Loading...
CCMtg07-02-07Min_ I_.Ol~TG~VOOI~ C~'lCX C®1VIli~1ISS~®1®T Longwood pity Commission Chambers ~ 175 West ~'Varren Avenue. Longwood, ]Florida 1VIINU`1'ES JULY 2, ;'007 7:00 P.lVI. Present: Mayor John C. Maingot Deputy Mayor Mike Bolt Commissioner H.G. "Butch" Bundy, Jr. Commissioner Brian D. S;acketl: Commissioner Dan Anderson Teresa S. Roper, Acting City Aittorney John J. Drago, City Administrator Sarah M. Mirus, City Clerk Tom Smith, Division Manager of Streets/Fleet Richard Kornbluh, Division .Manager of Utilities Tom Jackson, Police Chief Carol Rogers, Director of Financial Services Ryan Spinella, Executive Assistant ;,~, Paul Sizemore, Interim Director of Community Services Laurie Mooney, Fire Chief Fran Meli, Recreation Pra~grams Manager Donovan A. Roper, Special Council 1. CALL TO ORDER. Mayor Maingot called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. A moment of SILENT MEDITA7CION was followed by the PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 3. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS. None. 4. RECOGNITIONS/ PROCLAMA:TIOl`1S. A. District #3 Presentation of'the Business Person of the Month Award for July 2007 to Dr. Lisa Palmer, owner of Palmer Chiropractic and Sports Medicine located at 135 `JVest Pine Avenue. Deputy Mayor Holt read a brief biography on Dr. Lisa Palmer and presented her with the Business Person of the Month Award. Photographs were then taken. CC 07-•02-07/177 B. Proclaiming the month of July 2007 as "Recreation and Parks Month." Mayor Maingot read the proclamation for "Recreation and Parks Month." He presented Ms. Meli with the proclamation and photographs were taken. 5. BOARD APPOINTMENTS. A. City Administrator recommends in accordance with the requirements of Chapters 175 and 185, Florida Statutes, that the City Commission appoint Marc McLarnon, as the fifth member to the Board of Trustees for the Police Officers' and Firefighters' Pension Plan. The City Commission unanimously appointed Marc McLarnon as the fifth member to the Board of Trustees for the Police Officers' and Firefighters' Pension. Plan. 6. PUBLIC INPUT. A. Presentations. The Police Department requests the City Commission view a presentation by Cost Recovery Corporation (CRC) outlining a program designed to recover costs relating to traffic crash investigations and give staff appropriate direction. Chief Jackson said he was tasked annually with providing law enforcement service throughout the community. He stated he realizes the economic future is somewhat in question with the proposed tax reduction. `-~' He was forced to take a look at what .services they provide and in-house what services may need to be eliminated. In review of this data over the last 6-7 months, he reviewed the previous five years of crash data. He stated it became apparent to him, while annually they .investigate between 1,300 and 1,400 crashes for a community that sleeps 13,000, the service population during the day swells to nearly 60,000; Longwood becomes the crossroads of the County. In reviewing the crashes the Police Department investigates, in any given month, 9-10% of the crashes were actually caused by City residents and the other 90% were caused by or involved' non-residents. He realized a lot of the .resources were being used to render service to those who do not pay for services in the City. He said with this in mind and faced with the possible economic future we have; at a recent Chiefs' Conference he met Regina Moore with Cost Recovery Corporation. Her company provides a program similar to our medical billing. He stated he asked her to present her program to the Commission and provide information so this could be considered as an option should the City be facing cutbacks. Regina Moore, President of Cost Recovery Corporation, said they have been recovering costs associated with motor vehicular accidents for Fire Departments since 1999. Three years ago they began doing the same. for Police Departments. She said every time the officers respond to a crash, ,~ their company will submit a claim to the automobile insurance company CC 07-02-07/178 of the responsible party of tlae accident. She advised this was not federally regulated to date. However, over 50% of insurance companies are paying ~`"' these claims in full. She said. there were never any out-of-pocket costs to a resident. If the resident's insurance company would decline payment for some reason, this would simply be= written off. She said if it were a non- resident and the insurance company declined payment, then they would be held financially accountable. She :Mated the City would have an ordinance in place that. would allow for• the a;~sessment of user fees. She said there was no charge to the City or the D,~partments, because they do not take a percentage of the monies that are recovered. They bill a separate administrative fee on top of those. They use the same fee schedule in every state and the fees are. based on hiring material. Their company assesses claims based on the reporting information received. by the Fire and Police Departments. Deputy Mayor Holt inquired what local municipalities or counties they currently represent. Ms. Moore said they were currently working with Chiefland, Live Oak, and Bellview. She said they were c;urgently in approximately six departments in Florida. Davie was currently preparing their ordinance, She will be making presentations in the: State of Florida over the next two months. She said the City could do an ordinance for any of the safety service resources. Commissioner Bundy asked Chief Jackson if Winter Park was doing this for their Fire/EMS service and if Maitland started their's last year. Chief Jackson responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Bundy inquired if there was any feedback from those cities and how it was working. Chief Jackson responded in the negative. He•said the key was that it was not pursuing the resident since the:; pay taxes. He stated they were spending an inordinate amount of time and cost investigating crashes caused by people outside of i:he City that do not fund the City in the sense of taxes for the services they are causing. He declared when he saw this program he thought it might be an opportunity for an area that could provide some funding- for the: services we provide. Commissioner Bundy inquired how much time was spent on an accident to include writing the report. Chief Jackson said it would be fair to say the average traffic crash would take approximately 45-55 minutes. He said this would be without excessive road blockage or severe :injuries. He said some crashes may take two or three officers to direct: traffic while others are gathering CC 07-02-07/179 information and tending to the injured. He stated the average calculation on 1,400 traffic crashes you would probably have approximately 2,800 to 3,000 man hours a year on crash investigations. Ms. Moore said Dr. Henley, who founded this. company, started EM'S billing in the early 1970's prior to •it being federally regulated. He assisted the federal government when forcing the insurance companies to the table. She advised their process mirrors that exactly, so they are already set up if the federal government regulates this. She stated city leaders were looking at this from the standpoint of protecting their citizen's tax dollars. Commissioner Sackett said he could not see if someone from out of state were here and had a traffic accident, suddenly having a fee for this accident. He inquired if there was a standardized fee. He stated he liked the idea of recovering some money, but he would Like to see the ordinance and fee schedule. Ms. Moore said the City would have control over the process. She said sales tax and income tax were quite different from property tax. She advised they use a fee schedule in every state in which they do business. The Fire Department fee schedule is based. on the Hope Study that was used by the federal government when regulating EMS. They .did cost analysis for Police Departments as. a baseline for the standard. It was the concurrence of the City Commission with Commissioner Anderson voting nay to ask the Acting City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance for review. Commissioner Anderson said he did not think an ordinance should be brought forth at this time. It should be placed on the agenda for discussion at another time. Commissioner Bundy stated he would like to include the Fire Department and EMS Services. Mayor Maingot requested this matter be placed on the next agenda for discussion. Seminole County Alternative Water Supply Projects presented by Jerry Salsano and Nancy Christman with the St. John's Water Management District. Nancy Christman, St. johns River Water Management District, said she had provided a packet of information that she would be briefly reviewing. She reviewed this information and said it was available on the website. She said with the growing population in Florida there will not be enough groundwater to meet the demands without causing environmental harm. She stated the Water Management District will be working with utilities to CC 07-02-07/180 fmd alternatives. She said capturing stormwater and reusing it decreases needs for groundwater. This type of project can be funded from the ~~ stormwater cost share program if ~~he goals of the program are met. She stated she would be available to ~~ork with staff on any of these concepts of interest to the City. She said wc; have been in a severe drought and it was natural in Florida for lakes to fluctuate up and down and there was a fact sheet in the packetthat ,addresses questions from citizens. She stated they were here for water supply planning and Jerry Salsano would be discussing the need for the projects and the type. of projects the Water Management District was looking at, as well as how the. City might participate. Mayor Maingot said they kr.~ow that by 2013 the consumptive use permit will be frozen at that level for gro~rnd water. He inquired what would the process be if additional water is needed by then. Ms. Christman advised the District has said if local governments were working in earnest on projects to develop alternative water supply, and the plant isn't ready, but the commitment has been made; they will work with the entity during those inter`~ening; years as necessary. Commissioner Anderson said one of his concerns has been that Longwood's population has held :steady for most of the last 15 years or i longer. At the same time, surrounding cities and the County in general I'mo' have increased. Yet, Longwood's consumptive use permit keeps getting dialed down and it seems the inter.it is to put us into non-conformity, so that we are penalized and will be: required to fmd an alternative source of water. He said if the permit had been left alone,. we would be okay because our City is not. growing and the water consumption has stayed very steady. Ms. Christman said all consumpti~ie use permits are reviewed every five years and at that time the applicant has to show the need for the water they have been allocated. Jerry Salsano, Torrent Consulting for St. Johns River Water Management District, apologized for the prior scheduling conflict. He said he was here to speak to the City about spending money and the decision they will need to make. He reviewed a po~•er point presentation on "Alternative Water Supply Projects. " He reviewed a slide with 25 utilities that represent a 2013 to 2025 demand deficiit of over 48 million.. gallons per day (mgd). He reviewed the options and associated costs. He said they were talking about 24 to 30 month process fees in either case, Eastern Option or Western Option. The funds would need to be budgeted for one-third over three fiscal years. He reiterated 2013 was the deadline and this is a three year process to become organized and ~~et into a 35% design phase, then another two years to design and permit, and another three years to build. ~ During his presentation he will be reviewing; where we stand,. how we got to where we are, sources and yields, overview of the projects and CC 07-02-07/181 concepts, the process, what the District is prepared to offer in terms of support and_funding opportunities, timeline and key points. He stated there would be no additional groundwater beyond 201.3, and this means the amounts will be capped. He said it is presumed every drop of reclaimed water will be used. He stated seawater was an option, but there were better sources closer to the City. He said potential sources would be the middle of the St. Johns River or the Ocklawaha River. He reviewed the available yields .from these rivets and said reverse osmosis would be required by the St. Johns River. He reviewed the demands for this area and said Seminole County would probably want to obtain their water from Yankee Lake. He reviewed schematics and cost elements for the Eastern and Western Options. He said a lot. will depend on where the sentiment lies in the process that takes place on July 18th. Commissioner Anderson said a project of this magnitude would be. less costly to do up front and add to it rather than going back and being required to do another project. Mr. Salsano said it was correct, you need to strike a balance between sizing the pipe and doing parallel pipes. He reviewed project cost comparisons. He said costs could be shared by other cities in Seminole County. He stated the City of Longwood and the City of Sanford were geographically in the middle of the options. He said the expected outcome would be to receive a Preliminary Design Report to identify the best ~, source, best place(s) and sizes for facilities and mains, identify the best ~ treatment options and partner system modifications. He said this prioritizes project delivery and fmancing options. He reviewed the post"tees and negatives ofthe options. He reviewed the process and available support. He reiterated there would be a meeting on July 18th to organize for preliminary design work. He said they would need the letter by July 18th. Between July 18, 2007 and September 30, 2007, the interlocal agreements will be executed and the scope refined. After October 1, 2007, the preliminary design will begin. Commissioner Bundy inquired what impact it would have on the groundwater we have now if taking from the Ocklawaha River. Mr. Salsano said you would never take from the run. You would take downstream to have minimal affect on the spring. He said it would all be dependent upon setting a minimum flow on the river. He stated the rule would be set to protect the aquifer as well as the river. Commissioner Anderson asked the City Administrator if he had an opinion of a course of action, and if choosing to go forward, how we would fund something like this over multiple years. Mr. Drago said the money should come from the public utilities fund and not the general fund. He stated if the Commission was inclined to fund the CC 07-02-07/182 $99;000, then $33,000 would be placed in the budget each year. He said if ~- there was an interlocal agreement signed, then that would bind the City }`"~ financially for those three years. H:e and 1VIr. Kornbluh went to a meeting at the County regarding the 'Yankee Lake Project. He stated they could not answer as to when they would be installing. pipe to feed the City of Longwood or Casselberry. He said the Yankee Lake Project would take care of the County's demands in the 46/Markham Hills area and Lake County.. Mr. Salsano said the County would bring three people to the meeting on July 18th and at that meeting they ~Nill lay out their time table. He stated hopefully they would provide the City with cost for service prior to the meeting. Mr. Drago said the Cotmty could riot quantify the route at the meeting. He confirmed that Longwood is stuck in the middle. It will need to be determined whether it will be beftc;r to upfront the costs with .guarantee to obtain the water at a reduced: rate or wait until the pipeline comes through and tap in paying the cost at that time. He said he would be placing this on. the next meeting agenda. Mr. Salsano said if the City goes to the County at this time to say you want the water, it is fair to say there will be a pipeline at your. door much more quickly than if you choose to participate in any other option. He ~- advised the County already has a plant site and a place for an intake. The County is in permitting for the int~~ke structure. and the line for their plant. He declared participating in this project does not preclude the City from backing away from it at a later date and going. exclusively with Yankee Lake. He said the District thinks it is better to do both; keep negotiating with the County, but also commit io this cost free process occurring between now and September 30th. This will allow the City to see what their options are. He affirmed Vohzsia County was also talking with Seminole County. S. Public Participation. None:. 7. CITY ADMINISTRAT'OR'SREPORT. Mr. Drago reported the Commission received a letter in their mailbox relative to the Mosquito Control Board. He said when he learns from the County if this is to be a citizen appoiritee or staff he will let the Commission know. 8. MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS' REPORT. District #2. Commissioner Anderson said the Illuminations was giving feedback on what is going on in the City and ,where we are with different projects. He said one of his concerns was Reiter Park where; he sees it is under redesign and would be bid in July. He stated they needed more; information and a timeline. He said he knows the reasons for the delays, bu.t this needs to be communicated to the CC 07-02-07,11.83 people. He reported he saw the letter from the County regarding the widening of State Road 434, and this letter puts the City in a bad light. He said when reading this, it made him think what is the City asking. for and what is the number one priority. He said with underground utilities, there are differences in asking that the entire cross connects are underground versus the main transmission. He stated. his other question was in regards to the .retention pond. Mayor Maingot advised action has occurred in these regards. Commissioner Anderson said when someone wants to develop in the City, there seems to be confusion over the requirements for what needs to be submitted prior to discussion and planning. He declared. they need something better than a sketch, but it did not need to be fully engineered. He said. there was a distinction in the costs. He stated they would need something with enough dimensions so it can be realistically discussed and the planning department has a comfort level. He said this would not require the applicant to spend thousands of dollars on final engineering for something that will be tweaked and moved. He stated there were a lot of projects that would benefit from this and it would help both sides of the process to getthrough it easier. He reiterated; how can they .get the amount of information needed without everything, being engineered. He said there was confusion between the expectations of staff and applicants. This creates conflict and he would like to remove that when allowing for preliminary approval. Mr. Drago said sometimes .you have to consider when saying.it looks okay and what that means in the eye of the beholder. He said if the. site plan does not come up to expectations relative to the code, then you have a conflict. He prefers to see all the numbers when making a decision. Commissioner Anderson said if there is a rule of thumb that states a percentage for retention, it would be reasonable to assume that. a competent engineer would be able to~ engineer the correct facility in the space. He stated if it could be said, based from what has been shown during the initial considerations, that it appears the designer will be able to meet all of the City Codes and the layout looks good at this time. He said before a site plan can be approved, one must give everything and it must meet. all of the codes. Mr. Drago said they do talk with the developers and review their sketches and renderings prior to submitting a full site plan. However, for the approval process they do require the full site-plan. District #3. Deputy Mayor Holt wished everyone a Happy Independence Day. He stated the Mosquito Control Program looks like a citizen appointment. He said if it is an elected official, could they appoint that person in the near future. Mr. Drago said as soon as they learn whether it is a citizen, staff, or elected official, the Commission will make.the selection. J CC 07-02-07/184 District #4. Commissioner Bundy reported the Barrington entrance looks very ' nice. He said he was working with the residents on the sign. He stated on the backside of Grange Circle, away from the Lake Emma Road entrance, a house has an aluminum porch on two-thirds of the lemgth on the front of the house. He said the neighbors were upset and he exfilainecl to them if it meets the building and Longwood Development Code, there was. no choice but to issue the permit. He stated the City has a program where they work with deed restricted community architectural review boards, and wild not issue a permit until i"t has been through their process. He suggested staff look at someway to insert something into the review .process in regards to the arcltectural styling and the way the properties look. He asked for a consensus to have staff look into this matter. He stated he was reluctant for the City to get too involved. Commissioner Anderson said he would be, willing to discuss the matter and perhaps neighborhoods could come together in choosing what was important for them. Deputy Mayor Holt said he would concur in bringing it' forward. Commissioner Bundy said they had an issue regarding how to educate the public. He gave an example of the color palette. f[e stated we do not require a permit to paint properties and if obtaining a permit i'or other work, they will be informed about the color palette. Otherwise, they are informed after the fact and Codes Enforcement has cited them and notified them they need to select their colors from a palette. He said he had a problem with enforcing a Code where there has been no effort made to inform the pe;ople. He stated he would like to see a proactive approach taken in informing the public. Mayor Maingot suggested asking the City Administrator to come up with a recommendation. Commissioner Anderson said this type of information should be part of "Welcome to Longwood" information provided to businesses and- residents. Commissioner Bundy said he did not wan}: to see State Road 434 widened from I-4 to Rangeline Road and stop. The said the businesses that would be impacted from the widening were a minute percentage compared to the overall impact. He stated it was his understanding the C`.ounty stepped in and offered to fund the project upfront to be reimbursed when the State funding was available. He said this dovetails with the 4-laving of Lake Emma Road. District #5. Commissioner Sackett reported he visited the. Longwood Summer Program and. the staff was doing a phenomenal j ob with the children. He said a week ago he was at a meeting and sitting next to him was the lady concerned about the railroad crossings and the train v~histles. She thanked the City for taking care of the trains and said they have subdued somewhat. He said she told him they were playing, melodies with the whistles now. He reported a lady stopped hun in the store yesterday to tell him how wonderful Longwood's Police Department is. CC 07-02-07/185 She said Herb Stewartson spent time at her daycare facility conducting a safety check. He reported Lyman High School lifted itself to a "B" school; Woodlands and Longwood Elementary were "A" schools, as well as Rock Lake. Middle. Commissioner Sackett said he received an e-mail regarding the Devonshire wall project and was told there were no .funds to start the project this year. He stated person sending the e-mail would like the City Administrator to let her know when she can start the campaign for Devonshire. District #1. Mayor Maingot reported he, Mr. Drago, and Mr. Sizemore met with the United States Postal Service regarding-the gang mailboxes and it was a rewarding meeting. They also met with FDOT representatives from District #5 and discussed at length concerns and desires with regards to the 434 widening project. He said there were. some constructive ideas and this was a productive meeting. He stated gradually they were .getting things done. He said they were doing preliminary work regarding the area in front of the Hospital and the Intersection of 434 and 427. He reported the plans to 2050 show 434 as 10-lanes. 9. CONSENT AGENDA. A. Approve Minutes of the June 11, 2007 Work Session and Minutes of the June 18, 2007 Regular Meeting. B. Finance Division of the Financial Services Department recommends payment of approved and estimated bills for July 2007. C. City Administrator recommends the City Commission confirm the appointment of Paul Sizemore as the Community .Services Director at an annual salary of $80,000. D. The Computer Services Division of the Finance Department. recommends the City Commission approve a contract and purchase order with American Audio Visual for the project to replace the Commission Chambers audio and visual equipment in the amount of $44,949.00 and authorize the City Administrator to sign all appropriate documents. Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. Seconded by Commissioner Sackett. Discussion was held regarding Items C and D. Commissioner Bundy said he had concern paying $80,000 to someone who has been with the City only four years and malting them a Department Director. Mayor Maingot said he also had some concerns and Mr. Sizemore was 1 currently earning $58,000. He has been carrying the load from this ~J Department and the prior Director was earning $80,000. The range for the CC 07-02-07/186 position is $64,000 to $96,000 with the mid range being $80,000. He ~ stated through Mr. Sizemore;'shard work he has been able to accomplish for the City in terms of the n.ew design standards and other things that have been implemented. He said years of experience are important, but demonstrated capability is equally important.. He declared if the City wants good dedicated peoplf> they should be prepared to pay the market price. for good talent and $80,000 ~Nas reasonable. Commissioner Bundy said he had a problem with starting the position in the upper range of the salary range;. He said Mr. Sizemore has done a good job and it had nothing to do with that. Deputy Mayor Holt said what world be the incentive for someone to stay any length of time ifstarting them out at $80;000 knowing they will cap out at $96,0.00. He said he would like to see all the Department Heads start at this range. Mayor Maingot said he has been doing the job under the pay scale. He reiterated they need to look at ~~vhat he has demonstrated. Commissioner Anderson said every position was not equal and there were different needs in each position. He -stated Mr. Sizemore has served the j City well and demonstrated a lot o:f drive. He said they need to look at the value of the individual and That would be the cost fo acquire an ~~' equivalent talent. He stated when he looks at an.employee who has demonstrated the talent and has done a good job running the department and desires to stay here the salary fits. Commissioner Sackett said h.e look at the experience the. person brings. He stated $80,000 was a little high, but when you look at what will be coming up within the next year they will be tapping Mr. Sizemore for his resources. He said he was- co:mfort~ible with this and they need a person who. is articulate and presents as capable as they have seen Mr. Sizemore do. Ms. Roper advised separatin€; this :item and voting on it separately. Commissioner Anderson moved to vote on Item 9 C separately and approve it. Seconded by Commissioner Sackett and carried by a four/one roll call vote with Commissioner Bundy voting nay. Commissioner Sackett inquired if there were other bids on Item 9 D. Mr. Drago advised there were other bids, one was $90,000 and one was at $100,000. He apologized for that information not being included. ~ Deputy Mayor Holt inquired if the City Clerk had the opportunity to review the information. CC 07-b2-07/187 Ms. Mirus advised she did not meet with the company. Mr. Dunn outlined the information for her. ~j Mr. Drago reviewed the list. of new equipment. Commissioner Anderson said he did some research and provided information regarding what needed to be accomplished with the new equipment and its function. He has been told this equipment will meet those functional needs. Deputy Mayor Holt inquired why they would have two LCD monitors and the large screens. Commissioner Anderson suggested. approving the amourit conditional on leaving the LCD monitors off and if they need to add them the funding is there. Mr. Drago said the LCD monitors could. be optional. He said the purchase order could be done for the amount less the monitors and keep them in abeyance if needed. Main motion carried for Items 9 A, B, and D by a unanimous roll call vote. 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS. ~"'~ A. The City Clerk recommends the City Commission read by title only and adopt Ordinance No. 07-1832, which establishes a Special Service Fee for outstanding lien searches. Ms. Roper announced having publication for both items under public hearing. She then read Ordinance No. 07-1832 by title only. Ms. Mirus advised this Ordinance, if adopted, would. establish a special service fee for outstanding lien searches to include special assessments, utility balances, fees and fines the City may have on record. She said Commissioner Sackett.inquired at the last meeting if other cities in Seminole County charged for this service. She advised the City of Altamonte Springs charges $10, and the City of Sanford does .not charge for this service, but does charge $25 for an administrative letter. Also, the City of Oviedo and Winter Springs have requested a copy of our Ordinance. Mayor Maingot opened the public hearing. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the Ordinance. Deputy Mayor Holt moved to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Sackett .and carried by a unanimous voice vote. CC 07-02-07/:188 _ Deputy Mayor Holt ~~noved to adopt Ordinance No. 07-1832, as ~ presented, Item 10 A.. Seconded by Commissioner Sackett and ~``~ carried by a unanimous rota call vote. Commissioner Sackett moved to extend the meeting. Seconded by Commissioner Anderson and carried by a unanimous voice vote. The Commission recessed a1: 9:55 p.m. and reconvened at 10:04 p.m. B. The Community Developrrrent Division of the Community ServYCes Department recommends the City Commission read by tide only, set July 16, 2007 as the second- public hearing date and approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 07-18:'.6 to amend the Longwood Development Code (COCA. 01-0'7). Commissioner Anderson inquixed.if anyone was present to speak on Item 10 B. He suggested tabling t:he item to the next meeting. Ms. Roper said as long as there was no one present to speak on the item. She advised. Robert's Rules has a suggested guideline of how the agenda. should be followed and it does provide leeway to change if need be. She said if no one was present to speak: on the item, they would not be depriving anyone of their rights. ~' Commissioner Bundy inquired if i~~ would need to be re-advertised. Ms. Roper responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Anderson rrioved to table Item 10 B to the next meeting due to the interest in time. Seconded by Commissioner Bundy and carried by~ a un~uumous voice vote. 11. REGIJI,AR BiJSINESS. A. The Community Development Division of the Community Services Department requests the City Commission discuss the~submittal requirements for variance requests within the Historic District and give staff the direction deemed appropriate. Mr. Sizemore said prior to the adoption of the Historic District Code Book and sun setting of the Historic Preservation Board the variance request process within the Historic District: would go through the Historic Preservation Board first for review and they would make a recommendation to the Board of Adjustment who would determine whether to grant the variance. He advised in November 2003, the Historic Preservation Board and the Board of Adjustment approved variances to property located at 172 West Warren Avenue that also fronts on Bay Avenue. He said there was a two year window in which the applicant could have acted upon those variances and at the end of that time period CC 07-02-07/189 the variances expired and they.would again be required to request variances or comply with the current code. He stated the application submitted in 2003 was submitted with a situ drawing. He said this touches on some of the issues brought to light lately regarding submittal requirements for variances or other types of development applications. At the time, prior to the adoption of the Code Book, this type of drawing would be accepted and evaluated, then ultimately going before boards to determine whether or not to grant variances. The applicant decided to move forward on this project and had. apre-application meeting with staff. He said staff advised the applicant, from staff s perspective, to complete a site development plan so they would .have all of the engineering details and be able to make a determination whether the variances were necessary. He reiterated the applicants had already been through the process once in 2003 and had all of their paper work. The applicant wanted to proceed through the same process again with the same drawings and they would then determine how to proceed with their site engineering based on whether or not they could receive these variances that were granted in 2003. He advised the applicant submitted a variance application package and everything was complete. They have done-their public • notifications and it was ready to move forward through the. variance process and be scheduled for a public hearing in front of the Commission. He affirmed. they were not able to be scheduled for this meeting due to advertising lead times and assembling the complete package. He said they wanted to get this information before the Commission as soon as possible to get a solid determination as to whether or not these application materials were sufficient for variance applications in the Historic District. The Commission has seen variance appeals for other applications throughout the City and made the determination that engineering detail was necessary in order to determine if a variance was required. However, this is a different situation; it is in the Historic District and regulated by the Code Book as opposed to the Development Code. He said the best guidance in the Development Code was in Section 9.2.2 (a). He said it does leave some room for interpretation and stated it would beat the Commission's direction if they wanted this type of item brought before them. Mayor Maingot said without having a site plan prepared as now required, they would be opening Pandora's Box. Commissioner Bundy said, as long as it is explained to the applicant that it is always subject to proper engineering and everything is predicated upon this. He said this dovetails with what Commissioner Anderson discussed under his report. He stated in the Historic District each property is unique in itself and he would not have a problem with .something like this, and, as always, it would.be subject to proper engineering. He said if any applicant spends several thousand dollars on engineered drawings predicated upon the project moving forward on getting a variance and the variance is J CC 07-02-07/190 denied, they have just wasted that money. He confirmed approving a variance does not constitute site plan approval. l`~" Mr. Sizemore said they did a couri:esy review of the drawing they had submitted in 2003. The Codes have changed since then and they went through indicating which of those variances would need to be changed and came up with a new list based on this drawing. He stated this was with the disclaimer that it may not be all inclusive. The application package as seen is based upon that prelimnaJy staff review. Commissioner Anderson said when he was. talking earlier the picture in the agenda item is almost exactly ~Nhat he .was referring to. The only piece staff would be missing was a few ~.nore dimensions. He said when reviewing the justifications and correlating there with the picture, you understand what they are requesting and why they think the variances are in keeping with the District. He stated the. true approval would have all of the numbers. Deputy Mayor Holt said he agrees they would be opening Pandora's Box. Commissioner Sackett said he did not see this as a site plan. He stated the property has seven (7) variances a_tizd parking was the reason for the 1 variance. He said he would like to see the numbers and the reason for the, variance. lam- Commissioner Anderson said the question before the Commission was what they need to provide in Orden to get the answers they need. He stated he did not need to see all the calculations they could be dealt with later. The Commission could determine whether they can fit the requirements into the space allocated by putting the dimensions on the drawing. Mayor Maingot said. Deputy Mayor Holt pointed out inconsistencies. He said the Code was in place and where do they draw the line. Commissioner Anderson said it was very important to have codes, but the point of a variance was to address something that was specific and unique to a particular property. The burden is on the applicant to demonstrate. the uniqueness and the need for the variance from the code. He stated th.e process is there to allow them the opportunity to make their case. Commissioner Bundy said if they take this logic and extend it, they need to disband the Board of Adjustme~lt. He said there has to be a process for properties that are unique. He statc;d he did not want to see people have to go the cost of hiring an engineer on a maybe. He said this was granting a variance, not approving a site plan.. This would allow them to come up with a site plan that includes those exceptions. to the code. CC 07-02-07/191 Commissioner Anderson said the heart of the. board item was that staff wants recommendations. He stated he would like to give them the tools they need to deal with the process and feel comfortable to work with the applicant. He reiterated the burden is on the applicant. He said the Commission cannot- grant, a variance with missing information. He stated there is a nebulous area in the code that could be interpreted in different ways and what is .actually required for the applicant to submit a variance request. In the- absence of .specific language, Mr. Sizemore is leaning toward requiring the full site plan. He asked if this was correct. Mr. Sizemore responded in the affirmative. Commission Anderson asked if he wanted the Commission to identify exactly what needed to be specified before. an applicant submits a variance request, separate from this particular variance request. Mr. Sizemore said he was sorry if this item got confused with the bigger issue, but it was catalyst for the bigger issue to be brought forward. He said it could be this variance application or any others. The quest of the problem is what criteria staff should use to evaluate whether or not the variance. needed to come before the Commission and be evaluated. It will be applicable to any other variance application as well. He said the criteria set forth is what they will use to determine'if a variance application is complete to bring to the Commission. Ms. Roper advised if the Commission was going to require something less than a site plan, they will need to set some type of policy as to what. the minimum requirements would be to accept a variance so people are treated equally. Commissioner Anderson asked. if it would be acceptable, when talking about variances, to give the geometry of the site plan without the other pieces. Ms. Roper said when coming in for a variance; a minimum of information explaining why the variance is required would need to be provided. She stated she would like. to see a standardized procedure. Commissioner Anderson inquired if they need to establish standards, does that mean, in this case, until standards were developed, do they need to fall ,back to where they have to .show everything. Ms. Roper said, in this ease, they are being asked if this sketch is enough for the Commission to make a decision or would they require more than that. Deputy Mayor Holt said these people should not be here with their ~ information. The only issue is that staff is requesting direction whether CC 07-02-07/19.2 applicants should be able to submit variance requests for the Historic District. Commissioner Bundy moved to allow applications for variances to be placed on the Corrunission agenda for public hearing with preliminary drawings. and necessary specifications for submitted items to support the variances asked for. Seconded by Deputy Mayor Holt and. carried by a three/two roll call vote with Mayor Maingot and Commissioner Sackett voting nay. B. The. Community Development Division of the Community Services Department recommends the City Commission read by title only, set the Public Hearing date as July ~lti, 2007, and approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 07-18?~0 to vacate and abandon a four (4') foot by thirty (30') foot. section o:f an easement described in the official plat book 20, page 97 through 9b. located on the property addressed as 1100 Sonoma Court. Ms. Roper read Ordinance No. 07-1830 by title only. IVIr. Sizemore said this was a. requc;st to vacate an easement located on the property. He explained when the pool was constructed it encroached into a drainage and utility easement to the rear of the property.. The applicant is now proposing to construct a screen enclosure and has submitted an application to vacate and abaxidon a section of the easement. He said. utility providers in the area indicate they have no objection. Commissioner Bundy moved to approve the first. reading of Ordinance No. 07-1830 and set July 16, 2007 as a public hearing date. Seconded by Commissioner Anderson and carried. by a unanimous roll call vote. C. The Community Development Division of the Community Services Department recommends the City Commission discuss the proposed town home development at: 131 ]~ongwood Hills Road and give staff the direction deemed appr~prial:e. Mr. Sizemore said this was regarding the town home project currently within. Seminole County's jL~risdiction at 131 Longwood Hills Road. This is an enclave within the city limits of the City of Longwood and upon recording of the deed will be: annexed within the City and also prior to public city utility services. I [e advised the City had a meeting with the County and the applicant to work through the process for review of the project to make sure the City had input in the review considering the property would be annexed into th.e City. At that meeting, it was established the applicant would submit a site development plan to th.e City for review so comments could be issued and addressed prior to the County moving forward with further apprcival. Staff has conducted review of the CC 07-02-07/193 submittal and issued comments. He said from Community Development the main items were addressed at the joint meeting and identified as items that would need to come to the Commission. The first item is the required.. 20-foot wetland buffer that cannot be met because of the retaining wall. The second is the separating, wall requirements for the adjacent properties for the same reason,•the grade of the property and the way the retaining wall was constructed. He .stated these two items in particular were before the Commission for direction on how to handle. The other review comments are included in the packet. Mr. Towers requested this item be brought before the Commission to discuss the comments. Mayor Maingot said the retaining wall and 20-foot buffer were discussed during the joint meeting and it was one of the issues that was felt could be dealt with. He stated the recommendation regarding the wall was also discussed and it was felt this could not be done and this could be accomplislied with proper landscaping material. He said another area of concern that: was brought to his attention was the area where the land is cut into and there is a 6-foot drop. Michael Towers advised this will be taken care of and incorporated in with the landscaping. He said they had a biologist t submit a report to staff and the 20-foot setback requirement for the wetland buffer is for protection of the wetlands. The. biologist report said a 6-foot sand filtration was far .superior to a 20-foot surface vegetation buffer. He .said the. vegetation has grown out to the. retaining wall. He reviewed pictures and said they have met the 6-foot retaining wall requirements of both the City and County. He pointed out that the finished floor elevation of the house is the same as what their finished floor elevation would be. This particular backyard kept the natural topography and built another 6-foot-retaining wall in their backyard. He said their intent is to heavily landscape the area and avoid a penitentiary look. He reviewed the lighting for the project. Mayor Maingot inquired if they addressed the staff comments. Mr. Towers said they have addressed everything. Mayor Maingot asked if these should be incorporated into the plans so a total approved package can be sent to the County.. Mr. Towers said the only area he would like to make a request was under the City Engineer's comments. He stated since they will be going through St. John's Water Management District and Seminole County to defer the retention areas to the County. He said the County's "requirements would be as equally difficult as the City's. • Commissioner Anderson inquired if he was referring to stormwater retention. He said he believed they were the same numbers. CC 07-02-07/194 Mr. Towers responded in thc; affirmative. He said the City Engineer's .- ~ comment number five was not a problem. He stated.he was asking for ~' details on the retaining wall and this has already been inspected and approved, so he would requEst that it be waived. Deputy Mayor Holt clarified. they were not waiving the requirement. It was just being submitted tol:he County. Mr. Towers responded in the affirmative. He said Mr. Kornbluh's comments would all be addressed and they were working closely with him. He stated they were currenfly doing the addressing. He said if they could work through the City Engineer's. comments. Mr. Sizemore said that covers the staff comments for the most part. There were the two items they wend over that are an issue whether the City Commission is willing to accept a compromise of the City Code. He stated they also needed to determine hove to proceed in communicating this information to the County, whether to have it resubmitted to the City to verify the comments have been addressed and compliance achieved on the other two .items. This could i:hen b~~ signed off on and sent to the Colmty, or they could work off of thE: review comments. Mr. Towers said they could ]gave t;he site plan modified to incorporate everything and have the City signoff. Mayor Maingot asl{ed Mr. Sizemore if this was acceptable. Mr. Sizemore said from staff's perspective the preferred way would be to have a final package he could have each reviewer look at and say whether their comments were addressed. If the Commission decides not to include the Engineer's comments; then he would not signoff on this review. Mr. Drago said he had a legal problem. in waiving the City Engineer's comments. The City Engineer is responsible for reviewing site plans to maintain the integrity of the Ciry's Code. He stated he would need a good comfort level that the review by the Engineer was consistent with the County. He stated staff was more than lenient in giving Mr. Towers some options on some of the requiremer.~:ts. He said he did not hear Mr. Towers was going to take those options. He also is concerned with some of the items that need to go before the Board of Adjustment for a variance when annexed into the City. He referred to the security of the wall and said it also needed to be brick or stone pl;~ced on the face towards the development. He said it was agreed upon at the j oint meeting that the City would determine the compliance r~,lative to the Code and the County would be the permitting agency. Mr. Towers said the site plan submitted stated there will be a limestone finish between the columns that will be consistent with the same material CC 07-02-07,195 on the outside of the units: He said the landscape will take approximately 6-8 months of normal growth rate, but it will still .have a finish that matches the exterior or the buildings. He said the stormwater retention of the County models St. John's and this would be a triple effort and he is suggesting relying on the County for this matter. Commissioner Anderson said the points of contention deals with the wetlands and that the County would accept the sand filtration buffer over the 20-foot buffer. He asked,if this was to satisfy the County or St. John's requirement. Mr. Towers said this was to address the City's Code.. Commissioner Anderson said the other point would be whether the City would require something regarding the geometry of the height of the two fences. Mr. Towers said they want this development to be buffered from the other neighborhood as much as providing a buffer for them. Commissioner Anderson said it sounds as if almost everything has been satisfactorily dealt with. Mr. Sizemore said they have resolved a lot of the detail work. The only items that remain are those listed in the staff comments. ~ Commissioner Anderson said it sounds like they have very few items left. He said he was extremely dissatisfied with how this process began. He stated he did not have a problem with getting to a point where they signoff with the exception of these few items and. writing a letter to the County . expressing the areas of concern. When the County approves it, the City Engineer needs to also have the same comfort level. He stated it sounds like it is a procedural issue. He said he wants to make sure the wall is done before the City says they are fine with it, but this can be done by staff. Mr. Drago said the wall will be stipulated in the Development Order so that the City knows it will be done. Mr. Towers needs. to come up with a plan from a safety point. He said the drainage responsibility will ultimately lie with the City: He would .hope the Commission would have the where-to-all to say; in order to have a good comfort level they want the City Engineer to signoff on it. Mr. Towers said they would be deed restricting the use of the funds of the Association for the maintenance of the retention pond. Mayor Maingot asked Mr. Towers if he had a problem following through l with the City Administrator requests. ~J CC 07-02-07/196 Mr. Towers advised he did not have a problem with this. He .suggested ,- sending aletter to the County with the issues outlined in the letter to be ~~"' part of the Development Order. Mr. Drago said the process is simple that Mr. Towers has agreed to present the information to th.e City relative to the City Engineer's comments. Present t_he information for review and that issue is resolved. The other issues are the. retaining Nall as per staff comments. He said this will require variances and they understand that, and will recommend to the Board of Adjustment to grant the ~~ariance for the wall. Discussion was held regarding the wall and variances. Mr. Towers advised you would not see the wall. from the subdivision side and the fencing will be integrated. Commissioner Bundy asked what would happen if the Board of Adjustment did not grant the: variance. Mr. Drago advised it would come to the Commission. He explained since this is not already built to anon-conforming use and the applicant has agreed to meet the City Code, the variance will be required. Commissioner Bundy said they .cannot say at this time they would approve those variances since they do not Piave jurisdiction. Mr. Towers said they. had nog problem going through the variance process. Discussion was held regarding the wall. Deputy Mayor Holt said the Code states the fuush is to be stone or brick. Mr. Towers advised the wall would be limestone and there would be no painting or maintenance issues. Mr. Drago reviewed the areas in v~rhich variances would be required. One would be the wall at the wetlands ~~.rea and the second is in regards to safety and security to the east side. of the wall. Mr. Towers advised he has given final landscaping approval. to Mr. Drago. Mr. Sizemore inquired if the Commission direction was that Mr. Towers is to make the changes according to the directions he received here, including the City Engineer's comments, and give this back to the City for review. He said he will collect signoff from the reviewers and once this had happened he will provide notii'lcation to the. County with a copy of the approved site plan. CC 07-~02-07/197 Mayor Maingot responded in the affirmative. Mr. Towers said they were working within the confines of the County's `~ agenda for the July 25tH D. The Finance Division of the Financial Services Department recommends City Commission read by title only, set Jtuly 16, 2007 as a public hearing date and approve the first reading of Ordinance 07- 1834 which amends the Fiscal Year 06/07 Budget. Ms. Roper read Ordinance No. 07-1834 by title only. Commissioner Bundy moved to approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 07-1834 and set July 16, 2007 as a public hearing date. Seconded by Deputy Mayor Holt. Mayor Maingot inquired about the Fire Assessment Study the County had done. Mr. Drago said he had not seen or received a copy of that study. He advised this was a separate study from the one paid for by the County and it-was to establish a separate Fire Assessment Fee only for the City of Longwood relative to fire suppression. Motion carried by a unanimous roll call vote. E. Mayor Maingot requests that the City Commission discuss and decide who will be in charge of the City Clerk's office during the. City Clerk's leave. Deputy Mayor Holt asked how long.. and who did the Clerk have in mind that could fill her job. Ms. Roper .said .she did some research last week in,regards to the Family Medical Leave Act and how the maternity leave is defined in the City's policy. She said the City's policy reads that the person requesting maternity leave should first take their sick time, accrued vacation, and then the balance of the twelve (12) weeks. She stated the City has the right to say the Family Medical Leave Act runs concurrently or consecutively with the policy during. which time her position is held open. She said she interpreted this that the sick leave and vacation leave would be used first and if the person desired extra time, they would use the balance of the '° twelve (12) weeks allotted by the- Family Medical Leave Act without pay. She advised she looked at the job descriptions of the City Clerk and Deputy City Clerlc and the job description of the Deputy City Clerlc, and she. believes the City Clerk's description as well, states in the absence of the City Clerk that the Deputy City Clerk would fill in. J CC 07-02-07/198 _ Mayor Maingot asked Ms. lvlirus if she would like to advise who would be filling in during her maternity leave. Ms. Mirus said when she. spoke to the Commission individually with regards fo what she had planned for her office, she- had discussed this with the Personnel Manager, and it wa;~ okay for her to take three weeks off .sick and work part time from horr~e. She stated the Personnel Manager told her if the majority of the Commission went along. with that, it would be acceptable. She said she was confused by this item since she had the majority of the Commission.. Mayor 1Vlaingot said there ~Tas an established policy and one employee just returned from maternity leave. He stated this procedure is established by the City and followed. He said if granting a variance from policy they were opening for someone else to be treated in the same way. Ms. Mirus said she did not see herself as an ordinary employee. She is contracted by the City and serves ;~.t the pleasure of the Commission. Ms. Roper said there was an argument for that both ways. The City Clerk is a contracted employee appointed. by the City Commission and she can see the Clerk saying she is on a di:Eferent tier than the rest of employees. She said there was also an argumment that any contracted employee should be treated in a like manner. She said it was the Commission's decision whether the Clerk can work part time or from home. She stated her concern is the precedence they would be setting for other members of the City and also whether working from home or part time fulfills her job description. She said she has a cor.~cern regarding being custodian of the records and where you are going to be custodian at. She stated she has a legal concern regarding this and aii interim would be the best option during her maternity leave. She advised the policy also requires a doctor's note to return. Commissioner Anderson said he vas initially unopposed to the Clerk working part time from home. Since then, having listened to the arguments, it is clear they need to uphold the policy and appoint the Deputy City Clerk. He said he did not have a problem with her working from home on items that were not records custodian issues. Commissioner Sackett said this was up to a doctor's release and it could be a short time based upon what th.e Clerk's family and physical needs are. He said the Family Medical Act was for both husband and wife. He stated he also was initially unopposed. H~~ said let the Deputy step up, enjoy your daughter, and come back as physically soon as you can. Commissioner Bundy inquired if the Clerk had an idea of how long she plamled to be gone. CC 07-02-07i 199 Ms. 1Vlirus said she discussed this with her doctor and she thought she could do the part time, but it seems the Commission was not going, in that direction. She stated she has twelve (12) weeks time. ~J Commissioner Bundy said they would not,need to appoint any one since the job descriptions state the Deputy City Clerk assumes the duties. Ms. Roper said she did not check to see if this was codified or a Resolution. She said if it is not, in a prolonged absence, they would need to take the action of appointing the Deputy City Clerk. Mayor Maingot moved that during the absence of the City Clerk, Sarah Mirus, on maternity leave, the Deputy City Clerk will assume the function and responsibilities of said office.. Seconded by Commissioner Anderson. Commissioner Anderson said to take the time needed and when she is ready, they will be waiting for her to return. Mayor Maingot agreed and .said one of the reasons for the Family Medical Leave Act. was to guarantee your job is there for you when ready to return. Motion carried by a unanimous roll call vote.. Commissioner Bundy said to research this and bring it forward spelling it u out in a Resolution. 12. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT. Ms. Roper reported Mr. Roper has requested a Shade Meeting be scheduled for the Bay Avenue property. It was the consensus of the Commission to hold a Shade Meeting on July 30~` at 7':00 p.m. Ms. Roper advised she would be out of town July 6 - 13, 2D07. She said their staff would-know how to contact her if the need arises. She will. also be at the Municipal City Attorney's meeting, on July 19 - 20, 2007. 13. CITY CLERK'S REPORT. No report. 14. ADJOURN. Mayor Maingot adjourned the meeting at 12:20 a. ATTES .~ , Sarah 1VI. 1VIi~-us, C1VIC City Clea-k 1 ~/ CC 07-02-07/200