AUGUST 26, 2003
The following is a non-verbatim transcript of the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING
OF SEMINOLE
COUNTY, FLORIDA,
held at 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, August 26, 2003, in the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA,
the usual place of meeting of said Board.
Present:
Chairman Daryl McLain (District 5)
Vice Chairman Grant Maloy (District 1)
Commissioner Randy Morris (District 2)
Commissioner Dick Van Der Weide (District 3)
Commissioner Carlton Henley (District
4)(Late)
County Manager Kevin Grace
County Attorney Robert McMillan
Deputy Clerk Carylon Cohen
The Invocation was given by Pastor Wes
Tanksley, Church of God of Sanford.
Commissioner Grant Maloy led the Pledge of
Allegiance.
CHAIRMAN’S REPORT
Chairman
McLain advised of a Resolution recommended by Sheriff Eslinger to recognize
September 11, 2003, as a tribute to Heroes’ Day in Seminole County in honor of
the victims of terroist attacks and military members of emergency services
personnel. He said the Sheriff would
read this resolution at an upcoming event.
Motion
by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, adopt
appropriate Resolution #2003-R-129, as shown on page _______, recognizing September
11, 2003, as a tribute to Heroes’ Day in Seminole County in honor of the
victims of
terroist attacks and military members of
emergency services personnel.
Districts
1, 2, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
Awards and
Presentations
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy,
to adopt appropriate Resolution
#2003-R-128, as
shown on page _______, acknowledging the recipients of the 2003 Seminole County
Industry Recognition Award; to be presented at the “2003 Industry Recognition
Luncheon” to be held on September 19, 2003.
Districts 1, 2, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der
Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to approve and authorize the following:
6. Approve and authorize Chairman to amend the Department of Library and Leisure Services Fee Resolution #2003-R-130, as shown on page _______.
7. BCR #03-72 – $25,000 – Public
Works – Road Operations/Stormwater – Fund: 13000 – Stormwater Fund. Based on an agreement between Seminole County and the St. Johns
River Water Management District (SJRWMD) approval by the Board of County
Commissioners on May 12, 2001, the SJRWMD agreed to fund a portion of the
Celery Avenue (Midway) Regional Stormwater Facility not to exceed $25,000. This $25,000 was received on July 15, 2003
and will offset this transfer from Stormwater Reserve. The balance of Stormwater Reserves Water
after the transfer will be $671,291.
8. BCR #03-75 – $50,583 –
Public Safety – EMS/Fire/Rescue – Fund: 12801 – Fire Impact Fund. Staff requests this transfer of funds to the roads improvements
account line for the purchase of traffic preemption devices, which were
inadvertently budgeted to the Capital Machinery and Equipment account line.
9. BCR #03-76 – $120,000 –
Public Works – Engineering – Fund: 11541 – 2001 Sales Tax Fund. A transfer of funds is needed to establish a sidewalk project in
Geneva. The sidewalk will be along 1st
(SR 46 to Avenue ‘C’) and along Avenue ‘C’ (from 1st Street to old
Geneva Road). Funding for this project
is available from the sidewalk construction contingency project.
10. BCR #03-77 – $400,000 – Public Safety – EMS/Fire/Rescue – Fund:
11200 – Fire Protection Fund. This transfer is requested to move funds
from the regular salary line to the overtime line to accommodate the minimum
staffing requirement of emergency units for the remainder of the fiscal year.
11. BCR #03-78 – $500,000 – Public Works – Road Operations/Stormwater –
Fund: 13000 – Stormwater Fund. This is
an accounting adjustment to transfer $500,000 of St Johns River Water
Management District (SJRWMD) funding originally allocated to the Little
Econ/Crane Strand Retrofit Project.
This project was cancelled by the SJRWMD and funding has been redirected
to the Mellonville Avenue Retrofit Project.
There is also a Budget Amendment Request on this agenda allocating
$1,000,000 to this project.
12. BCR #03-79 – $24,595 – Judicial – Circuit Court Facilities Fees –
Fund: 12402 – Circuit Court Facilities Fees Fund. Staff requests this
transfer of funds to secure the purchases of a multi-media Smart Cart for the
Juvenile Justice Center, a JAVS IP to ISDN network device to allow cost
effective connection to remote sites and a Net Tool Inline Network Tester to
allow for time efficient resolution of network connectivity. (Funded from
Circuit Court Facilities Fees).
13. BCR #03-80 - $312,300 – Administrative Services – Facilities Maintenance – Fund: 00100 – General Fund. A transfer is requested for end of year close-out of various projects, some are safety related and some are at the request of the BCC. The projects include replacing carpet at the County Services Building and Public Safety Building; replace/upgrade of irrigation and landscaping at the Public Safety Building and repair of water leaks at the Courthouse.
14. Budget Amendment Resolution #2003-R-131, as shown on page _______,
$1,000,000 – Department: Public Works – 13000 – Stormwater Fund. Based on the Agreement between Seminole County and the St. Johns
River Water Management District (SJRWMD) approved by the Board of County
Commissioners on July 22, 2003, the SJRWMD will reimburse the County $1,500,000
for the Lake Jesup Basin/Mellonville Avenue Retrofit Project. $1,000,000 is allocated to this project by
this Budget Amendment Request and the balance of $500,000 is allocated by a
Budget Change Request (also on this agenda).
MSBU
15. Approve
and authorize Chairman to execute Satisfaction of Lien, as shown on page
_______, for Michael A. and Kathleen S. Wright for the Chula Vista Road Paving
and Drainage.
16. Award CC-1215-03/TLC, as shown
on page _______, Removal/Construction of Concrete Sidewalk, Curb Cut Ramps,
Curb and Gutter within Various Areas of Seminole County to P.L.A.N. Estimating
Services of Palm Coast as primary and Gibbs & Register, Inc. of Winter
Garden as secondary (Not-to-Exceed $1,500,000.00 per year).
17. Award RFP-4197-03/PWM, as shown
on page _______, Irrigation Evaluation Services, to Clear Water Products &
Services, Inc. of Winter Springs (Not-to-Exceed $50,000.00/per year).
18. Approve Amendment #1, as shown
on page _______, to Work Order #2 to RFP-4108-01/BJC, Owner’s Representation Services
Agreement for the Juvenile Justice Center Expansion and Renovation, with ZHA
Inc., Orlando ($15,000.00).
19. Approve Amendment #2 to A/B-3021-01/GG, Team
Contract for Traffic Signals and Systems, with Traffic Control Devices,
Altamonte Springs (primary) and Chinchor Electric, Enterprise (secondary). (Increase the Not-to-Exceed amount to
$2,246,204.18 per year).
Information
Technologies
Telecommunications
20. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute the
Shared Public Service Radio Communications Facilities Interlocal Agreement, as
shown on page _______, as set forth in the terms and conditions associated with
the provisions for enhanced public safety and emergency radio services.
23. Adopt appropriate Resolution #2003-R-132, as
shown on page ______, naming an unnamed right-of-way Sharps Settlement Lane
pursuant to established street naming procedures set forth in the Seminole
County Ordinance #2000-22.
24. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute (6)
Satisfactions of Second Mortgage, as shown on page _______, for the following
households assisted under the SHIP Program’s Home Ownership Assistance
Program: Stephanie Woods and Robert
Woods; Linda Lopez; Travis D. Costen and Andrea L. Costen; Loretta Giorella;
Jeremiah & Jamie Dickerson; and Khadijatu Turay.
25. Approve Plat for the Wal-Mart Neighborhood
Market at Red Bug Village located at the northeast corner of Red Bug Lake Road
and Dodd Road East in Winter Springs (Wal-Mart Stores East, LP).
26. Approve Final Plat for Ashford Park Townhomes
on a 15.197 acre parcel within the Trinity Retail Center located at the south
end of Tuskawilla Road and south side of Aloma Avenue (SR 426) and
approximately ¼ mile west of SR 417 (Centex Homes, Jill Galdeiri).
27. Approve Minor Plat for Mystic Cove on a 14.61
acre parcel within the Mystic Cove Planned Unit Development located on the
north side of Aloma Avenue (SR 426) and approximately 283 +/- feet east of SR
417 (Fox Chase Partners, Ltd., Steve Joos).
28. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute
Memorandum of Understanding, as shown on page _______, between Seminole County
Community College and Seminole County for Dependent Care Shelter.
29. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute the
Hazards Analysis Grant, as shown on page _______, between the Florida
Department of Community Affairs and Seminole County.
Districts 1,
2, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to
approve and authorize the following:
35. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute Purchase Agreement, as
shown on page _______, relating to the parent tract of Parcel Numbers 148/748
of the Lake Drive road improvement project, located at 1439 Azalea Avenue,
Casselberry, in the amount of $140,000.00, a negotiated whole take with no fees
or expenses incurred; Jackson Property.
36. Adopt First
Supplemental and First Amended Resolution #2003-R-133 of Necessity, as shown on
page _______, relating to the Lake Drive road improvement project (from
Seminola Boulevard to Tuskawilla Road).
Litigation
37. Approve proposed settlement of expert costs relating to Parcel
Number 135 and 735 of the Dodd Road road improvement project, located at 1401
Dodd Road, in the amount of $4,347.00; Floyd Property.
Districts 1, 2, 3, and 5 voted
AYE.
CLERK’S REPORT
Motion
by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to approve and
authorize the following:
38. Expenditure Approval Lists, as shown on page _______, dated August
5 & 12, 2003; and Payroll Approval List, as shown on page _______, dated
July 31, 2003.
39. Chairman to execute Satisfactions of Judgment for the following
Court Costs & Application of Indigency Fee:
Troy Donnell Brinson, Case #00-3018-CFA -
$40 Application of Indigency Fee
Robert Jaeger, Case #96-6211-MMA - $110
Court Costs
40. Chairman to execute Satisfactions of Judgment for the following Bail Bond Liens:
Tavares
K. Thomas & Lexington National Ins. Co. - $2,038
Aubrynn
L. Trong & Continental Heritage Ins. Co. - $1,038
41. Chairman to execute Satisfactions of Judgment for the following
Public Defender Liens:
Matt Bonard, Case
#01004284CFA - $200
April Brooks, Case
#03003337MM - $100
Sheila Caballero,
Case #03000439MM - $100
Jonah K. Fox, Case
#00001313CFA - $200
Joseph Goffio,
Case #02010820MM - $100
Robert Greenwald,
Case #94000611CFA - $350
Keith Lambert
Johnson, Case #02007218MM - $260
Joe Kissinger,
Case #92003607CFA - $350
Nicole M.
Lombardi, Case #03003715MM - $300
Marvin Eduardo
Lopenzaurevelo, Case #02011780MM - $260
Patricia Michaels,
Case #020011574MMA - $260
Jeffrey Dennis
Molen, Case #03005151MMA - $200
Stephen Anthony
Moro, Case #02010683MM - $100
Cheri M. Nicol,
Case #99002719CFA - $200
Gustavo Nodarse,
Case #02003098CFA - $200
Jimmy R. Pierrot,
Case #02007584MM - $150
Inxo Ramirez, Case
#02011789MM - $260
Michael Washing
Robinson, Case #01005904MM - $200
Robert James Rush,
Case #02011942MM - $100
Christopher R.
Sonnefeldt, Case #020011801MMA - $100
Curtis Stone, Case
#97007554MM - $100
David Scott
Strachan, Case #03000825MMA - $100
Nid Vongthirath,
Case #02002868CFA - $200
Lee Freddie Willman,
Case #95004556MM - $200
Kenneth Edward
Winne, Case #K811325CFA - $650
Kenneth Edward
Winne, Case #L811325CFA VOP - $100
Kenneth E. Winne,
Case #851232CFA - $200
Kenneth Winne,
Case #88000852CFB - $400
42. Request for Destruction of Non-Microfilmed and Microfilmed Records as identified.
43. Approval of Official Minutes dated July 22 & 25, 2003.
Sheriff’s Office
45. Approve Budget Amendment Resolution #2003-R-134, as shown on page
_______, to the Drug Trust Fund for $10,000 in matching funds to be used in
support of the Sheriff’s Office grants programs. These funds were not included in the Sheriff’s Office budget
submission for fiscal year 02/03 and we are requesting the Budget Amendment
Request to reflect these funds in the Sheriff’s 02/03 budget. Funds will be
used in support of Homeland Security Operations.
46. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute the Certificate of Acceptance, as shown on page ______, for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program.
47. Approve submission of the Federal Bureau of Justice Assistance
Grant application by the Sheriff’s Office for the purpose of reducing crime and
improving public safety. The minimum
10% match is already included in the Sheriff’s 2003/2004 budget
submissions.
48. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute Budget Amendment Resolution #2003-R-135, as shown on page _______, recognizing the Florida Legislature Grant Appropriations for Child Protective Investigations.
Districts 1, 2, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
-------
The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s “received and filed”:
1. Work Orders #12, #13, #16, #17 & #19, as shown on page _______, to PS-5129-02.
2. Work Order #8, as shown on page _______, to RFP-489-00.
3. Work Order #5, as shown on page _______, to PS-521-98.
4. Work Orders #55 & #56, as shown on page _______, to PS-590-01.
5. Work Order #68, as shown on page _______, to FC-1139-00.
6. Work Order #40, as shown on page _______, to PS-556-00.
7. Work Order #4, as shown on page _______, to PS-575-00.
8. Work Order #9, as shown on page _______, to RFP-4173-02.
9. Work Orders #14 & #15, as shown on page _______, to PS-586-01.
10. Development Orders, as shown on page _______, as follows: #03-30000079, Thomas Camp Variance and #03-30000062, Debra Goodwin Variance.
11. Change Order #5, as shown on page _______, to FC-1168-01.
12. Change Order #11, as shown on page _______, to FC-1123-00.
13. Change Order #1, as shown on page _______, to CC-1195-02.
14. Letter from Sheriff Don Eslinger to the Board providing information relating to Part 1 Crime Rate per 100,000 residents and ratio of law enforcement officers per 1,000 residents.
15. Memorandum to Jerry McCollum, County Engineer, from Herbert Zischkau, Assistant County Attorney, relating to Direct Pay Request, Seminole County v. 7-Eleven, et al.
16. Title Opinion and Cash Performance Bonds, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $3,029 and $174,100.95 for Mirror Lake Commercial Subdivision.
17. Consultant Services Agreement M-386-03, as shown on page _______, with PBS&J.
18. Consultant Services Agreement M-387-03, as shown on page _______, with PBS&J.
19. Memorandum to Sandy McCann, Commission Records, from Shirley Berrie, County Attorney’s Office, submitting the following relating to Lake Emma Road: Warranty Deed and Temporary Construction Easement, as shown on page _______, for Philip & Jessica Bergeron.
20. The Newsletter of the Blue Dolphin Dive Club dated August 2003.
21. Maintenance Bond #36286, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $9,943.50 for the project known as Wayside Estates; Private Road Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $45,190.62 for the project known as Markham Estates; Maintenance Agreement, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $16,000 for the project known as Markham Estates; and Water & Sewer Maintenance Bond, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $3,513 for the project known as Sturbridge Oaks.
22. Memorandum from Kevin Grace, County Manager, to BCC re: Capital Project Fund Transfer for Hester Ave. Railroad Crossing Rebuild.
23. IFB-3072-03 Sodium Hypochlorite Purchase Agreement, as shown on page _______, with Harcross Chemicals.
24. Assignment of Conditional Utility Agreements, as shown on page _______, with BR Royal – The Crossings Business Center & Steel Software Solutions, Inc.
25. Conditional Utility Agreements, as shown on page _______, with William & Vicki Kirtley and Nizach Properties, LLC.
26. Bill of Sale, as shown on page _______, accepting water system within the project known as Sturbridge Oaks Subdivision.
27. Bids as follows: CC-1216-03; IFB-3074-03; PS-5146-03; and IFB-3073-03.
Motion by Commissioner
Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to adopt appropriate Resolution
#2003-R-136, as shown on page _______, authorizing exchange of property with
BDC Markham, Ltd., per the County Attorney’s recommendation; and authorize the
Chairman to execute the Disclaimer and Relinquishment of Interest in Real
Property, as shown on page _______; proof of publication, as shown on page
_______.
Districts 1, 2, 3, and 5 voted AYE.
County Manager’s
REPORT
Tom Helle, Deputy
Building Official, addressed the Board to present the appeal by Kenneth Coyne of the Findings & Order of
the Building Contractor Examiners Board.
Commissioner Henley entered the meeting at
this time.
Attorney
Marcus Valentassis (phonetic), 111 N. Orange Avenue, representing Kenneth
Coyne, addressed the Board to state he has the actual copy of the statute that
the Building Contractors Board found his client guilty of, which is not the
same language that was put into the notice of hearing in the charging
document. He said the statute says the
license or certificate holder must be the one to continue the performance in a
negligent, incompetent or unworkman-like manner inconsistent with County
construction practices. The Board heard
testimony in exact contradiction. He
said at some point after commencement of the project, Mr. Coyne’s project
manager was no longer on the job. Up
until that point, the construction had always passed all of the County’s
inspections. For whatever reason, the
project manager and the owner of the home got into some sort of dispute and the
project manager was off the project. He
said this was not a case of abandonment.
Chairman
McLain asked Mr. McMillan about the question of improper notice based on the
wrong statute. Mr. McMillan stated he
did not have any information on that.
Mr.
Helle advised staff did not bring a charge against Mr. Coyne in reference to
the State statute, but Seminole County Code Section 40.34.
Commissioner
Morris suggested the County Attorney address the notice question. Whereupon, Chairman McLain recessed the
meeting at 9:45 a.m. for Mr. McMillan to confer with staff and Attorney
Valentassis. The meeting reconvened at
9:52 a.m.
Mr.
McMillan reported that the notice Mr. Coyne received did not have a precise
definition of what the charge was and it was not in the exact language of the
ordinance. He said the notice in this
kind of proceeding is simply to give a general notice of what the problems are,
to allow the client to be at the hearing and present his information. He does not see that as a defect in the
notice. He explained that the BCC is
sitting in the place of the Building Contractors Board and the standard the BCC
will use is the standard in the County Code.
The debate from Attorney Valentassis is that the notice in the hearing
was the language that Mr. Coyne allowed the construction to continue in an
unworkman-like manner.
Commissioner
Morris asked if Attorney Valentassis would like the Board to delay the hearing
and readverstise it. Mr. McMillan
stated Attorney Valentassis would like to have the hearing remanded to the
Building Contractors Board for another hearing under the actual language
involved. The staff is not in favor of
that.
Discussion
ensued among Attorney Valentassis and the Board. The consensus of the Board was to continue with the hearing.
Attorney
Valentassis submitted copies of the verbatim transcript of the meeting of the Building
Contractors Examiners Board vs. Kenneth Robert Coyne (copy received and
field) heard on May 15, 2003. He said
County Code 40.34 (a)(2) requires that it be the contractor who continues to
perform or the certificate holder. He
said there is nothing in the Florida law or County code that says the
contractor, whether he is terminated or abandoned, becomes liable for the
negligent work of others that come after him.
He referred to the transcript and said at the hearing, Mr. Helle said
the pictures (copies in the staff report) exhibited showed the state of the
home at the time of the hearing, but there is contradictory testimony that the
owner hired someone to redesign the trusses.
He said the overview is that Mr. Coyne’s project manager worked on the
project until mid October and was then off the project. After the project manager was off the job,
the work proceeded. He stated the
County staff testified at the hearing that they did not know at what point Mr.
Coyne’s project manager was off the job and what work was attributed to him and
what was not. Yet, the Building
Contractor’s Board still found his client guilty of violating a statute that
requires that it be the license holder that performs the negligent work. Attorney Valentassis advised that at the
time the project manager was off the job, no one notified the County so the
permit was still open.
Chairman
McLain discussed why didn’t Mr. Coyne notify the County that his project
manager was off the job. Attorney
Valentassis explained that the project manager was out of town for six to eight
weeks and there was miscommunication.
He said it also does not appear to be anything in the Code as to who
should notify the County. Upon inquiry
by Chairman McLain, he said the project manager’s work was not done by written
contract with Mr. Coyne, but there was a verbal agreement to pay a fee to the
project manager to supervise the construction.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Attorney Valentassis agreed that good business
practices were not followed, but he said that is not what is before the Board
at this time.
Commissioner
Henley said it seems like there was a contract with Mr. Coyne who contracted
with somebody else who left the job because the owner fired him, but the owner
did not have the authority to do that.
Chairman
McLain said it sounds like Mr. Coyne facilitated the pulling of a permit for
his unlicensed associate and then turned the project over to him and walked
away from it. Attorney Valentassis said
he did not walk away as his testimony said he was on the job at various stages
of construction and that is why it passed all the inspections.
During
further discussion, Chairman McLain said Mr. Coyne should have known that the
project manager had abandoned the job.
Whereupon, Attorney Valentassis said the point is this is not what the
statute is addressing and he would like the order stricken. He said his client was found guilty of
negligent construction when the Contractors Board did not know who did the
construction. Mr. Coyne’s license was
pulled for seven years, when the Board doesn’t know who did what work on the
job.
Commissioner
Morris referred to Tab 10, page 12 of the transcript and said from the
testimony, it appears that the dispute between the owner and Mr. Coyne occurred
because payments were not made and inspections were not made. He said the testimony was not disputed. Attorney Valentassis explained that Cecil Freeman
referenced was not the project manager, but one of the subcontractors. He advised this event took place after the
project manager was let go and the subcontractors no longer had one to look to.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. Helle advised this all came out during the
hearing that the project manager had been let go. He said staff did not know at that time that Mr. Coyne was no
longer on the job. They only learned
that in the meeting. He was under the
assumption that Mr. Coyne was still on the job. He said as far as he can understand Mr. Coyne allowed work to be
done under his permit. Discussion
continued with Commissioner Morris and Mr. Helle.
Chairman
McLain stated the General Contractor who pulls the permit has to be held
accountable until he notifies the County that he is no longer employed on that
job. Commissioner Van Der Weide said
that is his point and not only is the General Contractor responsible to the
County, but also to the owner.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. McMillan said he did not hear anything that
would change his opinion relative to what the Contractors Board decided on.
Attorney
Valentassis reiterated his points.
Commissioner
Morris stated he still believes the Building Contractors Board made the correct
decision.
Motion
by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide, to uphold the
Findings and Order of the Building Contractor Examiners Board suspending Mr.
Kenneth Coyne’s permitting privileges.
Under
discussion, Commissioner Maloy stated he supports the Building Contractor
Examiners Board’s recommendation.
Chairman
McLain said he supports the motion.
Commissioner
Henley said he believes this is the appropriate action.
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Bob Briggs, Environmental Services, Business Manager, addressed the Board
to present request for adoption of the Water and Sewer Rate Resolution, adopting utility rates and providing an
effective date to initiate billing. He
advised staff is asking the Board to reconsider the October 1 deadline. He said there are some conflicts. They have committed to support the Health
Department through September and would like to change the date to October 14,
instead of October 1, 2003.
Mr.
Briggs responded to Commissioner Maloy regarding a citizen’s complaint about
the increase.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by
Commissioner Henley, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2003-R-137, as shown on
page _______, for water and sewer rates, adopting utility rates and providing
an effective date to initiate billing (October 14, 2003), as amended.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Fire Chief Terry Schenk
addressed the Board to request approval to prepare a contract to purchase
property located at 201 Valentine Way, Longwood, Florida for use as a
Fire/Rescue Emergency Training Center for $2.375 million utilizing funds from
the Fire/Rescue MSTU. He reviewed from
a PowerPoint presentation (copy received and filed) on the proposed training
center and storage facility. He stated
what is needed is a central training point where multi-disciplined training can
take place. He reviewed the proposed
uses for the facility. He introduced
Dr. Dave Harrison from Seminole Community College, who was in attendance to
answer any questions.
Lt. Mike Hammond
addressed the Board to review the following slides: Uses for Hands On Training; Hazardous Materials; Technical
Rescue; Weapons of Mass Destruction; and Urban Search and Rescue.
Chief Schenk continued
with discussion and review of the following slides: Out-of-County Training; discussion of use as a storage facility;
Logistics Warehouse; Storage for Specialized Equipment; Health Department
Laboratory; General Fund Impact; Negotiated Price ($2,375,000); Estimate Costs
for Start-up and On-Going, Annual; Value Over 30 Years; Funding Sources;
Benefits; and the Proposed Training Center and Storage Facility (aerial photo
of how the facility would be used).
Upon inquiry by
Chairman McLain on the liability if other organizations are allowed to come
into the facility, Mr. McMillan advised the County would enter into agreements
with other agencies relative to indemnification and hold harmless. The agreements would have to come before the
BCC for approval.
Commissioner Henley questioned what would be the
impact on the County’s liability insurance.
Mr. Grace said he would think the County would mitigate the risk with
the agreements.
Commissioner Henley stated his concern with
this item coming up in this fashion at this time. He said it was not long ago it appeared they were in dire straits
financially with other issues. Now all
of sudden they have lots of money to go out and buy a facility when it was not
budgeted and it appears there won’t be any problem operating it. He said he can’t imagine the County coming
in with a facility like this without there being a certain amount of
increase.
Chief Schenk said his office has training
staff now, and they work now with the cities and their training officers can
come in and handle some of the work.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Jamie
Croteau, Administrative Services, addressed the Board to advise Facilities
staff has looked at the building and it does need a new roof and they have
worked with Chief Schenk on some of the figures.
Chief
Schenk advised that a total of $700,000 would be needed for a new roof
($300,000); work on the air conditioning, and painting on the outside of the
building.
Mr.
Grace said staff is only asking for authorization to prepare the contracts and
move forward.
Chief
Schenk responded to the following questions by Commissioner Morris: what is not getting done that staff had
anticipated spending the $1 million on that is now going to this project; would
the current SCC site still be used; that the lab should not be just local but a
regional site; would sole ownership be by the County; if the different training
would still be in Seminole County; the location of the burn building and would
there be actual smoke; possible noise; and if there is any grant funding for future
years.
Mr. Grace advised Commissioner Morris that
he is recommending approval.
Commissioner Van Der Weide complimented the
Public Safety Department for being on the cutting edge. He thinks this would put the County in a
position that the employees would be trained to handle whatever might come up
in the future. The public is going to
look to the Board and Public Safety to have in place what is going to be needed
to protect them.
Mr. Schenk further advised Commissioner
Henley that just one fire station facility would be delayed due to this
project. He said the funding is set up
for this project and it would be out of this year’s budget. The bulk of the funding would be on the
front end.
Commissioner Henley questioned about the
amount of money in the reserves and said staff is talking about taking the
one-time windfall this year and using it.
He asked about the anticipated funding for the following years.
Chairman McLain said he thinks it would be
appropriate, if this moves forward, when staff comes back if the Board can have
some kind of financial briefing on the status of how these funds would be spent
and how that relates to balancing the budget in October.
Commissioner Henley asked for information
on the cash flow over the next five years.
Commissioner Morris said he thinks they
should move forward with the conceptual approval and prepare the contract and
so on, but one thing in the discussion was drive times and overtime paid during
the training period. He said if the
equipment could be kept here, there would be less travel time to other areas.
Whereupon, Chairman McLain said he thinks
that is an excellent point and should be included in the financial analysis.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide,
seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to authorize the County Manager to move forward
and bring back a contract and the additional information requested by the
Board, including the financial and feasibility over five years and the savings
in manpower costs for hours, and risk cost on the insurance.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at
11:02 a.m. and reconvened at 11:15 a.m.
-------
Matt West presented the request for appeal
of the Board of Adjustment’s decision to affirm the Planning Manager’s denial
of a boathouse and dock permit, prior to the construction of a single-family
residence in the A-10, A-5 & A-3 (Rural Zoning Classification Districts);
David E. Axel, appellant.
Mr. West said his interpretation and past
interpretations have been that the dock or boat dock is an accessory use, and
the owner would have to have a house before he could have a dock. Staff is looking into how they can amend the
Code to accommodate an allowance to have a dock prior to having a residence
constructed. He said he hopes to bring
this back before the Board on October 14, 2003, with some recommended amending
language. He said he would like to meet
with each Commissioner separately before the October 14 meeting to get their thoughts. The Board of Adjustment heard this appeal
and voted to uphold their decision to deny a dock prior to construction of a
single-family residence. Staff is still
recommending the Board of Adjustment’s decision be affirmed, thereby, upholding
the denial of the appeal. He said he
reviewed the policy Mr. Axel referred the Board to and he doesn’t believe it
conflicts with his interpretation.
Chairman McLain asked if staff was aware
that the St. Johns District allows boat docks of 500 square feet or less
without a permit.
J. V. Torregrosa, Development Review, addressed the Board to advise the
Department of Environmental Protection allows an exemption for single-family
residential properties up to 1,000 square feet provided they have one foot of
linear frontage on the waterfront per 10 square feet of dock. Mr. West said this is strictly a zoning
issue and the County Code does not allow it before a house.
Commissioner Morris advised that he has a
past relationship with some of the property owners in this matter and there may
or may not be some gain. Therefore, he
will not be voting on this matter because of a conflict. The Memorandum of Conflict Form, as shown on
page _______, filed by Commissioner Morris was received and filed.
Mr. McMillan advised the Board they are
dealing with a general code interpretation and this has nothing to do with a
specific dwelling being proposed.
Whatever ruling the Board issues today, Planning will use that in every
future case for a boat dock permit on a residential lot.
Commissioner Maloy questioned what is the
logic in the differences with A-10, A-5, A-3, and RC-1 saying a boat dock is a
separate use and R-1AAA saying it is an accessory use. Mr. West said he thinks the language was
drafted by different people at different times. He can’t account for why it was written three different
ways.
David Axel, Appellant, addressed the Board
to state he did not request a specific permit for a specific lot. He is here as the developer of Mills Cove
and a member of the Homeowner’s Association.
He said they have 10 lots in the gated development zoned A-3. He said when he informed a number of buyers
that he believed the County would reject the application for a boat dock, they
asked him to bring this forward to resolve it.
He said he has a different interpretation of the Code from the
staff. He displayed copies of the Code
30.102A and explained how the BOA interpreted the use of the word, “and,” in
the sentence and use of the word, “and,” under Item C, Groves and Farms. He said under R-C1, Item C, the meaning is
clear. Section 30.101 defines boat
docks and boat houses and accessories.
It lists these but not as accessories.
Further, he said there is no definition in the code where it
specifically states that a boat house or a boat dock is an accessory. He pointed out under Rural 3 Uses, Item B,
he believes the two-fold contention of staff was that you could have a boat
dock after you put up a house and there would be no conflict because it is
allowed. He referred to Policy 12,
Comprehensive Plan, on the Protection of Private Property Rights, stating there
are no such definitions in the Code that he could find to support that a
private recreational facility is different from a personal recreational
facility. He asked the Board to
interpret the matter to protect the private property rights to the individuals
they sold the lots to.
District Commissioner Maloy said the Board
had a similar situation with a home occupation on whether swimming pool lessons
could be done and the language was poorly written in that instance too. The codes are based to protect the health,
welfare, and safety, and he doesn’t see any harm in allowing a boat dock or
boat house. He said staff’s intention
is to relook at the language anyway and make it clear. He, therefore, believes the benefit of the
doubt should be given to the property owner.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by
Commissioner Van Der Weide, to reverse the Board of Adjustment’s decision to
affirm the Planning Manager’s denial of a boat house and dock permit, prior to
the construction of a single-family residence in the A-10, A-5 & A-3 (Rural
Zoning Classification Districts); David E. Axel, Appellant; Decision on Appeal,
as shown on page _______.
Under discussion, Chairman McLain discussed
the next step for the appellant to take.
Districts 1, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Morris abstained from voting.
COUNTY
MANAGER’S BRIEFING
David Gregory, Solid Waste Manager,
addressed the Board to present some ideas Solid Waste is developing
particularly relative to the tip fee structure.
Mr. Grace explained that if a city were to
enter into an agreement with the County to guarantee that their waste would
come to the County’s landfill, they would get preferred pricing at a $3
discount ($3 per ton reduction in tip fees).
If the cities decided not to enter into agreements with the County, they
would pay the regular tip fee rate for the use of the landfill.
Chairman McLain said he thinks they would
want a binding contract over a period of time.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr.
Grace said he has looked at the financial impact and believes they can provide
this kind of discount and still be in good shape financially.
Commissioner Morris discussed if the city
were to break the agreement then they would pay back the reduced fee amount.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr.
Grace said the County would be implementing the same $3 reduction to the
unincorporated areas beginning October 1, 2003. He said everybody who makes the commitment will get the same
reduced price, commercial and residential.
-------
Chairman McLain advised the Board to be
aware that Items #59 and #62 on tonight’s agenda have requested
continuances. The Board voiced no
objections to continuing those items.
Commissioner Morris informed the Board that
he had a request from an individual to move Item #55 from the afternoon’s
agenda to tonight’s meeting. He
discussed this with the County Attorney and they determined if the item were
moved, it would be 10:30 or 11:00 p.m. before it was heard, so he recommended
not moving the item. Although tonight’s
agenda has now been changed, there is still no guarantee of the time the item
would be heard.
-------
The Board recessed at 11:44 a.m., reconvening at 1:30 p.m., with all Commissioners and all other Officials, with the exception of Deputy Clerk Carylon Cohen who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Sandy McCann, who were present at the Opening Session.
Motion
by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley to authorize the
filing of the proofs of publication for this meeting’s scheduled public
hearings.
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof
of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to
consider the Seminole County Port Authority proposed Budget for Fiscal Year
2003/04, received and filed.
David
Lanier, Chairman of SCOPA, addressed the Board to present the Seminole County
Port Authority’s Budget for FY 03/04 (copy was received and filed). He advised that this budget was unanimously
ratified by the SCOPA Board of Directors at their June 26, 2003 meeting;
however, there was a 4-3 vote on the budget initially with the minority side
objecting to the administrative costs in the budget. He further advised that in the spirit of compromise, the three
objectors voted to ratify the budget in total with his assurance that he would
publicly acknowledge their objections to the BCC. He reviewed that included in the administrative costs is a 5% salary
increase and a 13% health and life insurance increase for the Administrative
Assistant. There is no salary increase
included in the budget for the Executive Director. He further reviewed the budget, advising SCOPA will be
contributing $300,000 to the County for economic development.
No
one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Commissioner
Van Der Weide stated things are looking good at SCOPA and the County
appreciates the $300,000 contribution. He added that hopefully next year that
contribution can be increased.
Commissioner
Henley congratulated Mr. Lanier and Executive Director, Dennis Dolgner, for the
excellent job they continue to do. He
reminded the Board that they will be holding a work session with SCOPA, and the
Commissioners need to determine where they believe the Port will be going in
the future.
Commissioner
Morris commended SCOPA for their good work.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide
to adopt the Seminole County Port Authority Budget for FY 2003/2004, as
described in the proof of publication.
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Upon
inquiry by Chairman McLain, Mr. Grace advised the work session with the Port
will be scheduled in October.
Commissioner
Morris suggested scheduling the work session at 3:00 p.m. on the day of a
regular BCC meeting.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a major amendment to PCD (Planned Commercial Development) located on the southwest corner of SR 426 and Chapman Road Walgreen’s, Preston Bolt, received and filed.
Planner Cathleen Consoli addressed the Board to present the request, advising the applicant is requesting to amend the PCD, formally known as Polystar Industries, to include commercial uses for a proposed pharmacy. The request includes a revision to the approved preliminary master plan and a change to the uses permitted on the site to uses found in the C-2 (Commercial Retail District) rather than the M-1A (Very Light Industrial District) uses as depicted on the 1998 preliminary master plan. She further advised the LPA/P&Z voted unanimously to recommend approval of the request with the staff conditions, plus the condition to provide opaque screening adjacent to the north property line to protect the existing home from light intrusion. She stated the applicant has requested that the word “Walgreen’s” be replaced with “pharmacy”. She added that staff recommends approval of the request with the following conditions: (1) Building setbacks per D.O.; (2) Landscape buffers per D.O.; (3) Permitted uses are those permitted and conditional uses found in the C-2 zoning district plus self service gasoline pumps as an accessory use, restaurants and drive-in banks (The following uses are prohibited: adult entertainment establishments and alcoholic beverage establishments including bars and cocktail lounges, new and used car lots, hotels & motels, flea markets, self service laundries, veterinary kennels or clinics, dry cleaning plants, bottling and distribution plants and boat sales or boat service facilities); (4) Alcoholic beverage sales may only be incidental in nature such as convenience stores or bona fide restaurant uses; (5) Restaurants may only operate between the hours 7 a.m. until 11 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 7 a.m. until 1 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays; (6) Deliveries may only be received between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 p.m.; (7) The pharmacy site may be open 24 hours a day, seven days a week; (8) The site shall provide 30% open space; (9) A 5-foot sidewalk shall be constructed along Chapman Road the entire length of the parcel; (10) Only one access point to the subject property is permitted to cross the Cross Seminole Trail (access point shall be located at the pre-existing trail crossing location); (11) A 10-foot buffer is required adjacent to the trail corridor on the east property line with 4 canopy trees and 4 under story trees per every 100 linear feet; (12) Gas canopies shall have recessed lighting so that lighting fixtures shall not be visible below the horizontal plane of the canopy; (13) Provide opaque landscaping buffer adjacent to the northern property line to limit light intrusion into existing homes; and (14) Final Master Plan shall adhere to all applicable requirements of the Land Development Code and Vision 2020.
Upon inquiry by Chairman McLain, Don Fisher, Director of Planning & Development, advised staff has been working on an extensive inventory of land uses and will be bringing those to the Board in early November.
Meredith Pickens, representing the applicant, addressed the Board to advise they concur with the staff report and listed conditions in the D.O.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
District Commissioner Maloy recommended approval.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Morris to approve a request for a major amendment of a PCD located on the southwest corner of SR 426 and Chapman Road, as described in the proof of publication, Preston Bolt of Chapman 426 Development LLC, based on staff findings and the Development Order, as shown on page _______.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
LAND USE AMENDMENT &
REZONING,
R&F INVESTMENTS, LLC, WILLIAM D. RAY, JR.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a Small Scale Land Use Amendment from Recreation to Industrial and Rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to C-3 (General Commercial & Wholesale District) for approximately 4.5 acres for the Bill Ray Nissan Car Dealership expansion located on North U.S. 17-92, R&R Investments, LLC, William D. Ray Jr., received and filed.
Planner, Cathleen Consoli, presented the request, advising the applicant wants to develop the site to allow for additional parking and expansion of his facilities. At the June 24, 2003 BCC meeting, the Board directed staff to proceed with the land exchange. The C-3 zoning classification is needed to permit car repair on this portion of the property. The proposed land exchange will result in an increase of County-owned land within the Spring Hammock. Buffers are required adjacent to the wetlands to protect the adjacent Spring Hammock Preserve. She stated that the rezoning and land use amendment is the first step in the process of the land swap. She further advised that the P&Z recommended approval of the request by a 3-2 vote and it was requested by them that additional precautions be taken in order to assure that run-off from the proposed development is treated because of its proximity to the Spring Hammock Preserve. She added that the staff recommends approval of the request.
Attorney Jamie Seaman, 28 W. Central Blvd., Orlando, addressed the Board to advise she represents the adjacent property owner (James Bryan). She stated there is a 40-foot access easement that has been providing access to her client and she wants to make sure that easement will not be eliminated or changed by the Board’s action today.
District Commissioner Morris stated the parcel to the north is also coming in for approval and he would like to see some kind of cross access agreement worked out with all three property owners.
Polly Miller, League of Women Voters, addressed the Board to speak in opposition, stating they are requesting Mr. Ray withdraw this request because it is in violation of the November 6, 1990 bond referendum that asked Seminole County voters to approve the bonds for use for natural lands. She said the Spring Hammock should be protected and the property the County is proposing to swap is part of the natural lands purchased by the County. She submitted for the Record a listing of bond referendums.
Nancy Bowers, 3052 Foxhill Road, Apopka, addressed the Board to speak in opposition, stating she is involved in saving the County’s natural lands. She said that the legislature has done a good job of amending Florida’s elections laws. However, what has not been addressed is a failure by office holders to follow the wishes of the voters once ballots have been counted. Case in point: the high-speed rail and the class size laws. She said now there is the Spring Hammock affair. She stated she does not believe it is right for the Board to chop off 4.5 acres of natural lands to accommodate a businessman’s desire to enlarge his parking lot.
Sarah McClendon, 250 Spring Lake Hills Drive, addressed the Board to read her comments into the Record voicing her objections to the land use amendment and rezoning.
Fred Harden, 174 Wekiva Park Drive, Chairman of the Seminole County Natural Lands Committee, addressed the Board to state if this is approved, he would like to see a 10-to-1 swap for natural lands.
Bill Ray, applicant, addressed the Board to advise they are making this request because they need more parking in order to improve the front of their dealership. He stated that the land behind them has been cleared by the State within the last 12 months because of a pine beetle infestation.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Written Comment Form from Charles W. Read was received and filed.
Speaker Comment Forms were received and filed.
District Commissioner Morris stated he would like to clear up some misconceptions. He said that the County has been very successful with their natural lands program and one of the reasons is because they have been able to stretch their money by doing swaps such as what is proposed here. He said exchanging land by a 10-to-1 ratio is for wetlands only and not for regular land exchanges. He further said that this will not be a reduction in natural lands, but an increase in acres (almost three times as much). He stated that the Board has done nothing but expand natural lands.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to adopt Ordinance #2003-38, as shown on page _______, approving a Small Scale Land Use Amendment from Recreation to Industrial; and adopt Ordinance #2003-39, as shown on page _______, approving rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to C-3 (General Commercial & Wholesale District) for the Bill Ray Nissan dealership expansion, for approximately 4.5 acres, on north U.S. 17-92, as described in the proof of publication, R&R Investments, LLC, William D. Ray, Jr.
Under discussion, Commissioner Morris stated he believes that when Mr. Ray comes in for site plan approval, he will do his best to protect the buffer around the property. He added that this will not affect Mr. Bryant’s access.
County Attorney, Robert McMillan, confirmed that nothing the Board does today deletes Mr. Bryant’s access.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Mr. Grace advised the land exchange agreement will come back to the Board within the next 45 to 60 days.
REZONE FROM A-1 TO PLI,
KID’S HOUSE OF SEMINOLE COUNTY
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a request to rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PLI (Public Lands & Institutions) for approximately 2.3 acres located on the north side of Narcissus Avenue, approximately 300 feet west of Hester Avenue, Kid’s House of Seminole County, received and filed.
Planner, Cathleen Consoli, presented the request, advising Kid’s House of Seminole County is a non-residential counseling center for children, which is funded by a variety of sources, including the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office. Due to an increase in needed services, Kid’s House wishes to expand its facility upon the adjacent property, which is also owned by the County. She reviewed that the BCC directed staff to proceed with the administrative rezoning process for the subject parcel. She further advised that the P&Z unanimously recommended approval and the staff has no objections.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
District Commissioner McLain recommended approval.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy to adopt Ordinance #2003-40, as shown on page _______, approving rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to PLI (Public Lands & Institutions) for approximately 2.3 acres located on the north side of Narcissus Avenue, approximately 300 feet west of Hester Avenue, as described in the proof of publication, Kid’s House of Seminole County, based on staff findings.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
REZONE FROM A-1 TO PLI,
MELLICH BLENDEN ENGINEERING
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider a request to rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PLI (Public Lands & Institutions) for approximately 2.3 acres located on the north side of Narcissus Avenue, approximately 700 feet west of Monroe Road, Mellich Blenden Engineering, Steve Mellich, received and filed.
Francisco Torregrosa, Planner, addressed the Board to present the request, advising the applicant requests the rezoning to accommodate a social services facility. He stated the land use for the property is HIP, which allows the proposed PLI zoning classification. He further advised staff recommends approval of the rezoning.
Upon inquiry by the Chairman, the applicant’s representative advised he agrees with the staff recommendations.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
District Commissioner McLain recommended approval.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris to adopt Ordinance #2003-41, as shown on page _______, approving rezoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to PLI (Public Lands and Institutions) for approximately 2.3 acres located on the north side of Narcissus Avenue, approximately 700 feet west of Monroe Road, as described in the proof of publication, Mellich Blenden Engineering, Steve Mellich.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
AMENDMENT TO HIBC DRI,
MIRANDA FITZGERALD
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider an amendment to the Third Amended and Restated Development Order for the Heathrow International Business Center (HIBC) Development of Regional Impact (DRI); consideration of a rezoning to PUD zoning; and consideration of the First Amendment to Third Amended Restated Commitments, Classification and District Description and PUD Final Master Plan, for property located on the west side of I-4, immediately north of the I-4 and Lake Mary Boulevard Interchange, on properties extending north along International Parkway to CR 46A (portions also known as H.E. Thomas Jr. Parkway), Miranda Fitzgerald, received and filed.
Chairman McLain advised of a request from Colonial Realty to continue this item for two weeks. He further advised that he is in receipt of a Fax (copy received & filed) from Attorney Fitzgerald asking that if the item is continued, she would like to have it deferred until the 7:00 p.m. portion of the Board’s agenda and is opposed to continuing it for two weeks.
Planner, Tony Matthews, addressed the Board to advise staff is recommending approval of both the First Amendment to the Third Amended and Restated D.O. and the proposed rezoning.
Joseph Sarnovsky, representing Seminole Community College, addressed the Board to state a traffic study was done early on and Colonial Properties did sign off on it. He further stated the project is moving along nicely and they would request the Board to only continue this until this evening’s meeting. He added that there is a Board of Directors’ meeting next week where they are expected to engage an architect. He explained that this parcel was donated to the college on the condition that they use it for college purposes.
Chairman McLain stated that as District Commissioner, he did not find out there was a problem until this morning.
Attorney Meredith Pickens, representing Colonial Properties, addressed the Board to state they are not opposed to the college’s plans, but there are a number of issues that need to be resolved before the Board acts on the request. She said the main issue they are concerned with is traffic and they would like SCC to be responsible for their fair share of traffic improvements. Also, she said that she knows SCC does not have a problem with granting the access to the lift station, but they would like to see that as a condition of the D.O. They would also like to see the number of apartments stipulated in the PUD documents.
Commissioner Morris reminded the Board that this property has a contractual element that if it is not under construction by the year 2005, the land will revert back to Colonial Properties.
Attorney Pickens stated Colonial Properties has no intention of stalling this development in order to recover the land.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request Form was received and filed.
District Commissioner McLain stated this problem has come up at the last minute and he believes it is important to start off the relationship between HIBC and Colonial Properties on a good foot. Therefore, he recommended continuing it until the September 9th BCC meeting.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris to continue until September 9, 2003, at 1:30 p.m., consideration of an amendment to the Third Amended and Restated Development Order for the Heathrow International Business Center (HIBC) Development of Regional Impact (DRI); consideration of a rezoning to PUD zoning; and consideration of the First Amendment to Third Amended Restated Commitments, Classification and District Description and PUD Final Master Plan, for property located on the west side of I-4, immediately north of the I-4 and Lake Mary Boulevard Interchange, on properties extending north along International Parkway to CR 46A (portions also known as H.E. Thomas Jr. Parkway), as desribed in the proof of publication, Miranda Fitzgerald.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS
Commissioner Maloy commended County staff for their promptness in placing warning signs on Brooks Lane due to the flooding.
-------
Commissioner Morris and the Board wished Chairman McLain a Happy Birthday.
-------
Commissioner Van Der Weide discussed flooding problems in his district and advised staff has been working on finding solutions.
-------
Commissioner Henley also discussed some flooding in his district and said some work is being done; but he hopes they will be able to get a stormwater authority implemented to deal with this problem county-wide.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Commissioner Henley advised the Port Authority will be meeting with SCC to discuss what is happening with the incubator program. He added that he believes this is something the BCC needs to discuss with the Port Authority during their work session.
-------
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated at the last TDC meeting a few Board members expressed their dislike with continuing to fund the Central Florida Zoo at the level the County has been funding them. He requested staff to research the original ballot language to determine the percentage of TDC funds that must go to the Zoo. He said he believes it is important for the TDC members to understand the process.
Mr. Grace stated he will do the research and report back to the Board.
The following Communications and/or Reports
were “received and filed”:
1. Letter dated 8/5/03 to
Chairman McLain from Andrea & Brian Ledford re: flooding in Bay Lagoon
subdivision from joint-use retention pond by Woodlands Elementary School.
2. E-mail dated 8/12/03 to
BCC from David H. Moreton re: excessive water usage.
3. Notice of 8/19/03 Senior
Resource Alliance Meeting and Update.
4. Memorandum dated 8/5/03
to BCC from County Manager Grace re: Capital Project Fund transfer, $214,200
for Little Econlockhatchee River Basin stormwater construction services.
5. Notice of 8/22/03 Envision
Seminole board meeting.
6. Facsimile dated 8/12/03
to BCC from Meredith H. Pickens, Shutts & Bowen LLP, re: request for
continuation to the Spring 2004 Cycle of the Rockwell/United Assoc. Properties
project on Long Pond Rd.
7. Letter dated 8/11/03 to
Chairman McLain from John W. Koenig, O-Force, re: economic development and
workforce update.
8. Notice of 8/20/03
Seminole County Port Authority (SCOPA) board meeting.
9. Letter dated 8/7/03 to
Chairman McLain from Virginia W. Fittje, Carvica, Inc., re: Halifax Trauma
Center funding. (cc: County Manager, Deputy County Managers, County Attorney,
Acting Fiscal Services Director)
10. Seminole County Health Dept./FL Dept. of Health quarterly report
for 3rd quarter 2002-03.
11. Letter dated 8/14/03 to Chairman McLain from Diane Pickett
Culpepper, Bright House Networks, re: changes to digital cable Pay-Per-View
lineup.
12. Metro Orlando Economic Development Commission (EDC) July 2003
activities highlights.
13. Notice of 8/20/03 Sanford Waterfront Master Plan Steering Committee
board meeting.
14. Notice of Seminole County Board of Adjustment 8/25/03 public
hearing re: 171 Brightview Dr. variance.
15. Letter dated 7/21/03 to Chairman McLain from Wendell Springfield
re: opposition to Banana Lake Rd. rezone request. (cc: County Manager, Planning
& Development Director)
16. Facsimiles, e-mails (various dates) to BCC re: opposition to rezone
application on Long Pond Rd. from: James Adams; Sherri Chiaro; Joe &
Delecia Colozzo; John & Kathleen Chiaro; Mr. & Mrs. Danvers; and Linda
& Melvin Aschenbach.
17. Notice of City of Lake Mary 9/3/03 public hearing re: James F.
Simmons variance for 356 Sun Oaks Ct. (cc: County Manager, Planning &
Development Director, Planning Manager, Elections Supervisor, Property Appraiser)
18. Facsimile & e-mail (various dates) to BCC re: opposition to
Spring Hammock land swap with Bill Ray Nissan from: Dr. Beverly Baird Boothe
and Michele J. Wierzbowski.
19. Notice of 8/22/03 US 17-92
Redevelopment Planning Agency (RPA) meeting.
20. Copy of memorandum dated 8/15/03 to Sandy McCann, Commission
Records, from Becky Noggle, Environmental Services, re: Submission into County
Records.
21. Copy of letter dated 8/15/03 (with attachment) to Bill Suber,
Property Appraiser, from Darrell W. Smith, FL Dept. of Revenue, re: 2003/04
Seminole County Property Appraiser budget.
22. Notice of 8/25/03 City of Sanford public hearing re: annexation of
property between Poinsetta Dr./Rose Dr. and Sanford Ave./Palmway. (cc: County
Manager, Planning & Development Director, Planning Manager, Elections
Supervisor, Property Appraiser)
23. Notice of 8/25/03 City of Sanford public hearing re: annexation of
property between Ridgewood Ln./Ridgewood Ave. and Ridgewood Ave./Hardy Ave.
(cc: County Manager, Planning & Development Director, Planning Manager,
Elections Supervisor, Property Appraiser)
24. Notice of 8/21/03 Seminole County Public Safety Coordinating
Council meeting.
25. Copy of memorandum dated 8/18/03 (with attachment) to Ken Roberts,
Public Safety Director, from County Manager Grace re: letter of appreciation
from Phil Penland, Altamonte Springs City Manager for Public Safety personnel
assistance associated with the Red, Hot & Boom event on 7/3/03.
26. Parks & Recreation Contracts, as shown on page _______, for
Services: Brandon Booth (Slow-pitch Softball Scorekeeper) and Greg Reynolds
(Slow-pitch Softball Umpire).
27. Facsimile dated 8/21/03 to BCC from Susan Figurski re: support of a
county-operated spay & neuter clinic.
28. Notice of 9/9/03 Seminole County BCC public hearing re: rezone
request for Tuscawilla Centre. (cc: Property Appraiser)
29. Notice of 9/3/03 Seminole County Land Planning Agency/Planning
& Zoning Commission (LPA/P&Z) public hearing re: major amendment to
preliminary master plan for Gassey Jack’s PCD. (cc: Property Appraiser)
30. Copy of memorandum dated 8/22/03 to Sandy McCann, Commission
Records, from Becky Noggle, Environmental Services, re: Submission into County
Records.
31. Letter dated 8/25/03 (with attachment) to Chairman McLain from
Dennis R. Weaver re: rezone request for Tallman Mews/W. Gabriella Ln.
32. Copies of letters dated 8/11/03 from Ken Roberts, Public Safety
Director, re: appreciation of donations to Animal Services Division to: Bianna
Roberts; Abigail Anderson; Peter Lepuschitz; Cornelia Dietzel; Bonnie Basten;
and Linda Nelson.
33. Orlando/Orange County Convention & Visitors Bureau update for
August 2003.
34. Notice of FL Dept. of Agriculture & Consumer Services Regional
Stakeholder Workshops Schedule.
35. Copy of National Assoc. of Counties (NACo) 2002/03 Annual Report.
36. Letter dated 8/20/03 to BCC from Jeno F. Paulucci re: density in
Celery Ave. proposed land use amendment.
37. Copy of letter dated 8/19/03 to Colleen Rotella, Community
Resources Manager, from Andrew Van Gaale, Sanford Planning Director, re:
Goldsboro Front Porch Reading Academy FY 2002/03 CDBG Interlocal Agreement
extension.
38. Letter dated 8/15/03 to BCC from Gloria E. Wade, Protectors of
Companion Animals, Inc., re: invitation to 10/7/03 animal protection symposium.
39. Copy of memorandum dated 8/15/03 (with attachment) to Ken Roberts,
Public Safety Director, from County Manager Grace re: letter of appreciation
from Al Grieshaber, Sanford City Manager, for Public Safety personnel assistance
associated with the rescue of Sanford Utilities employee Kelly Gibson on
8/5/03.
40. E-mail press release dated 8/18/03 to BCC from Sally Sherman,
Deputy County Manager, re: selection of Lisa H. Spriggs, CPA, as new Fiscal
Services Director.
41. Copy of letter dated 8/12/03 to Guy Maxey, Chairman, FL Assoc. of
Counties (FAC), from Randy Hatch, Suwannee County Commission Chairman, re: FAC
Counties at Risk Study.
42. E-mail dated 8/24/03 to BCC from Jeanne Brennan re: opposition to
Spring Hammock land swap with Bill Ray Nissan.
43. Notice of 9/4/03 City of Sanford public hearing re: property at
3085 St. Johns Parkway to establish outdoor storage of automobiles. (cc: County
Manager, Planning & Development Director, Planning Manager, Property
Appraiser)
44. Letter dated 8/20/03 (with attachment) to BCC from FL Senator Anna
Cowin re: legislative budget requests for 2004 legislative session. (cc: BCC,
County Managers, County Attorney, Fiscal Services)
45. Letter dated 8/21/03 (with attachment) to Chairman McLain from
Harold W. Barley, MetroPlan Orlando, re: designation of Orlando Sanford Airport
as an “Emerging” Airport in FL Dept. of Transportation’s Strategic Intermodal
System (SIS) Plan. (cc: BCC, County Managers)
46. Notice of 9/3/03 Seminole County Land Planning Agency/Planning
& Zoning Commission (LPA/P&Z) public hearing re: rezone of Shangri-La
Ln. (cc: Elections Supervisor, Property Appraiser)
47. E-mails and facsimiles (various dates) to BCC re: opposition to
construction of 100 parking spaces at the E.E. Williamson Rd. trailhead from:
Quentin (Bob) Beitel; Joseph Abbott, PE; Patricia & Arthur Kemp; Judy Neri;
Jamie Burbidge; Ted & Nancy Williams; Teressa & Robert Tarter; Debra L.
Wert; Brenda Dooley; Ed Gilbert, President of Markham Meadows HOA; Kenneth
Steigerwald; Dr. Larry Duffy; and Roger Dooley.
48. E-mail dated 8/20/03 to BCC from Richard Fanning & family re:
support of parking area at the E.E. Williamson Rd. trailhead.
49. Form letter facsimiles (various dates) to BCC re: opposition to
construction of 100 parking spaces and/or support of limiting parking spaces to
maximum of 25 at the E.E. Williamson Rd. trailhead from: Bridget Rivera; Janet
E. McCulloh; Ralph A. Lang; Mitch Arnold; M. Victoria Campbell; Chris
Harrington; Nigel Bradley; Beth Jordan; Frank Karczewski; Farrell & Imogene
Henegar; Roger Dooley; Glenda Hachenberger; and Elizabeth Grant-Henderson.
COUNTY MANAGER’S REPORT
Mr. Grace requested direction on the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Sanford for the Convention Center. He advised he has spoken with the new City Manager and they both agree the Interlocal should be terminated.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to terminate the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Sanford for the Convention Center.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Mr. Grace advised the first BCC meeting in November falls on November 11th, which is Veteran’s Day. He suggested canceling that meeting and having only one meeting in November because the second meeting is two days before Thanksgiving.
The Board, by unanimous consensus, agreed to cancel the BCC meetings on November 11 and November 25, 2003, and scheduling one meeting in November to be held November 18, 2003.
-------
Mr. Grace distributed the outstanding LYNX budget issues (copy received & filed) and requested direction. He said the three issues are: new Medicaid - $185,000; new healthcare cost - $30,564; and the new CAD-AVL - $100,000.
Commissioner Henley stated that in consideration of their recent efforts, he would be willing to fund these items for this year only.
The Board, by unanimous consensus, agreed to fund the three outstanding issues for LYNX for this year only.
Commissioner Henley suggested Mr. Grace contact the School Board to see if they would be interested in working with LYNX to supplement their fleet.
-------
The meeting was recessed at 3:15 p.m., reconvening at 7:01 p.m., this same date, with all Commissioners and all other Officials, (with Deputy County Manager Sally Sherman replacing County Manager Kevin Grace), with the exception of Deputy Clerk Sandy McCann, who was replaced by Deputy Clerk Eva Roach, who were present at the Opening Session.
and Henry Schumacher
Proof
of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to
consider Large Scale Land Use Amendment from Suburban Estates to Low Density
Residential to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for 60 +/-
acres located on two tracts of land (1) north of Myrtle Street, approximately
0.25 miles east of Noland Road; and (2) south of Myrtle Street and west of
Noland Road, Ann Esterson and Henry Schumacher, received and filed.
Chairman
McLain stated staff has received a request from the applicant to continue this
item.
No
one spoke in support or in opposition of the continuance.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris
to continue to the Spring 2004 Amendment Cycle, request for a Large Scale Land
Use Amendment from Suburban Estates to Low Density Residential to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for 60 +/- acres located on two tracts of
land (1) north of Myrtle Street, approximately 0.25 miles east of Noland Road;
and (2) south of Myrtle Street and west of Noland Road, as described in the
proof of publication, Ann Esterson and Henry Schumacher.
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page
_______, calling for a public hearing to consider transmittal of the proposed
Text Amendments to the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan (Vision 2020 Plan) to
ensure compatible land uses adjacent to the Orlando Sanford International
Airport, Seminole County, received and filed.
Tony
Matthews, Planning, addressed the Board to state in 2002 the Federal Aviation
Administration approved the Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) for the Orlando
Sanford International Airport. The NCP
included eight recommended land use measures that would involve changes to the
City of Sanford and Seminole County Comprehensive Plan and Land Development
regulations. The purpose of these
measures is to: (1) Reduce existing
incompatible land uses around Orlando Sanford International Airport; (2)
Prevent the introduction of additional incompatible land uses; and (3) Protect
long-term noise compatibility with aircraft activity at the Orlando Sanford
International Airport. He stated staff
recommends transmitting the proposed text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
(Vision 2020 Plan), with staff findings.
The Land Planning Agency (LPA) recommended approval of the request.
Larry
Dale, Orlando Sanford International Airport, addressed the Board to state he
agrees with the presentation. He said
he will be happy to answer any questions.
Mr.
Dale explained for Commissioner Morris the last sentence of Section D2 of the
Orlando Sanford International Airport Text Amendments. Discussion ensued between Mr. Dale and
Commissioners Morris and Henley relating to that language.
Mr.
Matthews stated staff has been trying to work closely with the Airport
Authority, the City of Sanford and FAA and they already have adopted similar
policies. He stated what staff is
concerned about is the people who build homes there and the whole issue of home
ownership as opposed to rental property.
Most of the tenants are not necessarily investing in that property for
the long term.
No
one else spoke in support or in opposition.
District
Commissioner McLain recommended approval to transmit the proposed text
amendments to the DCA.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide
to transmit to the DCA the proposed
Text Amendments to the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan (Vision 2020 Plan) to
ensure compatible land uses adjacent to the Orlando Sanford International
Airport, as described in the proof of publication, Seminole County.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider Small Scale Land Use Amendment from Suburban Estates (SE) to Planned Development (PD) and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); located on the west side of I-4 approximately 600 feet south of E.E. Williamson Road, Seminole County, received and filed.
Chairman McLain
stated staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed request.
No one spoke in support or in opposition of
the continuance.
Motion by Commissioner
Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris to continue to September 9,
2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, request to consider
Small Scale Land Use Amendment from Suburban Estates (SE) to Planned
Development (PD) and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit
Development); located on the west side of I-4 approximately 600 feet south of
E.E. Williamson Road, as described in the proof of publication, Seminole County.
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Proof
of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to
consider request to Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1AAA (Single Family
Dwelling District) on 5.1 acres located on the north side of Gabriella Lane, ½ mile
west of Tuskawilla Road, Jay Barfield, received and filed.
Jeff
Hopper, Planning, addressed the Board to present the request as outlined in the
agenda memorandum. He reviewed the
adjacent zoning designations as well as the lot compatibility analysis. He stated staff recommends approval of the
request.
Mr.
Hopper discussed with Commissioner Maloy how long the Low Density Residential
land use has been in effect and why there is different zoning on the property
to the east (Kings Cove Subdivision).
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. Hopper advised the lots along the south are
probably configured more along the lines of R-1AAA and all of them are
developed. The calculation only
recognizes zoning.
Hugh
Harling, Harling Locklin & Associates, addressed the Board to display an
aerial map of the proposed and surrounding properties. He stated he is the engineer and planner for
Mr. Barfield’s project and he concurs with staff comments. This project is both consistent and
compatible with the Comp Plan and Vision 2020.
He said he concurs with the calculations that have been done with the
compatibility matrix. He pointed out
that the lots along Gabriella and Bear Gulley Lake are deeper and they are
probably in the neighborhood of 1/3 to ½ acres in size and some of them are
larger than one acre. He displayed a
flood prone map and he indicated where Bear Gulley Lake and Gabriella Lane are
located. He stated if the land between
the 100-year flood plain and the normal high water line is taken out of the calculation,
those lots fall in the 1/3 or ½ acre classification. The residents have indicated that they would be willing to rezone
their own property to RCE, which is one acre.
If this is done under the County’s definition, those would be
nonconforming lots and that will create a very heavy burden on them. It would create an inconsistency with the
County code for zoning purposes. He
said he concurs with R-1AAA zoning and he has committed to a 2,200 sq. ft.
house size minimum and a maximum density of eight lots. He indicated on the map where two
subdivisions tie in at the intersection of Tuskawilla and Gabriella Lane. He said all of the traffic from those
subdivisions comes to that intersection.
If the traffic at that intersection is added with the eight lots, they
are approximately 3.4% of the peak hour traffic. This is a very insignificant increase of traffic. He stated they will be protecting the
natural resources of this property as well as a lot of the trees. The FLU 11 section of the Comp Plan only
applies to the Little Wekiva and east Seminole County. He said they will be protecting the street
trees and enhancing them according to the Code. The water quality will be protected. He stated he feels that putting this particular development in this
location and at this density will protect the neighborhood.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. Harling advised there are no plans to offer
access to Bear Gulley Lake.
Upon
further inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Robert McMillan, County Attorney,
addressed the Board to advise a conventional zoning district has the standards
and the only commitments to be accepted beyond those are voluntary and the
zoning districts cannot be redefined.
By putting a cap on it would basically be a contract zoning.
Jay
Barfield, applicant, addressed the Board to state the contract limits them to
eight lots and he has agreed to that.
He stated he has agreed to save as many trees as possible. R-1AAA zoning is a 13,500 sq. ft. lot and
their eight lots would be between 20,000 to 21,000 sq. ft. He stated he feels that this project is
compatible with the neighborhood. He
said the neighborhood will be named Tallman Mews and the price range of the
homes will be a minimum of $400,000. He
displayed photographs (received and filed) of homes that they have built in the
Winter Park and Maitland areas.
Jack
Krips, 7756 Waunalto Court, addressed the Board to review a brief synopsis and
history of the site. He stated Mr.
Saunders owns the property in question and he has worked over 20 years in
trying to keep up this property. He
displayed and reviewed photographs (all received and filed) of a pond with a
fountain, the subject property, a closer view of the pond and the trees located
on this property.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. McMillan advised the Board cannot impose any
conditions. The Board can either
approve or deny the rezone.
Ray
Saunders, 4141 Gabriella Lane, addressed the Board to state ½ million people
move into this state every year and they deserve to live in housing that is
capable with their ability to pay and lifestyle. He stated he has spent a lot of time and money to beautify this
property and he cannot maintain it any longer.
County
Attorney, Robert McMillan, left the meeting at this time.
Mr.
Saunders stated he lives across the street and he doesn’t want to diminish his
home’s value. He stated Mr. Barfield
has built beautiful homes and he is sure that Tallman Mews development will be
a fine asset to the community.
Mr.
McMillan reentered the meeting at this time.
Attorney
Alison Yurko, office of Thomas Callon, addressed the Board to submit and review
a copy of the Future Land Use map. She
reviewed the character of the neighborhood, access, buildable property, and the
conservation area and lake. She
displayed photographs (not received and filed) of homes and submitted an
Addendum to the Contract on Gabriella, a potential motion, and Vision 2020
Comprehensive Plan Goals, Objectives and Policies (all received and
filed). She reviewed issues relating to
5-acre tracts, 2½-acre lots, ¾ acre lots, the pond, Gabriella Lane being a dead
end road, and single access point. She
continued by reviewing the obligations of the buyer and seller as well as the
Addendum to Contract on Gabriella. She
concluded by reviewing Design Elements #2 (Preserve and Protect Neighborhood),
#13 (The County shall preserve and enhance the beauty and livability of the
neighborhoods) and #18 (Neighborhood should be designed to establish an
identity in value that motivates residents to protect them). She said 15 people have signed a Petition
(not received and filed) voicing their concern about a formula that was lobbied
for by the Home Builders Association.
Dennis
Weaver, 4212 Gabriella Lane, addressed the Board to speak with regard to him
and Mr. Saunders trying to get development in this area that would be more
amiable to the neighborhood. He stated
Mr. Saunders has worked very hard for the past 20 years in trying to work with
development that is compatible to the area.
He said he would rather see five homes on the property instead of eight.
Commissioner
Morris left the meeting at this time.
Lou
Reutter, 4220 Gabriella Lane, addressed the Board to state he just wanted to
confirm that the land adjacent to this property is ¾ acres and he is opposed to
the rezoning.
Laurie
Carbone, 4269 Gabriella Lane, addressed the Board to state she is speaking on
behalf of herself and her husband. She
stated she has lived on the property for 3½ years and she has 5-year-old
triplets. The things that attracted
them to the area are being threatened now.
There is very little traffic and very little noise on the street.
Michael
Manglardi, 4181 Gabriella Lane, addressed the Board to state he, his wife and 4
children live in this area and they are concerned about their
neighborhood. He stated he understands
and fully recognize that growth will occur there, but he would like the Board
to make it consistent with the neighborhood.
He said his mother lives next door to him and both of them own approximately
six acres. Autumn Glen, Kings Cove and
other subdivisions don’t dictate his neighborhood by a formula.
Nick
Helyer, 4111 Gabriella Lane, addressed the Board to state he has lived on
Gabriella Lane for 14 years and he happens to know that his total land area is
1.35 acres. He spoke with regard to an
increase of traffic to the area. There
are 17 properties in his neighborhood and two of them have lot sizes just over
¾ of an acre and the remainder range from 1.2 to 5 acres. At the request of Mr. Helyer, over 10 people
stood up showing their opposition to the request.
Commissioner
Morris reentered the meeting at this time.
Michael
Bibliowicz, 4399 Gabriella Lane, addressed the Board to state the reason he
moved to the Gabriella neighborhood is due to the size of the community and
lots and the rural feeling he gets. He
stated he feels the density should not be increased for the community just for
the sake of increasing it. He said he
is not opposed to increasing the number of homes in the area, but within
reason. He added the average homes in
the area are one acre and all he is asking for is a fair number that will fit
in his neighborhood.
No
one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker
Request Forms were received and filed.
Mr.
Harling stated the 100-year flood elevation is 53 and the normal high water
line is probably 51. That land is not
included in the calculation. The
residents need to be cautious about rezoning all of the property to a lower
intensity zoning in order to create a lower intensity item on the books. They may create a nonconforming use on some
of the lots. He stated he still
believes that eight lots in a density of 1.3 acres is compatible as well as the
traffic.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. Harling advised he believes they are
creating a park-like pond on the property and the eight lots will utilize the
bridge across that pond. He stated that
no one has not told him that there will be access to Bear Gulley Lake.
Mr.
West explained for Commissioner Henley the definition of neighborhood. He also reviewed design principles of Policy
3.3.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. West advised he has received a copy of
Attorney Yurko’s information. He stated
the design element doesn’t say that all the lots in the neighborhood are the
same size and it doesn’t mandate that you have to have one-acre lots on the
north side of Gabriella Lane because some of the lots on the south side are one
acre. He said there are no deed
restrictions that will prevent those property owners from subdividing 2½-acre
tracts. The Comp Plan does not require
a threatened and endangered species survey at this time. The whole context of the design element does
not talk about a particular collection of 10 or 20 lots, but about a
neighborhood being a little larger than that.
The design element also doesn’t say that lot sizes have to be
identical. The densities of Gabriella
Lane are well below 4 units per acre and the lot compatibility analysis is
another tool.
Upon
further inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. West advised staff recommendations
have not changed based on what they have heard this evening. If the trend of R-1AAA is continued, there
may be a compromise of R-1AAAA along Kings Cove and that is something that can be
considered. He stated this development
would require sidewalks at the front and along Gabriella Lane, but they do not
have to be connected to a sidewalk to the outside.
District
Commissioner Maloy stated what he is seeing is arguments of five homes versus
eight homes as to what they may or may not build. This isn’t a land use change, but a rezone and there has been
some debate whether or not the lot compatibility ordinance is accurate. He stated he would recommend continuing
R-1AAAA as a buffer coming down Gabriella Lane and to allow R-1AAA in the back.
Chairman
McLain asked Mr. Harling if he had any objections to dividing this parcel into
two different zonings with property along Gabriella Lane to be R-1AAAA and
beyond that, it would be R-1AAA.
Mr.
Harling stated that would be acceptable to him.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Mr. Harling advised he has committed to preserve
the pond as well as the house size.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide
to adopt Ordinance #2003-42, as shown on page _________, to approve rezoning
from A-1 to R-1AAAA for the southern
portion near Gabriella Lane and R-1AAA for the northern side, on 5.1 acres
located on the north side of Gabriella Lane, ½ mile west of Tuskawilla Road, as
described in the proof of publication, Jay Barfield, subject to a minimum house
size of 2,200 sq. ft., with preservation of the pond and its features to be
included.
Under
discussion, Commissioner Morris stated the pond is not included in the density
calculation.
Mr.
Harling stated he has committed to eight lots or less and that is in the
contract with the seller.
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at
8:30 p.m., reconvening at 8:40 p.m.
Proof of publication, as shown on page
_______, calling for a public hearing to consider transmittal of a Large Scale
Land Use Amendment from Suburban Estates to Low Density Residential and Mixed
Development for approximately 610 acres to the DCA, located on the north and
south sides of Celery Avenue, Seminole County, received and filed.
Chairman McLain stated he owns 40 acres
along this area and he will not be voting on this item, but he will be able to
make comments.
Matt
West, Planning Manager, addressed the Board to state the City of Sanford is
interested in annexing this property and staff has been renegotiating a joint
planning agreement with them. Staff
recommends transmitting to the DCA the land use amendments from Suburban
Estates to Low Density Residential for Zone #1 and from Suburban Estates to
Mixed Development for Zone #2. He
stated staff has negotiated with the City of Sanford a cap of three dwelling
units per net buildable acre in Zone #1, as the County calculates it. The County and the City of Sanford have
agreed to cap the density for Zone #2 to no more than six dwelling units per
acre, as the County calculates it. The
City of Sanford has also agreed to accept maintenance and responsibility for
Celery Avenue by the year 2013. That
transfer would be by a separate agreement.
Additional properties have annexed into the City of Sanford and there
are two large subdivisions under construction on the west end of Celery Avenue
area. Both of those subdivisions are
constructing 300 homes. He displayed an
aerial map and reviewed the densities of
the two approved subdivisions. He
stated additional property in this area has been annexed by the City of
Sanford, therefore, the actual area being transmitted to the DCA has shrunk
somewhat. Staff has made progress with
the negotiations with the City of Sanford as well as the community. The City of Sanford has instructed their staff
to work with the County’s staff to come up with an overlay zoning district that
the community would support. He stated
he has sent drafts of the Overlay Standards to the City of Sanford and they are
reviewing them. He submitted a draft
(received and filed) of the Overlay Standards.
The minutes of the community meeting last Tuesday are being transcribed
and the concerns of the residents will be incorporated into the Design Standards. He stated he intends to schedule another
community meeting in two or three weeks and he will brief each Board
member. If the Board recommends approval
of the transmittal to the DCA, and while the DCA is reviewing the transmittal,
he can be finalizing the ordinance. The
ordinance can be brought back in December for potential adoption of these land
use amendments. The draft Joint
Planning Agreement with the City of Sanford will be brought back to the Board
at the same time. The Board previously
directed staff not to adopt these standards until the overlay and interlocal
agreement for Celery Avenue is wrapped up.
He stated he feels that it is acceptable to transmit the amendment
knowing that the two products are being worked on for finalization. The P&Z recommended approval of the
proposal. He said Diane Kramer and
Sandi Robinson have sent letters indicating concern that if Low Density
Residential is approved for three units per acre, there would probably be a
need for an additional elementary school site.
They have asked staff to figure out how they can reserve 15 acres for a
school site.
Mr.
West discussed with Commissioner Henley how many homes are being built in those
two subdivisions. He submitted a letter
(received and filed) from Jeno Paulucci expressing his concern about the
proposed land use amendment.
Mr.
West explained for Commissioner Morris how many acres have gone out of the
study area and extended into the City of Sanford.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. West advised the joint planning agreement
covers the acreage that is incorporated and unincorporated. It covers more than the Celery Avenue area. He added that staff will be working with the
City of Sanford relating to a school site.
Chairman
McLain stated he has met with the School Board Chairman to discuss this issue
and she wasn’t fully aware of all the circumstances. He said he explained to her and the President of the Airport
about the new road that is going to the airport and about the possibility of a
school site near that area to cover more than just the Celery Avenue area.
Mr.
West discussed with Commissioner Henley relative to Celery Avenue staying at
two lanes. He stated he believes the
property owners do not want to encourage Celery Avenue to be a
cut-through.
Kenneth
McIntosh, 951 Powhatan Dr., addressed the Board to state he is a landowner in
both zone areas and he represents approximately 20 families. He stated he is opposed to the request and
he recommends denial of the amendments for zones one and two. This is a 9J5 Comp Plan Amendment and this
is a private interest driven amendment and the annexation of actions and
objectives by the City of Sanford are driving the land planning process rather
than future comprehensive land planning objectives controlling the Joint
Planning Agreement and Interlocal Agreement with the City of Sanford. He stated the City of Sanford’s intrusion
into this area has been going on for two years. The 9J5 requires transmittal of a complete proposed Large Scale
plan amendment. The one presented
tonight is incomplete and inadequate.
It suffers the same impediments that were not recommended by the Board
on other occasions. He stated the
citizens have concerns with the geographic configuration, the density control
and influences, roads, traffic, drainage, schools, and joint planning and
interlocal agreements and the overlay standards, which are not in place. He said he feels a proper configuration with
the expansion by the City of Sanford should be controlled by the east boundary
line, which lines up with Sipes Avenue.
He reviewed the properties that are being annexed by the City of Sanford. He stated this needs to stop somewhere and
he is asking staff to give consideration to the area east of Sipes. The density control influences are a primary
concern to the residents. He pointed
out that Section 5 of the Joint Planning Agreement indicates that the density
shall be 1, 2 and 3 units per acre. The
exhibits to the Joint Planning Agreement indicate that the density is 6 units
per acre in Zone #2. There have been
discussions relating to the overlay standards and they have suggested to staff
that this item be continued tonight until actions have been completed with the City of Sanford
regarding the Joint Planning Agreement and Interlocal Agreement. He stated he has also suggested completing
the overlay standards that will be satisfactory to the County, the City and
citizens. He said he would appreciate
seeing Celery Avenue being developed similar to Rinehart Road from Lake Mary
Blvd. to 46A. The Joint Planning
Agreement indicates that the City of Sanford will assume responsibility of Celery
Ave. prior to December 31, 2013. The
agreement is only for seven years as it expires in 2010. The agreement can be subject to nonrenewal
upon 90 days written notice and it may expire before the required compliance is
in place by the City of Sanford. The
Joint Planning Agreement does not discuss net buildable acre except in an
exhibit nor does it give private owners standing before a competent
jurisdiction in the event that any of those specific covenants are not carried
forward by the City of Sanford. The
City of Sanford has a tremendous drainage problem and no solution has been
indicated other than a retention pond being constructed in the area of the
experiment station.
Mr. McIntosh referred to the letter from Sandy Robinson relating to a 15-acre site for a future elementary school. He stated the Joint Planning Agreement and overlay standard does not mention the school site. There are a lot of matters that are categorized as loose ends and there has been very little progress made. The St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) is considering constructing a potable water treatment plant in this area. All of these matters need to be considered. The proposed request is not ready for transmittal as there are too many loose ends.
Mr.
McIntosh explained for Commissioner Henley how he feels the County should deal
with the City of Sanford’s intrusion with the density they have approved in
that area.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. West advised the Joint Planning Agreement
is not an agreement to transfer the road.
That is a separate agreement. He
explained the purpose of the general pattern of development relating to the opt
out. Discussion ensued with Mr. West
and Commissioner Morris relating to transmitting the interlocal agreement and
the overlay standards to DCA and exploring the possibility of a school site.
Upon
further inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. West advised he is anticipating
that the interlocal agreement and overlay standards will be in place and if
they are not, staff will recommend continuing this item to the next Cycle.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. McMillan advised certain aspects of the
interlocal agreement can be binding as long as the agreement is in force. There are aspects in which the County and
City cannot contractually bind the agreement because it is binding their
legislative authority.
Larry
Dale, 3400 Celery Ave., stated he developed the first platted subdivision after
the City of Lake Mary became a city with three lots per acre. He stated Celery Avenue is a designated urban
service area. He said his concern is
there is a strip of heavy industrial zoning and with existing suburban estates,
there are no buffers required. He
stated he wants to be protected from low density residential as it may change
the character of his neighborhood.
Becky
Mizzell, 2790 Celery Ave., addressed the Board to state she owns a couple of
properties in this area. She stated
this area was not developed for years because it was a flood prone area. She said she believes that this area should
be developed but it needs to be done properly and she doesn’t see it
happening. There is no place for the
children to go to school in this area nor is there a place for the school buses
to turn around in the proposed subdivisions.
She said she doesn’t believe that these properties should be
incorporated into the City as this will add more to their problems. She added she would like the Board to
consider making a place for the children as far as schools and play areas that
is off the road.
Archie
Smith, 4130 Celery Ave., addressed the Board to state he has not been involved
in the neighborhood meetings, as he chose not to. He stated he runs the Sanford Boat Works and Marina. A study is being done on SR 415 and those
doing the study do not know how they are going to come off the bridge and
access Celery Avenue. The residents do
not want any houses built from
Sanford to SR 415. He said he believes
that proper roads and planned development are better than hodge podge
situations.
No
one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker
Request and Written Comment Forms were received and filed.
Chairman
McLain stated he lives in that area and his concern is that the City of Sanford
continues to annex property in a methodology that allows denser development
than what they can negotiate with the City through an interlocal agreement and
land use plan. He stated he is in
favor of protecting the quality of life
in that area. He said his concern is
that unmanaged growth with the City of Sanford annexing one parcel at a time
and developing under their rules is going to allow the community to be denser
than what he feels is appropriate.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Van Der Weide, Mr. West advised staff has a signed JPA
agreement from the City of Sanford to take the road, cap the density and do the
zoning overlay, but staff wants to make further amendments before it is brought
before the Board. This issue wouldn’t come back to the Board until
December 2003 as DCA would take 60 to 70 days to review the report. This must be worked out by the first meeting
in December so that DCA will have time to review it and respond to any
comments. The next cycle would be in
February or March 2004. He displayed a
future land use map and explained why the proposed uses are configured the way
they are.
Commissioner
Van Der Weide stated he believes an agreement is within reach and he is
wondering what consequences the time frame has in working out this agreement.
Mr.
West stated he intends to meet with the residents again to try to hammer out
some details of the overlay.
At
the request of Commissioner Henley, Mr. West responded to the list that Mr.
McIntosh indicated were insufficiencies in the Joint Planning Agreement.
Mr. McMillan stated the first term of the
agreement is seven years and it will automatically renew for five additional
years unless within 90 days at the end of term, the City says they will not
renew it. Discussion ensued relative to
the 10-year term and covering the aspect of the overlay and the roadway agreement.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Mr. West advised if the agreements were not
completed by December 2003, staff would recommend continuing this item to the
2004 Spring Cycle. He stated staff will
present a matrix of the citizen’s comments as well as the minutes of the
community meetings.
Commissioner
Maloy stated he feels uncomfortable with a lot of the details not being worked
out and with some of the decisions being made without the Board’s input. He stated he feels a joint meeting with the
City needs to be scheduled to work out some of these issues. The one problem he is having is the
infrastructure and he feels more comfortable if some of these details are
worked out and there is a plan on how they are going to acquire and pay for the
right-of-way.
Chairman
McLain stated he feels the problem is, when is the City of Sanford going to
move forward and the problems they are going to cause and the lack of oversight
they will have without an agreement.
Discussion ensued.
Commissioner
Maloy stated he feels more comfortable working out these issues ahead of time.
Commissioner
Henley stated he doesn’t think that anything has been accomplished from the
last meeting. The City of Sanford has
approved the agreement, but it is not satisfactory to the County. He said he doesn’t see the necessity of
transmitting this to DCA until these issues are worked out.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Van Der Weide, Mr. West stated if the Board waits until
June 2004 to adopt, other properties can be annexed.
Commissioner
Morris stated each Board member shares a concern of having agreements in
place. He stated he would recommend the
Board moving forward with this and if the issues are not resolved by December,
it is over.
Commissioner
Henley stated the only thing he has heard is the transmittal and adoption
deadline. He stated he doesn’t see a
need to rush through this.
Commissioner
Morris stated he would not be voting in favor of continuing the request if the
issues were not resolved in December.
At
the request of Commissioner Henley, Mr. McIntosh gave his thoughts regarding
the possibility of binding the City of Sanford to the agreement and the impact
that may have if it was transmitted to DCA.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Mr. McIntosh advised he doesn’t think that
anything the Board does this evening will stop the City of Sanford.
Upon
inquiry by Commissioner Van Der Weide, Mr. McIntosh advised he doesn’t see any
urgency involved.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Henley to
continue to the Spring Cycle a Large
Scale Land Use Amendment from Suburban Estates to Low Density Residential and
Mixed Development for approximately 610 acres to the DCA, located on the north
and south sides of Celery Avenue, as described in the proof of publication,
Seminole County.
Districts 1 and 4 voted AYE.
Commissioners Morris and Van Der Weide
voted NAY, whereupon, the motion failed for lack of a
majority vote. Commissioner McLain
abstained from voting.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Van Der Weide,
Mr. McMillan advised if the public hearing closes and if there is no vote to
transmit or continue, the item is over.
Chairman McLain encouraged the Board to
reconsider the motion to continue to the Spring Cycle. Discussion ensued relative to the time
frame.
Motion by Commissioner
Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to transmit to the DCA Large
Scale Land Use Amendment from Suburban Estates to Low Density Residential and
Mixed Development for approximately 610 acres, located on the north and south
sides of Celery Avenue, as described in the proof of publication, Seminole
County.
Under discussion, Commissioner Van Der
Weide stated he doesn’t think there is a trust here to make this work. Discussion ensued with Mr. West and
Commissioner Henley as to where the delay has occurred.
Commissioner Morris stated he would like to
include
in the motion that with the understanding that these agreements must be worked out by
December.
Districts
2 and 3 voted AYE.
Commissioners
Maloy and Henley voted NAY, whereupon the motion failed for lack of a
majority vote.
Commissioner
McLain abstained from voting.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide
to continue to the 2004 Spring Cycle a Large
Scale Land Use Amendment from Suburban Estates to Low Density Residential and
Mixed Development for approximately 610 acres, located on the north and south
sides of Celery Avenue, as described in the proof of publication, Seminole
County.
Districts 1, 2, 3 and 4 voted AYE.
Commissioner McLain abstained from
voting. Memorandum of Voting Conflict
Form, as shown on page _______, for Commissioner McLain was received and filed.
Commissioner
Henley stated he would like the County Manager to give the Board a periodic
report on the progress of this issue as well as the schedule of meetings for
same.
Commissioner
Maloy stated he would like a copy of the drafts submitted.
-------
There being no further business to come
before the Board, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m.,
this same date.
ATTEST:_______________________Clerk_____________________Chairman
cc/sm/er