CC01-19-15MinLONGWOOD CITY COMMISSION
Longwood City Commission Chambers
175 West Warren Avenue
Longwood, Florida
MINUTES
January 19, 2015
7:00 P.M.
Present: Mayor John C. Maingot
Deputy Mayor Ben Paris
Commissioner Joe Durso
Commissioner Brian D. Sackett
Commissioner Mark Weller
Dan Langley, City Attorney
Jon C. Williams, City Manager
Michelle Longo, City Clerk
Troy Hickson, Police Chief
William Gulbrandsen, Fire Chief
Lee Ricci, Human Resources Director
Pam Barclay, Finance Director
Sheryl Bower, Community Development Director
Richard Kornbluh, Utilities Division Manager
Tom Kruger, Economic Development/Special Projects
Manager
1. CALL TO ORDER. Mayor Maingot called the meeting to order at 7:00
p.m.
2. OPENING INVOCATION. Pastor Carlos Cabos with New Creation
Assembly gave the invocation.
3. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS. Ms. Longo read the following
announcements.
A. Senior Matinee will be held on Wednesday,, January 21, 2015
from 1:30 p.m. until 3:30 p.m., Longwood Community
Building, 200 West Warren Avenue. This month's feature is
And So It Goes.
5. PROCLAMATIONS / RECOGNITIONS
CC 01-19-15/1
A. District #5 Presentation of the Business Person of the Month
Award for January 2015 to Mr. Nicholas Menand, Manager of
Wawa Store #5156, located at 162 East State Road 434.
Commissioner Sackett read a brief biography on Mr. Nicholas
Menand and then presented him with the Business Person of the
Month Award for January 2015. Photographs were then taken.
B. Presentation of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Good Citizenship
Award to Dr. Marian Anderson -Cummings.
Commissioner Sackett read a Proclamation recognizing Dr. Marian
Anderson -Cummings and presented her with the Martin Luther
King, Jr. Good Citizenship Award. Photographs were then taken.
C. Presentation of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Good Citizenship
Award to the honorable Brenda Carey.
Mayor Maingot read a Proclamation recognizing the Honorable
Brenda Carey and presented her with the Martin Luther King, Jr.
Good Citizenship Award. Photographs were then taken.
D. Presentation of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Good Citizenship
Award to the honorable Lee Constantine.
Commissioner Durso read a Proclamation recognizing the
Honorable Lee Constantine and presented him with the Martin
Luther King, Jr. Good Citizenship Award. Photographs were then
taken.
E. Proclamation "Florida First Responder Appreciation Week" to
show first responders and their families how much we value
their service to our cities, counties, and state.
Commissioner Sackett read a Proclamation proclaiming January 5t'
through 9t`, 2015 as "Florida First Responder Appreciation Week".
He presented the Proclamation to the Police Chief and Fire Chief
and photographs were then taken.
6. BOARD APPOINTMENTS. None.
7. PUBLIC INPUT
A. Public Participation. None.
8. MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
District #4. Commissioner Weller said he and his wife attended the Car
Show on January loth, which was well attended. He also thanked City
employees who came out during the holiday break to clean up a large
CC O1-19-15/2
amount of papers along Ronald Reagan Boulevard. He said he spoke with
Mr. Williams about using individuals doing community service time to
pick up trash along City roads.
Mr. Williams said they do have people assigned to do community service
on a regular basis. He stated he had a conversation with the Leisure
Services Director and they can direct those efforts to clean the rights -of
ways and roads.
Commissioner Weller said he met with Jon Williams, Sheryl Bower and
Tom, Krueger, and during the meeting he was informed the City's website
is not an effective marketing tool to show businesses and individuals the
benefits to move their businesses to Longwood. He said as a small
business owner, he understands the power of having an effective website
and how this can be a first impression. He said if used effectively, it can
usually turn into business.
Commissioner Weller moved that the City Commission give the
City Manager the authority to obtain bids to redevelop the City's
website to assist the Economic Development Manager in bringing
business to Longwood. Motion carried by a unanimous voice vote.
District #5. Commissioner Sackett said it was a very successful Car
Show and he understands there is an even bigger one next month. He said
there are more dogs loose in Reiter Park than before. He said people are
needed there to enforce the rules. He said this weekend he will be going
to Buddy Ball where 15-16 year olds pair up with a handicapped child to
play baseball. He also noted he has just completed a community service
project with the Boy Scouts that meet at Longwood Elementary. He said
at the end of February when State Road 434 is finally finished he would
like to have a banner across State Road 434 or some sort of sign to thank
all the businesses for sticking with them, for all this time. He said they
need to thank them and acknowledge them, because it has been a struggle
for the businesses.
District N. Mayor Maingot said he met with the head person Mr. David
Boden for the widening project, along with the City Manager about the
ongoing concerns,of a number of their businesses. Mr. Boden said there
were a number of delays on the project because there were issues not on
the original plans and they had to deal with them. He said they are all
looking forward to the conclusion of the widening. He said the
Commission interact with a lot of people and whatever decisions they
arrive at are on behalf of their entire population of citizens. He said this
Commission takes their concerns very seriously when they are
communicated to them. He said he was the Chair for the past year of the
Seminole County Tourism Council. He said they have made many
changes and also said tourism has meant very little in Seminole County to
most people except those involved in tourism. He said they have just
CC 01-19-15/3
ended this year at 14.7 percent over the past year and have brought in over
$27 million dollars in economic development. He has handed over the
Chair to Frank Cirrincione, the General Manager of the Hilton Hotel in
Altamonte. He noted the Fireball Run is coming soon, he met with the
group since they wanted to know about the history of Longwood. He
stated he received a letter from a resident who has an issue with trucks and
passed it along to the City Manager to address.
District #2. Commissioner Durso said the League of Cities is issuing its
Public Records training, which they are all required to attend. He said he
thinks they may have it online by the summer, which they can take and get
credit as it is required by Florida law. He and Mr. Williams have met with
representatives from Lyman High School about the extension of their
Parks and Recreation programs and the potential of them using their fields
and facilities during the summer for their residents, and getting involved in
the restructuring of Lyman's facilities as they move forward. He said they
are moving forward with the Seminole County School Board in setting
meetings regarding Longwood Elementary and the possibilities of creating
a girls softball complex for those who can't use Candyland Park when it is
constantly being used by Babe Ruth. He brought up a request by the
Oviedo Chamber of Commerce to create a business initiative along State
Road 434. He said they will be requesting to come sit with them to see if
they would like to participate, like they do with the Seminole County
Chamber with some of their business development ideas.
District #3. Deputy Mayor Paris said on January 12t" there was a very
heavy rainfall and he saw something he thinks deserves some recognition.
He was driving around checking for any flooding and he spotted several of
their city trucks and Streets Department employees in the rain opening up
storm drains. He said most roads were opened up and flooding was
minimal. He wanted to commend these employees for doing this in that
rain.
9. ANY ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA
Commissioner Durso made a motion to move Regular Business
Items 12A through 12F and Item 14A forward before the Public
Hearing. Motion carried by a unanimous voice vote.
10. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve Minutes of the December 15, 2014 Regular Meeting.
B. Approve the Monthly Expenditures for December 2014 and
January 2015.
C. Approve the Monthly Financial Report for December 2014.
CC 01-19-15/4
D. Approve an increase in the amount of $80,000 to purchase
order #015537 to Sunstate Meter & Supply, Inc. as suppliers of
water supply meters and related materials for fiscal year 2014-
2015.
E. Approve a Piggyback Agreement to the Contract between
Sarasota County and R & M Service Solutions, LLC for the
Valve Assessment & Maintenance Program and an increase in
the amount of $20,000 to the R & M Service Solutions, LLC
purchase order.
F. Approve the Award for Water & Sewer Materials and issuance
of a. purchase order to Ferguson Waterworks & HD Supply
Waterworks.
G. Approve the Award for Vehicle Maintenance and the Purchase
Orders associated with each contractor.
H. Approve an increase in the amount of $1,829.25 to purchase
order #015630 for the final invoice to Municipal Water Works
as suppliers of water and sewer materials for fiscal year 2014-
2015.
Commissioner Durso moved to approve the consent agenda
as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Weller and
carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
12. REGULAR BUSINESS
A. Read by title only and adopt Resolution No. 15-1370, which
amends the Fiscal Year 2014/2015 budget.
Mr. Langley read Resolution No. 15-1370 by title only.
Commissioner Durso moved to adopt Resolution No. 15-
1370 as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Sackett.
Commissioner Weller asked Mr. Williams for an explanation of
this Resolution.
Ms. Pam Barclay explained why budget amendments are done and
that they have started to do them quarterly instead of at the end of
the year as requested by the Accounting Manager. She then went
over what was included in this budget amendment.
Commissioner Weller asked if this is the first year they have done
this.
CC 01-19-1515
Ms. Barclay said they always do budget amendments and this is
the first year they have done them quarterly.
Motion carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
B. Approve a Letter of Engagement with McDirmit, Davis & Co.,
LLC to provide auditing services.
Commissioner Durso moved to approve Item 12B as
presented. Seconded by Commissioner Sackett and carried
by a unanimous roll call vote.
C. Approve a request to change a site plan (SP 12-06) approved
per the Settlement Agreement between Mr. Michael Towers,
Oakwood Construction and the City of Longwood for the
property on Pine Avenue and Wilma Street.
Commissioner Durso moved to approved Item 12C as
presented. Seconded by Commissioner Sackett and carried
by a unanimous roll call vote.
D. City Commission to hear a request from RE/MAX Assured to
mitigate a Code Enforcement Lien in the amount of $175,350
on the property located at 300 East Orange Avenue.
Ms. Kimberlynn Moriarity with Re/Max, listing broker for this
properly, said the property was foreclosed on 10/1/2014. She said
the fines in the amount of $175,350 were accrued before the bank
took ownership of the property. She said they do have a contract
on the property with an investor and he has bought numerous
properties from her and her organization. He will bring the
property into compliance. She thinks it is in compliance now and
has been so since the bank took ownership. She is asking that
these liens be mitigated to zero so she can close the file.
Commissioner Durso asked if the City Attorney was comfortable
with this.
Mr. Langley said this is a request his office did not evaluate. He
said this property was in a mortgage foreclosure and they have
limited expenses in that response, probably no more than $200.
He said Code Enforcement said they had a violation that went on
for some time and was corrected.
Discussion ensued regarding the date the violation stated, when it
came into compliance, as well as there being a contract on the
property and when they can close and keeping the property in
compliance.
CC 01-19-15/6
1
1
Commissioner Durso made a motion to approve Item 12D
as presented, with a $250 Administrative fee tacked on to
cover the cost of the City. Commissioner Weller seconded
the motion.
Mr. Langley said his office incurred $200 in fees reviewing a
mortgage foreclosure complaint that was filed.
Commissioner Durso amended his motion to $500.
Commissioner Durso withdrew previous motions and
moved to approve Item 12D with the amount of $500 as
administrative cost to the City and the date that the money
must be paid by is January 31, 2015, or the original amount
of $175,350 will revert back. Seconded by Commissioner
Weller.
Commissioner Sackett said that property was sitting there not in
compliance for a long time, and it has neighbors who had to deal
with that.
Commissioner Durso respectively disagrees with his fellow
Commissioner. He said they have had this conversation several
times. The other alternative is that the $175,000 stays, the deal
does not go through, and the neighbors live with a home that
remains where it is. He said he would much rather have the
property back on the tax rolls paying the monthly bills. He said it
is important to remember that the long term for the neighborhood,
and having an abandoned, run-down house in the middle of it is
not where they need to be.
Commissioner Sackett said he agrees with that.
Motion carried with a four to one (4-1) roll call vote with
Commissioner Sackett voting nay.
E. City Commission to hear a request from EXIT Real Estate
Results to mitigate a Code Enforcement Lien in the amount of
$45,950 on the property located at 764 Meadowlark Court.
Mr. Langley said his office does not have a file on this case and the
administrative costs are $150 on this case. He said this case is
currently in compliance.
Chief Hickson said this property was out of compliance for 458
days and the administrative cost is $150.
CC 01-19-15/7
Mr. Langley said the fine is currently at $45,950.
Ms. Katie Richardson, on behalf of Ms. Janice Pettaway, the listing
agent of 764 Meadowlark Court, said the bank that foreclosed is
Reverse Mortgage Solutions and the prior owner is deceased. The
heirs were not interested in maintaining the property and there was
an inoperable vehicle, which was removed in May, 2011. The
bank inherited the property through foreclosure and had no
knowledge of any of this. She said they do have a contract on the
property to close January 30, 2015.
Commissioner Durso moved to approve Item 12E with
$500 Administrative cost to the City by January 31, 2015
or the original amount reverts back. Seconded by
Commissioner Weller.
Commissioner Durso said the reason they do this is because the
bad guys are gone, the house has been taken, and they aren't
getting any money from them. It doesn't do them any good to hold
the new people, who are trying to invest in the property,
accountable for $45,000. He said it is the reason they are, in
general, a little easier on these types of situations because when
people are trying to do positive things with the properties, they
would much rather have them back on the tax rolls than being
abandoned pieces of property.
Motion carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
F. City Commission to hear a request for discussion from Ms.
Cheryl Bryant regarding the Citizens on Patrol Christmas
Parade.
Ms. Cheryl Bryant, 335 North Ronald Reagan Boulevard, owner of
The Wild Hare, said she loves a parade, a challenge and also
community events. She passed out the notice of the parade to each
of the Commissioners regarding the parade. She said it did not
have the correct information on it, so they received notice, but not
what was actually going to happen. She stated more than Ronald
Reagan Boulevard was shut down and that affected lots of
businesses here locally. She said people could not even get to her
store. She said they would like to discuss this with the
Commission and try to make things better. They appreciate the
effort of the Community police, however they cannot have these
events shut businesses down and lose huge amount of revenue on a
Saturday. She wanted to know how to move forward and discuss
these issues and also, how these other folks in the audience can
CC 01-19-15/8
share their concerns and their ideas of how to make it better next
time.
Mayor Maingot said the Citizens on Patrol (COPS) held a meeting
last week that was open to the public, but very few people were
there.
Ms. Bryant said they were not invited.
Mr. Williams said there is planning already beginning for next year
and for the committees that will be formed. He said the business
owners concerns and their involvement has been passed along and
will be included in the planning process for the next parade.
Commissioner Weller said he strongly suggests that the City has
the Economic Development Manager involved in this process. He
needs to be at every meeting and the buck needs to stop with him.
Mr. Christopher Roush, Bianco's Mona Lisa Italian Restaurant and
Catering, 135 West Jessup, said he appreciates all the hard work
that went into the parade and it was a very nice event. He is
concerned about the catering side of his business. He said they
book a year or two in advance. He would not be able to tell what a
good or bad weekend for them a year in advance, to not have
access to their building, would be. He said the weekend of the
parade could have cost them tens of thousands of dollars, and it
could have potentially cost them hundreds of thousands in sales
this year if they had not had personal relationships with some of
the local law enforcement officers who agreed to let them through.
He wanted to propose two things: one, communication about
where and when these meetings are being held be made more
publicly available and two, he would like to propose if certain
streets need to be closed down, which he understands will happen,
perhaps certain vehicles can get windshield badges or access
permits.
Ms. Collette Hall, 343 N. Ronald Reagan Avenue has two
businesses there, and said the day of the parade there was a horse
trailer blocking their driveway. She said they could not have
access in or out of their driveway for a couple of hours, which
made them late for a catering event they had that evening. She
suggested having designated parking areas for trailers, so they do
not block the businesses parking areas.
Mayor Maingot told everyone there will be subsequent meetings in
the future and requested everyone to attend to voice their concerns.
CC 01-19-15/9
14. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. City Commission discussion and acceptance of the proposed
settlement agreement with Mr. Sean Law.
Mr. Langley said they have a proposed settlement agreement and
he received a signed copy from Mr. Sean Law on Friday. He went
over the fines that had accrued for a period of 646 days to an
amount of $193,900. He said regarding the litigation history of
this case, there were significant attorneys' fees spent throughout
the appeals that the City prevailed upon. There is a pending law
suit for the collection of the fines. The proposal for settlement is
that Mr. Law will, on or before February 13, 2015, pay to the City
the sum of $27,500 to reimburse the City for administrative costs,
attorneys' fees, and cost rising out of the Code Enforcement action,
and the appeal for litigation. That also will pay a little over $4,000
towards the fine as well in addition to reimbursing the City for all
its costs and attorneys' fees. He said he would recommend
approval. He went over more of the items in the agreement other
than payment. The fine is paid down to $80,000, and is still going
to be a lien on the property; which gives Mr. Law a heavy
incentive to sell the property. He is obligated under the agreement
to list the property with MLS, market the property for sale, and sell
to a third party not related to him. He has to continuously have it
listed and provide the City proof he is doing all this. He also has to
escrow money with his attorney, who was there to answer
questions or make comments on the agreement. He also has to pay
for a professional landscaper to continuously mow, trim and edge
the property. If he sells the property, he has to provide a contract,
and if he sells to a third party not related to him, that remaining
$80,000 will be considered satisfied. If he cannot sell within two
(2) years and continuously maintains the property, the fine will be
reduced in intervals of $16,000 over the next five (5) years after
that. He said this agreement provides the City a right of entry upon
the property for inspection purposes and corrective actions if he
fails to maintain the property.
Commissioner Weller made a motion to give Mr. Law two
(2) years to sell the property and if he does not sell within
two (2) years, the fines stay. Seconded by Commissioner
Durso.
1&. Langley said thereis another party to this proposed settlement.
Commissioner Weller interrupted to say essentially they are
rewarding bad behavior. He said there are people that were
impacted that probably wanted to sell their house through this
whole period who probably couldn't sell it for top dollar because
CC 01-19-15/10
of the situation. He said he could make it where he does not sell
the property even though he lists it at market value, there could be
one reason or another why it doesn't sell. In two (2) years, he is
starting to walk away scot-free. He does not think that is fair. He
is paying $27,500, but look at all the angst he has caused the
community, the City, and his neighbors.
Mr. Dwayne Gray, Partner of the law firm of Zimmerman, Kaiser
& Sutcliffe, 315 E. Robinson Street, Orlando, Suite 600, said he
was asked by Mr. Sean Law's father, who is a client of his, to
represent him to try to resolve this fiasco. He has family that live
in Longwood and he understands the angst that something like this
causes when a misguided, young person has his own thoughts on
landscaping, etc. He was not involved in this case until three (3)
months ago, when at that time the yard was cleaned up, and they
made commitments to the City that they have maintained and met
each and every step. He said also, under the terms of the
settlement, Mr. Law is not permitted to live within a certain area
after he sells the house. He said that is a pretty extraordinary
agreement the young man is making. He is not a wealthy man and
is trying to put the money together to be able to pay the City the
$27,500. He said he is administering the trust account and hired
the landscape person to clean it, and he said this yard will be taken
care of until they sell the house.
Commissioner Weller asked Mr.- Gray what the goal was.
Mr. Gray said the goal is for Mr. Law to sell the property and to
relocate outside the City.
Commissioner Weller stated two (2) years should be adequate to
sell the property.
Mr. Gray said those terms are fine with them. He said based upon
the real estate market -and things getting better now, he believes the
house will be able to sell within two (2) years. He said they are
waiting to get this approved before they get listing agreements,
which he plans on getting to the City next week.
Commissioner Durso said he wants to hear from the two (2)
residents that have been affected by all of this.
Ms. Katherine Ettman, 397 E. Maine Avenue, said the
Commission did not get involved when this all started five (5)
years ago. She said they got involved three (3) years into this. He
got written up two (2) weeks ago again and was supposed to
appear in front of the Magistrate on January 22, 2015, which has
been postponed until February 27t'. She said Mr. Law has not met
CC 01-19-15/11
all goals or he would not have gotten written up. She said she is
asking that they protect the citizens and themselves. She will be
back in front of them if it happens again. The back yard is still not
in compliance because the weeds are as high as what he is
growing.
Commissioner Durso asked her if she would rather he stay and pay
the fines or leave. He understands the frustration and wants to
solve the problem.
Ms. Ettman said she doesn't feel anyone should be forced out of
their home.
Commissioner Durso said he is not being forced out.
Ms. Ettman said yes, but they want him to move out and she would
like him to go by the law, which took him a long time to do. She
said if he wants to move out and sells his home, then that would be
in the best interest of the neighborhood after what he has done.
But, she also knows that a year ago, he said to the attorney he was
going to be putting his house up for sale. She said they have never
seen a for -sale sign. He has 'a reputation for saying things, but
never doing them.
Commissioner Durso said that was the leverage in this deal. He
agreed to sell that property, pay the fine, and selling it within two
(2) years. He was not going to do that until they had a legal
document that said all that. Despite his youthful appearance, he is
a very intelligent young man and knows what he is doing.
Ms. Etman said she does not think $27,500 is enough for what they
have had to put up with as well as the City.
Ms. Bobbie Corbitt, 730 S. Oak Street, said she is the next door
neighbor to Mr. Law. She said it has been a real struggle over the
years. She wants to see a for -sale sign in his yard very soon. She
said this has ruined her lawn because all the weeds have grown
into her yard, plus there are tracks through her yard from his yard
of some kind of animals. She feels it is time to get rid of him
because he pushed the limit a long time ago and she knows they
have given him time, and it's now time for him to do something.
Mr. Langley said he wants to make clear Mr. Gray is committing
on behalf of his client. He said there is a provision in the
agreement that provides that if after two (2) years from the
effective date of this agreement that the property is not sold and
Mr. Law continues to maintain the property, there would be an
incremental decrease of $16,000 a year, beginning January, 2018
CC 01-19-15/12
and for several years thereafter reducing down to zero. He said the
Commission's motion right now would amend the settlement
agreement to strike that out altogether, and require if the property
is not sold within the two (2) year time period, the $80,000 reduced
amount would stay in place, and the City would have the right to
collect $80,000. He asked Mr. Gray if his client agrees with that.
Mr. Gray said if that is what it takes to get this done, that is fine.
Motion carried with a unanimous roll call vote.
11. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. City Commission- to hear a public request for Special
Exception (SPE 06-14) regarding Grant Street Townhomes, to
reduce the 20 feet required rear setback to 15 feet for all 27
units (LDC 3.2.0-Longwood Boulevard East Planning District)
and to reduce the 10 feet required side setback to 5 feet setback
for the affected units (LDC 3.2.0-Longwood Boulevard East
Planning District).
Mr. Langley said this is a quasi-judicial matter, one that applies to
an existing code or policy to a small number of people or a
particular piece of property. The Commission sits as a judge and
weighs the evidence presented to it by the persons interested in the
matter and the parties. The Commission's role is to evaluate the
applicant's special exception application based on the criteria that
is set forth in the Longwood Development Code. Those are
outlined in their agenda packet. He said they are also asked to
disclose ex-parte communications before the public hearing
proceeds. You are to look at the evidence presented and make a
determination as to whether there is competent, substantial
evidence in the record that supports your decision to whether to
approve, approve with conditions or deny the requested special
exception. Some of the type of competent, substantial evidence
you can rely upon would be city staff reports and testimony, expert
witness testimony, reports, fact -based information testimony from
the applicant and citizens, your comprehensive plan of the City,
your Land Development Regulations, maps and ordinances. He
said it is important to note that unlike a variance application, a
special exception does not require a finding of a hardship or to
present a hardship. This Section 9.3.0 was added in 2012 to
provide circumstances that would result in a development that
would provide equal or better outcome, but doesn't necessarily
meet the requirements of the code, can be presented to the
Commission for a special exception to deviate from the
requirements of the Code. The staff has outlined all the criteria
that are used to evaluate the special exception request. Those are
on pages 2 and 3 of your agenda packet, and staff has provided
CC 01-19-15/13
their initial evaluation on a few of those items. He said
Commissioners are asked to disclose ex-parte communications.
Those are communications with any parry or person outside of the
public hearing tonight concerning the application. That would
include the applicant, any neighbors, or any other persons who
have given comments for or against, or in general, in regards to the
particular application. He said now it would be appropriate for
each Commissioner to disclose the person or persons who have
communicated with them in regards to the application and general
nature of the discussions.
Commissioner Durso said he has had several communications with
members of the community, met with the developer and City staff,
and there was a community meeting between him and
approximately forty (40) residents that were in attendance, along
with a representative of the landowner or developer.
Commissioner Weller said he met with the developer on December
19t', and also met with a homeowner and spoke to a few other
homeowners concerning this matter.
Commissioner Sackett said he had a quick phone call with the
developer and had an email received recently that was a very
thoroughly written thank you for his insight.
Deputy Mayor Paris said he met with the developer on January 7t',
met with several citizens that live on the lake approximate to the
property, and he received several phone calls from concerned
citizens.
Mayor Maingot said he spoke to two (2) members of that
community and a gentleman who lives on the other side of the
lake. He also met with the developer. He said he actually went on
site with the developer, their City Manager, and Director of
Community Services to see exactly what they are dealing with, the
environment, the limitations, and recommendations to be made at
the appropriate time.
Mr. Langley said this is a quasi-judicial matter. If anyone wishing
to speak are to be sworn in. He then went over the process. The
staff for the City will go first and make a summary presentation of
the agenda item. Thereafter, the applicant, who is requesting the
special exception, will be afforded an opportunity to present their
case and why they believe their application should be approved.
Thereafter, members of the audience, for or opposed, will be
permitted to speak for three minutes per speaker. The Commission
has the ability to increase the time if they so desire. Pursuant to
the Commission rules, speakers are asked to keep comments brief
CC 01-19-15/14
and try to limit their comments to information that has not been
previously discussed. If anyone is a member of a group in
opposition to or for the application, you are asked to designate a
speaker to communicate your ideas so there is not a large group of
people repeating the same information, especially if there is a large
group represented by legal counsel. The Commission may take
into consideration the number of people represented by a particular
person and give additional time to a person speaking for a larger
group. The Commission can ask those in the audience represented
by that speaker to raise their hands so the Commission is aware of
all those whose voices are being represented through that speaker.
All speakers are requested to identify themselves by name and
address for the record. He said please speak into the microphone
so they can all hear and the record can take down the information
they are conveying. Each speaker is asked to be respectful and
courteous, and should direct comments to the Commission and the
Mayor, but do not address other members of the audience. At any
time, members of the Commission may ask questions of any of the
speakers, including staff members and the applicant. After the
public comments and input, the applicant will be afforded an
opportunity to address any of the comments made by the public. If
no further input is available or no one else wishes to speak, the
Commission can close the public input portion of the hearing and
proceed to deliberate, discuss the application, and proceed to make
a motion.
Mr. Langley said anyone wishing to speak is requested to stand
and be sworn in. He then swore -in city staff, the applicant and
those wishing to speak. Upon being sworn in, if they have not
already done so, please complete the forms Request to Speak
during Public Hearing and return them to the City Clerk prior to
speaking. He stated, please note the applicant has the right to cross
examine anyone who is speaking concerning the agenda item, and
those persons shall be allowed to cross examine the applicant if
they have been afforded party status in this case, in accordance
with the City's Code.
Mr. Langley told the Commission if the applicant is denied, the
City is required to give the applicant citation to the authority for
denial. If they are making a motion or seconding a motion or in
agreement with a motion, during their comment please specify in
their discussion which code criteria the application doesn't meet to
give the staff the ability to generate a letter to the applicant citing
the code section, the criteria that has not been complied with.
Ms. Sheryl Bower, Community Development Director, gave her
presentation. She said Avex Homes had submitted a site
application for a twenty-seven (27) unit Townhome Development
CC 01-19-15/15
with access from Grant Street. She went over the specifics of the
Special Exception and listed what the approval included. She also
presented their recommendation which was to approve the Special
Exception 06-14 by Avex Homes, with the condition that the
applicant provide a vegetative buffer along Lake Wildmere to be
approved by Mayor Maingot, with no less than one (1) tree per 60
feet of developed lakefront and consistent with the City's
landscape requirements, and that the masonry wall be replaced
with a solid fence and augmented with additional landscaping.
This also is to be approved by Mayor Maingot, along with any
other conditions the Commission determines is warranted.
Discussion ensued regarding conditions being placed on the
applicant regarding no left turn onto Grant Street from the
development, tree mitigation, and that the Commission -has the
ability to go above and beyond what the Code requires if they feel
that the Special Exception warrants additional conditions.
P
Commissioner Durso stated he wanted to hear both sides of the
question, fairly on their sides, and then make a judgment.
Mr. Langley stated the applicant has the burden of showing that
each of those criteria are met, and based on the evidence, the
Commissioners are the decision -maker based on the evidence in
the record they hear, including staff testimony, evidence from the
applicant, and those for and against. He said with respect to the
issue of imposing conditions, the Code, with respect to Special
Exceptions, does allow you to impose conditions and restrictions
upon the site, benefitted by a Special Exception as may be
necessary to minimize the injurious effect of the Special
Exception, or to make the Special Exception more consistent with
the spirit intent of the Code. After they consider the criteria, they
may approve with those conditions that they feel are necessary to
mitigate any injury that may be caused by the Special Exception,
or deny the Special Exception if they determine, based on the
evidence in the record, that those criteria have not been met.
Mr. Matthew Smith, 2105 North Park Avenue, Winter Park,
Florida, 32789, said he is a real estate and land use lawyer at
Licensing Associates. His law firm represents Avex Homes, a
local, Central Florida home building company. He said the
President, Eric Marks, was there and other consultants, to provide
testimony to answer concerns from the Commission or concerned
citizens. He said they had a brief presentation and were there to
discuss a reduction in side andrear setbacks by five (5) feet. He
said the sole purpose was to provide better results, project, and
product. These setback reductions are intended to provide a
project that works better, establish and sustain long term value.
CC 01-19-15/16
They think these setbacks will do that, but if they decide otherwise,
they will respect that and will amend the site plan accordingly. He
showed graphs representing twenty-seven (27) townhome units in
five (5) buildings showing the changes in the rear and side
setbacks. He said they can amend the plan altogether, which they
don't think will make for the best possible project. They could
reduce the width of some units, and in reducing the size of units, it
reduces the value of each individual unit and reduces the sales
price of each unit. The project could be built in a three-story
configuration instead of a two-story. He said they can reduce the
amenities package or the pool area or the clubhouse. He also went
over another option of changing the size of the buildings. He said
that is not the result they are seeking. There are plenty of
alternatives to make this work and all would have the same number
of units, twenty-seven (27), but some might be smaller. He said
they appreciate the feedback they have .gotten tonight and very
happy to explore those options. He said regarding the nutrient
level of the lake, he thinks that the storm water and water
management regulations are so strict, that they will find an
improvement from the current condition to the fully -developed
condition. He said as they do their site work, and work in the
wetlands area between the homes, lots and the lake, there will be
wetland plantings done that will absorb more nutrients, and
conditions will be more improved. He said from their perspective,
how do they establish that the project is better and is a better result
with these five (5) foot Special Exceptions granted. He said one
way is you will know it when you see it. From the applicant's
perspective, it is a community that maintains long term value.
That is absolutely the goal, and that is what they provided in the
first site plan they submitted to the City. He said if they need to
modify it based on feedback from the Commission, including a
denial as a Special Exception request, they understand that, but
they are looking to being long term partners, and looking forward
to their feedback and that of their concerned citizens. He said they
appreciate the staff s time spent on this, their individual time spent
on this, and they appreciate the recommendation that these Special
Exceptions be granted with the conditions they have already
discussed.
Discussion ensued regarding the various alternatives presented if
the special exception was not approved and making it a right exit
only from the development.
Mr. Smith said the right hand turn only ,would prevent the free
flow of traffic on the public rights -of -way and cause people to
stack internally. He said they have their traffic engineer here that .
could address that.
CC 01-19-15/17
Mr. Mohammad Abdullah, Traffic Engineer with Traffic and
Mobility Consultants, 1507 Hiawassee, Orlando 32835, said he has
had twenty years' experience and is Registered Professional
Engineer with the state. He has a Master's Degree in
Transportation Engineering and is a certified Professional Traffic
Engineer. He said regarding the question from the Commissioner,
before they look at restricting movements, they look at how much
'traffic they would be restricting. In the case of a WaWa, that is
heavy commercial use. He said a twenty-seven (27) residential
townhome units would generate about 150 trips per day total.
Looking at that direction, they may be restricting between forty
(40) to fifty (50) cars a day from making that movement.
Commissioner Weller said they are talking only about restricting
the development's cars from turning there, not restricting cars
going up and down Grant Street.
Mr. Abdullah replied they would be restricting just the
development's cars, so they are looking at the total volume that
would possibly want to go in that direction from this development
out of 150 cars, if they restrict the left out, they would be removing
twenty-five (25) cars off Grant Street from this development. That
is less than 1/8 of a percent of the traffic on Grant Street. He said
if they were to put a concrete island that says you can only turn
right on a two-lane road, they are really pushing drivers to start to
make a right turn and then make a left, which is a very unsafe
movement. He said you cannot effectively do it on a road like this.
Commissioner Weller said there is property that the developer can
use. He is saying not to use Grant Street, he is saying to use the
developer's property to prevent cars turning left onto Grant Street.
Mr. Abdullah said if they were to put that concrete island on the
developer's property, they can't design it in a way that won't allow
a vehicle to get almost going north, and then turn around again and
go south. He said they are almost causing a counter -flow situation.
Commissioner Weller said they are only affecting the traffic that is
leaving the development. He asked Mr. Langley, in order for them
to approve this Special Exception that could be one of the
conditions.
Mr. Langley said the condition that they place has to go towards
resolving a mitigated injury that would be caused by the requested
item reducing the setbacks. He said they would have to meet that
determination and that is a judgment call for the Commission to
make.
CC 01-19-15/18
Commissioner Weller said he has heard complaints and one of
them he heard was the amount of traffic going down Grant Street
and through Columbus Harbor.
Mr. Smith said that is fifty (50) cars spread out over the entire day.
This project would amount to one (1%) percent of the total
capacity of Grant Street.
Mr. Eric Marks, President of Avex Homes, 3680 Avalon Park, East
Boulevard, Orlando, Florida 32828, said his intention is to answer
questions and understands they are trying to find ways to mitigate
concerns about traffic. He said they are certainly willing to look at
those. The real initial question, not the perceived issue of whether
or not there is a traffic problem on Grant Street, is they can give an
expert's opinion that has done traffic counts and studies to show
there is no real problem from a level of service standard on Grant
Street. He said they could probably find a way to make a right turn
only. He said it has a negative impact on the marketability of the
project, and with all due respect, if he felt Grant Street needed that
protection, he thinks they would be more than willing to talk about
it. There are some things Grant Street could use that they are
willing to talk about, like ways to calm traffic, but a right turn only
has the only real effect of negatively impacting this project. It
does not solve any problem that exists.
Mr. Abdullah said they have done traffic counts on Grant Street,
and it is currently operating at less than fifty (50%) percent of its
capacity. He said while the residents may perceive traffic to be
there, the road is definitely operating within its designed standards.
Regarding Wildmere, it is in a little better shape. He said it is at
less than or about thirty (30%) percent of its capacity. Those are
some of the things they look at for designing engineering solutions
for restricting movements. He said an important factor is to
improve safety. Unfortunately, in this situation if they were to try
to physically restrict that left turn, it would not be an effective
solution. It would actually decrease safety because they are almost
forcing a movement that is difficult to make.
Commissioner Weller said that doesn't make any sense because if
it was a safety issue, they are designing it to make a right turn. He
said if someone is going against it and making a left turn, then it is
going to be a safety issue. If they design it to be a right turn, it is a
right turn, and they spill out onto State Road 434 and go right or
left instead of cutting through all the way down Grant Street and
going through Columbus Harbor.
CC 01-19-15/19
Mr. Abdullah said he understands his point and is not going to
argue that. He said obviously, people make choices. As engineers,
it is incumbent upon them to design the best possible solution.
Commissioner Weller said ultimately, what he was saying is he
can design it to make it a right turn only.
Mr. Abdullah said they can design it to be a right turn, in his expert
opinion in this situation, the level of difficulty that they are
introducing into that movement is not equivalent to the safety of
that concern.
Commissioner Durso said he wants to hear from the residents to
hear their presentations. He said they keep interjecting and
basically influencing everything they are going to be saying. He
wants to hear from both of them and then he has his questions.
Mayor Maingot called forward people who are opposed to the
Special Exception.
Mr. Charles North, 655 S. Grant Street, which is the adjacent
property next to the development. He said the purpose of these
setbacks is to prevent houses to be built too close to one another,
possibly affecting ventilation, light safety, privacy, decrease land
owned, and a policy to the City for environmental issues. He said
the problem with changing these setbacks, the justification that the
developer gave was to provide a front driveway that will
accommodate a parked car, which requires twenty (20) feet
minimum driveway length. He said as it stands now with the
setbacks, it would be a length of fifteen (15) feet instead of twenty
(20) feet. He said the other justification that the developer gave
was the impacts, while achieving the necessary amount of lots to
make the project financially feasible. He said he does not think it
is up to the City to make changes for a developer so he can make
more money on a piece of property. If it is going to affect his
pocketbook, he does not think it should be up to the City to provide
any means available for him to do that. He said as far as the
traffic, the traffic study they did was for two (2) days only, and he
can guarantee it was only two (2) days, and one of those days was
the day they had all that heavy rain. The traffic up and down that
road was considerably less than what it normally is. He said traffic
between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. in the evening on a Wednesday,
Thursday or Friday backs up to his driveway from the red light at
State Road 434.
Mr. Langley noted that for the record, the agenda packet contains a
number of citizen objection letters and other materials.
CC 01-19-15/20
Mr. Stan Peltz, 603 East Wildmere Avenue, said prior to what he is
doing now, he spent twenty (20) years with the same company. He
said fourteen (14) of those years were spent in a leadership
position and one of the earliest and most valuable lessons his
business mentor taught him was to be extremely cautious when
granting exceptions. He learned good rules were put in place to be
followed and any time you make an exception to a guideline, odds
are it is going to come back to bite you, even if you thought you
were doing -it to help somebody or doing the right thing. He said,
when you make a special exception for one person and someone
else finds out about it, you are the bad guy if you don't do that
special exception for the other person. It sets a precedent. He "said,
they also put themselves in a potential liability situation,
susceptible to being terminated on condition, or even being sued.
He said when he takes what he learned in business and applied to
this situation, this request for exception, it seems the responsible
thing to do is to make absolutely sure the developers have
exhausted every possibility to avoid breaking carefully established
rules. Since setbacks are carefully established for the reason of
public safety and environmental protection, granting an exception
in this case would suggest that City officials were willing to
compromise the well-being of its citizens, and risk the preservation
of precious, delicate wetlands. He said unless there is an
overwhelming condition that cannot be mitigated by other means,
granting for the reasons Avex proposes would be irresponsible and
inappropriate. He said he did some research on when governments
should allow special building setbacks exceptions, and what he
read over and over is that they should very seldom be granted, and
only in situations of extreme hardship. He understands that is not
within the Code, but it seems to be a very common guideline to
granting exceptions. He said when he read Avex's explanation as
to why they want these exceptions, he did not see that. He does
not see where they demonstrated disapproving the exceptions
would create a hardship. In their letter to the City of Longwood,
Avex states that their request for setbacks exceptions are to "allow
for a denser development." He said that seems like a financial
benefit to him on behalf of the developer, not the community. The
other thing was to "create a more open feel to the development."
That sounds like something that is purely aesthetic in nature, not a
hardship. Lastly, to "achieve a feasible development." That is so
vague it is hard for him to understand that is a real criteria by
which to make an exception. He strongly encourages each official
to oppose this screwball request for exceptions to the setbacks,
especially the ones that potentially would further encroach on the
wetlands because this is probably the single most pristine natural
resource that the City of Longwood has, is Lake Wildmere. He
said they too want what is best for their City and neighborhood,
and truly feel guiding Avex to work within the confines of the
CC 01-19-15/21
current City's standards is in the best interests of their residents
now and for many years in the future. He said he heard the
attorney say if this is not approved, then they will do something
else. He said why not have them do that and work within the law
if it's not that critical. He asked for anyone that agrees with him to
raise their hand.
Mr. Carl Went, 701 South Grant Street, said he is two (2)
properties south of the proposed development. He said about
eighteen (18) years ago, he looked all over for a place to build a
home for his four children. He said it was the jewel of Longwood,
Lake Wildmere, which is spring fed from Lake Everest. He does
not know and has not heard anybody say, what happens to that
spring. That is the jewel that makes the water that feeds
downstream to two other lakes in their City and neighboring City
of Casselberry. He said that is something environmental that they
really have to look at. He walked that property today and was
surprised at some of the things they have allowed to happen. He
said the bank's parking lot drains out into the wetlands. There is
no catch basin for that parking lot oil that could go into the lake.
He said they talked some about traffic and he wondered why the
developer didn't make an exit and entry into that property off State
Road 434. He said if they go down State Road 434 and look at
some of the very nice developments in Winter Springs and other
cities, their entry is onto State Road 434. He said they are not
dumping twenty-five (25) to fifty (50) more cars a day down the
street. He said he lives there, and cars back up to his house trying
to get out. He said Highway 17-92 gets backed up, or Ronald
Reagan Boulevard gets backed up, they come down Grant Street
and Wildmere. He said they don't need twenty-five (25) more
cars, there aren't twenty-five (25) homes around Lake Wildmere.
He said they are the ones being impacted and they are going to
dump twice the number of cars than people that live around that
lake. He said something is wrong with the formula and he thinks
there are alternatives. He thinks the developer could come up with
a plan. He said they are all for the City getting more revenue,
bringing new development and new commerce. It doesn't have to
be at the sacrifice to the current residents. He said the people who
made these laws knew the importance of having setbacks. He said
they seem to be willing to just blow them away, so the builder
makes a couple more thousand dollars that is not the right answer.
Mr. Christopher Byrd with the Byrd Law Group, 3505 Lake Linda
Drive, Suite 200, Orlando, said he was there on behalf of the
concerned Wildmere residents. He said they are here in opposition
to the application for the Special Exception for many reasons. He
said their Land Development Regulations in Section 9.3.3 set forth
the criteria that they must check off each of the six (6) criteria in
CC 01-19-15/22
order to approve this Special Exception. Criteria #3 states that the
resulting development must be consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and other City adopted planning documents.
He pointed out the conservation element in their Comprehensive
Plan. It is the City's goal to maintain regulation to protect and
improve the quality of surface waters within their town. The
Special Exception being applied for today reduces the setbacks and
therefore increases the amount of impervious surface that would
result of this development. By decreasing the setbacks, they
increase the impervious surface and areas to construct surface
water management systems. All of that decreases the natural
filtration of the land to the lake and the spring that are currently
benefitting and protecting the quality of Lake Wildmere. He said
their policies also state that they shall establish a water quality
testing and assessment program for larger lakes, such as Wildmere.
He said listed in particular to determine the biological conditions in
management methods to maintain and approve the lake's water
quality. Using setbacks is the way the Code has set forth those
goals in maintaining pervious surfaces to allow storm water to
filter and not pollute the lake. Furthermore, the future land use
objective states that they must maintain land development
regulations to provide open space recreation amenities in a manner
that balances the preservation of natural resources with community
development needs. Policy C, in particular, says they must give
the highest priority to the acquisition of shorelines bordering Lake
Wildmere. This development, with the decrease setbacks would
actually decrease public access to the water, decrease open space,
and the opportunities for passive and active recreation. Allowing
this Special Exception on the setbacks would again increase the
impervious surface, water management systems, and lessen those
opportunities for the public. Criteria 96 states that if the condition
resulting from the request for a Special Exception is common to
numerous sites, which it seems like this request is, so that the
request for similar Special Exceptions are likely to be received, the
cumulative impacts of granting the request must be considered.
There are other properties which back up to Lake Wildmere that
could be developed or added on to in a similar way. Granting a
Special Exception for this project could cause severe detriment as a
whole to the biological quality of the lake. He said they would be
setting a precedent in this case that could apply to every other
property on the lake. Criteria #1 and 42 state that this request must .
be made in the spirit of the Code and that this exception to make
the development equal to or better than what the Code already
requires. He said one goal of the Code focuses on the
environmental protection and land use. Allowing this exception to
the setbacks would make the development worse off in the
objective of this Code rather than better. He said it doesn't meet
this criteria. Allowing this exception to the setbacks would also
CC 01-19-15/23
make the development in a worse situation to protecting the water
body of Lake Wildmere, and it does not lend itself at all to
environmental protection. He said to wrap it up, setbacks provide
relief to pollutants to this lake. This exception does not make this
development equal to or better than what the Code already
requires. He said increase impervious surfaces, increase areas for
storm water management structures does not equal better quality at
Lake Wildmere or better open space or public access for
recreation.. As the attorney for the development already stated,
they don't need this Special Exception. Simply put, they would
like to have a better product for this site, meaning they want to
maximize their private profit margin, not giving the City some
secondary, speculative benefit of increasing revenues, which
usually never equals out. He said when you add in the cost of
increasing infrastructure to this project, water and sewer
improvements, if there are any septic tanks involved, that is a huge
concern to the lake. He said it does not benefit the City as a whole,
nor does it make a better project in terms of the Code. He said on
behalf of the citizens and residents that he represents, they
encourage the Commission to oppose and deny the Special
Exception request.
Ms. Sarah Ashton, 1033 Oxford Street, Longwood, said she wants
to talk about the petition they have signed as a community in
opposition of this entire project. She said it is relevant this evening
because there are some specific items that accompany their
petition. She said they are opposed to the resulting traffic,
contamination of Lake Wildmere and connected waterways, noise
pollution, and light pollution that this project will cause. The look
of such a development also does -'not support the historic, rural feel
that the residents of the City of Longwood desire. She said for the
record, she will bring this up when she finishes. Secondly, she
wanted to comment that there is an endangered Wood Stork
population that frequents the lake. She said it seems to be a
primary feeding zone for these animals and potentially, a nesting
zone. She said that needs to be documented because that could
affect this project as a whole and Special Exceptions that interfere
with the habitat for this animal, which are of concern to all of
them. She said she moved to this area from Maitland to escape a
cut -through road and her quiet street is= already a sort of cut -
through road as it is. She said she did not know this when she
moved here and this development is going to make it even more
so. She said they had a pet killed on their street two weeks ago.
She said she is sad to say it probably is not going to be the only
one. She asked that they consider that as well because the traffic
affects all of them, not just the ones on Wildmere or Grant Street.
CC O1-19-15/24
Mr. Danny EmeKX, 1005 Oxford Street, said Mr. Marks, the
President of this corporation, knows exactly what he is doing. He
is a real estate attorney, and for a number of years he has been a
developer. He knew exactly what he was doing when he submitted
the site plan, knew everything about the property to meet the
requirements, and knows this backwards and forwards. He gives
them a site plan and then wants to come in here and change it. He
said like everybody says, it is for his particular bottom line. He
said, they show a picture of a three (3) story building to make them
feel nervous. It is a kind of bait and switch kind of deal. He said
he appreciates the traffic engineer and all his degrees, but they
actually live in the neighborhood and see the number of people
running up and down the roads all day long. He stated he made
eight (8) trips from his house that -day and a lot of them go back
and forth from their homes. He said State Road 434 is a jungle,
and everybody knows this. People will be cutting through, turn
left onto Grant Street or go through Columbus Harbor to Dog
Track Road, or will turn left or right onto Wildmere. He said they
wish it would only be fifty (50) trips per day. Nobody wants to go
onto State Road 434 in the afternoon because of the backup. He
said the developer's attorney said it doesn't matter to them, and he
does not know what he means by lesser. He stated, does it mean a
lesser quality product if this isn't done. He asked the Commission
to deny this request and stated there is no need for it, they just want
more money.
Mayor Maingot said the applicant can now rebut some of the
statements that were made in opposition.
Mr. Smith addressed the traffic study and said it is typically done
in one day, but the first day it rained very hard, so they came back
the second day. He addressed the purpose of the IMU Districts
and stated it is a more dense zoning classification than others.
That is why this project looks like it does and why they were there
that evening. He said the property does not have any access to
State Road 434, so there would be no way to directly access it. He
said regarding the stormwater and pollutants, the regulations for a
post -development condition are extremely strenuous. The pre -
development condition doesn't require to treat any fertilizer or
grass clippings or anything else that runs off that property or sheet
flows from adjacent property and none of it gets touched right
now. He said it all runs right into the lake. They have to build
stormwater lines and retention ponds to keep it all in the retention
pond and all percolate down to retain the stormwater on site so it
doesn't pollute the lake. He said these types of Special
Exceptions, particularly for the five (5) foot setback issue, are done
in the ordinary course. He said the Land Development Code is
drafted ahead of time without considering every possibility that
CC 01-19-15/25
could come along. This Code specifically in Section 9.3.0,
addresses this. He said the very purpose of that Code is to discuss
things that would improve the project or allow the project to be
improved without having to show that there is a hardship that
would be required if this was a Variance application. He said they
are happy to hear the suggestions and incorporate them into a
project.
Commissioner Weller said as far as making the development a
right hand turn only, it is not in the cards for them.
Mr. Smith replied it is not.
Commissioner Durso said this has been a very complicated issue
for their neighborhood and, at times, very emotional. He said he
wants to begin by thanking the residents for being as calm as they
have been in their presentations. He has had his share of heated
exchanges with individuals, but in a group setting, along with City
staff, and the developer, everyone has maintained some level of
real true professionalism in this, and he certainly appreciates it. He
said there are a few comments he wants to make on the state of the
City as a whole, and this project very specifically. He said the fact
is that they need housing, economic development. He had the
community meeting, and he said pretty directly that it is an
economic fact that they need new housing in the City. He
addressed how the cost of goods and services has gone up in the
City significantly over the past decade. He said if they look at
their budgets, they have done a fine job of cutting back, but can
only cut back so far, especially with regard to public safety. He
said growth is very much their order of the day. He understands a
lot of the concerns of the people in the audience who have lived
here for forty (40) or fifty (50) years, and for better or worse,
everything around them is changing. He said it is important to.
remember, as Lake Mary and Altamonte continue to grow,
Longwood remains a relatively more reasonable place to live. He
said he has some significant concerns about this project. With
regard to the water quality and use of the lake, he is still not
convinced that all of those things have been addressed. He does
not want people on Oxford Street or Grant Street, he wants them
on State Road 434. He thinks they should be able to find a way on
both of those properties since he knows there is a plan in some
way, shape, or form to figure that out. He said with regard to the
flood plain, parking requirements, water use and use of the lake,
there are a number of issues that still exist for him on this project.
He said he believes in development and in development rights.
He acknowledged that many are unhappy about it, but stated it is
what is needed. He said if they need to grow their business
community or bring enough people into the City to support it,
CC 01-19-15/26
businesses will not come to Longwood. He stated he does not
believe in development at any cost or development for
development's sake. He feels like they are kind of moving in that
direction in some cases on this item. He said based specifically on
his objections to the parking requirements in the Code, the wetland
and flood plain impact mitigation, transportation issues mentioned,
and water use issues he mentioned; while this project may comply
with many parts of the letter of the law, he believes there are still
some genuine questions about the spirit of the law, so he will be
opposing the Special Exception.
Deputy Mayor Paris mentioned concerns with the noise pollution
and light pollution. He asked the developer if there was any way
they could address those.
Mr. Smith said they are happy to comply, with the dark skies
requirements. He stated he does not think there will be much light
pollution. Any street lights would be much more of a human scale,
and they will be on the other side of the buildings. He said they
are happy to work with staff on it. He said they have already
agreed to provide a photo metric plan. He said regarding noise, he
does not know if there would be any material noise impact here.
Mayor Maingot mentioned some of his comments. He said in
2010, they made changes to their Comprehensive Plan. He said
change is always difficult, no one really wants change, but unless
they can move their economic base forward, how can they meet the
increasing costs of operating the City. He said they have done a lot
of things like privatized or outsource. He said they can either
improve their economic base and their opportunities for increasing
revenues, or they increase the millage rate. He addressed traffic,
and used his subdivision, Golden Grove as an example. He said
that Seminole County did some modifications on Lake Emma and
people in their subdivision were pretty upset about it. He said he
understands and appreciates what is being said. He said they have
to weigh things carefully and that is one of the reasons he went to
that property today to better understand. He spoke about the buffer
and instead of a wall, have a proper vegetative buffer in the area
where the retention area is going to be. He spoke about the lake
and how it is referred to as pristine, and he understands that there
are power motor boats on that lake and thought only canoes and
rowing boats could be used. He said people have told him there
are power boats on the lake using gasoline and oil, so they are
talking about,a pristine lake, and the next minute forget about how
it is being utilized. He said he agrees that they ought to protect
their water. He said it is important to weigh all the various
circumstances and what they have to deal with. He said the
developer has committed to work with them in doing whatever
CC 01-19-15/27
possible to mitigate a lot of things brought up, with a possible
exception of no turn on a certain area on Grant Street. He said he
has listened to his fellow commissioners, everyone else, and has
read all the letters sent to him. He said with the undertakings that
have been given to them to build a proper project of twenty-seven
(27) homes at 1,800 square feet for each home that is the way to go
on that property. He said he will certainly want to support that.
He said they are not going to be able to come up with all the
solutions to please everyone all the time. He said they listen to the
concerns, not disregard them, but also work together with the
people who are developing and investing their money in the City to
improve the economic well-being in the City. He has committed
himself to assist with the landscaping without charge.
Commissioner Weller said he agrees with Mayor Maingot and
Commissioner Durso concerning development in Longwood. He
said they truly need it, and as a long-time resident, he has learned a
lot this past year. He grew up on Lake Brantley and they had a
development on Wekiva Springs Road called Shadow Bay. He
said everybody was up in arms because it was townhomes. One of
the things they were saying is it will affect the quality of the lake.
He said the lakes are just not the same as they were, in terms of
lake quality. He said he is for this development, but not for the
developer impacting the traffic on a road going through other
subdivisions. He said he would approve the Special Exception if
they can mitigate where the traffic will go.
Mr. Marks made comments and stated this is a small city and
realizes every vote counts and every citizen is important. He
understands this is not an easy decision. He stated this is an
opportunity and they do plan to proceed with the project. He said
what the Special Exception process does is give an opportunity to
impose conditions that he has to comply with. If they don't have
this process, he comes back with a site plan that complies with
their code, but at that point there is no basis for conditions. He
said there is no basis to ask him to do a landscape plan, or to
mitigate the light, or to try to work on a plan that works for all of
them, and to mitigate the impacts on Grant Street. He stated it is a
better project, will be better for the City and will give them more
valuable units. He said they are the only ones that have presented
any evidence by experts, what they have heard is opinions. He
said the Commission is the best spot because as a developer, they
are here trying to say they will work with them on a landscape
plan. He thinks that Grant Street needs traffic calming devices.
The right turn is a great idea but the traffic engineer states very
clearly it is not going to work. He just does not want people to
think they are going to walk out of here, and if they vote against
these special exceptions that this project is not going forward.
CC 01-19-15/28
Commissioner Sackett cites 93.1, "in circumstances where the
applicant believes that due to the unique characteristics or other
special circumstances, strict compliance with the Code is not
feasible" and asked the developer if it is not feasible or not
desirable to stay with the Code.
Mr. Marks said the language is "strict compliance with the Code is
not feasible or desirable." He said it is more of a desirability
question than a feasibility question.
Discussion ensured about the project being more desirable and
options for the unit size.
Commissioner Durso stated Mr. Marks just said this was the one
time for them to negotiate. He stated he told him this was going to
happen, and they should have a conversation in more detail with
the residents early on and talk about transportation issues, lighting
issues, water issues, water quality issues, water usage issues, and
impacts to homes values, all these different things. He said he
came in basically opposed on some basic things relating to
questions that are being presented by staff on water quality and
transportation and a few other things. But from that presentation
he just made, he said he was fairly certain he knows how the
conversations with the residents went. He said that is of great
concern to him because he wanted an open conversation with the
residents. He said his goal was to make them a community partner
and make their neighbors happy to get something on both sides of
this issue. He said that clearly has not happened. He stated he was
concerned about that because basically coming into the Chamber
and saying damned if they do and damned if they don't, is not in
the spirit of cooperation. He understands that they might
technically be in line with the law but the spirit of the law is very
much based on positive economic development and positive
economic growth that is bought in by many people. He said this
whole situation went south to begin with, but now it has taken a
real turn with him. He stated he understands the legal
ramifications of these things, the tone goes against every single
thing that he wanted to see happen here. He said he has been on
the Commission long enough to know what is going to happen
with certain development. He stated he is basing his objection on
the original items he had referenced that were provided to them in
their document, but he is generally concerned about the state of the
way this whole thing went down. He is going to continue to
oppose it and to encourage his fellow Commissioners to do the
same.
CC 01-19-15/29
Mr. Marks said he knows the desire from the front end was that
they would all sit down and come to some conclusion, and while
he didn't make as much of an effort as he could have, they
certainly made some efforts. He has done this long enough to tell
them that this is the forum for that conclusion. It doesn't work
particularly well when he goes to sit and talk to landowners and he
has done this for over twenty (20) years. He said this is the forum.
It is typically mediated by either a Commissioner or the
Commission, and this is the forum. This is exactly the forum to try
to resolve those issues.
Discussion ensued.
Mayor Maingot referred to Mr. Langley on what their next step
should be.
Mr. Langley said it would be to have one of the Commissioners
make a motion to approve or deny or approve with conditions. If
the motion is made to deny the Special Exception, he would ask
the person making the motion to specify their reasoning's, and then
if there is a person making a second, to also agree with those or
add to it. He said during the discussion, each Commissioner who
agrees with the motion adds their comments as to the reason for
supporting the motion, the same if you move to approve.
Mayor Maingot moved to close the public comments.
Seconded by Commissioner Sackett and motion carried by
a unanimous voice vote.
Commissioner Weller made a motion to approve Item 11A
based upon the conditions that were stipulated in the
agreement and also to make no left turn onto Grant Street.
No second motion failed.
Mayor Maingot made a motion to approve and incorporate
the conditions from the staff report. Seconded by
Commissioner Sackett.
Discussion ensued.
Mr. Smith said the applicant would like to withdraw their Special
Exception application.
Mr. Langley stated there is no action required on the Item since
they withdrew their application.
13. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
CC 01-19-15/30
Mr. Williams said he would like to request an Executive Session for
purposes of collective bargaining negotiations on Wednesday, February 4,
2015 at 5:00 p.m. All approved.
14. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT. No report.
15. CITY CLERK'S REPORT. No report.
16. ADJOURN. Mayor Maingot adjourned the meeting at 10:28
1
ATTES
Michelle Longo, City IWk
1
1
John C.
CC 01-19-15/31
1
This Page Left Blank Intentionally.
1
CC 01-19-15/32