BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held at 9:30 a.m., on Tuesday, November 18, 2003, in the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.
Chairman Daryl McLain (District 5)
Vice Chairman Grant Maloy (District 1)
Commissioner Randy Morris (District 2)
Commissioner Dick Van Der Weide (District 3)
Commissioner Carlton Henley (District 4)
County Manager Kevin Grace
County Attorney Robert McMillan
Deputy Clerk Carylon Cohen
Pastor Jerry Walsh, Seminole Community Church, gave the Invocation.
Commissioner Henley led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Chairman McLain passed the gavel to County Attorney Robert McMillan to conduct the election of Chairman of the BCC for Year 2003/2004.
Mr. McMillan stated there is no second required for nominations nor is a motion required. He opened the floor for nominations.
Commissioner Van Der Weide nominated Commissioner McLain for Chairman.
Commissioner Henley nominated Commissioner Morris.
No other nominations were made.
Motion by Commissioner Henley to close the nominations.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioners Maloy, Van Der Weide, and McLain voted for Commissioner McLain as Chairman of the BCC for Year 2003/2004.
Commissioners Henley and Morris voted for Commissioner Morris as Chairman.
Mr. McMillan announced that Commissioner McLain has been elected. Whereupon, Commissioner Henley moved a motion that the Board elect Commissioner McLain by acclamation. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE to elect by acclamation Commissioner McLain as Chairman of the BCC for Year 2003/2004.
Mr. McMillan passed the gavel to Chairman McLain.
Chairman McLain opened the floor for nominations for Vice Chairman of the BCC for Year 2003/2004.
Commissioner Morris nominated Commissioner Henley for Vice Chairman; whereupon Commissioner Henley declined.
Commissioner Van Der Weide nominated Commissioner Maloy for Vice Chairman.
No other nominations were made.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to elect by acclamation Commissioner Maloy as Vice Chairman for the BCC for Year 2003/2004.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman McLain recessed the Board of County Commissioners meeting at 9:35 a.m. to convene the meeting of the U.S. Highway 17-92 Community Redevelopment Agency and reconvened the BCC meeting at 9:54 a.m.
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
Mr. Grace advised that Item #15, Budget Amendment Request for $12,676, has been pulled from the agenda. He also advised that a Budget Amendment Request for approval is included in Item #5, Approval to waive Purchasing Procedures and execute Contract with HKS Architects, Inc., not to exceed $50,000.
Commissioner Henley discussed Item #25, Award RFP-4190-03, Lease/Purchase of Computer Equipment. He said he has discussed many areas that could save dollars through some policies on what staff can purchase. He asked the Board members to pass on any ideas they might have to DCM Rob Frank.
Commissioner Maloy advised he wants to make a change to the requirements of the contract for Item #32, Award M-390-03, Bus Bench Concession Agreement. He said he thinks the County should have responsibility to identify the location of the bus benches and he wants it stricken that the contractor shall be responsible to identify the location of the benches.
Mr. Grace said he thinks the County would like for the contractor to come forward with the places for the County to review and approve. Whereupon, Commissioner Maloy suggested adding the language, “which must be approved by the County.”
The Board had no objections to the proposed change.
Commissioners Maloy and Morris also discussed where benches should be located. Commissioner Morris said a bench should not be installed where there are no shelters. Commissioner Maloy suggested adding the language, “unless there is approval by the BCC.” He said he thinks a shelter or bench will suffice in that situation.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to approve and authorize the following:
11. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2003-R-194, as shown on page _______, authorizing the completion of the County’s Solid Waste Bonds with the Financial Advisor (Stifel, Nicolaus and Company, Inc.) and Underwriters (William R. Hough, Senior Manager, and Bank of America, Co-Owner).
12. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2003-R-195, as shown on page _______, for the issuance of Homeowner Revenue Bonds and of Single Family Revenue Bonds, Draw Down Series, by the Orange County Housing Finance Authority on behalf of Seminole County.
13. FY: 2002/03
Budget Amendment Resolution #2003-R-196, as shown on page _______, $381,952 – Community Services: 00100 – General Fund. Medicaid Billings to the County increased significantly during FY 02/03 due to changes in State legislation. Billings for FY 02/03 have ceased and a transfer is necessary to replenish the account line (the budgets for FY 03/04 and FY 04/05 were adjusted during the budget planning process to accommodate the future increases). A portion of the transfer ($161,147) will be needed from General Fund Reserves resulting in a FY 02/03 reserve balance of $7,445,958 after the transfer.
14. Budget Amendment Resolution #2003-R-197, as shown on page _______, $50,080 – Judicial: 00100 – General Fund. Requesting the following budget increase to recognize an increase in revenue due to filing fees coming in higher than expected and accommodate the final annual expenditures for the Legal Aid Office. Legal Aid is supported through a $16 filing fee per Florida Statute Section 28.2401 and their budget is based on revenues received each fiscal year.
15. FY: 2003/04
Pulled from the Agenda the Budget Amendment Request, $12,676 – Judicial: 00100 – General Fund. Due to State budget shortfalls, grant-in-aid funding for Civil Traffic Infraction Court has been modified. Therefore, in-kind service will be reduced. The grant was decreased to $16,183 of which $6,659 was expended in the 2002/03 fiscal year (the State fiscal year runs from July 1 – June 30), leaving a balance of $9,524 to be budgeted to the current fiscal year. As of the current fiscal year the County will be matching this grant with in-kind services provided through the salaries of one Deputy from the Sheriff’s Office and one Trial Clerk from County Court. This transaction will result in a transfer of $12,676 to the General Fund Contingency account line.
16. Budget Amendment Resolution #2003-R-198, as shown on page _______, $1,165,000 – Public Works: 11541 – 2001 Sales Tax Fund. This transfer will provide construction funds for Minor Roads projects required due to unanticipated changes in scope and final construction cost estimates and provide for a study to determine the feasibility of intersection improvements for a project. Funds are available in Contingency account lines and the Reserve for Capital Improvement account line. After this transfer, the balance remaining in the Reserves for Capital Improvement will be $4,217,641.
17. Budget Amendment Resolution #2003-R-199, as shown on page _______, $25,000 – Public Safety: 00100 – General Fund. The Emergency Management Division of Public Safety received a Citizens Corps/CERT (Community Emergency Response Team) grant under FEMA funding from the Department of Community Affairs, Division of Emergency Management, for the amount of $25,000. The purpose of the grant is to prepare program managers and instructional teams to initiate and expand the CERT training program.
18. Authorize scheduling and advertising a public hearing on December 9, 2003 for the Consolidated Street Lighting District Ordinance.
19. Accept and authorize the Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion, as shown on page _______, for FC-1123-00/BJC – Southeast Regional WTP, with Wharton-Smith, Inc., Sanford.
20. Approve Amendment #4, as shown on page ______, to PS-525-98/BJC, Construction Engineering and Inspection Services for Markham Woods Road/Douglas Avenue Road Project, with Keith and Schnars, P.A., Rockledge ($72,793.72).
21. Approve Second (Final) Renewal for PS-597-01/BJC – General Professional Consulting Services for Comprehensive Planning, with Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez Rinehart, Inc., Orlando; Land Design Innovations, Orlando; and Wilbur Smith Associates, Orlando (January 3, 2004 through January 2, 2005) (Not-to-Exceed $275,000.00/year).
22. Approve Second (Final) Renewal for PS-598-01/BJC – General Professional Consulting Services for Environmental/Recreation Planning with Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez Rinehart, Inc., Orlando; Pandion Systems, Inc., Gainesville; and Lotspeich and Associates, Inc., Winter Park (January 3, 2004 through January 2, 2005) (Not-to-Exceed $225,000.00/year).
23. Approve Second (Final) Renewal for RFP-4121-01/BJC – Prosecution Alternative for Youth Program Counseling Agreement (P.A.Y. Counselors Program) with Another Chance Counseling Center, Winter Park; Central Florida Psychological Services, Sanford; Families in Recovery, Longwood; Human Services Resources & Associates, Longwood; Quest Counseling Centre, Altamonte Springs; and Robert A. Tango, Lake Mary (January 3, 2004 through January 2, 2005) (Not to Exceed $62,000.00 per year).
24. Approve the First Renewal for RFP-4176-02/BJC – Outpatient Substance Abuse Treatment Services for the Seminole County Drug Court Program, to The Grove Counseling Center, Inc., Altamonte Springs (January 15, 2004 through January 14, 2005) (Not-to-Exceed $60,000.00).
25. Award RFP-4190-03/JVP, as shown on page _______, Lease/Purchase of Computer Equipment, to Pomeroy Computer Resources, Jacksonville (Not-to-Exceed $3,600,000.00 per year).
26. Approve Amendment #4, as shown on page _______, to RFP-4117-01/GG, Display Wall & Display Wall Controller for Seminole County Advanced Traffic Management Controller, with Advanced Video Inc., Columbia, SC (Not-to-Exceed $48,160.80) (Time Extension).
27. Award IFB-3076-03/JVP, as shown on page _______, Term Contract for Streets, Driveways, Curbs & Gutters, to American Persian Engineers & Constructors, Inc. (APEC, Inc.), Orlando and Sunshine Building and Development Corporation, Casselberry (Not-To-Exceed $1,422,075.00 per year).
28. Award IFB-3077-03/BJC, as shown on page _______, Term Contract for Court Resurfacing Services for Parks and Recreation Division, to Varsity Courts, Inc., Longwood (Not-to-Exceed $90,000.00 for a period of three (3) years).
29. Approve Amendment #1 to A/B-391-00/GG, Turf Maintenance of Drainage Areas, with Ott Landscape Maintenance, Deland (Not-to-Exceed $28,860.00 per year).
30. Waive the procurement process, approve Sole Source Procurement and authorize the issuance of Purchase Orders for the Repairs of Flow Meters and Electronics for the Water and Sewer Division on an as-needed basis, with Techni Quip, Inc., Auburdale (Not-to-Exceed $30,000.00 per year).
31. Waive the procurement process, approve Sole Source Procurement and authorize the issuance of Purchase Orders for the purchase of Field and Laboratory Calibration, repair, maintenance and chemicals, with Hach Company, Ames, IA (Not-to-Exceed $65,000.00 per year).
32. Award M-390-03, as shown on page _______, Bus Bench Concession Agreement, as amended, to Metropolitan Systems, Inc. of Orlando, FL ($25.00/bench/year payable to the County).
33. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute a HOME Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) Subrecipient Agreement, as shown on page _______, between Seminole County and the Center for Affordable Housing, Inc.
34. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute three (3) Satisfactions of Second Mortgage, as shown on page _______ for households assisted under the SHIP Program’s Home Ownership Assistance Program; Theresa Ann Hernandez, John S. and Tammy T. Matteson, and Paul & Kim L. Trepte.
35. Authorize release of Performance Bond (American Casualty Company of Reading, PA) in the amount of $4,905.78 (roads, streets, drainage, water and sewer improvements) dated 12/07/2001 for Crown Colony Subdivision.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to approve and authorize the following:
41. Approve negotiated settlement relating to Parcel Numbers 152/752/852 of the Dodd Road road improvement project, located on the west side of Dodd Road north of Dike Road, in the amount of $13,275.00 for apportionment attorney’s fees; Amberwood Unit III Community Association, Inc. Property.
42. Approve negotiated settlement relating to Parcel Numbers 106/706 of the Dodd Road road improvement project, located at 1550 Dodd Road, in the amount of $40,000.00 inclusive of land value, severance damage, statutory interest, attorney’s fees and costs; Erdman Property.
43. Approve proposed settlement relating to Parcel Numbers 227/827 of the East Lake Mary Boulevard Phase IIB road improvement project, located at the southeast corner of Cameron Avenue and Canyon Point Road, in the amount of $100,000.00 inclusive of land value, severance damages, statutory interest, attorney’s fees and costs; Fertakis Property.
44. Approve proposed settlement relating to Parcel Numbers 131A, 131B, 131C, and 731 of the Lake Emma Road road improvement project, located at 420 Sun Lake Circle, Lake Mary, in the amount of $33,380.00, inclusive of attorney’s fees and costs; Ambassador III L.P.’s Property.
45. Adopt Second Supplement and Second Amended Resolution #2003-R-201, as shown on page _______, of Necessity relating to Lake Drive road improvement project (from Seminola Boulevard to Tuskawilla Road).
46. Approve and execute revised Purchase Agreement, as shown on page _______, relating to Parcel Numbers 230/730/830 of the East Lake Mary Boulevard Phase IIB road improvement project, located along east side of Cameron Avenue south of State Road 46, in the amount of $165,000.00, with no attorney’s fees or expert costs incurred; Lamar Brooke Property.
47. Approve and execute Purchase Agreement, as shown on page _______, relating to the acquisition of the leasehold interest of Florida Central Railroad Company (“FCRC”) in railroad property owned by CSX. Portions of the property are necessary to construct improvements to Bunnell Road. The Board has previously authorized acquisition of the entire parcel based on potential future trail uses. The proposed Agreement purchases FCRC’s entire leasehold interest in the property for the amount of $996,000.00, inclusive of all fees, costs and expenses.
Commissioner Henley discussed Item #47, stating what they are doing is paying nearly $1 million for the lease and now have to go back and negotiate on the land. He said he hopes staff is tough on negotiating when it comes to the land. Mr. McMillan stated this is an extremely expensive project. He thinks the fee at closing will be close to $3 million. A short discussion ensued.
County Engineer, Jerry McCollum, addressed the Board to make comments. He advised the project is about 2.2 miles.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to approve and authorize the following:
48. Expenditure Approval Lists, as shown on page _______, dated October 21 and 28, and November 4, 2003; and Payroll Approval List, as shown on page _______, dated October 23, 2003.
49. Chairman to execute the following Satisfactions of Judgment/Court Costs:
Ronald Thomas Haskins, #01-4641-CFA - $368, Court Costs and Application of Indigency Fee
Tina Michelle Komanetsky, #03-2129-CFA - $510
Aquiles Antonio Rojas, #00-5036-MMA - $258, Court Costs and Public Defender Application Fee
Aquiles Rojas, #00-4269-MMA - $288, Court Costs and Public Defender Application Fee
Ryan Alan Chamberlain, #99-1306-CFB - $46.17
50. BCC Official Minutes dated October 14 and 28, 2003.
51. Noting, for information only, the following Clerk’s “received and filed”:
1. Work Order #77, as shown on page _______, to FC-1139-00.
2. Amendment #1, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #43, PS-590-01.
3. Amendment #2, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #29, PS-590-01.
4. Copy of Memorandum to Jerry McCollum from Herbert S. Zischkau III, Assistant County Attorney, regarding Direct Pay Request concerning Seminole County v. 7-Eleven, et al.
5. Work Order #1, as shown on page _______, to PS-5142-02.
6. Change Order #2, as shown on page _______, to CC-1196-02.
7. Work Order #9, as shown on page _______, to PS-5120-02.
8. Closing documents, as shown on page _______, regarding Seminole County/R&R Investments Property Exchange (Bill Ray Nissan).
9. Notice of Application for a Transfer of Majority Organizational Control regarding CWS Communities LP, d/b/a Palm Valley.
10. Notice from the Florida Public Service Commission regarding Commission Hearing and Prehearing for Docket No. 030339-TP, Petition of Allegiance Telecom of Florida, Inc.
11. Copy of Memorandum to the BCC from County Manager Kevin Grace regarding Capital Project Fund Transfer in the amount of $57,200 for Markham Woods/Douglas Realignment Project.
12. Bill of Sale and Letter of acceptance, as shown on page _______, of water and sewer system within the project known as Markham Forest.
13. Title Opinion Letter, as shown on page _______, for Wayside Estates.
14. Fire Division Uniform Purchase Agreement, IFB-3075-03, as shown on page _______.
15. Second Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Choose Life License Plates Annual Use Fee Proceeds Agreement, RFP-4111-01.
16. Work Order #4, as shown on page _______, to PS-5135-02.
17. Amendment #1, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #28, PS-590-01.
18. Construction Services Agreement M-398-03, as shown on page _______.
19. Purchase Agreement Settlement Authorization, as shown on page _______, for East Lake Mary Boulevard, Phase IIB, Donald S. Fulsang and Susan Norton, as approved on July 22, 2003.
20. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Design/Build Contract (D/B-607-01).
21. Amendment #1, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #9, RFP-4109-01.
22. Florida Division of Forestry 2002/2003 Annual Report.
23. Sixth Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Agreement Between Owner and Design/Builder, DB-605-00.
24. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Custodial Services Agreement, RFP-4187-03.
25. Amendment #1, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #1, PS-5140-03.
26. Development Order, as shown on page _______, for 5th Street Chuluota Daycare, Michelle and Michael Humphrey.
27. Survey Services Agreement M-399-03, as shown on page _______.
28. Satisfaction, as shown on page _______, of Connection Fees for Lake Forest Section 6A.
29. Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Conditional Utility Agreements for water and sewer service with Christian Life Center of Orlando, Inc.
30. Bill of Sale and Letter of Acceptance, as shown on page _______, of water and sewer system within the project known as Lake Forest Section 12B.
31. Performance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $2,262,104.17 for Dunwoody Commons Phase I.
32. Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $11,345.00 for Carmax Sanford, Rinehart Road Right-of-Way.
33. Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $14,037.79 for Monroe Commerce Center North Phase I.
34. Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $2,839.58 for Hampton Inn (Colonial Town Park).
35. Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $13,245.00 for Mystic Cove Apartments.
36. Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $4,124.61 for Lake Forest Section 12B.
37. Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $32,050.13 for Oakhurst Reserve Phase 2.
38. Documents as follows per Joint Use Agreement for Stormwater Facilities for CR 419 Phase II approved on October 14, 2003: Owner’s Affidavit, Non-foreign Certificate and Request for Taxpayer Identification Number, as shown on page _______, by Live Oak Reserve Ltd.; Consent of Mortgagee to Permanent Slope Easement with Wachovia Bank, as shown on page _______; Consent of Mortgagee to Permanent Slope Easement with Hermad Limited Partnership, as shown on page _______; Consent of Mortgagee to Permanent Slope Easement with Engle Homes/Orlando, Inc. n/k/a Tousa Homes, Inc., as shown on page _______; Consent of Mortgagee to Permanent Slope Easement with Oviedo Funding, LLC, as shown on page _______; Permanent Slope Easement with Live Oak Reserve Ltd., as shown on page _______; Partial Release of Mortgage with Wachovia Bank, as shown on page _______; Partial Release of Mortgage with Hermad Limited Partnership, as shown on page _______; Partial Release of Mortgage with Tousa Homes, Inc., as shown on page _______; Partial Release of Mortgage with Oviedo Funding, LLC, as shown on page _______; and Special Warranty Deed by Live Oak Reserve Ltd., as shown on page _______.
39. Satisfaction, as shown on page _______, of Connection Fees for project known as ITT Business Training Facility.
40. Conditional Utility Agreements, as shown on page _______, for water and sewer service with Willa Springs Office Park, Inc.
41. Bills of Sale and Letters of Acceptance, as shown on page _______, for Hampton Inn at Colonial Town Park and Oakhurst Reserve Phase 2.
42. Bill of Sale, Letter of Acceptance, and Warranty Deed, as shown on page _______, for Mystic Cove Apartments.
43. Bids as follows: RFP-4205-03; RFP-4199-03; CC-1219-03; IFB-3077-03; IFB-3078-03; and PS-5152-03.
52. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute the $3.5 million State Appropriation for Child Dependency, as shown on page _______, that was appropriated in the Justice Administrative Commission’s (JAC) Grants and Donations Trust Fund for State Fiscal Year 2003-2004. Cash source will be from Trust Funds from the Department of Children and Families (DCF). JAC will pay the Grantee for expenditures made by the County Government in the amount not-to-exceed $37,935.42 for period beginning July 1, 2003 and ending June 30, 2004.
53. Authorize expenditure from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund in the amount of $1,000 for the following: $1,000 contribution to the Boys and Girls Club of Central Florida, West Sanford Branch, in support of the Club’s Drug Prevention Program.
54. Approve Budget Amendment Resolution #2003-R-202, as shown on page _______, $130,573; Local Law Enforcement Block Grant awarded to Seminole County Sheriff’s Office from the U.S. Department of Justice to purchase the required equipment to outfit 8 deputy positions recently awarded by the COPS office. The required 10% match is already included in the Sheriff’s Office budget.
55. Approve Budget Amendment Resolution #2003-R-203, as shown on page _______, re-budgeting $441,751.91 in prior year unexpended contract/grant funds to the Sheriff’s Office FY 2003/04 budget.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
DCM Sally Sherman addressed the Board to request Board adoption of a resolution establishing Miami-Dade as a permanent Secretariat of the Free Trade Area of the Americas.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2003-R-207, as shown on page _______, establishing Miami-Dade as a permanent Secretariat of the Free Trade Area of the Americas.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Morris asked that the Resolution be forwarded to the respective elected officials.
Ms. Sherman reviewed some legislative items for the upcoming Legislature and some monitoring items (copies of information provided in the staff report). She stated she would pull some information together and bring back a complete package at the December 9, 2003 meeting.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he thinks it is important that Central Florida understands that there is a real potential for the leadership that the County had and the leadership roles in the House and Senate could go south based on the makeup in the future.
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at 10:12 a.m. and reconvened at 10:25 a.m.
Planning Manager Matt West addressed the Board to present request for reduction of the code enforcement lien on the property located at 180 W. 3rd Street, Chuluota, Parcel #21-21-32-5CF-2500-0100, Seminole County (Wayne J. Walmer, Sr.), to the estimated administrative costs of $645.36 for processing and, upon payment in full, authorize Chairman to execute Satisfaction of Lien. He reviewed the history of the case, noting repeat violations. He said because of the repeated violations, staff is recommending denial of rescinding the lien or continuing the request to a date certain in the future to further monitor the property.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. West showed a picture (not received and filed) of the site on the overhead screen.
Wayne J. Walmer, Sr., owner, addressed the Board to state the car was only on the property for 48 hours. He said all the cars on the property are now in running condition. He explained how he had worked with the County and had done everything except for removing the motor home. He explained the delay with doing that due to the brakes not working. He said he had the motor home moved in time, but he failed to get in touch with the County in time. He advised the Board that he mowed County-owned property across the street from him that had not been mowed for 17 years. Whereupon, Chairman McLain said staff will look into that.
Jerry Robertson, Code Enforcement, addressed the Board to state the property has had a number of violations of junk vehicles. As of yesterday, the property was in compliance. For many years, there has been a history of being in and out of compliance. Calls have been made and violations were picked up by staff on site visits and on reinspections.
Commissioner Morris asked if the Board has ever held a lien for a period of 12 months on a piece of property to see if the property owner would stay in compliance.
Mr. McMillan answered that there have been liens on property for quite awhile, and it is not unusual to have a lien on property until it is sold. He said Commissioner Morris could fashion the motion to say to reduce the lien for six months to see if the owner will stay in compliance for six months or so.
District Commissioner Maloy stated he was leaning towards the point that Code Enforcement was not setting fines for revenue for the County but to try to keep the property looking nice. He was planning to recommend continuing for 120 days to see if there are any reoccurring violations and bring this back if Mr. Walmer follows all the rules. He explained he is suggesting putting Mr. Walmer on a probationary period for 120 days.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to continue the request for 120 days to the earliest meeting and bring it back in order for staff to monitor and report back at that meeting if there have been any reoccurring violations; code enforcement lien on the property located at 180 W. 3rd Street, Chuluota, Parcel #21-21-32-5CF-2500-0100, Seminole County, Wayne J. Walmer, Sr.
Under discussion, Mr. Grace advised the date will be the second Tuesday in March, March 9, 2004.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Mr. West presented the request for reduction of the code enforcement lien on the property located on Airport Boulevard Parcel #34-19-30-503-0J00-0140, Sanford, Seminole County (Shirley Jones) to the estimated administrative costs of $248.04 for processing and, upon payment in full, authorize Chairman to execute Satisfaction of Lien. He advised there have been no future violations since 1991. Staff is recommending approval of the request.
Shirley Jones, property owner, addressed the Board to state she agrees with the recommendation to reduce the lien.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to reduce the Code Enforcement Board Lien on the property located on Airport Boulevard Parcel #34-19-30-503-0J00-0140, Sanford, Seminole County, Shirley Jones, to the estimated administrative costs of $248.04 for processing and, upon payment in full, authorize Chairman to execute Satisfaction of Lien, as shown on page _______.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
County Manager’s Briefing
Mr. West asked for Board direction on preparing an Ordinance to amend the Land Development Code as it relates to the regulation of boat docks as a principal and/or accessory use and suggestions for improvements or clarifications to the Code with a tentative hearing scheduled for the December 9, 2003 meeting. He said he has drafted some language he is recommending to bring back in ordinance form. He reviewed a couple issues that were brought up since the staff report. One is the need to make further clarification that boat docks may not be leased to other parties and, secondly, there may not be the need for requiring to launch a boat on the body of water where the boat is located, if there is another launch that can be used.
Commissioner Van Der Weide said he thinks staff has put in significant safeguards.
Commissioner Maloy said he likes the change to make the zoning uniform and not have conflicting wording in the zoning categories.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to approve direction to staff to prepare an Ordinance to amend the Land Development Code as it relates to the regulation of boat docks as a principal and/or accessory use and suggestions for improvements or clarifications to the Code and advertise a public hearing scheduled for the December 9, 2003 meeting.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Mr. West presented the request for Board direction regarding the contents of the proposed Joint Planning Agreement with the City of Sanford and the Celery Avenue Zoning Overlay. A copy of the report booklet, “Sanford Joint Planning Interlocal Agreement and Celery Avenue Zoning Overlay” was received and filed. Mr. West said the booklet gives a three-year history of Celery Avenue. He reviewed where staff is in the process of negotiating an agreement. He reported that since the September meeting, there has been a request from the City of Sanford to annex an additional 70 acres into the City, directly east of Celery Key subdivision now under construction. The City of Sanford has asked that the cap line start at the Agricultural Station property, meaning they could annex up to the Ag Station property. He advised that the City is making an amendment to their code to have the City Commission consider changing how they calculate density to mirror how the County calculates density. He further reviewed the agreement.
Russ Gibson, Sanford Director of Planning and Community Development, addressed the Board to state the City has a positive relationship with regard to working with the County. He brought two points before the Board. Regarding the Celery Avenue Corridor, he said Sanford has a significant investment with regard to its capital outlay up to Brisson Avenue, and he asked that the Board give consideration to allow the land use to be greater than three units per acre. He stated the methodology for density is going before the City Commission on November 24 to be considered. He further advised that the City Commission adopted, earlier this year, the JPA at three units per acre along the entire Celery Avenue corridor, and is asking the County to give consideration to amending that up to the State property.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. Gibson said the City is asking for an amendment to be consistent with the development that has occurred to date, but it would terminate at the State property. Whereupon, Commissioner Morris began discussion on the density.
Don Fisher, Planning and Development Director, addressed the Board to respond to comments by Commissioner Morris.
Commissioner Henley discussed with Mr. Gibson the reason the City needs the higher density. He said amending the density would be a high impact on school funding. He said maybe the County should look at contesting the annexations if they can’t get to a more agreeable number of units.
Under discussion, Chairman McLain stated he thinks the Board needs to protect the community and maintain no more than three units per acre. He is concerned that with two units to the acre, people can still use wells and septic tanks, and they want to see the developments come in on water and sewer rather than have more wells and septic tanks. He said hopefully Sanford will move this along in having three units to the acre and, for this new project, only four units per acre. He said if they can get an agreement with Sanford to put into place what the maximum densities are, he thinks that will protect the corridor. He has the fear they will have a community with all types of mixed developments and densities rather than a consistent overlay. He said he would not want to see these densities (up to the State property where the Ag Station is) be more than four units to the acre. He thinks the Board can make that decision during the annexation process.
Mr. Gibson stated the City staff has already conveyed to the developers along Celery Avenue that they are concerned with regard to the impact on the school system and are looking to see how the developer can contribute to those issues.
Chairman McLain advised the School Board has met with him and the County Manager and staff; and they are working with them on an elementary school site to be acquired. They are interested in building a new elementary school in the area.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he would like to see this get resolved. He is not sure a whole lot has changed from what he is hearing and that concerns him.
Chairman McLain said he thinks the reluctance is with the Board of County Commissioners and not the City of Sanford.
Ken McIntosh addressed the Board to state they did have a community meeting in September and Mr. Gibson was there. At the October meeting, Mr. West brought to their attention the new annexation which is just west of the Agricultural Experiment Station. He responded to Commissioner Henley’s request for responses to the October 21, 2003 memorandum from Karen Consalo, Assistant County Attorney.
Mr. McMillan stated he thinks most of the things in the memorandum can be worked out; he doesn’t think there is anything critical.
Mr. McIntosh explained for Commissioner Maloy how he arrived at his figures for the number of units. Mr. McIntosh stated his group is wed to two units per acre but they are weakening as Mr. West has convinced them that there are subdivisions that are operable in the County that are not two or three units per acre.
Commissioner Morris stated in terms of the original discussions, the list from Mr. McIntosh and the group has shortened dramatically. He discussed the issues with Mr. McIntosh as pointed out in the memorandum by Ms. Consalo.
Mr. McIntosh said he thinks it is important for the County staff to attend the City Commission meeting and make comments, especially on the new annexation.
During further discussion, Commissioner Henley stated he would like to see the impact of the new formula.
Chairman McLain stated in an area of consistency and the new annexation, the City would certainly not approve higher density to the east. That would be a signal to the County that there is concern over what their intentions are.
Commissioner Maloy said he sees they have four issues: the overlay standards; the land use changes for the County; the road agreement; and the Joint Planning Agreement. He sated he could personally support 2.5 units in the area as a compromise to move forward. The biggest problem he sees in the future is when they go to a land use change that will allow developments at the end of the road to occur in a quicker fashion than they normally would. He sees that as a bigger issue than the Joint Planning Agreement. He said before they change the land use, he would like to see a plan on how to improve the infrastructure and the drainage. He asked what kind of road would be needed to bring it up for the future growth. He said he thinks they need to have a plan in place.
Mr. McIntosh said the citizens would agree to 2.5 units per acre. He stated a meeting was held at Hamilton Elementary School and only two things were discussed, the 100 ft. Celery Avenue right-of-way and all appropriate drainage structures that are needed in the area. There were no dollars and cents placed on that at the meeting.
Commissioner Morris said they could note there will be no developments until the infrastructure is in place and have concurrency within five years. This would address Commissioner Maloy’s issues. He said if they could agree to 2.5 units and move with that; and then put in some language that Commissioners Maloy and Henley could live with over a five-year time frame for development with infrastructure to bring it up to County standards. That would get a three or four-lane road.
Chairman McLain said he thinks the Board is at somewhere between two and three units to the acre. If they move forward, they will have to hold a public hearing and all the property owners will have the opportunity to state their wishes. He summarized the direction he’s hearing is that Mr. West can move forward with this process and work toward agreement on the areas the Board discussed.
Commissioner Henley stated he would like the language agreed upon to be incorporated into the agreement. He encouraged the County Attorney to deal with the infrastructure and incorporate the suggestion by Commissioner Morris to encourage development in a proper fashion.
Chairman McLain summarized that west of the Ag Station would be four units per acre and from the station east, there would be 2.5 units per acre. The Board consented to the 2.5 units.
Mr. West asked for direction in Section 2. He said the original agreement was for six units per acre, but the Celery Avenue group recommended no more than three units.
Commissioner Maloy stated he did not see that as a big problem with six units in that section.
Chairman McLain confirmed with Mr. West that if they move forward with that, any property owner there could object to the land use change taking place.
Chairman McLain advised he would go to Item #61 now due to the time and continue Item #60, Revision 7 - Article V Legislation, to the afternoon agenda.
Robert Adolphe, Environmental Services Director, addressed the Board to advise an update will be given to them on the current status of the Northwest Seminole County Tri-City Reclaimed Water Augmentation System joint venture that supplies irrigation quality water for commercial and residential use with the Cities of Sanford and Lake Mary. He introduced David Gerach (phonetic) of CPH Engineering to make the presentation.
Mr. Gerach addressed the Board to review the PowerPoint presentation (copies received and filed) covering the following topics: History; Water Quality; Reclaimed Water Augmentation System; Exhibit A-1, Cost Breakdown; Distribution; Regional Reclaimed Water System; Beneficial Recharge Areas; Current Available Reclaimed Flows; Current Study; and Current Study Goals.
Chairman McLain stated he would like to see the actual costs the Board must invest in the surface potable water program and compare that to enhancing and providing more reclaimed from surface water in order to reduce the potable need from the ground so they can meet their goals with St. Johns.
Commissioner Morris complimented staff and CPH for the good work that went into this project. He said the implications are much greater than anticipated.
Mr. Grace said they are pursuing a comprehensive program to water supply and not looking at just one approach. He thinks there are some other opportunities that were presented that they need to focus on. The problem with reclaimed water is that it is very expensive to get out to the subdivisions.
Mr. Adolphe reported that staff is applying again for two consumptive use permits. The special counsel has told them they should consolidate the permits because that gives them an advantage of a comprehensive approach. He said that would also give them a plan for the County, which would include all sources of alternative water both for potable and reclaim. He added he will bring that back to the Board shortly.
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at 12:06 p.m., reconvening at 1:33 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 Sandy McCann, who were present at the Opening Session.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley to authorize the filing of the proofs of publication for this meeting’s scheduled public hearings into the Official Record.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Continuation of a request to consider a major amendment to the PCD Master Plan and Addendum #1 to Developer’s Commitment Agreement for NW 46 PCD, located east of Oregon Avenue, west of I-4, ½ mile north of SR 46, as described in the proof of publication, Meredith Pickens, received and filed.
Planning Manager, Matt West, advised the applicant wishes to continue this request indefinitely. He added that when this comes back to the Board, it will be readvertised.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to accept the withdrawal and the indefinite continuance for request for a major amendment to the PCD Master Plan and Addendum #1 to Developer’s Commitment Agreement for NW 46 PCD, located east of Oregon Avenue, west of I-4, ½ mile north of SR 46, as described in the proof of publication, Meredith Pickens.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
REQUEST TO VACATE & ABANDON,
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a request to vacate and abandon a portion of a 10-foot platted drainage easement located between Lots 14 and 15, Alaqua Lakes Phase 5B, 3540 Legacy Hills Court, Jeff Moskowitz, received and filed.
Planner, Denny Gibbs, addressed the Board to present the request, advising the applicant is requesting the vacate in order to combine two lots to build one house. The area of the requested vacate contains no utilities and does not affect the drainage system for the subdivision. She added that staff recommends approval.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to adopt appropriate Resolution #2003-R-204, as shown on page _______, vacating and abandoning a portion of a 10-foot platted drainage easement located between Lots 14 and 15, Alaqua Lakes Phase 5B, 3540 Legacy Hills Court, as described in the proof of publication, Jeff Moskowitz.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
REQUEST TO VACATE & ABANDON, EASEMENT ON
CELERY AVE., D.R. HORTON, INC./WILLIAM BARFIELD
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a request to vacate and abandon a 661-foot wide blanket maintenance easement dedicated to Seminole County located on the north side of Celery Avenue within the Sanford City Limits in Section 29, Township 19 South, Range 31 East, D.R. Horton, Inc./William Barfield, received and filed.
Planner, Michael Rumer, addressed the Board to present the request, advising the proposed vacate encompasses property within Celery Key, which is currently in the subdivision permitting process with the City of Sanford. He further advised the staff has reviewed the request and recommends approval subject to the following dedications: (1) 65-foot drainage easement over the subject drainage ditch; (2) 20-foot drainage easement over an existing drainage ditch on the west side of the property; and (3) 25-foot drainage easement over an existing drainage ditch on the east side of the property.
Bill Barfield, applicant, addressed the Board to request approval.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to adopt appropriate Resolution #2003-R-205, as shown on page _______, vacating and abandoning a 661-foot wide blanket maintenance easement dedicated to Seminole County located on the north side of Celery Avenue within the Sanford City Limits in Section 29, Township 19 South, Range 31 East, as described in the proof of publication, subject to the staff recommendations, D.R. Horton, Inc./William Barfield.
Under discussion and upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. West advised this property is already under construction.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
CONSIDERATION OF TEXT AMENDMENT
TO THE COMP PLAN/CIE EXHIBITS
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a text amendment to the Capital Improvements Element of the Comprehensive Plan by means of updating the Exhibits section, received and filed.
Planner, Dick Boyer, addressed the Board to present the request, advising the amendment reflects the adopted Budget for FY 2003/04, plus those items proposed for rebudget on October 28, 2003. He added staff recommends approval.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to adopt amendment to the Capital Improvements Element of the Comprehensive Plan, by means of updating the Exhibits section on the Element, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
COUNTY MANAGER’S BRIEFING, CONTINUED
DCM Sally Sherman addressed the Board to report on Revision 7 to Article V Legislation. Copy of PowerPoint presentation was received and filed. She reviewed the following: background; highlights of HB 113A; and funding HB 113A.
Director of Fiscal Services, Lisa Spriggs, addressed the Board to review the following regarding the fiscal impact to the County: reduction in revenues; State surplus/County deficit; optional programs; additional costs to County; and one-time costs (transfers). She summarized the fiscal impact, stating that it is estimated the County deficit will be $1 million annually, plus a one-time cost for transfers of $1.7 million.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Ms. Spriggs stated it appears the State will be approving the Clerk’s budget. However, she said County Finance’s budget will still be approved by the BCC.
Ms. Sherman stated there are still many questions and concerns about this legislation and staff is working with other counties to identify all potential issues. She advised there will be a “Glitch Bill” in the 2004 legislative session. She reiterated that there will be at least a $2.7 million fiscal impact in the first year and $1 million per year thereafter. She added that staff will continue to monitor this legislation and provide the Board with periodic updates. Copy of Implementing Revision 7 to Article V of Florida’s Constitution booklet was received and filed.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Ms. Sherman stated staff has not sent this information to the County’s Legislative Delegation, but they have been working with the Florida Association of Counties.
Mr. Grace stated they will add this to the County’s legislative agenda.
Commissioner Morris stated he would like to know what the trend of inflation is on these costs over the last three years. He suggested informing Guardian Ad Litem, the Law Library, and Adult Drug Court that they are on the chopping block because of the actions by the State.
Ms. Sherman stated staff has had meetings with them and have told them that currently they are included in the budget.
Discussion ensued with regard to the discontinuation of the State Attorney’s funding for defending local ordinances.
Chairman McLain requested staff look at the timing for the new furniture for the new Criminal Justice Facility.
Commissioner Morris asked staff for a breakdown on the type of local ordinance cases that would be prosecuted.
Chairman McLain advised Kate Pullen, Director of Sheltering for the Humane Society of the United States, will be touring the Seminole County Animal Shelter on November 19, 2003.
The Chairman briefly discussed a letter received from Tony Tizzio regarding reappointments to the Seminole County Trails and Advisory Committee. He suggested the Board make appointments at their December meeting. He said homeowners might need to have a little more voice on the committee. He asked staff to find out, prior to the December meeting, where the current members live and how many are homeowners that live on the trail itself.
DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS
Commissioner McLain clarified that a request to withdraw Item #62, NW 46 PCD, was received from Meredith Pickens and was mistaken for Item #69, Chase Groves. He stated his Administrative Aide at first phoned residents to let them know that Item #69 was being withdrawn, but later corrected the mistake.
Commissioner Maloy reported that he received an e-mail from Jerry McCollum, County Engineer, advising that at the November 14 Rail Stakeholders meeting the FDOT eliminated any new rail lines in Seminole County.
Commissioner Maloy stated he would like the County Manager and County Attorney to go through the Seminole Code to see if there are obsolete codes that need to be repealed. He submitted a copy (received & filed) of some of the codes he found that he believes should be deleted.
Attorney McMillan advised some of these items are Special Acts created by the Legislature. He said he will get back to the Board on this.
Commissioner Maloy questioned if there is a statute of limitations on various setback and code requirements. He said there is a case of a resident erecting a shed 15 years ago that encroached into the side setback. He said he would think there would be a period when these types of infractions are grandfathered in.
Planning & Development Director, Don Fisher, stated staff can do some research to determine what other jurisdictions are doing, because currently there is nothing in the Code that allows the grandfathering in those instances. He said staff will prepare a report on same and present it to the Board in the next three months.
Commissioner Van Der Weide reported that half of the trees planted on Wekiva Springs Road have died. He suggested the trees be replaced and watered more frequently.
Commissioner Van Der Weide advised that he is awaiting a traffic study regarding truck traffic on Wekiva Springs Road.
Commissioner Morris reminded the Board that the Expressway Authority Board meeting is scheduled today at 4:00 p.m.
The following Communications and/or Reports were received and filed:
1. Copy of letter dated 10/24/03 to US Congressman Bob Graham from Chairman McLain re: opposition to certain verbiage in SB 150, “Internet Tax Freedom Act”.
2. Copy of letter dated 10/27/03 to Rick Joyce, MOIAC, from Chairman McLain re: BCC vote to create a new County Commissioner liaison appointment to MOIAC.
3. Copy of letter dated 10/27/03 to Alexander J. Hannigan, HBA President, from Chairman McLain re: commendation for leadership during FY 2002/03.
4. Copy of letter dated 10/27/03 to Colleen Castille, FL Dept. of Community Affairs, re: City of Sanford Comp Plan Amendment.
5. Letter dated 10/24/03 to BCC from Thomas G. Percival, Jr., FL Dept. of Transportation, re: 11/18/03 public hearing on SR 15/600 (US Hwy. 17-92) Interchange at SR 436. (cc: BCC, County Managers, Public Works Director, County Engineer)
6. Parks/Recreation Contracts, as shown on page _______, for Services for the following: Colleen M. Luce (Slow-pitch Softball Scorekeeper); Matthew Boysden (Slow-pitch Softball Umpire); Matthew J. Steverson (Round-Robin Tennis Instructor); and Gene Astarita (Slow-pitch Softball Field Supervisor).
COUNTY MANAGER’S REPORT
Mr. Fisher requested Board conceptual approval of the feasibility to relocate an access location with regard to the Deep Lake PUD/Aloma Avenue Townhouses. He said staff is not asking for a decision at this time, but would like direction on whether this can be brought back for consideration at the December 9th meeting. He advised that the County received a letter to litigate from Attorney Mike Jones for the Board’s previous denial of the development’s request for 133 dwelling units. Staff has been working with Mr. Jones to resolve the issue and he would like to know if there is consensus, if it’s feasible, to relocate the access on the site. He stated that Mr. Jones has indicated that they are now proposing 100 dwelling units with a higher end product. Also, he said Mr. Jones is requesting that the fees for the preliminary master plan and revised master plan be applied for this request.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Fisher advised staff is satisfied with the right-in/right-out only. He said ultimately it will be FDOT’s decision. Discussion ensued.
Attorney Mike Jones, representing the developer, addressed the Board to state this would be a temporary right-in and right-out until the intersection is completed.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. Jones advised the project will be upscale townhouses with two-car garages in the rear.
Commissioner Maloy stated prior to the public hearing, he would like to see the access worked out with FDOT.
Ron Henson, project engineer, addressed the Board to state that there will not be an offset intersection. When the intersection is completed, both the southern and northern lanes will be relocated easterly.
Commissioner Maloy stated he would like to visit the site to see how the temporary access will work.
Mr. Jones stated that they understand the Board’s concern. He said before they waste time and money on litigation, they would like to work with the County to see if the issue can be resolved.
Commissioner Morris stated he will continue to file a Conflict of Interest Form, as shown on page _______, with regard to this item even though he is no longer involved with the property. He added that in the past he made no comments on this development, but he will be commenting in the future in order to make sure the Record is correct and the individual’s rights are not violated.
The Board, by consensus, directed staff to bring this item forward as a public hearing item at their December 9, 2003 7:00 p.m. meeting. The Chairman confirmed that the filing fees will be waived, which is the way the Walmart site was handled.
The Chairman recessed the meeting at 2:50 p.m., reconvening at 7:02 p.m., this same date, with all Commissioners and all other Officials, with the exception of Deputy Clerk Sandy McCann, who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Eva Roach, who were present at the Opening Session.
Chairman McLain introduced members, manager, coaches and League President of the Altamonte Springs Babe Ruth Softball Patriots 16 & Under Team.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to adopt appropriate Resolution #2003-R-191, as shown on page _______, commending the Altamonte Springs Babe Ruth Softball Patriots 16 & Under Team for their outstanding accomplishment in winning the 2003 Babe Ruth Softball World Series in Louisville, Kentucky.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
The Board presented the Resolution and hats to the Altamonte Springs Babe Ruth Softball team.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider First Amendment to Third Amended and Restated DRI Development Order for Chase Groves DRI; enact an Ordinance adopting the proposed Small Scale Land Use Amendment from Low Density Residential to Planned Development; enact an Ordinance rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to PCD (Planned Commercial Development District); PUD (Planned Unit Development) to PCD; PUD to PUD; and Addendum #7 to the Chase Groves PUD Developers Commitment Agreement and PUD Final Master Plan, located at the southwest corner of CR 46A and Casa Verde Blvd., Meredith Harper-Pickens, received and filed.
Tony Matthews, Planning, addressed the Board to state the applicant is proposing a 21,750 sq. ft. Neighborhood Commercial development which would allow permitted uses in the CN (Restricted Neighborhood Commercial District) zoning classification, in addition to banking and financial institutions with drive-through facilities and sit-down restaurants. He stated CN zoning is designed to serve areas that are predominantly in residential character, but which require some neighborhood establishments and shops. The applicant is proposing to remove 0.8 acres from the Chase Groves PUD to combine with the abutting 2 acres, which is not within the PUD, to allow the development direct access onto CR 46A. This 0.8 acre property is currently designated as Open Space within the Chase Groves PUD. Removal of this property from the PUD will not reduce the open space requirement of the Chase Groves development below the minimum of 25% for PUDS. The current open space/recreation is approximately 32%. The site is served by CR 46A, Casa Verde Blvd. and Lake Blvd. Direct access into the site from CR 46A shall be right-in only. The applicant is proposing access onto Lake Blvd. and Case Verde Blvd. Development trends are towards single-family residential and proposed office and commercial uses within the Chase Groves PUD on the east side of Casa Verde Blvd. He stated Section 380.06(19) of the Florida Statutes requires that any change to a previously approved DRI development order, which creates a reasonable likelihood of additional regional impact, shall cause the development to undergo further DRI review. The applicable DRI criteria, associated with the applicant’s request, relates to a decrease in the open space of 5% or 20 acres, whichever is less. The applicant’s proposal to remove Parcel “A” from the DRI represents a reduction in open space of approximately 0.8 acres or 0.7%, which is below the 5% or 20 acres DRI threshold. The East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) indicated in a letter that the proposed change to the Chase Groves DRI does not result in an automatic substantial deviation determination pursuant to the Florida Statutes, nor is it expected that it will cause new or increased impacts to regional resources or facilities when considered independently or cumulatively with prior project changes. The Planning & Zoning (P&Z) Commission recommended approval of the request. Staff recommends approval of the requests subject to the following: (A) Compatibility with surrounding uses can be achieved by applying the conditions set forth in the enclosed rezoning development order that addresses location criteria, size, design, access, buffering, lighting, and hours of operation; (B) CN zoning is designed to serve areas of Seminole County that are predominantly residential in character but which require some neighborhood establishments and shops; (C) The proposed use is within the allowable range of square footage for Neighborhood Commercial uses; (D) Restaurants, whether sit-down or drive-through, would not be compatible with adjacent residential uses, due to potential noise and odor generated from patrons using outdoor seating for smoking, and therefore are not recommended; (E) Developer will be responsible for funding a fair share cost for future signalization at CR 46A and Casa Verde Blvd., if warranted; (F) Removal of the 0.8 acre property from the PUD will not reduce the open space requirement of the Chase Groves development below the minimum 25%; (G) Removal of Parcel “A” from the DRI represents a reduction in open space of approximately 0.8 acres or 0.7%, which is below the 5% or 20 acres; (H) The proposed amendment to Planned Development and PCD rezoning do not alter the options or long range strategies for facility improvements or capacity additions included in the Support Documentation to the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan; and (I) Planned Development future land use and PCD zoning use would be consistent with Plan policies identified at this time.
Mr. Matthews stated staff is recommending the following conditions be placed in the development order: (1) Permitted uses within the PCD shall be limited to the list of permitted uses within the CN Restricted Neighborhood zoning classification and shall include banking and financial institutions with drive-through facilities. Outdoor amplification of sound shall be allowed as a customary use for banks and pharmacies, provided amplification is not audible at the property line of abutting residential uses; (2) Development to comply with the applicable provisions of the CN Restriction Neighborhood zoning classification, unless more restrictive conditions are set forth within this development order; (3) Floor area ratio shall not exceed 0.25 FAR; (4) A minimum of 25% open space shall be provided on site; (5) Lighting shall be cut-off/shoe box style with light poles not to exceed 16 ft. in height, with setback a minimum of 50 ft. from adjacent properties and lighting shall not exceed 0.5 ft. candles at the property boundaries. Details of lighting plan shall be submitted with the PCD final site plan; (6) Automated teller machines, if any, shall be located on the side of the building facing CR 46A; (7) Awnings, if provided, shall be sensitive to the building height, size, materials, and color. Awning colors shall be muted or neutral; (8) Neon signs or highlighting of buildings with neon shall not be permitted; (9) The buildings shall be residential in character and the roofs shall contain varying architectural features, so that they do not appear to be predominantly flat. Roofing material shall be composed of asphalt shingles. The exterior building material of the building shall be brick. Stucco architectural features may be permitted. Architectural elements on the rear shall be designed to minimize the appearance of a building. All electrical and mechanical equipment, and all drain scuppers on any building façade shall be screened and painted to match the building, or decoratively integrated as a building façade architectural fenestration. Exterior of buildings shall not be lighted with decorative up or down lighting; (10) Developer to submit architectural renderings, including plan view and cross section of the wall and landscape plan, building heights and building configuration that are consistent with renderings presented at the BCC public hearing on November 18, 2003. Renderings shall be made a part of the PCD final site plan; (11) The maximum buildings’ height shall not exceed 25 ft. at the peak height and shall be limited to one story in height; (12) The maximum total square footage of proposed buildings shall not exceed 21,750 sq. ft.; (13) The maximum square footage for a single building shall not exceed 14,250 sq. ft.; (14) Dumpster/refuse areas shall be located a minimum of 50 ft. from any adjacent residential uses; (15) Access to CR 46A shall be right-in only; (16) Access locations onto Lake Blvd. and Casa Verde Blvd. shall be a minimum of 200 ft. from CR 46A; (17) Developer shall be responsible for funding a fair share cost for future signalization at CR 46A and Casa Verde Blvd., if warranted; (18) The dumpster pickup hours shall be limited from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.; (19) Hours of operation, including delivery operations, shall be 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; (20) Developer, at this option, may select to subdivide the property into a maximum of 2 parcels. This division will allow each parcel to meet minimum parking standards; however, no side yard setbacks or landscape buffers will be required along the new property split line, unless required by the Seminole County Land Development Code. Appropriate access/parking/drainage and utility easement would be addressed during the lot split process; (21) A 3 ft. high picket fence shall be installed along the Lake Blvd. frontage which matches the architecture of the buildings, supplemented with four canopy trees and four understory trees per 100 lineal ft.; (22) The buffer adjacent to the existing single family lots on the south side of the site shall be a minimum of 25 ft. in width with a 6 ft. block stucco wall and 8 canopy trees per 100 lineal ft. Four understory trees per 100 lineal feet shall be placed within this buffer. Existing trees may satisfy some of the planting requirements of this condition. Existing trees within the buffer shall be preserved to the greatest extent possible where not impacted by the installation of the wall and the buffer shall include extensive landscaping to be determined at time of PCD final site plan; (23) A minimum building setback of 75 ft. shall be required from the south property line; (24) The building setback along Lake Blvd. shall be a minimum of 25 ft.; (25) The southern 20 ft. of the rear buffer shall be maintained as a tree preservation/tree planting area to provide an opportunity for installation of extensive landscaping abutting residential uses. Retention within the rear buffer shall be designed to the maximum extent possible to preserve existing vegetation. Landscaping and retention pond design shall be shown on the PCD final site plan; (26) Illuminated wall signs are subject to the CN zoning classification and signs shall not be placed on the west or south side of buildings. One illuminated ground sign shall be permitted on the north side (CR 46A) of the property, subject to the CN zoning restrictions. Illuminated signs may not be lighted between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.; (27) Pedestrian connections shall be provided from the sidewalk along CR 46A, Casa Verde and Lake Blvd. to the sidewalks in front of the buildings; and (28) Unless otherwise provided herein, development must meet all other applicable provisions of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan (Vision 2020) and Land Development Code. Mr. Matthews submitted e-mails and letters (all received and filed) from area residents opposing the request. He stated he has received one e-mail (received and filed) supporting the request. A letter from Attorney Ken Wright relating to moving forward with the Chase Groves DRI hearing on 11/18/03 was received and filed.
At the request of Commissioner Maloy, Mr. Matthews read the permitted uses within CN zoning.
Mr. Matthews informed Chairman McLain how long CN zoning has been in the Comprehensive Plan.
Attorney Ken Wright, Shutts & Bowen, addressed the Board to display and review a PowerPoint Presentation. He stated the applicant is asking for a rezone, Comp Plan Amendment and approval of a Notice of Proposed Change. He reviewed the Approval Process relating to the application filed (5/16/03) and DRC Meetings held on 7/30/03 and again on 9/17/03. He continued by reviewing the Staff Recommendations; Findings, and the following Comp Plan Elements that were reviewed: FLU 2.4; FLU 2.11; FLU 5.3 and FLU 2.5. He reviewed the six additional findings and recommendations outlined in his presentation. He continued his presentation by reviewing Staff Conditions; Approval Process; Issues That Were Discussed at the LPA Hearing relating to Traffic and Crime; and Similar Examples of Situations of Commercial Establishments That Have Appropriately Been Surrounded by Residential. He displayed and reviewed copies of photographs showing commercial establishments that are located adjacent to surrounding residential areas: Hunt Club and SR 436; Oakmont located on Lake Mary Blvd.; SR 46 and Orange Blvd.; 17-92 north of Lake Mary Blvd.; Lake Forest west of I-4, CR 427/SR 434, shopping center on Lake Mary Blvd east of I-4, and Chase Groves. He concluded by reviewing a site plan (received and filed) of a project (Kash and Karry) approved by the Board within the last year.
Attorney Wright explained for Commissioner Maloy the original purpose of the strip around the parcel that is part of the DRI.
Attorney Frank Ruggieri, 55 East Pine St., representing Chase Groves Homeowners, addressed the Board to display and review photographs of the retention pond, landscaping, brick wall and sign location for Chase Groves and an aerial map of the proposed site (all were received and filed). He discussed the issue of the 0.8 acre parcel in question, stating normally front parcels are owned and maintained by homeowner associations. The Notice of Proposed Change did not deal with the five easements as they are not temporary or perpetual easements. He stated he is perplexed as to how the proposed development could take place with those easements in place. Many of the homes and residents have been in Loch Arbor for 30 to 50 years. The last phase of the Chase Grove community abuts the A-1 parcel and the homes to the south start at about $160,000. The members of this community have made the largest investment of their lives by buying those homes and he doesn’t see how this development will not depreciate their property values. He stated he spoke to Sandra Glenn, Executive Director of ECFRPC, and she indicated that she would not change her opinion and she wasn’t inclined to give him any specifics on what impact the removal of the stormwater infrastructure would have on Chase Groves. He said there hasn’t been adequate investigation, as required by the DRI statute, as to what impact this would have on the community. He said he feels it is very peculiar to see a parcel that is immediately in front of residential community that is not owned by the community and controlled by that community. He stated he doesn’t believe the easement rights have adequately been addressed. He said he feels the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He displayed a site plan and he stated Attorney Wright indicated that the existence of this Planned Commercial use warranted approval of this rezoning change because it is already commercial. The residents are opposed to the request as there are numerous other commercial establishments up the road that address their needs. He said he fails to see how this development is required as set forth in the Land Development Code. He read Attorney Wright’s comments indicated on page 9 of the October 1, 2003 P&Z meeting. He stated the Future Land Use Policy 5.3 provides “to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl, the County shall not designate additional strip commercial development through plan amendments, instead commercial and retail uses (subparagraph B) shall be located where commercial uses are the predominant existing use along the roadway in both directions from the site, therefore, the proposed commercial represents infill development”. He stated he doesn’t see any infilling being done here, it is just spot zoning. He reviewed that Policy 2.4, Subparagraph C provides development intensity is limited and designed to serve the needs of the immediate neighborhood. He said based upon the existing commercial use, he fails to see that this is designed to meet the needs of the immediate neighbors. The development order does not provide for CN zoning, but for PCD, which does not restrict the types of uses that a CN zoning does. He pointed out that the access points on Casa Verde Blvd. were designated on the original PUD that it would be near Brightview Dr. rather than as it is currently proposed.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Robert McMillan, County Attorney, advised he is not sure how the easement rights play with the Planning Council recommendations, if there are easements that prevent the property from being utilized in the way a developer proposes to utilize it. That is a problem they will have to deal with or they won’t be able to move forward with the development. That would be an issue between the holder of the easement and the owner of the property.
Commissioner Morris stated he would like to correct the Record that the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council did not hear this issue. It was a staff interpretation, not an appeal, directed to the Planning Council.
Sharon Sullivan, 290 Aldrup Way, addressed the Board to state she is the President of Chase Groves Homeowners Association and she is here in opposition to this commercial rezone. She stated the Chase Groves Board of Directors voted unanimously not to support this rezoning request. They are opposed to this because it will allow commercial uses and business operations that would negatively impact their neighborhood, adversely affect the abutting residential single-family homes, and it would set a precedent along the CR 46A corridor. If the developer is proposing Neighborhood Commercial Development, then why ask for PCD zoning. The general taxpaying public needs to be protected and ensured that when something is approved, it will not be changed in the developer’s favor. Since the P&Z 10/1/03 meeting, the Homeowners Association has received a letter from Crescent Retail, stating that they are presently under contract with Walgreens to build on the corner. The Hardwick property should be rezoned to a transitional type land use. Chase Groves is located to the south and the historical residential area of Loch Arbor is located around the Crystal Lake Basin. Seminole County owns a 9-acre parcel to the west of this property. These areas are residential in nature to the west, south and north of the proposed site. The Chase Grove parcel is encumbered with easements that need to be protected. The Board approved the Chase Groves DRI the way it was and the easements were put in place without approval. The stormwater drainage system adjacent to the proposed parcel has significant infrastructure problems with the absence of certain underdrains in the north area. The Road Division has a record of street cave-ins along Brightview Dr. and Fletch Ave. These issues need to be reviewed as this is a situation where the developer is now gone and the homeowners are left with the problem. She stated John Moore, Engineering, indicated that portion of the Chase Groves wall on the south side of CR 46A would be rebuilt by Seminole County. Chase Groves Homeowner Association wants to have that wall replaced. The Hardwick property is encumbered with easements in the residents’ favor for entrance feature, landscape, irrigation, stormwater drainage and utility easement access. There shouldn’t be a problem for Seminole County to replace the wall and signage. In order to ensure the long-term viability of residential neighborhoods along the CR 46A corridor, there must be regulated property development to create compatibility with the surrounding existing land uses. She asked the Board to consider denying this request.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Ms. Sullivan advised she would like noncommercial offices that are more residential looking in nature, such as the office complex at Bay Tree on Lake Mary Blvd., as well as something that has compatible hours of operation.
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at 8:25 p.m., reconvening at 8:35 p.m.
Attorney Craig Minegar, 250 Park Ave., addressed the Board to state he is representing Loch Arbor Homeowners Association. He stated he would like to speak with regard to what is the legality of what is being requested and to highlight some of his concerns. He said this is clearly an offense to the residential community character of Chase Groves and Loch Arbor, and it is an active, and obtrusive use. This is a disturbance to the community character and an active obtrusive use. He added he feels the intent of the Small Scale Land Use Amendment process is to accommodate specific Small Scale development. It is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the land use plan. He said the biggest issue to him is acceptable roadway compatibility and transition to nonresidential uses is only permitted at major intersections and he doesn’t see any major intersections involved in this at all. What he sees happening here is creating a major intersection and adding a commercial mode at the north tip of a residential community. He discussed issues relating to development trends towards residential and the standard of review. He stated for all these reasons and on behalf of Loch Arbor Homeowners Association, they are requesting the Board deny the request.
Bob White, 300 Lake Blvd., addressed the Board to state he is the President of Loch Arbor Homeowners Association and he is speaking in opposition to the rezoning of the property in question. He stated he submitted petitions at the P&Z meeting and he has additional Petitions, as shown on page _______, from Ravenna Park, Idyllwilde, Oaks and Kaywood subdivisions opposing the project. He stated about ¼ mile east of this property, there is the old Winn Dixie plaza in which the School Board is now occupying part of it. There is also a shopping plaza behind the Shell station that has never been fully occupied. Lake Blvd. has a posted speed limit and there is a problem with speeders on that road. The drivers seem to enjoy the S curb that comes out of the property in question.
Jeffrey Swiatek, 918 Delfino Place, addressed the Board to state he is here to ask the Board to deny the rezoning request. He referred to the 10/1/03 P&Z minutes and read Commissioner Dorworth’s comments that he sees two commercial developments in the area and he saw no reason not to have it rezoned. He raised an issue relating to traffic from the 100 block of Brightview Dr. He asked the Board to deny the request.
Jay Jurie, Sanford resident, addressed the Board to state he represents the Sustainable Communities Advisory Counsel. He said he resides on the east side of Sanford and part of what is being done here is showing some support from homeowners from a different part of the County. He stated he travels CR 46A on a regular basis and before any commercial activity is approved on CR 46A, some improvements need to be made to accommodate traffic to the east and north of this road. He asked if there are any plans to improve CR 46A to support this type of development. He stated he does not feel it is necessary to change the zoning to accommodate further development, therefore, he would request the Board to deny the request.
Amy Lockhart, 417 Lake Blvd., addressed the Board to display photographs (received and filed) of Lake Blvd. near her home. She stated she was told that a professional study has not been done and she believes that it should be done. She said she has two children and she does not allow them to play on the following intersections in Seminole County: East Mitchell Hammock & Lockwood Blvd., Howell Branch & SR 436, Lake Mary Blvd. & 17-92, SR 434 & SR 419, Red Bug Lake Road and SR 426, Red Bug Lake Road and Tuskawilla Road, SR 436 & 17-92, SR 434 & CR 427, Lake Mary Blvd. & International Parkway, and SR 46 and Rinehart Road. She stated an Eckerds Drugstore is located on each one of those intersections. She said within the last two weeks, there have been two accidents by people cutting through their subdivision. Last Saturday, a man was driving down her street at 50 mph and landed in a culvert. She displayed pictures (received and filed) of the accident. She stated she feels that Dr. Hardwick has the right to sell his property, but it should be developed in a manner that is consistent with the Future Land Use designation of Low Density Residential.
Chairman McLain stated two meetings ago, the Board authorized staff to study the realignment of Lake Blvd., which would align that with a red light. What they will be doing in the study is a cut-through traffic analysis to evaluate what kind of traffic is going through there. He stated Lake Blvd. will be added to the sidewalk program and traffic calming devices will also be evaluated as well. He said the Presidents of the homeowner associations would be notified of the hearing date. He added he would commit to not surplus the County property, but will develop it into a passive park for the community.
Tim Lockhart, 417 Lake Blvd., addressed the Board to state he is opposed to the rezoning. He displayed and reviewed photograph of a house located on the property (Exhibit 1); staff report that does not accurately show that the Future Land Use for this property is Low Density Residential (Exhibit 2); the County Engineer has confirmed that Lake Blvd. is considered a local road (Exhibit 3); and a photograph showing vacant office/professional site located ½ mile away. All exhibits and Mr. Lockhart’s comments were received and filed. He hoped the Board would not be swayed by what he calls the 4 C’s: Comments, Common property, Contributions and Consistent votes. He reviewed each of the 4 C’s. He asked the Board to deny the project.
John Lang, 106 Brightview Dr., addressed the Board to state his property value will go down and he doesn’t want this in his neighborhood. He stated the vast majority of his neighborhood is against the project as most of the residents have very small yards. He discussed the issues of lighting and noise.
Nick Balevich, 2715 Amaya Terrace, addressed the Board to read his comments relating to not believing that this is a done deal and the Board will base their decision for what is best for all. He stated there is vacant land located in downtown Sanford, and the Board should focus on leasing these vacant areas. If the Board approves this, they should consider that the site plan presented is ridiculous and further retention should not be included in the buffer of single-family homes. The buffer should be significantly increased. The square footage and intensity are excessive and should be given special consideration and further restrictions. The residents in the area want to drive downtown to Sanford or the mall to shop and not next door to their backyards. Therefore, they will boycott this facility and will encourage others to do so.
Sonja Greenlee, 205 Lake Blvd., addressed the Board to submit photographs (received and filed) showing what her property looks like right now, historic Loch Arbor and the surrounding area. She read her husband’s comments relating to the value of the properties, absences of nonconforming commercial development and economical issues. She and her husband urged the Board to vote against the request.
Beverly Mason, 309 E. Crystal Dr., addressed the Board to submit a booklet (not received and filed) containing photographs of a home built by the Patricks, home built on Lake Forest by the Lingles and the home of John Chouinard, Jr. She stated this neighborhood is unique for Florida to have this continuation of families who love living in Loch Arbor. The character of the neighborhood has not changed for years. A zoning decision cannot be made by how much an investor can receive in two years on the purchase of property for commercial use. She showed and reviewed a photograph of an apartment complex. She asked the Board to protect the character of her historic neighborhood.
Greg Chouinard, 130 Brightview Dr., addressed the Board to state the proposed rezoning is going to affect him greatly. He stated he has concerns with increased traffic and noise. With the exit onto Lake Blvd., it will be pretty noisy in his back yard. There will be a lot of spill over with the lighting as well. His property value will be a lot lower than the property ¼ mile down the road.
Nell Snow, 176 Wood Ridge, addressed the Board to state she lives in Kaywood and she is very much opposed to this proposed commercial development as well as the other residents Kaywood. She discussed the issues of break-ins that may occur in the residential area if this is approved. She said the developer is only thinking of his pocket book. She discussed issues relating to not having adequate drinking water. She stated she wants the Board to keep in mind the future of the entire State of Florida.
Philip Lee, 411 Lake Blvd., addressed the Board to display and review aerial maps (received and filed) showing the Crystal Lakes Chain Basin, the water flow direction, and the high recharge fresh water. He referred to a newspaper article (not received and filed) dated 10/13/03 describing similar problems in the diagram and how Orange and Lake Counties will be headed to court as increasing density population demands water rights. He indicated on the map the site that they want changed to commercial. Two members of the P&Z Commission indicated that they could not agree with this recommendation. He stated they do not need a domino effect of commercial parking lots marching from the GreeneWay to Rinehart Road. He added he doesn’t feel the Board should rezone this site.
Rob Crews, 2642 Amaya Terrace, addressed the Board to state he believes there are petitions that highlight the fear of increased crime, traffic, light pollution, and noise pollution. He stated he likes the idea of having a shopping center near his home and being able to buy bread on the way home. He said he knows that throughout the process there seems to be some animosity directed toward Dr. Hardwick and the Board. He stated he enjoys his quality of life and a drug store is not going to change that.
Leslie Lormann, 400 W. Crystal Dr., addressed the Board to state the residents do not have anything to gain from this project. She stated she feels that the increased traffic and noise pollution would be detrimental to their quality of life. The proposed site is not the place for a high traffic retail establishment.
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at 9:45 p.m., reconvening at 9:55 p.m.
Attorney Ken Wright responded to the residents’ concerns relating to the easements that will burden Mr. Hardwick’s property, the property values, the request being inconsistent with the Comp Plan, a PCD being more restrictive than straight zoning of Neighborhood Commercial, the wall easement along CR 46A, access to Dr. Hardwick’s property from Casa Verde, Neighborhood Commercial and transitional zoning, the impact of the intersections, the legal decisions having to be based upon legal requirements, and traffic issues. He stated he feels the 4 C’s that Mr. Lockhart mentioned are irrelevant. Dr. Hardwick is entitled to the request based upon staff’s recommendation and P&Z recommendations. Dr. Hardwick’s property on CR 46A is going to have two commercial out lots to the east, and behind that he will have a parking lot from out lots to the PUD. The total commercial intensity is up to 180,000 sq. ft. A light will be at the corner whether or not this project is developed. He said the development order refers to the roofing materials being asphalt shingles. He stated without knowing what kind of building will be constructed, it could be set up for residential gable. Staff and P&Z have recommended approval of this project with the conditions outlined by staff. He said the Board has not heard any substantial evidence regarding traffic issues or land value or any aspect of this request to controvert staff’s recommendation. He stated he finds this request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code and he would request the Board approve the project.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request and Written Comment Forms were received and filed.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Van Der Weide, Mr. Matthews advised based on what they have heard tonight, staff has not changed their opinion. He stated he feels staff’s recommendation is upheld by the Comp Plan and Land Development Code.
Don Fisher, Planning & Development Director, addressed the Board to state he concurs with Mr. Matthews’ comments.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. Fisher advised this is a judgment call by the Board relative to transitional uses and impacts.
Upon inquiry by Chairman McLain, Mr. Fisher advised the automated teller machines would be available 24 hours a day and by putting them adjacent to CR 46A, the building would act as a buffer to the residential area.
Mr. Fisher informed Commissioner Maloy that a bank is an office in a CS/CL use. He stated banks are not allowed in the CN use.
Upon inquiry by Chairman McLain, Mr. Fisher advised with the additional buffers required by code, landscape and site design, and hours of operation, staff felt that could be an additional use. He added that generally bank hours are not overly intense in nature.
Mr. Fisher explained for Chairman McLain why staff recommended access to Lake Blvd. He also discussed the issues of extending urban sprawl and transitional uses.
Melonie Barrington, Traffic Engineering, addressed the Board to advise staff looked at intersections for multi-way stop locations and at that time they were not warranted.
Mr. Fisher reviewed for Chairman McLain issues relating to FLU 2.3, hours of operation, lighting and the height of the building.
Jean Abi-Aoun, Development Review, addressed the Board to inform Chairman McLain that a 1/8” water main line is located on the east side of the property.
Commissioner McLain stated if the Board approves this project, he would recommend striking Condition #6, Automated teller machines, from the development order. He stated he feels it would be more appropriate to not include access to Lake Blvd., as he feels that road should be realigned and the right-of-way would have to be vacated or made a cul-de-sac.
Commissioner Morris stated he appreciates what the applicant is attempting to do here in terms of the restrictions in trying to make a LDR parcel work for commercial. A number of people understand that it will be a drug store but it could be something else. He discussed the issues of the current DRI, open space, 5 units to the acre density, and CR 46A being widened.
Mr. Fisher explained for Commissioner Morris how Neighborhood Commercial is justified if commercial is not already there. Discussion ensued relative to a matter of interpretation, that commercial can go in a variety of areas, and Walgreen and Eckerd stores are transitional zoning. He reviewed a few locations in the County that transitional zoning abuts another DRI, apartments or on commercial interchanges.
District Commissioner McLain stated he will entertain a motion to approve the request subject to staff recommendations and the changes he proposed.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to deny the First Amendment to Third Amended and Restate DRI Development Order for Chase Groves DRI; an Ordinance adopting the proposed Small Scale Land Use Amendment from Low Density Residential to Planned Development; an Ordinance rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to PCD (Planned Commercial Development District); PUD (Planned Unit Development) to PCD; PUD to PUD; and Addendum #7 to the Chase Groves PUD Developers Commitment Agreement and PUD Final Master Plan, located at the southwest corner of CR 46A and Casa Verde Blvd., as described in the proof of publication, Meredith Harper-Pickens.
Under discussion, Commissioner Morris stated that relates to the interpretation of the 20/20 Plan on transitional uses and it does deal with traffic situations relative to the neighborhood road.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he has lived in the same house (Sweetwater Oaks) since 1975 and the residents are happy with the fact that an elementary, middle and high school are close. He stated they also have convenience stores and a shopping center near them, and they were always very happy that they were there. But, it appears public opinion has changed and they see these changes as major problems.
Commissioner Henley stated he has reviewed the code and he has come up with a different viewpoint than staff. He stated he has problems with this going to Neighborhood Commercial and this use does encourage urban sprawl. This project could be put on the other side of the GreeneWay as there are convenience stores on each side of that. For those reasons, he will be supporting the motion.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider an Ordinance adopting proposed amendments to the Seminole County Land Development Code, Chapter 2, Definitions and Chapter 30 – Light Ordinance, received and filed.
Don Fisher stated staff had some discussions with some residents and they felt better language needs to be provided. Therefore, staff would like to request a continuance to January 13, 2004 to give them time to work on that language.
Commissioner Maloy stated he is not opposed to the continuance, but the one thing he doesn’t understand is on page 5, hours of operations of a business. He doesn’t see how that has to do with lighting. He stated he doesn’t like the way it is worded as he feels that is unfair.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated a lot of people feel that lighting is a safety issue. He stated he would be real cautious about being too restrictive with lighting.
Mr. Fisher stated he would suggest making the changes that staff worked on this evening and then address Commissioner Maloy’s issue.
Commissioner Maloy stated he understands the aspect of controlling that issue, but he feels it should be a lot clearer.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated instead of having perimeter lighting reflecting into the site, the lighting can be controlled further in instead of spilling over outside.
Mr. Fisher stated staff would like an opportunity to incorporate that back into the ordinance.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to continue to January 13, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, request to consider an Ordinance adopting proposed amendments to the Seminole County Land Development Code, Chapter 2, Definitions and Chapter 30 – Light Ordinance, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider an Ordinance adopting proposed amendments to the Seminole County Land Development Code, Chapter 60 – Arbor Regulations, amending Sections 5.6; 60.3; 60.4; 60.7; 60.8; 60.22; 60.23; and 60.24 of the Land Development Code and creating Sections 60.2; 60.5.1; and 60.502 of the Land Development Code, received and filed.
Mr. Fisher stated staff had discussions with the Development Advisory Board and the Sustainable Community Advisory Council and they felt that if staff could work with them a little longer, they could come back to the Board with a better document. Staff is requesting a continuance to January 13, 2004.
Chairman McLain called the following to speak but they were not in attendance: Rex Clonts and Sam Kendall.
Jay Jurie stated he is speaking on behalf of Mr. Kendall and they concur with the continuance.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to continue to January 13, 2004 at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, request to consider an Ordinance adopting proposed amendments to the Seminole County Land Development Code, Chapter 60 – Arbor Regulations, amending Sections 5.6; 60.3; 60.4; 60.7; 60.8; 60.22; 60.23; and 60.24 of the Land Development Code and creating Sections 60.2; 60.5.1; and 60.502 of the Land Development Code, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Morris stated the comments he wanted to make before were related directly to the Chase Groves item as well as in defense of some Board members. However, he doesn’t see a point in making them because he is not sure they want to be heard.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m., this same date.