BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
SEPTEMBER 10, 2002
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, September 10, 2002, in the SEMINOLE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING at SANFORD, FLORIDA, the usual place of meeting of said Board.
Present:
Chairman Daryl McLain (District 5)
Vice Chairman Grant Maloy (District 1)
Commissioner Randy Morris (District 2)
Commissioner Dick Van Der Weide (District 3)
Commissioner Carlton Henley (District 4)
County Manager Kevin Grace
County Attorney Robert McMillan
Deputy Clerk Sandy McCann
Chairman McLain announced that in memory of those who lost their lives during the terrorists attacks on September 11, 2001, the invocation will be given by Father Benjamin Berinti, Church of the Nativity, Longwood.
Father Beriniti gave the invocation.
The Sheriff’s Department presented the colors and the National Anthem was sung by Sheralyn Brinson from the Public Works Department.
Battalion Chief, Rick Schabot, led the Pledge of Allegiance. The colors were retired.
AWARDS & PRESENTATIONS
Commissioner Morris introduced Patricia Gehri of the International Visitors Program and stated she is accompanied by the following members of Parliament of the Republic of Moldova: Valentin Chilat, Valeriu Cosarciuc, Iulian Glavan M.D., Eva
Gudumac M.D., Lidia Gutu, Victor Morev, Viorel Prisacari M.D, and Efim Zubcu.
The Moldova guests presented the Chairman with a medal and a seal of their country, and invited the Commissioners to visit their country. Whereupon, the Chairman expressed his appreciation.
-------
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-139, as shown on page _______, proclaiming October 6, 2002 as the day to observe and recognize the patriotic service and dedicated efforts of the fire and emergency services personnel.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
The Resolution was presented to Fire Chief Terry Schenk who addressed the Board to express his appreciation and to introduce the following fire personnel: Rich Schabot, Lawton Green, Tim Corn and Tim Nickelson. He displayed a tee shirt the fire fighters will be wearing tomorrow in memory of the 343 fire fighters who gave their lives on September 11, 2001. He added that the names of the 343 fire fighters are on the shirt.
-------
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-137, as shown on page _______, in recognition of achievement by the Seminole County Department of Information Technologies in receiving the eGovernance Award of Distinction, awarded by the National Academy of Public Administration and National Association of Counties.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
The Resolution was presented to Information Technology Manager, Kim Patterson. She addressed the Board to introduce the following from her staff: Matthew Collins, Peter Mason, Chris Pederson, and Al Hill. She also expressed her thanks to the Board for their support and for the support of Director Chris Grasso.
-------
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-138, as shown on page _______, proclaiming the month of September as “Leukemia & Lymphoma Awareness Month”.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
The Resolution was presented to Jim Weinberg, Tracy Tucker and Betsy Cohen.
Mr. Weinberg addressed the Board to express his appreciation to the Board and to advise they are now serving over 1300 families in the Central Florida area.
-------
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-140, as shown on page _______, acknowledging the recipients of the 2002 Seminole County Industry Recognition Award, which will be presented at the “2002 Industry Recognition Luncheon” to be held on October 4, 2002.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Economic Development Director, William McDermott, addressed the Board to present request for approval of the Jobs Growth Incentive Economic Development Agreement with Starport/Cambata Aviation International, advising the company is a world-class, full-service FBO company located at Orlando Sanford International Airport. The proposed project consists of constructing an additional 43,100 square feet of building space and 69,700 square feet of ramp. The expansion will create 44 new jobs, of which 35 are technical positions paying an average salary of $42,000/yr., by the end of 2003. He further advised that the City of Sanford approved $88,000 cash award for new job creation, a waiver of site plan review fees of $200, engineering plan review fees of $200 and site development permit fees of $42,035.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Jobs Growth Incentive Economic Development Agreement, as shown on page _______, between Seminole County and StarPort/Cambata Aviation International in the amount of $88,000; to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-143, as shown on page _______, and amending same from $42 million to $4.2 million; and to approve deferring road impact fees until the Certificate of Occupancy is issued.
Under discussion, Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he believes the staff should come up with a new set of criteria based on economic incentives at the Airport because of the special circumstances out there.
Commissioner Maloy stated that there is no doubt this is a good company; however, he cannot support the motion unless the Board approves a policy to move impact fees back on all businesses.
Commissioner Morris stated he thought the Board talked about holding the fees until the issuance of C.O.’s.
County Manager, Kevin Grace, advised if the Board is interested in looking at a broader application with regard to deferring road impact fees until C.O.’s are issued, he can have staff review that and bring it back to the Board.
Commissioner Van Der Weide stated in his opinion, the impact of the home or business is not until the time of occupancy.
The Board, by unanimous consensus, directed staff to review the broader application of deferring road impact fees until the time that Certificates of Occupancy are issued and to bring same back to the Board for discussion.
Chairman McLain stated he agrees with the motion because he believes the airport is the number one economic incentive for the County at this time.
Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Commissioner Maloy voted NAY.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve and authorize the following:
6. Settlement offers and offers of judgment relating to Parcel Numbers 174 and 175 of the Airport Boulevard Phase III road improvement project, located on the southwest corner of Airport Boulevard and County Road 46A, in an amount of up to $864,126.00 for Parcel 174 and $545,340.00 for Parcel No. 175, exclusive of attorney’s fees and costs, Shoemaker Construction Co., Inc. & A.K. Shoemaker.
7. Approve and execute Purchase Agreement, as shown on page
_______, relating to Parcel Number 163 of the Airport Boulevard Phase III road
improvement project, located on the east side of Bevier Road north of Jewett
Lane, in the amount of $195,000.00, inclusive of attorney’s fees and costs,
Robert E. & Peggy J. Brown.
8. Approve and execute Purchase Agreement, as shown on page _______, relating to
Parcel Number 127 of the Airport Boulevard Phase III road improvement project,
located on the east side of Bevier Road and west of Airport Boulevard, in the
amount of $10,000.00, inclusive of attorney fees and costs, Barbara A.
Jackson-Bond.
9. Approve and execute Purchase Agreement, as shown on page
_______, relating to Parcel Number 126 of the Airport Boulevard Phase III road
improvement project, located on the north side of Bungalow Boulevard and west
of Airport Boulevard, in the amount of $6,250.00 with no fees or costs
incurred, Mamie L. Bradley. Offer approved by the Board on March 12, 2002.
10. Authorize the revised Binding Written Offer for Parcel Number 147 of the
Airport Boulevard Phase III road improvement project.
11. Approve and execute Purchase Agreement, as shown on page _______, relating to
Parcel Number 164 of the Airport Boulevard Phase III road improvement project,
located on the east side of Bevier Road north of Jewett Lane, in the amount of
$185,000.00, inclusive of all fees and costs, Douglas J. Carman.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Mr. McMillan advised he has reviewed the United Arts Contract and it is his opinion that the provisions in the contract was not intended to open up all the records of United Arts - only those records that deal with the services they are providing to the County would be public. He said that he has not gotten to the details of the documents that have been requested. However, if United Arts produces documents to him for review to determine if they need to be released, by virtue of them giving him the documents, they automatically become public records. He stated United Arts is currently in litigation and the judge has the ability to review the documents without releasing them and will make a determination whether they should be released or not. He added that no one on County staff has that ability.
Mr. Grace advised Item #27, Certificate of Completion for FC-1152-01/BJC has been withdrawn from the agenda.
Commissioner Maloy requested Item #34, RFP-4165-02 be pulled for a separate vote.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris to approve and authorize the following:
20. BCR #02-131 - $65,651 – Information Technologies - Telecommunications Fund: 00100–General
Fund. Transfer funds to replace phone
systems at the Clerk of Court and Tax Collector’s three branch offices. The Tax Collector and Clerk of the Court
have provided funding, which was deposited in the General Fund.
21. BCR #02-133 - $31,000 – Public Works – Engineering – Fund: 11500 –
Infrastructure Tax Fund/12601 – Arterial Impact Fee Fund. Additional funding is needed to cover the
final change order for CR 427, Phase III/IV.
Existing field conditions required modifications. Request a transfer from capital reserves.
MSBU
22. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute Street Lighting Agreements, as shown on page _______, for new MSBU districts becoming effective October 1, 2002.
23. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute Satisfaction of Lien, as shown on page _______, for Myrtle Lake Hills Road Paving and Drainage Project (James G. and Sandra B. Dowdy).
24. Approve Change Order #14, as
shown on page _______, and authorize the Chairman to execute the Certificate of
Completion, as shown on page _______ for FC-161-99/BJC – C.R. 427, Phases III
and IV Construction Project, with Bergeron Land Development, Inc., Kissimmee
($503,397.12) (Time Extension) (Certificate of Completion).
25. Approve Change Order #3, as
shown on page _______, for FC-1127-00/BJC – Heathrow Water Treatment Plant
Expansion, with Wharton-Smith, Lake Monroe ($11,564.02) (Time Extension).
26. Approve Change Order #11, as
shown on page _______, for FC-1135-00/BJC – C.R. 46-A, Phase II Construction
Project, with Southland Construction, Inc., Apopka ($107,868.36) (Time
Extension).
27. Withdrawal of request
to accept and authorize the Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion
for FC-1152-01/BJC – Timaquan Lift Station Generator Retrofit, with MGI –
Morgan General Mechanical Group, Inc., Pompano Beach.
28. Accept and authorize the
Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion, as shown on page _______,
for FC-1157-01/BJC - Replacement of the Insulation and Suspended Ceiling at the
Administrative Services Building, with Encompass Mechanical Services, Orlando.
29. Accept and authorize the
Chairman to execute the Certificate of Completion, as shown on page _______,
for FC-1166-01/BJC – Markham Water Transmission Main, with Masci Corporation,
Inc., Harbor Oaks.
30. Approve ranking list for
PS-5122-02/BJC – Threshold Inspection Services for the Seminole County Criminal
Justice Center, authorize staff to negotiate and award Agreement, as shown on
page _______, to Universal Engineering Sciences, Orlando (Not-to-Exceed
$75,000.00).
31. Approve Amendment #10, as
shown on page _______, to PS-332-96/BJC - Engineering Services for Lake Emma
Road, with Bowyer-Singleton & Associates, Inc., Orlando ($36,000.00).
32. Approve an increase to the Not-to-Exceed contract amount for PS-573-00/BJC - Dodd Road Post Design Services, with Bowyer-Singleton & Associates, Inc., Orlando ($16,500.00).
33. Approve First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to PS-589-01/BJC – Engineering Services for Greenwood Lakes/Heathrow Water Transmission Main & Reclaimed Water Main, with Blount Sikes & Associates, Orlando, (Not-to-Exceed $57,084.30).
35. Revoke award of RFP-4134-01/BJC - SHIP Architectural Barrier Removal Program, with Stien Gerontological Institute, Miami.
36. Award IFB-3054-02/GMG – Term Contract, as shown on page _______, for Street Sweeping Services to Pro Sweep Central Florida, St. Cloud (Primary Contractor) and Central Sweeping Service, Inc., Winter Garden (Secondary Contractor) ($60,800.00 per year).
37. Authorize the issuance of a proprietary source Purchase Order to Motorola, Inc., Longwood for support of the Oviedo First Response Agreement required by Public Safety and Information Technologies/Telecommunications ($90,624.45).
38. Approve Amendment #2, as shown on page _______, to M-303-02/BJC – County Services Building (CSB) parking and drainage improvements project, with Bowyer-Singleton and Associates, Orlando ($2,500.00).
40. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute two Satisfactions of Second Mortgage, as shown on page _______, for Roberto Hernandez-Tur & Esther Fernandez-Canizare and Miriam Talmadge; households assisted under the SHIP Program’s Home Ownership Assistance Program.
43. Approve final plat for the Alaqua Lakes Phase 7 Subdivision, located approximately two miles west of the intersection of Lake Mary Boulevard and Markham Woods Road (Charlie Ayers, Taylor Woodrow).
45. Approve and authorize Chairman to execute the National Safe Kids Campaign/Seminole County Agreement, as shown on page ________.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Discussion ensued with regard to Item #34, request for award of RFP-4165-02-BJC, Acquisition Services for County’s Natural Lands, Trails, Greenways & Community Development programs.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Purchasing Manager, Ray Hooper, addressed the Board to explain how staff tried to deal with the cost ranking. Discussion ensued.
Chairman McLain suggested continuing this item until this afternoon’s meeting in order to give staff an opportunity to review this further with Commissioners. The Board voiced no objections to same.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve and authorize the following:
1. Expenditure Approval Lists, as shown on page _______, dated August 20 & 27, 2002; and Payroll Approval List, as shown on page _______, dated August 15, 2002.
2. Chairman to execute Satisfaction of Judgment/Court Costs for Public Defender Application Fee and Court Costs for Francisco Haros Tamayo, #02-1719-MMA in the amount of $198.
3. Chairman to execute Satisfaction of Judgment/Bail Bond Lien for Antowoine K. Cannon & Accredited Surety & Casualty Ins. Co., #9907588-MMA in the amount of $534.
4. Chairman to execute the following Satisfactions of Judgment for Public Defender Liens:
Craig Daniel Bouchard, #01010802MM - $250
Kurt Gerard Campbell, #96011909MM - $100
Jonathan J. Christopulos, #99012515MM - $200
Rolando O. Diaz, #01009360MM - $250
Zachary P. Ely, #99007770MM - $100
Robert Eriksson, #01013434MM - $50
Juan C. Figueroa, #01013029MM - $200
Ann M. Fleshman, #98001686CFA - $750
Leighton B. Frazier, #02006063MM - $260
Ryan Daniel Fredericks, #0205876MM - $50
Karen J. Fulks, #97002398CFA - $350
Stacy Renee Goodwin, #89003663CFA - $250
David Gorski, #90010381MM - $50
Simon James Harper, Jr., #97000138CFA - $500
Robert W. Hurst, #01011985MM - $200
Jenny Jackson, #98003342CJA - $150
Patsy Jerry, #01009506MM - $250
Mitchell Katz, #0204764MM - $50
Anthony Lupo, #90002528MM - $50
Janice Martin, #96000088CFC - $350
Kevin A. Perry, #97003015CFD - $200
Eric L. Rivera, #01005299MM - $200
Melissa Stewart, #01008933MM - $200
Tindall Thomas, #01011849MM - $200
Alex Torres, #02001960MM - $200
Carlos D. Torres, #02000650CFA - $200
Charles Dana Tucker, #91003250CFA - $350
Juan Valentin, #02000035MM - $200
Sandra By Young, #84001248CJA - $75
5. Approval of Official Minutes dated August 13, 2002.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
The Board noted, for information only, the following Clerk’s “received & filed”:
1. Second Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Work Order #1, PS-525-98, Keith and Schnars, P.A.
2. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Construction Contract Agreement M-325-02, Mid-Florida Forklift, Inc.
3. Work Order #12, as shown on page _______, to PS-586-01, SCS Engineers.
4. Consultant Services Agreement M-329-02, as shown on page _______, PBS & J.
5. Consultant Services Agreement M-328-02, as shown on page ________, PBS & J.
6. Work Order #35, as shown on page _______, to PS-556-00, DCR Engineering Services, Inc.
7. Letter to the BCC and County Manager Kevin Grace from Bruce McMenemy regarding public records request made to United Arts of Central Florida, Inc.
8. Development Orders, as shown on page _______, for the following: Mystic Cove Apartments PUD; Nanette Mueller; Grace Bimson; Christopher and Ann Logan Black; Habitat for Humanity in Seminole County (4); Benjamen and Debra DeLawder; Tim and Jill Voss; Walter M. and Sue E. Scherer; Rafael Santiago; Michael E. & Melissa L. Jirout; Kurt and Janice Schopfer; Judson L. Otte; Carmen Diaz; James L. LaJoie; Charles and Karin Magaw; Julio R. and Julia L. Sosa; and Florida Jai Alai, Inc.
9. Term Contract IFB-3044-02, as shown on page _______, with Central Florida Environmental Corp.
10. Satisfactions of Connection Fees, as shown on page _______, for Heather Glen, Forest Cove, and South Park Business Center Lot 8 – Ault Systems.
11. Conditional Utility Agreements, as shown on page _______, for water and sewer services for the following: Pulte Home Corporation; Orlando Lake Forest Joint Venture (Lake Forest Phase 13A and Phase 19); and Homevest L.L.C.
12. Memorandum from County Manager Kevin Grace to the BCC regarding Capital Project Fund Transfer for Lake Jesup Navy Canal.
13. Memorandum, as shown on page _______, to Sandy McCann from Shannon Suffron regarding bonds scheduled to be released on August 27, 2002 for Berington Club Phases I, II, and III.
14. Cross Access Agreement and Grant of Easement, as shown on page _______, with MARCOR, LLC.
15. Performance Bond #6167435, as shown on page _______, in the amount of $311,980 for Magnolia Plantation.
16. Change Order #1, as shown on page _______, to CC-1179-02, Meadors Construction Company.
17. Work Orders #24, #25, and #26, as shown on page ________, to PS-590-01, Metric Engineering and TEI Engineers & Planners.
18. Change Order #1, as shown on page _______, to FC-1171-01, Wharton-Smith, Inc.
19. Work Order #47, as shown on page _______, to PS-543-99, Geotechnical Professional Associates, Inc.
20. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Engineering Services Agreement M-320-02, KLG Orlando, Inc.
21. Work Order #3, as shown on page _______, to RFP-484, LA Consulting, Inc.
22. Work Order #9, as shown on page ________, to PS-551-00, Ecotech Consultants, Inc.
23. First Amendment, as shown on page _______, to Consulting Services Agreement RFP-484-00.
24. Work Order #3, as shown on page _______, to RFP-4123-01, Atlas Scientific Technologies, Inc.
25. Change Order #4, as shown on page _______, to FC-1169-02, Pooley Enterprises, Inc.
26. Bids as follows: IFB-3053-02; RFP-4166-02; PS-5123-02; IFB-3054-02; PS-5121-02; RFP-4168-02; PS-5124-02; and PS-5125-02.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris to approve and authorize expenditure of $8,250 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund for the following: a contribution to the Missing Children Clearing House Advisory Board; an expenditure for the purchase of red ribbons for public and private school children during the 2002 Red Ribbon Campaign; a contribution to the Martin Luther King Jr. Steering Committee in support of their scholarship fund; and a contribution to National Association of TRIAD’s National Conference.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute request for release of $25,000 from the Office of State Courts Administrator to continue the Hearing Officer Program, as shown on page _______.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman McLain advised that Public Hearing Items #59, #64 and #65 scheduled for this afternoon and tonight are requested to be continued.
The Board voiced no objections to having staff contact interested parties to advise of the proposed continuances.
Mr. Fisher advised staff is asking that Item #57, Request for placement of a gate in the wall for Colonial Grande Phase II Project, be continued until September 24, 2002 so that the legal language can be worked out.
The Board voiced no objections to same.
-------
Mr. Fisher gave a video presentation regarding request for approval of an RFP for the Land Development Code Overhaul. Copies of presentation and revised Scope of Services were received and filed. He reviewed Phase 1 of how they have improved customer service by opening a centralized customer resource room for faster and more pleasant service. He also reviewed Phase 2, which entails the requested RFP to overhaul the LDC and production of a digital web-based format. He discussed Phase 3 of where they want to be and the information that they would like accessed easily by customers.
Commissioner Henley stated he believes this is a step in the right direction.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Van Der Weide to direct staff to release a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the overhaul of the Seminole County Land Development Code based on the scope presented.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Mr.
Hooper provided handout information (copy received and filed) regarding the RFP
and gave some past history. He advised
Chairman McLain that staff has not changed their recommendation for The Triece
Company.
Commissioner
Maloy stated if there is no percentage claimed as commission, then that might
be more incentive to get a lower price on the land use. He thinks that is something that should be
factored in.
Commissioner
Morris said because someone is paid a commission does not mean they are going
to get the best price.
Mr.
McMillan said there is no commission paid unless there is already a commission
being paid to the seller’s broker. He
explained there would be no additional commission charged on any deal beyond
what the seller’s broker would be charging as part of the deal. He stated nothing happens under this contract
that increases the price or diminishes what the seller would be getting.
Mr. Grace further
explained that there is no bonus.
Commissioner Van Der
Weide stated his concern when this first came up was the possibility of making
money from both sides.
Chairman McLain stated
an important thing to remember is that throughout the Natural Lands Program and
in providing other services for the County, he feels The Triece Company has
done an excellent job and he does not see a need to change.
Commissioner Van Der
Weide said he thinks the due diligence staff has done to see that there are no
bonuses is a significant change in the County’s and taxpayers’ favor.
Motion by Commissioner Morris to approve the staff
recommendations and award RFP-4165-02/BJC, services related to coordination and
acquisition for the County’s Natural Lands, Trails, Greenways and Community
Development Programs, to the Triece Company, DeBary (Not-to-Exceed $65,000 a
year).
Under discussion, he
said if the motion is approved, the Board could analyze each individual
transaction as it comes up.
Mr. Grace reported this
is for a three-year contract to be renewed for two successive periods, not to
exceed one year each.
Whereupon, Commissioner
Morris stated he would prefer a one-year contract with two, one-year renewals,
if that were acceptable. These are not
automatic renewals.
Commissioner Morris amended
his motion to reject the staff recommendation and approve a one-year
Contract, as shown on page ________, with two, one-year renewals, to be renewed
at the pleasure of the Board. He said
the Board could then better analyze the situation.
Commissioner Van Der
Weide seconded the motion.
Commissioner Henley
said it concerns him when the County goes out to bid and asks companies to
submit bids in good faith and then they base their judgment on the fact that
they are satisfied with the company they have had. He discussed that The Triece Company has served the County and
been paid extremely well, but he doesn’t think that should weigh the point that
the Board disregards all the other bidders who, in his opinion, are also
qualified; and the staff evaluation comments show they are also capable of
doing the job. He said the Board is
ignoring the offer of 0% and $65.00 or $70.00 per hour for the 3% and $90.00
per hour.
Commissioner Morris
stated he understands what Commissioner Henley has said and the comments of
Commissioner Maloy and Van Der Weide this morning. He thinks they are all valid comments and concerns. He said it is because of their efforts that
the contract has been changed. It is
not the same one they saw before and he thinks they have perfected it. The Board will be looking at more validity
checks, and the intent of his motion is to give the Board a year to see what
this contract really means and how the performance will be.
Commissioner Van Der
Weide stated he is supporting the motion because this is an improvement over
and above what the County had. He said
with a shorter-term contract, the Board can take a look at this again, and
because the bonuses are eliminated, that is a major factor.
Districts 1, 3 and 5
voted AYE.
Commissioners Maloy and
Henley voted NAY.
PROOFS OF PUBLICATION
Motion
by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to authorize
filing the proofs of publication for this meeting’s scheduled public hearings.
Districts
1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE
CARMEN AND FRED EDWARDS/
TED BUCKLEY
Continuation
from March 26, 2002, of a public hearing to consider the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment from Suburban Estates to Planned Development; and Rezone from A-1
(Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); property located on the west
side of Banana Lake Road, approximately 3400’ south of CR 46A, Carmen and Fred
Edwards, property owners, as described in the proof of publication, as shown on
page ________, Ted Buckley, applicant.
Motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to continue to the Spring 2003 Cycle consideration of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Suburban Estates to Planned Development; and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); property located on the west side of Banana Lake Road, approximately 3400’ south of CR 46A; as described in the proof of publication, as shown on page ________, Carmen and Fred Edwards, property owners, Ted Buckley, applicant.
Lynne Shields, 552 Lakeworth Circle, addressed the Board to state she would be happy with the continuance.
No one else spoke in support or against the continuance.
The Speaker Request Form for Lynne Shields was received and filed.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Planner Amanda Smith addressed the Board to request that Item #60, Amendment & Rezone, Hugh Harling, be continued until later in the agenda as some of the parties were not present at this time.
APPEAL AGAINST BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT
Continuation from July 9 and August 13, 2002, consideration of Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in denying a request for a lot size variance from 11,700 square feet to 7,020 square feet and lot width variance from 90 feet to 65 feet; property located on the east side of Virginia Avenue (1135 Virginia Avenue), approximately 680 feet south of North Street, west of Palm Springs Drive, as described in the proof of publication, Nora N. Martinez.
Tony Matthews, Principal Planner, addressed the Board to state one of the neighbors has requested this item be continued due to today being Election Day. He had copies of the letter (received and filed) distributed to the Board for their information.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Chairman McLain advised there are people in attendance tonight for this public hearing. He read from the letter submitted that the two persons unable to attend were working at the election polls tonight.
District Commissioner Henley said he believes these persons are already on record against the item. He also knows of another person who could not be in attendance and took the option to send in his objections (letter was received and filed into the record). He said he doesn’t believe the Board has in the past granted a request for continuance except for the applicant. He would hate for the Board to establish a precedence that anyone could call and ask for a continuance based on other obligations. He said there are other means available to the public to make their opinions known.
Mr. Matthews gave the history of the lots. He advised that after further review and analysis, subsequent to the Board of Adjustment public hearing, staff recommends upholding the Board of Adjustment’s decision in denying the requested variances with the following findings: (1) The requested variances do not meet the criteria in Section 30.43 for granting variances because of: (a) There are no special conditions or circumstances which are peculiar to the subject property. The current zoning regulations in R-1AA were in effect in 1971, at which time the subject Lots 8 and 9 were combined in order to meet minimum requirements for lot size and lot width requirements within the R-1AA zoning so that a house on Lot 8 could be legally constructed; (b) Separating Lots 8 and 9, thereby creating two (2) nonconforming lots, was a deliberate action by the appellant resulting in a self-created hardship; (c) Granting the requested variances will confer on the appellant special privileges that are denied by Chapter 30 to other land owners in the same zoning classification as other applicants have been denied similar variances; (d) Literal interpretation of the provisions of Chapter 30 would not deprive the appellant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning classification and would not work unnecessary and undue hardship on the appellant as Lot 8 is still developable; (e) Granting the requested variances is unnecessary as the combined lots met the minimum lot size and lot width requirements for R-1AA zoning for a single building site prior to separation by the appellant; and (f) Granting the variances would not be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of Chapter 30 of the Land Development Code as granting the requested variances would be inconsistent with adjacent development, and other properties zoned R-1AA; (2) Approval of the requested variances would be inconsistent with the provisions of Section 30.26(d) of the Land Development Code, which states that no lot or yard existing on September 8, 1980, shall thereafter be reduced in size, dimension, or area below the minimum requirements set forth within the Land Development Code. The appellant’s lot separation occurred after this date; (3) Approval of the requested variances would be inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element Policy 3.2 of the Vision 2020 Plan, which requires the combining of lots within antiquated plats to resolve land use compatibility. The subject lot was platted prior to adoption of County zoning and subdivision regulations; and (4) No new or additional information has been presented, subsequent to the Board of Adjustment’s decision, to warrant a change in staff’s recommendation.
Attorney Jeff Buak, Brown Ward Salzman & Weiss, Orlando, addressed the Board to state he is representing Ms. Nora Martinez. He distributed notebooks of documents (copy received and filed) to the Board and stated they disagree with some of the facts presented by staff. He reviewed the documents, also giving a brief history. He advised Lots 8 and 9 were sold independently. Through their history, they weren’t owned by common ownership until 1972, when Mr. Avent bought the lots. He said Mr. Avent purchased Lot 8 in 1971 and he had the house built at that time. The second lot was purchased much later. He said Ms. Martinez bought both lots in 1987. She has continuously maintained that they were two individual lots. She had anticipated building a house on Lot 9 and selling the house on Lot 8 to her sons. The current owner of the house, Mr. Santiago, indicated that he recognized there were two lots for sale when he purchased them in 2000. At the time he was only able to buy the lot with the house on it. He pointed out from the notebook that the certificates from the Tax Collector indicate the lots were separately identified. He noted this substantiates the lots have always been separated and were never a combined lot as staff indicated. He said his argument is that the lots are not being reduced, but have been the same since 1954. They are requesting to use Lot 9 as it would have been in 1954. The only intervening cause was the enactment of the County ordinance, which required minimum square footage and lot frontage requirements. They think the hardship was caused by the enactment of the Code and not by Ms. Martinez. Attorney Buak said if the BOA’s denial were upheld, that would render the property valueless and useless to Ms. Martinez or any other owner in the future. He pointed out that in 1995, this same request was granted by the BCC. He said he has provided at least 14 different documents showing that consistently through this neighborhood the substandard lots under the Code have been used to build single-family residences. He thinks Ms. Martinez should be given the same opportunity to use her property as her neighbors.
Discussion ensued with the Board.
Mr. McMillan advised a person could not claim an exemption on two lots anyway. He said if it appears that the lots have been treated consistently as two lots, then maybe they are two lots. Ms. Martinez bought them after the Code went into effect and the Board has considered that a self-imposed hardship at times when the owner buys substandard lots knowing they are substandard.
Upon inquiry by Chairman McLain, Mr. Matthews stated his focus has been on Virginia Avenue and there have been a number of variances requested over the years, mostly for lot size, and most of those were denied by the Board.
Richard Leigh, Attorney with Swann & Hadley, representing Jose Santiago, addressed the Board to state his client purchased Lot 8 from Ms. Martinez. He said Mr. Santiago is opposed to the variance being granted. He thinks it is clear that the hardship is a self-created one as a result of Ms. Martinez selling one of the lots to Mr. Santiago. He said Mr. Santiago stated when he bought the lot, buying both lots together was not considered or discussed. He said his client might come before the Board in the future requesting a similar variance because he now has a substandard lot. He asked the Commission to approve the staff recommendation and deny the request.
Chairman McLain read the Written Comment Forms from Bernard and Nancy Huguenot and Barbara Younker in opposition to the request.
Gino Ratti, 1140 Virginia Avenue, addressed the Board to state he built a house there in 1978-79 and it was zoned R-1AA. At that time, Mr. Wolffe, realtor, owned both of the lots and they all thought it was one piece of property. He responded to Attorney Buak’s comment that if not approved, the lot will have no further value to Ms. Martinez, that she could sell the lot to Mr. Santiago who bought the house. He said he is opposed to the request.
Edward Martinez, Jr., 931 Old White Way, addressed the Board to state he feels sorry for Ms. Martinez because she has property that is now useless. He knows realtors sell properties and all they are interested in is their commission. He is sure Ms. Martinez was not told by anyone when she purchased the property that she was buying two, non-conforming lots. He said if property rights mean anything, Ms. Martinez should have the right to do something with this piece of property other than blow it away.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Written Comment and Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.
Upon inquiry by Chairman McLain, Don Fisher, Planning & Development Director, addressed the Board to state the Code made no provisions for grandfathering lots when the zoning changed. He said it has been common in that area for the past 15 to 20 years that the people have had to get lot size variances. He reported that many had to request variances and more were denied than approved.
District Commissioner Henley stated he sympathizes with Ms. Martinez’s circumstances and he believes in property rights, but he does not believe those rights are exclusive to the applicant only. The other landowners also have property rights. The fact is that the Code went into effect in 1980 and the applicant had sufficient property to conform to the lot size required by Section 3.2, and sold the property 20 years after the Code was in effect. He feels the owner created the current situation at that time.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to uphold the decision of the Board of Adjustment, by approving the Administrative Order and Notice of Decision on Appeal, as shown on page ________, thereby denying the request by Nora N. Martinez for a lot size variance from 11,700 square feet to 7,020 square feet and lot width variance from 90 feet to 65 feet; property located on the east side of Virginia Avenue (1135 Virginia Avenue), approximately 680 feet south of North Street, west of Palm Springs Drive, based on staff findings and recommendation; as described in the proof of publication, Nora N. Martinez.
Under discussion, Commissioner Henley stated he doesn’t think there is anything special or peculiar about this structure or land that would make it possible for the Board to grant the variance, in view of the fact it was self-created by the separation of the lots by ignoring Section 3.2 of the Land Use Code. He thinks it would be granting special privileges to do so.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Commissioner Henley stated he was including in his motion all of the staff findings 1 through 4 as identified.
Commissioner Morris stated that also the property rights go in both directions and the Code looks for the protection of the neighborhood and the standards of the neighborhoods.
Chairman McLain stated there are several plats in the County that are undeveloped with lots that do not meet the current land use. He asked if the owners of those properties sell them as platted and the new owner tries to obtain a building permit, would the platted lot be a non-conforming lot and the only way they could build on it is through a variance.
Mr. Fisher answered that is correct. He said the County did not adopt subdivision regulations until July 28, 1970. That is when zoning applied. Prior to that, there was a different process. He said it is a “buyer beware” situation.
Mr. McMillan added that if there is a change in the ordinance, everyone is presumed to have knowledge and it is part of the public record. He said these are things the person is supposed to look at before he buys the property.
Whereupon, Chairman McLain said it concerns him that an individual of good faith can come to the County with a plat that’s been recorded, identify the property, it could be surveyed, and he can purchase the property and then come to the County after closing and choose to obtain a building permit and be refused or told he would have to apply for variance.
Commissioner Van Der Weide said it is not good for government to have a “buyer beware” attitude. This is the kind of thing you would see in the private sector with unscrupulous dealings.
Chairman McLain said he thinks in this case, the argument that the person owned both lots and they could have made it a conforming lot is prejudiced against one individual. There are two separate identities on the lots, and he doesn’t know if he would want to make the judgment whether it is one or two people who own the property, it should not make any difference. It should be the same rule.
Commissioner Morris stated this neighborhood has a standard, and a little common sense also needs to be applied by the property owner.
Commissioner Henley said he thinks they need to signal in the land use that any of the lots that are antiquated need to be combined. He said the individual in this case had both lots, which meant she could have complied with the Code, but in selling one lot, she chose not do so.
Chairman McLain asked would it be appropriate for the County to record something in the public records that would identify these antiquated subdivisions.
Mr. McMillan explained the people who obtained variances have generally been those who owned one lot and could get no other property. The Board would take a strong view that they should try to buy the other half of the lot in order to combine them. He said this has been addressed many times.
Chairman McLain requested Mr. Fisher add this to the list of things for staff to evaluate and bring back to the Board’s attention at a later date.
Commissioner Van Der Weide said if there is anything the County can do to notify these people of potential “snafus” he thinks they owe it to themselves to do that.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Chairman McLain recessed at 2:33 p.m., and reconvened at 2:45 p.m.
Continuation from August 13 and 27, 2002, of a Large Scale Land Use Amendment from Industrial to Higher Intensity Planned Development; and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) for Loma Vista PUD, located on the west side of Aloma Avenue and east of the Greeneway, as described in the proof of publication, Hugh Harling.
Amanda Smith, Senior Planner, addressed the Board to state staff is recommending approval of the large scale land use amendment and associated rezoning only with regard to the addition of the additional four properties. The other changes regarding development on Tract A (the apartment site) must meet the current Development Order and Developer’s Commitment Agreement, and staff approval of the Large Scale Land Use Amendment and Associated Rezone, but is not recommending approval of any changes to Tract A.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Ms. Smith said there are minor clarifications for the property owner’s information and staff is recommending that information to be changed.
Commissioner Maloy gave some background history of the PUD and discussed the issue of walls and buffers.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris on whether Commissioner Maloy had a solution to the wall situation, Commissioner Maloy said he was hoping there would be some compromise from both property owners, but that has not worked out. He said staff and the property owners are saying the original conditions should be met, and he concurs with that.
Applicant, Brad Stevenson, stated they agree with the staff recommendation.
Chairman McLain called for Jerry Jeffrey to speak before the Board.
Mr. McMillan advised that Mr. Jeffrey has filed a suit against the County on behalf of the Clarks, seeking a variety of remedies regarding this matter. He said in the past, he has had some concern about the opposing counsel addressing his clients without his permission.
Whereupon, Commissioner Henley requested that Mr. McMillan intercede at any time he thinks the process is going improperly. Chairman McLain stated he agrees and sees that as Mr. McMillan’s responsibility to protect the Board.
Jerry Jeffrey, 1900 Howell Branch Road, representing Dan and Cathy Clark, addressed the Board to state Hugh Harling, representing CED Development, agreed to the wall being set back 15 feet for a fire break to have an access for the fire truck to go on Mr. Clark’s side of the wall and to have a fire hydrant. He corrected the staff report that the fire hydrant is not complete as it is not where it is supposed to be. He explained the hydrant is located on an island in the parking lot and is not accessible to his clients or Ms. Stanko. He said CED tried in 2001 to change the wall requirement, but was unable to do so and now they have submitted an application for the third time to try to change that. In the interim, CED put the wall where they wanted. He explained that his clients are so frustrated, and the reason he filed suit is that nothing seems to be going on in this case. They believe CED needs to be sanctioned in some way to make them do this right, as originally ordered.
Mr. McMillan affirmed that if the Board does not change the development order, it will be complied with.
Mr. Fisher advised staff would use the Code Enforcement Board process if the development order is not complied with. He said the C.O.’s have been issued. He recommends that the best way to proceed would be through the Code Enforcement Board process.
Commissioner Morris questioned why the C.O.’s were issued when the complaint was known that the wall was not put in the right place. Mr. Fisher said this was an attempt to work with the applicant who represented they were trying to come up with a better way to put in the wall that the adjacent property owners would agree with. It is now obvious that the negotiations on the wall are not going anywhere.
Under further discussion, Mr. Fisher explained that different developers and property owners would handle the remainder of the development. He would hate to penalize them because of what is happening on the other tract with the other developer.
Mr. Fisher stated staff is dealing with CED Development to try to resolve the wall issue, and with Mr. Harling on the remainder of the property, who represents the Claytons.
Matt West, Planning Manager, addressed the Board to state the Claytons are making the application to add in the additional four acres.
Virginia Stanko, 3200 W. SR 426, addressed the Board to state she was present on September 25, 2001, when it was discussed putting a wall up and the developer completing the certificate of occupancy. She was told the developer had 45 days to comply with the request to put up a wall. In December, CED decided to pull a permit to put up the wall. She said she wasn’t going to object to where it was located as long as the wall was put up. She stated in January, CED went on Mr. Clark’s property and dug up her monument and a trench on her property; and poured a footer for the wall, which is partially on her property. This is where everything stands. Mr. Jost (phonetic) said he is not going to do anything until he resolves this with Mr. Clark. Her other issue is that CED illegally trespassed on her property and did damage and she could not satisfactorily reach an agreement because of a DOT retention pond. She asked who is responsible for CED not being in compliance.
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at 3:03 p.m. and reconvened at 3:08 p.m.
-------
Commissioner Morris announced he just received a phone call that the Governor has announced, because of voting irregularities in certain jurisdictions, that all election polls will be open till 9:00 p.m. in the State of Florida. He said the Chairman’s duties would therefore be extended tonight at the canvassing.
Chairman McLain stated there is only one administrative item for tonight and the County Attorney has volunteered to attend and continue that to an afternoon public hearing.
Commissioner Morris asked Mr. Grace to confirm with the Supervisor of Elections if she has received the Governor’s orders.
-------
Mr. Stevenson stated he is with the office of Harling Locklin and they only represent the Claytons on the 4-acre parcel that’s being added. He said he could not comment on anything that CED is working on.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.
Enlarged copies of the letter to Daniel Clark from Hugh Harling regarding Loma Vista Apartments; drawings of pre-development conditions and submittals to staff for approval; and pictures of the Clark’s property line and home site were received and filed.
Mr. Fisher advised Commissioner Henley that CED had made the request to place a “living wall” instead of the masonry wall on the property. That was to be considered by the Board within a 45-day time frame. He agreed to the release of occupancies because he knew the Board was going to hear the request 30 days after their decision to either approve the living wall or put in the masonry wall. He did this is an attempt to work with the developer. In hindsight, that may not have been the best way to handle it. He said the Board did consider the “living wall” and it was denied.
Chairman McLain expressed he has grave concerns about approving additional amendments to this development if the current order is not being followed. He doesn’t think Code Enforcement is the appropriate methodology, because they won’t know who will eventually be responsible for payment of any fines and the fines could build up and go on for years. He thinks the prudent thing to do is correct the problems with the existing development order and enforce those prior to any additions to the development.
Discussion ensued on the different properties and developers. Commissioner Maloy stated he understands the Claytons own the four acres, but it is not clear who would be building the apartments. CED, who purchased the property from the Claytons, owns the apartments.
Commissioner Henley suggested continuing this item until they can clarify the issues of who is accountable. He said he would hesitate to approve the new request until they know who the Board is dealing with and how to resolve the deficiencies.
Commissioner Maloy asked how could the Board enforce as quickly as possible the original requirements and not penalize the innocent people who are a part of the current process.
Mr. McMillan said there is not an efficient way to do that and that’s why you work with the developer. He said this could either go through the Code Enforcement Board process or the Board could sue going through the court system. He said withholding the building permits is normally the thing that gets attention.
Chairman McLain said he was considering Commissioner Henley’s suggestion on a continuance until they can get to the bottom of this and find out what the applicant’s intentions are about correcting the deficiencies.
Whereupon, Mr. McMillan said staff wants the Board to understand if they do not take action, this item would move to the Spring 2003 cycle. Discussion ensued with staff. Mr. West suggested the Board could continue this item to December 10, which is the adoption hearing of the fall cycle.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to continue to December 10, 2002, the Large Scale Land Use Amendment from Industrial to Higher Intensity Planned Development; and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) for Loma Vista PUD, located on the west side of Aloma Avenue and east of the Greeneway; as described in the proof of publication, Hugh Harling.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
Dick Boyer, Senior Planner, addressed the Board to state this is the end of the spring cycle. He presented the Spring 2002 Amendment Cycle Adoption Ordinance for approval, excluding the Lake Jesup item (Item #65) on tonight’s agenda that is planned for continuance. He said the ordinance would be revised to reflect that change and would exclude Item #60, Loma Vista PUD, just heard before the Board and continued.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to adopt Ordinance #2002-37, as shown on page ________, Spring 2002 Amendment Cycle.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
RUTH WOOD
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in approving for Hyacinth Wallace a Special Exception for an Adult Day Care Facility with a maximum of 20 clients; property located on the east side of Tuskawilla Road, approximately ½ mile north of SR 426, Ruth Wood, received and filed.
Jeff Hopper, Senior Planner, addressed the Board to present the request. He stated staff is recommending the Board of Adjustment’s decision be upheld, subject to all conditions specified in the Development Order.
Ruth Wood, Appellant, addressed the Board to ask how does the Board of Adjustment conclude that a 20-person per day maximum adult day care constitute a lower intensity than 20 people actually living at the site. She said Ms. Wallace stated at the Board of Adjustment meeting that she would be picking up clients in a 15-passenger van. She said everyone is on a schedule and they are going to want to deliver the clients to the site. This could mean a possible going and coming of 40 people per day, along with staff, the cleaning crew, and food service. In her opinion, this constitutes considerable intensity in a residential area that would be incompatible with surrounding properties. She said the properties in this area are all residential. All commercial businesses are either south of Bear Creek at the intersection of Aloma and Tuskawilla or at the north end of Tuskawilla at the Red Bug intersection. Further, she said if a turn lane is put in on Tuskawilla Road, that will make it difficult for those persons who live in the new subdivision to turn north onto Tuskawilla in the mornings and will make it difficult for those coming out of Parker Court and Eugenia Court to turn south or left onto Tuskawilla Road in the mornings. If a special exception is made for this property, she feel it is going to set a precedence that would force the County to agree to other A-1 properties nearby becoming similar type businesses. She asked why not zone the property Office Professional and collect the taxes due the County. She advised that according to the Property Appraiser’s Office, the building is 4,226 square feet and not 7,052 square feet as given on the application. She asked who is going to enforce the applicant not using the second floor of the building and who will enforce the restrictions, such as only 20 people. She advised if the property is operating as a business now, the Property Appraiser has it listed as a homestead exemption. Also, the license as an Assisted Living Facility was revoked in 1999 due to uncorrected deficiencies.
Commissioner Maloy advised Ms. Wood that A-1 zoning does allow business uses.
Hyacinth Wallace, 2323 Tuskawilla Road, addressed the Board to state the people will be inside and not outside the house. She has a 15-passenger bus that she will use to pick up the people.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Maloy, Ms. Wallace stated she had met with the staff to learn what changes need to be made to bring the building up to code. She said she has gotten some estimates for the sprinkler system and driveway, and she has an engineer who will be working on that for her. She said according to the appraised value in 1999, the building was 10,000 square feet, with the property being two acres (more or less).
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Henley, Ms. Wallace said she would be paying Meals On Wheels for the lunches. She further advised Commissioner Maloy that there are no convalescent home activities occurring on the property now, but she has independent living services with five people.
Upon inquiry by Commissioner Morris, Ms. Wallace said all 20 clients would be ambulatory and there would be five staff people including herself. She also said the clients would be allowed to have visitors, and she would not have any clients on the weekends.
Mr. Hopper advised the Board that he did not address the traffic count. Whereupon, Commissioner Morris said he thinks that is an important question.
Commissioner Henley stated he thinks if this is approved, it should be included in the Development Order that the business is limited to Monday through Friday.
Jeanette Dolny, 4630 Parker Court, addressed the Board to state the original problem was that special exceptions were being granted and every time there was no way to enforce the restrictions to make the area livable. She asked how can this be controlled and who will monitor the 20 people. She told of a problem with the septic tanks overflowing after Ms. Wallace took over and it was not voluntarily cleaned up. She asked how could these clients be confined to indoors. She said this license was not renewed because of unfulfilled requirements. Ms. Dolny questioned where would Ms. Wallace’s clients come from. She checked and Seniors First is for Orange County citizens only.
Deandra Littles, 7016 Oakmore Lane, addressed the Board to state this would not be an everyday adult day care for one person. There would be a maximum capacity of 20 people and one person would not come every day. She clarified that the meals (not clients) would come from Seniors First. The clients would be the elderly living in the areas of Tuskawilla, Oviedo, and Casselberry who need a place to go during the day and be among others.
Connie Claspell, 457 Sunny Brook Way, addressed the Board to state she doesn’t know exactly what the neighbors could be complaining about. She said the house is on Parker and there are maybe seven houses there. The houses are all on frontal lots and the empty portions are abutting Ms. Wallace’s property. She submitted pictures (received and filed) of the property showing a wooden fence so no one can see onto the property. She understood that people would come in and have meals, crafts and such during the day and would be picked up during the evening.
Chairman McLain read Written Comment Forms (received and filed) in support of the facility from Hyacinth Walker, Jan Robertson, and Nucci Cento.
Ms. Wood submitted to the Board a printout (not received and filed) from the Property Appraiser’s Office that gives the square footage of the house. M. Hopper advised that if there is not enough square footage for 20 people, then the number of people to be served would be reduced.
No one else spoke in support or in opposition.
Speaker Request Forms were received and filed.
District Commissioner Maloy stated the site plan seems to be inadequate and substantial changes need to occur on the property. He doesn’t necessarily know what those changes are. He asked staff if that information could be brought to the Board at a future meeting.
Mr. Fisher said staff could work with the applicant to have more details attached to the site plan. He recommended continuing this hearing to the second meeting in October (October 22) to allow staff time to meet with Ms. Wallace and revise the site plan and bring that back to the Board.
Mr. Fisher reviewed the criteria that must be met for approval. Mr. West said the Development Order does limit the business to week days.
Commissioner Morris discussed the daily trips, doctor appointments, and visitors and said this may be much more than just their own service trips.
Commissioner Van Der Weide said the Board is not aware of what the State licensing requirements are for adult day care and he would like to know what the law is and where they can and cannot go.
Motion by Commissioner Maloy, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to continue to October 22, 2002, the Appeal against the Board of Adjustment in approving for Hyacinth Wallace a Special Exception for an Adult Day Care Facility with a maximum of 20 clients; property located on the east side of Tuskawilla Road, approximately ½ mile north of SR 426; as described in the proof of publication, Ruth Wood.
Under discussion, Chairman McLain stated if the motion passes for a continuance, the Board would not take public comments again, but get the information to answer questions and make a decision.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
VACATE AND ABANDON/MCKENDALL
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider vacating and abandoning that portion of the 20-foot wide platted drainage and utility easement located at 600 Sweetwater Creek Court, Benjamin S. McKendall, received and filed.
Cynthia Sweet, Planner, addressed the Board to state staff is recommending approval of the request to vacate and abandon.
No one spoke in support or in opposition.
District Commissioner Van Der Weide stated he has not had any complaints.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to adopt appropriate Resolution #2002-R-144, as shown on page _______, vacating and abandoning that portion of the 20-foot wide platted drainage and utility easement located at 600 Sweetwater Creek Court; as described in the proof of publication, Benjamin S. McKendall.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
AMENDMENT TO HIBC AGREEMENT
Proof of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider Amendment to the HIBC Development Agreement relating to the International Parkway and associated recreational trail; Kenneth Wright, Shutts and Bowen LLP, received and filed.
Chairman McLain stated the request is to continue this item to October 22, 2002, 1:30 p.m.
Motion by Commissioner Henley, seconded by Commissioner Maloy, to continue to October 22, 2002, 1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, the Amendment to the Heathrow International Business Center (HIBC) Development Agreement relating to the International Parkway and associated recreational trail; as described in the proof of publication, Kenneth Wright, Shutts and Bowen LLP.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
-------
Mr. Grace advised he has a copy of the Executive Order extending the voting time by two hours.
-------
Chairman McLain asked if the Board wished to reschedule Item #67 on tonight’s agenda.
Motion by Commissioner Van Der Weide, seconded by Commissioner Henley, to continue to September 24, 2002, 1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, the public hearing to consider Ordinance amending the Seminole County Code of Ordinances and Land Development Code to clarify separation requirements.
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 voted AYE.
The following Communications and/or Reports were received and filed:
1. City of Lake Mary Public Hearing Notice for September 19, 2002 regarding vacating a portion of Rosewood Avenue. (cc: Supervisor of Elections, Planning & Development, Planning)
2. Copy of adopted ordinance from the City of Sanford regarding annexation of property at 2522 Country Club Road. (cc: Supervisor of Elections, Planning & Development, Planning)
3. Notice of Public Hearing from the City of Sanford to consider annexations between SR 46 & Moore’s Station, between Cameron Avenue and Beardall Avenue and at Marquette Avenue and East Lake Mary Blvd. (cc: Supervisor of Elections, Planning & Development, Planning)
4. Copy of Memo dated August 30, 2002 to Sandy McCann, Commission Records, from Becky Noggle, Environmental Services, regarding submissions into County Records. (cc: BCC, Co. Manager, Deputy Co. Manager, Environmental Services Director)
5. Copy of letters dated August 21, 2002 from Kenneth M. Roberts, Public Safety Director, to Jessica Kendall and Myra Abel in appreciation of recent donations.
6. Copy of letters dated August 28, 2002 from Joe Gasparini, Parks & Recreation Manager, to Margie’s Tennis Group and Ralph & Gwen Allen in appreciation for recent donation.
7. Contract for Services, as shown on page _______, between Seminole County and Colleen M. Luce.
8. Copy of letters dated September 4, 2002 from Kenneth Roberts, Public Safety Director, to Cornelia Dietzel, David Dyleski, and Helen Lanham in appreciation of recent donation.
9. Copy of letter dated August 30, 2002 to Captain Greg Shapley from Bob Gleason, District Environmental Administrator/FDOT regarding Amendment to Advance Notification for SR 46 Lake Jesup Bridge Replacement. (cc: See mailing list attached to letter)
10. Letter dated September 3, 2000 from Diane Picket Culpepper to Chairman and Board of County Commissioners submitting the AOL Time Warner 2001 Annual Report. (cc: BCC, Co. Manager, Cable Franchise Coordinator)
11. Copy of letter dated August 30, 2002 from Richard W. Wells, City of Casselberry to County Manager regarding adoption of ordinance of property annexation between Howell Branch Road and SR 436. (cc: Property Appraiser, Supervisor of Elections, Planning & Development, Planning)
12. Copy of letter dated August 27, 2002 from Cynthia Porter, City of Sanford, regarding adoption of ordinance annexing property at 901 Towne Center Boulevard. (cc: Planning & Development, Planning)
13. Letter dated August 29, 2002 from Rachel Carnicelli, City of Sanford, regarding adoption of ordinance annexing property at 2002 E. 4th Street and 221 Crescent Blvd. (cc: Planning & Development, Planning)
14. Letter dated August 31, 2002 from Central Florida Sports Commission to Chairman regarding July 2002 Annual Report. (cc: BCC, Tourism Director, Library & Leisure Services Director)
15. Copy of letter dated August 29, 2002 from the Tuscawilla Homeowners Association to Board regarding opposition to Wal-Mart in the Red Bug Lake Road Corridor. (cc: Board)
CHAIRMAN’S REPORT
Chairman McLain reported he received a response from Teresa Jacobs, Orange County, on local preference scoring. She is going to work to help to make Orange County become more equitable in this process as far as Seminole County businesses are concerned.
Mr. Grace said he, Chairman McLain, and Orange County Chairman Crotty have a meeting on September 18. He said Commissioner Morris was told that there was a misunderstanding and Ms. Jacobs thought they were in compliance with Seminole County. The indication from the County Manager was that they were directed to make the change.
-------
Chairman McLain stated he received a letter of appreciation from Sandy Robinson, Seminole County School Board, for the contribution for the Pre-K Readiness Program.
DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS
Commissioner Henley questioned Mr. Grace on the agreement to aid in the reconstruction of baseball fields in Sanford. He said the County was to receive specific data every year before sending a check. He requested those reports be shared with the Board. Mr. Grace said he would have to follow up on that.
-------
Commissioner Maloy said he received notice that Wal-Mart is going to continue their proposal for the site on the south side of Red Bug. They are running into some opposition.
-------
Commissioner Maloy said he received a letter from a Chuluota resident discussing if there are any plans to expand the Lake Mills Park. He has discussed this with staff. Although it’s too early to say go ahead and buy, he thinks it is something staff should review.
Commissioner Morris asked if it would be appropriate to get the Parks Advisory Board to take a look at this and include this in the master plan.
Commissioner Maloy agreed, if there is no opposition, to have the Parks Board review this and report back to the Board.
COUNTY MANAGER’S REPORT
Mr. Grace discussed the membership dues to the Florida Association of Counties. The County has been asked to pay an additional amount on Article V in the amount of $11,335, which is not currently in the budget. He said if the Board wants to participate, he will include that amount as an adjustment to the budget at tomorrow night’s hearing. There were no objections.
-------
Chairman McLain recessed the meeting at 4:21 p.m., reconvening at 7:00 p.m., this same date, with County Attorney Robert McMillan and Deputy Clerk Eva Roach being present.
Continuation of a public hearing to consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Suburban Estates to Low Density Residential; and Rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); property located on the south side of Myrtle Street and west of Hester Avenue, Lake Jesup Woods, as described in the proof of publication, Hugh Harling; Proofs of publication, as shown on page _______, calling for a public hearing to consider request to Small Scale Land Use Amendment from Office to Planned Development; and Rezone from OP (Office Professional) to PUD (Planned Unit Development); property comprising approximately 9.9 acres and located on the west side of Wekiva Springs Road, ½ mile north of SR 434, Thomas Daly; and Ordinance amending the Seminole County Code of Ordinances and Land Development Code to clarify separation requirements, received and filed.
Mr. McMillan reconvened the meeting and stated it appears that there is a lack of a quorum. He stated in light of a lack of the quorum, the following items on the agenda #65, Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Rezone for Lake Jesup Woods, Hugh Harling, has been moved to the 2003 Spring Cycle, which will be heard during that time and will be readvertised; #66, Small Scale Amendment and Rezone, Thomas Daly, will be held at 7:00 p.m. on September 24, 2002; and #67, Ordinance amending the Seminole County Code of Ordinances and Land Development Code to clarify separation requirements, will be continued to September 24, 2002 at 1:30 p.m. There being no further business of the BCC meeting, he announced the adjournment of the meeting at 7:04 p.m.
ATTEST:_____________________Clerk______________________Chairman
sm/cc/er