BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
DECEMBER 10, 2002
The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held at 9:34 a.m., on Tuesday, December 10, 2002, in the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.
Present:
Chairman Daryl McLain (District 5)
Vice Chairman Grant Maloy (District 1)
Commissioner Randy Morris (District 2)
Commissioner Dick Van Der Weide (District 3)
Commissioner Carlton Henley (District 4)
County Manager Kevin Grace
County Attorney Robert McMillan
Deputy Clerk Eva Roach
Father Jack Flynn, St. Rita Church, Philadelphia, Pa., gave the Invocation.
Diane Merkt, Executive Assistant, led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Kevin Fall, CRA Coordinator, addressed the Board to state the U.S. 17-92 Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) is holding its meeting today to consider specific projects that have been recommended by the U.S. 17-92 Redevelopment Planning Agency. He recognized the following members of the Redevelopment Planning Agency (RPA): Commissioner Randy Morris; Commissioner Randy Jones, City of Sanford; Commissioner Robert Miller, City of Winter Springs; Commissioner Janet Jernigan, City of Lake Mary; Dick Wells, City of Casselberry (who is absent); Bill Spivey, Alternate for the City of Lake Mary; and Antonio Jerli, City of
Sanford. He stated the RPA recommended that the following projects be approved by the CRA and the associated funding be authorized from the U.S. 17-92 Redevelopment Trust Fund: Ratliff Demolition Project; Uniform Public Signage Standards; Signage Inventory/Mapping Project; 17-92 CRA Business Assistance Program; Public Farmers Market Building Enhancements; Public Farmers Market Site Enhancements; and 13th – 14th St. Median & Landscaping Enhancements. He said each of the projects is summarized in the agenda memorandum. He introduced Sue Greer, representing Sanwa Growers, Inc. and Don Coker, representing Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Service and Mark Markwit. He stated Public Farmers Market is an opportunity for the CRA to participate in partnering the project with the State, City of Sanford, Sanwa Growers and the community. The State has committed in excess of $350,000 and the City of Sanford has committed to $230,000 in funding and Sanwa Growers has invested over $500,000 as an anchor tenant and holder of a 10-year lease with the State. This project addresses three goals of the adopted 17-92 Corridor Redevelopment Plan. Those are: the elimination of blighted conditions; enhancement of visual and aesthetic qualities of the redevelopment area; and enhancing the public spaces within the redevelopment area. He showed a short video (not received and filed) of the Public Farmers Market project.
Sue Greer, General Manager of Sanwa Growers, Inc., addressed the Board to state Sanwa Growers are growers in Central Florida and they are happy to be coming to Sanford. She stated they have invested a half million dollars after spending three years of trying to get a plan in place. She said she feels this is a very good area and there is a great opportunity here that Sanwa doesn’t want to pass by. She reviewed the different locations of their business. She distributed a booklet (received and filed) containing before and after information relating to Sanwa Growers, Inc.
Commissioner Morris stated this is a program that represents a combination of a year’s worth of work in trying to balance expenditures in the CRA between the type of project, size of business, and geographic balance. He stated the Farmers Market represents small businesses primarily in the agriculture sector. The CRA Committee did not forward all of initiated requests and significant cost cutting was done. He said he would recommend approval of the Public Farmers Market Building and Site Enhancements.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Commissioner Morris stated the intent is the expenditures are made and finished. The public element, which is being funded for the Farmers Market retail, is what has helped to make it successful in Tampa.
Upon further inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Fall advised the State has committed to build the base building and that would cost around $295,000.
Commissioner Henley stated he realizes that this is a historical facility and he can appreciate the value of historical aspects.
Commissioner Morris advised he feels the Farmers Market will offer many kinds of fruit and vegetables. He stated the fact is the State is going to build this anyway and it is going to be something that is considerably less aesthetically attractive and less appealing to the retail public. The reason the Winter Park Market venue is so successful is because it is in a great location.
Motion by Commissioner Morris to approve the Public Farmers Market Building Enhancements and the Public Farmers Market Site Enhancements.
Chairman McLain surrendered the gavel to Vice Chairman Maloy for the purpose of seconding the motion.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley stated the one thing that concerns him regarding all of these projects is he has not seen any criteria that has been established and approved to determine what types of projects the Board is going to get involved in under the CRA, and to what extent the County is going to get involved in on private property. He asked what criteria is going to be used in making these determinations.
Kevin Grace, County Manager, addressed the Board to state he had a discussion with Mr. Fall and he believes this is a good project. He stated he also feels criteria needs to be established as they go forward so they know what kind of projects they support and work with money towards them.
Commissioner Morris stated the CRA Committee made this recommendation to the Board, but he will personally oppose any arbitrary set standards. These are projects that come before the Committee to either approve or reject and then bring before the BCC for final determination.
Commissioner McLain stated this is a substantial project as the State and private companies have come together. He stated he feels the added enhancements are important to the CRA to set the stage and set a visual impact of what the County would like to see on that corridor. He added he feels this is a small price to pay to have this kind of facility in Sanford of the quality they want to see. It is the RPA’s job to review these projects. This is one of the first major projects that can be an example along this corridor, therefore, he supports this as well.
Commissioner Maloy stated in looking at the project, it appears to have a benefit to the community, but he knows that if you look at CRA funds it is a drain on the general fund. He stated he feels this project is the better value than the other projects. He added he would be willing to have a work session to look at the overall picture of priorities and the criteria.
Commissioner Henley stated the Board had discussions about the CRA and how to redevelop that corridor. His priority is to be able to accumulate enough money to be able to buy some of the small spots that blanket that corridor. The County has been one of the big stumbling blocks in allowing businesses to make improvements. When these businesses come in for a permit to make improvements to their site, the County will not permit them until they bring everything on that site up to standards. A lot of these are small operations and they cannot meet the County code and the only solution to that is to accumulate those lots into one and put it back on the market. The Board has not come to a clear understanding as to what their priorities are going to be. He stated he believes the Board can come up with some criteria for the public to understand what the Board and CRA are going to do.
Commissioner Morris stated he has served on the CRA for one year and his goal is to try to bring balance. He stated the last major project is going to allow them to set core standards.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he has been against the CRA before it got started and he felt there was a better way to do this by working out interlocal agreements with each government entity along 17-92. He said he would be against setting criteria because he feels the flexibility will be lost and a given situation cannot be dealt with if it falls out of the narrow criteria that is set. The Farmers Market is a large piece of property and there can be a significant change with a partner involved. He stated as much as he is against a lot of these projects and the concept of the CRA and what it has done to the tax base, he will have to support the Farmers Market project.
Districts 1, 2, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Henley voted NAY.
The gavel was returned to Commissioner McLain who assumed the position of Chairman.
Motion by Commissioner Morris to authorize funding the following projects from the U.S. 17-92 Redevelopment Trust Fund: Ratliff Demolition Project; Uniform Public Signage Standards; Signage Inventory/Mapping Project; CRA Business Assistance Program; and 13th – 14th St. Median & Landscaping Enhancements.
The Chairman called for a second to the motion three times, whereupon, the motion died for lack of a second.
Commissioner Maloy advised he has a hard time seeing what you get if you take pictures of signs and why it would cost $50,000 to do that.
Commissioner Morris stated the Uniform Public Signage Standards is a design package for all directional and municipal signs that would run the entire length of the route. They would have a uniform nature but still will designate the city that you are going through. He stated for example, Disney uses this type of procedure as well as a variety of cities around Florida. The design, lights, locations and spacing need to be done to identify all key characteristics of the signs. The concept immediately ties the community together on the whole ribbon of the roadway. The Signage Inventory/Mapping project is the most difficult one to understand. The committee tried to figure this one out by asking the municipalities and FDOT what they have out there and what purpose the signs are being used, and no jurisdiction could answer their question.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated what worries him is the fact the cities were not interested in responding to the CRA. As far as the CRA money, the Board needs to concentrate on the big impact. He stated he feels 17-92 needs a community retention pond to make it possible for the other business owners to address their businesses without worrying about what is going to happen to them when they come in for a permit. He said he is not in favor of the CRA Business Assistance Program with taxpayers’ money.
Commissioner Henley stated he has concerns with that as well. He stated he believes the Business Assistance would go to SCC and he doesn’t feel the County should have to fork over another $50,000 when they already received $100,000 for their business assistance program.
Upon inquiry by Chairman McLain, Commissioner Morris asked the Board not to continue these issues as the RPA has worked hard. He asked how much money is left in the reserves because of the success of the CRA.
Mr. Fall stated $120,000 is in the reserves and $170,000 for the redevelopment demonstration project.
Commissioner Henley requested that the 13th – 14th St. Median & Landscaping Enhancements be taken separately.
Motion by Commissioner Morris to approve the Ratliff Demolition Project.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Fall advised the City came before the CRA with an opportunity to help prepare the Ratliff site for redevelopment and they felt that it would be a prudent CRA investment. A development order was signed to restrict uses of the property so that another junkyard wouldn’t be placed there.
Chairman McLain called for a second to the motion three times, whereupon the motion died for lack of a second.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve funding for the 13th – 14th St. Median & Landscaping Enhancements.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to deny funding for the Ratliff Demolition Project; Uniform Public Signage Standards, Signage Inventory/Mapping Project and the CRA Business Assistance Program.
Districts 1, 3, and 4 voted AYE.
Commissioners Morris and McLain voted NAY.
Commissioner Morris requested that the Chairman send a letter to SCC explaining the Board’s vote on the CRA Business Assistance Program.
AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-176, as shown on page ________, commending Delmuse R. Oglesby, Senior Team Member, Road Operations/Stormwater Division, Department of Public Works, for 30 years of service to Seminole County upon his retirement.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Van Der Weide presented the Resolution to Mr. Oglesby.
-------
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-177, as shown on page ________, commending Cubit Malone, Team Member, Road Operations/Stormwater Division, Department of Public Works, for 15 years of service to Seminole County upon his retirement.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Gary Johnson, Public Works Director, asked that John McDaniel come forward to accept the Resolution on behalf of Cubit Malone.
-------
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at 10:25 a.m., reconvening at 10:35 a.m., with Commissioner Morris entering late.
COUNTY ATTORNEY’S CONSENT AGENDA
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to authorize and approve the following:
4. Approve proposed
settlement relating to Parcel Number 111 of the Wymore Road road improvement
project, located at 140 Rollingwood Trail, in the amount of $6,000.00,
inclusive of all land value, severance damage, statutory interest, attorneys
fees and costs, Arnold and Diane
Abramson property.
5. Approve proposed
settlement relating to Parcel Number 109 of the Wymore Road road improvement
project, located at 120 Rollingwood Trail, in the amount of $6,000.00,
inclusive of all land value, severance damage, statutory interest, attorneys
fees and costs, Enrique and Sharon
Sernik property.
6. Approve proposed
settlement relating to Parcel Number 815 of the County Road 427 Phase I road
improvement project, located along the east right-of-way of County Road 427
north of Leonard Street, Altamonte Springs, in the amount of $600.00, inclusive
of attorney’s fees and costs, Estate of Lillie
Belle Reynolds.
7.
Approve and execute Purchase Agreement, as shown on page _________,
relating to Parcel Number 124 of the Wymore Road road improvement project,
located on the west side of Wymore Road just north of Spring Valley Road, in
the amount of $38,119.00, inclusive of all fees costs and expenses, Lois E. Selph, as
surviving spouse of Wilson Selph, property.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
INFORMATION ITEMS
Mr. McMillan informed the Board that the Florida Water Utility System purchase has been postponed until after the first of the year.
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
Upon inquiry by Commissioner
Henley, Mr. Grace advised that Item #8, Approve BCR 03-16, CRA projects, should
be adjusted to $212,126.
Commissioner Maloy stated he
likes the concept of putting the Occupational License Study Equity Committee
(Item #14) together, as he would like to see that to be revenue neutral,
preferably if they can hold the line on the $20 fee.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner
Maloy, Cindy Hall, Fiscal Services Director, addressed the Board to advise she
can check and see if they can simplify the occupational licenses by doing cross
jurisdictional with the cities and counties.
Commissioner Henley requested
that Item #41, Approve Agreement with the City of Altamonte Springs for sports
promotion, be pulled for a separate
vote.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to authorize and approve the following, as amended:
11. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2002-R-179, as shown on page ________, for the issuance of Homeowner Revenue Bonds and Single Family Revenue Bonds, Draw Down Series, by the Orange County Housing Finance Authority on behalf of Seminole County.
12. Adopt the Seminole County Health Department Fee Resolution #2002-R-180, as shown on page ________; and authorize Chairman to execute document.
13. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-181, as shown on page ________, amending the Seminole County Building and Inspection Fees; and authorize Chairman to execute document.
14. Approve list of business representatives, as shown on page ________, to participate on the County’s Occupational License Study Equity Committee.
15. BCR #03-14 - $211,770 – Public Works – Traffic Engineering – Fund 11500 – Infrastructure Tax Fund. A Local Agency Program agreement with FDOT was approved by the BCC on October 22, 2002 in order to install a mast arm signal and right-turn lane at the intersection of CR 419 and Edgemon Avenue in Winter Springs. The County will advance the funding on behalf of Winter Springs in order to begin the design and construction of the project. The project will be completed by June and the County will receive reimbursement from the FDOT by July. Funding for this project is available from the 1991 Sales Tax Fund reserves and from Traffic Engineering Major projects.
16. BCR # 03-15 - $56,246 – Fiscal Services – Budget – Funds: 10101 – Transportation Trust Fund, 10400 – Development Review Fund, 11500 – Infrastructure Tax Fund. Accounting adjustments are needed in order to replenish Fiscal Year 01/02 year-end account balances in the Public Works Department. Funding is available from other account lines within the Department.
17. Budget Amendment Resolution #2002-R-182, as shown on page ________, $322,333 – Public Works – Fund 10101 – Transportation Fund. In follow-up to the County Commission’s approval of a design/build agreement on November 12, 2002, this Budget Amendment Resolution recognizes additional funding which the Florida Department of Transportation has agreed to provide for the construction of the Cross Seminole Trail Bridge over SR 434 in Winter Springs. The corresponding Local Agency Program Supplemental Agreement is presented under the Public Works/Engineering portion of the consent agenda for the December 10, 2002 Board meeting.
18. BCR #02-141 - $190,811 – Public Safety – Fire Fund – Fund: 11200 – Fire Fund. This transfer is requested to reconcile FY 01/02 account line due to positions that were moved from the Non-Union account to the Union account.
19. BCR #03-18 - $39,268 – Library & Leisure Services – Parks & Recreation – Fund: 00100 – General Fund. Additional funds are needed for the Trails Maintenance contract. The bids for this contract came in higher than anticipated. Funds are requested from contingency to cover this budgeted project (accompanying item on the Purchasing Agenda).
20. Approve Amendment
#2, as shown on page _______, to DB-605-00/BJC – Design Build for the Seminole
County Juvenile Justice Center, with The Collage Company/Scott Partnership,
Lake Mary ($174,050.00).
21. Approve ranking for PS-5129-02/BJC –
Continuing Contracts for Surveying Services for Miscellaneous projects
throughout Seminole County, authorize negotiations and award Master Agreements,
as shown on page _________, to Bowyer-Singleton & Associates, Inc.,
Orlando; Harding ESE, Inc., Orlando; Lochrane Engineering, Inc., Orlando and
Southeastern Surveying and Mapping, Inc., Maitland (Not-to-Exceed $400,000.00
per year).
22. Approve ranking list for RFP-4171-02/BJC -
Wide Area Network (WAN) Managed Optical Services - Integration of existing
equipment, authorize negotiations and award an Agreement, as shown on page
________, to Siemens Enterprise Networks LLC, Orlando (Not-to-Exceed
$221,777.00).
23. Approve Amendment #3, as shown on page _________, to Work Order #5 to RFP-489-00/BJC – Appraisal Services for Airport Boulevard – Phase III, with Diversified Property Specialists, Inc., Debary ($20,000.00).
24. Approve the Third (Final) Renewal to RFP-474-99/BJC – Consultant Services Agreement for Wide Area Network Nortel Passport Maintenance, with Sprint-Florida, Maitland (January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2003) (Not-to-Exceed $107,000.00).
25. Award RFP-4174-02/GMG – Term Contract for Trails Ground Maintenance to Villa & Sons Landscaping Corp., Winter Garden (Not-to-Exceed $86,768.00 per year).
26. Approve Amendment #1, as shown on page ________, to RFP-4157-02/BJC - Appraisal Services East Lake Mary Boulevard Phase II-B (Airport entrance to SR 46) improvement project, with The Spivey Group, Inc., Orlando ($150,000.00).
28. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute appropriate Resolution #2002-R-183, as shown on page _______, to reauthorize the Disability Advisory Council through December 31, 2004.
29. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute three Satisfactions of Second Mortgages, as shown on page _________, for Barry & April Janvrin, Dicter & Hilda A. Zapata, and Dweese Thompson & Latesha D. Butler, for households assisted under the SHIP Program’s Home Ownership Assistance Program.
30. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute two Satisfactions of Second Mortgages - Early Release, as shown on page ________, for Eleanor Rex, Robert E. Fishburn, Jr. & Suzanne Fishburn, and Maria Mendez and Elain Nieves, for households assisted under the SHIP Program’s Home Ownership Assistance Program.
31. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute an Interlocal Agreement, as shown on page ________, with the City of Sanford for drainage improvements to the Cloud Branch Outfall System located in the Goldsboro area of the City of Sanford.
32. Approve Minor Plat for the Graves Replat of Alaqua Lakes; property located at 853 Eagle Claw Court, Lake Mary, in the Alaqua Lakes Phase 5B Subdivision (Andrea and Daniel Graves).
33. Approve Final Plat for Lake Forest Section 19; property located on the southeast side of Orange Boulevard, north of SR 46 and south of Nevada Avenue (Orlando Lake Forest Joint Venture).
34. Approve Minor Plat for U-Haul of Casselberry; property located on the west side of SR 436 approximately ˝ mile south of Howell Branch Road (Professional Engineering Consultants, Inc.).
35. Authorize release of Performance Bond No. 5928307 (Safeco Insurance Company of America) in the amount of $142,316.59 for Huntington Pointe Phase 4A located at Emma Oaks Trail between I-4 Eastbound and Lake Emma Road (Pulte Home Corporation).
36. Approve Final Plat for the Woodsong Subdivision; property located on the southeast corner of Orange Boulevard and Oregon Street, Sanford (M/I Homes).
37. Approve Minor Plat for Trinity Center Subdivision; property located on the south side of Aloma Avenue (SR 426) and the south end of Tuskawilla Road (Daly Design Group).
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
41. Request to approve and authorize Chairman to execute Agreement between Seminole County and the City of Altamonte Springs for sports promotion and advertisement in the amount of $50,000, was presented.
Commissioner Henley stated he feels that this is a duplication of something that they are already making a substantial investment in. He stated he understands that the Tourism Development staff recommended against this.
Kathryn Townsend, Tourism Development, addressed the Board to advise that is correct.
Commissioner Henley stated he is concerned that the County doesn’t know how much money it will take from Tourist Development to fund the bonds for the convention center. He stated he feels that this is precedent-setting because this proposal is the same venue that they are marketing.
Chairman McLain stated he would have to agree with Commissioner Henley.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he would have to agree that it is precedent-setting, but when it comes to sports, everything that Altamonte Springs is doing is precedent-setting. One of the things they are trying to do is pursue a major event that they never had before in Seminole County and there are other issues that will be coming as well. He stated staff did not recommend the request, but the Board members made up of volunteers and representatives from different cities supported it. He added he feels the three-year term is precedent-setting.
Commissioner Henley stated he believes the County already contributed over $94,000 to sports promotion and he believes that is a lot of duplication in view of the impact that will be taking on the Tourist Development budget.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated there seems to be a tremendous amount of concern about the TDC funds whether they continue to come down. He stated the funds come from the private sector and it is simply a conduit collecting the taxes. He said industry is the best barometer and he is in favor of the request.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to approve an Agreement with the City of Altamonte Springs for sports promotion and advertisement in the amount of $50,000.
Districts 1, and 3 voted AYE.
Commissioners Henley and McLain voted NAY, whereupon, the motion failed for lack of a majority vote.
Commissioner Van Der Weide recommended continuing this item until the afternoon meeting.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to authorize and approve the following:
CLERK’S REPORT
42. Expenditure Approval List, as shown on page _______, dated November 19, 2002; and Payroll Approval List, as shown on page ________, dated November 21, 2002.
43. Chairman to execute Satisfaction of Judgment for Court Costs for David Glenn Miller, Case #98-4872-MMA - $113
Stuart A. Baird, Case #00002822CFA - $200
Rebecca Brittain, Case #98002054MM - $200
Stacy Andrew Carver, Case #95003050CFA - $200
Kelly E. Chastian, Case #02006702MM - $200
Kevin B. Chaudion, Case #00002463CFA - $300
Wendy S. Getman, Case #01014241MM - $200
Leif R. Hines, Case #02006772MM - $200
Charles Hixon, Case #02001156MM - $250
Terrell C. Jackson, Case #00009330MM - $250
Bruce P. Johnson, Case #02007232MM - $260
Frankie LeFils, Case #97011206MM - $200
Mark L. Lewandowski, Case #00002819CFA - $200
Robert James Marek, Case #L9000526CFA - $50
Cynthia CF Smiley, Case #98003262CJA - $100
45. Approval of BCC Official Minutes dated November 12 & 19, 2002.
46. Authorize expenditure from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund in the amount of $1,000 to contribute to the Crimeline Program.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s “received and filed”:
1. Letter to the BCC from Geraldine Harford, Tax Deed Clerk, attaching list of Lands available from tax deed sale.
2. Performance Bond #929188098, as shown on page ________, in the amount of $274,612.09 for the project known as Royal Oaks Subdivision.
3. Letter of Credit #79, as shown on page ________, in the amount of $10,000 for Winding Cove Subdivision.
4. Performance Bond, as shown on page ________, in the amount of $4,905.78 for Crown Colony Subdivision.
5. Letter of Credit #8035350431-55, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $9,264 for Park Place at Heathrow.
6. Memorandum to Maureen Landgraf, Public Works Department, from Debra Edge, County Attorney’s Office, relating to Payment of Direct Pay Request for RFP-489-00/BJC; Work Order #5 and related amendments.
7. Memorandum to Linda Eiland, Administrative Services, from Henry Brown, Assistant County Attorney, relating to Payment of Direct Pay Request for Calling v. Seminole County.
8. Memorandum to Jerry McCollum, County Engineer, from Henry Brown, Assistant County Attorney, relating to Direct Pay Request for East Lake Mary Blvd. Segment 1.
9. Work Order #4, as shown on page ________, to PS-5116-02.
10. Work Order #18, as shown on page ________, to PS-356-96.
11. M-337-02, as shown on page _______, Electrical Services Agreement, Smithson Electric, Inc.
12. First Amendment, as shown on page ________, to Work Order #34 to FC-1139-00.
13. Work Order #2, as shown on page ________, to PS-587-01.
14. Work Order #50, as shown on page _______, to FC-1139-00.
15. Memorandum to Jerry McCollum, County Engineer, from Henry Brown, Assistant County Attorney, relating to Direct Pay Request for Dodd Road, Seminole County v. Scott, et al.
16. Work Order #2, as shown on page _______, to PS-535-99.
17. Work Orders #33 and #34, as shown on page _______, to PS-590-01.
18. Bids for PS-5132-02, as shown on page _______.
REGULAR AGENDA
Jerry McCollum, County Engineer, addressed the Board to present request from Florida Power & Light Co. for authorization to relocate existing overhead utilities to remain in an overhead configuration on East Lake Mary Blvd. between Ohio Avenue and the existing entrance to Orlando Sanford International Airport; and installation of any overhead utilities on the newly constructed portion of East Lake Mary Blvd. between the entrance to the Orlando Sanford International Airport and SR 46. He stated staff recommends approval of relocating existing overhead utilities to remain in an overhead configuration on East Lake Mary Blvd. He said FPL would like the second request delayed and staff has no problem with that request as it would not hold up any construction. He stated the second item would be delayed until the County Attorney’s office has time to discuss this issue with the attorneys of FPL.
Robert McMillan added that FPL has indicated that they have no problem delaying both issues until the next Board meeting in January. He stated it won’t affect any of the work that is being done out there.
Commissioner Morris reentered the meeting at this time.
Mr. McCollum stated staff has no objections to continuing both issues.
At the request of Commissioner Maloy, Mr. McCollum reviewed the process.
Mr. McMillan stated if the lines are already there they are not required to go underground, but if it is a new right-of-way, he is not sure the Statutes require that the County permit them to place the lines in the right-of-way.
Chairman McLain recommended continuing this item until January 14, 2003.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to continue to January 14, 2003, request to authorize relocating existing overhead utilities to remain in an overhead configuration on East Lake Mary Blvd. between Ohio Avenue and the existing entrance to Orlando Sanford International Airport; and installation of any overhead utilities on the newly constructed portion of East Lake Mary Blvd. between the entrance to the Orlando Sanford International Airport and SR 46.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Mr. McCollum presented request for authorization for the Chairman to execute the Northland Community Church, Inc./Seminole County Joint Facilitation of Public Infrastructure Lake Drive Agreement.
Commissioner Morris complimented staff and members of the Northland Community Church, as well as the City of Casselberry, for their efforts in facing a series of issues.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to authorize the Chairman to execute the Northland Community Church, Inc./Seminole County Joint Facilitation of Public Infrastructure Lake Drive Agreement, as shown on page ________.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Jamie Croteau, Administrative Services Director, addressed the Board to present request to approve Amendment #1 to the “Construction Manager at Risk” contract with the The Haskell Company approving the Guaranteed Maximum Price for construction of the Criminal Justice Center.
Chairman McLain stated he has met with the Chief Judge and the judges were concerned about the elevation of the benches. He stated there is $137,000 in the budget for new furniture for the judges and he would recommend that the Board let the judges decide whether or not they would like to use that money to raise the bench. If there is any money left over at the end of the project, new furniture will be considered; otherwise the existing furniture they are using now will be moved into the new Courthouse.
Commissioner Henley stated he has no objections going with that swap provided that the proposed budget for next year doesn’t have furniture in it.
Chairman McLain stated it will cost around $130,000 to go with 18” high benches and the furniture will run about $137,000. He stated he would rather the judges decide which option they prefer going with.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve Amendment #1, as shown on page ________, to the “Construction Manager at Risk” contract with the The Haskell Company approving the Guaranteed Maximum Price for construction of the Criminal Justice Center.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Commissioner Morris stated he was out of the room when the Board brought up Item #41, Approval of Agreement with the City of Altamonte Springs for sports promotion, and he is wondering if the Board would like to consider that item at this time.
Chairman McLain stated he would like more information on how much money is being spent for the Sports Commission for marketing and the money that is being used for promoting the events in Altamonte Springs.
Commissioner Henley stated another thing that needs to be looked at is the project’s specifics.
Commissioner Morris stated he was going to vote against this item, as he did not believe that the general fund request made sense.
Chairman McLain stated he would like to meet with the Tourism Development staff to obtain more information on this item and to consider it during the first meeting in January. He instructed the County Manager to have staff to meet with him so they can submit more information on this item.
COUNTY MANAGER’S BRIEFING
Mr. Grace requested direction regarding proposed Interlocal Agreement with the City of Casselberry relating to adult entertainment sites. He stated staff feels the whole concept is worth exploring and they would like to pursue the interlocal agreement with the City of Casselberry as well as the City of Sanford and the legal counsel. He said if the Board has no objections, staff will work with the two cities and counsel on this issue, then they will proceed with that direction.
The consensus of the Board was to pursue with the agreement and to come back at a later date with more information.
-------
Ginny Markley, Planning & Development, addressed the Board to review the Timing of Impact Fee Payment as outlined in the agenda memorandum. She stated the impact fee ordinances required collection prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.) as well as issuance of building permits. She said many C.Os. were issued without payment of the impact fees and this was due, in part, to the County’s inability to control the City’s administrative processes and the County not having an automated process that would prohibit issuance of a C.O. prior to payment of fees. Over 1,870 properties did not pay the impact fees and notices/liens were filed against the owners. She noted that staff’s time to monitor payment, preparing notice/lien papers, and correspondence was substantial. She advised that 33 Florida cities and 22 counties were surveyed and 11 cities collected impact fees at the time of the C.O. Most cities provided water and sewer to its customers and the payment of fees was tied in with the utility connections. Out of the 11 entities, only seven stated that collecting fees at the time of C.O. was not a problem. Three counties identified the following problems: Hiring of more personnel and no administrative process was in place to collect fees. They relied on the cities to collect their own fees and to process notices of non-payment. The following additional problems were identified: Creates lag time between when the facilities are needed and when the impact fees are available to fund the facilities; dispute of fees delaying the issuance of the C.O.; once the C.O. is issued, the fees were difficult to collect; enforcement through the Code Enforcement Board or by legal action is costly and timely; and several participants indicated that the impact fee issues should be dealt with early in the process rather than at the time of the C.O.
Ms. Markley continued by reviewing the current process in place for deferring payment of impact fees. Staff has identified the following should the existing impact fee collection process be modified instead of at the time of building permit issuance: collecting impact fees at C.O. creates additional administrative processes; issued building permits would need to be monitored to ensure that the impact fees are paid when due; failure to pay impact fees prior to C.O. for single-family residential permits may place a burden on the new property owner. It is possible the burden of payment would shift from the builder to the prospective property owner should the builder transfer title of the property to the prospective homeowner prior to payment of fees; impacts of development occur at the time of building permit issuance and not at time of C.O. Reservation of facility capacity is encumbered upon payment of the impact fees. To defer payment until C.O. may delay the receipt of impact fee funds needed for capital projects; and the Seminole County Land Development Code and the City Interlocal Agreements would need to be amended. She stated due to issues encountered by the County in the past when collecting impact fees at the time of C.O. and due to the Concurrency requirement for facility reservation concurrent with the issuance of a final development, staff recommends that the time of payment remain at the time of building permit issuance. Staff, however, does recommend that the Board authorize staff to pursue an administrative process which would allow the County Manager to review and approve agreements to defer the payment of impact fees for up to 180 days or at the time of C.O., whichever occurs first; and to authorize staff to amend the Land Development Code to consider the same.
Commissioner Morris stated he has been an advocate to defer these payments until the C.O. He stated he has talked with staff extensively for years about this and the only real thing that stands out in staff’s presentation that has substantial substance to it is capital projects may be delayed by this. He stated he supports the delay until payment is made at the time of the C.O.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he believes the argument staff has made is the fact they may not collect impact fees. He stated the simple administrative process is to pay the impact fee at the time of C.O. or you will not get a permit until it is paid.
Commissioner Henley stated all of the municipalities require payment of the fees during the building permit time. He stated he would like to know what is the problem if they go to C.O.
Mr. Grace stated he would suggest not changing the cities’ process.
Chairman McLain stated the only thing he would be concerned with is the County needs to be careful on Area of Concern #2, burden of payment may shift to prospective homeowner, as he doesn’t want to see the developer or builder sell a house to someone and they fail to pay the impact fees and it is already transferred and a lien is on the property.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Ms. Markley advised the County can place a hold on their permits, but it is the cities’ permit staff is concerned with.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris to authorize staff to proceed with the change of the timing of the impact fee payment at the time of C.O.; and to have staff to come back with the checks and balances implementation program.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
The Board recessed the meeting at 11:23 p.m., reconvening at 1:30 p.m., this same date, with all Commissioners (with Commissioner Maloy entering late) and all other Officials, with the exception of Deputy Clerk Eva Roach, who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Sandy McCann, who were present at the Opening Session.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to authorize the filing into the Official Record of the Proofs of Publication for this meeting’s scheduled public hearings.
Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Maloy entered the meeting at this time.
FROM A-1 TO PUD, HUGH HARLING, Continued
Continuation of a public hearing to consider a Large Scale Land Use Amendment from Industrial to Higher Intensity Planned Development and Rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); for property located on the west side of Aloma Avenue and east of the Greeneway, as described in the proof of publication, as shown on page ________, Hugh Harling.
Planner, Cathleen Consoli, addressed the Board to present the request, advising the applicant has agreed to relocate an existing fire hydrant and to provide a 15-foot stabilized fire break along the western property line; and has agreed to relocate a wall in the southwestern corner of the PUD. She further advised staff recommends approval.
Scott Kulp, representing the applicant, addressed the Board to state he would like to make some minor corrections to the PUD agreement, but believes they are not of substance and can be taken care of with staff.
Linda Dodge, representing the Claytons, addressed the Board to advise they are trying to add this property into the PUD and would request approval. She added that she would like to request that if there are any other issues, that they be kept separate.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
District Commissioner Maloy stated it appears that the developer has followed through with the commitments he made previously.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to adopt Ordinance #2002-47, as shown on page _______, approving a Plan Amendment amending the future land use from Industrial to Higher Intensity Planned Development and rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); and an Amendment, as shown on page _______, to the Developer’s Commitment Agreement, for the Loma Vista PUD, located on the west side of Aloma Avenue and east of the Greeneway, subject to the Planning staff conditions.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
APPEAL AGAINST THE BOA,
Continuation of a public hearing to consider an Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a request for a height variance from 3 feet to 6 feet for a wall within 25 feet of a street, for property described as a corner lot, located at the northwest corner of Florida Road and Center Drive, as described in the proof of publication, Raju Amin.
Planner, Cathleen Consoli, presented the request, advising this item was continued from the November 26, 2002 meeting in order to gain more information regarding the visibility issues at the intersection. She stated she has met with the Traffic Engineering and Development Review staff and they recommend relocating the stop sign and bar in order to allow a clearer site visibility. Copy of engineering information was received and filed.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
District Commissioner Morris stated now that the stop bar will be moved, he would recommend granting the appeal.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to grant the Appeal against the Board of Adjustment, thereby, overturning the decision which denied a height variance from 3 feet to 6 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; and to direct staff to forward the new information received from Traffic Engineering to the Board of Adjustment, and approval of Administrative Order, as shown on page _______.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
APPEAL AGAINST THE BOA,
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider an Appeal against the Board of Adjustment’s decision to deny a Special Exception to allow a Day Care Facility in A-1 (Agriculture) zoning; for property located on the east side of Orange Boulevard, approximately 800 feet north of SR 46A, Lake Mary Day Care/Tom Griffin, received and filed.
Senior Planner, Kathy Fall, addressed the Board to present the appeal, advising the BOA denied the Special Exception due to the traffic patterns and the intensity of the proposed use. She further advised the applicant wishes to construct a 12,000 square foot, one-story building on the south end of the 2-acre site, with 233 students. The building would require 48 parking spaces and a total of 23 employees are proposed. She reviewed for the Board the standards for granting Special Exceptions. She stated staff recommends overturning the BOA and granting the appeal subject to the student capacity not exceeding 100 students.
Bruce King, co-owner of the subject property, addressed the Board state they have made substantial changes from their original application to what is being proposed now. He said operating hours will be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. He reviewed the adjacent area land uses. He stated the BOA denied their request based on the proposed number of parking spaces and the onsite traffic flow. He said the County parking requirements for day cares is one space per employee. They will have 23 employees and are proposing 48 parking spaces. The parking lot will be designed according to County standards. He advised the average sized day care facility in the County has 327 feet of loading and unloading area; they are proposing 640 linear feet. He stated that the proposed use will not adversely affect the public’s interest and it will meet the demand for a day care facility in the marketing area.
Upon inquiry by District Commissioner McLain, Amin Setti (phonetic), Engineer representing the developer, addressed the Board to discuss the trip generations for this project.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated up until now the County has not gotten involved with day care facility regulations, which are handled by the State. He said he believes it is unfair for the County staff to regulate the number of students, when the applicant’s competitors are regulated by the State and it is based on square footage. He added that he feels this puts the applicant at a disadvantage.
Mr. King stated he is in full agreement with the staff’s recommendations, except for the requirements that there be no pole-mounted lighting and the student capacity capped at 100 students. He said they believe it is important to provide some lighting in the winter months when it gets dark early. He further said that they would agree to lower the poles and/or screen light fixtures. Copy of proposed site plan was received and filed.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Commissioner Morris stated that clearly the facility should have some lighting. He said the key will be to not light the building up and to make sure the lighting does not affect the residential area. He suggested giving the staff flexibility to come up with a plan to keep the lighting to 15 feet or lower.
Ms. Fall advised staff will work with the applicant to come up with an acceptable plan for lighting.
Upon inquiry by District Commissioner McLain, Ms. Fall advised the project did pass concurrency with regard to traffic.
District Commissioner McLain stated he concurs with Commissioner Van Der Weide’s comments relating to the number of students. He said he believes there is a need for day care in this area and it is an excellent location; therefore, he would recommend overturning the BOA’s decision and would support allowing the 233 students, with the requirement that the applicant work with staff on the pole lighting issue.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley to grant the Appeal, thereby, overturning the Board of Adjustment’s decision to deny a Special Exception to allow a day care facility in an A-1 (Agriculture) zoning, located on the east side of Orange Boulevard approximately 800 feet north of SR 46A, as described in the proof of publication, Lake Mary Day Care/Tom Griffin; and approve 233 students, with the requirement that the applicant work with the staff to make sure the pole lighting does not bleed over to the residential area.
Under discussion and upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Director of Planning & Development, Don Fisher, addressed the Board to advise staff will allow the latitude of range of ages (preschool, babies, elementary school ages) to attend the day care center and not tie it down to specific numbers.
Commissioner Maloy suggested turning off the lights at a certain time.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider a request to rezone from RP (Residential-Professional) and A-1 (Agriculture) to OP (Office-Professional); for property described as 0.38 acre at the southeast corner of Lake Howell Lane and Ruby Court, Gifford Anglim, received and filed.
Senior Planner, Jeff Hopper, addressed the Board to present the request, advising the proposed site plan shows a 5,000 square foot office building. He further advised the applicant is requesting the following waivers: reduction of required buffer width along Ruby Court and Lake Howell Lane from 10 feet to 5 feet; and reduction of the required landscape buffer between the building and parking areas from 10 feet to 3 feet. Staff supports the waivers with the following conditions: normal landscape planting requirements should be met within all buffers; for all parking spaces adjacent to Ruby Court and Lake Howell Lane, tire stops or raised curbing should be required to prevent vehicles from overhanging the 5-foot buffer; any parallel parking spaces to be provided on the site should have a minimum length of 22 feet; no reduction in required parking should be allowed; and no reduction in dimensions of handicapped parking spaces should be allowed. He stated the staff recommends approval, subject to the conditions in the proposed development order.
Gifford Anglim, applicant, addressed the Board to advise he is in agreement with the staff recommendations and the proposed development order.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
District Commissioner Henley recommended approval.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to adopt Ordinance #2002-48, as shown on page _______, approving rezoning from RP (Residential-Professional) and A-1 (Agriculture) to OP (Office-Professional); for property described as 0.38 acre at the southeast corner of Lake Howell Lane and Ruby Court, as described in the proof of publication, Gifford Anglim; and to approve Development Order, as shown on page ________, approving requested waivers and noting the removal of the prohibition of medical/dental offices.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a site plan amendment for the Bougainvillea Clinique, located on the northeast corner of Aloma Avenue (SR 426) and Bear Gully Road, Bougainvillea Clinique, received and filed.
Earnest McDonald, Principal Coordinator, addressed the Board to present the request, advising the applicant intends to expand an existing medical office building from 4,245 square feet to 18,000 square feet. He stated the staff recommends approval of the request, based on the findings in the staff’s report and the following: (1) The proposed amendment is consistent with the adopted FLU of Office for the subject property; (2) The proposed amendment is consistent with Seminole County Vision 2020 Comp Plan Policies related to the Office FLU; and (3) The proposed amendment is compatible with adjacent low to medium density residential uses. He added that the P & Z Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the site plan.
Upon inquiry by District Commissioner Maloy, Mr. McDonald advised the OP zoning is site plan specific.
Jay Jackson addressed the Board to advise he is in agreement with staff recommendations.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Morris to approve the site plan amendment for the Bougainvillea Clinique, located on the northeast corner of Aloma Avenue (SR 426) and Bear Gully Road, as described in the proof of publication, Bougainvillea Clinique.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Consideration of a public hearing to reaffirm approval of an amendment to Seminole County’s Vision 2020 FLU Policy 1.7, to permit middle schools on property located within the East Lake Sylvan Transitional Area, originally approved by the BCC on September 24, 2002, presented.
Kathy Fall presented the request. She stated the staff, on September 24, 2002, inadvertently recommended that the BCC approve the ordinance to amend the Future Land Use Policy 1.7. Instead the recommendation from staff should have been to transmit the ordinance to DCA. Staff is requesting the Board reaffirm the approval of the ordinance approved by the BCC on September 24, 2002. She submitted for the Record some revised language to the policy.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley to reaffirm approval of the Ordinance amending Seminole County’s Vision 2020 FLU Policy 1.7, as amended, which was originally approved by the Board on September 24, 2002, regarding schools in the Wekiva River Protection Area.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider an Interlocal Agreement between Seminole County and Orange County Industrial Development Authority permitting the expenditure of a portion of the proceeds of the Authority not to exceed $5,300,000, and to ratify issuance by the Orange County Industrial Development Authority of variable rate demand revenue bonds for Christian Prison Ministry, Inc., received and filed.
Director of Fiscal Services, Cindy Hall, addressed the Board to present the proposed agreement and resolution.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to authorize the Chairman to execute the Interlocal Agreement, as shown on page _______, with Orange County Industrial Development Authority permitting the expenditure of a portion of the proceeds of the Authority’s not to exceed $5,300,000 and to ratify issuance by the Orange County Industrial Development Authority of variable rate demand revenue bonds, on behalf of Seminole County for the Christian Prison Ministry, Inc.; and to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-186, as shown on page ________, for same.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
MUNICIPAL TAXING UNIT (MSTU)
Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider an Ordinance amending the Seminole County Fire Municipal Taxing Unit (MSTU), received and filed.
Lin Polk, Fiscal Services, addressed the Board to correct the amount in the impact statement, advising it should be $6 million instead of $9 million.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley to adopt Ordinance #2002-49, as shown on page ______, amending the Seminole County Fire Municipal Taxing Unit (MSTU) to include the City of Altamonte Springs, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider the Consolidated Street Lighting District Ordinance, repealing Ordinance #2001-49, adopted December 11, 2001, received and filed.
Jennifer Bero, Fiscal Services, addressed the Board to present the request.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley to adopt Ordinance #2002-50, as shown on page _______, Consolidated Street Lighting District Ordinance, repealing Ordinance #2001-49, adopted December 11, 2001, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider the Uniform Method of Collecting Non-Ad Valorem Assessments pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 197.3632, received and filed.
Gail Bigelow, Fiscal Services, addressed the Board to present the request.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-187, as shown on page ________, for the Uniform Method of Collection for Non-Ad Valorem Assessments pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 197.3632, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman McLain discussed with the Board the recommendation of the Governor’s Wekiva Basin Area Task Force proposing the location for the western beltway. He stated he asked staff to prepare a resolution with regard to the Task Force’s recommendation. He requested Gary Johnson discuss this issue at this time.
Public Works Director, Gary Johnson, addressed the Board to advise the Task Force began formulating a recommendation at their last meeting regarding routing an expressway in Seminole County. He said County staff advised the Task Force that they were in an area that staff knew the BCC would want to speak to. He advised the preliminary recommendation is to use the SR 46 alignment in Lake County for the part of the western beltway extension west of Seminole County. There is still some question about the western end of the connection with the Orlando/Orange County Expressway Authority. He said the Task Force’s recommendation is that in Seminole County, the expressway connection would be to I-4; and in Seminole County they see that connection entering the County at the approximate location of the existing SR 46 Bridge (over the Wekiva River) and from that point on, until the connection with I-4, they are leaving that undefined, subject to consideration from the Seminole County BCC, the Seminole County Expressway Authority and FDOT. However, the eastern terminus of that connection would be somewhere between the St. Johns River Bridge on I-4 and the recently completed 417 Eastern Beltway connection. He stated staff is prepared to transmit the proposed resolution in opposition to the route, if adopted, to the Governor, DCA, FDOT, the Task Force and the Orlando/Orange County Expressway Authority.
County Engineer, Jerry McCollum, addressed the Board to give a brief history of the beltway. Copy of a chronological summary regarding same was received and filed. He said the proposal for SR 46 is totally inconsistent with any action that has been taken and it is inconsistent with Metroplan’s plan and the County’s land use plan. He stated the BCC has protected this area for a long time. He said staff is suggesting that if they are looking at resolving and relieving the traffic for a near term, there is the Apopka Bypass that goes from Apopka and ties into Maitland Boulevard - this would relieve traffic from Lake County. Also, the staff is saying that they need to start funding the Volusia/Seminole Corridor (route to 415). Therefore, he said staff’s recommendation is to advise the Task Force, as well as the Governor and the other partners in this, that the County has already adopted a resolution saying that they do not want an expressway on SR 46 - it should be in Volusia County, north of the Wekiva River and not even coming through Seminole County; and that if they want to look at alternatives, they should look at the Apopka Bypass, as well as the Seminole/Volusia Corridor.
Chairman McLain stated Volusia County has already submitted a resolution to the Task Force saying that they do not want it to go north into Volusia County. He said probably some of the same reasons they do not want it in Volusia County is why the Board doesn’t want it in Seminole County - because it cuts through a substantial amount of urban and residential communities.
Commissioner Morris stated the proposed resolution is consistent with the actions the Board has taken in the past. He said that the concept of turning SR 46 into a four-laned road, limited to a control access, and that it be a “parkway” type of road is one thing; but turning it into an expressway is another thing. He added that the last thing they need is more congestion in the I-4 Corridor. He said he feels this is bad planning and a bad design.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to adopt Resolution #2002-R-188, as shown on page ________, in opposition to any toll route or expressway facility that crosses the Wekiva River into Seminole County; and to request that the Wekiva Basin Area Task Force remove from consideration any such proposed toll or expressway corridor in Seminole County.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Chairman McLain discussed with the Board the LYNX board restructuring issue. He advised the most recent legislation proposed from Orange County through their delegation is to restructure LYNX down to seven members where Seminole County and Osceola Counties would have one vote each and the largest City would have one vote and then Orange County, who funds the most money, would have three additional governor appointments. He said this would reduce Seminole County’s participation in the organization dramatically. He reviewed a new proposal from Representative Frank Adkinsen which recommends each Chairman from the three County Commissions have a Chairman’s Committee and of those three Chairmen, they would choose the Chairman of LYNX for a two-year term. That Chairman would be empowered much more than he is now and would have direct control over the auditor, executive director and attorney. Copy of Rep. Adkinsen’s proposal was received and filed. He stated that he believes they will be seeing a lot more of these proposals in the next several months; and believes it is important to Seminole County that the BCC decide from their own perspective what level of participation the BCC wants to have.
Mr. Grace recommended working with Osceola County, the City of Kissimmee, and the City of Altamonte Springs on this issue.
Commissioner Morris stated he believes the restructuring will be driven by Orange County and for the benefit of Orange County. Therefore, he believes Seminole County should not be involved because he does not feel the County will have enough of a financial impact on the organization under whatever will come out of this. He believes it will be a further degradation of the County’s voting influence. He further stated that he would rather see the County go ahead and let LYNX be run by Orange County and have Seminole County contract services for themselves. He added he believes Seminole County is in a losing game.
Chairman McLain stated he has requested Mr. Grace to prepare a letter (not received & filed) that basically covers the components that have been discussed. He questioned if the Board wants to send this letter to make the Board’s position clear.
Commissioner Maloy stated he thinks the Board needs to keep their options open.
Commissioner Van Der Weide said he believes the proposed letter is great, but wondered if this is the time to send it. Discussion ensued.
Mr. Grace stated the Legislative Delegation meeting is next week and he believes this issue will be discussed at that time.
Commissioner Henley stated he does not see anything wrong with communicating these thoughts to the Legislative Delegation.
The Board, by unanimous consensus, authorized Chairman McLain to attend the meeting tomorrow, giving him the latitude and the discretion to use the proposed letter and to convey that the BCC is not happy with the way things are moving and that they would like to be involved in the decision-making process with regard to the restructuring of LYNX.
-------
Kent Cichon, Planning & Development, addressed the Board to discuss the appointments of the trade boards.
The Board directed Mr. Cichon to bring this item back for consideration at the next meeting.
Commissioner Maloy briefly updated the Board on the meeting held last night at Oviedo City Hall regarding the UCF Ten-Year Plan.
-------
Commissioner Van Der Weide left the meeting at this time.
Commissioner Maloy advised Gary Brender is the new Chairman of CALNO.
-------
Commissioner Maloy advised that at the last LYNX meeting, the Board voted to freeze all travel and hiring until the January meeting’s review of the budget.
-------
Commissioner Maloy advised that the KBG/Lake Howell apartments are not going to be built; therefore, he assumes the pond swap agreement is off.
-------
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Morris to appoint/reappoint the following:
ANIMAL CONTROL - Kathleen Prince
DISABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE - Tracy Olson
NATURAL LANDS COMMITTEE - Barbara Whittier, Carolyn Schultz & Jennifer Quigley
PARKS & RECREATION - Tom Artingstall & Jane Harrison
HISTORICAL COMMISSION - Lillian Griffin
SEMINOLE COUNTY PORT AUTHORITY - Melonie Cornell; and adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-189, as shown on page _______, for Michael Good for serving since 1999.
Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Commissioner Morris discussed the Letter (copy received & filed) from the City Manager of Winter Springs requesting temporary access to the Cross Seminole County Trail right-of-way for truck traffic associated with the repair of a pond embankment for a borrow pit owned by Chanh Nguyen.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to instruct staff to give permission, under the City of Winter Springs’ supervision, temporary access to the Cross Seminole County Trail right-of-way for truck traffic associated with the repair of a pond embankment at the borrow pit owned by Chanh Nguyen, for a period not longer than six months and that the truck operation would be only during daylight hours (no earlier than 8:00 a.m.)
Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to appoint/reappoint the following:
AGRICULTURE ADVISORY COMMITTEE - Jack Vaughan & Jim Hunter
ANIMAL CONTROL BOARD - Bonnie Carillon
DISABILITY ADVISORY BOARD - Rose Davis & Humphrey Horn
LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD - Rose Reeves
NATURAL LANDS COMMITTEE - Pat Burkett, Cecilia Height & Cecil Thompson
PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD - Holly Heath
SEMINOLE COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - Tom Green
Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Commissioner McLain advised of his nominations to various boards and committees.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to appoint/reappoint the following District 5 appointments:
ANIMAL CONTROL BOARD - Debra Garrambone-McMenemy
HISTORICAL COMMISSION - Linda Batman & Etta Jane Keogh
LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD - Dorothy Wood; and adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-190, as shown on page _______, commending Miles C. McDonnell for his services.
SEMINOLE COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - N. Lee Holt
SEMINOLE COUNTY PORT AUTHORITY - Helen Stairs
Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
The following Communications and/or Reports
were received and filed:
1. Facsimile dated 11/26/02 to BCC from Sid Vihlen, Jr., FRS, re: meeting to address garbage and recycling service issues.
2. Letter dated 11/21/02 (with attachments) to Chairman McLain from Sonny Timmerman, FL DCA, re: proposed Comp Plan Amendment and DCA review report. (cc: BCC, County Managers, Planning & Development Director for response)
3. Copy of letter dated 11/19/02 (with attachments) to County Manager Grace from Geraldine D. Zambri, Longwood City Clerk, re: City Ordinances #02-1627 and #02-1628, Annexations. (cc: Planning & Development Director, Planning Manager, Property Appraiser, Supervisor of Elections)
4. Letter dated 11/26/02 (with attachment) to Chairman McLain from Diane Pickett Culpepper, Time Warner, re: changes in cable lineup.
5. Copy of letter dated 11/26/02 to Seminole County Probation c/o Renee Sanville from Joe Gasparini, Parks & Recreation Manager, re: monetary donation in memory of Amy Kuritar Lohrmann.
6. Copy of letter dated 11/27/02 to Lori Rice and Richard & Katrina Blumenauer from Joe Gasparini, Parks & Recreation Manager, re: monetary donation in memory of Anna B. Wells.
7. Notice of City of Altamonte Springs 12/11/02 Conditional Use public hearing re: 2040 W. SR 434. (cc: Planning & Development Director, Planning Manager, Supervisor of Elections, Property Appraiser)
8. Letter dated 11/27/02 (with attachments) to BCC from Linda Burnette, SJRWMD, re: federal funding through the State and Tribal Assistance Grants program.
9. Letter dated 11/26/02 to BCC from H. William Habermeyer, Jr., FL Power, re: collective bargaining with the IBEW.
10. Letter dated 11/27/02 (with attachments) to BCC from Tom Percival, FL DOT, re: SR 15/600 (U.S. 17-92) Interchange at SR 436 PD&E study. (cc: Engineering, Traffic Engineering)
11. Letter dated 11/27/02 (with attachment) to County Manager Grace from Andrea Lorenzo-Luaces, Winter Springs City Clerk, re: City Ordinance #2002-26, Annexation. (cc: Planning & Development Director, Planning Manager, Supervisor of Elections, Property Appraiser)
12. Notice of City of Altamonte Springs 12/11/02 Conditional Use public hearing re: 2180 W. SR 434. (cc: Planning & Development Director, Planning Manager, Supervisor of Elections, Property Appraiser)
13. Copy of letter dated 11/27/02 to Steve Krug, Engineering, from Bruce White, Lindsey Estates HOA, re: drainage and design of SR 46A road construction.
14. Notice of City of Altamonte Springs 12/11/02 Annexation, Rezone and Change of Future Land Use public hearing re: 2040 W. SR 434. (cc: Planning & Development Director, Planning Manager, Supervisor of Elections, Property Appraiser)
15. Memorandum dated 12/2/02 to BCC from County Manager Grace re: Rob Frank as Acting County Manager during his absence 12/4/02-12/6/02.
16. Copy of memorandum dated 11/25/02 (with attachments) to BCC from Russ Hauck, LYNX Board of Directors, re: LYNX Internal Review Report.
17. Copy of letter dated 11/21/02 to Mary Van Hook from Ken Roberts, Public Safety Director, re: monetary donation to Animal Services Division.
18. Copy of letter dated 11/7/02 (with attachment) to Governor Jeb Bush from Kirby B. Green, III, SJRWMD, re: Water Management District Capital Improvements Plan and Water Resource Development Work Program. (cc: BCC, County Manager, Public Works Director)
19. Notice of Seminole County 12/10/02 Site Plan Amendment public hearing re: Aloma Ave. (SR 426) and Bear Gully Rd. (cc: County Manager, Supervisor of Elections, Property Appraiser)
20. Letter dated 12/2/02 (with attachment) to BCC from Rachel Carnicelli, Sanford Deputy City Clerk, re: City Ordinance #3759, Annexation. (cc: County Manager, Planning & Development Director, Planning Manager, Supervisor of Elections, Property Appraiser)
21. Copy of letter dated 11/27/02 to Colleen Rotella, Community Resource Manager, from Marcia Cyrus Langlois and Treena A. Kaye, Central FL Legal Services, Inc., re: Wyman Fields Foundation Disaster Reconstruction Program (CDBG/HOME/SHIP). (cc: BCC)
22. Letter dated 12/2/02 to Chairman McLain from Michael Snider, FL DOT, and Russel E. Hauck, LYNX Board of Directors, re: restructuring of management of rail studies in the Orlando urban area for TEA-21 funding and legislation. (cc: BCC, County Manager, Deputy County Managers, Public Works Director, County Engineer, Planning Manager, Transportation Planner)
23. Letter dated 12/2/02 to BCC from Alice R. Friedman, Lake of the Woods HOA, re: landscape maintenance and irrigation costs.
24. Letter dated 12/27/02 (with attachment) to BCC from Thomas G. Percival, Jr., FL DOT, re: SR 415 (from SR 46 to SR 44) PD&E study.
25. Copy of letter dated 12/26/02 to Commissioner Henley from Pat Telson re: Time Warner Cable and the Tanglewood Subdivision. (cc: BCC, County Manager, Planning Manager)
26. Parks & Recreation Contract, as shown on page _______, for Lisa Alfone (Slow-pitch Softball Scorekeeper).
27. Copy of memorandum dated 12/6/02 to Sandy McCann, Commission Records, from Becky Noggle, Environmental Services, re: submission into County Records.
28. Letter received 12/6/02 to BCC from Vez Walker re: Fossitt Business Park.
29. Letter dated 12/6/02 to Chairman McLain from Lonnie N. Groot, Stenstrom McIntosh Colbert Whigham & Simmons, re: Fossitt Business Park.
30. Letter dated 12/4/02 (with attachments) to BCC from Brady Lessard, Sanford Mayor, re: disposition of former FL Power & Light parcel.
31. Letter dated 12/6/02 to Chairman McLain from Stanley E. Stevens re: Horseshoe Village, Chuluota. (cc: BCC, County Manager)
32. Letter dated 11/21/02 (with attachment) to BCC from C. Guy Maxcy, Highlands County Commissioner, re: gas tax indexing.
Mr. Grace gave a brief update on his discussions with St. Johns River Water Management regarding the County’s Consumptive Use permit.
-------
The Board, thereupon, recessed at 3:42 p.m., reconvening at 7:03 p.m. with all Commissioners and all other Officials, with the exception of Deputy Clerk Sandy McCann who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Carylon Cohen, who were present at the Opening Session.
MAJOR REVISION TO DEEP LAKE PUD
PRELIMINARY MASTER PLAN/HARVEY
Continuation
of a public hearing from November 26, 2002, to consider a major revision to the
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.
Commissioner
Morris stated, as he did previously for this item, he has filed a Conflict of
Interest, as shown on page _______, because of his financial interests in the
project. He said he has a right to
address the Board, but he has elected not to do that to not give the appearance
to the Board that he was trying to influence them in any way because of the
office he holds. He said he would step
away from the dais while the Board deliberates this issue. He stated his conflict continues from the previous
filing.
Commissioner
Morris left the dais at this time.
Whereupon, Chairman McLain advised that Commissioner Morris would not
participate in this portion of the public hearing as he has not for any portion
of the public hearing on this item.
Ed
Suchora, Beazer Homes, 215 N. Westmonte, addressed the Board to state at the
last hearing Chairman McLain recommended they follow Commissioner Maloy’s
suggestion to stagger the buildings and add some other restrictions and
covenants to the project. Chairman
McLain also suggested they add a larger unit to the portfolio to allow the
project to be more compatible with the Centex site. He said they have gone back and worked with the architects,
engineers, attorneys and others necessary to get these things done. He displayed the density calculation chart
which shows the Beazer project is less dense than the Trinity Retail Center
site approved by the Board and located immediately adjacent to the west of this
project. He reviewed the density
calculations and Matt West, Development Manager, confirmed that those were
correct. Mr. Suchora noted again that
their project is further to the east and is a transitional property between an
existing approved townhouse site and a commercial site to the east. Mr. Suchora displayed a plan showing the
staggering of the buildings. He advised
they added a 1498 square foot unit to the end of each of the buildings with
three bedrooms, 2˝ baths and the rest of the units are 1251 square feet of two
or three bedrooms, 2˝ bath plans.
Attorney
Mike Jones addressed the Board to state he understands that high-density
development is not something the Board wants to see in the neighborhood;
however, the Commission approved that through the Comprehensive Plan. He said he understands that this project has
complied with all the County requirements.
He asked if there was anything they have not complied with.
Matt
West, Planning Manager, addressed the Board to state he believes all the
conditions previously applied to a PUD have been met by virtue of this plan and
staff is recommending approval. The
staff believes this is adequate transition and there are adequate buffers. Staff is recommending approval at the
proposed 133 units, 12.74 units per acre.
Mr. West said the change in the architecture and adding the second units
were directed by the Commission and they have the final interpretation of what
is compatible.
Mr.
Jones stated there are no variances, no special exceptions, and other projects
like the West Palm Village project were approved at 15 units per acre;
Grandview and Seminole Apartments at 20 and 19 units per acre; Mystic Cove at
18 units per acre; and Loma Vista at 20 units per acre. He said the Board has put themselves in an
awkward legal position and because there is compliance with all the codes and
regulations, they have to consider that they are sitting as a quasi-judicial
body. What they are asking is that the
project comply with the regulations and laws the Board have made, and that has
been done; and the recommendation for approval has been made. He said the County would have a hard time
justifying this before the Court. He
said the Board has the other citizens of the County to consider and the cost
and expense of litigation. He reported
that yesterday in the case of Twin Rivers vs. the City of Oviedo, which
is almost identical to this situation, the Court found that because the project
was in compliance with all the codes, the vote appeared to be political, and
now the project is going forward.
Commissioner
Henley asked if there had been an adjustment in the commercial; if it was still
C-2 or C-1.
Jim
Stelling, Managing Member of Loma Green Development, LLC, addressed the Board
to state the application is for C-2 zoning.
They feel that with C-3 next door and their project being close to the
Greeneway, C-2 is a reasonable request.
Mr.
Suchora said the changes they made to the project were in exchange for
maintaining their density at 133 units.
If the density were to drop below that, then they would not be able to
make the changes.
District
Commissioner Maloy stated this issue has been troubling to him, and never
before has he been lobbied and pressured by a lobbyist and investors to approve
such a project. He believes there is a
role for lobbyists to provide information, but he has a big problem when
information turns to pressure and a bigger problem when pressure turns to
force. He said he will not buckle when
forced and he finds himself now in a very difficult position. If he votes for this project, he immediately
faces accusation from the public that this is approved for political reasons
and if he doesn’t support what the applicant wants, he will be accused by
others that it is for political reasons.
He stated he has reviewed the original proposal from April and watched
the video of the past hearing in April.
At that hearing, the applicant said this project of 65 units would be a
quality development. As proposed, it was
really specific and the net density was 8.77 units per acre. According to staff, if you apply that
density and add the extra property of this development, the new proposal would
have a density of 91.5 units per acre.
He said it is not his job as a Commissioner to make sure a project is
profitable, and it was not the Board who originally made the request for 8.77
units per acre, and it is not his job to give the applicant anything he asks
for. He is looking for a burden to
demonstrate a need to revise the plan.
He stated it is troubling to look at the current proposal, and it was not
discussed at the public hearing, that while it says 65 units, a clause is
included that says the applicant may opt to construct apartments and townhomes
on the multi-family tract, Lot 4. He
thinks that was very deceiving, as it was not disclosed to the Board and staff
was not aware of it. He said it appears
there were two things trying to go on at the same time--the 65-unit proposal
and a clause that the applicant had the right to build 20 units per acre. He said he is standing by his original
recommendation with a slight change.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by
Commissioner Van Der Weide, to approve by Ordinance the major revision to the
Preliminary Master Plan for Deep Lake PUD, as he believes this is a fair
proposal and fair compromise, with the following modifications by staff: (1) Change the commercial from C-2 to C-1;
the number of units to total 104; the wall buffer will be either split block or
masonry with stucco finish; one-third of the units will be three bedroom
apartments with 1498 square feet; and this project will not be marketed as
student housing.
Under
discussion, Commissioner Maloy asked staff to look at HIP zoning throughout
District 1. He said there have been
occasions, for example the Greystone community, where the applicant asked for
low density within the HIP district and the Board approved larger lot
sizes. There have been other HIP
districts with low density residential such as Riverwalk. Also, when the Portino project came up for
medium density, high intensity planned development, he was the only
Commissioner who supported that project and it was turned down by the Board by
a vote of 4 to 1. This went through the
court system and was found to be a reasonable request to turn it down.
Upon
inquiry by Chairman McLain, Commissioner Maloy affirmed the units to be at 104
with 1498 square feet and his motion includes the alternating fronts.
Districts
1 and 3 voted AYE.
Commissioners
McLain and Henley voted NAY; whereupon, the motion failed for the lack
of a majority vote.
No
other motion was made.
County
Attorney Robert McMillan advised that without another motion, the item is still
pending before the Board. If the Board
adjourns without any action taken, the item is essentially denied, but the
Board would have to readvertise and
consider it. He encouraged the Board to
act on this item in some fashion.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, to approve
the major revision to the Deep Lake PUD Preliminary Master Plan, with the
stipulations as stated by the applicant.
Chairman McLain asked for a second to the motion two times without response; whereupon, he surrendered the gavel to the Vice Chairman for the purpose of seconding the motion.
Under discussion, Commissioner McLain stated it is very unusual for the Board to be in this situation. He said this project has gotten as much or more scrutiny as any development he has seen in his 10 years on the BCC. It concerns him that at the last hearing, they had a motion to approve the project at 104 units, two bedroom, 1250 feet, with no restrictions on elevation and no enhancements to three bedrooms, and that motion failed. The applicant came forward and offered a way to make the project larger with the three bedrooms and made the project more architecturally desirable. He said it is hard for him to understand why 25 units should be an issue when the project next door has a higher density than this one, and this one is closer to the Greeneway. He has trouble understanding why the Board is where they are on this issue. He said he can agree with the C-1 zoning as that is what the project next door has and it will help improve the quality of the commercial development on the roadway. He said he thinks this is a reasonable request, it is compatible, and the densities are lower. He questions the Board’s legal standing based on the facts.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he is not an attorney, but the Board does what they see best based on their previous experiences. He asked if a PUD says a density of such and such number, can it be something less; is that a guideline or is the decision up to the Board?
Mr. McMillan responded if the applicant has an approved PUD that admits a certain density; and the applicant comes in to have the site plan approved and it is consistent with the PUD document, then he is entitled to have it approved. The request tonight is to amend the PUD and that’s a different situation.
Commissioner Henley said besides the change in density, there was also acreage added to the PUD and moving a retention pond to off site, changes from the entrance to the roadway; and a new developer is involved. He thinks there are sufficient changes. The record shows this is not the first time the Board has been requested to make a change by developers. He thinks the Board is bound by what the zoning regulations are and what is reasonable. He finds it difficult as to why the Board can’t approve this in view of what has previously gone on along that same corridor.
Districts 4 and 5 voted AYE
Commissioners Maloy and Van Der Weide voted NAY; whereupon, the motion failed for the lack of a majority vote.
Vice Chairman Maloy returned the gavel to Commissioner McLain to resume the duties of Chairman.
Mr. McMillan advised that as it stands the applicant has the PUD that was approved in April.
Chairman McLain asked the applicant if he will accept the 104 units with the conditions placed on it, and Mr. Suchora answered no.
Mr. Stelling asked the Board for a ruling. He said they don’t want to be in limbo and need to know where they stand legally.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to deny the requested major revision to the Deep Lake PUD Preliminary Master Plan by an Administrative Order, as shown on page _______; 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, Commissioners Henley and McLain said they will support the motion in order to dispense with this issue.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
REGULAR AGENDA
FINAL
MASTER PLAN/HARVEY SLAYTON,
SUSAN
S. IRELAN AND ALOMA DEVELOPMENT LLC, Cont’d.
Continuation from Sept. 24, 2002 and November 26, 2002, a request for approval of a combined Final 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 South Tuskawilla Road; Harvey Slayton, Susan S. Irelan and Aloma Development LLC.
Chairman McLain asked if this request was necessary based on denial of the previous item. Mr. West answered that South Tuskawilla meets all codes and the applicants are not requesting any changes. He said the Board could approve the Final Master Plan for just South Tuskawilla and staff could amend the Development Commitment Agreement to pull out all the Deep Lake portion and put the original Deep Lake conditions in if the Board wishes.
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at this time for staff to discuss this issue, and reconvened at 7:43 p.m. Commissioner Morris did not return to the meeting at this time.
Upon reconvening, Chairman McLain announced that the Board would move to Item #64 on the agenda at this time and return later to Item #63.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS, Continued
REZONE
FROM A-1 TO R-1AAAA
SIGNATURE
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1AAAA (Single Family Dwelling District) Sandy Lane Reserve 2; property described as approximately 4.8 acres located on the west side of Sandy Lane, approximately 800 feet south of the intersection of Sandy Lane and Sand Lake Road, Signature Development Corporation, received and filed.
Tony Matthews, Principal Planner, addressed the Board to present the request. He stated staff is recommending the Board enact the ordinance approving the rezoning with the following findings that: (1) R-1AAAA zoning meets the minimum level of presumptive compatibility as provided for in the Lot Size Compatibility Ordinance of the Land Development Code of Seminole County; (2) The proposed rezoning is consistent with Vision 2020 Plan policies related to the Low Density Residential future land use designation; (3) The proposed rezoning is compatible with adjacent single family residential development and development trends; and (4) Development must meet the applicable provisions of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan (Vision 2020) and Land Development Code of Seminole County. He advised that the Land Planning Agency recommended approval of R-1AAAA zoning with staff findings and that the development be limited to no more than eight lots. This was approved unanimously. Mr. Matthews noted that Sandy Lane is now under construction.
Ken Watkins, applicant, President of Signature Development Corporation and Signature Homes Corporation, 130 Commerce Street, addressed the Board to state when Mr. Huskey had the zoning changed on the site two or three years ago, he contacted him and they bought the other sites and took over the project.
Commissioner Morris reentered the meeting at this time.
Mr. Watkins said they concur with the staff recommendation.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Van Der Weide, Ed Huskey, 1000 Wekiva Springs Road, addressed the Board to state he has not heard from the doctor, but the other residents have written letters approving the zoning. He said the homes will range in price from $550,000 to $800,000.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to approve the staff recommendations to enact Ordinance #2002-41, as shown on page _______, adopting the proposed rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1AAAA (Single Family Dwelling District) on approximately 4.8 acres located on the west side of Sandy Lane, approximately 800 feet south of the intersection of Sandy Lane and Sand Lake Road, with staff findings and recommendation; as described in the proof of publication, Signature Development Corporation.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
REZONE
FROM A-1 TO R-1AAA
SIGNATURE
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1AAA (Single Family Dwelling District) Sandy Lane Reserve 3; property described as approximately 1,100 feet south of the intersection of Sandy Lane and Sand Lake Road, Signature Development Corporation, received and filed.
Mr. Matthews stated staff is recommending enactment of an ordinance approving the R-1AAA zoning as proposed with the following findings: (1) R-1AAA zoning meets the minimum level of presumption compatibility as provided for in the Lot Size Compatibility Ordinance of the Land Development Code of Seminole County; (2) The proposed rezoning is consistent with the Vision 2020 Plan policies related to the Low Density Residential future land use designation; (3) The proposed rezoning is compatible with adjacent single family residential development and development trends; and (4) Development must meet the applicable provisions of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan (Vision 2020) and Land Development Code of Seminole County.
Mr. Matthews advised that the Land Planning Agency recommended approval of the R-1AAA zoning with staff findings and that development be limited to no more than eight lots. This was unanimously approved.
Mr. Watkins stated he agrees with the staff recommendation.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to approve the staff recommendation to enact Ordinance #2002-52, as shown on page _______, adopting the proposed rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1AAA (Single Family Dwelling District) Sandy Lane Reserve 3; property described as approximately 4.9 acres located on the west side of Sandy Lane, approximately 1,100 feet south of the intersection of Sandy Lane and Sand Lake Road; as described in the proof of publication, Signature Development Corporation.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
SMALL
SCALE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE
FOSSITT
BUSINESS PARK/
HARLING
LOCKLIN AND ASSOCIATES
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider the Small Scale Plan Amendment from Suburban Estates and Low Density Residential to Planned Development and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PCD (Planned Commercial Development) and approve Preliminary PCD Site Plan, Fossitt Business Park/Harling Locklin and Associates, received and filed.
Chairman McLain advised Mr. Locklin that the neighbors still have some concerns and would like more time to work with him. They have spoken with several of the Commissioners who would be willing to continue this item to give Mr. Locklin more time to work with the residents, if he has no objections. Whereupon, Mr. Locklin stated they have worked with the community since hearing from Chairman McLain via phone and they feel they have accomplished all the objectives with the landscape plan. He believes they are ready to make their presentation this evening.
Mr. Matthews stated staff is recommending enacting an ordinance adopting Planned Development land use, PCD zoning, and preliminary PCD site plan on the north side of Orange Boulevard, as proposed; and is recommending denial of Planned Development land use and PCD zoning on the south side of Orange Boulevard, with staff findings and recommendations. He advised the Local Planning Agency recommended approval of Planned Development land use, PCD zoning, the Preliminary PCD site plan and Development Order for the entire request on both sides of Orange Boulevard. This was approved by a vote of 4 to 1.
Commissioner Morris left the meeting at this time.
Mr. Matthews further advised there are 23 conditions (copy received and filed). He reviewed the following three changes staff is proposing to the Development Order: (1) Regarding Condition #4, staff is recommending a wall and not going with the berm option; (2) The Development Review Manager has recommended that Condition #14 not be included in the Development Order and instead rely on the access the applicant has provided; (3) The staff has added new Conditions #21 and #22. Mr. Matthews submitted three e-mails (copies received and filed) received since the staff report was distributed. He said two of these have already been previously submitted.
Hugh Harling, applicant, addressed the Board to read and submit a Petition, as shown on page _______, from residents of the Bookertown community in support of the amendment and rezoning for the north and south parcels. He also submitted to the Board an Exhibit Package for the Fossitt Business Park (copy received and filed). Mr. Harling reported on the community meeting held on August 12, 2002. He discussed the issues raised by the residents who live north on Missouri and he reviewed the site plan. He said they believe, based on the staff report and the report from the Planning and Zoning Commission that the project is consistent and compatible.
Commissioner Henley asked Mr. Harling to discuss the type of roof he envisions.
Mr. Harling also discussed other issues of the community that Orange Boulevard is not up to County standards for its entire length, and a request by the Bookertown residents that Lynx bus service be brought to Orange Boulevard. He explained these are issues the Board might wish to look into; but he has no control over them.
Mr. Harling advised that the Fossitts own the property to the east and are currently using it for agricultural/commercial uses, and have purchased the house immediately to the north of them and have done some renovations at this time. Their intent is that the house would continue to be a residential property. He said the long-range intent is to continue the commercial/agricultural application of the property to the east. When they are ready to discontinue that, they would like to develop another similar project and would bring that as a future application. He said they have done their best to mediate and come up with a design and intensity that will allow the Fossitts to have a high quality office/industrial park and showroom/warehouse at this location, protect both neighborhoods, and give the residents along Missouri a quality buffering wall system to enhance their neighborhood. Mr. Harling stated they are in agreement at this time with the amended conditions by staff.
Bruce Anderson, 1730 Perch Lane, addressed the Board to state if this project is approved, make it clear in the motion that the wall they worked on is part of the condition and that the wall currently in the conditions is no longer applicable.
Robert Scott addressed the Board to state he is a neighbor to the Fossitt development and he has no objections to the request. He said his father (area property owner) is very much in favor of the request.
Patrick Moore, 1760 Perch Lane, addressed the Board to state he took pictures of the existing business of the Fossitts. He displayed the posters of pictures (received and filed) for the Board’s review. He said they don’t know the Fossitts or the intentions of the commercial buildings so there are a lot of questions. He was told that the existing business was agricultural, but he sees a lot of garbage, tires, and leaking fuel tanks on the ground. He said all the homeowners in the St. Johns River Estates area, on Nebraska and a few in Bookertown are concerned. The situation now is an eyesore and is not an economically healthy environment. That’s another reason he is asking for a continuance so that they can work further on this project and get more information.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. Matthews stated the metal buildings on the property have been there for a number of years and started as an agricultural use, but were cited by Code Enforcement. He understood from Code Enforcement that there was nothing presently going on in the buildings. He said the buildings are not a part of the project being considered tonight.
Ransome Welborn, 4600 Canal Drive, addressed the Board to state he moved his family into their home in 1974. He gave the history of the neighborhood. He said he believes this change will devalue their property and harm their way of life. He stated they would prefer not to have to litigate this, but if they are pushed to it, they will.
John Sabol, 4700 Canal Drive, addressed the Board to state he is opposing the rezoning request. He said they are a waterfront community with homes ranging from $200,000 to $800,000 approximately. They believe the home values will be negatively impacted. He thinks the project is inappropriate with what they are trying to do in the neighborhood.
Charles McCurdy, 4600 Nebraska Avenue, addressed the Board to state they own property north of where the Briar Corporation is still building warehouses. They bought their home because it was nice and quiet and the zoning was Suburban Estates. They thought the rest of the area was also and would continue to be that way. Since Briar Corporation built the warehouses, their quietness has disappeared. He said he doesn’t know what the Fossitts have planned, but he knows there is going to be another retention pond and that will be more mosquitoes. There will be more and more trucks coming out and that is a safety hazard for the children, as well as for themselves. He thinks it would be a tremendous eyesore to drive through an industrial park to get to a residential area, and that won’t do the property values any good.
Kathy Brown, 1730 Beacon Drive, addressed the Board to state there are about 45 to 50 homes and over 50% are against this request. She submitted a Petition, as shown on page _______, in opposition; and letter, as shown on page _______, from another resident who did not get to sign the petition. She also submitted a letter (copy received and filed) from a certified appraiser stating the property values would be adversely affected if the request is approved. She said Missouri is the only entrance and exit to their subdivision, and they realize something is going to get built eventually. What they are asking is for the Commissioners to look at the entire project as a whole. She said they are talking about a ten-year plan and no one has asked for a small area study and they need one. She asked what’s going to happen to traffic and the substandard road. This would be dumping more traffic on Orange Boulevard.
She advised that because the residents of St. Johns River Estates live outside the 300 feet, they were not properly notified, but she has been the one to keep the residents informed. She said she has all of the deeds and they show that Nikki Clayton owns all four parcels in question. There are a lot of things that are still of concern for the homeowners and they are still asking for a denial or continuance because nothing has been brought to light. The Fossitts are asking for a variance on the height of the building and they have not addressed all the concerns of the setbacks on the walls. Ms. Brown said when the Claytons purchased the property, it was agricultural and there was no contingency plan. The single-family home talked about is going to have a retention pond in the back yard. She said Missouri Avenue is the only way in and out of their neighborhood. The only ones to monitor the tenants in the warehouses would be the homeowners. She advised that there are other parcels nearby for sale with pending commercial rezoning.
Willie Fossitt, 1500 N. Oregon Street, addressed the Board to comment about the pictures shown as they relate to code violations. He explained his business operation is handling large industrial mowers. He said the entire area with the tree, where the St. Johns Estates residents park with their children to catch the bus, will be improved with the plan on the table at this time. He said this property would be turned over to the County as part of the plans. He advised Commissioner Henley that the buildings on the property have been there for over 30 years.
Chairman McLain said he has concerns about the type of activities on the property with the buildings with Suburban Estates land use and A-1 zoning. Mr. Matthews said he does not believe those are approved A-1 zoning activities. He understood from Code Enforcement that the property was vacant with no activity going on.
Chairman McLain said he visited the site and visited with the homeowners in the area. He personally thinks the landscape plan for an office/industrial site is an improvement as far as the aesthetics of the entrance. His concerns are like those of the homeowners for the type of development and activity that will be taking place. With the information provided, he thinks it would be appropriate to continue this item and allow staff to evaluate the existing site next door and how it will be cleaned up. The biggest concern the community has is their doubts about what they will have when the new site is developed based on what they have now.
Mr. Harling answered questions about the additional sites. He said he understood that before the Fossitts were on the sites, this was a produce facility. He explained the Fossitts don’t have the 18-wheelers, but they do have tractors and storage for the mowing and agricultural pursuits.
Whereupon, Chairman McLain said he questions the agricultural use with some of the other elements. He thinks the Fossitts would need a special exception. He recommended continuing this item until the first meeting in January. In the meantime, have Mr. Fossitt and his representative work with staff to deal with the issues on the existing property. He said from the photographs, the property is not being used for agricultural purposes. If this project is going to move forward, for the community to feel comfortable with it, he thinks they have to address the deficiencies of the adjoining property.
During discussion of the continuance, Mr. Harling said he thinks January 28 would be a good time frame for the continuance. Based on the District Commissioner’s recommendation, he requested a continuance to January 28, 2003, and he will meet with homeowners associations and the St. Johns Estates community and work with staff on the adjacent property. Chairman McLain stated when they come back, he would like to have some information as to the status of the property and what is going to be done for proper screening and the termination of any inappropriate activities.
Upon inquiry by Chairman McLain concerning the designation of impact fees paid for transportation in the area being used for improvements on Orange Boulevard, Don Fisher, Planning & Development Director, addressed the Board to state that would take a change in the programs already identified. He said staff could look at doing this, and it is something that has been done in the past at a substantial cost. He said it would probably cost about $20 million to do all the improvements.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request and Written Comment Forms were received and filed.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to continue to January 28, 2003, the request for a Small Scale Plan Amendment from Suburban Estates and Low Density Residential to Planned Development and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PCD (Planned Commercial Development) and approve Preliminary PCD Site Plan; as described in the proof of publication, Fossitt Business Park/Harling Locklin and Associates.
Under discussion, Chairman McLain stated the Board will not take public comments at the meeting of January 28, but will allow a spokesperson from the community to comment about their meeting and progress of this application.
Commissioner Maloy asked when this comes back that the applicant bring a sketch or rendition of the building that would show the elevation.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at this time and reconvened at 9:17 p.m. with consideration of Item #63.
FINAL
MASTER PLAN/HARVEY SLAYTON,
SUSAN S.
IRELAN, AND
ALOMA
DEVELOPMENT LLC, Continued
Mr. West stated staff has taken the Developer’s Commitment Agreement and modified it. Copies were distributed to the Board (and copy of same was received and filed). Mr. West stated after the modifications, the Agreement only contains items that relate to the South Tuskawilla property that is only the single-family development. He said the applicants have agreed to the modified language and are satisfied. Two other changes are: on page 6, under B 3., modify to read, “There shall be a minimum 50 foot public road, meeting County standards, dedicated . . .”; on page 8, add E. under Commitments Exclusive To the South Tuskawilla Property to read, “This development is subject to the most strict provisions of this Developer’s Commitment Agreement and the Development Order approved on April 9, 2002.
Mr. Suchora stated they agree with the staff comments.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to approve the Final Master Plan and Developer’s Commitment Agreement, as shown on page _______, for South Tuskawilla Road property PUD with amendments by staff; as described in the proof of publication, Harvey Slayton, Susan S. Irelan, and Aloma Development.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
ORDINANCE
AMENDING COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
POLICIES
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider Ordinance amending Comprehensive Plan Policies TRA 4.4 and 7.3 to allow for erosion control paving of South Sylvan Lake Drive, received and filed.
Alice Gilmartin, Principal Coordinator, addressed the Board to state this is an amendment to the transportation element of Vision 2020 of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan.
Joe Cirillo, 6505 S. Sylvan Lake Drive, addressed the Board to state he has a petition from the residents of South Sylvan Lake Drive to present to the Board. He read the petition in support of this item. The Petition, as shown on page _______, was received and filed into the Record. He also submitted a copy of the environmental permit (copy received and filed) from the St. Johns River Water Management District for the paving of South Sylvan Lake Drive. Additionally, he submitted pictures (received and filed) showing the erosion.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request Form for Mr. Cirillo and Written Comment Form for Yvonne & Carl Gatzke were received and filed. Copy of E-mail to Mrs. Gatzke from DCM Robert Frank and Diane Merkt, Executive Assistant, were also received and filed.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to approve the staff recommendations and enact Ordinance adopting the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendments allowing for erosion control paving of South Sylvan Lake Drive (included under the umbrella Ordinance #2002-55 adopted this date), as described in the proof of publication.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley asked for the approximate cost and source of funds for this.
Mark Flomerfelt, Stormwater, addressed the Board to state there is carryover money from Year 3 and there would be a $60,000 to $70,000 cost to do the complete paving.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
ORDINANCE
AMENDING SEMINOLE COUNTY
LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, Continued
Continuation of a public hearing to consider Ordinance amending the Seminole County Land Development Code, as described in the proof of publication, as shown on page _______.
Mr. West stated at the first public hearing of November 26, 2002, there was no public comment. The Planning & Zoning Commission recommended unanimous approval. He said these are changes recommended by the Municipal Code Corporation and the staff. Once this is approved, these amendments and others will be transmitted to the Municipal Code Corporation for reprinting.
Barbara Foster, 2150 Terrace Boulevard, addressed the Board to state the current code says no screen enclosure for a pool shall be erected less than 25 feet from a natural shoreline. She said she would not like to see that changed. The proposed code changes that to 15 feet. Her position is to support leaving the 25-foot setback. A copy of the letter to the Board from Ms. Foster was received into the Record.
Mr. West advised this is page 71 of the draft ordinance, paragraph (b). Chairman McLain stated he could not recall the Board granting a variance for a screen enclosure that would be moving toward the lake. They have all been on lots. He asked if the wording could be amended to read for water bodies it would be 25 feet, but in other areas, it would be 15 feet. Whereupon, staff advised they could amend the wording on page 71 to read, “25 feet from a natural shoreline . . .”
Linda Sharrow, 226 Nob Hill Circle, addressed the Board to state they bought their home so they could see the lake and her view would be blocked if a screen room would be put up next to her. She is in favor of leaving the setback at 25 feet. Letters from Ms. Sharrow to the Board were received and filed into the Record.
Peter Dempsey, 232 Nob Hill Circle, addressed the Board to state he agrees with the other two speakers. He said when he bought his home, he based his purchase on the 25 feet setback.
Mr. West pointed out on page 71 of the draft ordinance, paragraph (a), the wording shows a reduction in the pool setback to 20 feet from the shoreline of a natural water body. He said with the Board’s direction that can be increased to 30 feet. Chairman McLain concurred with the change.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to adopt Ordinance #2002-53, as amended for the pool screen setback to remain at 25 feet and the swimming pool setback to remain at 30 feet, as shown on page _______, which includes revisions to the Seminole County Land Development Code; as describe in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
ORDINANCE ADOPTING CIE POLICY
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider Ordinance adopting the Capital Improvements Element policy text regarding the funding of public transportation, received and filed.
Ms. Gilmartin presented the request for adoption of the ordinance for a new policy.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to enact an ordinance adopting the proposed Capital Improvements Element policy text amendment regarding the funding of public transportation (included under the umbrella Ordinance #2002-55 adopted this date); as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Chairman McLain asked for a motion to adopt the Ordinance adopting the Comprehensive Plan Amendments. A copy of the Ordinance was received and filed.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to adopt Ordinance #2002-55, as shown on page _______, adopting the Comprehensive Plan Amendments approved.
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 9:37 p.m., this same date.
ATTEST:________________________Clerk____________________Chairman
er/slm/cc