BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
JUNE 12, 2001
The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA, held at 9:35 a.m., on Tuesday, June 12, 2001, in the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.
Chairman Dick Van Der Weide (District 3)
Vice Chairman Randy Morris (District 2)
Commissioner Grant Maloy (District 1)
Commissioner Carlton Henley (District 4)
Commissioner Daryl McLain (District 5)
County Manager Kevin Grace
County Attorney Robert McMillan
Deputy Clerk Eva Roach
Pastor John Overcash, Sanford Church of Christ gave the Invocation.
Commissioner Henley led the Pledge of Allegiance.
AWARDS & PRESENTATIONS
Commissioner McLain expressed his appreciation to the professional firms who worked hard in putting in place the expansion of the Seminole County Historical Museum.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris to adopt appropriate Resolution #2001-R-97, as shown on page ________, expressing appreciation to Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez Rinehart, Inc., Harter-Adams, P.A., MacGregor-Smith Blueprinter, Inc., and Stillwater Technologies,
Inc., for their contributions to the expansion of the Seminole County Historical Museum.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner McLain presented a Resolution to each of the professional firms. Linda Bateman, Chairman of the Historical Association, addressed the Board to express her appreciation to the firms who helped in expanding the museum.
A gentleman from one of the firms addressed the Board to state on behalf of the consultant team, he would like to say that it is an honor for them to do the work and he would like to thank the County for recognizing the firms.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated this is something that the County appreciates the volunteer efforts of those firms and he would like to thank them for their services.
COUNTY ATTORNEY’S REPORT
Commissioner Henley requested that Item #3, David M. Callin, Anna T. Callin and Myeong Choi v. Seminole County litigation be pulled for a separate vote.
Robert McMillan, County Attorney, addressed the Board to advise of an Add-on, Item #4A, Authorize County Attorney to proceed with lawsuit brought by Kurt W. Spath.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Henley to authorize and approve the following:
4. Approve proposed settlement relating to Parcel Numbers 113/713 of the County Road 427, Phase III road improvement project, located on the west side of County Road 427 between Palmetto and Freeman Street, Longwood, in the amount of $9,981.00 inclusive of all property value, cure costs and attorney fee and cost reimbursement.
4A. Authorize County Attorney to defend lawsuit relating to Kurt W. Spath v. Seminole County Animal Services Division and Seminole County Animal Control Board.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Authorization to petition the Fifth District Court of Appeal for certiorari review of an order finding the County liable for inverse condemnation in David M. Callin, Anna T. Callin and Myeong Choi v. Seminole County, presented.
Commissioner Henley stated he would like to know what efforts have been made in trying to settle this case. He stated he doesn’t think this should have gone to trial, as it could have been settled earlier.
Mr. McMillan stated the original development order was approved by the Board in 1992 and it required that a conservation easement be given to the County over the flood plain. Apparently, there was a warranty deed filed rather than an easement and that did not come to the County’s attention until 1996 when the suit was filed. He stated as soon as he determined what happened, his office contacted the property owners and their attorney to see if this could be corrected with a corrective deed reserving the conservation easement. That was not acceptable to them and then the Board authorized an offer, which was rejected by them. His office then asked for Board authorization to issue the deed, but the property owner never accepted it. This issue went to trial and the court determined that there was a taking. After the trial, the complainant’s attorney requested $100,000 in damages for the property owner. He stated staff is requesting authorization to seek review of the order determining that there was County liability. He said the issue of liability will be scheduled for trial and be determined later.
Commissioner Henley stated the reason it was rejected is the County had retained mineral rights and took more land than expected. It did not revert back to the status that was there before a warranty deed was given. The property owner’s attorney indicated that staff had directed that it had to be a warranty deed. In view of the fact that the Board is frequently asked to settle because of the potential loss if they do not prevail, he stated he feels that staff should have informed the Board of the offer ($100,000) that was made. He said he feels that amount is excessive and he is reluctant to go to the next step in view of the fact that this has been going on for 10 years. He added the reason he wanted to pull this item was to make sure that the Board understood that there was an offer on the table. He stated he feels that mistakes were made on both sides, therefore, he feels the Board should direct staff to make a counteroffer.
Mr. McMillan stated his office received the $100,000 offer on May 25, 2001 (three weeks ago) and the appeal has to be filed within 30 days. He stated negotiations cannot be engaged without losing the issue on appeal. The County’s policy on negotiations is to get an offer and they counteroffer and if a resolution is obtained, it will go before the Board. If a resolution is not obtained, the attorney normally does not want it to go before the Board unless the County concurs with the settlement. He stated his office is willing to discuss a settlement. The legal issue is whether or not the County is liable for the actions of their employee acting out of the scope of his employment and the law indicates that they are not.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. McMillan advised his office may or may not have contacted the plaintiffs between now and May 25, but he is not sure at this point.
Stephen Lee, Deputy County Attorney, addressed the Board to state the order required the County to issue a deed within 30 days and the County’s choice is to either appeal that requirement or comply with it. He stated it would make more sense to get the matter under review and then negotiate a settlement.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Van Der Weide, Mr. McMillan advised that the appeal must be filed by Friday, June 15, 2001.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. Lee advised the hearing will be held at the 5th District Court of Appeals in Daytona Beach.
Commissioner Morris stated it appears to him that they are out of negotiation time and he would recommend that the Board authorize moving forward to preserve the legal rights, and at the same time authorize staff to submit a report to the Board on a counteroffer.
Commissioner Henley stated he doesn’t have a problem preserving the right as long as they will get a good faith effort in trying to settle this. He stated he would advise the County Attorney that if the Board is not made aware of these issues publicly or privately, then they have been denied an opportunity to exercise policy-making decisions.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to authorize staff to petition the Fifth District Court of Appeals for certiorari review of an order finding the County liable for inverse condemnation relating to David M. Callin, Anna T. Callin and Myeong Choi v. Seminole County, with direction that the County Attorney’s office is to brief the Board on this issue with a counteroffer, and to report back to the Board at the second meeting in July.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley stated this must go before the Board before the County accepts it.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Mr. Lee requested authorization to negotiate and execute an agreement with the selected person, firm or agency to act as a Hearing Officer in the vested rights appeal in the Oxford Outdoor Advertising case.
The Board voted for their choice from the following responses: Joyce Savage-Gaston; Carole Joy Barice; Cecelia Bonifay; Tallahassee Mediation Services; and State Division of Administrative Hearings. Mr. McMillan announced that Commissioners Morris, Van Der Weide and McLain voted for Tallahassee Mediation Services. Commissioners Maloy and Henley voted for Division of Administrative Hearings. Voting sheets were not received and filed.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Morris to authorize negotiation and execution of an Agreement with Tallahassee Mediation Services to act as a Hearing Officer in the vested rights appeal in the Oxford Outdoor Advertising case.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
COUNTY ATTORNEY’S BRIEFING
COMPARISON OF PAYDAY LOAN ORDINANCE
Mr. Lee stated the County has filed a motion for rehearing relative to a pending lawsuit involving the County’s Payday Loan Ordinance. He stated the Ordinance has a severability clause and the balance of the Ordinance may be enforced without regard to the interest rate limitations. He said the Legislature has passed Senate Bill 1526, which regulates "Deferred Presentment". The Board’s options are to abandon the attempt to regulate the industry or to pursue the pending motion for rehearing, appeal (or accept) the ruling regarding interest rates and enforce the valid provisions of the Ordinance.
Commissioner Morris stated the County’s passage of the ordinance has served its purpose as it brought the issue to a higher degree of attention statewide. He said he doesn’t feel the Board should appeal this any further as he doesn’t feel the County needs to protect the rights within this.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated he doesn’t feel that the Board should appeal this issue either, as it was a major factor in turning up the heat.
Mr. Lee stated the County is not required to undo the ordinance and they can withdraw the motion for rehearing and allow the appeal time to run.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. Lee advised the ordinance is on the books but has been declared unconstitutional.
Commissioner Maloy stated his concern is if an ordinance is on the books, it would make sense to repeal it to clear the record.
Mr. McMillan stated staff will be coming back for recodification of the Seminole County Code and since this is part of the code, they can repeal it at that time and clear the record of that ordinance.
Mr. Lee informed the Board of several large counties seeking the Governor’s veto of the Transportation Bill containing the billboard compensation language.
Commissioner Morris stated he feels the Board should take the position in adding the County’s voice in urging the Governor to veto the bill.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated he feels now is the time for the County to participate in voicing their concerns.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Morris to direct staff to contact the Governor’s office in urging the Governor to veto the bill.
Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Maloy voted NAY.
Mr. McMillan advised that he received an order relative to the Eller Media v. Seminole County appeal regarding the denial of the Amendment of the Aloma Mini Storage PCD. He stated the Circuit Court upheld the County’s denial of the PUD amendment.
NATURAL LANDS PROGRAM/ACQUISITION OF KATIE’S LANDING
Colleen Rotella, Planning & Development, addressed the Board to present request for Board approval of the Option Agreement for the purchase of Katie’s Wekiva Landing as a partnership with the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of the State of Florida. She briefly reviewed the background of the acquisition as outlined in the agenda memorandum. She stated today is the deadline for the acquisition.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris to authorize the Chairman to execute the Option Agreement, as shown on page _________, for the purchase of Katie’s Wekiva Landing as a partnership with the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of the State of Florida.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley stated he wants to go on Record that this acquisition has not been finalized and the question of what is before the Board today does not bind them to the $700,000 price.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
COUNTY MANAGER’S REPORT
John Moore, Engineering, discussed with Commissioner Maloy school safety issues for Item #17, BCR 01-105.
Commissioner McLain left the meeting at this time.
Mr. Moore also discussed the issue of redesigning the ponds as well as the size of the medians.
Commissioner McLain reentered the meeting at this time.
Commissioner Henley stated he has received a phone call relative to sidewalks being right against the curbs.
Commissioner Morris stated the sidewalk on Longwood/Lake Mary Road sits one foot off from the road and he feels it is too close to the curb. He stated he appreciates the conservative nature of staff trying to save money, but he feels it should be done right by spending the money to widen these sidewalks.
Commissioner Maloy stated if the County needs to widen the sidewalks to compensate that, then it should be done.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated he supports the issue of widening the sidewalks. He stated the sidewalk on Wekiva Springs Road came right up to the curb and it was moved back and it is working out very well.
Commissioner Morris requested that staff provide more backup information relative to Item #40, approve Agreement with the Central Florida Sports Commission for the 2001 Sunshine State Summer Games. He stated it is difficult to vote on issues when there is not enough information.
Jack Wert, Tourism Development Director, addressed the Board to state this is the first time they have done the Sunshine State Games. He stated from his calculations that the revenue from the sales tax, hotel tax, and gas tax will exceed $324,350. He stated he will forward that information to the Board.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to authorize and approve the following:
7. Approve the following five Byrne Grant proposals: Elder Services Unit I, Computer Crime Investigation I, County DUI Prosecution Initiative IV, Community Justice/Neighborhood Enrichment III, and Child Abuse Victim Assistance Tracking System II, as shown on page _________, and authorize Chairman to execute all required grant documents.
8.BCR #01-95 – $2,000 – Fiscal Services – MSBU – Fund: 16006 – Lake Picket Aquatic Weed fund. To provide additional funds to pay for the MSBU Lake Picket Aquatic Weed Services. Balance in reserves following this request is $62,212.
9.BCR #01-97 – $6,678 – Environmental Services – Water & Wastewater – Fund: – 40100. The Timaquan generator project was originally budgeted for $100,000. A miscellaneous contract for $7,345 has been encumbered for the electrical engineering services. The bid for the remainder of the work is $99,333. A BCR for $6,678 is needed for the difference. Savings are available from refurbishment of St John's Village Liftstation.
10.BCR #01-98 – $840,000 – Public Works – Engineering – Fund: 11500 – Infrastructure Tax fund. To transfer funds from the project’s construction account line to the design account line to provide for the estimated amount needed for final design, permitting and post design services.
11.BCR #01-99 – $10,500 – Administrative Services – Facilities Maintenance – Fund: 00100 – General fund. Furniture was originally budgeted as operating expense. Move funding to capital account since components will be joined and therefore purchased as capital.
12.BCR #01-100 – $5,200 – Environmental Services – Water & Wastewater – Fund: 40100 – Water & Wastewater/40201 – Solid Waste fund. This transfer is required to add other debt service costs/administration fees associated with fees paid to the paying agents of our outstanding bonds.
13.BCR #01-101 – $350,000 – Fiscal Services – Budget – Fund: 10101 – Transportation Trust fund. To adjust accounts inadvertently left off of backup from mid-year budget amendment. These accounts establish the trails program within Public Works.
14.BCR #01-102 – $5,000 – Public Safety – EMS/Fire Rescue – Fund: 11200 – Fire Protection fund. Staff requests the redesignation of savings realized on the purchase of generators ($7,218). The savings will be used to purchase ice machines for two fire stations. Emergency response personnel require large amounts of ice during extended operations in extreme heat conditions.
15.BCR #01-103 – $50,500 – Public Works – Engineering – Fund: 11500 Infrastructure Tax fund/12603 – West Collector Impact Fee fund. Request transfer of funds from the project’s Road Construction account line to the Design account line. Savings are available in the Road Construction account line based upon updated estimates for proposed improvements to the existing roadway.
16.BCR #01-104 – $166,243 – Public Works – Stormwater – Fund: 13000 – Stormwater fund. An agreement modification with the SJRWMD approved by the BCC on 5/22/01 has redirected savings from the Weathersfield project to fund design for the Northwestern Avenue, Horse Lovers Lane and SR 434 sedimentation basin projects.
17.BCR #01-105 – $58,000 – Public Works – Engineering – Fund: 11500 – Infrastructure Tax fund/12605 – South/Central Impact Fee fund. Additional engineering services are needed to update the design plans for Dodd Road. These services include revising plans to meet American Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, providing sidewalk connectors and meeting current safety standards. Funds are available in the project’s land account line.
18.BCR #01-106 – $25,000 – Public Works – Director/BPI – Fund: 10101 – Transportation fund. To transfer funds from reserves to pay audit/accounting advisory services for the Seminole County Expressway Authority (SCEA). The inter-local agreement with the agency stipulates that the Authority will transfer funds back to the County to cover these costs.
19.BCR #01-108 – $73,248 – Public Safety – EMS/Fire/Rescue – Fund: 11200 – fund. To transfer funds to cover shortage in the overtime account line due to holiday pay being inadvertently charged to the overtime line.
20.Budget Amendment Resolution #2001-R-102, as shown on page ________, $650,000 – Public Works: 10101 – Transportation fund. To recognize a reimbursement grant of $650,000 from FDOT, towards design costs for upgrading SR 434 from a 4-lane facility to a 6-lane facility from Maitland Blvd. to SR 436. The County Incentive Grant Program Agreement between Seminole County and FDOT was approved by the Board of County Commissioners on 5/8/01. Funds will be received on a reimbursement basis. Purchasing
21. Approve Change Order #6, as shown on page _________, to FC-193-99/BJC – International Parkway North (formerly known as Grantline Road) project, with Jones Bros., Inc., Mt. Juliey, Tennessee ($67,899.77).
22. Accept and authorize the Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion for FC-1110-00/BJC, as shown on page __________, Switchgear and Feeder Line Replacement at County Services Building, to Bowers Electric, Inc., Orlando.
23. Accept and authorize the Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion, as shown on page _________, for DB-603-99/BJC – Historical Preservation of Hopper Academy, to CPH Constructors LLC, Sanford.
24. Accept and authorize the Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion, as shown on page _________, for FC-184-99/BJC – McCulloch Road Paving, Force Main and Water Main Relocation Project, to Southland Construction, Inc., Apopka.
25. Approve First Renewal for PS-557-00/BJC – Construction Engineering and Inspection Services for Public Works Projects with an estimated construction cost of less than $500,000.00, with HDR Construction Control, Winter Park; and Metric Engineering, Winter Park (August 7, 2001 through August 6, 2002) (Not-to-Exceed $500,000.00).
26. Approve First Renewal for PS-570-00/BJC – Engineering Services for the Consumers/Lake Hayes Water Transmission Main, with Inwood Consulting Engineers, Inc., Orlando (August 8, 2001 through August 7, 2002) (Not-to-Exceed $750,000.00).
27. Approve Second (Final) Renewal and Amendment #2 to RFP-469-99/BJC – Sludge Hauling Agreement, with T. Wayne Hill Trucking, Inc., Haines City (July 20, 2001 through July 19, 2002) (Not-to-Exceed $363,400.00).
28. Approve Third Renewal to RFP-225-95/BJC - Security Guard Agreement, with International Total Services, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio (October 1, 2001 through September 30, 2003) (Not-to-exceed $341,551.56).
29. Approve Second (Final) Renewal to RFP-413-97/BJC - Custodial Services Agreement, with A1A Cleaning Service, Inc., Longwood (August 15, 2001 through August 14, 2003) (Not-to-Exceed $823,159.53).
30. Award A/B-3016-00/JVP FDEP Chemical Sample Analysis to U.S. Bio Systems, Boca Raton (Primary) and ELAB, Inc. (Secondary) (Not-to-exceed $75,072.00 for a one year period).
31. Approve and Award Bid #263-01-/GG, Sale of Dirt Fill Material Located at East Lake Mary Blvd. to Al Bailey’s, Truck, Oviedo ($0.00 per cubic yard of unsifted material; $0.25 per cubic yard of sifted material); David’s Hoe and Hauling, Sanford ($0.09 per cubic yard of unsifted material; $0.15 per cubic yard of sifted material).
Planning & Development
32. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute a Satisfaction of Mortgage, as shown on page _________, for Hector H. and Sandra D. Gonzalez in the amount of $3,500 for down payment assistance under the SHIP Program’s Home Ownership Assistance program.
33. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute a Satisfaction of Mortgage, as shown on page __________, for Brenda J. and Jose’ F. Garcia in the amount of $3,000 for down payment assistance under the SHIP Program’s Home Ownership Assistance program.
Building & Fire
34. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2001-R-103, as shown on page _________, renaming Missouri Street to Missouri Avenue, located within the plat of Sanford Farms, between Orange Boulevard and Canal Drive.
35. Approve Final Plat of the Victoria Manor Subdivision located at the end of Victoria Terrace through the Victoria Park Subdivision, South of North Street and East of Raymond Avenue (M/I Schottenstein Homes, Inc./Eric Wills, Representative).
Medical Quality Assurance & Education
36. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute renewal of Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity for Rural/Metro Corporation of Florida d/b/a Rural Metro Ambulance, Orlando Regional Healthcare Systems, Inc., and Florida Hospital.
Business Process Improvement
37. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute the Intergovernmental Agreement, as shown on page _________, for Staff Services between the Board of County Commissioners and the Seminole County Expressway Authority.
38. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute the Joint Facilitation of Public Infrastructure Agreement, as shown on page ________, Avery Park between Cahill Enterprises, Inc. and Seminole County to provide for a Joint Use System (stormwater retention pond) to accommodate the stormwater retention needs for the Tuskawilla Road, Phase IV Project and the Avery Park Subdivision.
39. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute Agreement, as shown on page __________, between Seminole County and the St. Johns River Water Management District for the Midway Subdivision Regional Retention Pond Facility and Created Wetlands.
40. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute Agreement, as shown on page _________, between Seminole County and the Central Florida Sports Commission for the 2001 Sunshine State Summer Games ($25,000).
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS’ REPORTS
CIRCUIT COURT/JUDICIAL REPORT
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Morris to authorize and approve the following:
A. Expenditure Approval Lists, as shown on page _________, dated May 8, 15, 22, & 29, 2001; and Payroll Approval Lists, as shown on page _________, dated May 10 & 24, 2001.
B. Chairman to execute the following Satisfactions of Judgment/$40 Public Defender Application Fees:
Charles David Inman, #01000116CFA
Kethy V. Hammond, #00007870MMA
Julio Antonio Franco, #00004868MMA
Zayid Rabih Patterson, #99003470MMA
Sally Bleichner, #98007290MMA
Lavar Antonio Wansley, #99002358CFA
Fred Peter Hanson, IV, #00000275MMA
George Leo Riel, #00001889CFA
Brent Thomas Briscoe, Jr., #00001423CFA
Gary Wayne Frank, #00011187MMA
Donald J. Chiara, #99005613MMA
Ronald James Morrison, #98000263CFA
C. Chairman to execute the following Satisfactions of Judgment/Court Costs:
Carson Hendricks, #99011446MMA - $153 + interest
Robert C. Dykstra, #98006943MMA - $133 + $40 Public Defender Application Fee
Lyndon LaFord, #01001347MMA - $158
David Allen Council, #90012628MMA - $117.50
Jose Antonio Ramos, #94011742MMA - $110
Jose Antonio Ramos, #98001445CFA - $205.12
Edgar A. Castano, #96003748CFA - $253
Zachary P. Ely, #99007770MMA - $278
D. Chairman to execute the following Satisfactions of Judgment/Bail Bond Liens:
Glynn Everette Guthrie, Jr. & American Bankers Ins. Co., #00002489CFA - $4,938
Kristian A. Dukes & Granite State Ins. Co., #99006162MMA - $1,038
E. Approval of BCC Minutes dated May 8, 2001.
F. The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s "received and filed":
1. Engineering Services Agreement M-236-01, as shown on page _________.
2. Second Amendment, as shown on page _________, to Courier Services Agreement, RFP-400-97.
3. First Amendment, as shown on page _________, to Work Order No. 5 for PS-141, Engineering Consulting Services for Wastewater Agreement.
4. Work Order No. 2, as shown on page _________, for PS-537-99, Engineering Consultant Services Agreement.
5. First Amendment, as shown on page _________, to Work Order No. 6 for PS-511-97, Engineering Financial Services Agreement.
6. First Amendment, as shown on page _________, to Work Order No. 19 for PS-556-00, Electrical Engineering Services Agreement.
7. First Amendment, as shown on page _________, to Work Order No. 6 for PS-372-98, Engineering Services Agreement.
8. Change Order No. 4, as shown on page _________, to FC-168-99, Tuskawilla Road Phases III & IV.
9. COPS Universal Hiring Supplemental Award, as shown on page _________, as approved on March 14, 2000.
10. Work Order No. 25, as shown on page _________, for PS-543-99, Engineering Services Agreement.
11. Agreement FC-1148-01, as shown on page _________, with Tri-City Electrical Contractors, Inc.
12. Sidewalk Easements Subject to Defeasance, as shown on page _________, granted by Augustine V. and Meena A. Joseph; Richard K. and Margaret K. Jennings; Gene and Mary Letterio; and Marie R. Rogel.
13. Second Amendment, as shown on page __________, to County Physician Agreement, RFP-450-98.
14. Florida Healthy Kids Corporation Agreement, as shown on page __________, approved by the BCC on November 11, 2000.
15. Utility Easement, as shown on page _________, granted by Shadow Creek Apartments Associates, LTD.
16. Amended Easement Grant, as shown on page __________, granted by Twentieth Century Land Corporation.
17. Construction Contract Agreement M-237-01, as shown on page __________.
18. Work Order No. 26, as shown on page __________, to PS-543-99, Engineering Services Agreement.
19. Work Order No. 2, as shown on page __________, to PS-552-00, Professional Engineering Services Agreement.
20. Second Amendment, as shown on page __________, to Work Order No. 1 for PS-562-00, Engineering and Professional Services Agreement.
21. Work Order No. 22, as shown on page __________, to PS-555-00, Engineering Services Agreement.
22. Request for Bids from the St. Johns River Water Management District for the sale of surplus property.
23. Photography Services Agreement, M-239-01, as shown on page _________.
24. Work Orders No. 5 & 6, as shown on page __________, to FC-1139-00, Public Works Minor Project Construction.
25. Recorded Third Amended and Restated Substantial Deviation Development Order, as shown on page _________, for Oviedo Marketplace, as approved by the BCC on November 28, 2000.
26. Satisfaction of Connection Fees, as shown on page __________, for Tuffy/Subway-Red Bug Lake Road.
27. Conditional Utility Agreements, as shown on page __________, for Water Service for Kevin & Linda Felgenhauer and James N. Duke and Danna G. Duke as Trustees for Lots 1, 25, and 26.
28. Warranty Deed, as shown on page __________, and Letter of acceptance of water and sewer systems and lift station within the project known as Westlake Colony.
29. Utility Agreements, as shown on page __________, for Water and Sewer Service for HIBC Development Company.
30. Conditional Utility Agreements, as shown on page __________, for Water and Sewer Service for Border Lake LLC; West Lake Supercenter Parners, Ltd.; Mansour M. Sabeta and Merwin Naime; Oviedo Crossroads, Inc.; and Orlando Jawod, Inc.
31. Bill of Sale, Warranty Deed, and Letter of acceptance, as shown on page __________, of the off-site water and sewer systems and lift station within Loma Vista Apartments.
32. Letter to Ginny Markley from Attorney Lonnie N. Groot regarding request for continuance for Nobel Learning Communities.
33. Letter to Amanda Smith from Attorney Lonnie N. Groot regarding request for continuance for Meechal and Ashok Patel Special Exception.
34. Bids as follows: #B/D-262-01; PS-590-01; RFP-4116-01; PS-593-01; PS-591-01; PS-592-01; and RFP-4114-01.
1. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute Civil Domestic Division Contract GZ904, as shown on page _________.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
The Chairman recessed the meeting at 10:45 a.m., reconvening at 11:00 a.m., with all Commissioners being present.
REGULAR AGENDA (Continued)
Colleen Rotella, Planning & Development, presented request for Board consensus on the Natural Lands Committee recommendations. She stated the Natural Lands Committee adopted the following characteristics to evaluate properties: vulnerability to development; rarity of species; connectedness; completeness of habitat types; manageability; passive use potential and special considerations such as bargain purchase and joint funding availability.
Commissioner Henley stated the one major criteria that the Board asked the Committee to list is the potential for water recharge areas. He stated more of these areas need to be conserved as a lot of those recharge areas are being snapped up for development. He added he would like the Committee to look at that issue.
Ms. Rotella reviewed the three properties (Pineloch Management, VanHorn and Yeager) considered for acquisition and the Committee’s recommendations as outlined in the Natural Lands Committee Booklet (received and filed).
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Ms. Rotella advised the Committee will be looking at how they will make connectivity with the Chuluota Wilderness area and the Caruso property.
Commissioner Morris stated he would like to make the connectivity a priority.
Commissioner McLain stated he would like to know what portion of the VanHorn property is below the 100-year flood plain and how much is wetlands.
Ms. Rotella stated the majority is outside and what is shown in dark blue of the map is the 100-year flood plain.
Commissioner Henley stated he doesn’t feel that the VanHorn property should be ranked high on the priority list as there is no danger of commercial development in that area. There are other areas in the County that the Board may want to preserve for conservation purposes.
Commissioner McLain stated he feels that property along the Wekiva River should be a priority at this time as there are other properties with recharged areas.
Commissioner Morris stated he has walked the Yeager property and the thing that is interesting to him is this property has intense immediate access. The development scheme for the eastern portion of this property will be very intense commercial. The western portion of the trailhead will be a series of commercial convenience stores, gas stations, etc.
Commissioner Henley stated when this was first discussed he wondered why the County would want to buy property that is adjoining the GreeneWay and it is being developed as a highly intense area. He stated he would be willing to consider the Yeager property as long as the County can obtain joint participation and they can get a good price. He said he would be interested in knowing what the recharge potential is for that area.
Commissioner Maloy stated he would be interested in pursuing further exploration of this property. He stated he feels the key issue is to obtain joint participation. He added he would like to know if the City of Winter Springs is interested in pursuing this.
Paul Partyka, Mayor of Winter Springs, addressed the Board to state he cannot speak for the City Commission, but he feels the City would be happy to participate. He announced that the City of Winter Springs will be hosting the Scottish Highland Games scheduled for January 19, 2002.
The consensus of the Board was to authorize the Natural Lands Committee and staff to proceed with the acquisition process of the Pineloch Management and Yeager properties.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Ms. Rotella advised the connectivity area for the Chuluota Wilderness and Pineloch Management property will be included.
Mr. Grace presented request for approval of the proposed Compensation Plan for FY 2001/2002 and 2002/2003.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris to approve the Compensation Plan for FY 2001/2002 and 2002/2003.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley stated he doesn’t agree with everything that is in the plan. He stated it bothers him that a cost of living raise is given and the Board has not determined that index is being used to determine it. He said he would like the Board to agree on an index that they are going to use to determine the cost of living.
Mr. Grace stated that issue will be done during the budget process.
Commissioner Henley stated the other thing that concerns him is normally the merit increase is based upon the performance of an individual in a particular period of time, whether it is a year or not. He said if it is added to the base salary, that individual would have the merit for the rest of their employment period in the County. He added he would much prefer seeing it as a bonus.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated he feels that the consistency of the index is very important. There would be a problem if they start switching the index from year to year, therefore, he feels the Board needs to target an index they would be using.
Commissioner Henley stated he feels the Board should give their input and not leave it up to the department head or County Manager as to which employees are going to be considered. He stated the School Board uses the same procedure and they stipulate that those are the ones at that outset. He added he feels the County Manager or department heads need to inform the Board of what positions are being considered so that can be entered into the Record.
Chairman Van Der Weide recommended that the County Manager report back to the Board relative to the index issue.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Cindy Hall, Fiscal Services Director, addressed the Board to present request for approval of the following two resolutions relating to the new telecommunications legislation which consolidates and simplifies the tax structure for telecommunication companies: Resolution which sets the new telecommunications tax rate at 5.4% for year 1 and 5.1% for year 2; and Resolution which opts to eliminate the County’s levy and collection of rights-of-way use permit fees for telecommunication companies, and instead elects to increase the telecommunication tax rate by .12% as permitted by the new legislation, as outlined in the agenda memorandum. She submitted and briefly reviewed a handout (not received and filed) relating to the current structure.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris to adopt Resolution #2001-R-104, as shown on page _________, which sets the new telecommunications tax rate at 5.4% for year 1 and 5.1% for year 2; and appropriate Resolution #2001-R-105, as shown on page _________, which opts to eliminate the County’s levy and collection of rights-of-way use permit fees for telecommunication companies, and instead elects to increase the telecommunication tax rate by .12% as permitted by the new legislation, with staff recommendations.
Under discussion, Ms. Hall discussed with Commissioner Morris the estimated revenue that will be generated from the expansion of the tax base.
Commissioner Maloy stated he would support a resolution that would freeze the tax at the harmless rates.
Commissioner Henley stated the Board had three options to consider and he feels that this is a stealth tax when this rate is established and then the agencies are being taxed. The County has a windfall of $2 million of projected increase of revenue. He said this is a new tax. He stated he could have supported one of the other options that was presented to him during briefing. Therefore, he cannot support this since it is an increase in taxes.
Districts 2, 3 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioners Maloy and Henley voted NAY.
Commissioner Morris stated he would like to see the balance of the impact. The Board needs to know how that balances out and where the revenue comes from.
Chairman Van Der Weide stated he feels that this can be adjusted later on and he feels comfortable that the County will make sure that they will not end up on the short end of this revenue.
COUNTY MANAGER’S BRIEFING
Matt West, Planning Manager, addressed the Board to present request to amend the Comprehensive Plan regarding minimum area for building lots. He reviewed a brief history of the proposed change. A letter from Keith Schue, Sierra Club, requesting the Board to deny the request was received and filed.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to direct staff to initiate the process to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code as recommended by the DAB for the Fall 2001 Amendment Cycle.
Under discussion, Commissioner Maloy stated he doesn’t know exactly what the minimum lot size should be. He stated there have been situations where people have 5 acres with a pond and they were denied a building permit because they did not have enough property. He said he is not prepared to commit to ½ acre lots and he would like to have more analysis as to what impact that will have.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Don Fisher, Planning & Development Director, addressed the Board to advise that the rule for calculating density has been on the books since 1991.
Commissioner Morris stated he would like to get a better analysis of what the potential density and impacts will be. Therefore, he is totally against the motion as he feels staff need to submit a better analysis and look at this as a development issue. He stated the Local Planning Agency (LPA) hasn’t even heard this process yet and he feels they are rushing this issue.
Commissioner Henley stated he is also against the motion as he feels the Board needs to obtain additional input of what the effects would be.
Commissioner McLain stated this has been a problem in his district for many years with property owners not being able to build a house because of these regulations and staff couldn’t come up with a solution. He stated he feels the process can be modified and staff will provide an analysis on the increase.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. Fisher advised staff is recommending that they be given more time to do the analysis as this will give them time to do a good job. He stated he doesn’t feel that staff can get it done during the Fall Amendment Cycle, therefore, he would prefer waiting until the Spring Cycle.
Mike Hattaway, Development Advisory Board Chairman, addressed the Board to state the Committee felt that the study done in the past was flawed. He stated the Committee would like to proceed with the process, as they believe there is plenty of time for staff to provide information to the Board.
Larry Dale addressed the Board to state staff has studied this since 1991 and now they say they do not have the time to do the analysis. An analysis has been done and it may show a 50% increase. What is on the books now is really ridiculous and the County needs to find a way to change it.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Mr. West advised the LPA meeting is scheduled for August 1, 2001 and he believes the BCC hearing is scheduled for August 28, 2001.
Districts 1, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioners Morris and Henley voted NAY.
The Board recessed the meeting at 12:00 p.m., reconvening at 1:40 p.m., this same date with all Commissioners and all other Officials, with the exception of Deputy Clerk Eva Roach, who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Sandy McCann, who were present in the Opening Session.
PROOFS OF PUBLICATION
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Morris to authorize the filing of the proofs of publication for this meeting's scheduled public hearings.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C-1
TO PCD, EDX ELECTRONICS
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a request to rezone from C-1 (Retail Commercial District) to PCD (Planned Commercial Development); approve rezoning development order; approve PCD Preliminary/Final Site Plans; and approve Developers' Commitment Agreement for property located on the south side of Willa Springs Drive and west of Tuskawilla Road, EDX Electronics, received and filed.
Planner Nancy Roberts, addressed the Board to present the request, advising the project will consist of an office building with associated accessory storage and quality control/testing facilities. She further advised the staff recommends approval of the proposed rezoning and site plan. She stated the Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on June 6 and recommended approval with the recommendation that the restriction on roll-up doors be removed. If approved, the staff recommends the following: (1) Parking spaces comply with Section 30.1221 of the Land Development Code - parking spaces may be reduced in size to 9' x 18' in order to preserve trees where possible - a total of 95 parking spaces are proposed on the site; (2) Permitted uses allowed in CN, CS, C-1 as per the Seminole County Land Development Code in effect as of the date of adoption of this agreement and the following indoor accessory uses: storage, quality control/testing, and shipping/receiving; (3) The accessory uses noted shall each use no more than 25% of the building square footage - the accessory uses noted shall in aggregate use no more than 50% of the building square footage; (4) Loading docks, roll-up doors shall be prohibited - Semi trucks shall not be permitted on site more than twice monthly; (5) A brick or masonry wall that is 6 feet in height is required within the buffer, per Section 30.1232 of the SCLDC - if the applicant is not proposing a masonry wall as required in the SCLDC, a concept plan shall be required to demonstrate compatibility - the County's Planning Manager shall review the concept plan to determine its acceptability; and (6) Parking area lighting shall be a maximum of 16' in height and shall be cut-off type fixtures that comply with the provisions of Section 30.1233(b) of the SCLDC - wall pack lighting shall be limited to two fixtures per side of the building - a photometric plan shall be provided to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of Section 30.1233(b)(1) of the SCLDC.
District Commissioner Maloy stated he has never seen a condition limiting the number of times semi trucks can be permitted on site. He added that the property is currently zoned C-1. He questioned how this condition would be enforced. Whereupon, Ms. Roberts advised it would have to be on a complaint-driven basis.
Commissioner Maloy stated he does not see the reason for having the restriction on semi trucks.
Commissioner Henley stated he supports Commissioner Maloy on deleting the semi truck restriction.
Commissioner Morris questioned what kind of assurance is the County getting that the lighting will not spill over off the property. Whereupon, Planning Manager, Matt West, advised that can be included in the commitment agreement.
Attorney Lee Coduse (phonetic), representing the developer, addressed the Board to state it would be helpful for the Board not to impose a condition on his client that other developments do not have. He said he would support deleting the restriction dealing with semi trucks.
Commissioner Morris stated he would be in favor of "shoebox" lighting.
Greg Crawford, developer's engineer, addressed the Board to briefly discuss the lighting.
Director of Planning & Development, Don Fisher, addressed the Board to advise the Code does not talk about wall-mounted lighting; so if the Board wants that, they will have to include it as a condition of the approval.
Mr. West advised wall-mounted lighting to reduce spill over can be included as a condition of the approval.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Morris to adopt Ordinance #2001-26, as shown on page _______, approving request to rezone from C-1 (Retail Commercial District) to PCD (Planned Commercial Development District); approve Development Order, as shown on page ________, deleting the restriction of loading docks, roll-up doors and semi trucks and including the condition of wall-mounted lights in order to reduce spill over; approve the PCD Preliminary/Final Site Plans, as proposed; and approve the Developer's Commitment Agreement, as shown on page ________, for property located on the south side of Willa Springs Drive and west of Tuskawilla Road, as described in the proof of publication, EDX Electronics.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Upon inquiry by Chairman Van Der Weide, Mr. Fisher updated the Board regarding the Rave Ordinance, advising he has obtained a copy of Orange County's ordinance. He said he has been in touch with the Sheriff's Office and will be doing a Briefing on the item on either June 26 or July 24, 2001.
DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
Commissioner Maloy advised that Diane Eswine has been selected to be his new Executive Assistant, effective July 25, 2001.
Commissioner Morris discussed the donation of the old Longwood Post Office property to the City of Longwood for the City's downtown gateway project. Mr. Grace advised staff is moving ahead with preparing the agreement for the donation and will be bringing this back to the Board for approval.
The Board, by unanimous consensus, directed staff to proceed with same.
Commissioner Morris discussed a one-acre parcel of property that the County owns (per CR 427 construction) located at Woodfield Estates (Lake Mary Woods Ph. III & IV). He suggested this property be donated to the City of Lake Mary for a passive park. He said the homeowners association has said they would take over perpetual maintenance of the property. He requested consensus from the Board for the staff to draft the necessary documents for the donation to the City of Lake Mary.
The Board, by unanimous consensus, directed staff to prepare the necessary documents donating the parcel on CR 427 at Woodfield Estates to the City of Lake Mary; and to bring same back to the Board for final approval.
Commissioner Maloy advised that the Port Authority approved the County's request for $300,000 for the upcoming budget. He said at the Authority's meeting, there was also discussion about the Director's salary - combining the base salary with the bonus last year and the 3.5% added on top. He said that puts his salary at around $127,000 and he feels the salary is now maxed out.
Commissioner Maloy updated the Board regarding the recent LYNX meeting, advising LYNX did not seem to support the position to study the Northern Corridor Alignment beyond Central Parkway.
Commissioner Morris requested the Board direct staff to look into a parcel of property located on the western side of Hwy. 17-92, just south of SR 434 which has a potential for redevelopment.
Mr. Fisher advised staff has done a field visit and proposes an administrative land use amendment and rezoning.
Commissioner Morris announced he has been elected to the Regional Planning Council's National Board of Directors for a two-year term. He also announced that he will be chairing the Florida Association of Counties Legislative Policy Committee next year.
Commissioner McLain advised he attended the last CALNO meeting because Commissioner Maloy was unable to attend.
Commissioner McLain advised former City of Sanford Mayor, Larry Dale, has been chosen as the Sanford Airport Authority's new Director/CEO. He added that he and the Authority members are looking forward to working with him.
COMMUNICATIONS AND/OR REPORTS
The following Communications and/or Reports were received and filed:
COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
Mr. Grace advised that there is a request for a continuance for Item #53, Appeal against the Board of Adjustment, Dan Wallace/Nobel Learning Communities, scheduled for tonight's meeting. The Board voiced no objections to staff contacting the citizens interested in this item to advise them the Board plans on continuing this item until July 24, 2001.
The Board, thereupon, recessed at 2:23 p.m., reconvening at 7:07 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.
APPEAL AGAINST BOA
DAN WALLACE/NOBEL LEARNING COMMUNITIES
Continuation from March 13, and April 10, 2001 of the Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a Special Exception for a private preschool with up to 150 students; property described as a five-acre tract, located on the west side of Markham Woods Road, approximately 1-2/5 mile north of Lake Mary Boulevard, Dan Wallace/Nobel Learning Communities.
Ginny Markley, Zoning Coordinator, addressed the Board to state the latest request for continuance was from the appellant. She said Mr. Wallace is not present this evening as his son is graduating so Mr. Wallace requested a continuance to July 24.
Frank Shelton, President of Markham Woods Association, 14 Stone Gate North, addressed the Board to state the first notice he had of the continuance to July 24 was a couple of days ago. He said he finds the whole process very irritating. He feels Attorney Groot and others are using a system of continuances to play games. He said the property was never posted for the March 13 meeting and that is an obligation of the client. He stated he submitted a letter to Attorney Groot on April 23 with receipts for the cost of mailings and he has heard no word from him. He said he thinks the Board should deny this request now because it is completely incompatible with their road.
Fred Schott, 2056 Hutton Point, addressed the Board to state they were here before trying to get this heard and at the last minute the appellant wanted a continuance, and now they’re here again and he wants another continuance. He said, on behalf of the people who live in Markham Woods, the next time something this important is set, they would like to have a time certain like in a regular courtroom. He said at the last P&Z meeting where this was heard, Attorney Groot started swearing in witnesses, which he knows is improper. If they are going to behave like he wants them to, there should be a time certain where they set this hearing for a certain day and time where everyone has to show up and present their case so that it’s fair to all parties.
Attorney Lonnie Groot, Shutts & Bowen, addressed the Board to state he thought everything had been worked out. He said he copied Mr. Shelton on all his requests and he thought he had accommodated him on his summer vacation schedule. He said he is confused about the issue of going to the July 24 date. Regarding the mailings, he said he submitted the invoice and was told it was going to be processed. He said he would call tomorrow and make sure the payment comes within the next week. This is the first of his hearing that the payment was not made.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to continue to July 24, 2001, 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, as the first item on the agenda, the Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a Special Exception for a private preschool with up to 150 students; property described as a five-acre tract, located on the west side of Markham Woods Road, approximately 1-2/5 mile north of Lake Mary Boulevard; as described in the proof of publication, Dan Wallace/Nobel Learning Communities.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGES
Continuation of a public hearing to consider enacting the State Road 46 Scenic Corridor Overlay and the Longwood-Markham/Lake Markham/Markham Road Scenic Corridor Zoning Overlay as required by the Wekiva Global Compliance Agreement, as described in the proof of publication.
Planning Manager, Matt West, and Craig Shadrix, Planner, addressed the Board to present the request. Mr. Shadrix stated staff has taken comments from various groups and has coordinated many of the associated parties prior to tonight and has made changes that reflect an effort to address everyone’s comments. He reviewed the actions taken since the May 22, 2001, public hearing for the SR 46 Overlay as given in the staff report. He said staff has forwarded copies of the SR 46 Overlay to the Lake County Commission, has spoken with various other agencies regarding this, and has pledged to continue with a coordination effort.
Mr. West answered questions by Commissioner Maloy about the diameter of the trees and the signs permitted by the residences. He answered questions by Commissioner McLain on the size of the signs permitted and the setback regulations.
Commissioner McLain asked how the different setback requirements would stand the test in court. County Attorney Robert McMillan answered this could stand if the County could demonstrate a rational, governmental purpose in doing that. He said he understands that part of the reason for doing that was to avoid a taking on the smaller parcels. Commissioner McLain said he was not convinced that the setbacks required are equitable.
Thomas Vellanti, 6300 SR 46 West, owner of Twelve Oaks RV Resort, addressed the Board to state at the last meeting, Commissioner Henley’s suggestion was to limit the depth on the parcels instead of going on so many homes and frontage that don’t go back 3,000 and 4,000 feet. Also, he said the gentleman from the Audubon Society requested a trestle over the entire SR 46. Mr. Vellanti said he was raised in New York City and they have a lot of trestles. He said there is nothing rural about a trestle.
Attorney Miranda Fitzgerald, Lowndes Drosdick Doster Kantor & Reed, 215 N. Eola Drive, representing William R. Byrd as Trustee, addressed the Board to state she is concerned about the equities. She referred to the setback provisions (Section 6.A on page 4 of the proposed ordinance) and Section 6.D. (page 8) of the ordinance regarding landscape buffers and said that section varies also. She stated there are other provisions in the ordinance that restrict the number of signs and the location of signs so no signage can be put in the landscape buffer. She said that leads to the staggering of signs and no uniform pattern. She looked at the other scenic corridor setback requirements in the east part of the County and they don’t have the same discrepancy. She said those requirements run the core of the setback from the centerline. She thinks the equity issue affects not only the setback but the landscape buffer and signage issue as well. She said regarding the signage issue and setback, there is a provision about the amount of signage you get if you have access onto SR 46. She referred to page 10, Access Standards, of the proposed ordinance and discussed that there is no access on SR 46 if the parcel is big enough so that there is access to another road. She asked if a parcel has no access to SR 46, does that also take away the signage? She said she is concerned about the prohibition of signs unless they have muted colors. She said this is not in the other overlay ordinance. She also referred to page 11 of the proposed ordinance, Section H.1., and asked what does the "existing native vegetation" mean. She said it seems there should be a list of the native vegetation being talked about that would impact the stormwater facilities. She said page 5, Section B.1. states examples of appropriate signage are set out in Section 30.1060 of the Land Development Code. She said this is not an adopted section of the Code.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Attorney Fitzgerald said she had not reviewed these issues with the staff. She said she thinks there are enough issues that the ordinance should not be adopted tonight but should be looked at more closely.
Don Fisher, Planning and Development Director, addressed the Board to state he will check the Land Development Code for the section which Attorney Fitzgerald stated was not included.
Commissioner Maloy said reading from the staff report, it sounds like there was a meeting with Attorney Fitzgerald to go over these concerns. Attorney Fitzgerald clarified that she had met with staff prior to the last hearing, but there has been no discussion since the last hearing. She stated some of the comments made tonight, she did not make previously because she did not do as much cross-referencing between the two provisions before as she did for this hearing.
Mr. Fisher stated he met with Attorney Fitzgerald prior to the first public hearing and the staff thought they had resolved the issues with Attorney Fitzgerald also, except for the unpaved parking areas.
Keith Schue, Vice Chairman, Central Florida Sierra Club, Wekiva Issue Chair, addressed the Board to state he will submit documents (received and filed) to the Record. He thanked the staff for putting a great deal of work into this effort and the Commissioners for recognizing the importance of these ordinances as they relate to the Seminole County Global Compliance Agreement. He said the question is what is rural character as it pertains to a roadway and as it relates to the preservation of trees and the vegetation so when you drive along the roadway, you don’t see a lot of structures that are not rural in character. He distributed the documents to the Board which were submitted to the Record. He commented (letter received and filed) regarding the Markham Road, Longwood-Markham Road and Lake Markham Road Overlay and said the Sierra Club would object to the exception for one-acre lots to not have a buffer. He said they believe a buffer is important, whether it is a one-acre lot or not in order to maintain the rural look and feel. He commented (comments received and filed) regarding the SR 46 Ordinance that the signage regulations be applicable to the entire corridor and not just within the setback and that at least 10% of the walls and fences have openings in them to provide for wildlife movement. Discussion ensued by the Board. Mr. Schue stated he’s talking about wildlife movement for small mammals like rabbits, raccoons and foxes.
Commissioner Morris complimented Mr. Schue on his work with staff on this and said he is hearing his suggestions. He said he thinks the wildlife corridor needs to be addressed at the time the road is four-laned. He said regarding the 10% break, from a public safety aspect of children not being fenced in, this causes him great concern. He said he hopes Mr. Schue understands that some of them see this as a problem and the suggestion might be that they focus their attention on the design and access management plan for when this road ultimately gets improved.
Mr. Schue continued with the issue of one-acre lots. He said he does not believe an exception should be taken to not have a buffer for one-acre lots. He stated these buffer requirements pertain to new developments, as that is what will compromise the integrity of the corridor. Regarding parking, he proposed that the rules provided by the Sierra Club concerning asphalt parking apply only to those commercial land use designations and the other parking provisions apply to the rest not having a commercial land use.
Commissioner McLain stated what concerns him is what the Board is hearing now are the types of things he hoped would have been worked out with the staff so they could have presented them to the Board in a clear, logical fashion, and the Board could make the right judgment without all these new issues being added at the last minute. Discussion ensued by the Board.
Commissioner Morris stated in defense of Mr. Schue that most of what he has written to the Board is because of the changes the Board made at the first hearing, and he is still arguing that the Board should not do these things. He said Attorney Fitzgerald did bring up several new issues and admitted that they were new issues she had not considered. He thinks the Board can still go forward.
Nancy Prine, 655 Terrace Boulevard, Friends of the Wekiva River, addressed the Board to state she agrees with many of the comments Mr. Schue brought forward. She said they are concerned about the signage. She understands why there might be resistance to the muted colors, but this is not new. The muted tones are not new nationwide. This type ordinance on ground signs is consistent with other areas of the country that are recognizing the value of a scenic corridor. She said at the other meeting, they heard the neighbors say they moved to the Wekiva area because they wanted to be near the wildlife and they don’t mind driving several miles to go to the grocery store. She stated these are the things that are real important to the rural character and is what they hope the ordinance can offer to the people in this area so they can continue this particular lifestyle. She finds the landscaping of parking areas somewhat timid and thinks there would be more advantage to protecting the existing native vegetation such as canopy and understory trees. She asked that the restriction of landscaped areas of a minimum 10’ x 20’ be increased, as that is not sufficient in many codes to protect the trees of any size. She said the codes require a minimum setback from the trunk of the tree and she doesn’t think 10’ x 20’ will allow that. They should supply sufficient area for the trees, and significant trees should be allowed enough space to grow. She recommended the ordinance be approved and that staff make the adjustments necessary to bring both sides of the discussion to a common point.
Polly Miller, 121 Larkspur Drive, League of Women Voters, addressed the Board to state she would like to see the parking area left natural. She commended the Commission for bringing the ordinance forward. She urged the Board to pass the ordinance tonight and iron out the wrinkles as they develop.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.
Chairman Van Der Weide recessed the meeting at 8:12 p.m. to give staff the opportunity to bring back the issues brought up tonight for the Board to go over them one at a time. Chairman Van Der Weide reconvened the meeting at 8:35 p.m., with all Commissioners being present.
Deputy County Attorney Stephen Lee addressed the Board to state he will read the changes that everyone agreed to. He referred to the proposed SR 46 Scenic Corridor Overlay Ordinance, page 5, Section B.1., Signage, changed to read, "All signs within the corridor setback are to be constructed . . ."; also in the same paragraph, change Section 30.1060 of the Land Development Code to "Part 55 of the Land Development Code (LDC)"; in the same section, page 6, #2, change to read, "The faces of all signs within the corridor setback"; page 6, B.5., change to read, "Each non-residential use with frontage"; page 9, Section D.3.C., strike "vegetation" and insert "canopy and understory trees"; add on page 9 new paragraph as Section D.3.D. to read "One ground sign in accordance with Section 6.B.5 and 6.B.6. Attorney Lee said this would allow a ground sign within the landscape buffer. He advised on page 11, Item H.1., strike "vegetation" and insert "canopy and understory trees."
Chairman Van Der Weide stated the consensus is that all five Commissioners are comfortable with these changes, as read by Mr. Lee.
Mr. Shadrix stated the last remaining issue for which there was no agreement relates to the depth of the property. He stated one side agreed to increase the cut-off from 200 to 250 feet, which would be the trigger for qualifying for a 25’ buffer or 50’ setback or the greater restriction of a 50’ buffer and 75’ setback. He said there has to be a point for the cut-off and they would have to stick with that.
Commissioner McLain asked why does the ordinance affect property beyond the actual corridor, and why are they going all the way to the back of the property. He said it looks like staff would have 500’ on each side of the road as the corridor. Whereupon, Mr. West said that is a separate issue. The staff is now addressing the equity of having two different setbacks and buffers.
Commissioner Maloy stated the other overlay ordinances, particularly for Snowhill, are uniform from the centerline depth from the road. He thinks that’s more consistent. He suggested picking a number and making it uniform throughout the corridor. This would make it simpler and gets rid of the equity issue. Discussion ensued by the Board. Chairman Van Der Weide stated he thinks they need some flexibility on the setback, but he can’t understand why the buffer can’t be uniform.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner McLain, to have a 25’ buffer and 50’setback consistent throughout the corridor.
Districts 1, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Morris voted NAY.
Mr. West suggested 200’ from the centerline for the applicability clause for the width of the corridor. Commissioners Morris and McLain said 200’ was not enough. Commissioner Henley suggested 350’ from the centerline. Following a brief discussion, Commissioners McLain, Henley, and Morris consented to 300 feet from the road right-of-way.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner McLain, that the width of the corridor is defined as 300’ from the edge of the road right-of-way.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
On the issue of parking and impervious surfaces, Commissioner Morris discussed that what they could do in the ordinance to help guide development is encourage permeable surfaces for the drip line of specimen trees.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner McLain, to include in the ordinance encouraging permeable surfaces for the drip line of specimen trees.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to enact the State Road 46 Scenic Corridor Overlay Ordinance #2001-27, as amended, as shown on page _______, as required by the Wekiva Global Compliance Agreement, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. Grace stated he will send a copy of the final version of the ordinance to the Lake County Commission.
Motion by Commissioner McLain, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to enact the Longwood-Markham/Lake Markham/Markham Road Scenic Corridor Zoning Overlay Ordinance #2001-28, as shown on page _______, as required by the Wekiva Global Compliance Agreement, as described in the proof of publication.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
CONSOLIDATED STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT ORDINANCE
Continuation from March 13, 2001, of a public hearing to consider the Consolidated Street Lighting Ordinance repealing Ordinance #2000-54 for the purpose of dissolving the Ridge High Street Lighting Subdistrict.
Lin Polk, Fiscal Services, advised that originally the request was to approve dissolving the Ridge High Subdistrict and this would amend the current ordinance. She said due to the favorable response of 56% of the property owners supporting implementation of the street lighting district, the staff is now modifying its current recommendation in order to recommend denial of the request to dissolve the district
Commissioner Henley stated that in view of the fact the district was originally approved with 67% of the property owners and hearing from the Sheriff on the value of lighting as a deterrent to crime and safety, and the fact that 56% have still maintained approval, he would be in favor of denying the repeal and instructing staff to work with the Power Company to minimize the problems.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Ms. Polk advised that additional petitions came in this week.
Ralph Bingham, 2176 Linden Road, addressed the Board to state he is opposed to the continuance of the lighting district. He said this is a very divisive issue with the neighbors. He reviewed the events from two years ago when the petition first came out. He said the lighting plan is different today than was proposed then. He won’t give his vote that the extra lighting is required or needed. As it appears now, the plan has lines running along the north side of Linden Road and will require a great amount of tree trimming for removal. When they called Florida Power, they were told that Florida Power would put the lines wherever they wanted and the neighbors didn’t have any voice in the matter. He questioned if the lights could be put on only one street and not the other. He said with the original petition, the people were told that it would be underground lighting. The original plan is not the one now and that is what most people on Linden Road are so concerned about.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Commissioner Henley stated Florida Power probably could bury the lines if the neighbors want to bear the cost. He said if this is approved, he wants to work with Florida Power to try to minimize the problems.
Allen Thatcher, 2177 Ridge Drive, addressed the Board to thank Commissioners Morris, McLain, and Henley who made sure this came back and the staff for helping out. He said he is for the lighting. He is very much interested in the safety of this lighting, and he is concerned about the neighborhood. He said the Ridge High district is on the verge of becoming urban and without street lights, he thinks that would be creating a dangerous situation.
Andrea Bell, 2172 Linden Road, addressed the Board to state she is opposed to the lights. She said one of the problems is that one of the places the lights will go is on her property and then the wiring goes across the street. She said she has children ages 8 to 15. She feels they were misled about what was going to happen with the street lighting. The people she spoke to when she did the original petition felt the extra lighting would encourage the residents in the apartments to walk down their streets. She stated they don’t have a problem in their neighborhood now, and they have a very good Neighborhood Watch program.
Bruce Wiley, 2264 High Street, addressed the Board to state Linden Road has always been a concern because it has a lot of children. He said he is the one who originally took around the petitions. He went to every house and never mentioned underground lighting. He said Florida Power could not get the right-of-way to get the dropping to every house. They were not able to get all the agreements on Linden and that is his understanding why they had to run across the streets. He stated theirs is not an upper class neighborhood and underground lighting would be exorbitant to the people. He thanked the Board and staff for taking on this project.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.
Chairman Van Der Weide advised two Written Comment Forms were received from Larri Thatcher and Georges Lacombe in opposition to dissolving the district.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner McLain, to deny repealing Ordinance #2000-54 for the purpose of dissolving the Ridge High Street Lighting Subdistrict, as described in the proof of publication.
Under discussion, Commissioner McLain stated staff went through the procedures for approval, so this is not only for the safety factor, but the majority of the people voted in favor of the district.
Commissioner Morris complimented the parties on both sides and said they made very good arguments pro and con. He said it would be nice if Commissioner Henley could get a better plan worked out.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Ms. Polk advised that because of the issue with this petition, staff is in the process of amending the procedures and the initiation of the district will be done by contact liaison, but any future changes after the initial petition is presented, will be coordinated by staff so this will not have to happen again.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Henley stated he appreciated the attitude of the opposing views and the manner in which the people in the area have dealt with this. He pledged he will make every effort to make it as painless for the people as it can be. He asked Mr. Grace and staff to set up a meeting soon with the governmental relations person to see if they can make some changes to make this plan more palatable.
APPEAL AGAINST BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MEECHAL PATEL AND ASHOK PATEL, Continued
Continuation from May 22, 2001 of a public hearing to consider Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a Special Exception to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption (a package store) in the University Palms Shopping Center located on the northeast corner of McCulloch Road and SR 434, as described in the proof of publication Meechal Patel and Ashok Patel.
Amanda Smith, Planner, addressed the Board to present the Appeal. She identified certain retail and eating establishments within the shopping center that sell alcohol for on and off-premise consumption. She stated she checked with the State of Florida Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco regarding any violations with packing stores in the vicinity and found no violations at one store and two violations at another store. Staff also checked with the Sheriff’s Department regarding any DUI’s or illegal alcohol possession and found the figures are some of the lowest in the area. She found that within the UCF area, out of 105 DUI’s committed in Year 2000, only 5% involved the UCF campus.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Ms. Smith advised that no other store in the University Palms Shopping Center can deliver alcoholic beverages.
Ms. Smith said staff is recommending approval of the special exception. Discussion ensued regarding the delivery service.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. McMillan advised if the applicant meets the three conditions in the Code for the Special Exception, at that point the presumption is that they are entitled to approval, absent contrary evidence that this would be contrary to public interest. He said there would have to be some prevailing evidentiary base to deny the request.
Attorney Lonnie Groot, Shutts & Bowen, 300 S. Orange Avenue, addressed the Board to introduce P. Davis Robbins of the Watkins Retail Group; Ashok Patel, Applicant; Mitch Patel, Applicant’s son; and Anthony diValentin, Vice President of the UCF Rugby Team. Attorney Groot thanked the staff for a good staff report and Ms. Smith for going beyond the call of duty in terms of the issues for a special exception. He said this is really a case that should not be before the Board. He said the criteria for a special exception were met at the Board of Adjustment meeting and the requirements of the Land Development Code were met, and at that point, the approval should have been granted. He referred to the 3B Beverage Special Exception in the shopping center near Lake Forest. He read from the minutes of this case before the BCC dated January 26 & 27, 1999 (received and filed with additional documentation/records). He said his client is in a similar type situation as 3B Beverage. He stated his client desires to operate a high quality, aesthetically-pleasing business in harmony with the University Palms Shopping Center. He said both issues to deny the request at the Board of Adjustment meeting are totally unfounded. Attorney Groot pointed out that UCF has the lowest crime rate of any of the 10 universities in the State university system. He said his client wants to have a fine liquor, wine and cigar store and they want to do it in compliance with the law and they will make that commitment to the Board tonight.
Dave Robbins, Watkins Retail Group, addressed the Board to state they have less than a 5% turnover in their properties. He said with this project being a fine wine and liquor store with the cigar component, he thinks that is going to add something to the area that is not available now. He said they have numerous liquor stores in a number of their centers and he does not recall Watkins having problems at any of the locations in eight years. He also said the safety of citizens is tantamount to their operations. They only develop with Publix and do their best to operate a good, clean, safe shopping center.
Susan Eberle, 652 W. Palm Valley Drive, addressed the Board to state her neighborhood has been hit several times and over $60,000 worth of damages have occurred. She said they are against this liquor store. She spoke with Mickey Mullin who lives in Kingston Oaks and she said they are against this also. She reported there have been over 80,000 calls for service a year and a half in Orange County just south of Seminole County and many of them are related to alcohol and drugs. She said to trade off what was previously a doctor’s office for a liquor store is not a very good trade-off. She stated there is a lot of crime just outside the UCF campus in the student housing.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner McLain, Ms. Eberle said she does think having a package store in the plaza will result in a higher level of consumption by the UCF students as it is being made more easily available.
Ms. Eberle related how her neighbor complained about the local Publix advertising beer kegs. She said after sending a letter to the Publix President, the sign was removed. She asked the Board to uphold the Board of Adjustment in denial of this package store. She stated their neighborhood will be safer and better off with something else in this location. She submitted documents (not received and filed) to the Board for the public record including the letter to the Publix President and picture (not received and filed) of the beer keg advertising beer for sale.
Richard Byrd, Vice President of the Creekwood Homeowners Association, addressed the Board to state the letter submitted from their President, Teresa Stephens (received and filed) in opposition represents the policy of their Board. He said a liquor store would encourage and make more possible alcohol consumption by many underage drinkers who inhabit that immediate area. He said he finds it very hard to believe the statistics that have come out.
Attorney Groot advised there is an affidavit on file that he posted the property himself and he submitted a picture (received and filed) taken of the building with the sign posted. He also submitted the notice (received and filed) of the Special Exception hearing before the Board of Adjustment meeting on March 26, 2001, that he removed from the building. He stated there is no evidence of inordinate crime in this area and the store is not going to increase the drinking of the students; that is not what it is aimed at. He advised that in an effort to prove themselves to be responsible, caring business people, the applicant would agree to a development order that prohibits delivery from their store, if this request is approved.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.
Commissioner McLain stated at first, he thought the delivery idea was bad, but now he is not convinced that it is a wrong thing to do as long as it is dealt with properly. He asked why would the Board want to restrict the delivery service.
Commissioner Henley stated he thinks it would be very difficult for the police as well as the owner to monitor the delivery service regularly.
Commissioner Maloy said he thinks it would be easier to enforce the drinking age laws if there were one source of location of the sales.
Commissioner Morris stated he thinks the Board of Adjustment has legally erred. The BCC has asked the attorneys to discuss with the BOA what the staff has been recommending relative to the Comprehensive Plan. If the Board is going to change their Comprehensive Plan, that is something they need to do on a large-scale basis but not on an individual basis. In terms of enforcement action, he said it’s a lot easier to be site specific.
District Commissioner Maloy stated he had supported a delay to have staff do additional research. He was curious about what the neighborhood stores would have and was surprised that the number of incidents was so low. He said his main concern was the sale to underage customers. He stated he does have a problem with the delivery service.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to approve, by Development Order, as shown on page _______, the appeal against the Board of Adjustment, thereby, granting a Special Exception to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption (a package store) in the University Palms Shopping Center located on the northeast corner of McCulloch Road and SR 434, since the appellant has met the criteria spelled out and with the restriction to prohibit the delivery service, as described in the proof of publication, Meechal Patel and Ashok Patel.
Under discussion, Commissioner McLain stated he would support the motion but the Board would never have known about this issue if the applicant had not pointed it out. He said this is a voluntary restriction the applicant has put on himself.
Commissioner Henley stated he would vote against the motion because he believes it is detrimental to the character of the area. If the figures of low crime are correct, perhaps it is because they don’t have any more proliferation as it is. He said they all know what alcohol can do and he believes that adding another store in the area is detrimental.
Commissioner Morris thanked the Board of Directors of Creekwood for their letter because they pointed out the delivery on call service, which the Board did not know about.
Districts 1, 2, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Henley voted NAY.
ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA – CITIZEN
Susan Eberle stated she is very proud to be in Seminole County because of the natural lands that are preserved and she hopes that Orange and Lake Counties do the same thing.
Ms. Eberle advised Commissioner Maloy that if it is at all possible, the citizens would like to have flashing yellow lights at the corner of McCulloch and Rouse Road. She said she is afraid that some day someone will end up in the river or hurt.
Ms. Eberle read her letter (received and filed with additional documents) into the Record requesting an immediate peer review of the flood plan study completed in December 2000 by Singhofen & Associates.
Chairman Van Der Weide advised Ms. Eberle that the Board may not be moving as fast as she would like but they do have a plan. He said they are responding and moving forward very cautiously. He said they have all the citizens to take into consideration and there are some very different levels of opinion from professional people and the County from both sides.
Mr. Grace said he had discussed this with Mr. Dean, St. Johns River Water Management District, and he does not recall him saying the County needed to do a peer review. He thought what the County was doing was the prudent way to go as there was very little data. Mr. Grace said he is not against a peer review. Their point now is that there is a small amount of data backing up the study and they want to shore up the data. He said the St. Johns RWM District knows exactly what the County is doing.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 10:17 p.m., this same date.
ATTEST _______________________Clerk____________________ Chairman