BCC MEETING MINUTES

A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

JUNE 20, 1989

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, April 20, 1989, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Courthouse, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: C. W. "Chick" Gregg, Chairman: Richard Swartz; Michael J. Bakich; and Don Bailey. Others present were: Christopher C. Ford, County Attorney; Ava Kronz, Assistant to the County Manager; Robert K. McKee, Chief Deputy Clerk; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.

Commr. Bakich gave the Invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commr. Swartz.

MINUTES

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of June 6, 1989, and June 13, 1989, as presented.

APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COUNTY EMPLOYEES/LIBRARIES

RESOLUTIONS

Commr. Gregg presented Ms. Mary W. McMahon, Library Coordinator, who had resigned, a plaque and resolution honoring her part-time and full-time service to the citizens of Lake County since 1982.

CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS

CLERK OF COURT'S CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:

Accounts Allowed/Indigents

Request for payment of Warrant No. 95309 through Warrant No. 95710 for the following accounts:

Landfills Pasco Fire District

South Lake Fire District General Revenue

Bassville Fire District County Transportation Trust

Mosquito Control Aquatic Weed

Countywide Library Emergency 911 Fund

Countywide Fire District Revenue Sharing

Capital Outlay Fine & Forfeiture

Section a Private Industry Council

Mt. Plymouth Fire District Northwest Fire District

Eustis Section 8 Paisley Fire District

Road Impact Law Enforcement Trust Fund

Law Library Northeast Ambulance

Northwest Ambulance

Included in the motion was approval of the following indigents:

Sumter Electric for Kathryn R. Davis - $35.00 - District #l

Velma Walker for Kathryn R. Davis - $50.00 - District #1

Sumter Electric for Dorothy Mullett - $34.44 - District #l

Shelly Taylor - Tom Grizzard, Inc. for Thomas Lindsey

$50.00 - District #l

Mary L. Smith for Pearlie L. Taylor - $50.00 - District #2

Bonds - Contractor

Request for approval of the following Contractor Bond:

4733-89 Michael Haydn Arnett (Electrical)

Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges

Request to approve Satisfaction of Judgment for William M. Crider and William W. Crider, in the amount of $50.00 - Case No. 870947-CJ.

Accounts Allowed/Assessments/Subdivisions

Request to approve the following Satisfaction of Assessment Liens, and authorized proper signatures on same:

Lake View Heights, 2nd Addition

F. J. & Bessie M. Howell $ 731.68

F. J. & Bessie M. Howell 969.23

Sorrento Ranchos Pelan Park

David A. & Patricia Greene 3,298.03

St.Johns Waterfront Estate

Henry McAlister 294.64

Hilltop Subdivision, No. 3

H. B. Turpening & Agnes Savicky 700.31

Woodland Hills Subdivision

John E. & Joyce E. Parker 319.02

Mt. Plymouth Subdivision

Sylvia & Mayer Investments 476.53

Sylvia & Mayer Investments 476.54

Astor Forest Campsites

Ralph W. & Geneva Nichols 1,862.94

Donald V. & Marjorie Fluty & Billie Jean Hunt 915.75

Jean H. Libbra 1,161.75

Amy Whiteside Chote 166.00

Harold E. & Carol Calvert & Darlene C. Calvert 915.75

Harold Eugene & Carol Calvert 915.75

Harold Eugene & Carol Jane Calvert 915.75

J. D. & H. Louise Hale 1,147.54

James Patrick & Donna Tasker 1,254.74

Richard & Carol Peake 1,161.75

Reubena I. Bell & Sandra K. Dickinson 1,527.00

Gary L. & Alice I. Miller 1,099.44

Astor Forest Campsites 1,098.90

Steven A. & Linda J. Hill 1,643.20

Astor Forest Campsites 1.351.88

Bill G. & Lossie F. Hester 1,145.35

Kelton C. & Joyce Y. Bruce 1,145.25

Allen J. or Ann C. Capley 1,679.70

American Family Group 1,288.16

Gary F. & Betty J. Fassett 1,145.25

Frank A. & Evelyn E. Huster 1,679.70

Roy C. & Elizabeth A. Meade 1,161.75

Roy C. & Elizabeth A. Meade 580.88

Ronald L. & Betty McNeice 1,161.75

Theora B. McNeice & Ronald L. & Betty J. McNeice 1,161.75

Ronald L. & Betty McNeice 1,161.75

Richard & Carol Peake 580.88

Harold L. & France Wolcott 915.75

Ronald P. & Carol Emerson 1,161.75

Arthur F. & Fannie N. Jones 1,862.94

Florence C. Reynolds 915.75

Frederick A. & Violet Wichterman 915.75

Robert C. & Elda M. Munson 1,161.75

Donald V. & Marjorie Fluty & Billie Jean Hunt 915.75

Stuart P. & Dorothy S. Culpepper 1,783.99

Fred R. & Sylvia S. Pinner 1,172.88

Wendell & Catherine Eisentrout 1,145.25

Roy H. Cox 1,098.90

Emmett L. Harmon 1,161.75

Mary E. Pierce 1,243.59

Robert C. Horn 915.75

Charlie V. & Martha A. Jones 1,145.25

Earl W. & Norma J. Ziebarth, Jr. 1,145.25

Kenneth B. & Patricia M. Ross 1,679.70

Fred & Donna J. Dross 1,420.19

Fred & Donna J. Dross 1,573.89

Eugene W. & Emily Haft 779.69

Joseph M. & Jean M. Petrock 1,145.25

Watt & Elaine Howard 1,249.09

Watt & Elaine Howard 1,145.25

V. P. & Wilhelmina J. Hickenbottom 1,161.75

Anthony C. Nolke, Jr. 38.175

Kelton C. & Joyce Y. Bruce 2,356.62

Lynn J. Taylor, Sr. 2,442.00

Charles R. & Julia Thigpin 1,374.30

Florence P. Clark 1,908.75

Nelson W. Knode 928.42

Elmon & Shirley Meadors 1,221.00

Joseph E. Fowler, Sr. 1,832.40

Raymond E. & Virginia Custer 1,679.70

John E. & Phyllis J. Brown 2,076.72

Arthur P. & Joyce D. Eunice 1,862.94

John E. & Phyllis J. Brown 1,679.70

Philip B. & Margaret A. Deere 721.05

Homer R. & Forence M. Cody 1,145.25

Homer R. & Forence M. Cody 1,146.25

Louis J. & Martha E. Slima 1,145.25

Charles W. & Betty J. Hamrick 1,679.70

Edward J. Swed 1,221.00

Richard D. & Inge R. Smith, Jr. 1,145.25

Jim Noland, et al 1,145.25

Robert & Lyliane Adjemian 1,862.94

Jerry F. & Margie A. Stone 1,288.16

Walstein M. & Vera M. Hilton 1,161.75

William D. Alexander 915.75

Carl E. & Helen G. Duble 1,145.25

William Hippenstiel 1,161.75

Mabel G. & Joseph Mabry, Sr. 1,365.62

Thomas J. ti Wilma P. Adams 1,088.45

Thomas J. & Wilma Pi. Adams 763.50

Thomas J. & Wilma P. Adams 457.88

Joseph Faircloth 2,061.45

Charleen Barnett 1,161.75

James H. & Thelma Galloway 1,145.25

Marjorie B. Gendel & Donald E. Slack 1,099.44

Alfred C. Dobbelaere & Marie Hardy 976.80

John & Edna Erdelyan 1,214.23

David C. & Karen A. Togliatti 1,230.89

David C. & Karen A. Togliatti 974.85

John H. & Ethel H. Winburn, Jr. 1,161.75

Robby F. & Kathleen Tanner 1,832.40

Charles H. & Myrtle L. Grant 915.75

Barbara, Judith Ann, Syford, and Clay Durrance 1,145.25

Lawrence D. Davis & Earl B. Thacker 1,288.16

V. P. & Wilhelmina J. Hickenbottom 1,161.75

v. P. L Wilhelmina J. Hickenbottom 1,161.75

William D. L Louise W. Chandler 1,145.25

Ernest E. L Bonnie Tudor 1,288.16

William E. L Ruby C. Parsons 1,145.25

J. Travis & Linda S. Cooper 1,288.16

Paul Forrester 1,847.67

John J. L Mary R. Slimo 1,161.75

Graydon F. L Shirley C. Corn 1,527.00

Henry Earl & Geraldine J. Rowland 1,145.23

Frank L Irene M. Kain 1,679.70

Frank L Betty Stripland 1,161.75

George H. L Betty I. Dirlam 458.10

George H. L Betty I. Dirlam 1,145.25

John E. L Wilma T. O'Brien 1,679.70

Douglas H. L Etta B. Wilkinson 1,801.86

Dennis L. Alsobrook 915.75

Edward L Dorothy E. Wilkenshoff 1,288.16

Dennis L. Alsobrook 913.75

C. G. L Mary Jo Barry, Sr. 1,099.44

Sally W. Meeks 1,527.00

Christine Barringer 1,099.44

Melmoth L Dovie W. Rivers 1,068.90

Alvah L. & Irman J. Harman 915.75

Rudolph C. L Joanne Nelson 1,161.75

Rudolph C. L Joanne M. Nelson 1,679.70

Joe L Lillien Surber 1,145.25

William D. L Louise W. Chandler 1,054.85

Larue Ginter 610.50

Larue & Julia M. Ginter 954.38

Laure L Julia M. Ginter 2,290.50

Mills E. L Ann James, Jr. 1,679.70

James M. L Mary W. Maples 1,161.75

William E. L Ruby C. Parsons 1,309.40

Jack D. L Helen J. Cook 1,229.60

Theodore E. L Elizabeth J. Cooper 1,801.86

Harold G. L Betty J. Higgins & Craig L Sue B. Marsh,

W. J. L Trellis W. Burks 1,145.25

Fred G. & Maxine P. Dengler 1,145.25

W. M. Hilton 915.75

Fred G. & Maxine P. Dengler 679.12

W. M. Hilton 915.75

Fred G. & Maxine P. Dengler 600.26

Delmus D. & Myrtle M. Raulerson 1,145.25

Jesse S. Maxwell 1,161.75

George W. & Ann L. Vinson 1,679.70

Muriel C. Sims & Norman F. Perry 915.69

Muriel C. Sims & Norman F. Perry 915.75

Howard H. & Freda Ferguson 1,603.35

Howard H. & Freda Ferguson 610.50

Howard H. & Freda Ferguson 801.68

Charles W. Satcher & Joy W. Satcher, Trustees 1,183.49

Dewey C. & Shirley Wilkey 1,145.25

Ralph G. & Mary Frances Huff 854.70

Henry E. & Jessie L. Graham 1,172.88

Harrell B. & Margaret L. Rawlins 457.88

Harrell B. & Margaret L. Rawlins 867.40

Delma P . & Maude S. Mobley 1,557.54

Russell & Marlene H. Dupree 1,145.25

Alvah L. & Irma J. Harman 915.75

Theodore T. & Joyce L. Petrovits 915.75

James Edward & Jennie Ann Thurman 1,161.75

Franklin A. & Margaret A. Hagins 1,145.25

William F. & Evie W. Hagins, Jr. 1,145.25

Pearl & Christine McCreary 2,137.80

Paul G. Faircloth 1,679.70

Paul G. Faircloth 1,717.88

Thomas V. & Dickee Cook 1,161.75

John P. & Kathy H. Wheeler 1,145.25

Clark F. & Nicole M. Blakenship 1,862.94

Diego Terraria 1,145.25

Edward A. & Betty R. Beldin, Trustees 1,969.51

Dennis L. & Linda J. Crawford 1,145.25

Kenneth G. & Lorene S. Rice 1,145.25

Roy Marvin Hagins 1,145.25

Kenneth M., Ruth E., and Kris L. Nelson 915.75

Mavis & Will Culpepper, Jr. 1,756.05

Jack R. & Helen I. Lynady 915.75

Mavis & William B. Culpepper, Jr. 1,756.05

Jack R. & Helen Lynady 1,221.00

Theodore T. & Joyce L. Petrovits 915.75

Pearl McCreary 1,221.00

Harding Morgan 1,679.70

Marvin R. & Shirley Clark 1,288.16

Joel V. McCall, Jr. 1,145.25

Herman E. & Hazel E. Reaves 1,115.47

James D. & Katherin D. Parker 1,425.57

Thomas V. & Dickee Cook 1,183.90

Pearl McCreary 1,221.00

Budgets/Sheriff's Department

Request to acknowledge receipt of the Lake County Sheriff's Tentative Budget, for Fiscal Year 1989-90.

Budgets/Property Appraiser

Request to acknowledge receipt of the Lake County Property Appraiser's Tentative Budget, for Fiscal Year 1989-90.

Budgets/Elections

Request to acknowledge receipt of the Lake County Supervisor of Elections' Tentative Budget, for Fiscal Year 1989-90.

Budgets/Clerk

Request to acknowledge receipt of the Lake County Clerk of Circuit Court's Tentative Budget for Fiscal Year 1989-90.

CLERK'S OTHER BUSINESS

PROPERTY APPRAISER/MEETINGS

After a brief discussion regarding the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board, the Board tentatively set September 25-27, 1989, as the dates for said Board to meet.

No action was needed at this time.

ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/CONTRACTS LEASES & AGREEMENTS

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved and authorized proper signatures on the Termination Agreement between Mid-Florida Telephone and Lake County. It was noted by the County Attorney that Mid-Florida would receive $5,OOO.OO, as full consideration for cancellation of the contract.

COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:

Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Environmental Services

State Agencies

Request for approval of "Cooperator" Agreement, with the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, for boating improvements at Marsh Park, and authorized proper signatures on same.

Landfills/Environmental Services/State Agencies

Request for authorization to submit permit application to the Department of Environmental Regulation, for construction of an ash monofill.

Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Environmental Services

State Agencies

Request for approval of Household Hazardous Waste Collection Agreement with the Department of Environmental Regulation, and authorized proper signatures on same.

Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Environmental Services

Water Resources

Request for approval of Annual Joint Funding Agreement with the United States Geological Survey for hydrologic monitoring of selected lakes and river systems in Lake County, and authorized proper signatures on same.

Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Environmental Services

Water Authority

Request for approval of contracts with Post, Buckley, Schuh and Jernigan, Inc., to prepare Water and Wastewater Master Plans for Lake County, and authorized proper signatures on same.

Accounts Allowed/Budget Transfers/Public Health

Request for a transfer of funds from Contingency, in the amount of $14,345.00, to cover reclassification and salary adjustment previously approved for Welfare Administration.

Budgets/Libraries/State Agencies

Request for approval of revised Library System Budget for Fiscal Year 1988-89, due to the receipt of State Aid monies.

Accounts Allowed/Public Health

Request from Lake-Sumter Emergency Medical Services, to purchase ten (10) stretchers, at an estimated cost of $716.00 each.

Accounts Allowed/Road Projects/Subdivisions

Request for payment No. 1, to Rix Construction, for Project No. SA-61, Haines Creek Heights Subdivision, in the amount of $55,336.00.

Accounts Allowed/Road Projects

Request for payment No. 5, to Trac Roadbuilders, Inc., for Project No. 6-88, C-473, Widening and Resurfacing, in the amount of $79,931.70.

Deeds/Roads-County & State

Request to release the following Murphy Act Deed reservation:

No. 360 - 50 feet from centerline on C-42 - Lillina L. Lappe and Herschel Locke, Jr. - Paisley Area

Right-of-Ways, Roads & Easements

Request to accept the following Non-Exclusive Easements:

Trent C. Clutts and Rebecca B. Clutts - Robbins Road

ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/BUDGET TRANSFERS/PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT

Commr. Swartz stated that he had asked this request to be deleted from the County Manager's Consent Agenda, in order for it to be discussed separately. He stated that what concerns him is the fact that at the last Board Meeting, the Board approved funding for renovation in the Old Courthouse, of which some of said funding was to be shared by Environmental Services, as well as Planning and Development - then, the very next week there is a budget request for an additional $40,000.00. He was somewhat perplexed as to why the County would go forward, assuming that there was monies in division accounts for remodeling, but did not have monies to deal with the request that must have been in mind in the area of Addressing.

Mr. John Swanson, Director of Planning and Development, appeared before the Board and responded to Commr. Swartz's concern regarding the request, stating that the funding arrangement was that funds for the remodeling would come from Environmental Services and the Planning Department, particularly the Planning Department, if available. The Planning Department's budget, particularly in the salary account, is running very, very tight, based on the $85,000.00 unanticipated expense in the Addressing Department. At this particular time the Planning Department will not have any monies, at all, to contribute towards renovation of the third floor area.

Discussion occurred regarding this issue, at which time several Commissioners made comments.

Mr. Lonnie Strickland, Director of Health and General Services, appeared before the Board to give further input regarding the request, stating that when Addressing was budgeted last year, it was not budgeted for expenditures which they have encumbered through the year in bringing Addressing to the point where it is now. Additional staffing was brought on board, and was done through Mr. Swanson's departmental budget, however, budget transfers for said changes were never made. This is the reason for the request before the Board this date.

Commr. Swartz requested that, in the future, as recommendations are brought before the Board, before commitments are made, for department heads to make absolutely sure that funds are available in said departments' budgets to handle said commitments, in order to prevent department heads from having to reappear before the Board for additional funding, after original requests have been approved.

Commr. Bakich then questioned Mr. Bob McKee, Chief Deputy Clerk, as to what the balance of the County's Contingency Fund is, to which Mr. McKee responded that, if all requests for budget transfers before the Board this date are approved, the Contingency Fund will have a balance of approximately $262,000.00 remaining. It was noted that said balance would not include the reimbursement from E911, as well as other encumbrances which had previously been authorized by the Board, however, amendments had never been made regarding same.

Commr. Bakich advised Division Directors, with the Contingency balance being what it is, to use a great deal of discretion in future requests, as said funds can be expended very quickly before the fiscal year is up.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request to transfer $40,000.00 from the Contingency fund to Planning and Development's budget, due to unanticipated Addressing expenses.

Commr. Swartz then questioned Mr. Swanson and Mr. Strickland as to whether the County was going to be able to get through and get the system on line, within the funds that are now budgeted for E911 and Addressing, to which Mr. Swanson responded that, based on information received from Personnel, the request before the Board this date should carry his department through, on the Personnel Services Account, for the remaining portion of the year. Mr. Strickland stated that, as far as E911 goes, the only consideration being looked at, at this point in time, are some modifications to the existing EMS console, however, it is not something that is desperately needed. Mr. Strickland stated that, as far as E911 is concerned, they are still projecting an August hookup date.

ROAD CLOSINGS - PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE

PETITION NO. 548 - JOSEPH S. FOSGATE - CLERMONT AREA

Commr. Swartz stated that, due to this request being an extensive road vacation, he felt that the Board needed to address it and decide whether to go forward with it, due to the possibility of said property not having any access, with all the roads to it being closed. The Board reviewed an aerial map, indicating said roads being vacated.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request to advertise Road Vacation Petition No. 548, from Joseph S. Fosgate, to vacate tracts and right-of-ways, in the Plat of Lake Highlands Company, in the Clermont area.

Included in the motion was approval of the request to advertise Road Vacation Petition No. 550, from Robert G. Foget, to vacate Pershing Road and unnamed road, in Section 14, Township 19 and Range 25, in the Tavares area, being that said request was similar to the above request.

PUBLIC HEARINGS - ROAD CLOSINGS

Petition No. 545 - Terrence & Ernestine Browning - Eustis Area

No one present in the audience wished to discuss the request with the Board.

It was noted that the proper proof of publication was on hand as it appeared in the May 25, 1989, and June 1, 1989, editions of The Orlando Sentinel, The Lake Sentinel.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request to vacate roads and lots, in the plat of Riley Health Sanitarium Grounds, in the Eustis area, as advertised in Petition No. 545, by Terrence and Ernestine Browning.

Petition No. 549 - Ralph D. Suggs - Montverde Area

No one present in the audience wished to discuss the request with the Board, however, discussion occurred among the Commissioners and Mr. Suggs regarding his request to vacate roads, alleys and lots, in the Edgewater Beach Subdivision, at which time Mr. Suggs stated that said request depended on what the outcome was concerning Case No. 89-89-3, scheduled to be heard at the Rezoning Meeting, at 2:00 p.m. this date, therefore, would request postponement until after his rezoning request is heard.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved postponement of the above stated request until after Case No. 89-89-3 is heard at the Rezoning Meeting this date.

COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS

BIDS/POLLUTION CONTROL

Mr. Don Findell, Director of Environmental Services, appeared before the Board to explain the request, stating that the requested piece of equipment is necessary in order to analyze total organic carbons. He stated that his department is currently conducting landfill samples quarterly, at a minimum, and even more often when DER requires it. He stated that samples are currently being sent out to private labs to be analyzed, at a cost of approximately $35- 60,000.00, and that said cost will increase as a new landfill, as well as the ash monofill in Astatula, is constructed.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request for authorization to seek bids for the purchase of a Total Organic Carbon Analyzer, for the Pollution Control Lab.

ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/BUDGET TRANSFERS/LIBRARIES

Mr. Lonnie Strickland, Director of Health and General Services, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, stating that approximately one to one and a half months ago Library Services was moved from their existing office space in the old County Manager's Office on the fourth floor of the Courthouse, to office space several blocks away from the Courthouse. He stated that, at the time of the move, they were in the process of getting their computer installed, on the first floor of the Courthouse, and Ms. McMahon was having to make several trips a day from her office to the Courthouse, in order to load and unload information. Discussion had occurred, at that time, as to what alternatives could be done to alleviate the situation and they came to the conclusion that a multiplexor needed to be purchased for Ms. McMahon to utilize at her present office, thereby, saving man hours in traveling from her office to the Courthouse.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request for a transfer of funds, from Contingency, in the amount of $9,078.00, in order to purchase a multiplexor, for the County Library System.

ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/MUNICIPALITIES/ROAD PROJECTS

Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, appeared before the Board to explain the request, stating that last year the Board approved an agreement between the County and D.O.T., to have an engineering study done for six laning approximately one mile of Hwy 441/27, north of Leesburg, based on a D.O.T. estimate, in the amount of approximately $250,000.00. However, after the study was done, the consultant that was chosen, for the project, came up with a figure of $332,232.00, which will include engineering drawings, so that it can be put out to bid when funds become available. He stated that what is being requested this date, is the difference between the two figures, amounting to $82,232.00, needed to cover the additional cost of engineering. He stated that he submitted, for the record, a letter to D.O.T. asking them to explain why there was a shortage on their end. He stated that he would like to proceed with the project, noting that it will take approximately one year to do the study. He also stated that most of the funding will come out of next year's budget - that approximately 25% would come out of this year's budget and the remainder (75%) out of next year's budget.

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request for additional funds to be allocated, for the engineering on U.S. 27/441's six (6) lane project, in Leesburg, at a cost of $82,232.00, from impact fees, District III.

COMMISSIONER'S BUSINESS

CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS/OUTDOOR RECREATION

Commr. Swartz brought up for discussion and review the item of a draft interlocal agreement, to be used in conjunction with the disbursement of recreational funds, for Lake County, asking the Board to review the draft and make any comments regarding it, in order that it may be approved.

Commr. Gregg stated that the only concern he had was the issue of charging different rates for the different cities, however, felt that it could be resolved at the time the interlocal agreement is negotiated.

Commr. Swartz stated that he realized this could be a possible problem, therefore, only indicated those programs where said funds would be used. He also requested that Item No. 4, in the Agreement, be changed to state that if the funds allocated pursuant to this agreement are not expended by the City by the end of Fiscal Year 1989-90 (rather than expended within twelve months of the execution of the Agreement), for the purposes enumerated, that said funds be immediately returned to the County.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the draft of the Interlocal Agreement for Recreation Funding, as submitted and amended by Commr. Swartz.

COMMISSIONERS/MEETINGS/STATE AGENCIES

Commr. Gregg informed the Board, for informational purposes only, that at the State Association of County Commissioner's Board Meeting, on June 16, 1989, there was a discussion regarding the effort on behalf of the Counties to lobby some of the Bills that did not get approved by the Legislature this year. He stated that he brought back some information from the meeting, regarding what did transpire, and would see that each Commissioner received a copy.

STATE AGENCIES/WATER RESOURCES

Commr. Gregg brought the Board up-to-date regarding the Department of Community Affairs and what occurred on June 19, 1989, with the tour of the Wekiva Basin. He stated that he felt a lot was accomplished and that Mr. Swanson, Director of Planning and Development, and his staff did a good job in organizing the tour. He stated that representatives from DCA also went on the tour and were very complimentary of the effort and time that Lake County has put into the Basin and what the County is trying to accomplish. He felt they were, now, more aware of some of the problems that the County is faced with, therefore, felt that the County is getting closer to resolving the issue.

CLERK

Commr. Gregg brought up for discussion the issue of Mr. James C. Watkins, Clerk, remaining as Acting County Manager after the July 1, 1989 deadline. He stated that he and Mr. Watkins discussed the matter and that Mr. Watkins stated he would be willing to stay on board beyond the deadline date, if he were compensated, in the amount of $2,500.00 per month, starting July 1, 1989. He noted that the Board had compensated Mr. Watkins, up to this point, by contributing $17,500.00 towards his retirement.

Commr. Gregg stated that he felt there was some necessity for compensation, however, would leave the decision up to the Board. He stated that, in his opinion, Mr. Watkins has done a good job of managing the County, in the interim time period, and feels that no one can critize what he has accomplished in that time period. He stated that, if Mr. Watkins stays on board as Acting County Manager, that he needs to have reaffirmant from the Board that he would have all the authority of County Manager, in working with staff.

Commr. Bakich stated that, personally, he would not argue with the job that Mr. Watkins has done, however, had some difficulty with the fact that, early on, Mr. Watkins had informed the Board that he would be willing to work with them, with no compensation. He stated that he felt Mr. Watkins has been fairly compensated, up to this point, and also felt that the Board needed to lean more on Division Directors. He also had some difficulty with the fact that Mr. Watkins will not even be in town, for the better part of July, due to vacation time. He felt that the Board, during the interim period, needs to lean more on Division Directors and make them more accountable for their responsibilities.

Commr. Gregg stated that, when the Board agreed to compensate Mr. Watkins by contributing to his retirement, he did not think either the Board or Mr. Watkins realized that it would be for this length of time. He felt the Board added a lot of additional responsibility to Mr. Watkins, and that he handled it very well.

Commr. Bailey questioned the time frame involved for having a County Manager on board, to which Commr. Gregg responded within thirty (30) to sixty (60) days.

Commr. Bakich informed the Board that Mr. Robert Slavin, who the Board has hired to locate candidates for the County Manager's position, will be submitting approximately ten (10) to twelve (12) applicants' names to the Board on Thursday, June 22, 1989. These applicants will, supposedly, already have had reference checks done on them, therefore, will be the best applicants for the job. He.stated that Mr. Slavin understands the time frame that the Board is faced with and the need to get someone on board, and that he seems very optimistic that someone will be hired by the end of July, or the first of August, 1989.

Commr . Swartz stated that he, too, thought when Mr. Watkins came on board, as Acting County Manager, that he was doing so to help out, based on the fact that the County was in a difficult situation. Later it was determined that the Board would compensate him for the additional time and duties that he had contributed, by contributing to his retirement fund. He voiced a concern that there are a lot of other employees in the system who have been carrying a lot of the load, as well as Mr. Watkins. He stated that he had spoken with Mr. Watkins recently, regarding him staying on board as Acting County Manager, and that there was no mention of additional compensation at that time. He felt that the compensation that had been contributed to Mr. Watkins' retirement was going to be adequate for him to stay on board for another 30 to 60 days. He also stated that, if it were not for the fact that Mr. Watkins was going to be out of town most of July, he would vote to pay him the $2,500.00, however, being that he is, he cannot justify the additional compensation. He then suggested that the Board authorize Commr. Gregg, as Chairman, to speak with Mr. Watkins, regarding him staying on board as Acting County Manager, without compensation, when he returns from the Clerk's Conference on Thursday, June 22, 1989. If Mr. Watkins chooses not to stay on board, without compensation, then feels the Board should authorize the Chairman and Vice-Chairman to sit in on necessary meetings with staff, in preparation of the agenda, until a County Manager is brought on board.

It was the consensus of the Board that the Chairman speak to Mr. Watkins, relating the Board's feelings, as stated above, when he returns from the Clerk's Conference on Thursday, June 22, 1989.

No action was taken at this time.

MENTAL HEALTH

Ms. Judith Phillis, Program Supervisor, Health and Rehabilitative Services, District III Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Program Office, appeared before the Board stating that she was present today, along with two representatives which the Board had appointed to the District III Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Planning Council, and they were asking the Board's approval of the 1989-91 District III Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Plan.

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved the 1989-91 District III Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Plan, as requested by Ms. Phyllis, Program Supervisor.

COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS (CONT'D.)

FIRE PROTECTION/MUNICIPALITIES/PROPERTY APPRAISER

Mr. Lonnie Strickland, Director of Health and General Services, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, stating that Fire Protection has prepared a schedule of what needs to be done, to address the fire structure tax for Fiscal Year 1990-91. He distributed a memo, giving notice of an increase in special assessments used for fire protection, which will be mailed to all property owners in the unincorporated areas of Lake County (after approval by the Board), as well as a schedule, indicating the dates for public hearings regarding the increase in fire assessment fees. He stated that the Board needed to decide new maximum rates and set a hearing date and time this date, as the Property Appraiser's Office needs information from the public hearing by August 1, 1989, for TRIM notices. He noted that his office needs time to get out the mailings, which amount to approximately 65,000, and must be in the mail by July 10, 1989. He then proceeded to review the schedule with the Board.

Discussion occurred regarding the memo which will be mailed to Lake County residents, alluded to earlier, at which time the Board requested several changes to be made, and requested Commr. Bakich to review and approve the final draft before it is mailed out.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request to mail out notices to Lake County residents (after it has been approved by Commr. Bakich) advising them of the increase in special assessments used for fire protection.

RECESS & REASSEMBLY

At 10:30 a.m. the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for ten minutes.

STATE AGENCIES/WATER RESOURCES

Mr. Michael K. Miller, representing the St. Johns River Water Management District, appeared before the Board and gave a brief slide presentation regarding Local Government Technical Assistance Programs.

Commr. Bakich briefly commented on the presentation, stating that he hoped the County's staff would work closely with Mr. Miller's staff, as the County does not have all the information at hand that they possibly need, therefore, would encourage the County's staff to use resources provided by the St. Johns River Water Management District.

Commr. Swartz questioned whether Mr. Miller could give the Board a brief up-date as to what new rules the St. Johns River Water Management District may be developing or anything that has come out of the Legislature, during the last couple of sessions, concerning storm water management.

Mr. Miller replied that storm water management was, indeed, a big issue during this session, however, he had not had a chance to look at the first or second version, therefore, was not able to up-date the Board at this time.

Mr. Miller was then thanked by the Board for his presentation.

SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT/SUBDIVISIONS

Sgt. Larry Coniff and Deputy Earl Underwood, from the Lake County Sheriff's Department, representing the Neighborhood Crime Watch Program, appeared before the Board to request approval for the Sheriff's Department to exchange present road signs, which warn the public of Crime Watch areas , with a proposed new sign (which he displayed to the Board) which will, hopefully, be approved this date.

Mr. Harold Harris, designer and manufacturer of the proposed sign, was present, as well, to answer any questions there might be from the Board.

Discussion occurred regarding the program and sign, at which time Commr. Bakich questioned the cost of sponsors for said signs (which Sgt. Coniff had alluded to during his presentation), to which Mr. Harris responded that the cost would be on a graduating scale, which would run anywhere from $5.00 per month to $10.00 per month, but, no more than $10.00 per month. He stated that it would be a monthly charge, on an annual contract. He also noted that his firm has been doing this type of work for approximately ten (10) years.

Further discussion occurred, at which time several changes were requested to be made to the sign.

Commr. Swartz stated a concern he had that the County would be putting advertising materials in County right-of-ways, all over the County, to which Commr. Gregg responded that the County has already given approval to do so, with the present school bus stops.

Commr. Swartz then questioned Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, as to what it would cost the County, for County staff to print the signs in the Sign Shop, to which Mr. Stivender replied that it would be a substantial cost, due to the fact that the County, at present, could not produce said signs, due to the lettering involved. He stated that the County would have to contract with a private vendor, to do so.

Commr. Swartz questioned the County Attorney, Chris Ford, as to whether the County has some sort of non-exclusive easement agreement, to allow the placement of such signs in County right-of-ways, to which it was noted that each one is done through a Utility Permit process, in the Public Works Department.

Mr. Harris stated that his company will need something (possibly in the form of an agreement) from the County, giving permission for his company to install the signs on the right-of-ways.

The County Attorney, Chris Ford, suggested that Mr. Harris submit an agreement to the Board, which his legal staff will review and bring back to the Board, at a later date, for approval.

Mr. Harris stated that he would submit said agreement to the Sheriff's Department, for submittal to the Board, at the August 1, 1989, Board Meeting.

COUNTY ATTORNEY/CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS

Commr. Bakich brought up for discussion the issue of the County Attorney's contract, which is scheduled to expire July 31, 1989, however, the Board approved, at a previous Board Meeting, an interim contract, which is scheduled to expire September 31, 1989.

Commr. Bakich stated that the County Attorney had submitted a letter regarding a request, by the Board, for him to reconsider further his position regarding fees charged to the County. In the letter, Mr. Ford stated that, in his willingness to cooperate with the Board, and because of his concern for the welfare of the County, he would accommodate them, during the interim period, by altering his fees, however, the retainer fee will remain the same - $1,000.00 per month.

Prior to October 1, 1989, and/or the hiring of any other attorney by the County, whichever occurs first, the following hourly rates will be charged to the County:

(a) $100.00 per hour, for all attorneys, except for the three (3) monthly morning Board Meetings, which will be billed at $74.00 per hour.

(b) $50.00 per hour, for all paralegals.

It was noted that the original fee of $25.00 per hour, for secretarial and clerical services, was dropped, at this time.

After October 1, 1989, or after another attorney is hired by the County, whichever occurs first, the rates would be as follows:

(a) $125.00 per hour, for all attorneys with more than 10 years experience.

(b) $110.00 per hour, for all attorneys with less than 10 years experience.

(d) $25.00 per hour, for secretarial and clerical.

(e) An automatic annual inflation factor of 5%, or the C.P.I. at the County's option, would occur each year as of October 1, for the ensuing year.

For the interim period, all other aspects of the present agreement would remain the same.

Discussion occurred regarding the issue, at which time Commr. Swartz stated that over the next couple of months, perhaps to the end of this fiscal year, during the interim period, as the County moves into the transition period, that the Board, in the case of the Comprehensive Plan or the Mining Ordinance, etc., not get the County Attorney involved in any new projects of any significant magnitude. He noted that he did not want to see the County go over their budget for legal services.

After further discussion, Commr. Bakich made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Swartz, to approve acceptance of amendments to the County Attorney's fee schedule, regarding his contract with the County for legal services, as submitted this date.

The Chairman then called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously.

At this time, Mr. Ford thanked the Board for approving the terms of his contract, as modified, and stated that he looked forward to continuing to work with the Board on various projects.

Mr. Ford then brought the Board up-to-date, as to the condition of Commr. Windram, since his having what the doctors termed a very minor heart attack on Saturday, June 17, 1989. He had spoken with Mrs. Windram and she stated that the doctors feel there may have been a little damage to the heart, however, he was doing much better and felt that he would probably be home Thursday, June 22, or Friday, June 23, 1989. He stated that Commr. Windram was at Halifax Hospital, in Daytona Beach.

The Board expressed their concern and stated they would like their office personnel to convey their concern to Commr. Windram and his family.

RECESS & REASSEMBLY

At 11:3O a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for lunch and would reconvene at 2:00 p.m. for Rezoning.

ZONING

Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, informed the Board that the Zoning Department had made several changes in the Zoning Agenda, stating what said changes were.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimous ly, the Board approved the following postponements and withdrawals:

Postponements

CUP#89/5/4-4 Lloyd Lexius 7/18/89

#94-89-3 Highland Grove Partnership 7/18/89

#75-89-2 Kenneth Hyatt 10/17/89

#67-89-4 M.K. Citrus, Ltd. 7/18/89

#68-89-4 M.K. Citrus, Ltd. 7/18/89

CUP#89/5/5-4 Ernest Maddy, et al/Mark Carson 7/18/89

#84-89-5 L. R. Donnel, Trustee 8/15/89

#83-89-2 Terry Edwards 7/18/89

Withdrawal

CUP#89/5/3-2 Robert Williams

ZONING CONSENT AGENDA

Commr. Swartz requested the following cases to be deleted from the Consent Agenda and added to the Regular Agenda, so that they could be discussed separately:

#73-89-4 Victor Leviti Rezoning from A to AR

#91-89-2 Cole Whitaker Rezoning from A to PFD

#26-87A-5 Seltzer Treasure 1 yr. ext. of PUD Ord. #24-87

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Zoning Consent Agenda, as follows:

CUP#89/5/2-5 Harold Hess CUP in LM (Light Manufacturing),

to place a mobile home on the

site, for use as a caretaker's

unit.

#87-89-5 Donald Graham Rezoning from C-2 (Community

Commercial) to CP (Planned

Commercial), with C-2 uses.

#86-89-3 William Jeffrey Rezoning from A (Agricultural)

to M-l (Heavy Industrial).

#80-89-2 Clifford Cook and Rezoning from C-l (Rural or

Allen Kelly Tourist Commercial) to C-2

(Community Commercial).

#81-89-2 Clifford Cook Rezoning from C-l (Rural or

Tourist Commercial) to C-2

(Community Commercial).

#63-88A-2 Earl Stockwell, Amend CP Ord. #47-88; and a

c/o Ted Wicks variance of Sec. 69.123 of

LCSR, to waive 50 ft. r/w

dedication and width

requirements: 32 ft. setback

to east; 35 ft. to the south,

and 40 ft to the west, for

storage units, and 15 ft.

setback to the west for care-taker's

unit.

#90-89-l Kenneth Gatson Rezoning from C-l (Rural or

Tourist Commercial) to CP

(Planned Commercial).

#74-89-l Randall Eastwood Rezoning from RR (Rural

Residential) to RMRP.

PUBLIC HEARING LPA#88-1-3 AMEND LAKE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE

LAND USE PLAN GREATER CONSTRUCTION/JOHN F. LOWNDES

Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, informed the Board that what they were approving today was whether or not to transmit the request to the Department of Community Affairs, for their review. If the Board chooses to do this, then DCA will have 90 days to review the request and submit their recommendation to the Board. After the recommendation is submitted to the Board, the Board will need to have a public hearing for approval or denial of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment.

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board, stating that said request concerns approximately 220 acres, which is to become an extension of the Bramalea Urban Node, on the east side of Hwy. 27, in the area designated as the Green Swamp. He reviewed an aerial map of the property in question with those present.

A brief discussion occurred regarding the request, at which time Mr. Richey answered questions presented to him by the Board.

At this time, Commr. Swartz made a motion to uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and deny the request, however, the motion died for the lack of a second.

Commr. Bakich then made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Bailey, to overturn the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approve the request to allow three (3) units per acre, instead of the required one (1) unit per acre, of the Lake County Comprehensive Land Use Plan.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried.

Commr. Swartz voted "No".

PUBLIC HEARING #57-89-l REZONING FROM RR TO A

D. C. PROPERTIES, PARTNERSHIP AND

#58-89-1 REZONING FROM RR TO A R. HUGH DOUGLAS

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board stating that last month his client came before the Board and there was some discussion about the reevaluation of his agricultural request. He stated that what his client would presently like to do, is to withdraw all the property from its request for agricultural, except for one 20 acre parcel, which he indicated to the Board on an aerial map showing the property in question. The reason for leaving the 20 acre parcel in the rezoning request, is due to the fact that the applicant has said property under contract to someone who wishes to utilize it for agricultural purposes.

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from RR (Rural Residential) to A (Agricultural), as amended.

Included in the motion was approval to uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approve a request for rezoning from RR (Rural Residential) to A (Agricultural), as requested in Case No. 58-89-1, by R. Hugh Douglas, due to the fact that said case was the same as the above stated case, therefore, there was no need for discussion.

PUBLIC HEARING #62-84A-5 CP & c-l TO CP W/C-2 USES

DARRELL HARNAGE

No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from CP (Planned Commercial) and C-l (Rural or Tourist Commercial) to CP (Planned Commercial) with C-2 (Community Commercial) uses, to allow boat sales and repair on site.

ZONING (CONT'D.)

At this time, Mr. Dave Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, stated that he had just received a letter (which was submitted for the record) from Lake Land Planning Group, Inc., requesting a 30 day postponement of the following cases:

#96-89-4 Ramapo Ranch c/o Mark Carson

#97-89-4 Peter Neubauer, et al, Mark Carson

#98-89-4 Mark Carson & Canteen Foods

#99-89-4 Bahata Fruit Co., Mark Carson

#100-89-4 Bahata Fruit Co., Mark Carson

Mr. Greg Beliveau, representing Lake Land Planning Group, Inc., appeared before the Board stating that the reason for the request for postponement was due to the fact that one of his clients changed his zoning request, as well as due to the fact that Commr. Windram (who is the district Commissioner) had had a heart attack, and it was felt that he should be present to address the issues.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board approved the request for a 30 day postponement, regarding the cases stated above.

Commr. Swartz voted "No".

It was noted that the above stated cases would be heard before this Board on July 18, 1989, at 2:00 p.m.

PUBLIC HEARING #123-82A-4 AMEND CP ORD. #15-83

CARVIOUS ROBINSON

Mr. Paul Bergman, representing the petitioner, appeared before the Board stating that the petitioner was not present due to illness, however, he had a letter from Mr. Robinson (which was submitted for the record) explaining his request and giving permission for Mr. Bergman to represent him. Mr. Bergman stated that Mr. Robinson is a value to the community, as his repair shop is the only one between Deland and Eustis, and he helps a lot of residents who are on fixed incomes. He stated that without him a lot of residents would be walking.

Mr. Thomas Evangelista, a local resident, appeared before the Board, in opposition, due to the fact that, in his opinion, the business is a junk yard, not an automotive repair business. He submitted a local newsletter (for the record), containing an ad for the business, in which it states that Mr. Robinson buys junk cars.

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied the request to amend CP Ord. #15-85, to add additional land to an existing automotive garage.

PUBLIC HEARING #72-89-4 A to RR ROBERT S. REED

Ms. Jennifer McMurtray, a local resident, appeared before the Board, in opposition, stating that she was present to address the twelve (12) projects, concerning the Wekiva Basin, that the Board had scheduled to come before them this date. She stated that she felt the County needed to look at the Wekiva Basin (since it is in an environmentally sensitive area) as a whole, rather than taking each project separately. The County needs to put them all together and look at the aggregate effect. She stated that there were, originally, approximately 1,300 acres in the Wekiva Basin area up for rezoning this date, before the postponement of several cases, which were approved earlier. These cases would cause a large impact on Lake County, particularly the portion containing the Florida Black Bear. She stated the Board has worked very hard to outline what they feel would protect the Wekiva Basin area and, if all the developments coming before the Board this date are approved, it will be going against the regulations that the Board has proposed. In her opinion, the excess traffic that will be generated by the increased density, as well as the fact that all the developments will be using separate wells and septic tanks, is not in the best interest of Lake County, therefore, she urged the Board to stand by what they previously said to protect the environment, and deny the requests, as they are presented before them this date.

Ms. Rosemary Young, representing the Friends of the Wekiva River, appeared before the Board, in opposition to several requests before the Board this date concerning the Wekiva River Basin (of which said cases were listed in a letter submitted to the Board, for the record), stating that the Friends of the Wekiva River were against the requests, due to the fact that they were not in compliance with the Wekiva River Protection Act, and all are potentially detrimental to the Wekiva Basin and the Wekiva River.

Ms. Mary McKey, a local resident, also appeared before the Board, in opposition to several requests before the Board this date concerning the Wekiva River Basin area. She read and submitted a letter (for the record) indicating the cases she was opposed to and the reasons for her opposition.

At this time, Commrs. Bakich, Swartz and Gregg commented on the particular case before them and Commr. Gregg suggested the possible postponement of said case, until the Board hears further from the Department of Community Affairs, or, concerning those cases which do go PUD, that they comply, basically, with what the Board outlined in their amendment.

Commr. Swartz stated that, when a case is denied without prejudice, the applicant can bring the request back before the Board without any certain time period, however, questioned what would be the case if a certain zoning classification is denied - could the applicant come back with a different classification, to which Mr. Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, replied that, in fact, the applicant could.

Mr. Clapsaddle stated that, if a zoning case has a straight denial, then the applicant cannot come back with the same request for a period of one year, however, if the case is denied without prejudice, the applicant can come back within 90 days. He noted, however, that the applicant can come back the next month with a different request.

Mr. Bill Stearn, Assistant County Attorney, stated that, if the Board is going to vote to deny or postpone the request, based on the pending amendment, he was concerned that the Board may be enacting a moratorium, without voting on a moratorium. If the Board is going to vote, based on the current Comprehensive Plan that is in place, then that would be valid.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board overturned the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to RR (Rural Residential), to allow one (1) acre residential homesites, based on the conservation element of the current Comprehensive Plan.

PUBLIC HEARING #73-89-4 A TO AR VICTOR LEVITI

Commr. Swartz stated that he had asked that said case be deleted from the Consent Agenda, in order to discuss it separately, due to the fact that it involves the Wekiva Basin. He stated that he feels the Board needs to look at the whole area of the Wekiva Basin and questioned what will be accomplished by increasing densities. He then commented further on the request.

Discussion occurred regarding said request, at which time several of the Commissioners commented regarding the density factor of said case.

It was noted that no one present in the audience wished to discuss the request with the Board.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to AR (Agricultural Residential), to allow two and one-quarter (2 l/4) acre residential homesites.

Commr. Swartz voted "No".

PUBLIC HEARING #82-89-4 A to MP WITH LM USES DAVID RICHARDS

Ms. Katherine Hanson, representing the petitioner, appeared before the Board stating that the reason the request was approved by P & Z, for the property south of the railroad only, was due to the fact that Mr. Richards did not own railroad right-of-way on the property north of the railroad. She stated that Mr. Richards presently has the railroad right-of-way, for the property north of the railroad, under contract and it should close in approximately 30 days. She stated that the Zoning Department had indicated that, with the contract, Mr. Richards should be able to rezone both pieces of property and that the abandoned railroad track would carry with it the zoning on either side of it.

Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, stated that the Zoning Department used the area that was on the aerial as the legal description for the rezoning. He stated that the recommendation made to Mr. Richards was to delete the area north of the abandoned railroad. This could be included in the rezoning request this date, if the applicant chose to do so.

Mr. Bill Stearn, Assistant County Attorney, briefly commented regarding the issue of whether or not to include the property north of the railroad track in the rezoning request this date.

Ms. Hinson stated that the applicant did not have any known use for said property, at this time, however, did not want to be limited to Agricultural uses.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board overturned the recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to MP (Planned Industrial) with LM (Light Manufacturing) uses.

PUBLIC HEARING #93-89-3 A to PFD FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK

Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, representing the petitioner, answered questions, from the audience, presented to her by the Board, regarding the request.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PFD (Public Facilities District), to allow a firing range, with a stipulation that it contain Condition C., which states that there be no setback requirement on the east property line.

PUBLIC HEARING #77-89-3 A TO RR DANTE & JEAN D'ALESSANDRO

Dr. Dwain Zagrocki appeared before the Board, in opposition to the request, representing the residents of Apshawa (a subdivision in the Clermont area), stating that the community was against the petition, as presented, however, would accept the recommendation by P & Z, that said property be rezoned to AR, rather than RR.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission that the request be approved for an AR (Agricultural Residential) type zoning, rather than an RR (Rural Residential) zoning, to create one (1) acre residential homesites.

PUBLIC HEARING #78-89-3 A TO R-1-15 RICHARD H. LANGLEY

No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the request for rezoning Planning and Zoning Commission and approved from A (Agricultural) to R-l-15 (Residential Estates), to allow 15,000 sq. ft. of residential homesites.

PUBLIC HEARING #88-89-3 A TO RR NEVILLE & SUABI RAMNARIAN

Mr. Dean Welshymer, realtor, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board stating that he has been involved in Apshawa (a subdivision in Clermont) since the freeze. He stated that said subdivision (which he indicated on an aerial map on display) "as originally platted in five and ten plus acre parcels, except for one on the north end. He stated that said subdivision has been protected and kept as is for several years, and that he is now interested in protecting the perimeter of the subdivision. He stated that his client is opposed to the AR zoning, as recommended by P & Z, due to the fact that it is not economically feasible, as AR type zoning is not saleable and has not done well in Lake County.

Dr. Dwain Zagrocki, appeared before the Board, in opposition to the request, stating several concerns he had. He stated that the residents of Apshawa Subdivision are not against development - they would like to see it come, however, would like to see it come at a shorter range than what the petition would grant. He then asked the Board to consider the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, noting that the residents are only in favor of granting growth up to four (4) acres per site.

Mr. Welshymer reappeared before the Board to further discuss the issue and address concerns which Dr. Zagrocki alluded to.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board overturned the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to RR (Rural Residential), to develop one (1) residential homesites, thereby, retaining the present A cultural) zoning.

PUBLIC HEARING #89-89-3 A TO C-l RALPH D. SUGGS

Mr. Jim Thomas, buyer of the property in question, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, stating that he is proposing a fairly low intensity commercial development, and has agreed to all road improvements, which he thinks will improve the existing condition, such as two laning Lake Boulevard and landscaping the entry to Lake Boulevard, on both sides, including the lake front.

Commr. Swartz stated that he had viewed the site and found that Lake Boulevard is the only source of access out of Edgewater Beach Subdivision, onto Hwy. 50. He stated that he had traveled over the portion of Hwy. 50 which correlates with said request, and tried to determine whether or not this would be a situation that, if rezoned to commercial, with the road improvements, would be a better situation, in terms of traffic, than if, in fact, it was not rezoned to commercial, noting that, sometime in the future, road improvements would be made anyway, perhaps through impact fees. He stated that the intersection joining Lake Boulevard with Hwy. 50 is a bad intersection today, and is concerned that, with additional commercial traffic trying to get in and out, that the situation will have really been improved. He noted that there is no provision for any type of parallel access or frontage road along Hwy. 50.

Mr. Thomas addressed several issues which Commr. Swartz alluded to, injecting that, in his opinion, adding the two lanes to Lake Boulevard is going to greatly improve the existing situation, and adding a left turn lane to Hwy. 50 is going to be a major improvement. Regarding the parallel access issue, he stated that, in the future, if they see a real problem with access, due to strip commercial zoning, it would only be in his best interest to add, or donate frontage, for a frontage road.

Commr. Swartz then requested postponement of said request in order to obtain some traffic information to give the Board some reasonable expectation of which is a better system.

Mr. Thomas stated that his profession is land use planning and environmental consulting and he has worked a great deal with traffic engineers on various projects, and, in his opinion, in looking at the situation that is present in said area, he is not sure that one can come up with any type of figures that would make any of the individuals involved in the project feel more comfortable. He felt that the addition of a left turn lane, as well as the additional two lanes, is about the best that can be done, at this time.

Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, stated that staff shares the concern regarding the intersection, which Commr. Swartz alluded to, and at the Site Plan approval, staff will sit down with Public Works, Development, and D.O.T., and work out necessary improvements to said intersection.

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to CP (Planned Commercial), to allow for farm sales and a retail landscape nursery only.

Commr. Swartz voted "No".

PUBLIC HEARINGS - ROAD CLOSINGS (CONT'D.)

Petition No. 549 - Ralph D. Suggs - Montverde Area

No one present in the audience wished to discuss the request with the Board.

It was noted that the proper proof of publication was on hand as it appeared in the May 25, 1989, and June 1, 1989, editions of The Orlando Sentinel, The Lake Sentinel.

Due to the outcome of Rezoning Case #89-89-3, Mr. Ralph Suggs, petitioner, requested approval of Road Closing Petition No. 549, vacating roads, alleys and lots, in the Edgewater Beach Subdivision, in the Montverde area.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request to vacate roads, alleys and lots, in the Edgewater Beach Subdivision, in the Montverde area, as advertised in Petition No. 549, by Ralph D. Suggs.

ZONING (CONT'D.)

PUBLIC HEARING #76-89-3 A TO R-l-7 RALPH A. EYMAN

Mr. Dale Ladd, a local property owner, appeared before the Board in opposition to the request, stating that he lived on Lake Louisa Road and felt that the property in that area needed more density than the present agricultural zoning which it presently has, however, felt that six units per acre was a little excessive.

Mr. Ed Flake, a local property owner who also lives on Lake Louisa Road, appeared before the Board, in opposition to the request, stating that he is very concerned about the way Lake Louisa Road and its frontage is being torn up. He stated that he believes the applicant is planning to access the lake from said planned development, with a lot that is on the lake front, and feels that it will have an impact on the rest of the area, on both sides of the road - noting that there are some very expensive homes, within a quarter of a mile, in either direction of said planned development.

Mr. Ralph Eyman, petitioner, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, stating that he purchased said property approximately 18 years ago, as R-l-7, after which he had it rezoned to A (Agricultural). Now he is at a point in his life where the property is too much for him to take care of, therefore, he would like to subdivide the property into five lots and sell it. He stated that any other zoning that he has asked for, he was told that he would have to get a variance, due to a driveway, for access to Lake Louisa Road. He stated that he did not care what type zoning he was granted, as long as he could obtain a variance for road frontage for said property.

At this time, Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, gave input regarding the applicant's request for a variance for road frontage.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board overturned the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the recommendation of staff that said property be zoned to ER (Estate Residential).

PUBLIC HEARING #91-89-2 A TO PFD COLE WHITAKER

Commr. Swartz commented on said request, stating that he would question whether the County, at this point, should possibly and effectively lose developmental control over said area, due to water and wastewater, particularly, wastewater.

Mr. Ted Wicks, representing Mr. Charlie Sweat, with Southern States Utilities, appeared before the Board stating that said proposal is for an effluent disposal area to serve an existing sewage treatment plant. Said plant is franchised by the Public Service Commission, and has been in operation since approximately 1974. He stated that there has been a problem during the past seven or eight years with effluent disposal and said petition is an effort to comply with both the requirements of the Department of Environmental Regulation, as well as Lake County Pollution Control. He stated that Southern States Utilities has been looking for land, suitable for said facility, for approximately four years and due to some of the problems which have been occurring in the intersection of the Turnpike interchange and SR 19, they have not been able to locate land available for purchase. However, they have now reached a contractual agreement with Cole Whitaker Realty for purchase of said property. The rezoning request will be solely for the purpose of upgrading the existing facility and to bring it into compliance with rules and regulations, as stated above.

Commr. Swartz questioned Mr. Wicks whether, by doing this, they were increasing their effluent disposal ability to include areas other than what they are currently serving, and authorized to under PFC, to which Mr. Wicks replied that this particular tract would, indeed, allow them to serve the existing plant capacity, as well as increase their service area.

Commr. Swartz stated that this was a concern that he had, and, at this point, was not sure whether he wanted to encourage another private utility in an area that has been identified as an important area for the provision of services.

Further discussion occurred regarding the issue, at which time the Chairman stated that the County has done a feasibility study for said area, and has contracted to do a master plan, however, at present, the County is not sure what they are going to do in said area and are probably a year away from receiving the plan and being in a position of making a decision of what to do or which direction the County will go for said area. He stated that the Board knows there is a need, and is aware that the area in question has a good potential for future growth in the County, however, does not feel that the Board can restrict use of property in said area until the County knows how they are going to handle it. He stated that he would like to see some criteria in establishing future industrial and commercial PUD's in said area, so that where the Board does allow package plants, they would definitely require hookup to a future regional system. He further stated that the request before them would assist Southern States Utilities in bringing them back into compliance, as well as service a present need in that area.

A motion was made by Commr. Bailey and seconded by Commr. Bakich that the Board uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approve the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PFD (Public Facilities District), to allow an effluent disposal area for an existing sewage treatment plant.

Under discussion, Commr. Swartz stated that he agreed with what the Chairman, Commr. Gregg, had stated, however, felt that a point that needs to he understood is that, while dealing with private developers, under the current ordinance, the Board has the ability to require them to hook up, however, in this Public Service Commission area, the Board does not have the ability to force them into any other system, so, if the Board does create another system, and the Public Service Commission approves increasing the service area, the Board would not have the ability to impact their ability to use that system.

The Chairman then called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING #95-89-2 A to PUD SCOTTISH HIGHLANDS, INC.

Mr. Greg Beliveau, Lake Land Planning Group, Inc., appeared before the Board, representing the owner of the property in question, stating that said request involved approximately 540 acres, with a 900 unit PUD and approximately 8 acres for commercial use. He stated that the development would be located in an urban node, being the Yalaha and Okahumpka urban node. He stated that the site provides on-site wastewater treatment plants, as well as its own well site for potable water.

Mr. Dan Robuck, Attorney, representing both Silver Springs Citrus, an adjacent property owner, as well as Mr. Duke Whitman, also an adjacent property owner, appeared before the Board stating that his clients were not opposing the project, however, were trying to minimize their risk and have come up with some language which the applicant has agreed to and would like to add it as a condition to the PUD. Basically, what the condition states is that the applicant agrees not to object to Mr. Robuck's clients expanding their property in the future. He stated that one of his clients, Silver Springs Citrus, is presently negotiating to buy approximately 660 Eeet of the property in question, to be used as a buffer.

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing Mr. Hugh McElyea, McElyea Fernery and Groves, Inc., who owns approximately 200 acres in the vicinity of the property in question, appeared before the Board stating that the reason he was present was to ensure that the effluent treatment plant, for the property in question, was not going to be contiguous to his property.

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PUD (Planned Unit Development), as amended, deleting the second paragraph of Section B. Commercial 1. Acreage, Type of Commercial Uses, where it states "Gross leaseable area within the commercial sections of the PUD shall not exceed 100,000 sq. ft.", as well as the conditions alluded to by Mr. Robuck and Mr. Richey, to allow the establishment of a planned residential community, associated with commercial uses.

PUBLIC HEARING #85-89-l A TO PFD WILLIAM LEUGERS

No one present in the audience wished to discuss the request with the Board.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PFD (Planned Facilities District), to allow a church and the use of an existing residence as a parsonage.

PUBLIC HEARING #79-89-5 RMRP TO RM JOHN WALL

Mr. Robert Behymer, a local resident, appeared before the Board in opposition to the request, stating that he had submitted a letter, stating such, to the Board on June 15, 1989. He then read said letter, indicating some concerns he had regarding the request, such as the infringement upon his community of residential homes by mobile homes, rather than agricultural (which is the way it is presently zoned), to the Board and then discussed the matter.

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared before the Board stating that the request is to convert RMRP to RM, which requires greater standards, due to the fact that subdivision regulations have to be met, in that roads have to be paved to a greater standard and they have to meet the overall platting process, whereas one does not have to do this in an RMRP type zoning. He stated that the request before the Board this date increases the value and quality of the property in question.

Further discussion occurred regarding the request.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from RMRP (Mobile Home Rental Park Residential) to RM (Mobile Home Residential), to allow a mobile home subdivision of 12,500 sq. ft. lots.

PUBLIC HEARING #26-87A-5 1 YR. EXT. OF PUD ORD. #24-87

SELTZER 'TREASURE ISLAND CORP./VILLAGE BY THE GRANGE

Commr. Swartz stated that he had requested that said case be pulled from the Zoning Consent Agenda in order for it to be discussed separately. He questioned Mr. Steve Richey, who was present as the attorney representing the petitioner, as to what the petitioner has done, thus far, to get to where they presently are, to which Mr. Richey responded that said project was approved and initiated in March of 1988 and that a utility agreement, with the City of Leesburg, was entered into, to provide water and sewer for the marina, which is a part of the project. He stated that a full marketing and demographic study has been done, as well, noting that approximately $150,000.00 has been spent by the petitioner, up to this point, in taking care of all the above stated matters. He stated that where the project is, at present, in trying to find a joint venture partner, is putting the financing together in order to do the project.

At this time, Commr. Swartz stated that he felt it would be helpful, when there are requests for extensions, particularly the first request for extension, that as a part of the submittal, if it is available, to get information from the developer as to how the project is progressing, thereby, making the Board aware of the fact that the project has not been idle, which would help the Board in making their decisions regarding such requests.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for a one (1) year extension of approved preliminary PUD Ord. #24-87, to allow completion of final development plans for an approved Planned Unit Development (resort/convention center).

PUBLIC HEARING #63-88A-2 AMEND CP ORD. #47-88 EARL STOCKWELL

C/O TED WICKS (CONT'D.)

Mr. Frank Cash, representing the petitioner, stated from the audience that his client had been put on the Consent Agenda, inadvertently, and did not know that the request was going to be approved as it was presented. He stated that there were a few minor details that needed to be cleared up, and questioned whether the Board could reopen the case, for further discussion.

Mr. Bill Stearn, Assistant County Attorney, stated that he did not feel comfortable honoring Mr. Cash's request, due to the fact that anyone who may have been in opposition to any changes has already been told that the request was approved, and has left the meeting.

Mr. Cash appeared before the Board, stating that the request concerned a mini warehouse complex on Hwy. 44. He stated that at the Site Plan Review, it was asked of Mr. Stockwell to set back an additional 17 feet from Hwy. 44, due to the impending four laning on Hwy. 44, which he agreed to do, however, it also set the whole site plan back proportionately. Consequently, P & Z is asking for a 32 foot setback, which cannot be accomplished, due to the fact that the property is 8 feet short. He stated that the petitioner would like to get the site plan approved, as presented. Mr. Stockwell was told by Mr. Clapsaddle, in April, that the site plan would be approved, as drawn. He noted that Mr. Wicks, also representing the petitioner, was present in the audience, and stated that he was not notified concerning the additional 8 feet either.

Mr. Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, commented on the matter, stating that the setbacks which were presented at the P & Z Meeting, were taken off the preliminary site plan.

Mr. Cash stated that his client could live with the 22 feet, as indicated on the site plan, however, did not want it listed in the Minutes of the P & Z Meeting as 32 feet, whenever they only had 22 feet available to work with.

Mr. Cash also brought up an issue of what is to be stored in the units, stating that the ordinance did not state correctly what was to be stored in the units. He clarified this point with Mr. Clapsaddle, as well as the Board.

PUBLIC HEARING #92-89-l R-l-7 TO CP MARY ROBERTSON

No one present in the audience wished to discuss the request with the Board.

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from R-l-7 (Urban Residential) to RP (Multiple Family Residential Professional), rather than to CP (Planned Commercial), to allow a 3,000 sq. ft. medical building.

PUBLIC HEARING #53-89-5 R-l-7 TO RR JACK K. AUSTIN

Mr. Norris O'Jest, a local resident, appeared before the Board in opposition to the request, stating that he did not know what was happening concerning the request, until everything was over. He stated that he owned property adjacent to the property in question, and felt that he should have been made aware of how said property was being rezoned. He stated that the generators from the greenhouses make so much noise that it is difficult for the residents to sleep at night.

Mr. T. H. Poole, Sr., NAACP, representing property owners in the area, appeared before the Board to discuss the issue of the greenhouses and restrictions which have been placed on said property. He submitted a letter to the Board, for the record, and reviewed a portion of past Board Minutes regarding the same issue. He stated that 20 residents in the area are opposed to the request.

Mr. Jesse Moore, an adjacent property owner, appeared before the Board in opposition, reiterating what Mr. O'Jest had said concerning the pumps for the greenhouses running continuously and the residents being unable to sleep at night.

Commr. Bakich requested staff to have Code Enforcement go to the property and investigate the noise problem and report back to the Board at a later date.

Mr. Robert Vason, Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared before the Board indicating where the greenhouses, as well as the pumps, are located on the property, in correlation to some of the residents' dwellings. He stated that, out of 76 names which were submitted, in opposition, only one of the individuals is located within 100 feet of the greenhouses or pump site. He stated that he was not aware of any complaints being submitted to Code Enforcement.

Ms. Betty Colvin, a local resident, appeared before the Board in opposition, stating that the petitioner will be locating pumps directly in front of her house.

Mr. Poole stated that, upon questioning the residents present in the audience, he found that most of the residents reported their complaints to the Sheriff's Department, rather than to Code Enforcement or the Zoning Board. He stated that the residents also complained about the odor given off by the pumps, due to them being diesel.

Commr. Swartz commented on the fact that there may possibly be a land use conflict, and suggested that the case be postponed until a later date, in order to resolve some of the problems alluded to earlier.

Mr. Vason stated that he did not have a problem with a postponement.

Discussion continued regarding whether or not to postpone the request and come back to the Board with a different type zoning or to deny the request without prejudice, at which time Commr. Bakich made a motion to deny the request without prejudice, which was seconded by Commr. Swartz, however, after further discussion, Commr. Bakich withdrew his motion and Commr. Swartz withdrew his second.

A motion was then made by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously to postpone the request for 60 days, in order to amend the request and apply for a CUP.

Commr. Swartz noted that the existing problem needs to be taken care of before expanding.

PUBLIC HEARING #98-84C-4 ONE YR. EXT. OF PUD ORD. #24-88

CONWAY D. KITTREDGE

Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, informed the Board that said request for postponement was the third such request for this case.

Mr. Carter Moore, representing the petitioner, appeared before the Board to explain the request, stating that several things had happened, thereby, requiring the postponements alluded to by Mr. Clapsaddle. He then explained what said events were.

Discussion occurred regarding the County's policy concerning extensions, at which time Mr. Clapsaddle stated that staff does not generally recommend a third postponement, however, given the conditions of the case, staff does see some justification in a third extension.

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for a one (1) year extension of approved preliminary PUD Ord. #24-88, to allow completion of final development plans.

PUBLIC HEARING CUP#89/5/1-2 CUP IN A RELIABLE PEAT COMPANY

Mr. Marvin Mandale, Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared before the Board stating that present in the audience were the general partners of Reliable Peat Company, Mr. Joe Reiner and Mr. Jack Reiner. He then answered questions presented to him by the Board regarding the case.

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for CUP in A (Agricultural), as amended, to include amendment Nos. 16, 17 and 19, as stated in the recommendation, to allow a peat mine and peat processing yard on the site.

PUBLIC HEARING ONE YR. EXT. OF PUD ORD. #31-88

EMERALD SPRINGS COUNTRY CLUB

Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, informed the Board that at the Board Meeting of June 6, 1989, the Board postponed action regarding a request for a one year extension of the Emerald Springs PUD to this date.

Mr. Greg Beliveau, Lake Land Planning Group, Inc., representing the petitioner, appeared before the Board stating that the petitioner had gone before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the extension of one (1) year was unanimously approved by P & Z.

A brief discussion occurred regarding the request, at which time Mr. Beliveau answered questions presented to him by the Board.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved an additional extension of PUD Ord. #31-88, for Emerald Springs Country Club.

At this time, Commr. Gregg stated that staff needs some direction regarding what they are getting out of P & Z, as far as Rural Residential and Agricultural. He stated that he hopes to discuss the issue, at a later date, and, noting that the County still has a classification for Rural Residential, stated that if the Board is not going to allow Rural Residential, then staff needs to do something about it. He stated that, personally, he feels there is a need for Rural Residential and feels there is a lot of property in Lake County that qualifies for it, to which several other Commissioners agreed.

Mr. Clapsaddle stated that, at the last Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting, they voted to have staff investigate getting away from five (5) acre tracts in Agricultural. He stated that, at present, Agricultural is a five acre subdivision, which is not a genuine Agricultural use. However, he stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission recognized this fact and instructed staff to do some research and come back with an amendment to the Agricultural district, to get away from mobile home five acre tracts.

Commr. Swartz stated that, if it is determined that the next Zoning Meeting is going to be relatively short, the Board could schedule a workshop during that time. However, unless there is something different than what there has been during the first six or seven months, then he would suggest scheduling a separate workshop to address the issues.

No action was taken at this time.

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

C. W. "CHICK" GREGG, CHAIRMAN

JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK

sec/6-29-89/WP-2