Loading...
04-16-2007 - Regular These minutes have attachments associated with them that are not included in this document. They can be made available upon request. Page 1 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER REGULAR MEETING APRIL 16, 2007 7:00 P.M. COMMUNITY CENTER MINUTES CALL TO ORDER 1. Mayor Thomas called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Community Center. ROLL CALL Mayor Michael Thomas Present Councilwoman Debra Rogers Present Councilman Dennis Vincenzi Present Councilwoman Harriet Rhodes Present Councilwoman Judith Lichter Present City Manager Jon Williams Present City Clerk Susan Wadsworth Present City Attorney Carolyn Ansay Present INVOCATION, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE There was a silent invocation and pledge of allegiance to the Flag. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There were no minutes to be approved at this time. 3. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/PLAQUES/CERTIFICATES/DON ATIONS A. Deborah Green, WAV, presentations to Edgewater Garden Club and City of Edgewater Mayor Thomas read a proclamation declaring April as Water Conservation Month and presented it to Deborah Green of the Water Authority of Volusia. Deborah Green, Water Conservation Coordinator, Water of Volusia, expressed her appreciation to Councilwoman Lichter for her support of Ms. Green’s efforts over the years. She has been a mentor to her to keep water conservation on the Page 2 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 forefront. She then commented on the landscaping that was done at Menard May Park. She presented certificates to Peter Mascaro to give to the other members of the Edgewater Garden Club. Mr. Mascaro thanked the City of Edgewater for providing the red mulch at the park. He feels it really enhances all of the plants. Ms. Green commented on Menard May Park winning second place throughout the State in the Institutional Category in the Native Plant Society “Design with Natives” competition. She presented a plaque to Leisure Services Director Jack Corder. B. Eldon McDirmit, McDirmit, Davis, & Puckett, presenting the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for fiscal year ended September 30, 2006 Kelley Leary , McDirmit, Davis & Puckett, made a presentation regarding the CAFR for fiscal year ending September 20, 2006. She announced that the City received the Certificate of Achievement for fiscal year ended 2005 nd for the 22 year in a row. Ms. Leary then went over the Financial Section of the CAFR with regard to the Management’s Discussion and Analysis. She highlighted items on Page 6, Statement of Net Assets; Page 16 – Governmental Funds; Page 19 – General Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance – Budget and Actual. She then referred to the Statistical Section by highlighting Page 98 - Full-Time Equivalent City Government Employees by Function/Program (1) Last Ten Fiscal Years. Ms. Leary then went over the Other Reports Section with regard to the Management Letter, which outlines certain things that they are required to address to the Auditor General. She went over the Prior Year Audit Recommendations they had and what was done to improve upon those and the Current Year Recommendations. Ms. Leary then made a Powerpoint presentation with regard to the seven unfavorable ratios included in the Auditor General Financial Condition Assessment. (Attached) Most of the unfavorable ratios are due to the cash balances. Page 3 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Councilwoman Rogers asked that since they have some extremely serious unfavorable ratios that they go over some of the inconclusive ratios. Ms. Leary then went over some of the inconclusive and favorable ratios (Attached). Ms. Stoughton called out from the audience and asked what the total debt was. She stated it should be around $45 million. Ms. Leary confirmed it was around that. Mayor Thomas informed Ms. Stoughton she was out of order. Councilwoman Rogers asked about the benchmark and taking into account the City has a business fund, Water & Sewer, and the million dollar transfers that every year come from that fund into the General Fund and whether it would distort that benchmark due to other cities not having that same kind of income. Ms. Leary informed her that was strictly total long-term debt divided by population. It has nothing to do with transfers. It is simply the amount of debt outstanding compared to the population. Councilwoman Rogers stated she would think they would be or should be ahead of the game because of the transfer coming from the Water & Sewer Fund and it should have stayed within it and been used to pay that debt down. A large portion of the City’s debt has to do with the debt within the Water, Sewer & Stormwater areas. City Manager Williams mentioned the financial indicator only applying to the governmental fund. Ms. Leary stated the Auditor General sets up the ratios. Governmental debt doesn’t usually have pledged revenue. Ms. Leary continued her Powerpoint presentation by going over Financial Indicators 10, 11, and 13. Ms. Leary then went over Financial Indicator 12 with regard to Debt Service Expenditures in comparison to total expenditures. Councilwoman Lichter asked Ms. Leary if she was saying this debt has nothing to do with the fact that sewers and roads were required in a particular place in the City because those are being paid in a different manner. That has Page 4 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 happened to them in this City verses some other surrounding cities. City Manager Williams informed her this ratio is governmental again. He commented on what encompasses Governmental Funds with regard to Financial Indicator 12 and what this addresses. Ms. Leary informed them to see a breakdown they could look at Page 51 of the CAFR. Ms. Leary commented on why in a lot of ways she felt the financial statements for this year looked pretty good. They had excess of revenue over expenditures in both governmental and business type funds. It is just that excess was invested in the capital and it’s just affecting the cash balances, which half of the unfavorable ratios are related to the cash balance. It is something the Council needs to address going forward. They need to get the cash built back up so they have a little bit of a reserve. Mayor Thomas asked City Manager Williams to explain what Ms. Leary meant when she spoke of capital. City Manager Williams commented on the capital projects that have been done over the last eight years. They have had a lot of cash outflow related to those capital projects. City Manager Williams went over the Powerpoint presentation with regard to cash flow. (Attached) He commented on why decisions are being made today with regards to direction in terms of initiating ideas for controlling our expenditures. Based off of these trends, internally they start to get a little bit nervous in making sure they have enough cash to pay their payables and making sure the employees get paid. He then went over the number of days of operation the City has in the bank in the event we get a disaster. At one point, we had about 290 days of a cash cushion in the bank. Today we are sitting at 19 days. He then went over a comparison of operating income and referred to Page 19 in the CAFR. He mentioned asking the employees to come forward and provide solutions to help turn the ship around. Councilwoman Rogers asked if they have the figure yet from the actuary where they are going to need to calculate for the pension balances. City Manager Williams informed her they did have that figure but he didn’t have it off the top of his head but he would get it during the break and provide it to her before the end of the evening. Councilwoman Rhodes asked how close it was to what they budgeted. City Manager Williams thought they under Page 5 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 budgeted by about $30,000 but he didn’t have the numbers. He again agreed to get them during the break. Councilwoman Rogers commented on a statement made indicating that we have an excess of revenue over expenses in the General Fund. She asked if it would be good to say they don’t need to do transfers this year from the Water & Sewer Fund to the General Fund. City Manager Williams explained the excess revenues that were generated in the General Fund for this year was as a result of the non- operating segment and it specifically relates to the sale of the ParkTowne Industrial Park property. That is a one- time revenue source. He feels they need to try and back away from making their decisions based off of those non- operating revenues and start relying a little more on operating. Councilwoman Rogers stated the financials are historical. What is done is done. It just tells them what happened in the past. There is nothing telling them about their long term or long range with regard to the debt service from ParkTowne as well as the debt with the Water & Sewer Fund and the interest payments. She asked City Manager Williams for a report next time. She knows they are going to be going over this during budget so perhaps they just want it at that time. Looking back at the audited reports and everything that is not included within them, that affects them. She feels the reports are somewhat distorted because it is historical and she believes it still paints a brighter picture than what it really is in this City. She feels the cash situation, even if they didn’t have the situation with the property taxes, they have current issues and they have things that are going to hit them that they need to look at now. She feels the reports are historical and aren’t looking at long term. Ms. Leary referred to Pages 43 through 51. They have all the disclosures of all the commitments the City has in the future for capital leases and other long-term debt. Councilwoman Rogers informed her it wasn’t part of the report. Ms. Leary informed her it isn’t part of what the Auditor General is asking for. City Manager Williams stated they went back and looked at the additional fixed cost they have added in the budget over that same period of time, since 1998/1999, and the City has added a little over $2.3 million in fixed cost Page 6 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 that they have to account for in terms of debt service, principle and interest expense that will be incorporated into the operating. Typically they do come before Council when they have the budgets before them. Recognizing that this situation does get complicated by pending tax reform. They need to make some changes now and get themselves a little bit more of a cash cushion. Councilwoman Rogers stated she thinks of it as the employees of the City. Whenever the pension plan doesn’t perform well the City has to kick in to bring that up. When an individual makes more money every year, does that individual run out and spend it? Some people do but some people will realize they are going to end up paying taxes on that. They will save that money, perhaps in a deferred sense, so they aren’t paying taxes on the increase because they have already adjusted to a certain amount of revenue. In the City last year, again property taxes increased over 30%. The City didn’t save any of that and the City needed it to live on. She feels that based upon what decrease we receive in revenues this year, they need to cut all costs according to that percentage and look at what their requirements are according to the Charter and their debt and go down the line. They need to treat this as if it is one person on a budget rather than many pieces. If they don’t start doing something now, they are in serious trouble. She knows the financials look great but it’s still not far enough down the road. City Manager Williams stated they have directed the departments to plan on a 30% reduction. They feel a 30% reduction in expenditures using 2007 as the base year provides for the much needed property tax relief and it addresses the situation the Council has before them tonight. If they were to look at this year’s budget, they can walk into it automatically knowing they need to come up with $1 million, $500,000 to address the transfers from the Water & Sewer Fund and $500,000 to put back in cold hard cash to start correcting some of the trends. Councilwoman Rogers commented on in the City summary where it says the primary responsibilities of the City Manager are to implement the policies of the elected officials. She asked City Manager Williams if he wanted to avoid the $1 million transfer from the Water & Sewer. She would say they have that million dollars. Let’s pledge that they are going to take half of that and apply it to the debt and Page 7 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 take the other half to start building up the cash. Back in 1998/1999 the City had $8 million and they don’t have that now. She expressed concern with the City only being able to exist for a handful of days if a terrible hurricane should hit the area. City Manager Williams explained a lot of the reasoning for reducing their dependency on the transfers is the Water & Sewer Fund has no cash in it. Councilwoman Lichter stated she has been here over 15 years and during that time the City’s capital expenditures have tried by the desire of the citizens as well as the Council to make the quality of life better. She spoke of the citizens voting for the YMCA and things of that nature. She commented on many of the grants the City gets being matching grants. Councilwoman Lichter commented on the CAFR not being presented in the past as it was today. She spoke of receiving general suggestions in the past and they have always tried to live up to those but showing this trend in such graphic detail puts a different slant on it. City Manager Williams stated by no means is he suggesting that any of the capital projects that the City completed were not worthy projects and that they did not improve the quality of life for the citizens. He feels it is time for them to sit back, take a breath, regroup, and put some money back in the bank. During that time, they will be able to look at Senate Bill 360, which requires the City to submit a capital improvement program as an element as part of the Comprehensive Plan that identifies five years of capital expenditures. The first three years have to be funded with dedicated sources, looking at grant funds for years four and five. They have been very aggressive and everybody has benefited. Now it is time to sit back and take a breath, put some money in the bank and then they can re-evaluate where they go from here based off of the new capital element. Councilwoman Rhodes agreed with City Manager Williams that they shouldn’t have any capital expenditures until they have a capital expense fund and it has some money in it. Councilwoman Rogers stated they have to remember the City Manager was our Finance Director. He gave information Page 8 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 previously to the City Manager. The information they have tonight is given to them because the City Manager allowed it to be given to them. She feels that needs to be commended. He knows what they want to see based upon what they went through last year. She feels he is going to do what is necessary and they have to look at this in a business sense. They can’t get emotional about this. This affects 200 employees and over 20,000 people. Her hope is that the department heads will work more closely with the people under them and that people will understand that this isn’t a personal thing. They have the whole City to look at. They don’t want the City to go bankrupt. They want the City to grow and flourish. She doesn’t want to have services from the County. She wants to have services from the city. At the end of the day it is always the bottom line. How much is it going to cost? This is just the beginning of the information that is going to be fed to the Council when they start the budget process. Councilwoman Rhodes stated City Manager Williams has asked every department to submit a budget that is 30% reduced. She hopes that applies to Council as well. City Manager Williams informed her it does. 4. CITIZEN COMMENTS The following citizens spoke: Pat Card , 3019 Willow Oak Drive, commented on being the Chairman of the Board for a Charter School and when they contracted with James Moore & Co. to do their audit, the first document they gave them was their 39-page Charter that defines all of the things they have to do and not do. Mr. Card stated it appears to him that they are not in compliance with the City’s Charter in two areas. He stated they have a restriction on borrowing in their Charter. It appears to him that might have been exceeded. They also have a minor problem with the fact that they have for at least five years not complied with the Charter in regard to the reserves. If this weren’t in the Management Letter, he would be surprised, unpleasantly. Councilwoman Rhodes stated it is in the Management Letter and this is the first year they have complied with their reserves. We are within our Charter as far as borrowing. Page 9 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Mr. Card stated he is glad to know they are in compliance with both this year. Dominic Capria , 606 Topside Circle, stated he was concerned with the deficit in the Stormwater & Sewer. He understands that they transfer funds into the General Fund to accomplish paying for capital spending. He is concerned with ParkTowne Industrial Center. It hasn’t been broken down in this report. How much of that deficit that they acquired in these two funds has gone into the infrastructure of the ParkTowne Industrial Center. That is Phase I. He is worried about it because Phase II is coming up. If they hadn’t sold that land in Phase I, they would not have met the Charter requirements. He doesn’t know what is going to happen with Phase II. He would like to know approximately how much of that went into ParkTowne. Councilwoman Rhodes stated actually they made $1 million last year. City Manager Williams stated they made $1 million in sales. The General Fund has been transferring revenue to the Storwmater Fund in an effort to help it accomplish some of the capital projects related to ParkTowne Industrial Center. Hindsight is always twenty- twenty. If he could go back and change things, he would certainly take that project and pull it out and put it into a separate fund and account for it separate. That didn’t happen. They can only learn from history and in the event they undertake a project of this nature in the future, they will separate that accounting and have it in a separate type of Enterprise Fund. He couldn’t give a total accounting of how much has been spent out there in terms of Stormwater. Mr. Capria asked if he could get that in the future. City Manager Williams informed him certainly. Carol Ann Stoughton , 2740 Evergreen Drive, felt when City Manager Williams was Finance Director he should have ratted on the previous City Manager. In nine years time, the City has lost over $7 million. She feels City Manager Williams knew exactly what was going on and should have blown the whistle. She feels he will pull the City up perhaps out of this and she is thankful to the press to finally put the truth in the paper. She had been asking for over two years time to find out what the City’s debt is, which was at that time $45 million. Mr. Hooper would never tell them because nobody wanted them in the know. Now it is down to $45 million. She didn’t think back when they sold that property they met the Charter requirements. She would like Page 10 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 an investigation. She would like the Council to investigate what was done at that time because the City was not in compliance with the Charter. She said City Manager Williams also said that they have and we pay out $450,000 to employees. City Manager Williams informed her that is for one month. Ms. Stoughton informed him in his department alone with perks or pensions there is $307,000. The little guy that works for the town that picks up the garbage and the leaves, what is he getting. He is being scared out of his wits. Those guys deserve a commendation. Salaries up here should be brought down and those little guys should be brought up. All those guys under $40,000, she feels that is a sin. She would like to get a job be making $50,000 or $60,000 or $72,000 in this town. Ms. Stoughton would like to know what happened with the $7 million. She asked if everyone knew they were paying $315,000 a year for 15 years on the ParkTowne fiasco, which debt isn’t up until 2026. That was a sin. The persons who are responsible for that should be held accountable. The past City Manager put the City in this debt. It is a shame that the City let this happen. They should have known what was going on and done something about it. Now we are in debt. She feels by robbing Peter to pay Paul, the City is going to raise the sewer rates, water rates, and retention pond rates, that is a sin. She feels they should buckle up their belts and outsource many offices up in the top before they belly up and cut everybody else out of their pensions. She feels they have a right to know what their debt is. She feels better management has to be in place. Bill Glasser , 1703 Needle Palm Drive, stated normally he doesn’t pay too much attention to New Smyrna but he came out of his purple haze one day when he saw that the developers were talking to the utilities staff and he was interested in seeing what it was all about since we are probably going to be in a similar situation in the not too distant future. There was a meeting to determine who pays for the utilities that are going out to Venetian Bay and other places west. It was interesting reading especially when he got the third paragraph from the end. A gentleman was talking about what they had done running water lines out to Venetian Bay and what they have already accomplished. He says that interconnects to Port Orange and Edgewater reuse systems are also slated. He was wondering if Edgewater is going to start providing Page 11 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 reclaimed water so those folks can water their golf courses. Department of Environmental Services Director Terry Wadsworth stated he thought that was a mistake. They do have plans for additional water interconnects along Mission Road. That is the first he is hearing about reclaimed water. Mayor Thomas informed Robert Lott he had to approach the podium. Mr. Lott started to speak and Mayor Thomas informed him he needed to wait in line and approach the podium. Mr. Lott informed him he was going to provide some input to the City Manager. Mike Visconti , 316 Pine Breeze Drive, stated he would like to address the twelve firefighters in Edgewater who want outside negotiations to join a union. He suggested they do not join this union. He suggested they get a grievance committee amongst themselves. The unions don’t come cheap. They have to pay dues every month. Those same union dues they could put in the bank or invest it somewhere. The money would always be there and they could divide it amongst themselves or invest it. He said Councilwoman Rhodes said no matter how many unions there are you can’t get blood from a stone. He also said Councilman Vincenzi said they could join the union. They might feel happy about it but it doesn’t mean they will benefit from benefits or raises or anything. He again suggested they look into it and get themselves a grievance committee of five firefighters and go the Council or the Chief because he understands the City has been good to them for the past eighteen years. He didn’t know why they wanted to get an outside negotiator at this point. He feels it is the wrong time. He wished they would consider it and do it amongst themselves. Mayor Thomas asked Mr. Lott if he wanted to come up and say something. Mr. Lott informed him no. Andy Anderson , Pine Tree Drive, stated the auditor tells them tonight that the average cost for debt service in communities throughout this area is 5%. Then she said our debt service is 14%, which is almost three times what the other communities are paying in this area. He would like to see that change as soon as possible. Page 12 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Dot Carlson , 1714 Edgewater Drive, representing ECARD, th stated on the 4 of April ECARD turned in 413-signed petitions, I-95 density, to the City Clerk’s Office to be th validated. Last Thursday, the 10 of April, she was informed that the City Attorney is in the process of determining if those petitions can be validated since they were collected in 2006. She cannot find any part of the Charter that states petitions collected one year prior to submission are invalid. To date the City has not notified or informed her as to the decision of the Attorney. She knows under the Charter they have 20 days to certify the petitions. She feels the City will have more time to start the validation process due to the fact that the City Attorney has not determined as of today if the City has to even accept those petitions at all. She feels the City is attempting to deprive the citizens of Edgewater of their Constitutional rights under the First Amendment to petition the government. City Attorney Ansay stated the ECARD group submitted signature cards or petitions to the City Clerk. The City Clerk then transmitted them to the Supervisor of Elections. The Supervisor of Elections office is responsible for verifying the signatures under State law. She received a call on Thursday of last week a notice from the Supervisor of Elections office that they had concerns that the City never approved the language in the petition. This dates back to last year. These petitions were originally drafted at the same time as the 35-foot height amendment. There were three measures that were floating around last year. Ultimately only one got on the ballot. The Supervisor of Elections Office contacted her because they were told that the date the City had approved the language was provided to them by Ms. Carlson and it was dated May or June of last year. They wanted to verify with her that the City did indeed approve the language back on that date because they had concerns some of the signatures predated that date. She informed her she hadn’t reviewed any language, that she was new to the City and that they would track it down. Tonight she was provided documents by City Clerk Wadsworth. She had also been provided with a few documents from the City’s Paralegal on Friday, which were inconclusive. They have correspondence in to the previous City Attorney but to date it appears as if there has never been any review by the City of the language submitted on that petition that says it is in compliance with the Statute. They have nothing to indicate that a request was ever made that the Page 13 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 City do that until now. They are sorting it all out. As she was provided documents tonight, they have no indication that a request was ever made for the City to verify and approve that language so the signatures could be made. There is nothing in the Charter that requires the City do that before the signatures are made. That is a position the Supervisor of Elections is taking when they go through their process. The issues are what they are. The laws are very clear in this area. She hoped to have more information for Council at the next meeting. Trish Whitaker , 3124 Pine Tree Drive, stated she was here to talk about the Animal Shelter and some options. They know they are running out of solutions for the shelter and they know the Southeast Volusia Humane Society has failed to renew a contract with the City, which is leaving the City with very few if any options at all. They also talked about scrapping the shelter. Unfortunately the City has animals there and the City is going to continue to get animals in the City. She asked Council if a private group were willing to purchase the shelter would the City be willing to work with that group. The ideas they have planned are very simple. They are planning possibly a private kennel and non-profit shelter to contract with the City and they would also have possibly a private clinic or volunteer services for the vets within the shelter area. There is a very interested buyer at this time. They are planning on putting a proposal in for the next Council meeting. She feels this would be a win-win for everybody. Dave Ross , 2803 Needle Palm Drive, wanted to dispel what was considered a rumor. Miami Corporation is interested in developing much of their property. Mr. Ross stated he had documentation that they are interested in doing 25,000 acres. He had an e-mail from County Councilman Jack Hayman. At the last meeting he requested that the Council consider a resolution recommending that the voters of Edgewater sign the two petitions. One of which has just been discussed. The other is the petition to put on the ballot amending the State Constitution, which would require voter approval for Comprehensive Plan changes throughout the State. One of the issues he raised was the potential Miami Corporation. It was referred to as a rumor and is no longer a rumor. Page 14 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Mr. Ross asked Council to consider letting the citizens of this State control what happens to it and pass a resolution recommending these two ballots. If they don’t feel that is the way to do it, he asked the Council to publicly say why they don’t want to do it. Mayor Thomas called a ten-minute recess at this time. The meeting recessed at 8:20 p.m. and reconvened at 8:30 p.m. 5. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilwoman Rogers had nothing at this time. Councilman Vincenzi had nothing at this time. Councilwoman Rhodes stated she wanted to answer Mr. Ross’ question. Regarding the first part concerning the petition for west of I-95, 1 home per 20 acres. She feels this is too restrictive and too arbitrary. The second thing, voter approval for the Comprehensive Plan changes. She has no problem with that. It makes her life easier. Councilwoman Lichter had nothing at this time. Mayor Thomas commented on rumors that were floating around the City that a bunch of jobs were going to be eliminated and a bunch of City workers couldn’t sleep at night. City Manager Williams called a meeting last week and he asked if he could attend. They just don’t know what is coming down the pike on the tax reform. All they have done is instructed City Manager Williams to have Plan A, B, and C. They want to plan for the worse and hope for the better. He asked the City employees to come to the Council meetings. He hopes they keep coming. They asked the City employees to give them some ideas. Nobody knows better how to trim the fat than the employees. He talked to some City employees this week and he was really impressed. They said they were made more aware of what was going on. They are now turning off lights and cutting their engines off to save money. He stated you couldn’t ask them to do what you don’t ask the top to do. If you start crumbling from the top, then the whole organization crumbles. He is going to surrender his cell phone tonight. He hasn’t claimed any mileage and has been to many meetings around Volusia County. He is going to terminate his insurance program. If they want to give him a 30% cut in his pay, that is okay with him too. Page 15 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 6. CONSENT AGENDA There were no items on the Consent Agenda to be discussed at this time. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS, ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS nd A.2 Reading, Ord. No. 2006-O-44, City of Edgewater requesting an amendment to the Official Zoning Map to include 17.63+ acres of land located southwest of Edgewater Lakes Subdivision Phase 1a (Northstar Lane) as P/SP (Public/Semi-Public) st rezoning () 1 reading 1/22/07, Item 7G City Attorney Ansay read Ord. 2006-O-44 into the record. Development Services Director Darren Lear made a staff presentation. Mayor Thomas opened the public hearing. Miranda Fitzgerald , Law Firm of Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor, and Reed, 215 N. Eola Drive, Orlando, representing the Board of the Southeast Volusia Hospital District, stated she was there because of the consideration the Council has been talking about for some time about an animal shelter on this site. It is a permitted use under that zoning category, not a conditional use. The property immediately to the south of this site is 71.5 acres that is controlled in three different ownerships. The managing member of those ownership groups is the Hospital District board. They annexed the 71.5 acres of that property a couple of years ago into the City. In the master plan they proposed, they are proposing a hospital on the site immediately contiguous to where they would be proposing the animal shelter. They would appreciate when the time comes, if it is going to be an animal hospital they would like to have some dialogue with the City when they are into the design. She expressed concern with noise and stated if there is a hospital immediately adjacent one day, the compatibility of a hospital and animal shelter would be a concern of theirs. In the zoning code, the only restriction and the only expressed concern is adjacency of animal kennels and animal hospitals to residential uses. Page 16 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 They would like to be invited to the table if and when the City is considering the design of that facility. Jason Gambone , Director of Planning, SeaGate Companies, 185 Cypress Point Parkway, Palm Coast, echoed some of the same concerns that were just raised. They have the Edgewater Lakes Subdivision. He believed there were five to ten lots that directly abut the subject property and they have concerns due to the nature of the proposed use. He asked for consideration of the City at the time that they are prepared to do some site planning. They would also like to have a seat at the table to make sure their future residents and the future citizens of Edgewater are properly buffered or protected from the proposed use. Mayor Thomas thought they could do that in a motion addressing that. Councilman Vincenzi cautioned everybody about agreeing to allow everybody who may have a problem with this project to participate in discussions. He can see a hospital having a valid point of contention with noise. He isn’t sure about a residential development having a valid concern. Councilwoman Lichter stated there is a temporary shelter operating now. The animals are in basically. Where the hospital in particular is going to be located verses the possible area within that large 17.5 acres, there are 2 acres very remotely far away from the hospital facility with a distance of space in between. She agreed with Councilman Vincenzi. They are talking more than animal shelter. They are talking water types of facilities for the City also. They are talking even in between that space of police and fire types of administrative buildings. Right now their greatest problem is people are shooting on the property the City doesn’t own. The distance in proximity isn’t close in either case. She doesn’t have a problem with talking with people under any circumstances. She feels planners should talk to people on both sides. She feels in the end the decision would come out favorable for both types of activities that the City has planned and several more. Councilwoman Lichter stated if things work out properly they actually saw animals, especially cats, they have now in various nursing homes and facilities because of the relief they bring to patients. Some have adopted some of Page 17 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 the animals. She doesn’t see it necessarily a conflict because of the space involved with the land usage. Councilwoman Rhodes didn’t see what it would hurt. She feels with your neighbors you need to talk and find out their concerns. It doesn’t mean they are going to bow to their concerns. Those concerns should be heard. She doesn’t have a problem with this. City Manager Williams stated it isn’t something they need to word into the motion. They have taken notes. In an interest of being good neighbors, they could certainly sit down at the time they begin to move forward and listen to what their suggestions are and try to be a good neighbor. Mayor Thomas closed the public hearing and entertained a motion. Councilwoman Lichter stated she was going to predicate her motion by saying she thinks a discussion should precede the building of anything. Councilwoman Lichter moved to approve Ord. 2006-O-44, City of Edgewater requesting an amendment to the Official Zoning Map to include 17.63± acres of land located southwest of Edgewater Lakes Subdivision Phase 1a (Northstar Lane) as P/SP (Public/Semi-Public), second by Councilman Vincenzi . The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . st B.1 Reading, Ord. No. 2007—O-05, Sid Peterson requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to include 79.18+ acres of land located south of the Taylor Road and Glencoe Road intersection as Low Density Residential with large scale comprehensive Conservation Overlay ( plan amendment ) City Attorney Ansay read Ord. 2007-O-05 into the record. Development Services Director Lear made a staff presentation. Glenn Storch , Law Firm of Storch, Morris & Harris, made a presentation on behalf of the applicant. The City has already received a donated easement through the middle of the property in which the utility lines lie that goes to Page 18 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 the sewage plant. Water & sewer is available to the site. It is high and dry. The applicant can meet all of the requirements as far as the new Land Development Codes. They have requested this be changed to low density residential, which is appropriate for this area. He commented on the master development agreement including a number of provisions that were required pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Board. They tried to look at this as a vision for what the rest of Edgewater would look like. They have also taken into consideration Council’s desires. Mayor Thomas asked for Council comment. Councilman Vincenzi asked if the yellow area was the subject property. He asked what the white area was. Attorney Storch informed him it was an existing borrow pit. Mayor Thomas disclosed he has been on the property many times and this is a high sand ridge with sand pines. Mayor Thomas opened the public hearing. The following citizens spoke: Dot Carlson , 1714 Edgewater Drive, stated she has not been on that property. It is dry except for where the lakes are. She has a friend that lives off of Taylor Road and they want to know where the access roads are coming out of there. She asked if it is Glencoe. Attorney Storch pointed out where the access road was. Ms. Carlson asked if the only access road was off of Glencoe. She feels it looks like there is going to be a traffic problem. She questioned it being County. She sees a problem with the folks in the County. They will wait and see on that. She informed Attorney Storch he knows what to do with the tortoises. They do not bury. Carol Ann Stoughton , 2740 Evergreen Drive, stated when the developers come in and their top-notch lawyers, they have a requirement in the County to build X but when they come into the City they get everything they want. She hopes the Council considers the County isn’t going to help them if Glencoe Road has to have anything done to it and the builder isn’t going to do it. They need to consider all of the developments coming into Edgewater because that is one of the reasons we are in the mess we are in. We have portable schools and a need for more services with no money Page 19 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 to do it. She feels it should comply with what the County had as far as people allowed on the property in the first place. They come to the Council and over the years they vote everything in and that is a sin. Attorney Storch stated in the development agreement itself the applicant will be required to pay for all the cost of development on this site. There would be absolutely no contribution from the City whatsoever. Once this property is annexed into the City of Edgewater and developed, the tax base is in Edgewater, not the County. There is a basis for doing this. This is a planning process as much as anything else. What is the right plan for that area? Is this the right area for this? In this particular case the Planning & Zoning Board and Planning Department said yes. This is one of those areas where he feels they should be directing growth because this is the high, dry land. It is the area that presently has growth around it. It is everything the City has asked for as far as a good location for development in the future. If it is done with good planning and a development agreement, he feels they will be proud of the results and it will be financially advantageous to the City. Councilwoman Lichter stated at this moment all they are voting on is the taking in and annexing this piece of property. They aren’t really talking about a plan and going through the stages. Attorney Storch informed her they are voting on the Comp Plan Amendment, which sets this as Low Density Residential. Councilman Vincenzi asked Attorney Storch if this is the beginning of a process. Attorney Storch informed him that was correct. Councilman Vincenzi asked about no agreement being made as to how it is going to be developed. Attorney Storch informed him no. Councilman Vincenzi stated they still have to see plans and negotiate. Attorney Storch informed him that was correct. The particular hearing they are having now sets the Comprehensive Plan designation. The staff has recommended low density residential. Next they will have the first reading of a zoning amendment that will go through a master development agreement dealing with the types of uses that can be there. They can amend that as they are going through the process. They will not have a second reading on these until the Department of Community Affairs has a chance to review this and make their Page 20 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 comments. During that time they can work together and deal with the zoning issues on the site. After the rezoning, they work out the site plan review and all the other requirements. This is the very beginning of the process. Councilwoman Rogers stated City Manager Williams gave them an update on the Edgewater commercial projects but asked if he had also given them one for the residential projects. City Manager Williams informed her it was in the packet. Councilwoman Rogers feels this sounds like a good project compared to what they have had that they have already approved. What she likes is the low density. They don’t know yet what the project will include. She asked the time frame. She is looking at all the projects they have approved and it is stagnant. Permits aren’t being pulled and things aren’t being done. She expressed concern with annexing another piece of property and that means the City will end up having to give more water, the impact on the roads. She doesn’t want to make a land developer upset. She doesn’t think it is fair to say no, not at this time because they are probably going to end up doing it. Attorney Storch commented on this being an enclave area. The plan of the developer is to start this as soon as possible. They aren’t looking at doing this as an investment. They are looking to get this project rolling and they are going to examine the market. There may be some changes to the master development agreement. Whatever it is, it will still be low density residential and will still be consistent with the highest standards. He spoke of this being gorgeous property. Councilwoman Rogers stated it is different than some that they have sitting there where nothing is happening. She hopes the design would be something more unique than what they have sitting on the plate right now. Something that is of a little higher caliber than what Edgewater has currently. The City needs that. Attorney Storch commented on the waterfront being one of the things that makes this a marketable project. That is very important right now. Councilwoman Rogers questioned them having ideas as to what they are going to do. Attorney Storch informed her they did. Councilwoman Rogers asked him to talk more about Page 21 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 that. Attorney Storch explained they are looking at a combination of single-family, estate lots, high-end lots, and perhaps a cluster of town home units around the lakes. Part of this is trying to deal with what will happen in the future. He commented on a real issue for Edgewater right now is trying to create the north/south corridors. This is one of the segments that will be very important for creating the north/south corridor. They have been trying to incorporate this into their planning process. Councilwoman Rogers commented on this being on the east side of I-95 and where the north/south road would come. She mentioned if Old Mission becomes a north/south road they will have to do something as far as four-laning to get to Old Mission Road. Attorney Storch informed her they weren’t looking at Old Mission. Councilwoman Rhodes stated he was looking at Glencoe Road to Cow Creek. He commented on the road being used currently by the City to access its Sewer Plant. They will not have just one north/south access. The City will probably end up eventually with planning, with several north/south points with regard to hurricane evacuation. He spoke of it taking twenty to thirty years to complete a road. Councilwoman Rogers commented on the developer incurring the cost for the north/south going through this piece of property and the general public could use it. Attorney Storch informed her that was right and stated the design for this particular one would provide a road through the middle of this that could eventually be connected. Councilwoman Rogers asked if they were planning on the north/south being two lanes. Attorney Storch informed her yes. Councilwoman Rogers asked if there is a way it could be written into the agreement for this annexation that it has the reserve right-of-way on each side because of the potential for it becoming a four-lane. Attorney Storch informed her that was something the Planning & Zoning Board through of as well so they have created additional setbacks to allow for a larger lane if necessary. Mr. Lear informed them they would be talking about that during the next item. City Manager Williams commented on traffic studies and concurrency review that will be done. He commented on the ordinance passed by Council addressing the proportionate fair share for roads. He also mentioned school concurrency. All of the reviews are in place. Page 22 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Councilwoman Rogers stated but at the same time if they put it in their motion and put it in stone from the beginning, not just assume the studies are going to done, they need to make sure it is black and white and on each document so there is no room for misinterpretation. City Manager Williams referred to Senate Bill 360. Attorney Storch confirmed many of the things they were discussing are in black and white in the development agreement. This particular item is only the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, which states Low Density Residential. Councilwoman Rhodes stated in all the years she has been on the Council never has a developer come here and they have asked him if he intends to go forward with the project and they said no. They all say yes. Whether they do or not is a whole different story. Mayor Thomas asked about the north/south connector they were talking about. He asked if there was a piece of Massey property in between. Attorney Storch informed him there are a number of pieces that would have to be dealt with. When they are planning for these road systems, they need to start establishing where those corridors are going to be. Mayor Thomas mentioned the base of that road already being there. Attorney Storch confirmed it was a dirt road. Mayor Thomas mentioned they are talking about annexation. Mayor Thomas commented on the different properties on Glencoe Road. He feels this fits in with their plan of variety. This looks good to him. Bill Glasser , 1703 Needle Palm Drive, stated this has to be the first time he thinks ever that he has ever seen a developer say he wanted to have a four-lane road through the middle for his development. He commented on what Indian River Boulevard has become in Florida Shores, a four-lane racetrack. He can’t imagine anybody wanting to live like that. Attorney Storch pointed out he didn’t say he wanted it. This is what the Planning & Zoning Board and Planning Department has recommended so they allow for it just in case it is ever looked at. Page 23 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Mayor Thomas feels they have strayed because they are dealing with annexation. Mayor Thomas entertained a motion. Councilwoman Lichter moved to approve Ord. 2007-O-05, Sid Peterson requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to include 79.18± acres of land located south of the Taylor Road and Glencoe Road intersection as Low Density Residential with Conservation Overlay, second by councilwoman Rhodes . Councilman Vincenzi asked if they got a second and seconded the motion. Councilwoman Rhodes stated she already seconded it. The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . st C.1 Reading, Ord. No. 2007-O-06, Sid Peterson requesting an amendment to the Official Zoning Map to include 79.18+ acres of land located south of the Taylor Road and Glencoe Road intersection as RPUD (Residential Planned Unit Development) and approval of associated RPUD Agreement for rezoning Villas at the Lakes () City Attorney Ansay read Ord. 2007-O-06 into the record. Development Services Director Lear made a staff presentation. He has talked with the applicant and they have expressed a desire for the option to at a later date put in the PUD Agreement the option to plat all of this as single-family lots. They will bring the change to the agreement back before council at the second reading after DCA has issued a notice of intent for the future land use. If they do go to all single-family lots, it would be a total of eighty-eight single-family lots. Glenn Storch , Law Firm of Storch, Morris & Harris, made a presentation on behalf of the applicant. The most important thing is to make sure there is a market out there for what they are dealing with. They are looking at various options. Anything they do at this point will be done easily within the low-density residential structure. It is possible they are going to reduce the number of units on this site and that would provide a better marketability. They will have the plan for Council for the revised site Page 24 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 plan by the second reading. All the other provisions, other than the actual number of units would probably stay the same. They may come back at some point and reduce the number of units. Councilwoman Lichter stated she was curious about the state owned parcel. Attorney Storch informed it really is just an old FDOT borrow pit. He pointed out the green area being owned by the state but the other lakes are owned entirely by Hanson/McCaskill. When this is done it will look like it is part of a total environmental system. Councilman Vincenzi asked what the net acreage is on the property. Attorney Storch informed him 79.18. Councilman Vincenzi asked him what the buildable acreage is. Attorney Storch informed him under the density systems, there is nothing in the 100-year flood plain and no wetlands on the site so it is pretty much close to that. Mr. Lear informed him it was 3.7 units per net acre. Councilman Vincenzi wanted to know the acreage after you take out the lakes and the state owned property. Attorney Storch informed him they didn’t include the state owned property in the acreage count because they don’t own it. Councilman Vincenzi asked the acreage after you take out the lakes. Sid Peterson responded that it was 44 acres without the lakes. Mayor Thomas opened the public hearing. The following citizens spoke: Carol Ann Stoughton , 2740 Evergreen Drive, asked why they have to make the town this much bigger. By the time they are done, she thought they were talking about 200 acres, maybe not just from Mr. Storch and Mr. Peterson. She asked why they have to keep making the town bigger when we have debt already and they have trailers for the children to go in. It will take more police, more fire. Why do they have to keep rezoning and annexing land? She feels the land in our town is big enough and it is time they stop the developers. Let them go to the County. Why do they keep coming here? She feels the town is big enough. Councilwoman Rhodes stated this land is in the County and he could build in the County and the County gets the Page 25 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 revenue from it. We don’t but yet the City still has to provide the services because it is right at our City. She says if they are going to have to take the abuse they bring with the traffic and schools and other issues, then they should get money for it. Mayor Thomas wants to have a little say on what is being built out there. If the County has it, they won’t have any say. Dot Carlson , 1714 Edgewater Drive, asked what the net density was on the land that the County allows at this time. She then asked the use. Councilwoman Rhodes informed her it was rural. Councilwoman Rhodes informed her rural transitional. Ms. Carlson asked how many units he could build on it while it stays in the County. Attorney Storch stated if it is rural transitional they could go down to one unit per acre. Once you are allowed to have utilities the density could probably change. Ms. Carlson stated Attorney Storch always does a good slide show and when every time he has come with them to present something it looks great. So did the condos and they kept morphing. She asked if they were going to morph this around on them. They have some acreage coming in and it is going to look great too. If they are going to build it, build it. Get the roads in, get the people in and the rest of them can move out. Councilwoman Rogers stated normally with developments she is always the first one to say no. Sometimes she does it. The development last meeting she felt she had to say yes because it was in our Comp Plan and our land use. Sometimes she doesn’t care because she is looking at the wetlands. If she could pull out a couple of the ones that have been approved that she didn’t vote for, she would. She would put this development in a stack to say these should have been approved. The ones they have sitting on the table right now are right off of Old Mission Road and they are low, swamp and wet. It doesn’t look like the Army Corp and St. John’s are doing their job. She hoped they would. This development she doesn’t think is in that same league. As they are hearing from the Mayor the types of land it is. She feels these are all positives. This is one development that doesn’t have the same negative attributes as the others. She is going to have to vote yes on this one. Page 26 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Councilwoman Lichter feels every parcel of land has a personality. This project fits the personality of this piece of land. Other projects they have approved in the past also fit the personality of that land. She thinks there is a need of this but she also thinks there is a need for other types of housing. She believes in all types of housing in a community. Everybody can’t afford this. Sometimes she feels they should concentrate on a diversity of homes. Mayor Thomas entertained a motion. Councilwoman Rhodes moved to approve Ord. 2007-O-06, Sid Peterson requesting an amendment to the Official Zoning Map to include 79.18± acres of land located south of the Taylor Road and Glencoe Road intersection as RPUD (Residential Planned Unit Development) and approval of associated RPUD Agreement for Villas at the Lakes, second by Councilwoman Rogers . The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . nd D.2 Reading, Ord. No. 2006-O-45, Sid Peterson requesting annexation of 79.18+ acres of land located south of the Taylor Road and Glencoe Road intersection; cont. from 4/9/07, Item 7A annexation () City Attorney Ansay read Ord. 2006-O-45 into the record. Attorney Storch stated this is a piece that belongs in the City and will be a tremendous financial benefit to the City. Councilman Vincenzi asked him if they are going to start building right away. Mr. Peterson stated they are going to try. That is why they are thinking about going to smaller lots. Attorney Storch pointed out even if they aren’t building anything right now just having it in the City will increase the tax base without any services. Due to there being no comments, Mayor Thomas opened and closed the public hearing and entertained a motion. Councilwoman Rhodes moved to approve Ord. 2006-O-45, Sid Peterson requesting annexation of 79.18± acres of land located south of the Taylor Road and Glencoe Road intersection, second by Councilwoman Lichter . Page 27 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 The MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Mayor Thomas called a fifteen-minute recess at this time. The meeting recessed at 9:20 and reconvened at 9:35 p.m. st E.1 Reading, Ord. No. 2007-O-07, Glenn Storch requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to include 20.28+ acres of land located south of Two Oaks Drive and north of th 27 Street as Low Density Residential with large scale comprehensive Conservation Overlay ( plan amendment ) City Attorney Ansay read Ord. 2007-O-07 into the record. Development Services Director Lear made a staff presentation. Glenn Storch , Law firm of Storch, Morris & Harris, stated this is totally consistent with the neighborhood surrounding it. This is clearly what was intended for this area. This is an enclave of the City and totally surrounded by Edgewater. Mr. Lear pointed out this is the most consistent City land use following Volusia County’s future land use which is urban low intensity. This is the most comparable to low density residential. Mayor Thomas having not been on this property asked if anybody had. Mr. Lear stated he was out there a long time ago when they were building Majestic Oaks. Mayor Thomas opened the public hearing. Dot Carlson , 1714 Edgewater Drive informed Mayor Thomas she had been on the property and told him what vegetation was on the property and also pointed out there are 15 gopher tortoises on the property. Mayor Thomas stated that tells him the property is pretty high because gopher tortoises do not live in the low lands. That is the problem they have with the annihilation of the gopher tortoises because everyone wants to build on gopher tortoise habitat. Page 28 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Ms. Carlson stated in the center of the property there is a low area. She also spoke of there being scrub jay habitat on the property. Councilwoman Lichter asked if the new State law has gone through yet regarding protection of the absolute relocation of the gopher tortoises. Ms. Carlson informed her it had not. She spoke of humane societies now being allowed to go on property to relocate them. The owner can pay the mitigation to have them moved to appropriate land. She has seen land on McAllister’s property where if he didn’t have any some of those could be put there. Mayor Thomas mentioned the ordinance that has been drafted by Volusia County on top of the State ordinance. He asked if it was in effect yet. Ms. Carlson informed Mayor Thomas it was going through the process. There was a brief discussion regarding the incidental take that can be obtained by paying for a permit to legally bury gopher tortoises. Mayor Thomas closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Lichter moved to approve Ord. 2007-O-07, Glenn Storch requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to include 20.28± acres of land located th south of Two Oaks Drive and north of 27 Street as Low Density Residential with Conservation Overlay and with all diligence make appropriate arrangements to relocate tortoises that are found on the property even if the State has not finished their amendments concerning that subject, second by Councilwoman Rhodes . The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . st F.1 Reading, Ord No. 2007-O-08, Glenn Storch requesting an amendment to the Official Zoning Map to include 20.28+ acres of land located south th of Two Oaks Drive and north of 27 Street as R-3 (Single Family Residential) City Attorney Ansay read Ord. 2007-O-08 into the record. Development Services Director Lear made a staff presentation. Page 29 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Mayor Thomas pointed out he left three acres of common open space and drainage retention in the middle. Attorney Storch informed him that was based on the typography of the land. They will meet or exceed all requirements that are currently under consideration for gopher tortoise protection. Due to there being no comments, Mayor Thomas opened and closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Rhodes moved to approve Ord. 2007-O-08, Glenn Storch requesting an amendment to the Official Zoning Map to include 20.28± acres of land located south of Two Oaks th Drive and north of 27 Street as R-3 (Single Family Residential), second by Councilman Vincenzi . The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . nd G.2 Reading, Ord. No. 2006-O-46, Glenn Storch requesting annexation of 20.28+ acres of land th located south of Two Oaks Drive and north of 27 annexation Street; cont. from 4/9/07, Item 7B () City Attorney Ansay read Ord. 2006-O-46 into the record. Mayor Thomas opened the public hearing. The following citizen spoke: Harry Sabals , Two Oaks Drive, stated they keep showing the picture coming in out of Majestic Oaks but asked if they th were going to have the entrance on 27 Street still. Attorney Storch informed him they were. Mayor Thomas closed the public hearing and entertained a motion. Councilwoman Rogers moved to approve Ord. 2006-0-46, Glenn Storch requesting annexation of 20.28± acres of land th located south of Two Oaks Drive and north of 27 Street, second by Councilwoman Lichter . The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . st H.1 Reading, Ord. No. 2007-O-09, Jason Gambone requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to include 35.91+ acres of Page 30 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 land located south of Oak Street, east of US1 and west of the Indian River as Commercial and High Density Residential with Conservation Overlay large scale comprehensive plan amendment () City Attorney Ansay read Ord. 2007-O-09 into the record. Development Services Director Lear made a staff presentation. Due to the lack of this proposal’s compatibility issues with surrounding uses of low to medium density residential in the area, staff has recommended denial. Jason Gambone , Director of Planning, Seagate Companies, 185 Cypress Point Parkway, Palm Coast, made a presentation regarding the Comprehensive Plan and the associated PUD zoning at the same time. He commented on the property having Volusia County’s outdated future land use map designations and the designations that currently exist on the property. He commented on several meetings that were held with the previous City Manager prior to annexing. The message that came back to them was that the City was interested in having higher densities along the riverfront and did want some commercial uses on U.S. #1. At the time they understood the City was interested in expanding the tax base and more diversity in housing and some increased job opportunities. Mr. Hooper was very clear in telling them the City definitely wanted very well planned projects that respected the natural environment. This is what induced their company to annex the property back in 2005 and become part of the City. Back then they reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code as it was written at that time which confirmed what Mr. Hooper was saying. He spoke of the application being submitted in March 2006 and this being six months prior to the City adopting the Land Development Code changes that included the 35-foot height limit and also changed the definition of density from a gross calculation to a net calculation and it took out areas in the 100-year flood plain. Their attorney feels they should be vested from those regulations. He commented on why he feels their proposal meets all other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code with regard to the layout of the project on the property, traffic, and available water & sewer capacity. A project like this would generate approximately $1.2 million in transportation impact fees, $2.2 million in water & sewer impact fees and capital charges, several Page 31 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 hundred thousand dollars for parks, police and fire impact fees and about $2.5 million in school impact fees. They feel the project is environmentally sound. The site has about 3.5 acres of wetlands and they preserved all of that except for a small crossing, which had an impact of less than .1 acre. They maintained twenty-five foot buffers around the wetlands and a fifty-foot wide shoreline protection buffer. He commented on reducing the impervious surface, which allows for 70% open space. He commented on what they have done to increase compatibility with the surrounding properties. He further spoke about a project like this having a tremendous amount of private investment from an economic standpoint. They estimated the additional money on the tax roll would be about $170 million at build out, which would generate over $4 million in annual ad valorem taxes and over $1.1 million to the City. The commercial portion of the project would add about 150 permanent jobs. Mr. Gambone passed a handout out to Council regarding what some of the assumptions were and how it was calculated. Councilwoman Lichter asked City Attorney Ansay if she believed these people have vested rights because of the date they originally came in. City Attorney Ansay as a practical matter merely coming in with an application or having conversations with staff and as a legal matter does not create the types of vested rights they would get through a typical vested rights determination. She doesn’t feel having conversations with staff and/or filing an application is enough. Based on what she has heard she would say no but they would have to look at it a little closer. She commented on a provision in the Code that deals with vested rights and determination of vested rights. She also commented on case law that goes back for years. They have got a very established body of law that says they have to take pretty substantial steps before you get to the point of being vested. Councilwoman Lichter confirmed Mr. Gambone knew about the height limit and the citizen initiative going through. She asked if he has thought of a different type group of housing. Mr. Gambone stated they have thought about that and they would be happy to sit down with the City and discuss that. He commented on the one new regulation that might hurt them worse than the height regulation being the one where they excluded area in the floodplain from density calculations. Page 32 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Mayor Thomas asked Mr. Lear to comment again on why it was recommended for denial. Mr. Lear stated it is incompatible with the surrounding land uses. Councilwoman Rhodes stated she voted against the towers at this stage of the game for the same reason and she will vote against this for the very same reason. If it doesn’t get past this, they won’t end up in court. She will be voting against this. Mr. Gambone pointed out the building heights along the river were limited to 90 feet because of putting the parking underneath. Councilwoman Rhodes stated it isn’t the height she objects to it is the density on the river. Councilman Vincenzi stated out of the 35.89 acres, how much is below the 100-year floodplain. Mr. Gambone estimated about 2/3 of the 36 acres being in the flood plain. Only twelve acres would be outside of that. Councilman Vincenzi asked Mr. Gambone if they plan to build on the twelve acres. Mr. Gambone informed him they could build under the current regulations in the floodplain provided they are providing compensatory storage. He again commented on the problem being with the density being changed from a gross calculation to a net calculation when the Land Development Code was changed. Basically 2/3 of the portion they proposed for residential really has no value. Councilman Vincenzi stated he was going to vote no because he doesn’t like high density. This is the exact issue they ran in with the other set of condos. The next ordinance regarding the RPUD, as far as he understood if he had a signed and agreed upon RPUD then they would have vested rights. He doesn’t feel his verbal agreement with Ken Hooper entitles him to vested rights. He wasn’t going to support the next ordinance either. Councilwoman Rogers stated Mr. Gambone mentioned he was aware in September 2006 that the Land Development Code was changed. No one from the organization came to speak to them and now they are citing that and expressing and feeling they have vested rights. If she had been in his shoes, she would have been doing something back then. She is also going to vote no. Page 33 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Mr. Gambone informed her that their legal counsel, Jim th Scott, did appear at the September 11 meeting and did make statements to Council. He feels two people in the Planning Department is not enough for the amount of applications the City has coming in. It shouldn’t take 13 months to get to this point. It is very difficult to have anticipated what the Council was going to do in September at the point when they made application in March. Councilman Vincenzi asked Mr. Gambone if he was saying the reason they didn’t have an RPUD was because it didn’t go through City staff quick enough. Mr. Gambone stated they submitted this back in March 2006 and it is April 2007. In the thirteen months is when Council changed the Land Development Code. Councilman Vincenzi asked Mr. Gambone if he understood that they don’t get something approved the day they hand it in. It has to be examined. Mr. Gambone stated of course. Councilwoman Rhodes questioned the Land Development Code being changed before September 2006. Mr. Lear informed her it was in September 2006. Councilwoman Rhodes stated they knew it was coming at that point in time. Mr. Gambone stated there had been discussion but no official action had been taken at that point in time. Councilman Vincenzi stated even if the Council loved this idea and wanted to vote for it, the Charter now has a height restriction. He questioned his buildings being 90- feet. Mr. Gambone informed him some were 90-feet and some were 70 feet. Councilman Vincenzi stated because of that they couldn’t vote for this even if they wanted to. Mr. Gambone stated that is where the whole issue of the vesting comes in. It will be up to others to make that determination. Their counsel does not believe that the procedure that the City followed when it enacted its amendments, he felt that procedure was flawed and didn’t feel it was a legal or proper ordinance. Councilwoman Rhodes stated regardless of that ordinance she would still have to vote no. Councilwoman Lichter felt there were two options. His attorney really believes and it doesn’t quite seem like he has a tight knit case for vested rights. If he really believes that, no doubt they might be in court again. It Page 34 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 seems to her there is still the opportunity to look at the property and reestablish his plans to fit what is needed now and then there will be an opportunity to get something passed. In some way, they have a right to use their land. Mr. Gambone stated they weren’t there to try and be heavy handed. They would like to be able to work out a reasonable compromise with the City. Councilwoman Lichter asked Mr. Lear if it customarily takes thirteen months for all the cases that come in front of him. Mr. Lear stated generally no. They had a lot of issues going on that year with the Land Development Code changes and some other items that were before Council. Then there was the number of agenda items were to be shortened and that was part of the process. Councilman Vincenzi asked Mr. Lear if there was a maximum amount of time that they can’t take longer than to review plans. Mr. Lear informed him there was not. Mayor Thomas listed three reasons why he is not supporting the project. Reason #1, it exceeds the 35-foot height limit Charter amendment. Reason #2, it is not compatible with the surrounding developments and Reason #3 he doesn’t care what kind of arrangements you make for stormwater runoff. When you have that may people and that many rooftops and that many driveways, those heavy metals are going to eventually wind up in the river. It is his goal to have zero runoff into the river and to keep the river pristine for the future. Mayor Thomas entertained a motion. Councilwoman Rogers made a motion to deny Ord. 2007-O-09 due to the proposed density not being compatible with the surrounding existing uses and the Planning & Zoning Board’s recommendation of denial, second by Councilman Vincenzi . The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . st I.1 Reading, Ord. No. 2007-O-10, Jason Gambone requesting an amendment to the Official Zoning Map to include 41.87+ acres of land located south of Oak Street, east of US1 and west of the Indian River as RPUD (Residential Planned Unit Page 35 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Development) and approval of associated RPUD rezoning agreement for River Club () City Attorney Ansay read Ord. 2007-O-10 into the record. Development Services Director Lear made a staff presentation. Staff is recommending denial of this based on inconsistencies with the Land Development Code and Charter. Due to there being no comments, Mayor Thomas opened and closed the public hearing and entertained a motion. Councilwoman Rogers moved to deny Ord. 2007-O-10 due to the considerable number of inconsistencies with the Land Development Code and due to the fact that the two items that Mr. Lear mentioned, Section 21-50.02 and Section 21- 58.02 (c )(3), second by Councilman Vincenzi . The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . City Attorney Ansay reported that while they were discussing this item it was brought to her attention that there was no public comment on the previous agenda item. She suggested the original maker of the motion move to reopen the agenda item, reconsider it, open it back up for public comment and if there are any comments then pass the motion again. She apologized. Mayor Thomas apologized. He thought he opened it up for public comment. Councilwoman Rogers made a motion to reopen the first reading of Ord. 2007-O-09 for public comment, second by Councilwoman Rhodes . The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . Mayor Thomas asked for public comment. The following citizen spoke: Carol Ann Stoughton , 2740 Evergreen Drive, asked if there was any way they could work with this man. He has waited thirteen months. Councilman Vincenzi stated he thought they invited him to come back to negotiate but not the Page 36 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 present proposal. None of the denials mean he can’t do anything. He has to come back with another plan. Ms. Stoughton asked Mr. Gambone if he would be coming back with another plan. She felt he looked depressed. She felt it would be nice if they could work something out. Mayor Thomas closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Rogers moved to deny the first reading of Ord. 2007-O-09 due to the proposed density not being compatible with the surrounding existing use, second by Councilwoman Rhodes . The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . J. Res. No. 2007-R-04, urging the State Legislature to reconsider the methods used to determine changes in the State’s tax code City Attorney Ansay read Res. 2007-R-04 into the record. City Manager Williams made a staff presentation. Councilwoman Rhodes asked who wrote the resolution. City Manager Williams believed it came from the City of Holly Hill. Councilwoman Lichter stated when she first read it, it really doesn’t make proper sense. You think it might say to reconsider the results of what they did not the methods they used. She takes it if they really mean methods to mean this. There was a Commission appointed and that commission was not given the time it needed to work out the tax situation in the State thoroughly. They never asked for their results. They didn’t have time to finish. That is not clear of what Holly Hill’s manager really means. Now you have fifteen cities in the County voting yes without a clarification of that. She feels the amendments say they should have waited until there was a thorough investigation by the Committee that they appointed. City Manager Williams stated recognizing the clarity issues, if certain that is something the Council feels is necessary with the adoption of the resolution, they can include the clarification points brought forward by Page 37 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Councilwoman Lichter in the adoption of the resolution and go forward. Councilwoman Rhodes asked City Manager Williams for some examples of special interest state tax exemptions. City Manager Williams stated it is a pretty long list such as escort services, sales tax for sporting event tickets or sporting tickets. City Attorney Ansay also added legal fees. Councilwoman Rhodes felt the only things that should be exempt are food and clothes and they aren’t. Mayor Thomas stated he thought what they were doing was trying to send them a message that they need to try to fix it. Don’t just put a band-aid fix on it. If they are going to fix it, fix it. Councilwoman Lichter felt it wouldn’t hurt to say which fix should include the results of the Committee that had been appointed to study the tax situation. City Manager Williams stated certainly as all the cities come together to discuss this, quite frequently the obvious is to wait on those entities to come together to make some proposals because they believe 60 days to correct this problem is not practical. That is what the resolution is trying to communicate. Councilwoman Rhodes stated she likes the fact they are giving them an alternative. If every County in the State is giving them a different way to go don’t they wind up in the same place they are now. City Manager Williams stated there is a number of different ways to approach this problem. They are trying to be good stewards in participating in that process. They would suggest they wait on the Tax Reform Commission and the taxation and budget Groups to come forward with solutions rather than the Senate or House proposing something. In conversations today with the Florida League of Cities and the Association of Counties they were quite sure there would be something that would come out of this legislation. To even begin to somewhat think there isn’t going be any reform out of this legislation they would be wrong. They suggested it would not end this year and would be back Page 38 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 before them next year in trying to correct this problem on a long-term basis. Councilwoman Rhodes stated they are going to have to correct whatever problems they create this year. Councilwoman Lichter stated it is too bad the League of Cities didn’t come up with one statement for all the cities in the State. Mayor Thomas entertained a motion. Councilwoman Rhodes moved to approve Res. 2007-R-04, urging the State Legislature to reconsider the methods used to determine changes in the State’s tax code, second by Councilwoman Rogers . The MOTION CARRIED 3-2. Councilman Vincenzi and Councilwoman Lichter voted NO . 8. BOARD APPOINTMENTS There were no Board Appointments at this time. 9. OTHER BUSINESS There was no Other Business to be discussed at this time. 10. OFFICER REPORTS A. City Clerk Wadsworth City Clerk Wadsworth had nothing at this time. B. City Attorney Ansay City Attorney Ansay stated she received a letter from the attorney for the Southeast Volusia Hospital District and she is requesting that the City consider whether or not the District is vested under the height restriction as a result of an existing agreement for annexation that they had with the City that spelled out height issues. They are going to meet and talk with folks from the District and they will be back at some point to give Council a full report. C. City Manager Page 39 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 City Manager Williams commented on providing the Development Services quarterly report to the Council. City Manager Williams then commented on the contract for the purchase of the remaining property existing in ParkTowne from MGM Real Estate Group Inc. The contract provides for a provision for the property to be sold at $55,000 an acre for all usable land and $8,000 for that portion of land that is deemed unusable as a result of wetland designations and so forth. The contract had a provision that provides for thirty days due diligence and thirty days to close. Included in the contract there are some provisions that would allow the City to fulfill some of the contract obligations it has for the construction of Base Leg Drive as well as a time span over a drainage canal for Rowan Way. Looking at the provisions and working out some of the negotiations with the proposed real estate group that he finds that a very attractive provision in terms of this contract. During the budget process, they made provisions in the annual budget to go out and secure financing for the obligations and construction of that road to the tune of about $237,000 for fifteen years. By taking this approach they avoid interest expense and would save the City a little over $1 million in interest expense. The other provisions it hedges against construction cost in terms of the obligations for the infrastructure that are out there and remaining. It also gets the property back on the tax rolls. One of the problems that exist today is they have City Attorney Ansay’s firm that represents the City. During hiring her, one of the services she did not provide was real estate services. Council did direct that they would keep Foley & Lardner on to handle the issues relating to ParkTowne. At this point, he would like for Council to authorize him to change attorneys and move over to Rice & Rose out of Daytona Beach. He went to City Attorney Ansay and requested she provide the City with some recommendations. She has done so and they have offered to provide the services based off the same terms of her contract if the Council would authorize him to do that. They can get this contract before the new attorney and allow them to review the new contract as it is written. As a result of that he has requested an extension of the contract until the end of May with the intention of bringing it back to Council on the last meeting of the month as a regular agenda item for action by Council if they so choose. Originally when they put a contract before Page 40 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Council in January they established a minimum price of $4.5 million for the property. Councilwoman Rhodes moved to use Rice & Rose for real estate transactions based upon the same contract prices as City Attorney Ansay’s firm, second by Councilwoman Lichter . The MOTION CARRIED 5-0 . City Manager Williams commented on the budget time line and choosing dates that worked well for the Council’s schedule, ththththth July 12, 13, or 14 and August 16, 17, or 18th. Councilman Vincenzi asked City Manager Williams if he had sent him the dates in August he would have a conflict with. City Manager Williams informed him no. Councilwoman Rhodes informed him none of the dates in July were good for her but the dates in August were okay for her. Councilman Vincenzi stated they weren’t for him. thth Councilwoman Rogers informed him August 16 and 17 were th okay but August 18 wasn’t. Councilwoman Lichter stated th she would be gone from July 10 through July 21st. City Manager Williams informed Council he would have Assistant City Manager Liz McBride contact them. City Manager Williams stated the reason they chose those dates was because those dates are before the last Council meeting in which they plan on having Council establish the millage rate for advertisement for the TRIM notice. City Manager Williams commented on the workshop to be held to discuss the status of his goals. They have identified th an hour before the May 7 Regular Council meeting. City Manager Williams commented on an amendment that was approved by City Council regarding ParkTowne on September 11, 2006. The Council approved three amendments to the development agreement. One excluding .9+ acres at the northern most end of ParkTowne Boulevard to be sold to th Volusia County to accommodate the widening of 10 Street, they added concrete batch plants as a permitted use for development in Area B and permitted two points of access on th any lot or parcel. On January 17, the ParkTowne owners association met to discuss the amendments due to concerns relating to the concrete batch plant and two points of access. The City is revising Amendment #1 to exclude .9+ Page 41 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 acres to prevent the County from incurring costly delays due to the fact that that amendment has not been signed off by all the property owners at this point. They are breaking that amendment out separately and they are going to ask the owners to execute it so they can get that th property sold to the County in the interest of widening 10 Street. City Manager Williams reported that they have met with the FOP and presented some proposals regarding benefits and so forth. The headlines indicate that has not been well received. He wanted to extend the opportunity to conduct rdth another executive session with Council on April 23 or 26 to make sure they are in sync in what areas they need to be paying particular attention to with regards to the benefits. rd Councilman Vincenzi didn’t have a problem with April 23 th but he did with April 26. Mayor Thomas asked if they could wait until after they see what the legislature is going to do. He asked when their next negotiation is. City Manager Williams informed him st May 31. In light of the financials, they felt it might be necessary to sit back down. In talking to some of the Council he has gotten some different ideas and he wants to provide the situation where they can sit back down and talk and make sure they are moving in sync together. rd It was the consensus of Council to meet on April 23. City rd Manager Williams stated they would advertise April 23 at 7:00 p.m. for the executive session. City Manager Williams stated the Edgewater Citizen Watch Association with working with Brinks in providing special offers for security systems. For each referral they get an installation they will receive a $75 referral fee. They would like to mail it out in the utility bills. They don’t have any ordinances that prohibit that. They are going to distribute it with the employee’s paychecks. He asked if Council had a desire to do this. Councilwoman Rhodes asked who gets the $75. City Manager Williams informed her the Edgewater Citizen Watch Association. Councilwoman Rhodes felt it was a great idea. Councilman Vincenzi didn’t have a problem with it but having people complain about literature with their utility Page 42 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 bills before, he didn’t know if people really appreciated that. Councilwoman Rogers stated it didn’t have a political agenda to it. Councilwoman Rhodes stated this provides money for that group. Councilwoman Lichter had a slight problem with advertising one firm verses another firm. She didn’t feel this was the purpose of the newsletter. Councilwoman Rogers agreed. 1) Tentative Agenda Items There were no Tentative Agenda Items to be discussed at this time. 11. CITIZEN COMMENTS The following citizen spoke: Chris Balmer , 148 William Street, stated perfect segway Councilwoman Rogers. He appreciated that. Speaking of local businesses, he knows ParkTowne apparently has been sold and he thinks that is great. Talking about using an attorneys firm in Daytona. He knows they have three to five local attorneys in Edgewater that could easily handle a real estate transaction. He knows they have two title companies and disclosed that his wife owns one of those. He suggested they try to use local businesses. He feels they shouldn’t be sending legal work that could be done in the City outside the City. City Manager Williams stated they did inquire locally and those folks that did provide that service locally have respectfully declined due to some potential conflicts. Councilwoman Rhodes commented on when they hired Foley & Lardner and looked locally. They couldn’t find any. 12. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Mayor Thomas adjourned the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 10:48 p.m. Minutes submitted by: Page 43 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007 Lisa Bloomer Page 44 of 44 Council Regular Meeting April 16, 2007