Loading...
05-28-1974 Supporting DocumentsMINUTES N9 1032 REGULAR MEETING A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Clermont was held in the Council Chambers on Tuesday, May 28, 1974. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P. M. by Mayor Claude E. Smoak, 1r_ with the following members present: Councilmen Waller, Byrd, Schroedel and Oswalt. Other officials present were City Controller Fleming, City Clerk Carroll, City Attorney Vason, City Manager Hopkins, Director of Community Services Smythe and Chief of Police Tyndal. Others present were: Mr. and Mrs. E. Lamar Black and Messrs. Crowson, Czech, Drown and Hovis. A representative of the Sentinel/Star was also present. The invocation was given by Councilman Byrd, followed by repeating of the Pledge of Allegiance in unison by those present. The Minutes of the meeting held May 14, 1974 were approved as written. Mayor Smoak announced the first order of business to be a Public Hearing to consider request by Efurd Sign Company for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance (Section 26-73 Nonconforming Signs; Signs may not be modified to advertise a different business or service than that which they advertised at the time they became nonconforming) in order to modify an existing structure located adjacent to Highway #27, which was presently vacant. There was no one present who voiced objection to the request, whereupon motion was made by Councilman Oswalt, seconded by Councilman Waller and carried that the request be granted. Mayor Smoak announced the next order of business to be a report on the bid opening for the renovation of the Highland Avenue Well. Mr. Dave Crowson, consulting engineer, advised that a single bid from Singer Layne -Atlantic Company in the amount - of $13,050.00 had been received. It was the opinion of Mr. Crowson that this bid was not in order according to the specifications due to a misunderstanding/misinterpre- tation of the specifications as submitted, and therefore recommended that the bid be rejected and the City Manager be authorized to enter into negogiations with the bidder with respect to such misinterpretations of the specs. Motion was made b Councilman Schroedel seconded b Councilman Oswalt and carried that this recommendat of n be accepted. Mayor Smoak vote Naye on passage of the motion. Mr. Crowson further gave a brief recap to Council on the status of various projects underway such as their effluent disposal study and consequent betterment application for federal funding in of the city, and had been advised that the Florida Department of Pollution Control had adopted a priority schedule for funding and that Clermont was well "within the money" to receive a grant for preparation of plans and specifications for an effluent disposal system; That the plans and specifications had been prepared and bids were presently being advertised for construction of a force main and lift station to service the Clermont High School, and, that the surveys and necessary field work had been completed with respects to an additional supply source of water for the southwestern section of the city, but that a well site had not yet been obtained. He still further reported that the FHA commitment had come through in the amount of the estimated improvements for this project. Mr. E. Lamar Black, Co -Chairman of the Lake County BiCentennial Committee, appeared before Council and advised that it was their goal, in participating in the bicentennial celebration, to come up with some beneficial and permanent projects, possibly categorized as follows: Slum Clearance, Pollution Abatement, Public Health, Improvement of Recreational Facilities, Improvement of Cultural Projects and Improvement in Law Enforcement. He further reported that state funding for such bicentennial projects would be available and it was the purpose of this committee to formulate such projects and present them for funding. Mayor Smoak advised Mr. Black that Council would certainly be willing to work with the committee, and at such time as the groundwork has been laid and the rules set forth by which the city must conform in order to participate, he would be glad to call a workshop session of Council. Ask MINUTES N4 a 033 City Manager Hopkins submitted his report both orally and written, and a copy is attached hereto. With regards the possible improvement of Osceola Street between Eighth Street and West Avenue, motion was made by Councilman Oswalt and seconded by Councilman +Byrd With regards the pier at Jaycee Beach, Mayor Smoak requested that the City Manager investigate the feasibility of repairing the pier sufficiently at present in order to accommodate this season's swimming program, and then consider a permanent solution at budget hearings. Council was in agreement with this request. With regards the additional funds needed for the summer arts and crafts program, motion was made b Councilman Oswalt seconded b Councilman Waller and carried that an ad itiona 280.00 be out orize . With regards the request of the State Motor Vehicle Division of Drivers License to relocate their local facilities to a mobile home, motion was made b Cocilman Waller, seconded by Councilman Oswalt and carried that tTis request a unden e . Mayor Smoak reported as follows: That he had contacted Peter H. Johnson with regards possibility of an out of court settlement, but was of the opinion that Council should proceed as previously authorized; that a streak of mud had surfaced at the Jaycee Beach since the water had receded, and asked that City Manager Hopkins investigate the possibility of having this removed; That there was a need for a single light fixture to be placed at the Little League Field in such as location as to face toward the batting cage and one additional tier of fence behind the batter's box, and That he had received a request from the Lake County Economic Opportunity, Inc. for a pledge of financial assistance from the city in order to r Citizens Program in Lake County with t continue their Seniohe local project being the "Meals -on -Wheels". It was the suggestion of Mayor Smoak that representatives from this organization be invited to appear before Council and explain the program further. With regards the pension plan of city employees, it was consensus of Council that Dr. William Howard, actuary for the city's pension plan, be invited to meet with Council in workshop session to consider possible amendments to the existing plan. With regards the problem of resolving the ownership of lakefront property lying between Lake Shore Drive and Lake Minnehaha on which the city has granted leases and/or easements, and which matter had been referred to City Attorney Vason for further study following a memorandum legal opinion presented to Council by Attorney George E. Hovis in behalf of Robert Paxton, Mr. Vason reported as follows: That he was in agreement with the proposal as submitted by Mr. Hovis that the only alternative the city has to resolve the problem would be to determine the right-of-way of Lake Shore Drive through adequate survey and then vacate a southern portion of the r-o-w with the ownership of the vacation portion reverting to the abutting property owners on the north side of Lake Shore Drive; but that inasmuch as any vacation of property by the city would be primarily for public purpose and not private, he would recommend that all parcels affected be determined and all expenses for this be borne by the interested property owners. Attorney Hovis submitted a commitment to guarantee payment of the cost of a survey and other incidental expenses incurred ` in vacating the lakefront property lying between Lot 9 of Riviera Heights to Lot 52 _ of Clermont Heights, by Robert Paxton. Motion was made by Councilman Schroedel, vacate MINUTES NQ 1034 ments or other necessary easements. The meeting was adjourned by Mayor Smoak at 10:50 P. M. n i � Claude E. Smoak, Jr. Mayor Dolores W. Carroll, Cffy-C er CITY MANAGER'S REPORT At the last Council meeting the improvement of Osceola Street between Eighth Street and West Avenue, was discussed. No action on the recommendation to close the street to through traffic was taken pending the further investigation of other alternatives. In 1968, the Seaboard Coastline Railroad Company quit claimed twenty feet to the city for public use. Since only twenty feet of right-of-way exist, a standard twenty four foot street cannot be constructed. The acquisition of additional right-of-way cannot be accomplished since buildings abut the twenty feet on the south and the railroad tracks abut on the. north. If the right-of-way is improved, the paved, riding surface should be, in this case, at least two and a half feet from the abutting properties. Thus, a width of fifteen feet could be improved. This work could be accomplished by city forces using approximate- ly $1500.00 worth of materials. The project would take approximately three weeks to complete. The most time consuming and costly factor would be the removal of the existing base and replacement with limerock. The riding surface would be surface treatment and not an asphalt cap. One aspect of the project which should not be overlooked is drainage. The street currently falls from west to east. This would probably not change, but the amount of run off would increase. This could, and most likely would, create a drainage problem at Osceola Street and Eighth Street. There is no subsurface drainage facilities to accommodate the water and erosion under the railroad tracks will likely occur. If the Council decides to do the work with city forces, engineering should be done, particularly as it relates to drainage. We cannot run the risk of undermining the railroad tracks. If additional drainage is necessary to accommodate the water, the expense will be significant since the facilities must go under the railroad tracks. Section 5(b) of the City Charter provides that "At any time within three months after any park, street, highway, alley or other way, ditch, drain or gutter is laid out, opened, altered, widened, graded, paved, curbed, extended, dug, constructed or discontinued in the City of Clermont, when in the opinion of the City Council an real estate shall receive an benefit and advanta e therefrom, beyon the eneraT advanta a therefrom to a real estate in the City, THE City Council may a judge and etermine t e value of such benefit and advantage, and may assess on such real estate a proportionate share of the expense of the said improvement, but in no case shall such assessment exceed two-thirds of the amount of such expense, the balance to be borne by bonds for the purpose according to law". The Council should consider the desirability of assessments, particularly if the improvements become extensive. It should be pointed out that the Seaboard Coastline Railroad Company is the sole, northern abutting property owner. Any assessment to the railroad property should be carefully considered in view of 1) the railroad gave the property to the city and 2) the benefits derived would be questionable. If the Council deems it necessary to pursue this improvement, it is recommended that engineering be done to determine necessary drainage improvements. When these factors are known, then decide whether to assess or have the City bear the entire cost of the improvements authorized. And lastly, due to the narrowness of the right-of-way and paved, riding surface, limit the traffic to one way. Page 2 At the last meeting, no action was taken rogarding removal of the swimming pier at Jaycee Beach pending an analysis of the costs involved for replacement. The existing pier is 200 feet long by 8 feet wide. The estimated cost to replace this 1600 square feet of pier with 1) wood at $4.50/square foot is $7,200 and 2) concrete at $6.50/square foot is $10,400. In order to provide for two 50 ft x 6 ft extensions laterally from the pler to accommodate competitive swimming and swim lessons, an additional 500 square feet would be necessary at an additional cost of $2700 for wood and $3900 for concrete. The total cost would he 1) $9900 for wood and 2) $14300 for concrete. In view of the costs involved, it is recommended that the expenditure be considered at budget time. It is further recommended that the existing pier, be razed as it is considered dangerous and beyond repair. At the last meeting the Council approved the expenditure of $500 for the arts and crafts portion of the summer recreation program. it was my understanding that the $500 would cover the program. This was in error. The $500 is the amount necessary for materials. An additional $280 will be necessary for the personnel (7 hrs/day x 5 days/wk x 4 weeks or 140 hrs @ $2/hr). It is recommended that the additional funds be approved and charged to Acct 3-720. On April 21st, I attended a DPC public hearing regarding the FY 75 priority list and funding for sanitary sewer improvements. No substantial changes were made in the staff recommendations. Clermont was 13 on the list of 157 and well "in the money".___ .__...__ Clermont is scheduled to receive $63,030. Arrangements have been made with Orange Service Company, Inc. of Clermont to push and burn 71 trees at the treatment plant area at $3.50 per tree or $243.50. Work will commence within the next three weeks with 30 days allotted for completion of the work. The DOT will hold a public hearing tomorrow night at 7:30 P.M. at the Tavares Civic Center. The public hearing will be in regard to the Proposed Realignment of the State Primary Highway System. In essence, if any Lake County roads are taken out of the Primary Highway System category, the county will need to assume the cost of maintenance. SR 561 is an example of one under consideration. I plan to attend. If any member of the Council wants to go, let me know. On June 11 at 9:30 A.M. at the county courthouse in Tavares, a public hearing will be held regarding the Fire District Plan for Lake County. I plan to attend this meeting. If any member of the Council wants to go with me, let me know. Since the first part of April, we have been attempting to locate a site for the proposed new well in the southwest quadrant of the city. The need for acquisition of a site became apparent when it was determined that Peter Pool Park was not in public owner- ship. Our consulting engineers assumed it was since it was a platted park and had planned to locate the well in a corner of the park. If we are not successful in getting a commitment on a site by the next Council meeting, we will have a recommendation for acquisition. Current plans call for starting the slurry seal resurfacing program on Monday, June 3rd. Prior to commencing the work affected property owners will be notified. Pago 3 And lastly, we have received a letter of resignation from Patrolman David Dykes effective May 31, 1974. Patrolman Dykes Is leaving law enforcement to return to private business. Larry Lord has been employed to replace Patrolman Dykes. Mr. Lord will be employed Linder a waiver granted by the Police Standards [bard and will be attending school in addition to working in order to obtain certification. PhAid4op XsMay 2II, 1974 tiny 28, 1974 Clermont City Council. City Nall Clermont, Florida 32711 RE: LAKESHORE PROPERTY 0,1 LAKE MINNEHAHA Gentlemen: This letter is my commitment to guarantee payment of the cost of a Survey and other incidental expenses incurred in vacating the lakefront property lying between Lake Shore Drive and Lake Minnehaha. This commitment contemplates a Survey of Lake Shore Drive from Lot 9, Riviera Heights to Lot 52, Clermont Neights. Very truly yours, ROBERT PAXTON 430 East Lake Shore Drive Clermont, Florida 32711 i lhI'I)'V'IL'�L I�diS71IR.I) 11:d.1� a) I)L''Gf :I:1 :h:lit^f7i nrrr,n r�r,v� nr r,nw i v�rnn:;nre r in.n �, ary r. ' ornauaurmr, I�'l.ua/u,� nutu reu r�.nua fans a...no� AprLl 9, 1.974 LIEMORANDUM LEGAL OPINION TO: ROBERT PAXTON and GOUT.,'F PA.XT0:1, his or.lf:e, ROBCRT M. HOPKINS, Clermont City Manager, ROBER'1' F. VASON, JR- , Clermont City Attorney and members of the CLERMONT CITY COUPICII, RE: Title to property betweon lake Share Drive and Lake Minnehahn Pursuant to a request from 11r. and Mrs. Robert Paxton and conversations with Clermont City Officials, I submit this as a report on a problem facing several property owners. There are two main questions to be answered: 1. Who owns fee title to the real property lying between what appears to be the right of way of Lake Share Drive and the waters edge of Lake Minnehaha? 2. What can the Clermont City Council do to assure the per- sons who have improved the lake front property and who __ ... presently are using the lake front property that they can continue to enjoy such use without interference? 1. TITLE TO THE PROPERTY The property I am concerned with on behalf of the Paxtons is the lake front lying south of Lots 33, 49 and 50 of Clermont Heights. There are several other parcels that are affected or will be affected in the same manner. Clermont Heights was developed and formally platted by the Lake Highlands Company. - There are several plats on the Public Records of Lake County showing the subdivision - a partial map of Clermont Height's in Plat Book 2, page 24; a plat contained in Plat Book 2, page 25; a plat contained in Plat Book 3, page 3; and a plat contained in Plat Book 4, page 1. The plat contained in Plat Book 4, page 1 is the plat referred to in most legal descriptions. The property also is shown in the map of Clermont as shown .. in Plat Book 8, pages 17 to 23 inclusive. In all of the plats of Clermont and in all subsequent maps of Clermont, the right of way for Lake Shore Drive is shown as going to the edge of the waters of Lake Ifinnehalka. That is, there is no land between Take Shore Drive and Lake Minnehaha. If the plat and maps of Clermont are used as a basis for legal title to the property, it is obvious that the land in question is part of the street right- of way. Lit moat 1.111wa 1.11 Suut:h I,:dw CounLy, Chu State of Plor.lda ownn aLl. of, the :Lake botLom :Lying below Lite menu ItLyh water m:url:. Lit 1.943 na era wan prtam d by Lhu F.Lor.L la LcglAaLure (house Bill. ile. 93(,) ahLcln gave Lite C1ty of CLurmonC 1:1.0.0 to "+'t it * Lill lands .Lying %AL111.11 the LurrLtoriaL l.im:LUI of Lite CLty of Clermont that; lie between the varlou❑ and sevoral sLrnnLn, highways or public ways and Lite high-taaLer marls of Lite variouet and several. :Laken, not owned of record by tiny priva Cu persons ,a * *11 Therefore, tho StaLe of Pl.or.Lda claims no Interest in the :Land. If there was no land bcLwecn Lite street right of way and Lite lade at the brae j of Lite original plat and Lite land area hall, increased in sire because of ncctrution, the additional land has become a part of the original land; which :in this case would be a part of the streut right: of way. The Florida Supreme Court han held that a city street right of way can be increased by accreeion. See PRATER v. BAYLER STREET kgLARF Co. Fla. 49 So. 188. The same reasoning is used in other states. See 91 A.L.R. 2d 857. i The last question arising concerning title to the land is whether Lake (Highlands Company retained any ownership in the land lying between the street and the lake be- cause it is not shown on Lite plats. This will be discussed later in this memo. In summary, it is my opinion that title to the property lying between the ap ved portion of Lake Shore Drive and Lake Minnehatia is street ri;;liL of way and Lhere is no land :Lying between Lhe right of way and the lake. And it is my opinion that Lite leases the City of Clermont has given L•o persons owning property along Lake Shore Drive are subject to aL'tack and the casements given have been of no legal consequence. CONVEYANCE OF 'TITLE The most pressing problem facing Mr. and Mrs. Paxton is the same problem facing several other property owners along Lake Shore Drive - How can they be assured of continued enjoyment of the lake front in the future now that they have such a tremen- dous investment on the property? If the position is held that all of the land lying between the ap ved portion of Lake Shore Drive and Lake Minnehaha is street right of way, then the position must be maintained that the City cannot sell L-he property since it cannot sell a street. how- ever, the City can vacate a street or a portion of a street and, in my opinion, this would be the approach to false. Although this memo is being written on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Paxton, it is my opinion that the Clermont- City Council should consider this problem as it affects -2- all. propur.ty uwrlelsi nlong i,aku shore l:rLva who do not. own tbu lake i.'rout. I:li the Claymont Cl1:y Cuunci.l attempted to vncutc a purtlon of Lnku .';hero 1)Vlvice ,just fur Mr. and tire. 11uxt:on, the action probably wuuld hu 1..Augal. uLncu :,tracta rlr.e bald in trust far the benefit of tha public and a city caunoL vur_ut:e a ❑Lraet "for the benefit of a purees private :hiterl'uL". RONLY IiIV.CO_ v. CL'Cl' 013i•II:VIL36ACI1, F.lu., 1.74 Su. 26. i(oraver, a city can vacate u stret o er portion of n sireut nt LIw request of a ptivate individuul. or private :LndLvLdual.:; "whun dano In the intereut of the general welfare" HURT v. LEINCHUCK, Flu. 223 So. 2d 350. A good example of closLng u street at the rcdlteut of a private. individual or buuinasr, which was for tile general welfare was the closing of: a portion of .lunlata Street at the request of Konsler Steel. It should be pointed out that a continued beautification of Lake Shore Drive and continued payment of taxes for lake front property would be for the gunera.L welfare of Clermont. Mr. and Mrs. Parton suggest that the city of Clermont have ❑ survey made showing a suitable right of way for Lake Shore Drive. They are willing to pay their fair share of the survey. Then it is suggested tilat the portion of Lake Shore Drive lying South of the surveyed right of way be vacated. The ordinance vacating the Southern portion of the right of way should state that the vacated properly would go to the property owner abutting Lake Shore Drive to the North. The City of Clermont then would be requested to give quit claim deeds to tile property owners in which the specific parcels of lakefront property are described. --- The quit claim deeds would be requested purely as a form of disclaimer by the cLty and not as a conveyance of a specific interest, since the sale of real. property by the city must be by public sale. A quit claim deed disclaiming any interest in tile properly in favor of the property owner would be sufficient and would prevent the city from making any claim to the property in the future. CITY OF TARPON SPRItJGS v. Y.00H, Fla., 142 So. 2d 763. .. In my opinion tile property owners on Lake Shore Drive still would have one title question to answer or one title problem to resolve. The Lake highlands Company dedicated the street and at the time owned to the water's edge of Lake Minnehaha. If the position is taken that there is land lying between Lake Shore Drive and Lake Minnehaha that is not a part of the street right of way, then the position also must be taken that title to (or at least a reversionary interest in) the land is held by Lake Highlands Company. It should be pointed out that the 1943 act of the Florida Legislature did nothing along Lake Shore Drive except disclaim any interest by the state since even the State of Florida cannot sell what it doesn't own. Lake Highlands Company now is a dissolved corporation and the last known directors are dead or unknown. If the Clermont City Council agrees with my request as outlined above and the above procedures are followed, I still would petition the Circuit Court in Lake County to appoint a trustee for the purpose of executing a quit claim deed to -3- thy:: propor.ty. Florida Statute 608.30(6). The pcoocdure .L•r quLLc: evimpLe cutd It wOnl.d bo Lwr.e effective and 17ar .Eery expeuoivi: Chan +t quint Ll.tl.0 su:LC. CONCLUSION There r.trc ruveral compelling ro.asuns why it would be to the betterment of the general welfare of Lila conmrunLL'y to grant Lltc above rcgi.tests. They are: A. Lake Shore Drive :Ls one of the most beautiful streets 1.11 L,ake County and placing title to the lake front In the proper perrons would assure the continued maintenance and beauty. B. The boat houses are not on the property in question but are In the lake on State property, so most of the property in question is used as a means of access to boathouses and/or beautification of the area. C. The City of Clermont, Florida has no need for the lake front now nor can a need be foreseen in the future. E. If the property is owned by private individuals, the City will be assured that it will not have to maintain the lake front in the future. F. The affected property owners are paying taxes on the im- provements On the property and probably on the property itself. Plost of the taxes paid cannot be recouped. G. The serious problems that have arisen in the past would be eliminated. This memo is one person's opinion but is based on hours of title examination and legal research. It is submitted only on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Paxton but I do sug gent- that the Council consider all property owners affected along Lake Shore Drive (and other streets, if applicable). I would submit that the affected property owners should be required to pay only the actual costs Incurred by the City since most of them have paid a considerable amount in taxes and maintenance over the past years and will continue to do so. Also, I doubt that the City can charge for a street vacation. Respectfully submitted, - GEORGE E. 110VIS -4-