to review the impact fee structure. He said in the American system businesses do pay their way, and the whole goal has been to relieve the homeowner’s debt burden. He thinks this has been a phenomenal success story. He believes that “bricks and mortar” becomes more important during these times and he believes that language needs to be inserted. He thinks an appropriate amendment would be with language that shows wherever/whenever an appropriation should be made, projects will be given special consideration for “bricks and mortar.”
Commissioner McLain said he thinks it is important they maintain a certain amount of flexibility because many times they may have projects come forward that have State or City grants that require the County’s participation. He would hate to think the Board’s interpretation about “bricks and mortar” would preclude them considering these programs.
Commissioner Henley thanked Commissioner McLain for making the point that “bricks and mortar” should not be the overriding factor. He said if they are not careful, they can use up all their resources on some of these projects and fail to zero in on areas of the County they have really wanted to do something about. His main concern is the 17-92 corridor and if they can do something to revitalize the 13-mile stretch there.
Commissioner Maloy stated this is not a tax rebate program. He said one concern he has is where various cities get caught in competing wars with one another. He said it would be very easy for businesses to close offices around the country and open up new ones. He hopes staff will be careful they are not being used as players in a shell game like that.
Mr. Grace pointed out that on page 5 of the ordinance there is reference to “bricks and mortar.” Whereupon, Commissioner Henley said if that statement could be moved up into the minimum criteria of the ordinance instead of as an after thought, that would be better.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner McLain, to approve reauthorization of the Seminole County’s Job Growth Incentive Program by adoption of Resolution #2001-R-171 as shown on page _______, and adoption of Ordinance #2001-40, as shown on page _______, as amended with language referencing bricks and mortar under minimum criteria; as described in the proof of publication.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley affirmed with Commissioner McLain that this is not mandatory but is one of the criteria.
Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Maloy voted NAY.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider adoption of Ordinance accepting the new Commission District boundaries required under Florida Statutes and as shown in Exhibit 1 and described in Exhibit 2, received and filed.
Al Hill, GIS, addressed the Board for presentation of the request.
The Commissioners discussed the effective date of the Ordinance with Mr. McMillan.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to adopt Ordinance #2001-41, as shown on page _______, accepting the new Commission District boundaries required under Florida Statutes and as shown in Exhibit 1 and described in Exhibit 2; with an effective date of December 15, 2001, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman Van Der Weide asked for approval to direct staff to research the possibility of the County’s needs regarding regulating cyber-based businesses. He asked if they could at least have Planning Director Don Fisher and the County Attorney do research and report back to the Board.
Commissioner McLain said he thinks it is appropriate to look into what’s being done across the country with Internet trade and cyberspace type activities. The Board had a brief discussion.
The consensus of the Board was approval for Chairman Van Der Weide’s direction to staff as requested.
Chairman Van Der Weide discussed the County Manager’s evaluation. He said in a lot of cases, based on counties of similar size and population, the County Manager is making considerable less, but in these economic times he feels the most he can recommend is a 6.75% raise bringing the County Manager’s salary up to $129,138. He said this would keep it within the 6% range. Hopefully, next year the Board will have a chairman who sees fit, if Mr. Grace does a comparable job, to raise him up again.
Commissioner Morris stated last year when the Board hired Mr. Grace he was brought in at a very low range of the scale and they knew it was one they would give him a little time on they were going to try to phase him in to what realistically a CEO of his type should be making. He said the City of Altamonte Springs alone pays $120,000 salary; and with the County’s population over 360,000, a budget over $400,000,000, and over 1,000 personnel, they need to show people, particularly the County Manager and people underneath him, that the Board does reward in scale and brings the salary along as it should be. He said when you look at the range chart, it seems the amount should be more in the $130,000 to $132,000 range to bring Mr. Grace where he should be. That is still below Osceola County, which is a county less than half the size of Seminole County.
Commissioner McLain stated he thinks this is not just a salary increase but also a salary adjustment for the position and not just a typical annual increase.
Commissioner Henley said he was hoping it would be in line with neighboring Volusia and Brevard counties, but he doesn’t know if it was 6.9 %.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to award an increase in salary of 6.9% to the County Manager.
Under discussion, Mr. McMillan calculated that at 6.9% the new salary would be $129,319. Some discussion by the Board followed.
Commissioner Morris withdrew his second to the motion.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner McLain, to award a salary increase to Mr. Grace to bring his total salary to $132,000.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
The following Communications and/or Reports were received and filed:
1. Letters dated September 25, 2001, from the Chairman to Senator Graham, Congressman Mica, Congressman Keller, Congresswoman Brown, and Senator Nelson, Re: Federal funding for LYNX services. (cc: Board)
2. Memorandum dated September 27, 2001, from Stephen P. Lee, Deputy County Attorney, to the Board, transmitting copies of correspondence regarding the Status of Offer in Callin v. Seminole County.
3. E-mail dated September 28, 2001, to numerous addressees including BCC from Art Ackerman regarding Seminole County Trails. (cc: County Manager, DCM, Planning and Development Director, Planning)
4. Copy of the August, 2001, Activities Report from the Central Florida Sports Commission. (cc: Board)
5. E-mail dated September 26, 2001, from Russell D. Cuddy to the Board regarding "Tax Increase."
6. Letter dated September 26, 2001, from Byron W. Brooks, Executive Director, LYNX Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, to the Chairman, regarding the Americans with Disability Act and funding for the Transportation Disadvantaged Trust Fund. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development Director, Comp Planning)
7. Copy of letter from Luigi Damiani, President, Wekiva Hunt Club Community Association, Inc., to Vincent Smith, Vice President, Trammell Crow Company, Re: Shoppes of Sweetwater. (cc: Stephen Korshak, Sheriff Donald F. Eslinger, Shannon Saffron, Project Planner, Wekiva Board of Directors)
8. Copy of letter dated August 28, 2001, from Keith Schue, Wekiva Issue Chair, Sierra Club Central Florida Group, to Joseph A. Berenis, P.E., Deputy Executive Director, Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority, Re: Advanced Notification for SR 429 - Northern Extension PD&E Study/Orange and Lake Counties. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development Director, and as noted)
9. Letter dated September 19, 2001, from Jennifer Carroll, Executive Director, State of Florida Department of Veterans' Affairs, requesting contributions for the Florida WWII Memorial Trust Fund. (cc: Board, County Manager, Community Services, Veterans)
10. Agenda for the October 1, 2001, meeting of the Oviedo City Council. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, County Attorney, Planning & Development Director)
11. Memorandum from Kevin Grace, County Manager, to the Board, transmitting a copy of the Seminole County Mosquito-Borne Virus Employee and Public Protection Plan. (cc: Deputy County Manager, Department Directors)
12. Copy of letter dated September 21, 2001, from Dolores M. and Cecil L. Barkley to Commissioner Daryl G. McLain, District 5, Re: "Mega" rest stop expansion in Longwood. (cc: Board)
13. Copy of letter dated September 13, 2001, from Michael Snyder, P.E., District Secretary, Florida Department of Transportation, to Commissioner Daryl McLain, RE: Interstate 4 Rest Area. (cc: Bob Cortelyou, Steve Homan, Michael Hatchell, Board, County Manager)
14. Copy of letter dated September 26, 2001, from Sally A. Sherman, Deputy County Manager, to Harold W. Barley, Executive Director, METROPLAN, responding to Mr. Barley's letter regarding Seminole County representation at Transportation Technical Committee meetings. (cc: County Manager, Planning and Development Director)
15. Copy of letter from Kenneth M. Roberts, Director, Department of Public Safety, to B.J. McKee expressing appreciation for recent donation of $25.00 to the Animal Services Division.
16. Agenda and back-up information for the Sanford Airport Authority Board meeting of Tuesday, October 2, 2001.
17. Agenda for the October 18, 2001, meeting of the Seminole County Historical Commission; and minutes of the September 20, 2001, meeting.
18. Letter dated October 8, 2001, from Bill Fahey, Vice President, Sweetwater Oaks Homeowners Association, to the Chairman, Re: Stimmell Property, 850 Sweetwater Island Circle, Longwood. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development Director, Planning, Development Review)
19. Letter dated October 5, 2001, from Jane W. Gregory Re: Release of Conservation Easement Adjacent to Sweetwater Island, a.k.a. Stimmell Property. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development Director, Planning, Development Review)
20. E-mail dated October 5, 2001, from Bill & Michelle Haug to the Board, Re: Proposed development of Portofino. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development Director, Planning)
21. Letter from Commissioner Grant Maloy, District 1, to the Chairman, Re: Transportation Disadvantaged Board.
22. Memorandum from Mary Kay Cariseo, Executive Director, Florida Association of Counties, to County Commissioners, County Administrators, County Attorneys, County Finance & Budget Officers, County Lobbyists, Re: Local Economic Impacts.
23. Petition forwarded by Michelle Triano to the Seminole County Land Planning Agency/Planning & Zoning Commission and the Seminole County Board of Commissioners extending opposition to rezone request from UC (University Community) and from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development, Comp. Planning)
24. Sworn Affidavit to the Board concerning a Conservation Easement/Common Property Greenbelt at Stimmel Property at Sweetwater Oaks submitted by Darwin Morton. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development, Development Review, County Attorney)
25. Copy of letter dated October 3, 2001, from Susan Eberle to Chairman Dick Harris, Seminole County Planning and Zoning Board, expressing opposition to the proposed Portofino Apartment complex. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development Director, Comp. Planning)
26. E-mail dated October 3, 2001, from Donald Wheeler to Commissioner Van Der Weide expressing opposition to the proposed Emmer Project. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development Director, Planning)
27. Letter dated October 3, 2001, to the Chairman, from Thomas O'Hanlon, Chairman, Oviedo City Council, regarding striping on Lockwood Boulevard. (cc: City Council, Board, County Manager, Public Works Director, Traffic Engineering/response)
28. E-mail dated October 2, 2001, from Paul Hoffman, Realtor-Broker, Re: Ryland Homes/SR 46 & Longwood Markham Road. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development Director, Planning, Jeff Perlman, Al Katz, Skip Fowler)
29. E-mail dated October 4, 2001, from James Carlson Re: Ryland Group proposal. (cc: Board, County Manager, DCM, Planning & Development Director, Planning)
30. Copy of letter dated October 1, 2001, from V. Eugene Williford, III, City Manager, City of Oviedo, to Jerry McCollum, County Engineer, advising of the Oviedo City Council's authorization to transfer jurisdiction of CR 426 from CR 419 to just north of Franklin Street. (cc: City Council, County Manager, Charles Smith, BCC)
31. Copy of letter from Darrell W. Smith, Budget Services Director, to J. Raymond Valdes, Seminole County Tax Collector, transmitting the final budget for the fiscal year 2001-2002. (cc: Board, County Manager, Fiscal Services)
32. Notice of Permitted, Conditional, or Prohibited Use Change to be considered by the City of Lake Mary in Public Hearing on October 18, 2001, Re: "Downtown Development Overlay Standards." (Board, DCM, Planning)
33. Notice to Abutting Property Owners from the City of Lake Mary advising of zoning approval given in accordance with the City of Lake Mary's Land Development Code for the occupant to conduct a home occupation of services (general cleaning) in a dwelling unit located at 232 Seminole Avenue, Lake Mary. (cc: Board, DCM, Comp. Planning)
34. Copy of Memorandum from Darrell W. Smith, Budget Services Director, Florida Department of Revenue, to the Property Appraiser, transmitting copy of the Budget Summary Printout. (cc: Board, County Manager, Fiscal Services)
35. Letter dated October 5, 2001, from Sheriff Donald F. Eslinger, requesting that the Board consider waiving the requirement regarding minimum number of signatures for street lighting upgrades for the Roseland Park community. (cc: Board, County Manager)
36. Copy of letter from J. Suzy Goldman, Library & Leisure Services Director, to Margaret Walling, Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth W. Tuttle, Jr., Mr. and Mrs. Ricardo R. Gabriel, and Joyce Lehman, expressing appreciation for the recent donations to the Seminole County Public Library system.
37. Newsletter from the School Board of Seminole County. (cc: Board)
38. Contracts for Services, as shown on page _______, between Seminole County Parks and Recreation and David B. Stankiewicz and Sunday Dunning.
39. Letter from Robert King, Chairman, Friends of Lake Jesup, Re: Request from City of Sanford requesting approval of an amendment to the master plan of an existing Special Exception to all the construction of a Thermo-system Biosolids Processing Unit. (cc: Board, County Manager, Planning)
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner McLain, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2001-R-174, as shown on page _______, of appreciation to Ned Johnson for his service on the Natural Lands Committee; and appointment of John Stowe to fill Mr. Johnson’s unexpired term ending January 1, 2003.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner McLain, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2001-R-175, as shown on page _______, of appreciation to Bob Lee for his service on the Historical Commission; and appoint Bonnie Ward to fill the unexpired term ending January 1, 2002.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Henley stated a few years ago they made the effort to attempt to clean up the portion of 17-92 target area in Fern Park. He was there recently and it has deteriorated to the point it’s as bad as before. He has met with various staff people and they have visited the area and quite a number of code violations have been cited. He has asked staff to take proactive action and help the businesses realize the Board is serious about trying to clean up the area.
Commissioner Henley advised on the St. Johns’ agenda, there is an item to consider a public hearing on the potential purchase of the Maitland Wastewater plant that the County has dealt with and, hopefully, that is going to resolve itself if the St. Johns comes through with the purchase of the property.
Commissioner Henley stated a couple of months ago Mr. Groot came before the Board on land owned by the County in Casselberry (corner of Lake Howell Lane and Howell Branch Road and he asked the Board to allow them to pursue rezoning the retention pond to RMF 13, and the Board did not object to them doing that at their own risk and cost, but in no way was that to be construed to be an agreement with the County. The intent was to take this acreage to give credit to a parcel of land across the road for density purposes. Commissioner Henley said he would like to recommend that the Board instruct staff to cease any negotiation of that parcel of land as it relates to the intended swap.
Commissioner Morris stated part of the discussion dealt with some environmental factors.
Whereupon, Commissioner Henley said there was about 17 or 18 acres of wetlands, and he also read the geological report and it indicated the parcel is prone to sinkholes. There is a sinkhole on the property now. He said one of the areas of the plat plan shows the water should not be allowed to pond on that area, but the plat plan calls for that to be made a retention pond area. The City of Casselberry is requiring them to draft a hold harmless clause. He said he has been getting complaints all along since the roads have been paved due to the increase in cut-through traffic. They are looking at possibly 240 units on the two-lane road. He doesn’t think the County needs to be getting into that.
Commissioner McLain said he was told that a member of the St. Johns River Water Management District would like to talk to the Board about this issue. They see this as an element for cleaning up the water in Lake Howell. He doesn’t have a problem with suspending this at this time and pursuing it until they have a bigger hearing and have all the evidence. He said they could ask staff to not move forward until the Board has all the information. Discussion ensued between Commissioners McLain and Henley.
Commissioner Henley stated a gentleman is here who is the lead man for the entire neighborhood. He has now a request from one of the officials of the Lake Howell Homeowners Association asking if the Board would be willing to set up a taxing district.
Commissioner McLain stated in the past, the Board has often postponed things to get more information, but not to eliminate the project without hearing all parties. He is saying not to take any further action, but ask Mr. Grace to communicate with all parties involved, and then the Board can make a final decision.
Gary Johnson, Public Works Director, addressed the Board to state the staff have not received a formal request but have been in consultation with the St. Johns District and indicated what the implications are. He said this area is in the basin and any benefit attributed from this project to Lake Howell would be helpful.
Mr. Grace said he thinks staff felt this was a beneficial project, but he doesn’t feel it is a critical project and would not necessarily shut the door on the project being done in some other fashion.
Bob Mosser, resident of Lake Ann Estates, addressed the Board to state no one from the St. Johns District ever contacted him. This is not a St. Johns’ driven project, but is driven by the developer’s desire to get additional units into the project. One of the ways was to do a land swap with the County.
Commissioner McLain said this is highly unusual. He requested a staff briefing on this subject.
Mr. Grace said he thinks staff could have a full briefing before the Board at the next meeting, and in the meantime he could talk to St. Johns to see if they want to have someone present at the briefing.
Commissioner Morris said he thinks they share Commissioner Henley’s concern. He asked if they could delay action for two weeks to hear from St. Johns. Commissioner Henley said he has spent a considerable amount of time and talked to staff, and he is not willing to go ahead and push this through because he doesn’t think there is anything St. Johns could say that would cause him to change his recommendation.
Commissioner Maloy said he knows Commissioner Henley does a lot of homework on issues, so he was ready to support his recommendation.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated he would not have any trouble going either way. The only point that concerns him is if staff could clearly see there are extenuating circumstances. He suggested delaying this issue till the evening meeting to get some additional input from one of the attorneys.
Whereupon, Commissioner Henley said if they are going to hear from an attorney and developer, then they should hear from the citizens also.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. Grace said he would call St. Johns this afternoon and ask their opinion.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Van Der Weide, the consensus of the Board was for staff to contact St. Johns and at 7:00 p.m. bring this issue back and report on the conversation, and see if at that time the Board could determine how much further they want to study this.
Commissioner McLain referred to the letter (copy received and filed) from Sheriff Eslinger to Chairman Van Der Weide and said staff needs to address the lighting issue in Roseland Park. Mr. Grace said he would review that and report what options the Board has.
Commissioner Maloy stated he wants to see if the Board is interested in bringing forward the potential increase in the senior exemptions for future years’ budgets. Mr. Grace stated this would be brought back as an agenda item.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Chairman Van Der Weide responded that the two appointments have not been made to the Casselberry CRA. Mr. Grace said there are some other issues they want to ask the CRA also. Whereupon, Commissioner Morris requested a briefing on that.
Regarding Lake Emma Road, Commissioner Morris said there is a four-lane project they delayed deliberately at his request because of Highway 427 construction. He said that construction will probably terminate in December or January at the latest. The road project should commence in a year. He reported at a meeting on the widening project at Greenwood Lakes Middle School about 5 years ago, over 400 residents attended and were very upset about the four laning. They wanted one portion to remain two lanes and they agreed to 2-lane the southern portion and 4-lane the northern portion because of traffic counts. He said the traffic counts have now gotten to the level that the roadway should be four laned. When Highway 427 is opened, he doesn’t know if that will reduce the traffic. He would like to have staff start the process of monitoring this through the end of the year and readdress the issue of four laning through Longwood Hills Road. The Board had no objections.
Commissioner McLain advised the Florida Association of Counties President requested the counties take a look at their own budgets and see all the impacts they would have to their revenue sources. They are going to work hard at trying to come up with solutions to the State’s budget shortfall. They provided a list to Mr. Grace for the first year funding sources from the State that the County could not afford to live without. Many of those were bonding sources used to borrow money. It is projected the State will be $1.4 billion short on revenues. In the special session, the Governor will be addressing those. They are talking about possibly not implementing savings of the tax cuts on January 1. He commended Mr. Grace for his foresight in preparing for reductions if the County is in that position.
Commissioner Morris commented that the real battle will be in January. The last session is when the State will be doing the cutting. He said wherever they cut local funding, the State should eliminate the mandate, at least for that year.
Mr. Grace stated the Country is at war and people are being activated. So far, the County has had two employees activated and a total of 8 or 9 employees are in the reserves or National Guard. He said the County’s policies don’t address active duty. He distributed a written policy (copy received and filed) that would make the first 30 days full pay and the County would supplement after that the difference for a period of up to one year.
Commissioner Morris stated he would like to include one caveat providing that the Federal government does not put this in their benefits package also.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to adopt the Military Leave-Employees Called to Active Duty policy with the caveat, providing that the Federal government does not put this in their benefits package.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
The meeting was recessed at 3:12 p.m., reconvening at 7:07 p.m., this same date, with all Commissioners and all other Officials, with the exception of Deputy Clerk Carylon Cohen, who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Eva Roach, who were present at the Opening Session.
DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS REPORTS (Continued)
Mr. Grace stated the Board directed staff to contact the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) relating to the land swap off Howell Branch Road with the City of Casselberry.
Gary Johnson, Public Works Director, addressed the Board to state he spoke to two members of the SJRWMD and based on information submitted, they will not send a representative this evening to speak on this issue. He stated the SJRWMD remains open to the concept for the potential use of the wetland area by the County with a conservation easement to protect the wetlands. He said the SJRWMD are not opposed to the property exchange, but they would not characterize this as a district project. He said staff remains open to the possibility of utilizing that land, but they will not characterize this as a district project at this time.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to instruct staff to cease negotiation and to notify the City of Casselberry that the County will not enter into a land swap.
Under discussion and upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Commissioner Henley stated the impact on density would be up to the developer and the City of Casselberry. He stated it was relayed to him that if the swap did not go through, then they have the option to encroach into the wetlands to get the density. That is not an issue the County has control over since it is within the City of Casselberry’s limits.
Upon further inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Commissioner Henley advised it is his understanding the acre per acre swap has changed slightly and it appears the concern is density when you change the retention pond to an RNF 13, which is across the road from that property, then you move that property density over to the other existence to get more and that makes it a density issue. If they do not want to swap and the developer wants to continue that density, then they have to encroach into it. He stated he feels that is a density issue instead of a conservation issue. Discussion ensued.
Commissioner McLain stated he is under the impression that the client was approved for a number of units but he is not planning to use all of them.
Attorney Ken Wright, representing the developer, addressed the Board to state the overall density of the project being planned is 20 units under the allowable density by the City of Casselberry. He explained the reason why the retention pond is being used for transfer of density. He stated the retention pond would represent approximately 40 density units and they were 20 units over, which they are not using. If that acreage was eliminated, they would be 20 short. This project has been going on for months and he has been working with staff, SJRWMD and the City of Casselberry. He said had his client known, he would have impacted an additional portion of the wetlands and placed the density up there and never would have gone down this path. There would have been some wetland mitigation involved but it wouldn’t be worth this expense. This is a conventional financed project by HUD and it will have the effect of jeopardizing his financing and he will have to go back and repermit, pick up the additional 20 acres, and come back to the City of Casselberry.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Attorney Wright advised there is a 20-unit overage that is not presently being used and it would have a 20-unit reduction.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Van Der Weide, Attorney Wright advised in order for the density transfer to occur, he asked staff for a letter of intent subject to BCC approval of a resolution. The area encompassing the retention pond has been rezoned to RNF 13 to match this project. The final site plan approval is scheduled in about two weeks with the City of Casselberry Commission.
Commissioner Morris asked because of the difficulty that Attorney Wright’s client finds himself in and the whole circumstance, is he willing to not forego the entire potential 40 acres and not increase the density and still do the swap so he has a more contiguous use.
Attorney Wright stated he doesn’t think it can be done because even on a density reduction the financing would have to be redone and the time that it would take just to do that alone, would coincide with going back and repermitting. It is a large tract of land in which only a portion is uplands and it was his client’s intent to try to stay out of the wetlands and preserve most of them.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Attorney Wright advised his client would be responsible for the landscape maintenance of the pond and the County would maintain the function of the pond.
Commissioner McLain stated he didn’t think this issue would come back so soon as he thought more information would be evaluated.
Commissioner Henley stated he has a copy of a letter to Mr. Scott Bray indicating that a 4th floor would be added to Buildings 1 thru 9 and Building 10 would be eliminated. He read the response from that letter.
Attorney Wright stated he has a permit issued by the St. Johns River Water Management District. This is a project that would benefit the entire Lake Howell Basin.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated he would like to see this issue postponed for two weeks in order to give the Board time to get to the bottom of the interpretation of what has transpired.
Commissioner Henley stated he doesn’t feel that two weeks will have an impact on his opinion.
Commissioner Morris stated he would like to have time to discuss this further with staff so he can have a better understanding of this.
Commissioner Maloy stated he feels that this issue should have been on the agenda to begin with. He stated he feels this will give the Board time to get a better idea of what they are getting into. Discussion ensued.
Commissioner Henley stated he will withdraw his motion, but he doesn’t think two more weeks will change anything. He said all two weeks will accomplish is a tremendous amount of lobbying on both sides.
The Board consensus was to direct staff to bring this issue back at the next meeting.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. Grace advised this issue will be a regular agenda item.
Chairman Van Der Weide recessed the meeting at 7:39 p.m., reconvening at 7:47 p.m., with all Commissioners present.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider request to Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) and PCD (Planned Commercial Development) to PCD (Planned Commercial Development); property described as 14 acres, located north of Church Street and west of CR 15, Sanford, Patrick Callaway/Realvest-Upsala Business Center, received and filed.
Jeff Hopper, Senior Planner, addressed the Board to present the request. He stated staff recommends approval with the eight conditions outlined in the agenda memorandum.
Pat Callaway, applicant, addressed the Board to advise he agrees with staff recommendations. He said the only problem he had was the Planning & Zoning (P&Z) recommendations, which has been changed by staff.
District Commissioner McLain stated staff feels that the P&Z’s recommendation #3 relating to a retention pond is not feasible.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. Callaway advised he would have no objections to adding a 6 ft. block wall along the western property line.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris to adopt Ordinance #2001-42, as shown on page ________, rezoning to PCD (Planned Commercial Development); property described as 14 acres, located north of Church Street and west of CR 15, Sanford, Patrick Callaway/Realvest-Upsala Business Center, with staff findings including the eight conditions outlined, approval of Development Order, as shown on page _____.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider request for an Appeal against the Board of Adjustment (BOA) in approving for the City of Sanford an amendment to the master plan of an existing Special Exception to permit the construction of a Thermo-System biosolids processing unit at its 1,870 acre site located on the south side of SR 46, across the Mullet Lake Park Road intersection, Geneva Citizens Association, received and filed.
Ginny Markley, Principal Zoning Coordinator, addressed the Board to advise in 1989, the Board of Adjustment granted the City of Sanford a Special Exception to permit irrigation of hay and citrus crops with reclaimed water pumped from the City’s wastewater treatment plant. The City has applied to amend the existing Special Exception in order to construct up to 12 greenhouse type structures for the purpose of processing Class A biosolids from Class B treated wastewater sludge. The Class A biosolids will be used on-site to fertilize existing hay fields and other City owned sites. She stated the subject property is assigned Publicly Owned land use designation and A-1 (Agriculture) zoning classification, which allows public utility and service structures upon granting a Special Exception.
Ms. Markley advised the Board of Adjustment approved the amendment to the master plan of an existing Special Exception subject to the Thermo-System biosolid processing unit being approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) prior to construction of the biosolids processing unit proposed on Site 10.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Ms. Markley advised she understands that the City of Sanford has a commitment with a company in Germany to build on the existing plant site at no cost and before they would do that, they wanted the City to commit to purchasing additional processing units. It has to be up and running before it can be tested by DEP and DER.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Van Der Weide, Ms. Markley advised the applicant thought one was approved in the Carolinas.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Ms. Markley advised if the EPA and DEP does not approve the processing unit, the City of Sanford would not be able to build at this site.
Ms. Markley continued by reviewing the criteria for granting a special exception as outlined in the agenda memorandum. She stated staff has determined that: (1) The proposed amendment to the master plan of an existing Special Exception would be consistent with the general zoning category and plan for A-1; (2) The proposed use would not be detrimental to the character of the area or neighborhood or inconsistent with the trends of development in the area or neighborhood. The structures are planned to setback approximately 420 ft. from SR 46 and approximately 1,500 ft. from the nearest single-family residence; (3) The proposed use would not be highly intensive in nature and would not have an unduly adverse effect on existing traffic patterns, movements and volumes. The applicant has indicated that there would be approximately one vehicle daily, five days per week, visiting the site. There may be times when a small group of four to five people would visit the site to evaluate the unit; and (4) The proposed use is consistent with the County’s Comprehensive Plan. She stated staff would recommend approval of the request subject to the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall obtain the EPA and DEP’s approval of the Thermo-System biosolid processing unit proposed at the City of Sanford’s existing wastewater treatment site prior to construction of the Thermo-System biosolid processing unit on the subject property (Site 10); and (b) The final site plan to meet code requirements.
Attorney Bob Gatton, representing Geneva Citizens Association and Mullet Lake Water Association, addressed the Board to submit a booklet (received and filed) containing material, documents and affidavits regarding the proposed request. He stated the Geneva residents oppose this request and they were told that there is no other plant like this in the United States. The City of Sanford wants to have a test plant set up so they can examine it themselves before they decide to use it, therefore, they are here tonight putting the cart before the horse. He stated not only the City of Sanford is planning to use experimental technology, but also based on the testimony before the BOA, that technology is not even followed as recommended by the manufacturer. This technology was proposed for the purpose of dewatering sludge for ultimate incineration. That is not what the City wants to do. What they want to do is use this process to dewater sludge and spread it. The applicant indicated at the BOA hearing that this is similar to milorganite.
Attorney Gatton referred to Tab 1 of the booklet and reviewed the standards for granting a special exception. He stated Items 2 and 7 of those standards will be the ones that he will be focusing on tonight. He referred to Tab 9 containing an Affidavit from Mr. James Studeman and he reviewed contents of that affidavit. He introduced the following speakers Richard Creedon, Faith Mobsby, Sam Shephard and Cynthia Hollenbeck. He stated Mr. Creedon will speak on the historical perspective on how they got to where they are now and what was originally proposed by the City of Sanford. Ms. Mobsby will speak concerning the track record of the City of Sanford and what is being done on the property now. Mr. Shephard will address a number of issues having to do with the property as it exists now based on documents filed with the DEP, and the potential harm that could result from what is being proposed for this property. He said Ms. Hollenbeck will discuss the issues of the impact on the property in Geneva and her inability to sell property in Geneva.
Richard Creedon, 1172 Apache Dr., addressed the Board to state he is speaking as a resident of Geneva and on behalf of the Seminole County Ombudsmen. He referred to BOA minutes (Tab 2 of the booklet) dated February 20, 1989 and he read some of the quotes from that meeting. He stated Bill Simmons, Director of Engineering and Planning for the City Sanford at that time, indicated that the City has no plans to do anything with Site 10 except for irrigation. The City has not fulfilled their commitment made in 1989. He wanted to know why the BOA did list the reasons in the BOA minutes that the project would not be detrimental to the character of the neighborhood. He urged the Board to sustain their appeal and to kill this project once and for all.
Faith Mobsby, 1750 Cochran Road, addressed the Board to state she is here to ask the Board to protect the health and welfare of the citizens. She stated the City has been operating the wastewater treatment facility on Site 10. She said Tab 5 of the booklet shows noncompliance letters from DEP for every year the City has been operating on Site 10 and she read the dates of those letters and the deficiencies. She added the DEP provided her with information relating to monitoring wells that explain turbidity levels. She referred to and reviewed Tab 4 of the booklet relating to the City of Sanford’s field data. She stated Dr. Kane, a DEP inspector, indicated that the City is required to have at least 2 ft. of dry top soil before applying any wastewater on Site 10. The City has been spraying wastewater on a continuing basis, but they have no groundwater monitoring wells and this is a blatant example of how the City of Sanford has not complied with the regulations. She said she would like to give the Board data from the City of Sanford’s recent report, but they failed to file that second quarter report. It was due on August 28, 2001. She added she is asking that the Board see that the granting of the sludge plant is not in any way protecting the health, safety and welfare of Seminole County citizens. She stated once it is proven that the Geneva Bubble and the aquifer is contaminated, no one will be able to say that they were not aware of the dangers.
Ed Mobsby addressed the Board to submit into the Record a bucket containing a sample of milorganite (received and filed).
Samuel Shephard, 5211 Mulberry Grove, addressed the Board to state he has flown from Houston and he has a Bachelor’s degree in Chemical Engineering and a Master’s degree in Engineering Technology. He stated he wishes to concentrate on two issues, the first is source of odor and health hazards of biosolids and composting and sludge drying, and the other is possible groundwater contamination of Site 10. He reviewed what the chemicals attract and what happens to the gases. He reviewed the basic components of the two classes of biosolids as outlined in Tab 6 of the booklet and how they control the exposure of biosolids on site and generated gases. He stated he has attached several Theorems from “The Practical Handbook of Compost Engineering.” He stated the second issue to address is the ground water is already contaminated. He said he has evaluated Site 10 and he has reviewed high turbidity levels, which indicate a breakthrough of PH levels that are currently 4-6 and are more acidic than water. He added he would like the following questions answered: (1) What pathogen alternative in the 503’s does this technology comply? (2) What is the odor management plan and the gas scrubbing mechanism; (3) What type of temperature controls are being used; and (4) Why are there hot spots on Site 10. He said he would recommend the following: (a) Recent fecal Coliform test results be reproduced; (b) An odor management plan be included in the permit; (c) Long term product stability testing be evaluated prior to large scale implementation and (d) The PH of Site 10 be immediately adjusted and the nitrogen level be determined.
Mr. Shephard explained for Commissioner McLain the difference between regular liquid sludge being distributed as a fertilizer agent and the type of sludge that the City will be using.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. Shephard advised this is inappropriate unproved technology for what is being proposed.
Mr. Shephard explained for Commissioner Maloy the difference between the products coming out of greenhouses and milorganite. He commended on Commissioner McLain’s question relating to obtaining approval from EPA and DEP.
Cynthia Hollenbeck, 875 Pine Hill Blvd., addressed the Board to state she is a realtor and she has been selling real estate for eight years. She stated the odor will be the number one problem when selling property and she doesn’t know how the City can tell the residents that there won’t be odors. She said the biggest issue when selling property is the water source. She added anyone that knows the area, will question whether the water source is on the Geneva Bubble. The residents have piped in water and that water is drawn from wells that draw from the Geneva Bubble. She said in her professional opinion, this request will have a detrimental effect on the prices of homes and the homes will be more difficult to sell in the area.
Attorney Gatton submitted copies of pictures (received and filed) of the surrounding area and the proposed site.
County Attorney Robert McMillan left the meeting at this time and was replaced by Deputy County Attorney Stephen Lee.
Nancy Harmon, 752 Pioneer Way, addressed the Board to discuss the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan, Vision 2020 and specific rules that have been set forth. She stated the County does not have a plan to replace the water resource should it get contaminated. She stated the FLU 10 expresses sustainability and smart growth and it suggests the idea of responsible use of resources to meet the needs without jeopardizing the needs of future residents while ensuring the protection of the environment. Site 10 does not match what the goals are for smart growth. She said she would disagree that there wouldn’t be road hazards because there is a possibility of hazard industry vehicles stopping on a two-lane road into a facility that does not have proper access. People will be affected as well. She referred to minutes of 1989 and advised it was concluded that only 320 acres were applicable to irrigation and only 10% of the area was suitable for agriculture purposes. Wildlife protected by the Federal Government has been cited there. There are a significant amount of wetlands and it includes fresh water marshes and prairies. The FLU map supports the private property rights of the citizens of Seminole County and it is designed to protect individuals and owners from neighbors who compromises their ability for a quality of life. She stated Geneva does incorporate a good bit of Site 10 and it has a good deal of wetlands.
Chairman Van Der Weide recessed the meeting at 8:54 p.m., reconvening at 9:06 p.m., with all Commissioners being present.
Paul Moore, City of Sanford Utility Director, addressed the Board to state there have been some misconceptions on Site 10. The City owns 1800 acres of property and approximately 240 acres on the east side are citrus groves and 600 acres is hay crop. He stated what the City wants to do is upgrade the quality to make Class A biosolids into fertilizer so they can fertilize other City property. He introduced Dr. Jim Garringer to discuss the hydraulics of the system and Mike Parkson (phonetic) who is the owner of the technology in the U.S. He stated Mr. Shephard sells a competing technology and the City rejected it a few years ago.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Moore advised the City has no violations on Site 10 and they produce Class B biosolids. All wastewater plants produce biosolids and the majority of the biosolids are land applied. He stated what the City wants to do now is upgrade that to Class A biosolids.
Upon further inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Moore advised there are a number of items that the City has to do in a utility business. He stated there are times when an item will be missing or in violation and the City will check that out to see what the problem is and come back into compliance.
Commissioner Maloy stated he understands the City would like to obtain approval of this so the company will give them a free greenhouse operation on the north plant site. He stated he can understand the City wanting to get a free operation, but perhaps the City and County should chip in on a joint project for that test site.
Mr. Moore stated if the test site met all State and Federal guidelines, he would have no problem with that at all.
Commissioner Morris stated the City is saying this is a better process than what the City is currently doing out there. He stated most of the testimony tonight has been more about odors than anything else. He said he feels it may be wise for the County and the City to get together in doing the test site and then come back to the citizens so they know what is going on.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. Moore advised the plant takes approximately two years to build.
Commissioner Morris stated this is a technology the County should be looking at as well. He asked why not go in a joint plan together.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Van Der Weide, Tony VanDerworp, Sanford City Manager, addressed the Board to advise the company that the City has an agreement with will come in and build this test plant and make that investment in the City of Sanford. They would only do so if they have assurance from the City of Sanford that the City would buy from that company. If the County is interested in this, there may be some ability to discuss cost sharing with the manufacturer.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Van Der Weide, Mr. VanDerworp advised the City would be interested in a joint project with the County.
Mr. Grace stated he would be willing to discuss this with the City. He stated he believes there has been some discussion about pursuing technology like this in the future.
Commissioner Henley stated he would like to know if Mr. Shephard’s system is equivalent to this and is it already being used in this country. He stated if so, he would have some reservations to enter into an agreement that would tie the County into one company without more discussions as to why they should pursue this if there are other systems available and approved in this country.
Mr. VanDerworp advised the City has done extensive research on these systems and they have been researching the different technologies for over two years.
Commissioner Morris stated the issue of a joint test site would clear up any doubting issues and it would help them to see how it works.
Mr. VanDerworp stated he would like to discuss this with the contractor, as they might be able to clear that up.
Chairman Van Der Weide recessed the meeting at 9:25 p.m., reconvening at 9:35 p.m., with all Commissioners present.
County Attorney Robert McMillan reentered the meeting at this time.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Van Der Weide, Mr. Grace advised if the County is going to pursue a joint project with the City, staff would need some time to try to work out an agreement. There upon ensued discussion regarding continuing this item for one month.
Commissioner McLain stated he would like to know if the County has a staff person capable of giving testimony concerning the science of this project.
Mr. Grace stated he cannot address that at this time, but the County does have a number of consultants that can address this issue.
Commissioner McLain stated in order for the County to make a qualified judgment, he feels the thoughts of moving forward with considering a joint experiment is appealing to this Board.
Commissioner Henley stated he is not opposed to the County and City exploring a joint task. He stated the Board has an appellant before them dealing with a specific proposal and if the County is going to enter into a joint test site, this proposal is no longer sterile. If the Board deals with this issue and approves it, then it is over except for what the litigation may be. If it is voted down, at least the City of Sanford has the option of litigating. At least they know that what they are proposing is not acceptable to the residents and that would not preclude the County and the City from pursuing a possible joint test site. He added he doesn’t know that they would be getting a lot if they talk about delaying it.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated his concern is if the County continues this for six weeks, he is not sure that the citizens will be more interested in it than before. He stated he feels that Commissioner Henley has a valid point.
Attorney Gatton stated he would be opposed to continuing this as it will not solve the primary problem and the Board will not have a better answer in 30 days.
Commissioner Morris recommended getting the cart where it belongs by doing the joint test site. He stated the County can jointly reach an agreement and this issue could be continued for a year or so while the test is going on so that they can have a nullified case. He stated no one is going to agree to anything until they see the real product. Discussion ensued relative to continuing this item.
Commissioner Maloy clarified that the test site currently proposed is located at the north plant in Sanford.
Commissioner Henley stated it appears to him that the Board is asking the citizens to delay their appeal for four to six weeks or a date certain to determine whether the County and City will do a joint test. It may take a year or two to get the necessary answers. He stated he would recommend that the City of Sanford withdraw their application and the citizens withdraw their appeal, as this would give the County an opportunity to review the City’s research on other systems that may already be approved and viable.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. McMillan advised if the Board denies the application, the City of Sanford could reapply one year from the BOA action. If the City withdraws, the Board could waive the 12-month period.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Van Der Weide, Mr. VanDerworp advised the City is already behind schedule and they are trying to pull their wastewater treatment plant schedule and production schedule together. It takes a year to test this site. It would put the City back to the drawing board if they withdraw their application. He stated he thinks it would be amenable for the City if they can come back in two to six weeks with more information. This will give the City time to get with their attorney and the contractor to see if they can partner and still do what they want to do. Discussion ensued.
Mr. VanDerworp stated the City will withdraw their application without prejudice.
Mr. McMillan informed Mr. VanDerworp that he cannot waive the 12-month period on his own. The Board is the only one that has the authority to waive that time period.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Van Der Weide, Attorney Gatton advised what he is hearing is the City is withdrawing their application and they will wait to see what will happen with the County.
Mr. VanDerworp advised the City is willing to withdraw the application if they can come back and reapply without a waiting period.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
An article titled “Times Beach—The Ghost of Geneva Future” was received and filed.
Speaker Request Forms and Written Request Forms were received and filed.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris to accept the City of Sanford’s withdrawal of their application; and to authorize giving the City the ability to reapply for another Special Exception without waiting 12 months.
Under discussion, Commissioner Morris stated the issue is it does allow a rational period of time. The message has been sent loud and clear to the City of Sanford of how this Board feels and reflects the public opinion. This is one way to get to the truth and give the City an opportunity to work with the County.
Commissioner Henley stated it should be recognized that the BOA approved this by a 3-2 vote and there was testimony presented tonight that wasn’t presented to the BOA. He stated it would not be wise for the City to rush into hearing this again. He said he feels that Mr. VanDerworp will attempt to work with County staff to come up with something that will be acceptable.
Commissioner McLain stated if a joint test site agreement is not worked out, the City has an opportunity to try this one more time.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman Van Der Weide recessed the meeting at 9:56 p.m., reconvening at 10:06 p.m., with Commissioners Morris and McLain entering late.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider request to Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); property described as 46.9 acres, located south of SR 46 and east of Longwood-Markham Road, Ryland Group, received and filed.
Commissioners Morris and McLain entered the meeting at this time.
Matt West, Planning Manager, addressed the Board to state the applicant has committed to 2.5 acres of commercial land use being converted to Suburban Estates to match the rest of the project. He stated the Local Planning Agency (LPA) recommended approval subject to the following: (1) The land use of the Commercially-designated parcel be change to Suburban Estates; (2) The tier of lots adjacent to Longwood Markham Road shall be a minimum of 1 acre but would include within their land area the designated buffer tract. These lots shall also have a minimum of 120 ft.; (3) The maximum number of lots shall be 44, and one lot shall be removed from the eastern perimeter of the plan considered by the LPA; (4) The fence on the north and west sides of the site shall be porous to allow small wildlife to pass through the fence; (5) The water feature at the northwest corner of the site shall not be lighted; and (6) The plan shall include corridors for wildlife on the north, west, and east sides of the site as represented by the applicant at the LPA meeting. He submitted and reviewed a Policy Statement (received and filed) relating to Net Buildable Acreage. He stated if this project goes PUD, the developer would propose putting lots in that are smaller than an acre, but have areas devoted to open space, buffers and wildlife corridors. If they did not include the commercial, there would be about 39 to 40 lots. A lot of this is subject to further refinement at the subdivision stage. Staff does not know what the final width of the right-of-way or the size of the ponds will be. The wetland line has not been established at this point. Therefore, there are some variables that have not been worked out. If the Board decides to approve this request, staff would recommend the Board place in the development order that the property shall develop as no more than 42 dwelling units or one unit per net buildable acre.
Commissioner McLain stated this issue came up when he had a meeting with the homeowners and he asked staff to evaluate this so the Board would have a clear understanding of the process. He stated staff felt that one of the things the Board needs to decide is whether or not to remove the commercial site along with other improvement that would enhance the environment of this project.
Mr. McMillan stated there has been litigation as to whether or not commercial zoning is permissible within the Wekiva River Protection Area and it is permissible as long as it meets the statutory standard of having the same or less impact on natural resources that a residential development would.
Mr. West stated relative to the issue of being in the Wekiva Protection Area, there are additional standards that aren’t elsewhere in the County. He stated impacts are needed on natural resources that are equivalent or less than low density residential. There are measureable standards within the Wekiva Protection Act that tell you what to look for, but the natural resources that Act pertains to are preserving wetlands and wildlife habitat. When staff did the analysis or range of the numbers of units on this property, 37 or 38 probably could be obtained if commercial is included. He said if this commercial is litigated, it all comes down to traffic. He added he doesn’t expect the commercial on this property would equal the number of trips for 5 single-family homes. They should be able to get some reasonable use of this property for commercial.
Commissioner Morris stated 50 trips per day would be 5 homes and he doesn’t know too many commercial ventures that will spend the kind of money that will generate 50 trips. He stated he has concerns as to whether or not the viability is intact in the Wekiva Protection zone.
Mr. West stated there is not a lot of commercial sites in the area and staff knows that this can’t come up too often. He said now that the net buildable acres are defined in writing that gives the Board the ability to settle a lot limit. Discussion ensued.
Attorney Ken Wright, Shutts & Bowen, displayed site plans (received and filed) and stated this project came through with another plan that actually showed more lots. This PUD proposes a 70 ft. vegetated buffer with existing trees and it would remain in place. An additional 50 ft. no build zone and no permanent structures can be constructed for a total of 120 ft., which runs the entire north/south perimeter of the property. He stated the developer is proposing to incorporate the property to the south as an open space/community park tract. The 120 ft. buffer to the west is a combination of a 50 ft. buffer and a 50 ft. no build setback.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Attorney Wright advised there is .39 acres of wetlands on that site. Mr. West stated staff has not verified the wetlands line.
Attorney Wright stated as a result of meeting with staff and the commitments made by the District Commissioner, he is proposing that the lot on the east side be eliminated and those lines will be adjusted in the subsequent submittal to staff for review. The current plan shows 45 lots and by reducing that lot on the east, that would reduce the total to 44 lots.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Attorney Wright advised the total one-acre lots would be 6 on the east and 6 on the west.
Attorney Wright stated he feels that the site is compellingly within this provision. He stated as opposed to straight A-1 zoning, the PUD would provide buffering and open space as opposed to larger lots. He said he feels the elimination of the 2.6 acres of commercial is a policy decision.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Attorney Wright advised a tree survey would be provided during the site plan review. He stated there is 37% of open space on this site and there will be significant number of trees left. He said he would like to know what it would take for him to get the 2.6 acres of commercial. There has been discussion with regard to 42 lots and he does not have a plan that comes up with that number of lots. He added he would like to see a number no greater than 44 lots and he doesn’t believe anyone would come up with a similar and improved plan than what is being presented.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. West advised the code requires an average 50 ft. buffer and a minimum of 25 ft.
James Leavitt, 168 Steeple Chase Circle, addressed the Board to state he is the President of Longwood Markham Citizens Action Group. He stated he feels the Ryland PUD should be denied as recommended by staff. He said staff has pointed out that the subject property does not meet the criteria of PUD. He added Commissioners McLain, Morris and Maloy indicated at the 4/10 meeting that the Wekiva Park would not set a precedent for granting a PUD and the land was extremely unique and the land had many features that made it very environmentally sensitive. He displayed a copy of an article (received and filed) from the Orlando Sentinel indicating, “precedence is always an issue”.
David Moon, Solin Associates, addressed the Board to state he concurs with staff’s recommendation to deny this application. He stated he concurs with staff that this application is not consistent with the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan. He said the purpose of this meeting is to interpret the policy and the Comp Plan regulations to determine whether this PUD warrants rezoning. The Comp Plan amendment, as recognized by staff, is necessary to accommodate a land use change from commercial to residential. He stated he has not seen a situation where a contract is established at a zoning stage to amend the land use. Another issue he has concerns with is clustering and the application of a Planned Unit Development. He displayed and reviewed Policy 2.14.8.b.(4)(received and filed) relating to protecting natural resources. He also displayed and reviewed the following: Policy 2-14.9(d)(2); Policy CON 3.8 PUD/Cluster Developments; Policy 14.1.1 River Protection Areas and Policy FLU 1.7 Wekiva River Protection. He also displayed Requested Conditions of Approval (received and filed) and he reviewed the following: (1) Creation of additional open space shall be obtained by establishing no structure zones consistent with what the applicant has proposed; (2) To meet the intent of Policy 2.8 PUD/Cluster Developments, the developer shall reduce land use intensity within the Wekiva River Protection Area by waiving commercial development rights to the parcel at the project’s northwest corner and limiting use of said parcel to single family residential on one acre lots, recreation, open space, and/or stormwater retention/detention facilities; and (3) To meet the intent of clustering policies, the project should acquire 5 to 10 acres within the Protection Area and dedicate land to Seminole County or SJRWMD as a conservation or recreation area.
Jim Lee, President of Friends of the Wekiva River Inc., addressed the Board to state he concurs with staff recommendations that include those specified changes but he would like to see the 42 lots, and he does not want the commercial included.
Frank Shelton, 14 Stone Gate North, addressed the Board to state he is the President of the Markham Woods Association and he was involved in the creation of the 1987 Comp Plan. He said it irritates him that there is commercial in those areas. It is a disaster when you put PUD zoning in a Suburban Estates zoning. He stated 42 lots is a significant increase and wetlands are not saved because the lots have to be built on dry land.
Keith Schue, representing the Central Florida Sierra Club, addressed the Board to state he believes the Board has an adequate reason to deny this project. He stated when the Sierra Club looks at a proposed development, they must consider not just what the impacts to that site are but what the County action would do overall and what the ramifications would be in the Wekiva Protection Area. He submitted and reviewed a calculation (received and filed) of the estimated net buildable acreage. He also submitted a code interpretation policy (received and filed) signed by the Planning Director.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. Schue advised he feels that getting rid of commercial is a positive thing. He stated he doesn’t see that as a reason to reward the developer with extra amount of units.
Mr. Schue pointed out that the site plan submitted indicates a water amenity on the corner of Markham Road and SR 46 and there is a possibility that wildlife can be attracted to that. Letters from the Sierra Club and the Audubon Society commenting on the Ryland Group PUD were received and filed.
Keith Cleborne, 184 Steeple Chase Circle, indicated on his Speaker Request Form that he does not wish to speak at this time but would duplicate what Mr. Schue has said.
Fred Harden, 174 Wekiva Park Drive, addressed the Board to state he concurs with 42 units if commercial is eliminated. He stated the dilemma is one-unit lots by themselves don’t necessarily protect the environment. If a PUD is done right, it can be a benefit.
Lanny Greene, 145 Longwood Markham Road, addressed the Board to state he and his wife own the property on the south side of this development. He stated they thought it would be prudent to retain counsel and check the ownership on this. He said it is their property and it doesn’t belong to the people who intend to use it.
Chairman Van Der Weide called Jennifer McMurtray but was not in attendance at this time.
Jay Kruger, 116 Steeplechase Circle, addressed the Board to state when the Board approved development of homes on less than one acre near the Wekiva River, she felt, at that time, that the Board opened a Pandora’s box. She stated at that time, the Board assured everyone that was a special case and it would not be repeated. The developer is planning to build 44 homes on 46.9 acres and they are choosing to disregard regulations that are in place to protect the citizens. She stated Seminole County was renamed “Florida’s Natural Choice” but it will become Seminole County “The Developer’s Choice”.
Leonard Tylenda, 8211 Via Bella, addressed the Board to read the first paragraph of Seminole County Comp Plan Objective 14, Preservation of the Rural Character and Natural Resources of the Wekiva River Protection Area. He stated the idea is to protect the environmental resources for the greater good of the county. He said he doesn’t see any major changes or improvements in the major objectives of the Comp Plan. He stated he opposes the request and agrees with staff recommendations.
Polly Miller, representing League of Women Voters, addressed the Board to speak with regard to the Comprehensive Plan, the Wekiva River Protection Act, ecological impact and potable water.
Lilianne Raud, 120 Steeple Chase Circle, addressed the Board to state the Board should not try to bargain with this commercial property. She reviewed the reasons why it should not be done.
Kim Bradley, 8430 Murray Ct., addressed the Board to state the Comp Plan and Land Development Code does not say that anyone giving up commercial would get two or more houses. If the Board changes this zoning, they need to be very cautious in how they do it.
Teresa Kumm, 101 Ross Lake Lane, addressed the Board to speak with regard to one-acre lots. She stated the residents of Ross Lake would like one-acre lots adjacent to them because there is no road abutting them.
Nancy Prine, 655 Terrace Blvd., addressed the Board to state she would like to echo Jim Lee and Fred Harden’s comments. She stated the Audubon Society agrees with the stance that it is very important that commercial should be eliminated because it does not belong there. She pointed out that this property would be difficult to develop within the Wekiva River Protection Act and the requirements for clearance of access on the roadways. She also pointed out at the P&Z meeting there was discussion that Wekiva Park is going to have central water and sewer and it will be going past this site. It would be an excellent opportunity for this property to join in and have central water and sewer. If the development is approved, she would recommend that a mechanism be in place so that the buffers can be protected as well as the trees.
Faith Jones, 763 Mallard Dr., addressed the Board to state she is glad that staff clarified how net buildable density is calculated. Mr. West explained for Ms. Jones what a no buildable area is and how it will be enforced.
Chairman Van Der Weide read Written Comment Form from Todd Baum.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request and Written Comment Forms were received and filed.
The following were received and filed: Copy of a map; A copy of the Fall 1999 Proposed Text Amendments defining Net Buildable Area; Map showing the 100 year flood plane; Condition #2 acceptable by Astor Farms PUD; The difference between net density calculation and net density definition; An e-mail from Frances Chandler relating to Net Density Definitions; and A Fax from Professional Engineering Consultants submitting project data.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Attorney Wright advised he is proposing a 2000 ft. minimum home on this site. He reviewed the lot count calculation, the right-of-way calculation, and why an applicant would want to give up commercial.
Attorney Wright commented for Commissioner Maloy on the water (fountain) feature and its effect on wildlife. He displayed photographs (received and filed) of a subdivision with a retaining wall and he discussed the possibility of blocking the wildlife out of the area. He stated he has no problem removing the lighting but there is enough area aouth on SR 46 to attract wildlife.
Attorney Wright explained for Commissioner Maloy how the buffer will be protected, the no buildable area, and preserving the trees as well.
District Commissioner McLain stated he informed the applicant that he had grave concerns relative to this project. The key is when the Friends of the Wekiva and the Audubon Society indicate that they feel this is beneficial to the environment by getting rid of the commercial. He stated if the Board does not believe that getting rid of commercial is a benefit to the Wekiva Protection zone, then the Board should turn this down. But if the Board believes that it is beneficial, then staff would agree that the PUD is appropriate and conditions would be placed on it.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated he feels commercial should be eliminated, as he doesn’t feel that commercial will sit there forever. The more the land in that area is developed, the more demand will be placed on additional commercial.
Commissioner Morris stated he also feels that commercial should be eliminated. There is no doubt that region is being built out rather quickly and that land will become more attractive for that particular use.
Commissioner Maloy stated the way he sees it is which one of these two plans minimizes the impacts the most. He stated he feels that if the commercial is taken out it will do just that.
Commissioner Henley stated he sees the value of getting rid of the commercial. He stated relative to the Astor Farms issue, staff was told to submit a plan that would be acceptable to the environmental community and to the DCA to see if they would sign off on it. The DCA accepted that plan and as a result of that, even though Astor Farms was permitted far beyond the number of units they actually built, they agreed to go with one house per net buildable acre. The one thing that bothers him with this request is seeing ½ acre lots there because he feels the intent was one house per net buildable acre. He stated he has concerns that the Board will be continuing to be faced with these types of requests. He said he has difficulty wanting to trade that commercial for four additional units and he is concerned about preserving the trees. He added he is inclined to support staff’s recommendation to deny and have the developer to come up with a better plan.
Commissioner McLain stated he was prepared to deny this development, but getting rid of commercial does meet the test. He stated he would like to make sure there are one-acre lots on the west side, there will be water and sewer and the buffer would be enhanced with additional trees. He said he would also recommend including the three staff recommendations outlined in the agenda memorandum.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. West advised the issue of the water feature (fountain) and lighting could be dealt with at the final master plan. That would give the County’s Natural Resources Officer an opportunity to review it further.
Commissioner McLain stated the actual site of the pond and size will be dealt with during the final master plan. He stated the minimum lot size would be ½ acre, one unit per net buildable acre and 42 lots or less based on the net buildable acreage.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris to adopt Ordinance #2001-43, as shown on page _________, rezoning to PUD; property described as 46.9 acres, located south of SR 46 and east of Longwood-Markham Road, as described in the proof of publication, Ryland Group.
Districts 1, 2, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Henley voted NAY.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 12:25 a.m., October 10, 2001.