Commissioners deadlock on Panther Street vacation after residents warn of flooding, litigation; item continued to March 25

Seminole County commissioners on Feb. 25 were unable to reach a final decision on a petition to vacate a 672.6-foot portion of Panther Street in the Black Hammock area, instead voting to continue the public hearing to a date certain, March 25.

Caitlin Apgar, planning and development services, told the board the petition by Joshua and Sarah Lewis seeks to abandon an unimproved segment of Panther Street so the land can be conveyed to Lot 144/1000 Elm Street. Apgar said the proposed area is 672.6 feet long, 25 feet wide (16,812.5 square feet), that Duke Energy requires a 10-foot easement across the area, and that county engineering is reserving a 25-foot drainage easement over the entire tract. Apgar said the request complies with the county's vacating procedures under section 35.184 of the Seminole County Land Development Code and related authority noted in the application materials.

Neighbors opposed the request at the hearing. Tara Merritt, who said she lives at 1580 Panther Street, asked the board to deny the petition and said residents rely on the right of way to preserve access and future county options for drainage. Michael Prazutti, who said his property borders the vacated area, showed a survey and said fences, gates and other structures encroach into the right of way and that the community faces recurring flooding that could be worsened if public access is removed. Others, including Alicia Prazutti and Lawrence Capone, described rising groundwater levels and said relinquishing county rights now could impede future drainage fixes.

The applicants' attorney, Philip Capro, asked the board to approve the vacation and replace the public right of way with easements for drainage and utilities, arguing that an explicit easement for drainage would preserve the county's ability to address flooding while resolving the encroachment issue. Applicant Sarah Lewis, who resides at 1000 Elm Street, said she and her family have maintained the area since the 1980s and urged approval, saying an explicit drainage easement would let the county perform work if needed while preserving her family's privacy.

Board discussion focused on three topics raised by residents and staff: the presence of existing unpermitted structures in the mapped right of way, the fact much of the subject area is wetland that would require mitigation for any county-built drainage improvements, and ongoing basin drainage studies covering the Black Hammock area. County staff and the county attorney confirmed that a condition of a vacation would be the granting of utility and drainage easements to the county, and that easements preserve the county's ability to perform work; staff also said code enforcement and building divisions could address alleged unpermitted structures in the right of way.

An initial motion to approve the vacation and adopt a resolution was moved and seconded but failed on a 2-2 vote (tally recorded in the minutes as yes=2, no=2). With the application still pending and no majority decision, the board later adopted a motion to continue the item to March 25 to allow a full board discussion and to give staff time to notify participants and coordinate with code enforcement; that continuance passed by a recorded margin of 3–1. Staff said several basin studies are under way and expected to be completed by the end of the year, and that most of the subject strip is wetland, meaning any future county project would likely involve mitigation and permitting requirements.

The board directed staff to notify all parties who were present for the hearing, work with code enforcement on the alleged structures in the right of way, and return the item on March 25 with any updated information.

Clarifying details from the staff record and public comments: the vacated subject area is 672.6 feet long by 25 feet wide (16,812.5 sq ft); Duke Energy requires a 10-foot easement across the area; Seminole County Engineering requires a 25-foot drainage easement over the entire area; staff said the vacate application asserts the conveyance would not landlock adjacent properties; staff cited compliance with Seminole County Land Development Code section 35.184 (per the staff presentation). The county attorney and engineering staff said much of the right-of-way area is wetland and mitigation would be required for impacts, and that code enforcement would handle alleged unpermitted fences, gates or stands in the public right of way.

The item remains open and will be heard again on March 25. The board asked county staff to notify residents who spoke on Feb. 25 and to coordinate with code enforcement and engineering ahead of the next hearing.