The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held at 1:35 p.m., on Tuesday, February 10, 1998, in Room 1028 of the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.

Present:

Chairman Randy Morris (District 2)

Vice Chairman Win Adams (District 4)

Commissioner Dick Van Der Weide (District 3) (Late)

Commissioner Grant Maloy (District 1) (Late)

Commissioner Daryl McLain (District 5)

County Manager Gary Kaiser

County Attorney Robert McMillan

Deputy Clerk Sandy Wall

The Invocation was given by Rev. Tony Black, Sanford Church of Christ.

County Manager, Gary Kaiser, led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Commissioner Maloy entered the meeting at this time.

Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Adams to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-30, as shown on page ________, commending Roy Pike, utility Maintenance Team, Environmental Services Department, for his 20 years of service to Seminole County.

Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

The Resolution was presented to Mr. Pike, who expressed his appreciation.

--------

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner McLain to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-28, as shown on page

______, proclaiming the month of February, 1998 as "Black History Month".

Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

The Resolution was presented to Thelma Mike, who expressed her appreciation.

-------

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Adams to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-29, as shown on page ________, designating Saturday, March 21, 1998 as "St. Johns River Celebration Day".

Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

-------

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner McLain to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-33, as shown on page ________, expressing appreciation for the efforts of the sponsors and organizers of the Seminole County Prayer Breakfast.

Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

The Resolution was presented to Stephen Strang of Strang Communications, who expressed his appreciation.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner McLain to approve the Official Minutes dated January 27, 1998.

Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner McLain to authorize the filing of the proofs of publication for this meeting’s scheduled public hearings.

Districts 1, 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Continuation of a public hearing to consider an appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a Special Exception to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages (beer and wine) in conjunction with an Adult Entertainment Establishment located on the westerly side of Highway 17-92, approximately 1,000 feet south of SR 436, as described in the proof of publication, House of Babes.

Zoning Coordinator, Ginny Markley, addressed the Board to advise the hearing officer recommended the BCC grant the Special Exception to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages on the premises for consumption. She read into the Record the ten findings of fact and conclusions of law of the hearing officer (copy of same was received & filed). She clarified that the hearing officer’s proceeding was advertised in The Orlando Sentinel (copy of ad was received & filed).

Commissioner Maloy questioned whether staff, when they looked at the trends in the area, took into consideration the closing of the two bars or the fact that Casselberry is trying to the clean up the area.

Ms. Markley advised the request before the Board is for an alcoholic beverage license and staff did not review this as an adult entertainment establishment. She added the area is commercial.

Commissioner Maloy commented that it does seem to be a trend that people are trying to limit the sale of alcohol in this neighborhood.

At the request of Commissioner Adams, Ms. Markley reviewed the separation requirements and discussed restaurants with lounges versus alcoholic beverage establishments requirements.

Commissioner Morris stated it is known that this establishment has been unable to stop criminal activity (as indicated by 74 arrests in 1996) and questioned if staff took this into consideration. Whereupon, Ms. Markley advised they did not.

Attorney Steve LaBret, representing the House of Babes, addressed the Board to state it seems that every time they come before the Board, their request is pushed back and a decision is not made. He said that their request first came before the Board on October 28, 1997 after they went above and beyond the call of duty to try to change the structure and meet any and all requirements of staff and the Code. Now, after going thru the hearing officer proceeding, there is a recommendation to permit the sale of alcohol. He stated that this is a land use issue and not an adult entertainment issue. He said it has been determined by the hearing officer that this is not detrimental to the character of the area and would not unduly affect the existing traffic patterns. He advised that pursuant to staff recommendation, his client leased adjacent property for parking. He further advised that the County staff approved the traffic pattern and the plans they submitted. He added that his client has landscaped the property and they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

Commissioner Morris stated the criminal activity surrounding this establishment does enter into the consideration of this request.

Attorney LaBret pointed there has been only one conviction and stated that in the event the Special Exception is granted, there will be more policing power because the Division of Alcohol and Tobacco will be monitoring them and they can shut the business down, whereas, the Sheriff cannot.

Commissioner Van Der Weide entered the meeting at this time.

Commissioner Maloy questioned that having a history in the past of not following the rules when it comes to alcoholic beverages, what guarantee will there be that they will not be selling alcohol to minors or other violations should the Board grant the Special Exception. Whereupon, Attorney LaBret stated the Division of Alcohol and Tobacco places their agents in establishments to make sure that under aged people are not served.

Commissioner Maloy stated that on the internet, there is still advertisement that the House of Babes is the only place to get a lap dance. He submitted a copy of same into the Record.

The Board, thereupon, took a five minute recess.

Attorney LaBret advised he agrees to have a standing objection to any testimony given by the public. He requested the Chairman to ask each member of the public before they speak if they have read the report.

County Attorney, Robert McMillan, advised that basically the testimony presented before the hearing officer is what the Board is going to make their decision on, and anything anyone says today, in his view, is argument and not testimony.

Copy of transcript and report was received and filed.

Stan Bessmer, 1301 Glastonberry, addressed the Board to advise he has read the hearing officer’s report and he reviewed same with the Board. He stated he is opposed to the granting of the Special Exception.

Don Gergick, 215 Graham Road, addressed the Board to speak in opposition to the granting of the Special Exception. He stated that it is incomprehensible for the Board to ignore the findings of the consultants who conducted the study on the 17-92 CRA. He added that in view of the site’s past history, he can not see how the Board can do anything but vote a resounding no on this request.

William Gildart, 2205 Winnebago Trail, addressed the Board to state he is astounded by the lack of perception on behalf of the hearing officer as revealed in the report; and said he would recommend the Board disregard the report. He stated that the houses directly behind the House of Babes are either vacant, run-down, or converted to other uses. He said this shows that such places are not compatible with residential neighborhoods; they are destructive and have downgrading trends. He also stated that the trend along 17-92, is to clean-up and redevelop the area as shown by adoption of the CRA.

Upon inquiry by the Chairman, Mr. Gildart advised he did read the report.

Edith Gildart, 2205 Winnebago Trail, addressed the Board to advise her husband briefed her on the report. She also spoke in opposition to the appeal, expressing concern about crime.

Warren Richardson, 2202 Winnebago Trail, addressed the Board to advise he has not read the transcript; however, he is opposed to the appeal.

Santiago Gonzalez, 2520 Osage Trail, addressed the Board to advise he has not read the transcript. He stated he believes the area is going down hill and will continue to do so if this appeal is granted. He requested the Board to deny the request.

Ralph Foulds, President of the Lake of the Woods Homeowners Association, addressed the Board to advise he has read the transcript and feels there has not been enough input from the neighborhood as to what the impacts would be if this is granted. He said he does not believe this meets the separation requirement as he believes there is a church that is less than 1,000 feet from the establishment. He urged the Board to deny the appeal.

Anne Blakey, 2350 Worthington Road, addressed the Board to advise she read the summary of the hearing officer and is opposed to the appeal.

Attorney Mary Ann Klein, representing the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office, addressed the Board to advise the record does shown that a Sheriff’s deputy did testify before the hearing officer and she is here to reiterate their concern. She stated that there have been numerous arrests at the House of Babes in 1996 and at that time there was no alcohol beverage license issued to the establishment. They are concerned that if a license is granted, it will be detrimental to the community. She added that they strongly object to the appeal and believe the granting of same will adversely affect the public interest.

Ellen Williams, 173 S. Lakewood Circle, addressed the Board to state she is opposed to the liquor license and would hope the Board supports the community and citizens.

Barbara Studwell, 220 Lakewood Circle, addressed the Board to state she believes everyone is concerned about the Sheriff’s arrest report for this establishment. She advised she did read the hearing officer’s report and has a bad feeling about how government is working. She said it appeared that the Zoning staff and Attorney LaBret were working together. She added she felt the hearing officer was not familiar with the circumstances.

Richard Marks, 183 South Lakewood, addressed the Board to advise he owns a business on 17-92 and lives in the area. He stated he has not read the report. He added that he agrees with the residents and opposes the appeal.

Kensworth Cleare, 2531 Dakota Trail, addressed the Board to advise he opposes the appeal.

Arthur Fitton, 2515 Dakota Trail, addressed the Board to advise he did read the transcript and stated he does not believe Ms. Markley correctly described the 17-92 area. He listed what is located in the surrounding area.

Bill Studwell, 220 Lakewood, addressed the Board to state he believes the granting of the license would be a detriment to the character of the area and expressed his concern with the number of arrests in 1996. He said the Zoning Board has already said this is a blighted area and how can serving alcohol improve it.

Susan Doerner, 211 S. Embrey, addressed the Board to advise she attended the hearing officer’s proceeding; however, she did not know she could speak. She said she found the entire ordeal disturbing and stated she does not believe the hearing officer should have been used. She also said she could not fathom how the conclusions were reached. The citizens counted for nothing. She added that there would have been hundreds of people in attendance if they had known about the hearing.

The Chairman read written comments into the Record from Thelma Foulds and Donna Murphy. Speaker and Written Comment Forms were received and filed.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner Adams, Ms. Markley advised the parking issue has been resolved.

Commissioner McLain stated that the report of the hearing officer and the testimony of the Sheriff’s Department stated clearly that the Sheriff’s Department felt that the offering of liquor would be detrimental to the community.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. McMillan advised the Board has the right to weigh testimony based on their own judgments.

Chairman Morris stated he believes the testimony before the hearing officer taken as a whole leads to the finding that the combination of an adult entertainment establishment with an alcoholic beverage establishment would be detrimental to the character of the area. Along this line it is found that the character of the area is shifting and evolving and that the public policy actions of the County and the City of Casselberry are such that the character of the area can fairly and accurately be called a redeveloping area of the County, which is planned for a gateway presentation with a vibrant commercial development proximate to residential areas that are consistent with the provisions of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan. He also stated that the testimony before the hearing officer taken as a whole leads to the finding that the combination of an adult entertainment establishment with an alcoholic beverage establishment in the subject area would be inconsistent with the trends of development in the area inasmuch as both the County and the City of Casselberry have initiated and are in the process of implementing community redevelopment activities in the area. The testimony before the hearing officer taken as a whole leads to the finding that the addition of an additional alcoholic beverage establishment in the subject area would result in unduly adverse effects on the traffic patterns in the subject area and would adversely effect traffic movements and intensity and represent an adverse condition relative to the public health, safety and welfare. He further stated that the testimony before the hearing officer also leads to the finding that the addition of an additional alcoholic beverage establishment in the subject area would adversely effect the public interest in that such use, if permitted, would have an adverse effect on the public health safety and welfare. He said that looking at all of these findings, the conclusion of law is that the requirements of the Land Development Code have not been met by the proposed development and the use, if permitted, would be adverse to the public health, safety, morals and welfare and; therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the Special Exception. He added he does not believe the tests have been met and that the hearing officer erred in his conclusions.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to uphold the decision of the Board of Adjustment, thereby, denying the appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a Special Exception to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages (beer and wine) in conjunction with an Adult Entertainment Establishment located on the westerly side of Highway 17-92, approximately 1,000 feet south of SR 436, as described in the proof of publication, House of Babes.

Under discussion, Commissioner Adams stated his motion is based solely on the discussions of the Commissioners. He added that he appreciates the public coming forward to talk about this, but that has not affected his decision.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Morris, Commissioner Adams stated his motion is based upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law that the Chairman spoke to.

Commissioner Maloy stated in looking at the hearing officer’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, he sees some contradictions, especially on Item #10. He said this place has had a history of violations and it seems to him if they are given more vises at their disposal where violations can occur, he believes there will be more problems which definitely adversely affect the public interest and the character of the area. He added that looking at the trends (especially with the citizens of Casselberry voting to have more control over alcohol and the closing of some bars in the area) to him it was not given enough weight by the hearing officer. He said he definitely sees the character changing.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Proof of publication, as shown on page ________, calling for a public hearing to consider an appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a sign height variance to 40 feet in lieu of 30 feet for a billboard proposed on a site located on the west side of U.S. Highway 17-92, ½ mile south of SR 436, David Cholak, received and filed.

Ms. Markley advised Mr. Cholak indicates that a sign height variance is necessary because the building next door would block the view of the sign if it were constructed to a height of 30 feet. She reviewed the standards for granting variances. She advised that based on staff analysis, prior to all public hearings, the following determinations have been made: (1) It appears that special conditions and circumstances may exist that are peculiar to this property or business and which are not applicable to other commercial properties or businesses located within the C-2 district of the unincorporated area of Seminole County. It appears that the view of the sign to north bound traffic on Hwy. 17-92 would be blocked by the adjacent building located to the south of the subject property if the sign were to be constructed at a height of 30 feet; (2) Special conditions and circumstances are not a result of the actions of the appellant. Because of the separation requirements for billboards from other billboards, it is not possible to locate the sign to another site where it would not necessitate the granting of a sign height variance. The appellant has no control over the location or height of the adjacent building; (3) The granting of the variance would not confer on the appellant special privileges that are denied by the Ordinance to other lands, and businesses within the C-2 District. Other sign height variances, for off-premise signs, have been granted in other areas of the County where sign visibility is a problem; (4) A literal interpretation of the provisions of the Ordinance would deprive the appellant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the C-2 District under the terms of the Ordinance and would work an unnecessary and undue hardship on the appellant. The appellant is not being denied construction of a sign with visibility to southbound traffic. However, if it is the desire of the Board to allow a two-sided sign in this location, it appears that there would be a hardship due to the visibility problem; (5) It appears that the variance requested is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land for the siting of a billboard if it is the intent of the Board to allow a billboard that would be visible in both directions; and (6) The grant of the variance would be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the ordinance providing the Board finds a hardship.

Commissioner McLain left the meeting at this time.

David Cholak, appellant, addressed the Board to state the proposed sign conforms to the Sign Ordinance as written and all they are asking for is permission to raise the sign a minimal amount to allow decent visibility.

Commissioner Van Der Weide stated looking at the diagram, it does look like the appellant needs the total 40 feet.

Commissioner McLain re-entered the meeting at this time.

Stan Bessmer stated the residents in the area want to see Fern Park beautified. He stated he objects to the variance and would object to anything that is a variance in the Fern Park area.

Susan Doerner stated this area already is saturated with billboards and the residents do not appreciate it.

Public Comment Sheets were received and filed.

Mr. Cholak explained that the sign must go in this location because of the separation requirements. He stated that he does not believe this hardship is self-imposed.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner Adams to uphold the decision of the Board of Adjustment, thereby, denying the appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a sign height variance to 40 feet in lieu of 30 feet for a billboard proposed on a site located on the west side of U.S. Highway 17-92, ½ mile south of SR 436, as described in the proof of publication, David Cholak.

The Chairman called for a second to the motion three times, whereupon, he surrendered the gavel to the Vice Chairman for that purpose.

Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he believes the appellant would only need 35 feet.

Commissioner Morris stated self-imposed hardships should not be granted.

Districts 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioners Maloy and Van Der Weide voted NAY.

The gavel was returned to the Chairman.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Adams to approve and authorize the following:

Districts 2, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioners Maloy and Van Der Weide voted NAY.

-------

The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s "received and filed":

No report.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve and authorize the following:

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

--------

#22 Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to reject all bids for RFP-427-97/BJC, Concession Operations for the Seminole County Softball Complex.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

- - -

DCM, Cindy Coto, addressed the Board to distribute an add-on agenda memorandum concerning the concession operations for the Seminole County Softball Complex. Copy of correspondence from Attorney Frederick Stanley, Jr., representing Judy Zaks, Judy’s Icy Delights & Catering, was received and filed.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to waive the procurement process and award Contract, as shown on page ________, to New Age Café, Inc., Lake Mary, for the Seminole County Softball Complex and Park Concession Operations.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve and authorize the following:

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

The Board discussed with Mr. McMillan the payment of the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council Membership Dues. Mr. McMillan advised that Orange County did agreed to pay $1,000 which is the base membership fee and refused to pay the remainder of the dues. He further advised the Board that his legal opinion is that the County is required to be a member per Statute and the Council has a right to collect membership fees as appropriate.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to authorize payment of membership dues to the ECFRPC, under protest, less the $9,871 for OSO/MPO Special fees; and to authorize the Chairman to contact the Cities regarding the double assessment issue.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Acting Director of Planning & Development, Frances Chandler, addressed the Board to advise the Department of Community Affairs has found the Commercial land use amendment for the Commercial Realty Group to be non-compliant and has also found the associated text amendment which addresses water and sewer to also be in non-compliance. She requested Board direction with regard to this, advising the following options are available: (1) Rescind the plan amendments; (2) Direct County Attorney to defend the plan amendments with the applicant providing technical planning support; (3) Direct County Attorney to defend the plan amendments and authorize staff to hire planning consultants to provide technical planning support; or (4) Allow applicant to defend the plan amendments as an intervenor with its legal and other resources. She reminded the Board that the County staff did not recommend the amendments on the basis of urban sprawl. Discussion ensued.

Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to direct the County Attorney to defend the Commercial Realty Group plan amendments for property located west of Snow Hill road, east of Old SR 13, north and south of Chuluota Bypass, with the applicant providing technical planning support.

Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioner Morris voted NAY.

--------

The Board, thereupon, recessed at 4:30 p.m., in order to attend the Seminole County Expressway Authority Meeting, and reconvened at 4:45 p.m., this same date with all Commissioners and all other Officials, with the exception of County Attorney Robert McMillan who was replaced by Deputy County Attorney Lonnie Groot, who were present at the opening session.

Current Planning Manager, John Dwyer, addressed the Board to advise on November 26, 1997, a Denial of Development Order was issued by DCM, Cindy Coto, relating to a construction permit application for work at Sassy Merlot’s. The applicant’s attorney, Philip Hugh Trees, has indicated that the work that was accomplished was for items that were discussed with the Building Department officials. Mr. Trees indicates in his appeal request, that his client spent in excess of $20,000 for plans and drawings, requested by the Building Department. Mr. Trees also indicates that compliance with the building codes at the subject property are separate issues from the use of the property. He added that Mr. Trees is requesting, through his appeal, that the Board review and reconsider the Notice of Denial of Application for a Development Order. The staff recommends that the denial be upheld for reasons stated in the Notice of Denial of Application.

Attorney Hugh Trees, representing Sassy Merlot’s, addressed the Board to submit into the Record the following copies: Commercial Permit Application, Notice of Denial of Application for a Development Order, Correspondence regarding the appeal, Seminole County Occupational License, Florida Department of Revenue Certificate of Registration, HRS Sanitation Certificate, Alcoholic Beverage License, Correspondence regarding building inspections, Health Department Inspection Report and various Building Inspection Reports, Canceled checks to Wayne Young, AIA, Receipt for payment of Seminole County Impact Fees, and Affidavits of Daniel T. Kittinger and Wayne Young. He pointed out that there is correspondence between his client’s architect and the Seminole County Building Department with regard to inspections and bringing the building up to code. He stated that his client spent the money to complete the punch list given to him by the Building Department. He further stated that as best as he can determine in discussions with the County Attorney’s Office, this application has been turned down solely because one of the particular uses of the structure is an adult entertainment use as described by the County. He explained that this is a licensed restaurant and lounge that serves lunches and dinners. He stated that the renovations inside have nothing to with the structure’s use as adult entertainment, but has everything to do with the structure for serving alcohol, lunch and dinner. What the County has done so far is prevent the owners from doing what the County has asked them to do, which is the renovations to the interior of the building.

Deputy County Attorney, Lonnie Groot, advised State law says local governments can not grant development permits for uses that are inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan or their Land Development Code regulations. The use on the property is an adult entertainment establishment and that is inconsistent with County’s land development regulations.

Attorney Andy Brumbly, representing Shutts & Bowen and the County, addressed the Board to advise the position of staff and his office is that the permit is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Code regulations.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner McLain to uphold the Notice of Denial of Application for Development Order for Sassy Merlot’s.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Plans Examiner, Sylvia Smith, addressed the Board to present request for approval of the Preliminary Plan of Stonehurst, located on the east side of Tuskawilla Road approximately ½ mile south of Red Bug Lake Road, The Kingston Group. She advised the staff recommends approval of the plan.

Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve the Preliminary Subdivision Plan of Stonehurst, The Kingston Group.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

-------

Ms. Smith presented request to vacate and abandon a portion of the plat of Eagle’s Point Phase 5 for Eagle’s Point Development Ltd. Partnership. The vacate is located on the east side of Eagles Watch Trail which is north of the subdivision entrance road, East Tuskawilla Point. She advised the staff recommends approval.

Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-37, as shown on page ________, vacating and abandoning a portion of Tract E of the plat of Eagle’s Point Phase 5 for replatting into four lots to be known as Eagle’s Point Phase 6, property located on the east side of Eagles Watch Trail, north of the subdivision entrance road, East Tuskawilla Point, Eagles Point Development Ltd., Partnership.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

-------

Ms. Smith presented request for approval of the Preliminary Subdivision Plan of Eagle’s Point Phase 6, property described as 1.22 acre site internal to the Eagle’s Point development on the east side of Tuskawilla Road approximately ½ mile north of Red Bug Lake Road, Eagle’s Point Development Ltd., Partnership. She advised staff recommends approval.

Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve the Preliminary Subdivision Plan of Eagle’s Point Phase 6 for Eagle’s Point Development Ltd. Partnership.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to authorize scheduling and advertising a public hearing on February 24, 1998 for the Uniform Method of Collection for non-ad valorem assessments related to the City of Winter Springs wall project.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to authorize advertising the "Combat Auto Theft" (C.A.T.) Ordinance, as requested by Sheriff Eslinger; and authorize the County Attorney to revise the draft ordinance, as necessary, draft, and cause to be published the appropriate public notice; and to direct OMB to develop an economic impact statement relative to the draft ordinance.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

The Chairman briefly discussed the Regional Incentives Guidelines Options for the Economic Development Commission of Mid-Florida and requested Commissioners to submit any changes.

-------

The Chairman nominated Tom O’Connell to complete the balance of Art Grindle’s term on the Orlando Sanford Airport Noise Abatement Committee.

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner McLain to appoint Tom O’Connell to the Orlando Sanford Airport Noise Abatement Committee to fill the term expiring January 1, 2001; and to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-39, as shown on page __________, commending Art Grindle for his services.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

The following Communications and/or Reports were received and filed:

Commissioner McLain advised the Constitutional Revision Commission has passed an item concerning gun control which would weaken the citizens’ right to obtain firearms.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to adopt appropriate Resolution #98-R-38, as shown on page ________, in opposition to Proposal No. 167 pending before the Constitutional Revision Commission which provides for the possession, purchase and sale of firearms to be subject to local regulation by each County.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

-------

The Board, by consensus, agreed to continue the work session on the review of the Land Development Issues and Private Schools until the next scheduled meeting.

-------

The Board, thereupon, recessed at 5:30 p.m., reconvening at 7:03 p.m., this same date, with all Commissioners and all other Officials, with Deputy County Manager Cindy Coto replacing County Manager Gary Kaiser, with the exception of Deputy Clerk Sandy Wall, who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Eva Roach, who were present at the Opening Session.

Motion by Commissioner Adams, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to reappoint Ken Watkins to the Building Contractors’ Board.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

-------

Commissioner McLain stated he wasn’t in attendance when the Board discussed the 17-92 corridor project and putting together a demonstration project in the south end of Fern Park. He stated he is in support of jump-starting the development around the 5-points area. He said Randy Parks, owner of the Lincoln Mercury Dealership along 17-92, is interested in making some financial commitments to the CRA. He added he would like to include this issue with the report that is coming back to the Board at the end of the month.

Commissioner Adams stated he feels the County should commit $500,000 for this project as this will clearly give a message to the public that the County is serious about this.

Kevin Fall, Capital Program Analyst, addressed the Board to clarify that the Board wants staff to come back with some ideas to jump-start the development of the 17-92 corridor in the Fern Park area with specific projects and funding sources, how to integrate a public private partnership with Longwood Lincoln Mercury as well as other entities, and to review the JGIF fund.

Commissioner Maloy stated there are other issues, such as certain communities needing sidewalks and roads deteriorating in the Eastbrook and Spring Valley communities, that are more pressing than throwing out $500,000 for this project. He stated he doesn’t think it makes any sense to throw out this amount of money for some sort of art center. Discussion ensued.

The consensus of the Board was to authorize staff to come back with some ideas to jump start the development of the 17-92 corridor at the 5-points and Fern Park areas including the identification of potential projects and funding sources.

Proofs of publication, as shown on page _________, calling for a public hearing to consider Resolution adopting Uniform Method of Collecting Non-Ad Valorem Assessments, received and filed.

Gail Bigelow, Analyst, addressed the Board to outline the purpose of the proposed resolution as outlined in the agenda memorandum.

No one spoke in support or in opposition.

Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Adams to adopt Resolution #98-R-34, as shown on page _________, adopting Uniform Method of Collecting Non-Ad Valorem Assessments.

Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

Commissioner Maloy voted NAY.

Proofs of publication, as shown on page _________, calling for a public hearing to consider Amendment from Low Density Residential to Planned Development and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); property located south of Red Bug Lake Road and east of Brooks Lane, containing approximately 22.87 acres, Charles & Malcolm Clayton and Jack Spillane, received and filed.

Chairman Morris advised that the proposed Amendment and Rezoning has been withdrawn by the applicant. He stated it cannot be rescheduled; it has to be reapplied for.

Proofs of publication, as shown on page _________, calling for a public hearing to consider Amendment from Suburban Estates to Planned Development and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); property located north of Markham Road, south of South Sylvan Lake Drive, and ½ mile west of Orange Boulevard, containing approximately 97.5 acres, CFG Real Estate, Inc., received and filed.

Frances Chandler addressed the Board to introduce the cycle of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments process. She stated she believes the Board is seeing a trend relative to plan amendments. She added the type of amendments that are seen are not anomalies in the plan amendment process, but are the trends of types of amendments that will be seen in the future. The fringe and marginal areas of the County will be the properties most likely right for development. The intensities in these amendments are greater than the types of intensities that were seen in the past. The vacant developable land in Seminole County is diminishing. Staff is in the middle of a Comp Plan update and they are looking at these fringe areas and how they envision them for the future. Staff is basing the plan amendments for compatibility and rezonings on the direction the Board has given in the past. The whole cycle represents an issue along certain corridors of the County that have vacant land. She said none of these are isolated amendments and they do affect surrounding properties and staff feels that they need to look at these issues. Staff will report to the Board as to what they have evaluated thus far and they would like Board direction as to what they would like to see for these future areas.

Commissioner McLain stated he feels that the Board needs to look at low density residential development along the Grant Line Road extension corridor and the improvements in the areas of utilities.

Commissioner Adams stated the one area he is concerned about is appropriate transition from high density to single family residential.

Ms. Chandler stated staff has not evaluated sale price of a home and lot and how that plays a role in determining compatibility. As the land values are increasing and developable land is decreasing, there may be a role for that type of analysis.

Cindy Matheny, Senior Planner, addressed the Board to summarize the approximate gross acreage, location, requested density and lot size, and traffic circulation as outlined in the agenda memorandum. She stated staff recommends denial of the Land Use with findings that: (1) The proposal would be inconsistent with the development criteria of the County’s Comprehensive Plan relating to clustering within the Planned Development land use designation; (2) The proposal would not be compatible with development trends in the immediate vicinity west of Orange Blvd. and north of Markham Road; (3) The proposed densities are not comparable to existing and approved development in the surrounding area within the Wekiva River Protection Area; (4) Planned Development land use, as proposed, would be inconsistent with Plan policies regarding Wekiva River protection; and, (5) Low Density Residential land use, as proposed, would be inconsistent with Plan policies identified at this time and, therefore, is inconsistent with the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan. Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the rezoning request is: (1) Not in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan and the Seminole County Land Development Code related to Planned Unit Development; (2) The request would be incompatible with surrounding development, and (3) PUD zoning, as proposed, does not provide for an appropriate transitional use in this area. Therefore, staff recommends that the rezoning request be denied.

Bill Pullen, representing CFG Real Estate, addressed the Board to advise Attorney Ken Wright is suppose to review the applicant’s request, but is not in attendance at this time.

Chairman Morris stated the Board can hear public comment at this time in order to give Attorney Wright time to attend.

Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Charles Madden, Madden Engineering, addressed the Board to clarify the density of the proposed development. Discussion ensued.

John Dwyer, Current Planning Manager, addressed the Board to read the definition of net acreage.

Paul Waters, Campbell St. resident, addressed the Board to state he is the owner of part of the proposed property. He stated the plan protects environment and there is a park that will make the rails to trails program much more user friendly to the community and County. The proposed development will provide more business for the Yankee Lake plant and it will increase the tax base.

Polly Miller, representing League of Women Voters, addressed the Board to state the reason she is here tonight is because of the for sighted actions taken 25 years ago by the Board’s predecessors. She stated staff has recommended denial of this request based on noncompliance and the League of Women Voters is urging the Board to deny the request.

Donald Hibbard, Markham Road resident, addressed the Board to state when he submitted a request to split 2½ acres of his property, he was told that he could not divide anything less than one acre. Now this is being proposed beside his property. He said if this is approved, he would like a buffer zone. He added he has not heard anything about turn lanes being proposed.

Upon inquiry by Chairman Morris relative to turn lanes and other items needed for this development, Mr. Dwyer advised the final master plan will be reviewed and a final developer’s agreement will be negotiated at that time.

Commissioner McLain stated he would like Mr. Hibbard’s concerns accommodated for a family split in whichever way the County can. He requested staff to report back to him regarding same.

Mr. Dwyer stated the problem is Mr. Hibbard has 2½ acres and in A-1 zoning, the minimum lot is one acre. His only alternative is to rezone his property. Staff can review this and get back with the District Commissioner.

Chairman Morris read comments from Paul Erisman opposing the request and Winston Schwartz, James Froehlich, Jack Pratt, and James McWhorter in favor of the request. Speaker request and Comment forms were received and filed.

No one else spoke in support or in opposition.

District Commissioner McLain recommended that a work session be scheduled to discuss the issue of how they can deal with family property splits for family use.

Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Adams to transmit Planned Development land use with findings that: (1) Planned Development land use at the proposed density of 2/5 units, would serve as an appropriate transitional use between higher densities to the south and lower densities to the north and west; (2) Planned Development land use, as proposed, is consistent with previous development approvals in the immediate area; (3) Conditions in the area, including planned I-4/CR 46A interchange, have changed enough to warrant the change in land use; and (4) Planned Development land use, as proposed, would result in no adverse environmental impacts.

Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.

-------

There being no further business to come before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m., this same date.

ATTEST________________________Clerk_____________________Chairman

slw/er