March 16, 1999 City Commission Minutes

MARCH 16, 1999 7:00 PM

Present were: Mayor Dave Hood, Commissioners Jeffrey J. Boyle, Thelma B. Irvin, Frank Gillooly, Carl G. Persis, City Manager Eugene Miller, City Attorney Randy Hayes, and Veronica Patterson, City Clerk.

A G E N D A

Meeting called to order by Mayor Hood.

Invocation given by Reverend Isaiah Paul, St. Johns Missionary Baptist Church.

Pledge of Allegiance.

Approval of the Minutes of the February 24, 1999, Special City Commission Meeting and the March 2, 1999, Regular City Commission Meeting.

AUDIENCE REMARKS:

CONSENT AGENDA: The action proposed to be taken is stated for each item on the Consent Agenda. Unless the item is removed from the Consent Agenda by a City Commissioner, no discussion on individual items will occur and a single motion will approve all items.

Resolution No. 99-42 appointing Glenn J. Jaspers as a member of the Development Review Board; establishing conditions of service. (Completing the term of Tony Perricelli to January 16, 2002)

Resolution No. 99-43 authorizing the execution of a Lease Agreement between the City and Halifax Urban Ministries, Inc., for the "Old Housing Authority Building" located at 164 West Granada Boulevard.

Resolution No. 99-44 in support of the U.S. 1 Transportation Study regarding proposed improvements to U.S. 1 in the City of Ormond Beach. (Support of maintaining U.S. 1 as it is with improvements to the intersection at Granada Boulevard, favoring Streetscape as opposed to transit, reserving judgment as to widening, and not committing to any increase in intensity of land use along the U.S. 1 corridor)

Resolution No. 99-45 authorizing the execution of a Final Change Order (Number Three) to the sidewalk improvement contract awarded to Allen Green Construction Company, increasing the contract price by $3,840.25 to $112,099.00 and increasing the contract time by 31 days to 151 days. (Addition of sidewalks at the Airport Sports/Recreation Complex)

Resolution No. 99-46 accepting a proposal from McKim and Creed Engineers, P.A., to provide engineering services for the U.S. 1/Tomoka River Utility Relocation Project; rejecting all other proposals; authorizing the execution of a Work Authorization and payment therefor. (Necessitated by the rebuilding of the Tomoka River bridge - Not-to-exceed $57,555)

Resolution No. 99-47 expressing support for certain transportation projects to be placed on the Transportation Improvement Program Project Priority List for Surface Transportation Program Funding in the 2004-2005 Fiscal Year; authorizing the City’s Volusia County Metropolitan Planning Organization representative and alternate representative to take action consistent herewith; authorizing transmittal. Projects are as follows:

Add two (2) lanes to SR 40, Cone Road to Tymber Creek Road.

Add paved shoulders, bike lane, and drainage, SR A1A, SR 40 to Flagler County.

Add two (2) lanes to I-95, SR 40 to Flagler County.

Add two (2) lanes to I-95, I-4 to SR 40.

Miscellaneous improvements at the Ormond Municipal Airport.

Add sidewalk to the east side of U.S. 1, Rosewood Avenue to Melrose Avenue.

Report on Willis Drive construction.
DISPOSITION: Accept report provided by City Manager dated March 11, 1999.

Request to close Riverside Drive on April 3, 1999, for the First United Methodist Church annual "Easter Extravaganza in Rockefeller Park."
DISPOSITION: Approve as recommended in City Manager memorandum dated March 11, 1999.

Request to close Riverside Drive on May 1 and 2, 1999, for the Ormond Memorial Art Museum "Art in the Park."
DISPOSITION: Approve as recommended in City Manager memorandum dated March 11, 1999.

Request to close Riverside Drive on May 23, 1999, for the Ormond Memorial Art Museum "Petals and Palettes" program.
DISPOSITION: Approve as recommended in City Manager memorandum dated March 11, 1999.

PUBLIC HEARINGS:

A determination of the materiality of amending the "Shurgard Self Storage Facility" Planned Business Development as approved by Resolution No. 98-105 to allow a 1.12 foot encroachment to the established setback; establishing conditions of approval.

Ordinance No. 99-18 amending Articles I, III and VI relative to conditional uses of the Land Development Code by renumbering certain sections therein; by amending Sections 1.11, 3.41, 3.71 and 6.18 relative to pawn shops and conditional uses; by creating a new section to be numbered and titled Section 3.59, Pawn Shops, and providing regulations therefor. (Second Reading - Allowing in the B-5, Service Commercial, zoning district only)

Ordinance No. 99-19 amending Article 2.09, Recreational Vehicle/Boat Storage, Subsection C, Long Term Storage, of the Land Development Code, by amending height regulations of recreational vehicles in residential areas. (Second Reading - Permitting 10 feet with one (1’) foot ancillary equipment)

Ordinance No. 99-20 amending Article II, Accessory Uses, Section 2.10, Dumpster Pads, of the Land Development Code, to allow for an increase in the maximum height of the walls for the enclosure around dumpster pads under certain conditions. (Second Reading - Increasing from six (6’) feet to eight (8’) feet)

Ordinance No. 99-21 relative to a parking deferral program for office uses in Planned Residential Developments, amending Section 10.04F, Off-Street Parking, of the Land Development Code. (Second Reading)

Ordinance No. 99-22 approving the modification of the final plat of Unit V, "Emerald Lakes" of the "Ormond Lakes" portion of the "National Gardens Trust" Development of Regional Impact; authorizing the privatization of streets and sidewalks within the development. (Second Reading)

FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE No. 99-23 amending Chapter 22, Article II, Division 2, Sections 22-85 through 110, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Ormond Beach, Florida, by repealing the existing provisions and adopting new provisions regarding uniform requirements for direct and indirect contributions to the wastewater collection and treatment system; providing for administration, permits, and enforcement, penalties; providing severability; and providing for an effective date.

FIRE STATION NO. 93 ISSUES:

Reconsideration of Wilmette Avenue/U.S. 1 site for Fire Station No. 93.

Resolution No. 99-48 waiving certain parking requirements relative to the construction of Fire Station No. 93 at a site located on the southeast corner of U.S. 1 and Wilmette Avenue. (Reducing parking from 28 spaces to 11 spaces)

Public Hearing on Resolution No. 99-49 amending a Special Exception (now known as a Conditional Use Permit) relative to the Performing Arts Center/Senior Center, by modifying the landscape plans relative to parking and to accommodate construction of Fire Station No. 93; establishing conditions of approval.

DISCUSSION ITEMS:

Consideration of a review of Leisure Services facility fees.

Reconsideration of an appeal to the Court of Appeals of a decision by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals relative to multiple structures on a single lot. (Douglas Piatt, 515 Tomoka Avenue)

Use of origin and destination traffic studies.

AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS:

Reports, Suggestions, Requests: Mayor, City Commission, City Manager, City Attorney.

Close the meeting.

Item #1 - Call to Order

Mayor Hood called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.

Item #2 - Invocation

The invocation was given by Reverend Isaiah Paul, St. Johns Missionary Baptist Church.

Item #3 - Pledge of Allegiance

Mayor Hood led in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Item #4 - Approval of Minutes

Mayor Hood advised the Minutes of the February 24, 1999, special City Commission meeting and the March 2, 1999, regular City Commission meeting have been sent to the Commissioners for review and asked if there were any corrections, additions, or omissions.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, to approve the minutes as submitted.

Call Vote: Commissioner Boyle yes

Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gillooly yes

Commissioner Persis yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Executive Fire Officer Achievement

Mr. Eugene Miller, City Manager, publicly acknowledged, with appreciation, that Fire Chief Barry Baker has completed the Executive Fire Officer Program, the highest achievement in his expertise. Mr. Miller stated the achievement attained by the Fire Department, Police Department and other departments during the firestorm of 1998 was no accident; it was due to a great deal of training and effort.

Item #5 - Audience Remarks

Three Chimneys

Mr. Ceylon Barclay, 1239 Oceanshore Boulevard, President of the Ormond Beach Historical Trust, advised that in November approval was received for a $20,000 matching grant from the State of Florida ($10,000 from the State and $10,000 from the Historical Trust) regarding the Three Chimneys Rum Distillery Ruins. He stated Mr. Glenn R. Sweeney, Former Grants Coordinator recommended a public meeting should be held as soon as possible, which is tentatively scheduled for the beginning of April. Mr. Barclay reported on March 4, 1999, he made what he believes to be a successful presentation to the Department of Environmental Protection under the Conservation and Recreational Lands (CARL) Program for the $575,000 needed to purchase the property. Mr. Barclay pointed out this is just the first of several steps needed for funding. He advised the Department of State agrees the Three Chimneys is a potential land and national historic landmark site and is backing this project and recommending the City apply for two (2) additional grants: the Preservation 2000 grant with a June 3, 1999, cycle date, and the Special Category grant with a May 31, 1999, cycle date and requires $50,000 participation. He stated if this grant were received, it would cost the City $27,000 or less.

Mayor Hood asked Mr. Barclay if he is requesting the City approve the preparation of grants and/or additional staffing; whereby, Mr. Barclay conceded he was. Mayor Hood asked that this request be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. Mr. Barclay noted his concern is that Mr. Sweeney is no longer employed at the City, and the person taking his place has not yet written a grant. He stated besides these two (2) grants, their is a third grant for $10,000, which he also requested the City apply for as soon as possible. Mayor Hood asked that Mr. Miller place this on the next agenda.

Duck Relocation

Ms. Muriel Nicastro, 6 Mimosa Trail, reported the matter of the Mallard ducks that were relocated has been satisfactorily handled and expressed her appreciation to the City for appropriately addressing this problem.

Bike Week/Biketoberfest

Ms. Tina Share, 1317 Overbrook Drive, read a number of newspaper articles regarding Bike Week pointing out the noise, traffic, and other associated problems. She recommended Ormond Beach have a representative on the Daytona Beach Task Force where information could be shared, parking signs for motor cycles are available, and "shhhh" signs are available. Ms. Share stated Ormond Beach has been invited to be a non-voting, but active participant on both Biketoberfest and Bike Week planning. She urged Ormond Beach take advantage of this offer to have this City’s residents represented.

Mayor Hood requested that this item be placed on the next agenda.

Minority Employees in the Fire and Police Departments

Mr. George Watson, NAACP President, asked how many minorities, especially blacks, are employed in the Fire and Police Departments. Fire Chief Barry Baker answered there are five (5) blacks in the Fire Department and Police Chief Larry Mathieson reported there are two (2) blacks in the Police Department.

Item #6- Consent Agenda

Mayor Hood advised that the action proposed to be taken for each item on the Consent Agenda is so stated on the agenda. He asked if any member of the Commission had questions or wished to discuss any one or more of the items separately.

Commissioner Boyle asked that Items #6(B) and 6(G) be discussed separately.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Irvin, for approval of the Consent Agenda, minus Items #6(B) and 6(G).

Call Vote: Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gillooly yes

Commissioner Persis yes

Commissioner Boyle yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #6(B) - Halifax Urban Ministries, Inc. Lease

RESOLUTION 99 - 43

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND HALIFAX URBAN MINISTRIES, INC., FOR THE "OLD HOUSING AUTHORITY BUILDING" LOCATED AT 164 WEST GRANADA BOULEVARD; AND SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Irvin, for approval of Resolution No. 99-49, as read by title only.

Commissioner Boyle asked to discuss this item to make the City Commission aware that if the Halifax Urban Ministries should ever decide to move its location, Mr. Shiles, a local business owner, has offered to demolish the building at his own expense, build a parking lot on the property, and dedicate it for public use by the City.

Call Vote: Commissioner Gillooly yes

Commissioner Persis yes

Commissioner Boyle yes

Commissioner Irvin yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #6(G) - Willis Drive Construction Report

Commissioner Boyle requested a continuance of accepting this report until the next meeting. He stated he has been contacted by residents who may want to make comments regarding this matter at that time.

Commissioner Boyle moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, to continue this item until the next City Commission meeting.

Call Vote: Commissioner Persis yes

Commissioner Boyle yes

Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gillooly yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #7(A) - Materiality of Shurgard Self Storage Facility Encroachment into Setback

Commissioner Gillooly moved, seconded by Commissioner Persis, to close the public hearing on Item #7(A). The motion carried unanimously.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Irvin, to allow a 3.56 square foot encroachment to the Shurgard Self Storage Facility.

Call Vote: Commissioner Boyle yes

Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gillooly yes

Commissioner Persis yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

tem #7(B) - Pawn Shops

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, to close the public hearing on Item #7(B). The motion carried unanimously.

ORDNANCE NO. 99 - 18

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLES I, III AND VI RELATIVE TO CONDITIONAL USES OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY RENUMBERING CERTAIN SECTIONS THEREIN; BY AMENDING SECTIONS 1.11, 3.41, 3.71 AND 6.18 RELATIVE TO PAWN SHOPS AND CONDITIONAL USES; BY CREATING A NEW SECTION TO BE NUMBERED AND TITLED SECTION 3.59, PAWN SHOPS, AND PROVIDING REGULATIONS THEREFOR; REPEALING ALL INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES OR PARTS THEREOF; AND SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Boyle, for approval of Ordinance No. 99-18, on second reading, as read by title only.

Commissioner Gillooly recommended adding the Planning Board recommendations that these pawn shops be restricted from thoroughfares such as Clyde Morris Boulevard and Williamson Boulevard.

Commissioner Gillooly made a motion to amend Ordinance No. 99-18 to include the Planning Board recommendations.

The motion to amend died for lack of a second.

Commissioner Persis noted staff recommendations indicated a pawn shop is to be located a minimum of 1,000 feet from an existing pawn shop, house of worship, or school, but other cities are adopting a 1,500 foot standard.

Mr. Don O'Donniley, Planning Director, advised the zoning district this is recommended for has limited application, and with the 1,500 feet standard, the City would, in effect, be limiting pawn shops to the point of total exclusion. He noted that the recommendation is for a Conditional Use Permit which would require a public hearing before the City Commission.

Commissioner Persis made a motion to amend Ordinance No. 99-18 to change the 1,000 foot standard to a 1,500 foot standard.

The motion to amend died for lack of a second.

Call Vote: Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gillooly no

Commissioner Persis yes

Commissioner Boyle yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #7(C) - Recreational Vehicle/Boat Storage

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Boyle, to close the public hearing on Item #7(C). The motion carried unanimously.

ORDINANCE NO. 99 - 19

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE 2.09, RECREATION-AL VEHICLE/BOAT STORAGE, SUBSECTION C, LONG TERM STORAGE, OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BY AMENDING HEIGHT REGULATIONS OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS; REPEALING ALL INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES OR PARTS THEREOF; AND SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Boyle, for approval of Ordinance No. 99-19, on second reading, as read by title only.

Commissioner Gillooly made a motion to amend to add "When possible, manufacturers specifications will be used to measure recreational vehicles."

Mr. Randal Hayes, City Attorney, stated staff would generally use the manufacturers specifications as a measuring device. He stated the ordinance is adequate to implement the requirements without this addition, but if that is the Commission’s decision, it can be done.

Commissioner Gillooly stated this would eliminate the problem of gaining access to a person’s property to measure the vehicles; whereby, Mr. Ted MacLeod, Public Works Director, replied these specification could be used as a guideline, but cannot be used for actual measurement because the height can be altered by setting the chassis differently, having less air in the tires or other methods. He stated the City will use any tools available to determine the height.

Commissioner Gillooly withdrew his motion to amend as long as it is understood that this information is available and it will be used when necessary.

Commissioner Persis stated residents should not be taking wheels off of vehicles or similar methods to comply with the height limit, and the Code needs to be clear to avoid arguments. Commissioner Persis noted Section Three of the Ordinance reads "no recreational vehicle or equipment shall be used for living, sleeping, or housekeeping purposes when parked or stored on a residential lot or in any location not approved for such use." He reported during special events, Wal-Mart in Ormond Beach has recreational vehicles parked with people living in their vehicles, and the City has been accorded no cooperation from the store manager. Commissioner Persis asked Mr. Hayes if inclusion of this sentence will prohibit this type of activity; whereby, Mr. Hayes stated this will act as an additional aid, but it is vague to use it alone. Mr. Hayes noted that the Wal-Mart development order has some restrictions relating to parking requirements, and this type of activity would violate that development order. He added the City can put them on notice they are in violation, and the most stringent action that can be taken is to either temporarily or permanently revoke their development order and/or occupational license.

Mayor Hood asked if anyone had spoken to the manager of Wal-Mart regarding this issue; whereby, Mr. MacLeod replied that the Chief Building Official has spoken with the manager. Mayor Hood offered to speak to the manager and expressed confidence that the problem will be solved; but if it is not, then enforcement can take place.

Commissioner Boyle agreed laws are needed that are clear and easily enforced, but it is the option and right of the recreational vehicle owner to let air out of tires, adjust springs, or use whatever method is deemed necessary to comply with Codes. He stated the Wal-Mart issue illuminates the code enforcement problem which preclude Ormond Beach citizens from maintaining and storing recreational vehicles, while those from outside Ormond Beach can come in and move about freely and park in public parking lots. Commissioner Boyle stated the crux of the problem is enforceability, and because of this he advocated hiring one (1) or two (2) more code enforcement officers.

Commissioner Boyle noted Ormond Beach has established law trying to balance the rights of those who wish to own and store recreational vehicles and those who do not want to view them; and if it should go to Court, he contended a judge would lean toward the rights of the homeowner.

Commissioner Persis stated the Wal-Mart problem is not Ormond Beach’s ordinances or lack of code enforcement, but an individual company who is allowing people to park in his lot.

Mayor Hood suggested a motion to amend to reflect the following language in Section C, number 2: No vehicle or equipment shall exceed ten (10’) feet in height, plus one (1’) foot for roof-mounted air conditioning units and other accessory appurtenances, including, without limitation, roof racks, satellite dishes, or antennae. Commissioner Gillooly and Commissioner Persis so moved.

Call Vote (including amendment): Commissioner Gilooly yes

Commissioner Persis yes

Commissioner Boyle yes

Commissioner Irvin yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #7(D) - Dumpster Pads

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Boyle, to close the public hearing on Item #7(D). The motion carried unanimously.

ORDINANCE NO. 99 - 20

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE II, ACCESSORY USES, SECTION 2.10, DUMPSTER PADS, OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, TO ALLOW FOR AN INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE WALLS FOR THE ENCLOSURE AROUND DUMPSTER PADS UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS; REPEALING ALL INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES OR PARTS THEREOF; AND SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, for approval of Ordinance No. 99-20, on second reading, as read by title only.

Call Vote: Commissioner Persis yes

Commissioner Boyle yes

Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gilooly yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #7(E) - Parking Deferral Program

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, to close the public hearing on Item #7(E). The motion carried unanimously.

ORDINANCE NO. 99 - 21

AN ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO A PARKING DEFERRAL PROGRAM FOR OFFICE USES IN PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS, AMENDING SECTION 10.04F, OFF-STREET PARKING, OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; REPEALING ALL INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES OR PARTS THEREOF; AND SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, for approval of Ordinance No. 99-21, on second reading, as read by title only.

Call Vote: Commissioner Boyle yes

Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gillooly yes

Commissioner Persis yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #7(F) - Privatization of Streets and Sidewalks Within "Emerald Lakes"

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, to close the public hearing on Item #7(F). The motion carried unanimously.

ORDINANCE NO. 99 - 22

AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE MODIFICATION OF THE FINAL PLAT OF UNIT V, "EMERALD LAKES" OF THE "ORMOND LAKES" PORTION OF THE "NATIONAL GARDENS TRUST" DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT; AUTHORIZING THE PRIVATIZATION OF STREETS AND SIDEWALKS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT; AND SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, for approval of Ordinance No. 99-22, on second reading, as read by title only.

Call Vote: Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gillooly yes

Commissioner Persis yes

Commissioner Boyle yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #8- Adopting Wastewater Collection and Treatment System Requirements

ORDINANCE NO. 99 - 23

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE II, DIVISION 2, SECTIONS 22-85 THROUGH 110, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF ORMOND BEACH, FLORIDA, BY REPEALING THE EXISTING PROVISIONS AND ADOPTING NEW PROVISIONS REGARDING UNIFORM REQUIREMENTS FOR DIRECT AND INDIRECT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEM; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION, PERMITS, AND ENFORCEMENT, PENALTIES; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, for approval of Ordinance No. 99-23, on first reading, as read by title only.

Mr. Rob Merrell, of Cobb, Cole and Bell, and representing Homac Manufacturing Company, stated Homac would be subject to this ordinance. He reported Homac is supporting this ordinance, but wished to inform the Commission there will be a Resolution for consideration in the future delineating the fees and costs, and Homac may need to address these issues at that time. Mr. Merrell advised this ordinance will affect a lot of people regarding compliance with the technical standards and the forthcoming fee provisions; therefore, he recommended gathering input from other businesses.

Commissioner Gillooly asked how close this ordinance is from being completed; whereby, Mr. MacLeod indicated the ordinance is completed, but a resolution will be needed to establish a fee structure for inspections and permitting for the three (3) significant industries. He noted the permit fees are expected to be approximately $200 to $250, and the inspections, held twice a year, would be subject to inspection fees of less than $100 per inspection.

Mr. Hayes noted there will also be minor corrections made which will be specifically identified on second reading.

Call Vote: Commissioner Gillooly yes

Commissioner Persis yes

Commissioner Boyle yes

Commissioner Irvin yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #9(A) - Fire Station No. 93 Site Location Reconsideration

Commissioner Boyle made a motion to reconsider the site location for Fire Station No. 93.

Mr. Eugene Miller, City Manager, recommended the Commission defer reconsideration until after Chief Baker makes a presentation and after citizen comment.

Chief Baker reported approximately three (3) years ago the question of relocating Fire Station No. 93 was considered, and in the past 18 months, five (5) separate sites were investigated. He explained national standards must be used to determine fire station placement. Chief Baker stated it was determine that the Wilmette Avenue/Route #1 area was optimal. He reported the current response time to the Northbrook section is 7.4 minutes, which is excessive, but can be decreased to 5 minutes with the construction of this new station; and since it is on a major corridor, the response time was not significantly increased to any other portion of the district. He pointed out that the City Commission approved the County’s integrated response system which was taken into consideration in this placement. Chief Baker reported the site was presented and approved in a workshop on May 19, 1998; on June 2, 1998, the purchase of a small portion of land to accompany the major parcel was approved by the Commission; and on August 11, 1998, the architectural contract for $102,450 was approved and is now completed. He explained that staff of both the Fire and Police Departments spoke to over 50 groups where both he and Chief Mathieson made sure the location was known and received no opposition; therefore, when the people went to the poles to vote for this bond issue, it was felt they were aware of the location, even though the language did not specifically outline it. Chief Baker noted that a public hearing is not required to place a fire station in this zoning district.

Mr. Roy Longo, 327 North Yonge Street, indicated he is a Flagler County paramedic and lives one and one-half (1½) blocks from the proposed fire station. He expressed his opinion that this is an optimal site considering the response time issue. He noted the residents in his neighborhood were aware of the fact that this was the proposed site when they voted to approve the bond issue, and everyone he has spoken to approves of the location.

Mr. Joseph Lipscomb, 22 Shadow Creek Way, expressed confusion as to why this issue has come before the Commission after spending $22,000 to purchase property, $100,000 for a fire station design, and put before the public in the form of a bond issue.

Mr. Will Buchanan, 131 Wilmette Avenue, expressed opposition to the proposed placement of the fire station. He explained that during the time Wilmette Avenue was being extended, many promises were made to the citizens which are now being eroded away. He stated this causes residents to wonder if the promises made by Chief Baker regarding not allowing fire trucks on Wilmette Avenue unless absolutely necessary will be kept by him, or if in the future, should he leave, the next fire chief may not honor this commitment. Mr. Buchanan stated that Wilmette Avenue traffic is horrendous, and fire trucks on this road would cause a greater safety hazard. He pointed out that those who spoke in favor of the location do not live on Wilmette Avenue. Mr. Buchanan asked why the present location cannot house both the Police and Fire Departments. He noted that the projected amount of traffic on Wilmette Avenue was greater than estimated and expressed his concern that these traffic estimates will also be underestimated. Mr. Buchanan asked if the City Commission has any intention of addressing the issue of traffic on Wilmette Avenue.

Mayor Hood explained the traffic count is a separate issue, and he asked Mr. MacLeod to gather the data regarding the count and place it on a future agenda as an information item for the City Commission to determine if any further action is needs. He asked Mr. MacLeod to furnish Mr. Buchanan with a copy of the aforementioned report.

Commissioner Boyle restated his motion to reconsider the site location for Fire Station No. 93. The motion died for lack of a second.

Item #9(B) - Parking Requirement Waiver

RESOLUTION 99 - 48

A RESOLUTION WAIVING CERTAIN PARKING REQUIREMENTS RELATIVE TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF FIRE STATION NO. 93 AT A SITE LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF U.S. 1 AND WILMETTE AVENUE; AND SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, for approval of Resolution No. 99-48, as read by title only.

Commissioner Boyle expressed concern regarding a waiver of 61% of the fire station parking required by the Land Development Code. He stated when this fire station was proposed at the workshop, a specific site was not identified and a bond issue was not considered. Commissioner Boyle noted that when the two (2) consent agenda items were brought to the City Commission, they were not informed there would be additional expenses and Land Development Code requirements would not be met. He expressed concern when the Commission uses one set of rules for the City’s facilities and another set of rules for everyone else. He stated this sets a very bad precedent. Commissioner Boyle noted that had the owner of the land purchased by the City been able to receive relief from the Land Development Code rules, he may not have sold his property. He indicated the City Commission held a firm line with the Land Development Code regulations recently when considering the Hope Fellowship Church, as well as other applicants, and he contended the City should also adhere to the Code.

Commissioner Persis stated a fire station, unlike a business, is unique and the Chief is best qualified to know exactly how many parking spaces are needed for its operation. He advocated granting the waiver.

Commissioner Boyle advised that when the Land Development Code was written, the fire stations or other public building were not exempt to the regulations of the Code. He requested discussion at a future City Commission meeting to add language to the Land Development Code requiring a public hearing for the construction of any public building.

Mayor Hood stated that some who deem the Land Development Code can never be exempted, are the same people who argue it needs to be exempted when it suits their cause. He advocated allowing capable staff to make common sense decisions to deal with problems. Mayor Hood recommended that, before the end of this year, the Commission examine the possibility of eliminating the Land Development Code and devise a system that uses common sense, has some flexibility, and gives the City Commission the ability to deal with day-to-day problems.

Mr. Don O'Donniley, Planning Director, noted the language quoted in the bottom of the second paragraph is taken directly from the Land Development Code as follows: "The City Commission may waive all or a portion of this requirement if it is determined that the use would not generate the need for the required spaces." He stated this authority was granted in the Land Development Code. Mr. O’Donniley explained the requested waiver is based solely on the calculations of where the fire trucks and equipment are stored, and the standard 250 square feet of occupied space requirement has been met.

Call Vote: Commissioner Persis yes

Commissioner Boyle no

Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gillooly yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #9(C) - Landscape Plan Modification for Performing Arts Center/Senior Center

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, to close the public hearing on Item #9(C). The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION 99 - 49

A RESOLUTION AMENDING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION (NOW KNOWN AS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) RELATIVE TO THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER/SENIOR CENTER, BY MODIFYING THE LANDSCAPE PLANS RELATIVE TO PARKING AND TO ACCOMMODATE CONSTRUCTION OF FIRE STATION NO. 93; ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; AND SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Commissioner Persis moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, for approval of Resolution No. 99-49, as read by title only.

Commissioner Boyle explained this Resolution would remove and reduce landscaping at the Performing Arts Center/Senior Center to provide parking, which is further proof that the fire station is being "shoehorned" into a very crowded public area. He expressed concern regarding a precedent being set for commercial establishments as well as the impact on capital assets. Commissioner Boyle pointed out how limited the current parking is for popular events at the Performing Arts Center. He agreed with Mayor Hood that the Land Development Code is a dynamic document and needs constant adjusting, and he stated he favors looking closely at this document in a future agenda. Commissioner Boyle stated reducing green space in this area to provide parking contradicts what the City stands for.

Mayor Hood asked the City to commit to intensify the landscaping in the green space that is remaining after the parking spaces are created.

Ms. Judy Sloane, City Engineer, stated the landscaping has been significantly increased by approximately 30%. Mayor Hood requested a 50% increase in landscaping; whereby, Ms. Sloane agreed to accommodate this request.

Cloosingommissioner Gillooly asked what percentage of green space is being eliminated; whereby, not any total tCommissioner landscape area intensity, but is loosing grass area. indicated she is satisfied with Gwho he parking sitillooly noted he walked the property with Ms. Nancy Hogle, Special Events Supervisor, uation, and she this area.shouMs. Sloane explained the City is ld be the one most knowledgeable in

Care favor of is inchange and noted thommissioner Persis advised he also has talked to several people who it receiving a unanimous vote for approval by the Development Review Board.

Commissioner Persis moved to amend, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, to increase the landscaping to 50% in the remaining green space area.

Commissioner Irvin noted she spoke to people who agree that the fire station is not a problem, rather the problem is the promises that were made and not kept during the Wilmette Avenue extension project. She stated it is incumbent upon the City Commission to speak to these residents and come up with a solution to their problems.

Call Vote: Commissioner Boyle no

Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gillooly yes

Commissioner Persis yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #10(A) - Consideration of Review of Leisure Service Facility Fees

Commissioner Boyle stated in May 1997, the City hired a consultant to perform a cost-of-service analysis to establish the cost of providing each service. He noted he expected a study of the demographic population of this City would be included in order to determine how the resources are being allocated for each recreational group, but this was not included in the report. Commissioner Boyle stated the report outlined which fees to increase in order to attain equity in the cost of providing the service, but the City Commission decided to leave the structure in place.

Commissioner Boyle noted recently there have been two (2) public complaints: the first being the costs at the Casements where three (3) or four (4) small groups are no longer using the Casements for their meetings; and, the second being the cost to Seabreeze High School at the Nova Tennis Courts, which has no relation to the cost analysis from the consultants. He stated this fee was set without the cost analysis, which is what every City and consultant in the industry utilizes. Commissioner Boyle continued that there is no relation for the demand for the tennis courts, and the rate bears no relation to what other cities are charging school teams for their facilities; therefore, he questioned how this fee structure was derived. He expressed concern that staff has taken inflexible positions on these and other issues.

Commissioner Boyle also expressed concern about the difficulty in coming to a policy decision on the skate board park and recent resignations of valuable employees at the Casements and Performing Arts Center. He stated a total review is probably not necessary, but he would advocate a workshop, in the near future, to discuss all of the recreation issues recently raised. Commissioner Boyle noted concern that public perception of recreation is heading in a negative direction, and this workshop may be able to resolve some of the issues.

Commissioner Boyle made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, to hold a workshop to discuss facility fees and other Leisure Service issues.

Mayor Hood explained the principal of Seabreeze has no problem with the facility fee agreement because it is a contract between the Volusia County School Board and the City of Ormond Beach, and the reason the contract exists, is because the School Board has not funded the recreational facilities for Seabreeze High School as they should have. He stated the agreement should be re-examined, but not until it comes up for renewal; and a bad precedent is set when agreements are changed after they are ratified. Mayor Hood noted the school system needs to either fund the capital program for the City to create the facilities so they can use the facility for free, or provide the proper facilities themselves. He stated a workshop will only prove everyone has a different opinion on the amount of subsidy for each entity. Mayor Hood stated the people he has spoken to have the opinion that Ormond Beach facilities are as good or better than any in Volusia County. He recommended Mr. Miller meet with Mr. Hall and work out a program where the City has a better working relationship with the school system.

Commissioner Persis agreed with Mayor Hood and advocated the City Manager meet with staff to see what kind of progress can be made before scheduling a workshop.

Commissioner Gillooly advised more workshops are needed where some of these problems can be discussed in public view in a more relaxed atmosphere.

Mr. Miller recommended staff give the Commission a focus offering a set of alternate choices before they meet in a public setting. He stated this would be advantageous because once discussion is opened, public expectations are built that may not be on course to the policy directive of the Commission.

Commissioner Irvin agreed workshops are needed to better understand all the nuances of any certain issue since the Sunshine Law prohibits policy discussion amongst City Commissioners. She stated she does not disagree the fees could be lowered for the tennis courts, but at the moment, the City has a contract with the school board.

Commissioner Boyle stated a Commissioner at an earlier meeting reported the principal of the school did not stay for the discussion of this issue; therefore, any reconsideration of the fee would not be relevant, but he rejected that logic. He noted that although he understands the sanctity of contracts, when this contract was negotiated the school had a free facility at Oceanside; this is the first year this provision has ever been applied to a school, and he contended, will probably be the last. Commissioner Boyle stated that if a contract is seriously flawed and public complaint is registered, it is incumbent upon the Commission to investigate it immediately.

Commissioner Persis corrected that the statement made was that the principal did not stay for the discussion because he probably felt uncomfortable since the administration has one opinion and the parent has an opposing opinion. He stated the principal is in full support of the contract. Commissioner Persis also pointed out that not every student at Seabreeze High School lives in Ormond Beach.

Commissioner Irvin asked staff if anyone from the Volusia County School Board approached the City regarding these fees. Mr. Miller answered he is not aware of any complaints; whereby, Commissioner Irvin then questioned why it is an issue.

Commissioner Persis asked if the motion is to have a workshop before or after the City Manager discusses the issue with Mr. Hall; whereby, Mayor Hood clarified that the motion is to have the workshop regardless if the City Manager talks to Mr. Hall or not.

Mayor Hood asked if anyone objects to the City Manager attempting to work something out with the school system; whereby Commissioner Boyle stated he is not opposed to dialogue with Mr. Hall, but requested the City Manager also talk to Saralee Morrissey of the School Board and Pattie Evans of Daytona Beach to find out what other cities and schools are paying for services.

Mayor Hood stated Ormond Beach doesn’t care what other cities are charging because they have different situations. He explained Seabreeze is a landlocked school without proper land to offer recreational facilities, which makes this a unique situation.

Commissioner Boyle stated that using that logic, comparing other cities on things like employee pay contacts should also not be relevant.

Mayor Hood concluded that Commissioner Boyle objects to Mr. Miller talking to Mr. Hall, but the four (4) remaining members of the City Commission favor dialogue; therefore, he instructed Mr. Miller to initiate dialogue with Mr. Hall.

Call Vote: Commissioner Irvin yes

Commissioner Gilooly yes

Commissioner Persis yes

Commissioner Boyle yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #10(B) - Court of Appeals Reconsideration Regarding Multiple Structures on a Single Lot

Mayor Hood explained the City’s Board of Adjustment and Appeals granted a variance, and the City Attorney advised that the decision should be appealed to the Circuit Court.

Mr. Douglas Piatt, representing The Arbors Development Group, stated his firm develops residential style Alzheimer’s care facilities. He stated it was determined Ormond Beach has a need for this type of facility and located a three acre site on the north side of Tomoka Avenue for the facility. He stated the planned facility will be a benefit to the City of Ormond Beach, but the zoning is designated R-4 where only one (1) building is permitted per lot. Mr. Piatt explained one (1) building can be built on that lot, but it would not be residential in character because of its size. He stated the facilities they have previously developed are a pair of buildings, approximately 7,000 square feet, single story, and residential in nature. He added staff informed him that one (1) large building can be constructed, or two (2) smaller buildings connected by a corridor or breezeway would be permitted, but this would not be advisable considering the safety factors for the residents and would cause the need for additional personnel. Mr. Piatt pointed out that two smaller buildings would be more in keeping with the residential character of the neighborhood. He reported the Board of Adjustment and Appeals unanimously agreed to permit the variance.

Mr. Don O'Donniley, Planning Director, explained the connector would have to be an enclosed all-weather structure integral to the two (2) buildings; a breezeway would not be permitted.

Mayor Hood asked if the lot could be divided into two (2) lots and then two (2) 7,000 square foot facilities built. Mr. O’Donniley, indicated this is a possibility, but there may be problems relative to access or setbacks which have not been explored conclusively. Mayor Hood noted if two (2) separate facilities could be built which meet setbacks and other issues could be addressed by cross easements, he questioned why this remedy is being requested. Mr. O’Donniley explained this remedy is being requested by the applicant because he is unwilling to create the second legal lot, noting if the facility were to fail before closure procedures, a number of legal issues would be raised. Mayor Hood suggested a unity of title, noting a unity of title is not necessary to foreclose or for lending purposes.

Mr. Piatt explained that after he received unanimous approval from the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, he started funding engineering services. Mayor Hood clarified that the applicant is stating he has invested money based on the variance awarded by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and would not wish to loose this investment to solve the problem in a different method.

Mr. Randal Hayes, City Attorney, noted the reason this was brought to the Commission is because there are certain legal criteria that most be found at the Board level for a variance to be awarded, and these criteria were not met.

Mayor Hood stated he is willing to endorse the Board’s variance, and it should not go to Circuit Court.

Commissioner Irvin advised she would oppose this facility if it would resemble the facility on Hand Avenue; therefore, she would favor two (2) separate facilities rather than attaching the two (2) structures.

Commissioner Boyle stated it is clear that the Board did not use the legal criteria they were mandated to use; therefore, their ruling is on weak ground.

Mayor Hood asked if an attorney was at the Board meeting; whereby, Mr. Hayes stated an attorney was present and the Board was informed legal criteria was not being met.

Commissioner Gillooly stated the applicant seems to be sincere in wanting to do the best he can with the architectural rendering and landscaping.

Commissioner Gillooly moved to dismiss the appeal.

Commissioner Persis asked if this were permitted, what precedent would be set; whereby, Mr. Hayes replied that each case is dealt with on a case-by-case basis; therefore, there would be no actual precedent set.

Commissioner Persis asked if the Planning Department objects to any aspect other than the legal ramifications; whereby, Mr. O’Donniley replied the Planning Board did not have further objections, but the property could be divided into two (2) lots, each with a separate structure.

Commissioner Irvin asked if the design of the houses would be residential to enable the structures to be occupied as residential if this firm is no longer in operation; whereby, Mr. Piatt answered this facility would not be suitable for a single family. He showed a photograph of a structure built in the northwest and explained the structures planned for Ormond Beach would be more in tune with Florida architecture, but similar to the one depicted. Mr. Piatt advised this is the first of ten (10) facilities, and would be the flagship.

Commissioner Persis noted he prefers to have the facilities on two (2) lots and not vote against the Legal Department recommendation.

Mayor Hood passed the gavel to Commissioner Irvin to second Commissioner Gillooly’s motion.

Mayor Hood clarified the motion is to dismiss the appeal which will leave the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals standing.

Call Vote: Commissioner Gillooly yes

Commissioner Persis no

Commissioner Boyle no

Commissioner Irvin yes

carried Mayor Hood yes

Item #10(C) - Use of Origin and Destination Traffic Studies

Commissioner Boyle reported on February 18, 1999, the City performed a study of Riverside Drive in front of the Casements from approximately 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. where motorists entering the first block of Riverside Drive were stopped and asked three (3) questions: where are you coming from; where are you going; and what is the purpose of your trip. He noted at 9:30 a.m. he witnessed a police vehicle with lights flashing, three (3) City employees with clip boards, with three (3) vehicles stopped in front of him. Commissioner Boyle noted he was not asked to participate in a voluntary survey; he was simply asked the questions. He stated at 5:00 p.m. the flashing police light was off, but the vehicle and officer were still present, and the City employee asked if he would be willing to participate in a voluntary survey. Commissioner Boyle noted the staff report indicated the survey was voluntary, but he contended it is not voluntary when a police cruiser has lights flashing and the motorist is detained in a line of cars. He stated he was informed the information was intended to assist this Commission in future decisions regarding any adjustments they would make to the traffic flow in the area, yet he stated the usefulness of such data is seriously in question; and he contended there could have been a potential negative on the police bond issue due to the number and intensity of complaints he received from residents. Commissioner Boyle pointed out this Commission did not request this study; it was not promised or considered at the public meeting which took place at the Casements after this Commission reached a sensitive decision on whether to close this street; the residents did not request the study; and no such study was conducted when dealing with the larger Wilmette Avenue/Main Trail traffic issue. He stated the data gathered in this study could just as easily have been obtained from data the consultants already have on their database. He stated Mayor Hood had noted the City Manager promised the decision the Commission reached would not be compromised in any way; and based on the public reaction, this decision has been seriously undermined by this survey.

Commissioner Boyle moved, seconded by Commissioner Irvin, that this Commission set a policy that no origin/destination traffic surveys that stop motorists will ever take place in Ormond Beach again.

Mr. Miller stated origin/destination studies have been used by professional traffic engineers, city administrations, and elected officials to determine the movement of traffic in a community in a broad scope. He advised the intent of the City Manager and staff was to assist the Commission in dealing with a sensitive issue which has arisen numerous times. Mr. Miller stated the Commission directed staff to prepare a study of the traffic safety in that area, which is why this survey was conducted. He explained a meeting was held with the residents of this neighborhood, and staff promised it would come back with an unbiased response to each suggestion made during the meeting. Mr. Miller stated this survey is a professionally done origin/destination study which is very common. He explained the problem arose when both sides of this issue perceived a conspiracy against them; but he explained that after he spoke to the individuals, he was able to convince them this is not the case.

Mr. Clay Ervin, Project Manager for Ghyabi-Lassiter and Associates, advised City staff was properly trained to conduct this survey. He stated there was an attempt to do a similar study with the Wilmette/Main Trail analysis, but unfortunately, training was inadequate and the results were not acceptable. Mr. Ervin reported City staff was utilized in the Riverside Drive study to prove it was truly unbiased. He explained staff was trained the day prior to the study, was issued an overall procedure list, and written in bold was the statement that this is a strictly voluntary survey. Mr. Ervin stated that in order to gather accurate information, the line of traffic was not to become congested because this would make motorists choose a different route than normally taken and give a false reading. He stated general procedures had been followed, and his firm is now completing the statistical analysis of the information. He noted that because of this study, Ghyabi-Lassiter will be able to provide good raw data as well as refined data. Mr. Ervin explained a tube counter cannot give this level of data since it cannot tell where the automobile came from or was going, only the total number traveling on the road. He advised license tag studies can only tell where the owner lives, and phone and mail responses do not achieve the direct response; thus response is poor. He stated this type of survey is a valuable planning tool, and to make a blanket policy eliminating them, would be an error. Mr. Ervin noted his firm conducts these types of studies regularly for residential, commercial and industrial uses; therefore, he urged the Commission not to prohibit private property owners from using this common planning tool.

Commissioner Persis asked if it is necessary not to announce the survey beforehand to maintain the credibility of the survey, whereby, Mr. Ervin agreed that any public notice would skew the travel patterns. He explained that having the police officer present is endorsed by their insurance carrier because of safety concerns, and it shows that they took all precautions to assure the safety of the drivers and surveyors. Commissioner Persis noted that based on Mr. Ervin’s statements, staff was using a time-tested tool endorsed by the National Safety Engineers’ Association. He stated he opposes this "knee jerk reaction" now that the facts are known.

Commissioner Irvin stated elected officials should have been made aware of this survey so they would have known what to tell the constituents who called to file complaints.

Mayor Hood stated when he receives complaints, he considers it part of his job to find out the details and call the constituent back with the information; and while he would like to know some information from time to time, he does not want daily reports of work being done throughout the City.

Commissioner Irvin indicated she received calls before 8:00 a.m. and could not call the City Manager; therefore, she would have appreciated foreknowledge on this issue.

Mr. Miller apologized to the Commission for not informing them. He stated that because of the emotions involved, he should have predicted the Commission would have received calls, and they should have been informed even when this type of survey is not normally publicized.

Commissioner Gillooly noted the voluntary aspect of this survey is in question, because the police car with lights flashing appears coercive, and the fact that the survey was voluntary was not offered. He stated this is an invasion of privacy and questioned the purpose of finding out a motorist’s origin. Mr. Ervin explained the idea of "cut through" traffic is where there is an external/external trip through a neighborhood, and this study is a method of proving or disproving that theory. Commissioner Gillooly stated he will make a decision when the data is presented, but if he deems the study was not worthwhile, he may agree with Commissioner Boyle’s motion.

Commissioner Boyle urged Commissioner Gillooly to vote on the merits of this motion, not on whether sufficient data was collected. He stated the Commission is once again being told other cities are using this method, yet earlier it was told Ormond Beach is unique and other cities shouldn’t be used as a model. Commissioner Boyle noted the Commission made a sensitive decision on the Riverside Drive issue, and he has not heard how this study relates to the safety of Riverside Drive. He stated the City has no right to stop people to ask them questions; this was not voluntary; and it leaves a chilling effect on Ormond Beach.

Commissioner Boyle clarified his motion to reflect only City government generated origin/destination studies.

Police Chief Larry Mathieson explained the officers did not stop motorists or participate in the survey, but were merely present for visibility purposes.

Mr. Miller reported he met with residents from Riverside Drive as directed by the City Commission to address their traffic safety concerns. He stated staff meticulously gathered suggestions, and in order to answer some of the suggestions made in an unbiased manner, this type of study was needed. Mr. Miller urged the Commission to allow staff to present the report which will probably answer most concerns. He stated employees were used to minimize costs.

Commissioner Gillooly stated that while he is leaning toward voting with Commissioner Boyle, he will wait for the report; but should the report not prove the survey was justified, he will bring this item up again.

Commissioner Irvin advised this is another reason she advocates workshops because if this had been discussed in a workshop, problems could have been avoided. She stated she will not vote to prohibit any origin/destination study, but the elected officials need to approve such a study.

Mayor Hood agreed communications amongst Commissioners should be greater, but there can not be workshops for everything that happens in Ormond Beach. He stated he, as a developer, has used this methodology as have people all over the country, to avoid the allegation that the analysis is flawed. Mayor Hood advised staff will question at what point they bring issues to the Commission, and will it cause the public to question their methods.

Commissioner Boyle stated his question was not about staff informing the Commission, but whether the data collected in this survey speaks directly to the question the Commission just decided which is whether to close John Anderson Drive. Mr. Ervin explained that at the meeting with the residents, the residents determined the "cut through" traffic increased the volume for traffic and the potential safety problems, and their remedies were either partial closures, which is not a viable alternative, or looking at methods of calming traffic, or diverting traffic onto the another road so motorists would travel at a reasonable speed. He noted in order to do this, they would have to prove if there is cut through traffic, where the traffic is coming from, where it is going, who the users are, and what the purposes of those trips are. Commissioner Boyle stated his objection is how this relates to traffic calming and the obvious discomfort caused by this study.

Call Vote: Commissioner Persis no

Commissioner Boyle yes

Commissioner Irvin no

Commissioner Gillooly no

failed Mayor Hood no

Item #11 - Audience Comments On Agenda Items

Alzheimer’s Facility

Mr. Joseph Lipscomb, 22 Shadow Creek Way, advised his wife suffers from Alzheimer’s disease, and Ormond Beach needs a facility which provides loving care in a home atmosphere. He urged the City Commission to have compassion when considering the type of facility that can provide this to Ormond Beach residents.

Tennis Court Fees

Ms. Carolyn Brenner reported she spoke to Mr. Kirton, principal at Seabreeze High School, regarding tennis court fees, and he informed her he is reluctant to appear at these meetings to discuss this matter because each time he has asked for an adjustment to fees, they are increased, not decreased. She stated her opinion was that a citizen could see an injustice, bring it to the Commission’s attention and that the information would be treated with respect and handled with flexibility and common sense, and she does not believe this was the case.

Riverside Drive Survey

Mr. Glenn Jaspers, 160 Ocean Terrace, expressed his opinion that the staff let the Commission down in not informing them regarding the traffic study. He stated the study was inappropriate, and this will be brought up again and again until something different is done, even though the Commission voted to keep the road open. Mr. Jaspers urged Commissioner Gillooly to follow up and examine the merits of this survey, and that the public also be informed of what information the report contains.

Staff Turnover

Mr. Gordon Currie, 1 Cypress View Trail, stated for the past ten (10) years he has regularly attended City Commission meetings until September 1998. He reported this is the second meeting he has attended since that time, and he noticed many new staff members and questioned the large turnover. Mr. Currie stated the Commission is trying to be traffic experts, planning experts, and trying to micromanage the City, while the City Manager is tasked with that job. He noted taxes are increasing, and employees are receiving "run away" pay increases. He stated he has been a Holly Hill Mayor and City Commissioner, and he relied of the City Manager and staff and encouraged his fellow Commissioners to do the same. He noted the City is becoming passive; it does not want to improve its roads; and Ormond Beach is not a class city anymore.

Origin/Destination Traffic Study

Mr. Will Buchanan, 131 Wilmette Avenue, requested an origin/destination traffic study for Wilmette Avenue. He stated Wilmette Avenue could use speed stops, speed bumps, and cobblestone to close the traffic as anyone could attest if they are present 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Mr. Buchanan reported the police have unsuccessfully tried to stop the speeding.

Mr. Don Ward, 1214 Parkside Drive, stated one reason the residents may be upset the survey was conducted is because it occurred only a few weeks after the decision was made to keep the road open. He noted the flashing light on the police car may have attracted people who may have been curious to find out what was happening; thus the survey may not be accurate.

Fire Station Location

Mr. Ward asked why this particular location was chosen for the new fire station since it is so crowded whenever the Performing Arts Center has a show. He questioned why the station was not placed where the City owns land on Wilmette Avenue in the area near the Public Works Complex. Mr. Ward voiced his opinion that the cost of the 17 parking spaces should come from the Fire Department budget.

Mayor Hood explained the reason the fire station is not being moved to the Public Works Complex is because it is on the wrong side of the railroad tracks, which would create safety issues, and the houses on that side of the tracks are already covered by another fire station. Mayor Hood explained the money for the increased landscaping will come from the City budget, but exactly which area is uncertain.

Item #12- Reports, Suggestions, Requests

Gordon Currie’s Comments

Commissioner Boyle apologized to Mr. Currie for his disappointment that Ormond Beach is not raising to his expectations. He pointed out, however, that Ormond Beach did not increase its taxes, it went to roll back, and the budget clearly stated that is a 2.1% decrease in the tax rate. Regarding Mr. Currie’s statements related to the City Manager, Commissioner Boyle stated the City Manager’s job is to carry out policy, not to make policy; this is the responsibility of the City Commission who represents the people.

New Planning Director

Commissioner Boyle welcomed Don O'Donniley, Planning Director, to the staff. He noted he was critical of the City Manager for the length of time it took to hire a Planning Director; but after meeting Mr. O’Donniley, he understands why Mr. Miller was so careful in making his selection.

Annexation Consolidated Tomoka Land Company

Commissioner Boyle noted that at the goal setting meeting on February 17, 1999, the City Commission unanimously agreed that the number one priority of Ormond Beach was to decide the annexation question of the 3,000 acres owned by Consolidated Tomoka Land Company (CTLC) west of the City as well as those east of I-95 and north of LPGA Boulevard. He noted the Planning Board considered this issue last Thursday, and the City Manager reported two (2) major new developments: that Consolidated Tomoka had indicated that its extensive list of demands for relaxing wetland standards and development rules were not negotiable, and that Consolidated Tomoka had also formally applied to Daytona Beach to annex a parcel of property lying east of I-95, north of LPGA, west of Williamson Boulevard and lying within the service area of Ormond Beach. Commissioner Boyle stated Mr. Benedict of Consolidated Tomoka was in the audience at that Planning Board meeting and was asked if he would answer questions, had anything to add, or had any corrections; and Mr. Benedict responded he had nothing to add, which verified the "non-negotiable" aspect. Commissioner Boyle noted he has come to the conclusion that Ormond Beach will not be able to annex this property without seriously compromising the development rules and standards that have been in place for a long time. Commissioner Boyle reported the Planning Board asked staff develop an overall annexation policy that would apply to all potential applicants for annexation, which will be useful. He noted they also asked staff to determine how much of this land is developable, because the latest demand from Consolidated Tomoka is that all the non-developable land be counted as credit for the land that is developable. Commissioner Boyle recommended staff to pursue the greenbelt concept, stronger interlocal agreements with other cities, and the concept of sustainable cities to limit urban sprawl. Due to the fact Consolidated Tomoka claims terms are non-negotiable, Commissioner Boyle advised he is prepared to "close the book" on the annexation proposal.

Commissioner Boyle moved, seconded by Commissioner Gillooly, to deny the annexation proposal by Consolidated Tomoka Land Company.

Mayor Hood stated this would require a vote on an issue that is not on the agenda; therefore, the Thompson Rule would require this to be placed on a future agenda for discussion before a vote could be taken.

Mr. Randal Hayes, City Attorney, replied that if there is written material that needs to be considered, this does need to be placed on a future agenda; but if there is no written material, the Commission could consider this issue at this meeting.

Mayor Hood stated voices of extremism do nothing to progress toward a reasonable solution of this problem. He noted that he has previously stated that if Ormond Beach did not find some reasonable middle ground that would protect standards and also accommodate CTLC’s concerns, Daytona Beach will annex the land, and their less stringent rules would apply. Mayor Hood noted it would be ill advised to make such a motion on such a dynamic issue without having the ability to fully discuss it.

Commissioner Persis stated an issue as important as this should wait. He stated just because the CTLC representative did not have anything to add at the Planning Board meeting does not mean anything conclusive; he may have wanted to discuss issues with the other members of his Board.

Mayor Hood stated this is such an important issue for the Commission to start to discuss and the hour is late; whereby, Commissioner Boyle agreed there is merit in Mayor Hood’s words, but when all agree there needs to be some middle ground and the company says there is no middle ground, that is clear. Commissioner Boyle stated that after the round table discussion, the two (2) staffs were to meet and determine if there was a middle ground, but the City Manager’s letters and phone calls received no response and then in January, he receives an annexation request. He advised that Mr. Miller pragmatically suggested bringing in a State Conflict Resolution Team to make non-binding recommendations, but this was rejected by CTLC. Commissioner Boyle stated he sees no advantage to Ormond Beach to compromise its standards, rather he recommended Ormond Beach peruse interlocal agreements so all the cities have the same rules with a greenbelt established on the west side of the urban sprawl. He stated if so requested, he would be willing to discuss this issue on April 13, 1999.

Commissioner Gillooly stated the proposal from CTLC was extreme without one thing that benefited Ormond Beach. He stated it is to the company’s advantage to come into Ormond Beach, making property values higher than in Daytona Beach or Holly Hill. Commissioner Gillooly agreed that proposal was non-negotiable, but if the company is willing to come back with an offer that makes sense, they are free to do so.

Commissioner Irvin agreed CTLC undeniably stated their proposal was non-negotiable, but Ormond Beach should be making this decision.

Mr. Miller strongly recommended allowing staff to give considerable study to this proposal before rejecting it. He noted the Planning Board directed staff to proceed with the process, the first step of which is to take each proposal and compare it to the Ormond Beach regulations pointing out the differences, as well as comparing them to Daytona Beach and Volusia County regulations. Regarding the non-negotiable statement, he explained that this term is a common opening statement. Mr. Miller described an open discussion he had with representatives after the Planning Board meeting where he got the impression they were open to alternatives, and he urged the Commission to allow staff to complete the report for their consideration.

Commissioner Gillooly explained he found the first CTLC proposal insulting and urged the Commission send a strong message that Ormond Beach is not interested in this kind of proposal. He recommended they bring back a more reasonable proposal to open serious negotiations.

Commissioner Persis advised this kind of talk is normal in the business world, and there is too much at stake to let emotions get in the way of clear decision-making. He urged the Commission to allow Mr. Miller the opportunity to complete his report so a good decision can be made at a later date.

Commissioner Irvin agreed the Planning Board did agree to proceed; therefore, she would agree to wait for a decision, but she reiterated that CTLC did indicate this was a "take it or leave it" situation.

Mayor Hood advised, as a businessman, he is aware the "take it or leave it" negotiating is quite common, but it is always known by each party that compromise will have to occur.

Commissioner Gillooly clarified that he seconded the motion with the understanding that the City would not negotiate under the terms proposed, but CTLC can come back with another proposal; thus, this does not slam the door on negotiations.

Commissioner Persis stated there is paperwork that needs to be considered, such as the report described by the City Manager where the proposal and Ormond Beach, Daytona Beach, Holly Hill and Volusia County codes are compared.

Mayor Hood asked Mr. Hayes for his recommendation as to the legality to vote at this meeting; whereby, Mr. Hayes recommended this be scheduled for further review at a subsequent meeting. Mayor Hood advised the motion is void since the Thompson Rule applies, and this will be scheduled for the April 13, 1999, meeting.

Temporarily Closing of Riverside Drive

Commissioner Irvin recommended obtaining large clay pots, on rollers, which could be wheeled out as barricades when Riverside Drive is temporarily closed to create a more aesthetic appearance.

Water Service in the Year 2000

Commissioner Persis asked Mr. Ted MacLeod, Public Works Director, if the City water service is on track for testing for the year 2000; whereby, Mr. MacLeod stated the City is in the process of comprehensively testing all the equipment and computer systems. He stated major improvements will need to be made with the system that relays information from various wells and pumps, but this is being handled, and the City should be prepared by January 1, 2000.

Mr. Miller stated Ormond Beach’s problems are relatively moot because it entered the computer age rather late; therefore, the software was developed with the knowledge of the year 2000 problem.

Item #13 - Close The Meeting

The meeting was adjourned at 10:08 PM.