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.
Present:
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:
County Manager
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.
MSBU
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.
Development Review
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.
Sheriff’s Office
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’S REPORT
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.
ATTEST:______________________Clerk______________________Chairman
cc/sm/er