BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
NOVEMBER 26, 2002
The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held at 1:30 p.m., on Tuesday, November 26, 2002, in Room 1028 of the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of the said Board.
Chairman Daryl McLain (District 5)
Vice Chairman Grant Maloy (District 1)(Late)
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
Chief Deputy Penny Fleming led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Awards and Presentations
Chairman McLain advised that today the Board is celebrating the 10th Anniversary of Twinning with County Wicklow in Ireland. The delegation from Ireland consisting of Vincent Blake, Chairman; Councilman Pat Doyle; Councilman John Burn; Councilman Michael Lawlor; Councilman Liam Cavanaugh; Former County Manager Blaise Tracey and Chairman of the Wicklow County Film Commission; and Businessman Michael Lynham addressed the Board.
Commissioner Maloy entered the meeting at this time.
Commissioner Henley read the Resolution for presentation to the delegation.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-166, as shown on page _______, in recognition of the 10th Anniversary of Twinning between Seminole County and County Wicklow.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
The Commissioners and County Manager Kevin Grace presented the Resolution to the Delegation.
Chairman McLain, on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners, presented a silver bowl to the Wicklow Delegation in commemoration of their tenth year relationship.
Chairman Blake expressed thanks to Chairman McLain and the other Commissioners for inviting the delegation to Seminole County. He thanked all the people who have been involved over the 10 years who initiated the twinning and all the friends who have participated over the 10 years. He said it has been a wonderful experience for them and he hopes the same can be said for the people in Seminole County. He recounted other aspects that have developed as a result of the friendship, including a highway that leads into County Wicklow, development of a Federal Commission. He said they visited Wicklow Elementary School and were very impressed with the facility, naming it after County Wicklow, and the recognition given to County Wicklow by the school. Mr. Blake stated Jack Wert has been a great help to them in developing their relationship over the years and they are sorry to lose him. On behalf of the Wicklow Delegation, he wished Mr. Wert well in his new position. Mr. Blake, with help of the delegation, presented Waterford Irish Crystal Clocks to each Commissioner and the County Manager.
Chairman McLain expressed he is looking forward to a long lasting relationship over the next several decades.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-169, as shown on page _______, commending Jack Wert, Tourism Development Director, for his 13 years of service to Seminole County.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Van Der Weide presented the Resolution to Mr. Wert. Mr. Wert stated that over the years he has been blessed with a great staff and cooperation and support of the Commission. The County Manager was also very helpful and a supporter of their department. He said that today Seminole County is an integral part of everything that has happened in the region and he is happy to have been here while all that transpired. He thanked the Commissioners for the Resolution, friendship, and support.
Commissioner Morris stated no matter how difficult the challenge, Mr. Wert kept a positive attitude. He said they are losing a great asset in this organization.
Chair McLain stated Mr. Wert has done a great job of developing tourism and TDC. He wished him well.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-167, as shown on page _______, commending Robert L. Norris, Certified Tradesworker, Facilities Maintenance Division, Department of Administrative Services, for 30 years of service to Seminole County, upon his retirement.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Maloy presented the Resolution to Mr. Norris, who expressed that Seminole County has a lot of wonderful opportunities for the employees if they will take advantage of them. He said this was a good place to work and he thanked the Board for the opportunity to work in Seminole County.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-168, as shown on page _______, commending the Planning & Development staff for the Outstanding Public Project Award received from the Florida Planning and Zoning Associations, for the creation of a multimedia Customer Resource Center.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Morris presented the Resolution to Don Fisher and his staff. Mr. Fisher expressed, on behalf of the Department, their appreciation to the Board for their support of the innovative things they are trying to do.
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at this time and reconvened at 10:17 a.m.
5. Approve negotiated settlement of expert costs and statutory attorney fees relating to Parcel Number 105 of the Dodd Road road improvement project, located 1521 Dodd Road, in the amount of $46,918.67, Roberts/Kids Karousel, Inc., property.
6. Approve proposed settlement relating to Parcel Numbers 107/707 of the Dodd Road road improvement project, located at 1560 Dodd Road, in the amount of $27,147.00, inclusive of all land value, severance damage, statutory interest, attorney fees and costs, Frederick E. Lake, Jr. and Stella D. Lake property.
7. Authorization to reject American Bronze’s Reverse Offer of Judgment offered as to Parcel No. 102 of the East Lake Mary Boulevard Segment 1 road improvement project, located at 1650 East Lake Mary Boulevard, in the amount of $99,900.00, inclusive of all land value, severance damage, business damage and statutory interest and approve a County Offer of Judgment in an amount not to exceed $63,000.00, inclusive of all land value, severance damage, business damage and statutory interest, American Bronze Fine Art Foundry, Inc. property.
8. Approve settlement of Fifth District Court of Appeal’s attorney fees relating to Parcel Numbers 106/706 of the Howell Branch Road, Phase II road improvement project, located along north side of Howell Branch Road, in the amount of $17,225.00, Grace Properties, No. 7, Ltd. property.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Morris left the meeting at this time.
County Attorney Robert McMillan addressed the Board to state he has a report of all the pending cases that have been filed in Florida related to the Florida Water Systems Acquisition. Some jurisdictions have right-of-first refusal, which they are trying to exercise. The City of Altamonte Springs is considering some legal action due to their having several rights-of-first refusals on more than one of the small utilities that circle the city although the customers are in unincorporated Seminole County. He and the County Manager Kevin Grace have determined they have nothing to add to try to litigate. The County does not have a right-of-first refusal so theirs would be more in the public interest, but they should continue to monitor this. He said next week, this will be discussed at the Florida Association of Counties meeting at the FAC Legislative Conference. He asked if the Board wish them to do anything different.
Mr. Grace said the Board gave them the authority to take whatever action was prudent, including legal action. He and Mr. McMillan have discussed this with staff and they don’t think at this point it would be prudent to take any kind of action, but to continue to monitor and if the conditions change, they will make the Board aware. If they need to move quickly, they have the authority to take action.
Mr. McMillan said the case is pending in Volusia County on the right-of-first refusal. The order on that case could enjoin for further action, but he is waiting to hear the action on that.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. McMillan said there is no one coordinating the litigation and he will discuss at the FAC County Attorneys’ meeting if there should be coordination of what everybody’s doing. Commissioner Maloy said he thinks this is something that should be discussed with the State legislators.
Mr. Grace advised there are already efforts to modify the legislation. The problem is that the way things are going, this might be a done deal before the Legislature meets again. He stated the Public Service Commission is also investigating the sale, and there could still be some intervention at the State level to stop the sale.
Mr. McMillan discussed the RFP for the water treatment and wastewater plant security systems, which was removed from the agenda based on protest and suit filed by the second-ranked bidder. He said he, Mr. Grace, the Environmental Services Director, and Purchasing staff have concluded they can’t wait much longer to put the security systems in place. Mr. McMillan said he doesn’t see that the litigation is going to be resolved soon. He stated Mr. Grace has distributed a memorandum to the Board (copy received and filed) with the recommendation to go forward at this point; cancel the RFP, reject all proposals the Board received, invoke Section 220.06 of the Seminole County Code, waive all purchasing procedures and do whatever is necessary in the public interest to proceed with the project. Staff is asking to waive all the procedures as they relate to the procurement of the security systems on the facilities covered by the RFP cancelled and authorize direct negotiations with Wharton-Smith for the improvements based on the proposal previously submitted and authorize the Chairman to execute the Agreement, as approved by the County Manager and County Attorney in an amount not-to-exceed $1.7 million.
Mr. Grace advised Chairman McLain that this appears to be the best way to move forward. He said the County could be tied up for a year in litigation and the public water supplies could be in jeopardy. He recommended the Board’s approval.
Commissioner Henley stated he thinks this is appropriate action and he supports it.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to cancel the RFP pursuant to its terms, reject all proposals received, invoke Section 220.06 of the Seminole County Code, waive all provisions of the Purchasing Code as they may relate to procurement of security systems for the facilities previously covered by RFP-4167-02/BJC; and authorize direct negotiations with Wharton-Smith, Inc. for the improvements specified in and based on the proposal they submitted in response to the cancelled RFP.
Under discussion, Commissioner Maloy said in the future, big ticket items like this should be on the agenda. He added he would also support this action.
Chairman McLain clarified with Commissioner Henley that his motion also authorizes the Chairman to execute the Agreement, as shown on page _______, as approved by the County Manager and County Attorney in an amount not-to-exceed $1.7 million.
Districts 1, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Mr. McMillan reported the County went to trial last week on one of the adult entertainment cases. He said the trial was not concluded and will be carried over probably until after the holidays. This will be going on for some time.
Commissioner Morris reentered the meeting at this time.
DCM Sally Sherman addressed the Board to state staff has provided a list (included in the agenda memorandum) of the legislative issues identified by the Board and staff. These include those for the Commissioners to review and determine their priority and those for staff to monitor on a regular basis to ensure that there is no action taken that is going to create a hindrance in any of the County programs.
Under discussion, Commissioner Maloy stated he would not be in support of any tax increases. He referred to Item 3, Car Rental Surcharge, Adoption of a new per diem charge as a local option.
Mr. Grace asked if there are any issues of particular importance for direction to the lobbyists, it would be good to focus his energy on the most important ones as opposed to a bunch of issues. He also reported that he has had meetings with the School Board and Seminole Community College, and spoke to the Mayors and Managers Group about trying to focus and coordinate their legislative efforts better within the County. They are trying to have a Seminole County Day where the County, School Board, Seminole Community College, and representatives from the Cities go to Tallahassee with one voice on major issues of importance.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Chairman McLain and Commissioner Van Der Weide said they support moving forward with Item #3.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley said he understands that this would give the County local option, but is not imposing a tax at this point. This grants the right if the County determines it as appropriate action later on.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Commissioner Van Der Weide stated this would enable the County on the local level. This says to the Legislature that if they don’t want to let the Board decide on the local level, then put in the requirement that there must be a referendum to let the citizens decide. He said dedicated funding and anything they do with transportation is critical. He said this tax alone within the tri-County region would generate between $40 million to $60 million a year.
Chairman McLain said he thinks Item #5, Develop support for a prohibition against financial incentives for annexation, is a high priority for the Board. Mr. Grace stated there is legislation at the State level to address annexation this coming year. He said they would try to get this item worked into that legislation.
Commissioner Morris stated he thinks Item #C, SR 434 and I-4 Interchange - Interchange Reconstruction, is more critical than any traffic item on the list. He is hoping the Board will prioritize these.
Chairman McLain stated he agrees that this item is a high priority. Also, completing the Lake Mary Boulevard around the Airport and continuing with four-laning of SR 46 in front of the Airport are important. He would stress most the SR 434 and I-4 Interchange, but both these projects are important.
Under the issues for monitoring, Commissioner Morris said regarding Item #3, Any legislation addressing Living Wage, that it should be crystal clear that the Board is opposing any legislation that addressed living wage.
Commissioner Maloy said he believes the staff should monitor the acquisition of the local private utilities. Whereupon, Mr. Grace said that will be added to the list.
Ms. Sherman advised the Chairman that staff will probably bring an update back in January.
Commissioner Maloy stated he sent a letter to all the Seminole County legislators that the BCC wants to be a part of any discussions concerning reorganizing Lynx.
Commissioner Henley said he would like for the Chairman and Mr. Grace to meet with Mr. Crotty on this issue. He said the newspaper this morning said Orange County pays 80% of the funds. He said Orange County also gets more than 80% of the services and this has yet to be made clear to the public. He thinks this Board would be opposed to anything that says Orange County would gain control of the Lynx Board because it is a regional and not an Orange County board. He thinks face-to-face dialog needs to be established regarding this issue.
Chairman McLain said he has spoken with Chairman Crotty about this issue, and he thinks it is a good point that they follow up on that. He wants to make sure the Seminole Delegation is clear that the BCC is very concerned about any reorganization of the Lynx Board and changing the representation by the tri-county area.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he thinks too that the media is not reporting the true picture. He is concerned that the Chairman of the Seminole County Delegation mailed out a letter and the BCC did not receive a copy of that calling for an investigation of Lynx. He said only Orange County and the City of Orlando were copied on this letter.
Commissioner Morris stated it’s just not enough to respond when attacked, but they have to be an advocator and a participator at the table. He predicted, saying it is clear to him that the decision and determination for Lynx has been made, and they will end up responding to something that will come out in two months. He said he would rather be in front of that response. They need to be thinking now if they are going to be part of a contract to a new Lynx board. They could also investigate the private sector to see if they would want to contract that way. Along with these actions, the Chairman can say the BCC has requested a review of every option again and has great concern with changing a regional board that has been jointly agreed to.
Commissioner Henley stated he agrees with Commissioner Morris. He asked if the BCC was bound to the Lynx Board by legislative action. He said maybe they should explore the possibility of trying to get the legislation to release the County. Whereupon, Mr. Grace said he thinks the BCC is bound as far as representation on the Lynx Board, but there is no other legislation that obligates the BCC to subscribe to their services. Commissioner Henley asked that this be checked out. He said he doesn’t want Seminole County under the control of Orange County. Discussion among the Board continued.
Chairman McLain said he thinks it is very important that the County’s Consultant in Tallahassee take this as a high priority and follow it very closely over the next 60 days and make the BCC’s intentions and concerns well known, so the Legislative Delegation understands the Board’s position. Whereupon, Commissioner Henley recommended Mr. Grace put this in a letter to the Consultant and Delegation and copy the Board.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he thinks it is important to direct staff, as suggested by Commissioner Morris, to pursue all avenues relative to what may be the Board’s response to the outcome.
Chairman McLain said he thinks it is important for them to prepare themselves in case they are not satisfied with the outcome as to how the Board will provide mass transit elements to the Seminole County constituents. He said they need to protect their interest in the commuter rail project and make sure Seminole County is well represented on any agency that might be responsible for that.
Commissioner Morris said another option is for them to come up with their own formula for the composition of the Lynx Board.
Commissioner Maloy agreed that the County probably should have a proposal.
Commissioner Henley asked if this is the appropriate time to ask staff to develop a list of various options that need to be explored, including looking at their own formula to consider proposing. Mr. Grace said staff can do this and will try to have another briefing at the next meeting.
Commissioner Henley also asked if Mr. Grace and Chairman McLain could coordinate closely with Osceola County on a course of action.
Chairman McLain summarized the direction to Mr. Grace is that it is important for him to communicate with the Chief of Staff of Orange County the sentiment of the Board and personally meet with Chairman Crotty to make the Board’s feelings clear that they have to be involved in the decision-making process along with Osceola County. Communicate with Chairman Crotty that this is a regional board and they have to make a regional decision on how they will deal with Lynx and the mass transit element
Ms. Sherman advised the Board that Item #6, Support funding for Pre-Schools, will be deleted from the list due to the recent referendum passed. Mr. Grace said the referendum is not effective until 2004/2005 so staff does need to continue monitoring this so the County is not faced with putting in hundreds of thousands of dollars again this year.
Chairman McLain advised he received a response from the Orange County Chairman about the Board’s concern for how Seminole County firms are handled there for bidding and they are changing their policy and will make sure Seminole County firms are treated equally with Orange County.
Chairman McLain advised of correction to Item #35, First Amendment to Option Agreement for Purchase of Overstreet property, that the closing date is extended to March 15, 2003, instead of January 6, 2003.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to approve and authorize the following:
15. BCR #02-139 – $150,000 – Environmental Services – Water & Wastewater – Fund: 40100 – Water and Sewer Fund. Account adjustment to reconcile end of year balance.
16. BCR #03-12 – $112,000 – Public Works – Engineering – Fund: 11500 – Infrastructure Tax Fund/12601 – Arterial Impact Fund. The widening of Tuskawilla Road (Phase II) required that the roadway grade be elevated. This transfer will complete funding support for wall reconstruction at the Tuskawilla Forest Subdivision (accompanying item on the Purchasing Agenda).
17. BCR #03-13 – $90,000 – Public Works – Traffic Engineering – Fund: 11500 – Infrastructure Tax Fund. At the November 12, 2002 BCC meeting the Board requested that both SR 434 at CR 427 and Red Bug Lake Road at Dodd Road mast arm conversions be done in the current fiscal year. Funds are available from the 1991 Sales Tax Fund reserves.
19. Award CC-1192-02/BJC, Tuscawilla Forest Subdivision Wall, as shown on page _______, to Schuller Contractors Inc., Orlando ($150,000.00).
20. Award CC-1193-02/BJC, Wekiva Park (Hutchinson Property) Project, as shown on page _______, to Pooley Enterprises, Inc., Orlando ($195,000.00).
21. Accept and authorize the Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion, as shown on page _______, for FC-1152-01/BJC, Timaquan Lift Station Generator Retrofit, with MGI – Morgan General Mechanical Group, Inc., Pompano Beach.
22. Accept and authorize the Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion, as shown on page _______, for FC-1158-01BJC, Markham Regional Water Treatment Plant – Offsite Wells Phase I, with Jaffer Associates, Ltd., Miami.
23. Approve Renewal #1 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, 2003 through January 2, 2004) (Not-to-Exceed $275,000.00/year).
24. Approve Renewal #1 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, 2003 through January 2, 2004) (Not-to-Exceed $225,000.00/year).
25. Approve Renewal #1 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, 2003 through January 2, 2004) (Not to Exceed $62,000.00 per year).
26. Approve Amendment #1 to AB-3035-01/GG, Roadway Landscape Maintenance, with Ameriscapes Landscape, Orlando (Increase the Not-to-Exceed amount of the agreement by $321,712.96).
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:
44. Expenditure Approval Lists, as shown on page _______, dated November 5 and 12, 2002; and Payroll Approval List, as shown on page _______, dated November 7, 2002.
45. Chairman to execute the following Satisfactions of Judgment/Costs of Supervision:
Ryan Eugene Colgate, #96-9965-MMA - $390
Ken Poulin, #02002651MM - $300
46. Chairman to execute the following Satisfactions of Judgment/Bail Bond Liens:
Coretta Lynn Mitchell & Lexington National Ins. Corp., #01000019MMA - $411
Rhonda Raulerso Arnold & Continental Heritage Ins. Co., #96007336MMA - $1,038
Truman Lee Armstrong & Roche Surety & Casualty Co., Inc., #01003849CFA - $1,038
47. Chairman to execute the following Satisfactions of Judgment/Public Defender Applications:
David Charles Reuter, #02-3571-MMA - $40
Ryan Eugene Colgate, #99-7223-MMA - $40
Michael Antwan Cooper, #99-1010-CFA - $40
Vincent E. Foster, #01-1316-CFA - $40
49. Authorize expenditure from the Law Enforcement Trust Funds to contribute $1,000 to the Center for Florida’s Children.
50. Approve Budget Amendment Resolution #2002-R-173, as shown on page _______, re-budgeting $408,609 in prior year unexpended contract/grant funds to the Sheriff’s Office FY 2002/03 budget.
51. The Board noted, for information only, the Sheriff’s Office Budget Information, as provided.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s “received and filed”:
1. Maintenance Agreements and Letters of Credit, as shown on page _______, for Bentley Cove in the amount of $12,634 for water and sewer improvements; and for a private road in the amount of $16,021.
2. Private Road Maintenance Agreement and Letter of Credit, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $2,000 for Viscaya Cove.
3. Right-of-way Utilization Permit Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $1,041.90 for the Maitland Avenue ROW-Walgreens.
4. Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, for water and sewer improvements in the amount of $18,254 for Magnolia Plantation Phase 4A.
5. Work Order #3, as shown on page _______, to PS-570-00 with Inwood Consulting Engineers.
6. Work Orders #10 and #11, as shown on page _______, to PS-551-00 with Environmental Management Systems, Inc., d/b/a EMS Scientists, Engineers, Planners.
7. Work Order #56, as shown on page _______, to PS-532-98 with Southeastern Surveying and Mapping Corporation.
8. Resolution #2002-R-99, as shown on page _______, to Karen Hart for service on the Animal Control Board, as adopted by the BCC on June 11, 2002.
9. Private Road Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $14,322 for Magnolia Plantation Phase 4A.
10. EPA Watershed Initiative Grant Program, as shown on page _______, for the Monroe Basin Lockhart-Smith Canal Regional Stormwater Treatment Facility.
11. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to System Enhancement Project Agreement M-317-02.
12. Work Order #1, as shown on page _______, to PS-563-00 with Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.
13. Work Order #1, as shown on page _______, to PS-5114-02 with H. W. Lochner, Inc.
14. Work Order #5, as shown on page _______, to RFP-4123-01 with Atlas Scientific Technologies, Inc.
15. Amended Notice of Prehearing Conference from the Florida Public Service Commission regarding Docket No. 020006-WS scheduled for November 18, 2002.
16. Letter to Maryanne Morse, Clerk, from Thelma McPherson, Casselberry City Clerk, regarding annexation of U-Haul Area Property.
17. Work Order #5, as shown on page _______, to RFP-4123-01, Asbestos Consultant Services Agreement.
18. Work Order #31 and #32, as shown on page _______, to PS-590-01, Engineering Services Agreements.
19. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Work Order No. 5 to FC-1164-01, Continuous Building Construction Services Agreement.
20. Second Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Design/Build Contract D/B-606-01.
21. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #45 and Work Order #49 to FC-1139-00, Continuous Contracts for Public Works Minor Project Construction.
22. Letter of acceptance and Bill of Sale, as shown on page _______, for water and sewer system for Magnolia Plantation Phase 4A.
23. Development Orders, as shown on page _______, for David and Ana Polley and Fernando Alvarado and Angela Gomez.
24. Memorandum from the County Manager regarding Capital Project Fund Transfer in the amount of $51,000 regarding C-15 from SR 46 to SR 600/US 17-92.
25. Change Order #2, as shown on page _______, to FC-1158-01, Markham Regional Water Treatment Plant Offsite Wells Phase 1.
26. Performance Bonds, as shown on page _______, for water and sewer and roads, streets, and drainage for Lake Forest Section 19.
27. Copies of letters to State Senators and Representatives from Chairman McLain regarding Medicaid Cost Shift - HB 1975, as approved by the BCC on February 26, 2002.
28. Documents submitted as follows: Title Insurance Policy #FA-35-786618, as shown on page _______, for Lake Drive, Phase I; Warranty Deed and Temporary Construction Easement, Dill Properties, as shown on page _______, for County Road 46A, Phase III; Warranty Deeds with Douglas and Sue Brown, Mario and Helidora Riveron, and Emily Brown and Title Insurance Policies #FA-35-786622 and #FA-35-786626, as shown on page _______, for Wymore Road; Warranty Deeds with Helen Staper; Rebecca Lacher; T. B. Ball, III, and Lars J. Eriksson; Lars J. and Martha D. Eriksson; R & M Manufacturing Company; Robert E. and Peggy J. Brown; Douglas J. Carman; and William R. and Thomas E. Vincent; and Title Insurance Policies #FA-35-786624; #FA-35-786625; #FA-35-786623; and #FA-35-786621, as shown on page _______, for Airport Boulevard, Phase III; Warranty Deeds with Lyell Hintz (also Permanent Drainage Easement) and Fred and Mary Jane Allegro; Title Insurance Policies #FA-35-786617, #FA-35-786619, #FA-35-786620, and #FA-35-786631; Temporary Construction Easement (Allegro); Two Partial Releases of Mortgage (Allegro); Subordination Agreements (Allegro); and Termination of Notice of Commencement (Allegro), as shown on page _______, for Lake Emma Road; Special Warranty Deed with Nancy Rossman, as shown on page _______, for Airport Boulevard, Phase II; and Deed of Easement, as shown on page _______, with CSX Transportation, Inc. for Lake Mary Boulevard, Segment I.
29. Second Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #26 for PS-522-98, Comprehensive Planning Consultant Services Agreement.
30. Work Order #12, as shown on page _______, to PS-551-00, Consultant Services Agreement.
31. Developer’s Commitment Agreement, as shown on page _______, for Mystic Cove Apartments PUD.
32. Satisfactions of Connection Fees, as shown on page _______, for Crystal Photonics Phase 2 and Tuskawilla Professional Offices.
33. Letter of acceptance and Utility Easement, as shown on page _______, for Business Center Drive Water Main Extension.
34. Change Order #1, as shown on page _______, to CC-1182-02, Seminole County Landfill.
35. Concrete Telecommunication Shelter Installation Agreement M-336-02, as shown on page _______.
36. Maintenance Bonds, as shown on page _______, as follows: Cameron Office Complex, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $7,825.84; Maintenance Agreement and Letter of Credit, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $10,025 for Aloma Business Park; Private Road Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, for Stonehurst Phase 2 in the amount of $22,402; Maintenance Agreement and Letter of Credit, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $8,523 for water and sewer for Bennington Subdivision; Maintenance Agreement and Letter of Credit, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $3,218 for road improvements for Bennington Subdivision; Extension of Maintenance Bond #10376004, as shown on page _______, for Autumn Chase; Maintenance Agreement and Letter of Credit, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $99,842.46 for road improvements for Preserve at Astor Farms Phase 1; Maintenance Agreement and Letter of Credit, as shown on page _______, for water and sewer in the amount of $80,860.14 for Preserve at Astor Farms Phase 1; Private Road Maintenance Agreement and Letter of Credit, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $15,135.55 for Preserve at Astor Farms Phase 1; and Private Road Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $15,369 for Chase Townhomes Phase 1.
37. Warranty Deed, as shown on page _______, granted by MAG Development Co., Inc.
38. Engineering Services Agreement M-339-02, as shown on page _______.
39. Work Order #1, as shown on page _______, to PS-5121-02, Transportation Consulting Services Agreement.
40. Work Order #8, as shown on page _______, to PS-594-01, Engineering Services Agreement.
41. Copy of Memorandum to BCC from Penny Fleming, Sheriff’s Office, regarding FY 2001/02 Budget Closeout.
42. Work Order #28, as shown on page _______, to PS-590-01, Engineering Services Agreement.
43. Change Order #5, as shown on page _______, to FC-1173-01, Midway Paving & Drainage Improvements Phase II.
44. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #2 to FC-1164-01, Continuous Building Construction Services Agreement.
45. Work Order #6, as shown on page _______, to RFP-4109-01, Consultant Services Agreement.
46. Second Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Engineering Services Agreement, PS-592-01.
47. Order from the Florida Public Service Commission regarding application for rate increase in Marion, Orange, Pasco, Pinellas, and Seminole Counties by Utilities, Inc. of Florida.
48. Work Order #3, as shown on page _______, to PS-5113-02, Consultant Services Agreement.
49. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #1 to PS -561-00, Engineering and Professional Services Agreement.
50. Twenty-second Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Custodial Services Agreement, RFP-413-97.
51. Bids as follows: RFQ-4170-02; PS-5130-02; RFP-4176-02; and RFP-4177-02.
Sally Sherman, Deputy County Manager, addressed the Board to request approval and authorization for the Chairman to execute Interlocal Agreement between Seminole County and City of Sanford for the Convention Center. She reviewed the background from the Board meeting of October 22, 2002, and Joint Work Session of October 8, 2002. She discussed items raised by the City of Sanford for incorporation into the agreement and asked for Board direction regarding Phase II parking and liability insurance.
Mayor Lessard and City Manager Tony VanDerworp addressed the Board. Mayor Lessard stated the City Commission approved the Interlocal Agreement unanimously last night, and their primary purpose today is to answer questions of the Board.
Mr. VanDerworp stated the City sent a letter to the Board last week from the Mayor, which describes the commitment the City has put in place and reiterates their continuing commitment towards this project. He explained they have not been able to identify a revenue source for the Phase II parking. He said with the changes recommended, their Commission is asking the Board to move forward with this project.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. VanDerworp discussed the amount of City and CRA funds dedicated for the Convention Center. He explained if they look at constructing Phase II parking at about $1 million in FY 05/06 that would “eat up” all of the CRA revenues for the next three years.
Upon inquiry by Chairman McLain, Mayor Lessard stated Congressman Mica and Congresswoman Corrine Brown are very much in favor of this project. There had been some money earmarked for this project. He thinks this process will begin again now that the key appropriations process will start again. Chairman McLain stated he thinks it is important that they move forward on this project.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he only wants to do this if they do it right. He hates to build anything based on one year’s revenue and get tied down to the point they can’t see the total picture. He said he is not willing to move forward without the parking going along at the same time and unless they go with the 63.3 thousand square foot building.
Commissioner Morris said he doesn’t think 40,000 square feet is right. He believes an architect reviewing this would give the Board much better data than what they have currently from staff.
Mr. Grace said until they issue the bonds, the process to get out of the agreement for either side is relatively easy. He said it was the County staff’s thought that the architect would come back with options for the Board to consider covering various sizes, future expansion, etc.
Chairman McLain directed Mr. Grace to strike the square footage from the Agreement and insert a convention center of approximately 63,000 square feet.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. VanDerworp explained their insurance carrier said $1 million of liability insurance was sufficient for a facility like this one. Mr. Grace stated the County’s standard is $5 million and that’s why that figure was used.
Commissioner Morris said a parking garage is paramount to him as it is necessary for one to be built. He said if they build a parking garage, it would be for the hotel. They would prefer there be a parking garage now so the cars are not spread out over three or four blocks. He said he has a real problem with the County funding that, and he has had discussions about this with the Mayor, City Manager and two of the City Commissioners. He said he agrees to give the City time and work with them to seek federal dollars.
Chairman McLain stated he would encourage the Board to move forward with the understanding they will have to come up with a solution on the parking garage. He said he agrees that whether the City of Sanford has a convention center or not, they need a parking garage to develop some properties in downtown, especially with Riverwalk.
Whereupon, Commissioner Morris asked if they were to move forward, would it become a May/June time frame to have a full examination of the project and the financial resources. Mayor Lessard said he thinks that would be a reasonable time frame.
Chairman McLain said they may want to include on the Legislative Agenda Issues list to work with the City of Sanford on acquiring funding for a parking garage.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he has no problem moving forward, but if staff can be directed to relook at the TDC funding information and try to project some positive increases other than they’re in a disaster and have no way to get out of it. He doesn’t think that is the kind of thinking the citizens want the Board to have.
Chairman McLain said he agrees and thinks there are some opportunities where the County will not have to fully fund or partially fund the garage and they may want to look at those. He said he is prepared to make sure the project is right, that they have the adequate parking, and get the facility up and running as first-class.
Commissioner Van Der Weide advised the Chairman he thinks they must have the parking garage concurrent with construction. The County did originally agree to fund the capital expenditures, but the Board is looking to the City of Sanford to give as much help as possible.
Commissioner Henley stated he remembers that the convention center would be built large enough to house graduations and it would be a public/private partnership. He said this is not the project that was envisioned. Also, the first commitment the Board made in naming Sanford as the number one site was that up to $400,000 of Tourist Development taxes was to come from the hotel to be built. The hotels that were to come did not materialize. The deficit figure that has been put forth has always been with a hotel, so that may be much larger than anticipated. He said he cannot support this because it is not a private/public partnership and does not meet the needs. He said the needs of Seminole County have also changed significantly since 1994. He said there is now a hotel with meeting space that will handle any venue that comes to Seminole County over the years. Going to the larger building, based on the projections, leaves approximately $886,000 for operations of Tourist Development, when their operating budget last year excluding their debts was $1.475 million. So there would be significant impacts to the tourist development tax when advertising is crucial. He said in his opinion, this is not a good business decision. He thinks this project should be delayed until the financial picture is codified. He said all it will take in this country is one more tragedy to further reduce travel. He said there is no doubt that the City of Sanford needs help, and the County has been very generous in helping with the swimming pool, Helen Stairs Theatre, Main Street, and fireworks. He further stated that he thinks the reduction in liability insurance puts the County at a greater risk.
Commissioner Maloy said he would be opposing the interlocal agreement. He thinks it a risky project, and he is concerned over its impact on the tourism funds. This would be putting a convention center where it is going to be several miles away from where the tourists and business people would be staying, and he doesn’t think that makes good business sense.
Motion by Commissioner Morris to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the Interlocal Agreement for a Convention Center, as amended on the square footage to approximately 63,000 square feet; with Board consensus to reduce the liability insurance to $1 million and approval of the amended language by the City of Sanford for the parking garage.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley pointed out that with the amendment, there are other things that would be affected in the agreement.
Ms. Sherman clarified that the 12,000-foot ballroom was kept the same as originally proposed.
Chairman McLain called for a second to the motion with no response; thereupon, he surrendered the gavel to Vice Chairman Maloy in order to second the motion.
Under further discussion, Commissioner McLain said he agrees with Commissioner Van Der Weide that staff needs to reevaluate the numbers on the TDC. He is committed to finding a way to get the parking garage handled expeditiously.
Districts 2 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioners Maloy, Van Der Weide, and Henley voted NAY; whereupon, the motion failed.
Vice Chairman Maloy returned the gavel to Commissioner McLain to resume the duties of Chairman.
Commissioner Van Der Weide said he would like to have staff report back and readdress this at this afternoon’s meeting, including the parking based on new projections of TDC funding. He said what’s being done now is taking a pessimistic projection of an issue on a short span of one year, and he thinks that’s short-sightedness. Commissioner Van Der Weide said he is looking for projections based on an average, rather than one year.
Chairman McLain said the Board will take up this issue this afternoon, and he asked for Mr. Grace to provide this information to the Board as expeditiously as possible.
Jeff Hopper, Senior Planner, addressed the Board to request approval of the Final Master Plan and Developer’s Commitment Agreement for Tuscany Place Townhomes PUD (aka Beasley Property); property located at the southwest corner of Sunset Lane and Tuskawilla Road, Tom Daly.
Tom Daly, applicant, addressed the Board to correct typographical errors in the Developer’s Commitment Agreement as follows: Item #7, Building Setbacks, should read 15’ front setback and 5’ rear alley setback; and under Item E, Development Commitments, he asked that this commitment not exceed seven years. Staff concurred with both corrections.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to approve the Final Master Plan and Developer’s Commitment Agreement, as shown on page _______, for Tuscany Place Townhomes PUD, as amended; property located at the southwest corner of Sunset Lane and Tuskawilla Road, including approximately 6.66 acres.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Mr. Hopper presented request for approval of the Final Master Plan for NW 46 PCD; property located east of Oregon Avenue, west of I-4 and l/2 mile north of SR 46, Kenneth Wright. He stated the staff findings are that the Final Master Plan and Developer’s Commitment Agreement are consistent with the Preliminary Plan and the approved Development Order and Vision 2020 Plan. Staff is recommending approval.
Meredith Harper, Shutts & Bowen, representing the applicant, addressed the Board to advise of recommended language change (copy received and filed) to staff regarding IX. G, Development Commitments. She read into the record the amended language as submitted, and staff said they concur with the change that was negotiated this morning with the applicant.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to approve the Final Master Plan and authorize the Chairman to execute the Developer’s Commitment Agreement, as shown on page _______, as amended with the recommended change, for NW 46 PCD, property located east of Oregon Avenue, west of I-4, ½ mile north of SR 46, Ken Wright.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley discussed with Ms. Harper that there is one existing billboard currently on the site and she said they will comply with the arbor permit regulations as far as replacement goes.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman McLain announced that the other items on the Agenda will be heard after the lunch break when the Board reconvenes at 1:30 p.m.
The Board recessed the meeting at 12:12 p.m., reconvening at 1:30 p.m., with all Commissioners and all other Officials who were present at the Opening Session, with the exception of Deputy Clerk Carylon Cohen, who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Sandy McCann.
Cathleen Consoli, Planner, addressed the Board to present the revision of the Mystic Cove Final PUD Master Plan and Developer’s Commitment Agreement, property located on the north side of SR 426 and east of the Greeneway, Steve Joos. She advised the proposed revisions include allowing the individual lots within the PUD to have less than 25% open space as long as the overall development maintains 25% open space, including a masonry wall within the landscape buffer between Tracts A and B, allowing an additional ground sign for Tract B, and other minor changes, which do not alter the character of the development. She further advised the staff recommends approval of the proposed revisions to the PUD. She added that the proposed changes are consistent with the approved Development Order, Vision 2020 Plan, and the Land Development Code.
It was ascertained that the applicant was not in attendance.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve the revisions to the Mystic Cove PUD Final Master Plan and Developer’s Commitment Agreement, as shown on page ______, property located on the north side of SR 426 and east of the Greeneway, Steve Joos.
Under discussion and upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Planning Manager, Matt West, addressed the Board to advise in the apartment complex, the spaces will be all common open space. He added the commercial property owner will not have to maintain the open space within the apartment complex.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Planner, Dick Boyer, addressed the Board to discuss the Planning Certification Program. He stated that at this time, staff is recommending that the County not apply for the program; but to continue monitoring the program and renew discussions next year on same. He added that it does not appear to be a benefit to the County at this time.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated that whatever the Board decides to do, he believes the environmental groups and the DAB should be included in the process.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to direct staff to monitor the Planning Certification Program for the coming year and look at this again next year.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to authorize the filing of the proofs of publication for this meeting’s scheduled public hearings.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
AGREEMENT, Colonial Realty Limited Partnership
Continuation of a public hearing to consider an Amendment to the Heathrow International Business Center (HIBC) Development Agreement regarding the International Parkway and Recreational Trail, located between Lake Mary Boulevard and CR 46A within the Heathrow International Business Center, as described in the proof of publication, Kenneth Wright, Shutts & Bowen LLP, representing Colonial Realty Limited Partnership.
John Thomson, Principal Coordinator, addressed the Board to advise staff is recommending this item be continued indefinitely until such time as the annexation issue with the City of Lake Mary is resolved.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to continue indefinitely until such time as the Colonial Property annexation issue is resolved, consideration of an Amendment to the Heathrow International Business Center (HIBC) Development Agreement regarding the International Parkway and Recreational Trail, located between Lake Mary Boulevard and CR 46A within the Heathrow International Business Center, as described in the proof of publication, Kenneth Wright, Shutts & Bowen LLP, representing Colonial Realty Limited Partnership.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider an Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a height variance from three feet to six feet for a wall within 25 feet of a street, for property located at the northwest corner of Florida Road and Center Drive, Raju Amin, received and filed.
Cathleen Consoli presented the request, advising the applicant wishes to construct a 6-foot privacy wall which will sit on the property line and extend the entire length of each side yard along the road frontage. She stated staff recommends upholding the Board of Adjustment’s decision, thereby, denying the request.
Raju Amin, appellant, addressed the Board to display photographs (not received & filed) of his house and property and of other six-foot walls in the area. He stated he needs the six-foot wall for privacy. He also displayed photographs (received & filed) of the side street and stop sign bar where the wall is constructed.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
District Commissioner Morris stated he would like to continue this item so the stop sign bar and the site distance can be evaluated. He said he would like to have the Traffic Division review this.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to continue until December 10, 2002, consideration of an Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a height variance from three feet to six feet for a wall within 25 feet of a street, for property located at the northwest corner of Florida Road and Center Drive, as described in the proof of publication, Raju Amin.
Under discussion, Mr. Amin submitted for the Record a Petition, as shown on page ________, in support of the granting of the appeal.
James Levasseur, 1955 Center Drive, addressed the Board to advise he is the adjacent property owner and he has no objections to the six-foot wall.
Speaker Request Form was received and filed.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Morris left the meeting at this time.
REQUEST TO VACATE & ABANDON EASEMENT
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a request to vacate and abandon a 15’ platted drainage and utility easement located on the common lot line between Lots 4 & 5 in Heathrow Woods; further located at 1792 and 1798 Bridgewater Drive, Thomas & Kerry Bernard, received and filed.
Planner, Denny Gibbs, addressed the Board to present the request, advising the area of the easement does not contain any utilities and the applicant has provided letters from the applicable utility companies stating no objections to the request. She added that the staff recommends approval.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
District Commissioner McLain recommended approval.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-174, as shown on page _______, vacating and abandoning a 15’ platted drainage and utility easement located on the common lot line between Lots 4 & 5 in Heathrow Woods; further located at 1792 and 1798 Bridgewater Drive, as described in the proof of publication, Thomas & Kerry Bernard.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE RE:
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider an Ordinance amending Chapter 40, Part 2, Section 40.16, Seminole County Code, providing for Contractor Licensing Boards in accordance with State Statutes, received and filed.
Program Manager, Kent Cichon, and Tom Halle, Building, addressed the Board to present the proposed ordinance, stating the current ordinance requires five licensed contractor members for a term of one year. He said staff is recommending that the terms of the members be increased to two-year staggered terms.
Commissioner Maloy recommended that the terms be tied to the Commissioners’ terms of office.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. Cichon advised at the end of the calendar year, all terms will expire.
Commissioner Morris re-entered the meeting at this time.
Chairman McLain stated he feels comfortable leaving the one-year terms.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Henley to adopt Ordinance #2002-46, as shown on page _______, amending Chapter 40, Part 2, Section 40.16, Seminole County Code, providing for Contractor Licensing Boards in accordance with State Statutes; and approve Option A, which alters the composition of the boards by reducing the current five licensed contractor members to three licensed contractor members, and creating two consumer representatives, to include keeping the terms at one year, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE,
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider an Ordinance for the Minor Land Development Code Update, received and filed.
Planner Manager, Matt West, presented the proposed ordinance, advising the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval.
Mr. Grace advised this is the first public hearing for the ordinance.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Chairman McLain announced this is the first of two public hearings on the proposed ordinance; and the second hearing will be held on December 10, 2002, at 7:00 p.m.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he has worked with staff and is prepared to offer a motion regarding the Convention Center Interlocal Agreement.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute an Interlocal Agreement, as shown on page _______, with the City of Sanford for the Convention Center with the following changes: size of the facility to be approximately 63,000 square feet; the reduction in the liability insurance from $5 million dollars to $1 million dollars; and accept the proposed language presented by the City of Sanford regarding the Phase II parking with the insertion of the following sentence, “It is the City and County’s intention to develop, within the next six months, a funding plan to construct Phase II parking concurrent with the construction of the convention center.”.
Districts 2, 3 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioners Maloy and Henley voted NAY.
Chairman McLain advised that the Orange County Chairman has issued a letter changing Orange County’s purchasing policy so that Seminole County firms will be treated equally as Orange County firms when awarding contracts.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to appoint Stuart Fritz to the Code Enforcement Board replacing Susan Doerner; and to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-175, as shown on page ________, commending Ms. Doerner for her services.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Maloy advised he is in receipt of the LYNX Report that covered their internal investigation and a copy of the City of Orlando’s Audit regarding same. He said he will distribute copies of both to the Board.
The Board requested LYNX be placed on the agenda for the Legislative Delegation Meeting scheduled for December 17, 2002.
Commissioner Maloy advised of four small parcels of property (including one County-owned) on the six-lane portion of Tuskawilla Road, that have a land use of LDR. He said it is not practical to put any sort of residential along this road and he is requesting, if there is no opposition from the Board, that staff be directed to bring forward a plan amendment report to change the land use to Office that would be limited to one-story buildings and would be neighborhood-friendly. He added that this looks like the best way to wrap up the infill parcels in this area. Copy of Memorandum from Tony Matthews, Principal Planner, regarding same was received and filed.
Commissioner Henley stated that there is an illegal operation on one of the parcels and Code Enforcement has issued a cease and desist order. He suggested that the Board stay that order until the land use is changed.
Whereupon, Commissioner Maloy advised he believes that has already been done.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Henley to direct staff to prepare a Plan Amendment Report with public hearings to be scheduled for February 5 with LPA and February 25 with the BCC in order to change the land use to Office for four parcels of property located on Tuskawilla Road.
Under discussion, Chairman McLain stated he would not want the Board to get into a position of “carrying the ball” for private property owners changing their land use. However, he feels that the fact the County owns one of the parcels, that if the other owners want to “piggy back” on the County’s request, he does not have a problem with it.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Morris announced he will not be speaking on or presenting Items #64 and #65 (Deep Lake Master Plan Revision) even though he has a right to do so. He said instead, he will continue to file a conflict of interest form and will not be attending tonight’s public hearing concerning same.
Commissioner Morris requested staff review the history of the Cameron/Thrasher Property and report back to the Board as to whether the land use and zoning should be changed on same.
Commissioner Van Der Weide advised everything is going smoothly in his District. He commended the Public Works Department for doing an excellent job and requested the staff review the sidewalks for overgrown trees and vegetation and make suggestions on how to address this issue. Whereupon, Mr. Grace advised staff is already working on this.
The Board was advised of a letter from Tony Tizzio requesting appointment to the MPO; however, there is no opening at this time.
Planner, Jeff Hopper, addressed the Board to present the draft regulations regarding home occupation businesses. He stated staff recommends scheduling an additional work session to discuss this or direct the staff to prepare an ordinance with the proposed regulations.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he has numerous violations in his district and it concerns him that the County cannot enforce the obvious. He said he does not know why code enforcement doesn’t work.
Commissioner Van Der Weide left the meeting at this time.
Chairman McLain stated he believes the Board needs to schedule a work session on this subject. He also suggested staff meet with each Commissioner prior to the work session.
The Board voiced no objections to the Chairman’s suggestion.
The following Communications and/or Reports were “received and filed”:
1. Parks/Recreation Contract for Services, as shown on page _______, for Michael Burmaster (Slow-pitch Softball Scorekeeper).
2. Facsimile dated 11/5/02 to BCC from Joseph P. Hudson re: Fossitt Business Park.
3. Copy of letter dated 11/6/02 to Peter Lepuschitz from Ken Roberts, Public Safety Director, in appreciation of monetary donation to Animal Services Division.
4. Memorandum dated 11/7/02 to BCC from County Manager Grace re: Capital Project Fund transfer, $25,684, Lake Mary Blvd. at Sun Dr.
5. Copy of memorandum dated 11/8/02 to Sandy McCann, Commission Records, from Becky Noggle, Environmental Services, re: submission into county records.
6. Letter dated 10/30/02 (with attachments) to Interested Parties from Bob Gleason, FDOT, re: advance notification package for SR 15 (US Hwy 17-92) interchange at SR 436.
7. Memorandum dated 11/3/02 (with attachments) to BCC from Edward Kast, FL. Dept. of State, re: Report of Minority & Physically Disabled Appointments.
8. Memorandum dated 11/12/02 (with attachments) to BCC from Larry Goldman, Building/Fire Official, re: parking at attended self-service gas stations.
9. Letter dated 10/31/02 (with attachments) to BCC from Ray Valdes, Tax Collector, re: refund of FY 2001/02 General Fund unused revenue.
10. Letter dated 11/11/02 (with attachments) to BCC from Sam Nasser re: appeal of Property Appraiser denial of agricultural classification.
11. Letter dated 11/8/02 to BCC from Chuck Henry re: traffic calming devices.
12. Copy of memorandum dated 10/17/02 to Sally Sherman, Deputy County Manager, from Steve Lee, Deputy County Attorney, re: dual office holding.
13. Notice of 11/20/02 Seminole County Port Authority (SCOPA) Board of Directors meeting. (cc: BCC)
14. Letter dated 11/6/02 (with attachments) to Chairman McLain from Sonny Timmerman, FDCA, re: adoption of Seminole County Comp Plan and FDCA Notice of Intent. (cc: BCC, County Manager)
15. Notice of 11/13/02 City of Casselberry Land Use Change/Zoning public hearing re: U-Haul, 2055 Semoran Blvd. (cc: County Manager, Planning & Development Director, Planning Manager, Elections Supervisor, Property Appraiser)
16. Notice of 11/21/02 City of Sanford Rezone public hearing re: Allan Keen, 800 Vihlen Rd. (cc: Planning & Development Director, Elections Supervisor, Property Appraiser)
17. Notice of 11/21/02 City of Sanford Rezone public hearing re: McKee Construction, 3991 W. First St. (cc: Planning & Development Director, Elections Supervisor, Property Appraiser)
18. Letter dated 11/8/02 to BCC from Mary L. Hilliman, The Hilliman Gp. re: Community Development Office procedures.
19. Copy of memorandum dated 11/15/02 to Sandy McCann, Commission Records, from Becky Noggle, Environmental Services, re: submission into county records.
20. Orlando Sentinel Commentary re: lawsuits from sale of water services. (cc: BCC, Deputy County Managers, County Attorney)
21. Memorandum dated 11/13/02 to All Interested Parties from FL Representative David Simmons, Seminole County Legislative Delegation Chairman, re: 12/17/02 Legislative Delegation public hearing. (cc: BCC, County Managers)
22. Parks/Recreation Contract, as shown on page _______, for Kevin McKenna (Tennis Instructor).
23. Notice of 11/22/02 US 17-92 Redevelopment Planning Agency meeting.
24. Letter dated 11/18/02 (with attachments) to Chairman McLain from Martha Wright, FDLE, re: access by local governments to state and national criminal history information. (cc: BCC, County Manager, Deputy County Managers, Human Resources, Administrative Services, Community Services, Public Safety Director)
25. E-mail dated 11/5/02 to Lake Mary Mayor Greene from Cecil Thompson re: annexation of Colonial Properties by City of Lake Mary.
26. Parks/Recreation Contract, as shown on page _______, for Luis Santiago (Slow-pitch Softball Umpire).
27. Copy of letter dated 11/19/02 to Mary Hilliman, The Hilliman Gp., from Colleen Rotella, Community Resources Manager, re: down payment assistance for her client.
28. Letter dated 11/20/02 to Chairman McLain from Charles Bronson, Commissioner of Agriculture, re: appreciation of US 17-92 RPA recommendation to provide financial assistance for renovation of Sanford State Farmers Market. (cc: BCC, Kevin Fall)
29. Letter dated 11/18/02 to Chairman McLain from Brady Lessard, Sanford Mayor, re: Convention Center in Sanford. (cc: BCC, County Managers, Planning & Development Director, County Attorney)
30. Letter dated 11/18/02 to Chairman McLain from Rich Crotty, Orange County Chairman, re: local preference and location scoring in the procurement process. (cc: BCC, County Managers, Purchasing, County Attorney)
31. Letter dated 11/21/02 to BCC from Tom Wetherald, The Barn, re: support of Sanford State Farmers Market redevelopment project. (cc: BCC, County Managers, US 17-92 RPA)
32. Copy of letter dated 11/18/02 to Paul & Amy Reinecke from Ken Roberts, Public Safety Director, re: in-kind donation to Animal Services Division.
33. Copy of letter dated 11/18/02 to Paw Printz from Ken Roberts, Public Safety Director, re: monetary donation to Animal Services Division.
34. Letter dated 11/4/02 (with attachments) to Choose Life License Plate Funds Recipients from Palmer Brand, FL Dept. of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, re: FY 2002/03 annual audit and specialty license plate report.
35. Copy of memorandum dated 11/22/02 to Sandy McCann, Commission Records, from Becky Noggle, Environmental Services, re: submission into county records.
36. Copy of letter dated 11/12/02 to County Manager Grace from Bill Fahey re: commendation for Customer Resource Center and staff. (cc: BCC)
37. Copy of letter dated 11/21/02 to Sid Vihlen, Florida Recycling Services, from County Manager Grace re: request to appear before BCC concerning refuse collection performance issues.
38. Notice of 12/5/02 City of Sanford rezone public hearing re: 2215 Oregon Ave. (cc: Subs, County Manager, Planning Manager, Elections Supervisor, Property Appraiser)
39. Letter dated 11/23/02 to BCC from Sandra Glenn, ECFRPC, re: regional calendar information.
Mr. Grace briefed the Board on the County’s Consumptive Use Permit with St. Johns River Water Management District. He said there are still some things with the permit that are a concern to him. He said built into the SJRWMD’s allocations is a standard that by the end of ten years, the County will move from 360 gallons per capita in the northwest area to 270 gallons per capita. He stated staff believes, with some effort, they can do that; but, the District wants to require the County to come up with a rate structure that has to be approved by them. Discussion ensued.
Commissioner Morris stated it seems like there are some things that are unacceptable and are unfunded mandates. He suggested the Chairman and Mr. Grace meet with the District Director on these issues.
Mr. Grace stated he plans to respond fairly strong back to the District on these issues and he wants to make sure the Board is aware of it. He added that he agrees that he and the Chairman need to meet with the District Director.
Commissioner Henley requested Mr. Grace copy the Board with his response to SJRWMD.
Director of Environmental Services, Bob Adolphe, addressed the Board to state he believes the District’s large planning staff paints themselves in a corner.
The Board voiced no objections with Mr. Grace moving ahead with his response to the District.
Mr. Grace gave a brief update on the Clerk’s new Computer System, advising the Clerk purchased the new system from J.D. Edwards. He said it is a good system and he is pleased with the selection. He further advised that the Clerk is starting the conversion, which is a substantial effort. He stated that he is in the process of evaluating other components that they will need and will cost in addition to what the Clerk has purchased from her own funds. He added that he is very pleased with the way things are progressing and is working closely with the Clerk on this.
Mr. Grace advised the City of Lake Mary did continue their hearing on the annexation of Colonial Properties; but, has been unable to find out if the continuance is for two weeks or indefinitely. He said he would like the City to put this off indefinitely so that the County and City can come up with a long-term solution that is acceptable to both sides. He added he will keep the Board informed on this issue.
Chairman McLain reminded the Board of the dinner scheduled with the Wicklow Ireland delegation at 7:30 p.m., at Pebbles in Longwood.
The Board, thereupon, recessed at 2:57 p.m., reconvening at 7:01 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.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider an Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying variances at 3084 Harbor Lake Court, Oviedo, Rauel Galdo Morales, received and filed.
Jeff Hopper, Planning, addressed the Board to state the Board may approve a variance from 10 ft. to 7.5 ft for required accessory building setback; a variance from 25 ft. to 18 ft. for required side street setback and a variance of a maximum fence height from 3 ft. to 6 ft. within 25 ft. of a street. He stated a new variance from 10 ft. to 3 ft. for required accessory building setback from the west property line is also being proposed. This item was continued from the October 22, 2002 hearing in order to give the appellant an opportunity to submit an alternative proposal. The Board of Adjustment (BOA) denied the side street setback and maximum fence height based on reservations over issues of sight visibility and appearance in a side yard adjacent to a street. The Board had the same concerns and suggested that the appellant submit an alternate proposal, which would be less intrusive to the side yard. He stated the appellant would like the Board to consider her original request, but she is receptive to a different location, 3 ft. from the rural lot line and 25 ft. from the side street. Under this proposal, a variance would be needed to reduce the accessory building setback on the west from 10 ft. to 3 ft. A portion of the platted drainage and utility easement along the west property line would need to be vacated to accommodate the request. Staff feels that although all criteria for granting a variance are still not met, the proposed location closer to the rear property line is less conspicuous than the earlier request and will have no impacts on visibility or traffic safety in the neighborhood. He stated staff recommends upholding the BOA’s decision and if the Board wishes to approve the request, staff recommends the following: (1) In accordance with the appellant’s revised site plan, a variance from 10 ft. to 3 ft. should be granted to the 10 ft. accessory building setback. Approval should be contingent upon vacating a portion of the 7.5 ft. drainage and utility easement; (2) The fence height variance, if granted, should be conditioned upon meeting a specific setback from the Walnut Grove Place right-of-way; and (3) In granting the variance(s), the Board should state whether its decision is specific to the structures shown on the submitted plan, or if larger/additional structures not presented at this time could be permitted in the future.
District Commissioner Maloy stated he had a chance to visit the property and it looks a lot different seeing it in person than what is shown on the map. A chain link fence cannot be put up because it is against the deed restrictions. The one concern the BOA had was site visibility and he didn’t see any site visibility problem with the property. He stated Mrs. Morales has a strong desire to come out to the side property to enlarge her backyard so that in the future her children could play out back.
Raquel Morales addressed the Board to state Commissioner Maloy came up with some great ideas. She stated she now would like to ask for two variances. She said she would like to be able to line the shed up with the rear of the house, therefore, it would be set back 3 ft. instead of 10 ft. She stated her second request is to allow her to move the fence out 15 ft. and this would allow the variance to be 6 ft. She added she would like to be able to utilize her back yard.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
District Commissioner Maloy stated he did not see any site visibility problems or appearance problems. He stated he would be in favor of allowing the fence to be 6 ft. tall but the structure would not be allowed to go into the side yard setback.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to overturn the Board of Adjustment, thereby, granting the fence height variance that would match the site plan previously shown; the variance to be from 10 ft. to 3 ft.; and the pad for the shed to be limited to 10 ft. by 10 ft.; and to deny the request to move the building into the side yard setback; for property located at 3084 Harbor Lake Court, Oviedo, as described in the proof of publication, Rauel Galdo Morales.
Under discussion and upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Hopper advised in order to meet the 6th criteria, the appellant will have to prove that they do not have a reasonable use of the property without the variance.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider request for a Major Revision to Deep Lake PUD Preliminary Master Plan; property located south of SR 426, east of Tuskawilla Road, west of Deep Lake Road, Harvey Slayton and Susan Irelan, received and filed.
Matt West, Planning Manager, addressed the Board to advise the Board approved the initial request on April 9, 2002. A subsequent proposal was rejected around two months ago. He stated the applicant has revised the plan and has resubmitted a new amendment to the Preliminary Master Plan. He displayed the Future Land Use Map (received and filed) and reviewed the properties designated as High Intensity Development and the proposed uses. He displayed a chart (received and filed) showing the history of Deep Lake PUD and he reviewed the approved and proposed revisions to the Preliminary Master Plan. He stated the concern is Deep Lake is currently a private road and it does not align with a proposed traffic light intersection that will align up with the Clayton property. Staff is recommending realigning Deep Lake Road onto the Clayton property so that everyone would have access to a controlled intersection. The developer and the applicant have obtained signatures of the concerned property owners and copies of the executed agreements were received from the other four property owners. He stated the applicant is proposing 133 townhomes, which equates to about 9.5 dwelling units, 12.7 net dwelling units per net buildable acre. Each of the units will have an individual garage and the commercial acreage is still less than the original PUD. An off site retention will be provided to the south and the property does have 25% common open space.
Mr. West displayed the future land use map and he explained for Commissioner Van Der Weide how C-1 uses came about for Trinity Bay.
Mr. West displayed a Comparison Table (received and filed) of Deep Lake PUD and Trinity Retail Center and he reviewed the number of townhouse units, the net and gross density, the lot sizes, and setbacks/buffers of the each project. He stated the chart shows that everything is similar in design and the unit size for Trinity Retail Center is a little larger than Deep Lake. He pointed out that the next item is a request for the Final Master Plan for Deep Lake and it is normally heard during the morning session, but the Board could not approve it until after the major revision request was heard.
Ed Suchora, Beazer Homes, addressed the Board to state the lot sizes are strictly the difference between areas being platted. He referred to the Future Land Use Map and stated there is commercial zoning to the north and east, therefore, this site is more appropriate for a transitional product. Based on the Board’s comments, he looked for a bench mark to design a product that would be approvable by the residents and the Board. He stated his intent is to make this project in compliance with every requirement of Seminole County and fit within the precedent that was set when the site was approved. As a result, he has reduced the units by 47, increased the units from 16 to 20 ft. wide, and added garages to every unit. All of the units will have two to three bedrooms. He said this site is modeled after Centex so that it will be consistent and comparable in the area and match the precedent. He displayed and briefly reviewed the Recreation Center (received and filed) and he stated he has plans to make this a full maintenance project and it will be maintained by the common homeowners association.
Ron Henson, Design Services Group, addressed the Board to state their plan complies with all of the requirements for building setback/buffers.
Mr. Suchora stated he has met with adjacent landowners and the adjacent neighborhoods, and all of the homeowners to the south have agreed with this project and they have executed easement releases and those are included in the public record. They have had multiple meetings with the only adjacent land owner (Chris and Wendy Saliga) and they have requested a 40 ft. buffer between the edge of their property and the buildings and that has been increased to 60 ft. At the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) meeting, staff recommended a wall be installed along the Saliga’s property and he has agreed to that recommendation. He stated he has met with Trinity Bay HOA as well as the members of Bear Creek and have tried to work through their issues. Their only concern was to reduce the density because it sets a precedent for the density of the land. Trinity Bay did not have any concerns relating to what the projects would look like or the maintenance. The residents’ major concern was schools and traffic. A traffic study has been done and it shows that the entire area is completely concurrent. He stated he has discussed the school issues with staff and they indicated that the impacts are very little. Several elementary schools will be expanded or built and redistricting will be done to handle the new residents. The first resident is expected to move in 2004 when the new schools and redistricting will be in place.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Suchora advised the increased setback is from the property line and the Saligas have a pool house 50 ft. from the property line and the home is 20 or 30 ft. from the pool house.
Chairman McLain submitted into the Record several Written Comment Forms from residents opposing the project.
Marcus Griffin, 2754 Regal Lane, addressed the Board to state he represents the Bear Creek Homeowner’s Association. He stated the Bear Creek HOA opposed the quality and density of this project, but they are not opposed to growth and development of this project. This is an inferior project and too populous and in no way does it represent the conceptual plan that was used to have the property rezoned. What is acceptable to the community is a well-constructed aesthetic pleasing project that complements their investments. No one has the right to maximize their profits at the expense of others nor do they have the right to destroy the property values of the community for their own gain. The high density and low quality of this project will devalue the residents’ investments. He displayed a picture (received and filed) of the proposed townhomes and he stated it looks grotesquely industrial. This project looks like a traditional apartment-like blockhouse and the quality of this project is not high enough. He also displayed a picture (received and filed) of Barrington Place apartment homes located on the other side of SR 417. He stated there is no difference between the two except one is 150 sq. ft. larger. He said he cannot accept the current proposal as it does not meet the standards. The residents are the true investors of the community and they would be the ones who will suffer.
Craig Bailey, 5310 N. Lake Burkett Lane, addressed the Board to state he is the President of Trinity Bay Homeowners Association. He stated he opposes the proposed 133 units but has no objection to the original 65 units plan. His opposition is based on the density, lack of quality and the lack of comparability to the Beazer design versus the Centex design. He displayed and reviewed a chart (received and filed) showing the acreage of the April 6 approved plan and the November 26 revised plan. He said 36 single-family homes are under construction, as well as the Bougainvillea Clinic is being expanded to 18,000 sq. ft. He added 160 townhomes (Centex Homes) are approved for construction including 199 apartment units presently being constructed on the other side of the GreeneWay, as well as a Hess store and a retail center that is almost complete. There are two HIP zoned areas located on the west side of the GreeneWay as well. This area is saturated with traffic during the day and DOT indicated that this area could handle it. He stated it is a terrifying challenge in getting in and out of his neighborhood. He urged the Board to reevaluate this proposal and take a good look at the future development of this area.
Kenneth Prager, 2790 Regal Lane, addressed the Board to state he is a truck driver and the density of the original proposal would be compatible with his community. He stated 180 units were not acceptable and why would 133 units be acceptable. He said this whole project has been a scam and politically unethical from the beginning. He added he bought his house on the basis that this was a cul-de-sac and there is no way that this shoebox apartments could be anything but low-income housing. He said he paid too much for his home to have $100,000 homes or shoe-boxed apartments and not feel that he is being pushed out.
At the request of Commissioner Henley, Mr. Prager indicated on the map where he lives.
Wendy Saliga, 3055 Tuskawilla Road, addressed the Board to submit a form (not received and filed) showing the quality and direct relation to density. She displayed a map of the 65-unit townhome project and she indicated where the off-site retention was taken away from the project. She indicated on the map the location of her home. She stated she wants quality wetland protection as the wetlands is her backyard. She indicated where another retention area was removed. She said she would like assurance of vegetative screening of trees or hedges rather than a fence. She stated the Trinity Retail was approved for 168 units with 2 or 3 bedrooms. She said she would like a variety of square footage and options, as that will invite a more family environment. Centex has staggering of units and she would like that as well. She added she feels it is important to reiterate that the residents never opposed the 65 units and they would like to get what they previously supported.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Van Der Weide, Ms. Saliga advised she feels that 85 units is a reasonable number. She stated she feels the commercial zoning should be equivalent to the Trinity project.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Ms. Saliga advised she would like the vegetation screening around the wetland perimeter and she would love to see the original plan be put back into effect. She added she doesn’t want a chain-link fence all the way around the perimeter.
Stefania McGrath, 5295 N. Lake Burkett Lane, addressed the Board to state she is a real estate agent and she has had her license for about 10 years. She pointed out she has lived in Trinity Bay for 11 years and she has watched her property values increase and she was not thrilled that Centex wanted to build next to her subdivision. She said she was deeply concerned when she found out about the proposed project. She added she is looking to put her house on the market for around $185,000 to $200,000 but the 300 units next to her will definitely lower the value of her home. She said she has no problem with any building going in there, but she is concerned with that many more townhomes going in. She stated she is looking to move out so she can retain her property values because she doesn’t want to live next to townhomes. She stated she works in the education system and they are in the process of reconstruction, but it will still not be enough to cover all of the needed classrooms. She said her son goes to Tuskawilla Middle School and they have portables as well as Eastbrook and she doesn’t know where all of the children are going to go. She added she would like to see the property values of this project increase and price of the homes to start in the $140,000 to $160,000 range.
Todd Husty, 5690 S. Lake Burkett Lane, addressed the Board to indicate on the map the property he has made an offer on. He stated he would like to know when the land use plan went into effect.
Mr. West advised a major update was done in 1991 and another one was done last year.
Mr. Husty stated he feels there was some frustration at the last couple of meetings with the process. He stated everyone understands that the Board has to make the decisions about their lives, land use, and planning, and those decisions include requirements and limits for development. The residents’ concern is for more than just density; and the quality of life for their families.
Patty Duffy, 8420 Admiral Point, addressed the Board to state the density of this project is too high and the quality is too low. If the Board votes in favor of this major revision, they will be voting for unethical commission/staff practices as well as diminishing the integrity and quality of the communities. The 65 units previously approved should remain. Article 2, Section 8 of the Florida Statutes states a public office is a public trust and the people have the right to secure and sustain trust against abuse. She stated she knows that Beazer Homes can put in a great product and she would love to see homes coming in at $140,000.
Chris Saliga, 3055 Tuskawilla Road South, addressed the Board to state he is singing the same old song of quality, intensity and compatibility. He stated all of the residents’ lives will be changed by this decision. The applicant has indicated that he tried to work with the community but their method was to target individuals to see what their needs are. The community needs of quality, intensity and compatibility are too great and expensive to be met. The Board may hear them say that it is not feasible to build less units and still remain profitable. This is a community issue and the Board needs to rule with that in mind.
Mr. Suchora clarified for the Board the definition of quality. He stated as far as the square footage and comparability of the two projects, it is clear that each of these are 20 ft. wide and they have one car garage and two and three bedroom plans. He said what he has done is priced the units to start at the same price as Centex for marketing reasons and he is offering units from 1,251 sq. ft. up to 2,450 sq. ft. The value analysis finds that the average square footage exceeds that of Trinity Bay and is comparable to Bear Creek. The value will average around $185,000. As far as the commercial calculations, not only did they give up tract three and make it townhomes and removed the retention pond, they were able to remove a 90 ft. right-of-way over onto the Clayton’s property, thereby increasing the available land into commercial. Town home units in the original plan back up directly to the Saliga property without any buffer. He stated he has created an increased and better product. His engineers have determined that the wetlands need to be maintained. Ponds will be created on the off-site storage and that will allow stormwater to go directly into the adjacent man-made pond. There have been complaints relating to traffic and school impacts. He stated he believes his project will have less of an impact on the community because of its smaller nature. He added he focused on the Boards of each of the HOA’s and Mr. & Mrs. Saliga to try to satisfy everyone. He stated this project will not be designed for student housing.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated to Mr. Suchora that he resents that he is talking down to the citizens. He added that somehow he feels he was brought onboard to save the project, because the developers were a bunch of amateurs.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request and Written Comments Forms were received and filed.
District Commissioner Maloy stated this has been a difficult issue and it is unusual to have a project come through and then jump up the number of units. It has been a give and take from both sides. The applicant has revised the project to 133 units and the residents agree to 85 units.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve the requested Major Revision to a PUD Preliminary Master Plan and authorize the Chairman to execute the Development Order for an 18.66 acre parcel located south of SR 426 and west of Deep Lake Road, as described in the proof of publication, Harvey Slayton and Susan Irelan, with the following amendments: (1) This development will not be designed or marketed as student housing; (2) Front walls of the townhouse units will be staggered; (3) Dumpsters and mechanical units shall be located and/or screened and not be visible from SR 426; (4) No accessory building or common areas shall be allowed; (5) Tracts I and J be amended to C-1 uses; (6) 60 ft. setback provided adjacent to Mr. Saliga’s property, with a 6 ft. stucco or split block wall along the common property line; and (8) Maximum number of units to be 104, Harvey Slayton and Susan Irelan.
Under discussion Commissioner Maloy advised he feels the Board has the right to approve the original 65 units without property rights issues being involved. However he said he was trying to come to a compromise and have something that is higher in quality and more compatible.
Commissioner Henley stated he feels that is significantly less than the proposal.
Chairman McLain stated he feels the project is well served and now the P&Z and staff are supporting it. He said he would not be willing to support 104 units as he feels that would cause some problems.
Districts 1, and 3 voted AYE.
Commissioners Henley and McLain voted NAY, whereupon, the motion failed for lack of a majority vote.
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at 8:43 p.m., reconvening at 8:55 p.m.
Chairman McLain stated the one thing he has heard was quality and size and he feels there is relevance that all of the units are 1,250 sq. ft. He stated he is wondering what the Beazer Company would do if larger units were considered and move them up to the size of the adjoining facility.
Mr. Suchora stated it is 1,532 sq. ft.
Chairman McLain stated what he is hearing from the community is they want a higher upscale development that is going to have a higher price tag so it can be compatible with the Centex project.
Mr. Suchora stated since the Board suggested that he be required to stagger the units for aesthetics by increasing the size of the three-bedroom units to the size of the Centex units. This would allow him to create the staggered look. Therefore, he can have a larger marketable three-bedroom plan.
Commissioner Henley stated what he sees is 1,495 sq. ft.
Chairman McLain stated he would recommend a minimum 1,495 sq. ft. in addition to 1,250 sq. ft., with a three-bedroom unit being a minimum of 1,495 sq. ft. He stated the Board will need to make sure that when the architectural look of the building is changed, those units will be required to be bigger (1,495 sq. ft.). He viewed the photograph that Commissioner Maloy had relative to what the building would look like.
Mr. Suchora stated he would like the ability to intermix the three bedroom units as desirable for aesthetics and to be able to market for demand.
Upon inquiry by Chairman McLain, Mr. Suchora advised he is concerned about committing to a minimum number of three bedrooms.
Chairman McLain stated the applicant will have to design the buildings and a certain number of them would have to be larger in order to jet out.
Upon inquiry by Chairman McLain, Mr. Suchora advised that he will agree to 1/3 of the units being a minimum of 1,495 sq. ft.
Chairman McLain stated he feels that quality is important and he understands the residents’ concerns about property values. He stated he feels this is a substantial benefit to the community to increase the size to make it more compatible with the size of the units of the other development. He said he can support the number of units assuming the applicant can have larger units of 1,495 sq. ft. and have the different architectural design.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Van Der Weide, Chairman McLain advised he has no objections to 133 units as the density is lower and adding 1,495 sq. ft. minimum three-bedroom plan has enhanced the project.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Chairman McLain advised he has no objections to all of the commitments that Commissioner Maloy referred to in his motion. He stated the only additional requirement he would like included is adding 1/3 of the units to be larger by 1,495 sq. ft.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he would like to see some compromise between the 104 and 133.
Commissioner Maloy stated with some of these changes being made, he would prefer continuing this item so that the developer can submit a floor plan and architectural picture of what it would look like on the front.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to continue to December 10, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, request for a Major Revision to Deep Lake PUD Preliminary Master Plan; property located south of SR 426, east of Tuskawilla Road, west of Deep Lake Road, as described in the proof of publication, Harvey Slayton and Susan Irelan.
Under discussion, Chairman McLain stated he feels the Board can make a decision on the Major Revision this evening and continue Item #65, Request to Approve the Final Master Plan, as this would give the District Commissioner time to work with the developer on the architecture and size of the units.
Commissioner Maloy stated he would stand with his motion as the Board is dealing with the development order at this time and he feels they need to get the details in that to carry it through the rest of the process.
Districts 1, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Henley voted NAY.
Chairman McLain stated there will be no public comments at that time and the Board will only deal with the solution of this project.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to continue to December 10, 2002 at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible request to approve Final PUD Master Plan and Developer’s Commitment Agreement for the Deep Lake PUD and the South Tuskawilla Road Property PUD; property comprising approximately 60 acres, located south of SR 426 and east of S. Tuskawilla Road, Harvey Slayton, Susan Irelan and Aloma Development LLC.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m., this same date.