Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout_1996 05 13 City Commission Regular Minutes REGULAR MEETING CITY COMMISSION MAY 13, 1996 The Regular Meeting of the City Commission was called to order by Mayor John F. Bush at 7:30p.m. ROLL CALL: Mayor John F. Bush, present Deputy Mayor John Ferring, present City Manager Ronald W. McLemore, present City Attorney Frank Kruppenbacher, present COMMISSIONERS: Larry Conniff, absent John Langellotti, present Cindy Gennell, present David McLeod, present F or the invocation Mayor Bush asked for a moment of silent prayer. Commissioner Ferring said in lieu of the group of people that is present tonight, he would like to see if that particular item can be moved to the front of the agenda so the people do not have to sit here all night. Commissioner Ferring said furthermore, rather than going into a long drawn out venting of frustrations, he would like to make a statement that this whole issue regarding the S.R. 419 project only got into the Commission's hands late last week and said if the other Commissioners have done the same research as he and heard from some of the residents in the Highlands, that they will agree to save everybody's frustration and make a motion now to have the City Manager rescind the letters that were sent to the County supporting the change of zoning and write a letter in opposition of changing that zoning. Commissioner Ferring asked the City Attorney if there was any legal constraint on the Shepard Road situation where the City does not have to open Shepard Road. Attorney Kruppenbacher stated that he would have to look into the Shepard Road issue. Mayor Bush said he agrees that this item should be moved to the front of the agenda. Commissioner Ferring said he made a motion and stated that this item should never have been before the Commission, the Commission had no knowledge of it and as far as he is concerned he is in total opposition of changing that zoning, that zoning was put there for a reason and until further information comes forth regarding this. Commissioner Ferring said he doesn't see why the City has to get involved as a City to tell the County that we are not in opposition of it, and said he is definitely in opposition of it and said he is sure that many of the Commissioners is also in opposition of changing that zoning. Mayor Bush stated that he believes that on a situation such as this the City is required to make a response to the County on the Inter-Local Agreements that are in place. Manager McLemore stated that through our Comprehensive Plans and State Rule 9J-5, we are required to do what is called Inter-Governmental coordination assessments of these projects that impact us and obviously the impact is because of the adjacent properties that are within the City limits but the impact also extends the letter agreement that proposes to potentially annex the property and to provide the property with water and sewer. Therefore, the City is into the issue unless the Commission were to vote and say Resmlar Meetine City Commission Mav 13. 1996 95-96-16 Paee 2 they don't want anything to do with this and write and tell them that. Commissioner Ferring asked the City Attorney for legal clarification and said do to the fact that the City is not at this point involved with this property, does the City have to articulate our reasons for supporting or not supporting this project. Attorney Kruppenbacher said the City has entered into an Inter-Local Agreement and the Comprehensive Plan calls for the City to give input to the County when they ask for it and vise versa, the County is in the posture now of asking for input. The City Manager needs the guidance to know what he needs to do as the Manager regarding this issue and that is what he is asking the Commission. Commissioner Gennell said that in as much as we have a City Manager and he has brought it forward and placed it on the agenda, she said that she feels that the Commission should deal with it and hear what the Manager has to say and one of the Commission's options would be at that time is to dispose ofit in the manner that Commissioner Ferring is requesting, but feels that the Commission should hear out the City Manager and hear his position on this. Mayor Bush stated that there is a motion on the floor and asked for a second. There was no second, motion dies for lack of a second. Mayor Bush stated that this item will be the first item the Commission will deal with. Approval of Minutes of April 22. 1996: Mayor Bush asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of April 22, 1996. There were no additions or corrections to the minutes of April 22, 1996. Minutes stand approved as presented. Approval of Minutes of Special Meeting of April 30. 1996: Mayor Bush asked ifthere were any additions or corrections to the minutes the Special Meeting of April 30, 1996. There were no additions or corrections to the minutes of the Special Meeting of April 30, 1996. Minutes stand approved as presented. Mayor Bush read and presented Fire Chief Tim Lallathin with a proclamation for Emergency Medical Services Week. Chief Lallathin said he would like to encourage all the members of the audience and citizens of the community to stop by the Fire Station and get their blood pressure checked and if they have a medical emergency to dial 9-1-1 and they will be there. Mayor Bush said he wanted to make sure that the citizens present got to hear the proclamation because he feels that the Fire Department is doing an outstanding job with the medical transport service and that they deserve the recognition. PUBLIC INPUT There was no Public Input. Ree:ular Meetine: City Commission Mav 13. 1996 95-96-16 Pae:e 3 Mayor Bush stated that the Commission will now hear Regular Agenda Item "H'. Land Management Division H. Informing the City Commission of possible citizen concerns regarding the request of James Duke for a Small-Scale Amendment to the County Comprehensive Plan (change the land use from Suburban Estates to Industrial and rezoning from A-I to C-3), and related actions taken by City Staff, and other related issues. PURPOSE: to inform the Commission of the possible citizen concerns and the action taken by Staff as it relates to the upcoming Seminole County Local Planning agency/Planning & Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners Meetings which will consider a request ofJames Duke for a Small-Scale Amendment to the County Comprehensive plan changing the land use from Suburban Estates to Industrial, and rezoning from A-12 to C-3 on property located on S.R. 419. The purpose of this Board item is also to have the Commission provide policy direction related to issues that have surfaced regarding the proposed land use change and rezoning: Manager McLemore gave an overview on this item. This is an issue that puts us in a difficult situation. The residents are concerned about potential obnoxious uses from an industrial park and that type of zoning that is not consistent with their quality of life and their investments and property. The property owner himself is put into a difficult position because of the surrounding use of this property, his marketing ability is limited; it probably is relegated to some type of industrial type of development or some type of high density, low cost housing, in terms of what the property can be sold and marketed for. All these concerns have to be played out within the constitutional property rights, which is a decision the County will have to make, as to how to balance those rights. Manager McLemore said his prospective in this process the Commission/City wears two hats, one as a comment or in transmitting to the County what the Commission's desires are relative to this issue and the other potentially as a service provider if this property were in fact to be annexed into the City and serviced by the City's water and sewer system. In conclusion, the developer/property owner's options are limited, the property at this time (with the current owner/developer) is someone that the City knows who would probably want to work with the City and try to work something out that would at was reasonably satisfactory to everyone, we don't know what will happen if the property falls into other hands because it can have the same limitations on it to whoever owns it. Manager McLemore said he appreciates everyone's point of view and concern in this and said typically there would be a Staff presentation, but we don't have to do that at this time, and may wan to consider having the applicant put his position on record and then receive public comments. The Staff's comments are public record and are in writing, and if the public would like to hear those or if the Commission would like those articulated then we would move to Staff, if not we can go straight to the applicant to hear his position. Mayor Bush asked if the Commission had any questions from Staff. There was no questions from the Commission for Staff. Commissioner Ferring said he has no problem with the owner wanting to put his comments on record, however, he thinks there should be comments from the Commission to seetif the Commission is of the same mind as he is at and let's dispose of this as quickly as possible. Resmlar Meetin2 City Commission Mav 13. 1996 95-96-16 Pa2e 4 Scott Moore, with Ravinsdale Planning and Design, representing James Duke, spoke regarding this item. Mr. Moore stated that the property is approximately 13 acres, it is very wooded and is a long thin parcel and in average 300' deep. Some of the surrounding land uses on the property across the street is an existing asphalt plant, and an industrial park on the east side; to the south presently a portion of it is zoned industrial, to the west there is a spray field and existing Shepard Road with a 60' right-of-way and the residential neighborhood; to the north is existing wetlands. Mr. Moore stated that they intend to develop the property into a high quality light industrial commercial lots, for example: plumbing businesses, office showroom, light retailing or warehouses. The commercial park that we are intending to develop, we are going to have an artechicual review board that will control the actual uses as well as the development of the property and how it will look from the road itself There will be restrictions placed and the restrictions and covenants will be run by the owners association of the park itself that will limit those uses and also control it. Mr. Moore stated that they feel the highest and best use of this property is commercial/industrial instead of a high intensity residential lots; the only other alternative to this site would be some high intensity apartments, low income housing or possibly governmental subsidized housing and said he doesn't think that is really what they want to do on a major collector road that is only 300' deep, and said that he doesn't think that would benefit the community in any way. Moore read a portion of the covenants and restrictions. Mr. Moore said the developer is trying to be a good neighbor. Discussion. Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to deny sending a letter to the County requesting no opposition and that the City Manager's letters be revoked and another letter saying that we do oppose this change of zoning, this is totally incompatible with the nearby residential areas that are around that area. Seconded by Commissioner Langellotti. Discussion. Commissioner McLeod stated that whatever is done there either by the City or County, that protection has to be given to that property by the County, and stated that he doesn't feel that a six foot fence is adequate and thinks there should be an eight foot fence to try and deaden some noises and also natural buffering/fencing rather than a block wall that would give it some depth with some height, and trees and said he thinks that should be part of the recommendations that we disapprove of the park itself, however, if the County does consider we would like them to also consider other alternatives. Commissioner Gennell asked the City Manager and City Attorney if we throw out the agreement, then does that not put us in the position of completely loosing control over that whole parcel. Attorney Kruppenbacher said it is not the City's responsibility to negotiate something that the developer can take to the County, you are being asked to say to the County that you either like the project, like the project with changes or don't like the project; if the majority of the Commission doesn't want this project under any circumstances that you sit here and attempt to help resolve the issue, to create a record that basically tells another public body of the concerns where you may mollify some of the people. Attorney Kruppenbacher said if the Commission opts to take this vote and the developer does not petition for annexation and the City doesn't annex the property (either one) the City will have no control over this project; my answer is yes in essence you will have no control over it unless the developer petitioned to annex and the City then voted to accept the Res!Ular Meetin2 City Commission Mav 13.1996 95-96-16 Pa2e 5 annexation petition. Commissioner Gennell stated that one of our options is to deny this and one of the results of that is that the developer can then go to the County for water and sewer, would we not then would we loose any leverage or communication over this piece of property. Attorney Kruppenbacher said he thinks if the developer can obtain the water and sewer for this project from the County and the County approves the project the developer wants, the City has no jurisdiction over the property; the City only has it's legal rights to challenge any thing you think is inappropriate pursuant to the law, which in his opinion are limited if any given what has come down from the Courts on these issues. Commissioner Gennell stated that she has a document from the County, Master Document Duke Rezoning and the summary says comprehensive planning land use - recommend rezoning lots 4-11 to C-3, and do not recommend C-3 rezoning on 11-17 due to potential incomparability with abutting subdivision to the west. Mr. Moore said they were intending to get commercial for the whole property and their preliminary discussions with the County was that they did have a concern about compatibility and we are willing to restrict along the residential properties, uses that are not compatible and we would like to have input from the residential community to do that and that is what we are trying to do with our restrictions and covenants. Mayor Bush stated that we are looking at a piece of property that is going into the County and the City will have no say on what's going on that property, not furnishing City water and sewer will delay their development somewhat but eventually the County will run water and sewer to that area and at that point the developer can put on there what ever the County agrees to and the City will be here just as we had to sit through the Oviedo Mall situation. Mayor Bush also said another concern he has is this was sprung on the Commission very rapidly and no one has had time to study it and obviously the public got concerned about this and there is a great deal of information that no one really knows about how effective or how truthful it is as this point and said he doesn't personally want to see that developed commercial but on the other had he hates to see the City just wash their hands of it and we are 'passing this on to a future Commission and somebody in Winter Springs will have to deal with this at some point. Manager McLemore stated he has watched these things for 25 years, and the thing that concerns him about this is not what the Commission decides to do, and said he respects the Commission's opinion, he is just concerned about the citizens leaving with a false sense of security, this is a quasi-judicial rendering at the County level, it is going to have to be developed on a professional record and will be very difficult for them to not to deal with this issue at least to some degree the way it's being proposed. If they do not, he thinks the parties will simply go into Court and exercise their rights to get their rights, the facts are not good on this situation from his position and he thinks for the City to give up that opportunity to control this through the water and sewer agreement that the City had raises some degree of concern with his and said he just doesn't the citizens to leave thinking this still isn't a problem. Mr. Moore stated that they have sewer and water available to them from Seminole County. Mayor Bush asked why wasn't the City and homeowners given more notice of this so this could be addressed in a more complete manner. Mr. Jim Lup, representative of Duke Properties, stated that it was the intention of the Commission and Staff to have this meeting now, this meeting could have been held at a later time. Our hearing for DRC with Seminole County is not until June 5, 1996 and the final is not until July and we submitted this and have been discussing this with the City of Winter Springs for some time now, we approached the City about utilities because utility lines are right next to our property, yes the County can provide us with utilities, it is an extra added expense but compared to the expense of paying additional road impact Resmlar Meetine City Commission Mav 13.1996 95-96-16 Paee 6 fees of four times the amount of the County's would not make it practical so we came to the City and said we would work with the City. We said if the City could provide us utilities, we would annex into the City of Winter Springs which brings in the revenue base and we will work with the City on developing this and said he was aware of the concerns that might be raised with the property to the north along the residential, fortunately we have a 60 foot road and another 20 foot what appears to be buffer between us there, we admitted up front not knowing that the County's requirement for a wall would be required, we agreed up front that we would apply a wall. We had a project in mind similar to Roger Owen developed down the road which is very high class, up scale industrial uses (in his opinion). Mr. Lup stated that he has met with the City of Winter Springs Staff to ask how can they ease tensions and work together. Mr. Lup stated that he has a vested interest in the City, he is with the Commerce & Industry Development Board and said annexation for this City for this type of project, for this type of opportunity, jobs, revenue is good for the City, if we could work together and develop this in a way that benefits both the City and us and we are willing to do that and sit down do that, and we believe that is what we have done, and that is what we are here for. Mayor Bush said he would like to see the developer reconsider this, come back to Staff, work with the Commission, work with the Homeowners in the Highlands and maybe there is common ground that we could all come out winners on this, the Commission was not aware of this (as far as he knows) and said he thinks the Commission is not in a good position to make a good decision for the City or the Homeowners tonight. Mr. Lup stated that they didn't know if the Commission would be at this juncture necessary, we have Staff to work with us and policies that we follow by and we were working in those realms and didn't think it was necessary to come before the Commission at this point, we felt we had with working with Staff and working with the policies that are in place here at the City as well as in the County level, we were working towards that end to develop something that would be beneficial to everybody. Commissioner Ferring stated that he feels that this was a "done deal", this was a done deal with the City sending letters to the County Manager telling that the City had no opposition and the only reason this surfaced is because of the incomparability of the residential areas being within the project. The residents knew about this project, they received the notices and knew about the project before the City knew about it. Commissioner Ferring told Mr. Lup that ifhe really wants to do something for this City, he would reconsider going back to the drawing boards and talking with the Staffand withdrawing from the County anything that you've got put forward to them and if that is not possible, then you don't want to work with the City of Winter Springs and that is the reason we are in this position and therefore we have no choice to go forward with the motion that was made. Commissioner McLeod said he would like to see this tabled at least until the next Commission meeting if the maker and second would withdraw their motion so that everybody can look deeper into this as a Commission body and we can hear from the citizens to get input all the way around and then let the City Manager bring this back to us in a fashion that he would feel comfortable with his recommendations as Manager of this City. Mayor Bush said to Mr. Moore that he would like him (Moore) to delay taking this any further until the Commission has had more time to evaluate it, and he to have more time to work with Staff and Staff can get back with the Commission because we might be able to find common ground. Mr. Lup said they are under contractual obligations to perform within a certain amount of time, to be able to say he could accommodate, there is a time period under which they are working and that may not be possible to accommodate that. Mr. Lup stated that they are not under any obligation to come before the Commission, we have been doing Reeular Meetine City Commission Mav 13.1996 95-96-16 Pae:e 7 this on our own, to work with the City, he has been working with the City Staff for over a year. Mayor Bush said that Mr. Lup mentioned they were under a time constraint and said he doesn't think the Commission would object to a special meeting and thinks that the City Manager would give this the highest priority among his attention and Staff Mr. Moore stated that they need some kind of input so they can come back with something meaningful at the next meeting. Mayor Bush stated that he would like to see the developer step back from this and work with the Commission, the homeowners and the City Manager on this issue to see if we cannot resolve it before they go forward with it. Commissioner McLeod mentioned that the Highlands Homeowners Assoc. is having a meeting on the 15th and said that he would like to see the developer and homeowners and City Manager get together to talk out the differences and then in a week come back to this Commission and advise the Commission as to where we are. Mr. Carl Chiappone, President of the Highlands Homeowners Assoc., stated that they could not get together all their thoughts in a day and a half to negotiate with the developer. Mr. Chiappone stated that the homeowners could put together a committee to work with the developer. Commissioner Gennell asked that the motion be read back. Manager McLemore stated the answer to the question of why this project came up at the last minute and stated he made a mistake and said he was sorry for that, the issue here when he reviewed this file, there was an agreement in the file that led him to believe that this Commission has already acted on this and given direction. That was in error, it's in writing in the file, and said he doesn't question the wisdom of the agreement, the agreement is well structured and was intended to give this Commission some leverage over this project. Manager McLemore stated that in 25 years he has never entered into an agreement without the Commission ratifying that agreement and stated that he is not use to that kind of things and that is what happened. Manager McLemore stated that he doesn't want the residents to feel that they can't trust him to represent them, because when he reviewed the file the only options he saw was to try and start putting in a lot of restrictions to try and protect the homeowners and that is what he did. Vote on the motion: Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye. Motion passes. Mayor Bush said to Mr. Lup and Mr. Moore that they got the sense from the Commission that the Commission is wanting to see them meet with the homeowners and Staff and bring this back to us and said he feels there is ground that we can both work this out. Attorney Kruppenbacher stated that the County may ask Manager McLemore in the addition to the opposition is the City going to provide water and sewer independent of your opposition because there was an agreement that the City's former City Manager entered into, what he would recommend to the Commission is that there has been representation from the developer that they would work with the homeowners. The Commission does not have to make the decision on whether the City is going to provide water and sewer tonight, you can make that decision after the developer meets with the Reeular Meetine City Commission Mav 13.1996 95-96-16 Paee 8 homeowners and if they don't reconcile with the homeowners the City Manager can ask the Commission for direction on that issue. It was the consensus of the Commission to make that decision on the water and sewer at a later time. Mayor Bush called for a break at 8:40 p.m. Mayor Bush reconvened the meeting at 8:50 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA General Services Department A. Request the City Commission to authorize the Mayor to send a letter to the Florida Department of Community Affairs Bureau of Community Assistance, approving the distribution of Fiscal year 1996/97 Federal Anti-Drug Abuse grant funds. PURPOSE: to request the City Commission to authorize the Mayor to send a letter to the Florida Department of Community Affairs approving the distribution of $245,007.00 in Federal grant funds in Seminole County. Parks and Recreation Department B. Request the City Commission to consider information received from "The Compassionate Friends-Orlando Chapter" who are offering to donate a park benches) to the City for installation at Central Winds Park. PURPOSE: to provide adequate information to the Commission so that they can determine the appropriateness of accepting the proposed donated benches. Public Works Department C. Request approval to piggyback off of the City of Port Orange's Bid #92-24 for the relining of Gravity Sewer Mains. PURPOSE: to request approval to piggyback off of the City of Port Orange's Bid #92-24 for the relining of gravity sewer mains by Madsen/Barr Corporation at a cost of $98,226.00. Public Works Department D. Request authorization to execute Supplement #1 to Amendment 44 for Consulting Engineering Services - Orange Avenue Drainage improvements. PURPOSE: to request authorization to execute Supplement # 1 to Amendment 44 - Consulting Engineering Services for Orange Avenue Drainage Improvements with Conklin, Porter & Holmes Engineers, Inc. General Services Department E. Request the City Commission to approve the surplus property list, and participation in the joint governmental auction of such property on June 15, 1996, at the Seminole County Greyhound Park in the City of Casselberry. PURPOSE: 1) to obtain City Commission approval of the list of surplus property; 2) participation in the joint governmental auction on June 15, 1996; and 3) to piggyback the Volusia County State contract (via Lake County) at 7.5% auctioning fee for the first $50,000 gross proceeds, 8% of 8% of $50,000 to $100,000 gross proceeds, and 8.5% for amounts over $100,000. General Services Department F. Request the City Commission amend the Personnel Policy to adopt Resolution No. 780 - 1) leave Ree:ular Meetine: City Commission Mav 13. 1996 95-96-16 Pae:e 9 to be taken in fifteen (15) minutes, or quarter hour increments rather than four (4) hour increments; and 2) ratifY the Commissions previous action on March 25, 1996 to amend Section 20-2 nepotism to allow for part-time and seasonal employment (12 weeks or less) of relatives within a Department when there is no direct line of supervision by a relative. PURPOSE: to amend the City's Personnel Policy to allow 1) fifteen (15) minute increments for sick leave rather than four (4) hour increments, and 2) ratifY the previous action of March 25, 1996 to change Section 20-2 Nepotism to allow part- time and seasonal employment of relatives within a department when there is no direct line of supervision by a relative. Fire Department G. Request authorization to enter into a contract agreement for HV AC (heating, ventilation, air conditioning) equipment and installation for Fire Station on North Moss Road. PURPOSE: to authorize the City Manger to enter into a contractual agreement with Wayne's Heating and Air Conditioning for the installation of two 4 ton HV ACV systems at Fire Station #24 at a cost of $6,207.82 Land Management Division H. Request City Commission approval for the acceptance of the water and sewer system for public ownership and maintenance, The Reserve at Tuscawilla, Phase II. PURPOSE: to accept the water and sewer system for public ownership and maintenance. These improvements are located in Phase II of The Reserve at Tuscawilla subdivision (property located to the south of S.R. 434, west of Tuscora Drive and north of the abandoned CSX right-of-way). Commissioner Ferring had questions on Items C, D, E and F. Manager McLemore stated that a list of the items that are going up for auction will be made available in the lobby of City Hall; also the date has been changed from June 15, 1996 to June 22, 1996. Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to approve the Consent Agenda. Seconded by Commissioner Langellotti. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye. Motion passes. INFORMATIONAL AGENDA Parks and Recreation Department A. Request the City Commission review the information relative to the master planning process for Trotwood Park. PURPOSE: to provide updated information to the City Commission so that they will be informed about the Trotwood master planning project and its status. Police Department B. Reporting to the City Commission on the results of the "Love Your Neighbor Rib-A- Thon" PURPOSE: to advise the City Commission on the results of the "Love Your Neighbor Rib-A-Thon" held on Saturday ;May 3, 1996. Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to approve the Informational Agenda. Seconded Reeular Meetine City Commission Mav 13. 1996 95-96-16 Paee 10 by Commissioner Langellotti. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner Langellotti: aye. Motion passes. REGULAR AGENDA General Services Department A. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE 618. Request City Commission approval of the Second Reading and adoption of Ordinance 618 to vacate a portion of the Flamingo Avenue Right-of-way, a planting easement and utility easement on City owned property. PURPOSE: to cure existing easement violations and to vacate existing easements and right-of-way located on City owned property which will allow more flexibility in the future use of the property. This property is located between north Moss Road and North Fairfax Avenue and is part of Public Works/Utility Department and Fire Station No. 24 complexes: Attorney Kruppenbacher read Ord. 618 by title only. Mayor Bush closed the Regular Meeting and opened the Public Hearing. Mayor Bush asked if there was any member of the public who wished to speak on Ord. 618. There was no member of the public who spoke on Ord. 618. Mayor Bush closed the Public Hearing and reconvened the Regular Meeting. Motion was made by Commissioner Gennell to approve Ordinance 618. Seconded by Commissioner Ferring. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner McLeod: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye. Motion passes. General Services Department (Land Management Division) B. Recommending denial of the Bentley Homeowners Association request for the City to accept the Association's streets and stormwater management system for public ownership and maintenance as requested and recommending in the alternative, conditions under which said request could be recommended. PURPOSE: for City Commission to act upon a request of the Bentley Homeowners Association for the City to accept for ownership and maintenance, the streets and stormwater management system located in that private subdivision platted in two (2) phases - Bentley Green Unit I and Bentley Club at Bentley Green, a private subdivision of 66 total lots platted in the Tuscawilla PUD: Ron Hadbavny, President of Bentley Homeowners Assoc., Jerry Storey, Vice-President of Bentley Homeowners Assoc., and Russ Setta, Secretary/Treasurer of Bentley Homeowners Assoc. were present to speak against denial of the request. Mr. Hadbavny stated that all aspect of their development were constructed with the full approval of the City of Winter Springs, specifically the change in right-of-way from 50' to 40' and the deletion of the requirement of sidewalks except on the south side of the entrance were criteria changes that were approved by the City Commissioners in this forum during the planning stages of their development. Mr. Hadbavny stated that based on their review of the City Staff paper prepared on their request the common thread for recommending against accepting their facilities for public maintenance appears to be a matter of additional cost to the tax payers of Winter Springs. Mr. Hadbavny said since they Res!Ular Meetin2 City Commission Mav 13. 1996 95-96-16 Pa2e 11 are some of those tax payers and they pay the same tax rate as those people who live on streets that are publicly maintained, we feel we are owed our fair share of the benefits. We have done nothing to preclude our receiving these services in our present configuration, our development was built as approved by the City. As an option to refusing our facilities in their present configuration an alternative course of action was also discussed in the City Staff report; in our opinion the alternative actions that are recommended to make our facilities acceptable for public maintenance do not make a lot of good common practical sense for the following reasons: 1) the time cost and effort for each individual homeowner to grant the additional five feet of right-of-way on each side of the street is prohibited when there does not appear to be actual need for it other than to satisfy a Code requirement. Ifthere are actual physical needs that could be cited for this additional right-of-way then this action may be worth pursuing but there isn't. As for the requirement for sidewalks on each side of the street, we are not asking that they be constructed, due to the very limited traffic flow in our development and the disruption that would be created because of all existing sprinkler systems and landscaping, logic for doing sidewalks appears to be marginal at best and maybe even counter productive from a maintenance cost standpoint. Since additional cost maintenance seems to be the primary factor effecting the City Staff position on this matter, not having them built would appear to be a plus because it eliminates any future financial maintenance burden. The only other cost factor appears to be a lack of two inches of subbase in our roads. As a an engineer with a masters degree in civil engineering, I do not concur with the City Engineer's statement that the lack of the two additional inches of subbase for our streets would increase maintenance costs for the City. As a general rule, more is better, but only up to a point; in his opinion he stated that you must look at the specifics of the situation to determine what applies in each case. Since we do not have any thru streets in our development, our traffic flow is minimal, it is basically limited to occupant and guest vehicles and an occasional delivery truck, with this type and amount of flow the six inch stabilized subbase that was used to construct our roads is more than adequate by accepted design standards and thus our streets should not generate any additional maintenance burden. Stating that we need a one inch overlay of asphalt to preclude additional maintenance cost in his opinion is unfounded and not necessary for our specific site conditions. The requirement for a two year maintenance bond is also unwarranted for our situation, this type of bond is required after new construction to ensure any that any hidden flaws or deficiencies in the facility are corrected by the installation contractor at his expense during the warranty period. Since the original bond has expired with no apparent problems and since the City should have inspected the facilities during the construction process to ensure all design criteria were met, it is our contention that the provision of a bond at this juncture is inappropriate for our Homeowners Assoc. In summary it is their belief that they are entitled to public maintenance of their facilities, the public has access to their facilities, they were all approved by the City and we pay the same tax rates as any other resident of the City of Winter Springs, accordingly we seek your favorable endorsement of their request. Manager McLemore stated that there is a real dangerous situation here, the main point of the petitioners argument here is they indicate that the City has done something wrong, and it would be really an unfortunate situation for the Commission to entertain that or certainly to affirm that. The Commission has done nothing wrong, in granting these special conditions for a private development, the Commission did what the City's ordinances allow to do. The Commission has since moved Re2ular Meetin2 City Commission Mav 13.1996 95-96-16 Pa2e 12 beyond that and amended the ordinances to not allow that to happen any more. Secondly, in those kind of situations when we deal with land development issues, whenever new developments, new development schemes and new development conditions are brought forward, by virtue of the Compo Plan, we always made them come up to the current law, and they are not being treated any different from anyone else. Thirdly, what is being presented to the Commission is the same argument that those other 24 subdivisions out there could potentially make is the Commission approves this. That is going to be an exhaustive financial burden on this community to deal with once we open that equal protection law "box". Manager McLemore stated that he is sensitive to what the homeowners are saying and appreciate their position, we try to say to the Commission, this is fraught with danger, the Commission has done nothing wrong in approving this. It is our recommendation that the Commission follow the recommendation of what is in the package regarding this item. Attorney Kruppenbacher said in March the Manager contacted me and raised a question: should the City of Winter Springs accept for ownership and maintenance in their current condition the streets and stormwater management system located in the private subdivision known as Bentley Green and said his answer was no, and it continues to be no for the following reasons: deviation from the public street was approved based upon representations from the developer that this was a private neighborhood, thus giving them the rights to gate the neighborhood etc., the property owners bought subject with that knowledge. The Commission (at that time) did nothing wrong, they were in their legal authority to do that and they did it. The problem is that the Code does not contemplate the Commission's ability to take ownership of a substandard street and if you wanted to get to that, you would have to amend the Code to allow you to accept those things. If you are asking me as a lawyer, I will tell you, giving the amount of lawsuits we are seeing, I don't ever recommend a client take ownership of something that is substandard by anyone's standard or by a standard you've picked. Manager McLemore said it is important, for the record, to point out that in our treatment of this, in trying to be as fair as we could be under the conditions and said he knows it is not acceptable to the property owners and said he understands where they are coming from and appreciates that position, but to try to be fair and at the same time protect the Commission both financially and legally. An alternative was laid out, and that alternative is not attractive to them but the door was not slammed, there is an alternative, it is one that is not attractive to them but it is one that makes it work without the Commission getting into a bind. Attorney Kruppenbacher said in his memo to the City Manager, that the City is not prohibited from accepting the private streets that is in compliance with the design construction and inspection standards that the City has, the City can do that. Discussion. Russ Sutta, stated that the homeowners are not gaining any benefit right now the way the streets are now, the developer had originally marketed the community as a private community, the construction of the entrance features were never completed by the developer. We as homeowners never had the benefit of private streets. Mayor Bush said why isn't the homeowners action against the developer. Mr. Sutta stated that their action since the exception of the project has been to correspond with the developer and request that the developer complete the construction; the developer contends that he Ree:ular Meetine: City Commission Mav 13. 1996 95-96-16 Pae:e 13 is not obligated to complete that construction. Manager McLemore stated that this is a very important piece of law here, there is a very extensive Attorney General opinion, on point, on this issue, that a governmental body stays out of the restrictive covenants of a development, it is not a City's business, a City does not need to be in it and a City would expose the entire public to getting involved in it. Manager McLemore said he again suggests to the Commission, to not to begin to even admit that the City has any liability in this situation and the fat that it didn't happen the way the homeowners would have liked it to happen, enforcing restrictions in a development is not the Commission's business. To do that the City would tend to admit that they have some liability over the enforcement of those kind of restrictions and you don't. It is not a burden of this Commission to act on the homeowners behalf relative to those development standards other than what it does with any development order that is on codes. Jerry Storey, resident of Bentley, said he hasn't heard the issue addressed that is bothering him and that is how does the City justify that they are paying the same tax rates when they don't receive the services that others in the City receive. Attorney Kruppenbacher said they have the privilege of having a private street and have the right to gate their community and shut out the public. Manager McLemore stated that none of the general fund monies go into streets, the City's street maintenance is paid for from gas taxes, it is not a property tax issue. Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to recommend denial of the Bentley Homeownen Association request for the City to accept the Associations streets and stormwater management system for public ownenhip and maintenance as requested. Seconded by Commissioner McLeod. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner McLeod: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye. Motion passes. Mayor Bush mentioned that in the Consent Agenda Resolution 780 was inadvertently not read. Mayor Bush read Res. 780. Attorney Kruppenbacher stated that the Resolution should have the Sections that are being changed in the title. That will be corrected and signed. Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to approve Resolution 780 with the revision in the title. Seconded by Commissioner Gennell. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye. Motion passes. Police Department C. Request consideration of the Police Department responding to the Commission's concerns regarding the enforcement of violations of City Ordinances, presenting plans to improve the effectiveness of enforcement, and requesting consideration of the Code Enforcement Board meeting monthly, rather than bi-monthly. PURPOSE: to bring the Commission up to date on action taken to improve the effectiveness of enforcement of City Ordinance violations and to gain the Commission's authorization for the Code Enforcement Board to Meet on a monthly basis to affect this improvement: Commissioner Langellotti mentioned that he is glad to see that something is getting done on the Code Resmlar Meetin2 City Commission Mav 13. 1996 95-96-16 Pa2e 14 Enforcement. Commissioner Ferring questioned where the funds were coming from for the additional meetings. Harry Martin, Finance Director, stated that the money is in the account for paying the Boards. Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to approve the authorization for the Code Enforcement Board to meet on a monthly basis to affect this improvement. Seconded by Commissioner Langellotti. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye. Motion passes. Public Works Department D. Second Reading and Public Hearing of Ordinance No. 617. Request approval of the Second Reading of Ord. 617 - implementing water conservation rates. PURPOSE: to authorize the second reading of Ord. 617 which implements the water conservation rate structure mandated by the St. John's Rover Water Management District as part ofthe 1995 Consumptive Use Permit: Attorney Kruppenbacher read Ord. 617 by title only. Mayor Bush closed the Regular Meeting and opened the Public Hearing on Ord. 617. Mayor Bush asked ifany member of the public wished to speak on Ord. 617. There was no member of the public who wished to speak regarding Ord. 617. Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to approve Ord. 617. Seconded by Commissioner Langellotti. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner Langellotti: aye. Motion passes. Public Works Department E. Requests authorization to execute an Interlocal Agreement Providing Joint Control of Pollutants between Municipalities, Seminole County and the State of Florida Department of Transportation within Seminole County. PURPOSE: to authorize the Mayor to execute the attached Interlocal agreement with the co applicants for the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Part II application providing for the joint control of pollutants between coapplicants to satisfY the requirements of the application: Motion was made by Commissioner Langellotti to approve the Interlocal agreement with the coapplicants for the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Part II. Seconded by Commissioner GenneU. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye. Motion passes. Finance Department F. Request the City Commission approve the selection of Auditors for the City of Winter Springs. PURPOSE: appointment ofIndependent Auditors of the city of Winter Sprints for a three (3) year contract: Mayor Bush said the recommendation is to approve the selection of Deloitte & Touche as City Auditors for three years ending September 30th. Ree:ular Meetine: City Commission Mav 13.1996 95-96-16 Pae:e 15 Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to approve the City Manager's selection of Deloitte & Touche as the City Auditors for the years 1996, 97 and 98. Seconded by Commissioner GenneU. Discussion. Manager McLemore recognized Mr. Martin in efforts in this in negotiating a very good deal for the City, actually dropping the cost about $4,000. Vote: Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye. Motion passes. General Services Department (Community Development Division) G. Requesting the City Commission to approve the sending of a letter to Seminole County inviting the County to explore with the City the possibilities of accepting the environmentally sensitive lands of the BattleRidge property if annexed. PURPOSE: to receive approval to send a letter to the County Manager suggesting the County consider the potential of accepting acquisition of the environmentally sensitive lands of the BattleRidge property into is land acquisition program, if the property is annexed: Commissioner Ferring stated he feels this is a good idea and should give confidence to the people that are in opposition to this particular venture and will so that those will continue to be environmentally sound. Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to approve the sending a letter to Seminole County inviting the County to explore with the City the possibilities of accepting the environmentally sensitive lands of the BattleRidge property if annexed. Seconded by Commissioner LangeUotti. Discussion. Vote: Commissioner McLeod: aye; Commissioner Ferring: aye; Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye. Motion passes. Commissioner Gennell asked about Item H, add-on, Regular Agenda, one of the things on that wasn't dealt with on the recommendations was that the Commission adopt a policy that all intergovernmental responses be ratified by the Commission prior to response to the affected governmental agency by Staff and said she thinks it is important that the Commission puts something like this in place so this doesn't happen again. Attorney Kruppenbacher said the City Manager has advised that that was going to be his policy to not take a position with out coming to the Commission. It was the consensus of the Commission to accept that as policy. City Attorney - Frank Kruppenbacher: No Report. City Manager - Ronald W. McLemore: Manager McLemore recommended to the Commission to set a special workshop to discuss pay issues for the next budget process, for the next budget cycle. Manager McLemore stated that he contacted the consultant who did the pay studies for the City and he is available on the 16th (Thursday) and 20th (next Monday), we have a packet of information that will be given out. It would be very helpful to the budget process, we have several issues being in a year that we are dealing with a pay plan update. Ree:ular Meetine: City Commission Mav 13. 1996 95-96-16 Pae:e 16 Commissioner Ferring said he has discussed this with the Manager prior regarding this issue and said he doesn't see it tieing the budget process down, he said each time this issue has come up regarding the pay study, that it was a classified type of discussion and said he would request the City Attorney to advise the Commission to wether or not the Commission can have an executive session as opposed to a public workshop on this. Commissioner Ferring said to discuss employees salaries in public before the Commission looks at the study, he thinks it is counter productive to the employees and Commission and said he thinks it needs to be done in executive session. Attorney Kruppenbacher stated that the Commission is not legally obligated to have an executive session, that is a policy decision by the Commission. The Commission has a right to have an executive session to discuss the budget and discuss the salary survey as it relates to Firefighter negotiations. Attorney Kruppenbacher said you have to be able to do this to go through your budget, you can't possibly analyze what you are going to regarding a particular confidential unit without looking at a lot of things, which may mean looking at your old budget, or looking at a complete salary study. Attorney Kruppenbacher said no, you couldn't have an executive session and sit in the session and say you are not going to deal with the firefighters union, and just say you are going to talk about other departments or general employees; you can have a general discussion about how allocate funds in order to deal with bargaining. Commissioner Ferring said there was a question of the individual who drew up the pay study that we would have some very pointed questions to ask. Commissioner Ferring said as he recalls the last time this issue came up, it was an executive session before it was put into any part of the public record. Attorney Kruppenbacher said we had an executive session before based upon preparing for bargaining with the firefighters union. Commissioner Gennell said the Cody Study is public record now, and when the Commission makes the decision, the Commission will be discussing this at a subsequent meeting. Attorney Kruppenbacher said Commissioner Gennell' s thoughts and analysis and comments regarding that as it relates to bargaining are not public record at this point; they don't have to be public record by virtue of the Florida exemption as it relates to firefighter negotiations. Attorney Kruppenbacher said the purpose of an executive session is solely designed to afford the Commission the opportunity to have a free flow of discussion regrading the exempted product, firefighter negotiations and the information you need to know to analyze to deal with that in a forum where you do not have to worry about whether our employees hear you say "X" or "Y". Commissioner McLeod said the last time we were in negotiations with the firefighters at the time, but he doesn't believe the City is in a position this year that we are negotiating with the firefighters. Attorney Kruppenbacher said the Commission has the right to have the session closed to prepare for your bargaining with the firefighters, we are currently not in bargaining with the firefighters. Discussion. Motion was made by Commissioner Ferring to have an executive session and if needed followed by a public work session. Seconded by Commissioner Langellotti. Discussion. Vote: Resmlar Meetin2 City Commission Mav 13. 1996 95-96-16 Pa2e 17 Commissioner Langellotti: aye; Commissioner Gennell: aye; Commissioner McLeod: aye; Commissioner Fening: aye. Motion passes. It was determined that the executive session will be on Monday, May 20, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. Commission Seat V - David McLeod: Commissioner McLeod gave the Mayor and Commission a spread sheet regarding the salary study and asked them to review it. Commissioner McLeod stated that he owes Commissioner Ferring an apology regarding the Commission packet information in the lobby, and stated that he was right in that. Commissioner McLeod said he finds that the Commission Chambers are not user friendly and would like to allow the City Manager and his Staff to look into a overhead projector so it would show on both sides of the Chamber so that the citizens can see what the Commission is looking at when they are handed something at the meeting. Commission Seat II - John Fening: Report No Commission Seat III - John Langellotti: No Report Commissioner Seat IV - Cindy Gennell: No Report. Mayor's Office - John F. Bush: Mayor Bush said the reclaimed water that the City is putting in is basically going into new subdivisions and along S.R. 434 corridor (new section) and said he was asked by a citizen/business owner what is going to be done for the merchants already in the City, who are trying to keep their businesses attractive by watering and was asked why can't that portion of the City get reclaimed water. Mayor Bush said he would like to have the City Manager look into that and see what it would take to provide reclaimed water to the west side of S.R. 434 or alternatives that the Commission could consider for the merchants along that portion of the City. The meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, APPROVED: Margo M. Hopkins, City Clerk