The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, November 16, 1993, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: G. Richard Swartz, Jr., Chairman; Catherine C. Hanson, Vice Chairman; Rhonda H. Gerber; Don Bailey; and Welton G. Cadwell. Others present were: Frank T. Gaylord, Interim County Attorney; Peter F. Wahl, County Manager; Ava Kronz, BCC Office Manager; Neil Kelly, Chief Deputy, Administrative Services Department; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.
Mr. James C. Watkins, Clerk, gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of September 14, 1993 (Special Meeting - Morning Session), as presented.
Action regarding the Minutes of September 14, 1993 (Special Meeting - Evening Session) was postponed until later in this meeting.
Regarding the Minutes of October 5, 1993 (Regular Meeting), the following was requested:
Clarification was made in the spelling of a proper name.
Commr. Bailey requested that some language be inserted on Page 24, starting with Line 24, which he had stated, expressing his concern about the County spending $200,025.00 for a Xerox Docutech Production Publisher and the fact that he felt the Board should be reviewing how they could more appropriately use said money.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of October 5, 1993 (Regular Meeting), as amended.
CLERK OF COURT'S CONSENT AGENDA
Mr. Watkins, Clerk, referred to Item 6 of his agenda and noted that he was returning to the County a check, in the amount of $404,930.82, representing excess fees and a check, in the amount of $70,560.82, representing an upspent transfer of funds and that he was proud of the fact that he was able to do so.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:
Bonds - Contractor
Request for approval of Contractor Bonds, New, Cancellations, and Reinstatement, as follows:
New
1153-94 Terry L. Wolters d/b/a Southern Metal Building
3096-94 Terry Ross
4175-94 M. E. Day (Class A Building Contractor)
5108-94 James Griffis (Masonry)
5130-94 James A. Sherrod (Roofing)
5207-94 Daniel M. Beard (Pool Service and Repair)
5253-94 Ron Troutman
5257-94 Marshall Construction, Inc.
5260-94 Joseph V. Isola, Jr. (Electrical)
Cancellations
1422-93 Elmer R. Bolling (Roofing)
4066-93 David C. Whilden (Residential Contractor)
4797-93 Randall J. Guinn
5036-95 James Jeffery Lanier d/b/a J & J Electric
Reinstatement
5241-94 Charles Carpenter
Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges
Request for approval of Satisfaction of Judgment for James Michael Long, in the amount of $250.00, Case No. 92-830-CFA-01-30.
Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges
Request for approval of Satisfaction of Judgment for Richard Arthur Shapiro, in the amount of $50.00, Case Nos. 88-28-CJ and
88-29-CJ.
Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges
Request for approval of Satisfaction of Judgment for Richard Arthur Shapiro, Jr., in the amount of $50.00, Case Nos. 87-1189-CJ; 88-10-CJ; 88-28-CJ; and 88-29-CJ.
Accounts Allowed/Assessments/Subdivisions
Request for approval of Satisfaction of Assessment Liens (8), as follows:
Pine Island/Harbour
Henrietta Glinka $ 622.10
Woodland Hill/Piney Wood
Normand H. Fontaine & Kristine A. Fontaine $ 233.42
Arthur Frederickson & Janice Frederickson 449.35
Astor Forest Campsites
John & Raineria Lafstidis 1,547.15
La Place Court
Rayburn V. & Sara E. White 4,342.12
Mt. Plymouth II
Charles K. & Amanda Pepper 1,398.35
Susan Carter 742.87
Lakeview Heights
Grace A. Nicholson 570.45
Accounts Allowed/Clerk/Finance/Reports
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Clerk of Circuit Court's Financial Report for the year ending September 30, 1993 and a check representing excess fees, in the amount of $404,930.82, and a check representing an unspent transfer of funds, in the amount of $70,560.82.
Finance/Property Appraiser/Reports
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Lake County Property Appraiser's Financial Report for the year ending September 30, 1993.
Finance/Reports/Tax Collector
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Lake County Tax Collector's Financial Report for the year ending September 30, 1993.
Accounts Allowed/Finance/Reports/Sheriff's Department
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Lake County Sheriff's Financial Report for the year ending September 30, 1993 and a check representing excess fees for law enforcement and school crossing guards, in the amount of $87,980.64.
Utilities
Request to acknowledge receipt of the following: Legal Notice - Application of Lake Groves Utilities, Inc., to amend Certificate Nos. 534-W and 465-S, for water and wastewater service, to add territory in Lake County, Florida, as described in said Legal Notice.
Accounts Allowed/Finance
Request to acknowledge receipt of the list of warrants paid prior to this meeting, pursuant to Chapter 136 of the Florida Statutes, which shall be incorporated into the Minutes as attached Exhibit A and filed in the Clerical Support Division of the Clerk's Office.
Accounts Allowed/Reports
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Monthly Distribution of Revenue Traffic/Criminal Cases for the month ending October 31, 1993, in the amount of $125,045.95. Same period last year: $110,314.03.
Municipalities/Ordinances
Request to acknowledge receipt of Ordinances from The Town of Lady Lake, as follows:
Ordinance No. 93-08, amending the zoning regulations of the Town of Lady Lake, to rezone certain property generally known as Villa De La Palma from PFD to PUD.
Ordinance No. 93-09, amending the town limits of the Town of Lady Lake, by annexing certain contiguous property, upon voluntary application by the property owners, William T. and Catherine P. Norfleet, with provisions as set forth.
Ordinance No. 93-10, redesignating the zoning classification for certain property owned by Beryl N. Stokes, Sr., located within the town limits of the Town of Lady Lake, from R-1-A (Low Density Residential) to R-2-B (Multi-Family Residential).
Ordinance No. 93-11, amending the zoning regulations of the Town of Lady Lake, to rezone certain property generally known as a portion of The Villages Industrial Complex from Industrial to Industrial PUD.
PUBLIC HEARING
ASSESSMENTS/PUBLIC SERVICES/ROAD PROJECTS/SUBDIVISIONS
Mr. Jim Stivender, Jr., Director of Public Services, explained this request.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Mr. Carl Queck, who owns Lot 137 in Lake Eustis Village Subdivision, appeared before the Board stating that a lot of rebuilding has been going on along Hwy. 44 near his subdivision and questioned what type of pipes are being laid.
Mr. Stivender stated that the project Mr. Queck referred to is not a county project, therefore, he did not know what the pipes were intended for.
Mr. Willard Van Hoose, who owns Lot 52 in Lake Eustis Village Subdivision, appeared before the Board stating that he was against the residents of the subdivision having to pay an assessment and that he felt the County was discriminating against its retired people.
Mr. Roy Weddle, President of the Lake Eustis Village Property Owners Association, appeared before the Board stating that the residents of the subdivision worked very hard on trying to get the roads in their subdivision to be county maintained and that the association has received a sufficient amount of petitions to have the paving done. He stated that the roads are in bad shape and he hoped that the Board would approve for the paving to be done according to schedule.
Mr. Bruce Kroencke, who owns Lot 87 in Lake Eustis Village Subdivision, appeared before the Board stating that he was not a member of the property owners association, however, felt that those residents who are not members should have had input in the matter. He stated that the residents pay taxes, therefore, he did not feel that they should have to pay to have the roads in question maintained.
Commr. Swartz explained to those present how the special assessment process works and noted, for the record, that gas tax dollars are being spent to help bring said roads up to standards.
Ms. Verona Harris, representing her brother-in-law, Kenneth Harris, who owns Lots 64 and 65 in Lake Eustis Village Subdivision, appeared before the Board stating that her brother-in-law had not received sufficient notice of this meeting and was upset about it. She noted that her brother-in-law is very much against the special assessment.
Mr. Stivender was questioned by the Board as to when the notices of the assessment were mailed to the property owners of Lake Eustis Village Subdivision.
Mr. Stivender stated that the notices were sent by registered mail, which requires that the property owner has to be physically contacted, therefore, it may take several tries before the individuals are actually contacted.
Ms. Marilyn Larrabee, the owner of Lots 28 and 29 in Lake Eustis Village Subdivision, appeared before the Board stating that it may be a hardship for some of the residents to pay for the special assessment, but, she could not believe that people would move into a home and do nothing to improve the area. She stated that the roads are in bad shape and need repairing and she is in favor of the special assessment.
Mr. Charles Blymer, the owner of Lots 121 and 122 in Lake Eustis Village Subdivision, appeared before the Board stating that he had a problem with the County charging those residents of the subdivision who choose to finance their assessments with the County 12% interest for 7 years.
Commr. Swartz explained why the County was charging the 12% interest rate.
Mr. Blymer stated that he strongly objects to the special assessment because he is concerned about speeders and additional costs to him in replacing that portion of his driveway that is going to be torn up, as well as shrubs and trees on his property that are in the right-of-way. He stated that he did not feel that the special assessment was necessary at this time.
Mr. Stivender interjected that the residents' driveways will be fixed and matched to the new pavement, trees and shrubs will be disturbed as little as possible, and speed limit signs will be erected along the roads.
Mrs. Blymer appeared before the Board stating that she has five trees along the road which she feels may have to be removed for the special assessment and questioned who, if it is necessary to do so, is going to pay to have the trees removed.
Mr. Stivender stated that, if it is in the contract to remove said trees, the contractor will be responsible for doing so.
Mr. Charles Tornavaka, a resident of Lake Eustis Village Subdivision, appeared before the Board stating that he was in favor of the special assessment, as he felt the roads needed to be repaired. He stated that, as far as costs are concerned, it would be cheaper for the County to do the assessment and, as far as the 12% interest rate is concerned, the residents would have 84 months to pay it off.
Mr. James Willis, a property owner in Lake Eustis Village, appeared before the Board and discussed the issue of speeding, which was mentioned earlier, stating that the Board of Governors for the Lake Eustis Village Property Owners Association cannot ticket speeders, however, if the roads are brought up to standards and become County maintained, then Sheriff's deputies can ticket the speeders. He stated that the property owners association has patched the roads the best that they can, but they will never have the money to maintain the roads the way that they should be maintained.
Ms. Erin Brown, representing Ms. Kathleen Brown, her mother, appeared before the Board stating that her mother, who owns Lots 6 and 7 in Lake Eustis Village, is against the special assessment, because she cannot afford to pay for it.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commr. Hanson stated a concern that she had with liability, as far as the property owners are concerned, with respect to storms and trees that fall over the road, or are blown over on someone else's home, and the fact of who faces that liability. She stated that it is one of the biggest risks that will be taken off the property owners, as far as the possibility of lawsuits sometime in the future.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the assessment program is not perfect, but he feels that it is a fair way to take care of the road problems that the County has. He stated that the Board's job is to represent the majority of the people and the majority of the people in Lake Eustis Village want the roads to be paved and brought up to County standards, therefore, he was going to support the special assessment.
Commr. Swartz stated that this issue is one of those issues where there is not unanimous support. He stated that the County does not go out and seek to do special assessments, they come to the Board, because residents ask the County to come in and improve their roads to county standards. He noted that 80% of the residents of Lake Eustis Village want the roads in the subdivision to be improved to county standards.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request to award and authorize Project No. SA-78, Lake Eustis Village Special Assessment Lump Sum Construction, to Superior Asphalt Company, Inc.; to encumber and expend funds, in the amount of $95,485.45; and to approve and accept a resolution adopting the assessment roll for the streets in Lake Eustis Village, including Lake Bradley Drive, which is a mandatory assessment. Commissioner District 5, CTT Funds.
LAWS & LEGISLATION/MUNICIPALITIES
Regarding the issue of some new Florida Statutes pertaining to the annexation of enclaves, Commr. Swartz reassured some individuals who were present in the audience that the Board would not be making any decisions regarding the matter this date. He stated that the Board would be requesting County staff to work with the various City Managers and City Attorneys in the County, to develop some type of process whereby the County can deal with the change in the Florida Statutes that deals with the annexation of enclaves, and that what was on the agenda this date was not going to change anybody's situation, for any particular area or enclave.
Mr. Bob Erikson, a resident of Eustis, appeared before the Board and requested that a citizen advisory group be formed that could look at that type of issue.
A brief discussion occurred, however, no action was taken at this time.
ROADS - COUNTY & STATE/STATE AGENCIES
Mr. Jim Kimbler, District Director of Planning, Florida Department of Transportation, appeared before the Board and reviewed the Tentative Five Year Work Program Report, as of November 12, 1993, for Fiscal Years 1994-95 through 1998-1999, which was distributed to the Board, for their review. Regarding the 5 Year Transportation Plan (Highway Portion), he discussed in particular the following seven projects:
1. Adding lanes and reconstructing SR 19, from CR 561 to SR 500 and US 441
2. Reconstructing the drainage on SR 19, from SR 44 to Key Avenue, and doing miscellaneous construction on SR 19, from CR 561 to SR 500 and US 441
3. Adding lanes and reconstructing SR 40, from CR 445A to the Volusia County line
4. Adding lanes and reconstructing SR 44, from CR 468 to Caballo Place
5. Adding lanes and reconstructing SR 44, from the Sumter County line to CR 468
6. Adding lanes and reconstructing SR 500 and US 441, from .2 miles west of Lake Shore Drive to Lake Eustis Drive
7. Adding lanes and reconstructing SR 530 and US 192, from SR 25 and US 27 to the Orange County line
Regarding the 5 Year Transportation Plan (Public Transportation), Mr. Kimbler discussed two items, Operating Assistance and Airport Land Acquisition.
Mr. Kimbler then reviewed and discussed the FDOT Lake County Enhancement Program, for Fiscal Years 1994-95 through 1998-99, noting that it is a new program and a very popular one that was created under the Federal ISTEA Act (Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act). He stated that, during the past year, they had asked various Boards to identify their highest priority projects and they then attempted to fund same.
Mr. Kimbler then discussed the following three projects which FDOT had addressed, that the County had listed as priority projects, totaling $2,789,000.00:
1. Bike/Pedestrian Project from Clermont to Minneola
2. Bike/Pedestrian Project from the Sumter County line to Clermont
3. Countywide Contingency Project
Discussion occurred regarding the various charts which Mr. Kimbler reviewed, at which time he answered questions from the Board and staff regarding same.
Mr. Chuck Pula, Parks and Recreation Coordinator, pointed out that the County had requested, in their application to FDOT, that Project No. 5122578, the Bike/Pedestrian Project from Clermont to Minneola, be from the Orange County line to Clermont.
Mr. Kimbler stated that, if it was the County's priority that said project go from the Orange County line, that it would be a simple correction to make.
Commr. Swartz stated that apparently the report has been completed that pertains to the trust for public lands to get the County to review the trail possibilities, acquisition, etc., and that there are some acquisition costs involved and questioned whether, if the County were to spend some of its funds on that, it could get reimbursed from ISTEA funds, as they become available, in out years.
Mr. Kimbler stated that said program is both a blessing and a curse, noting that, because it is Federal funds, if any right-of-way acquisition occurs, it has to occur according to the Uniform Relocation Assistance Act and that would mean that they would have to follow all Federal standards. He stated that, if a reimbursement were desired, FDOT would have to first adopt it into a work program and enter into an agreement with the County. He stated that it is a possibility, but not a quick fix, and that it would take a little bit of time to coordinate.
Commr. Cadwell noted, for the record, that the Rails to Trails and the Parks and Recreation Board were going to request a workshop with the Board of County Commissioners on January 18, 1994 and that some of the questions the Board has about the matter might be answered at that time.
Commr. Swartz stated that he felt some FDOT staff should be present, to answer questions regarding the ISTEA Act. He then informed Mr. Kimbler that the Board is very concerned about the costs implications of the CUTR Study and that they wanted to convey that concern to their district officials. He stated that, if FDOT has not reviewed the fiscal impact on the County, he would like for Mr. Stivender, at some point, to make an appointment with FDOT, so that the district officials understand what the ramifications would be under the proposed schedule.
Mr. Kimbler stated that FDOT has reviewed the CUTR Study and understands the financial impact to the County. He stated that there will be an opportunity to discuss the issue, noting that maps are being prepared and, as soon as they are available, they will contact the County staff and indicate a time that they can actually be reviewed.
Ms. Pat Mayhill, Planner, Development Services Department, City of Eustis, appeared before the Board stating that the City of Eustis is very supportive of the SR 19 drainage study that is going to be conducted, noting that it will be a joint project between the St. Johns River Water Management District and FDOT.
No action was needed or taken.
PUBLIC HEARING
COUNTY ATTORNEY/SUITS AFFECTING THE COUNTY
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one present who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from the County Attorney's Office for approval of a settlement, in the case of Hicks vs. Lake County, Case No. 91-2932-CA-01, in the amount of $2,500.00.
PUBLIC HEARING
COUNTY ATTORNEY/SUITS AFFECTING THE COUNTY
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one present who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from the County Attorney's Office for approval of a settlement, in the case of Retey vs. Lake County, Case No. 92-176-CA-01, in the amount of $4,000.00.
ADDENDUM NO. 1
PERSONAL APPEARANCES
WATER AUTHORITY
Mr. Will Davis, Director, Lake County Water Authority, appeared before the Board and gave a presentation regarding the Water Authority's and the County's joint Geographic Information System (GIS). He stated that, in 1989, an interlocal agreement was established between the County and the Water Authority, for a three year period, whereby they would share in the cost of manpower and equipment associated with the GIS, with the intent that the Water Authority would assist the County in growth management decisions that were coming into play, as far as the Growth Management Act was concerned.
Mr. Davis stated that they ran into some difficulties, during the first year and a half, before they finally got the system off the ground and working properly and that, due to said problems, they came back before the Board in 1991 and requested a two year extension of the agreement.
Mr. Davis stated that, during the three years that the Water Authority has been running the system, they have managed to put together a lot of very valuable information, which he elaborated on. He stated that one of the nice things about the system is that they have had the opportunity to work with a variety of State and Federal agencies, in acquiring additional information.
Mr. Davis stated that they have just acquired five foot contour coverage for the whole county and that they are presently in the process of trying to converge the differences between the South West Florida Water Management District and the St. Johns River Water Management District, in south Lake County, which they hope to have completed in approximately three weeks. He stated that they have a map showing all government owned lands in Lake County, with the exception of the cities, however, they hope to include that information sometime during the next four months.
Mr. Davis stated that they have also been working with the Soil Conservation Service and the South West Florida Water Management District and have pulled water withdrawal permit information, enabling them to query a one square mile area of a certain site to see what the withdrawal requirements are, as far as CUPs are concerned.
Mr. Davis discussed various other sources of information that the Water Authority has been able to acquire through the GIS, as well as some additional projects that they are currently working on, and reviewed several overheads pertaining to same.
Mr. Davis stated that he was present this date to see how the Board would like to see the program proceed, in the future, due to the fact that there is less than one year left in the joint agreement. He noted that they have spent $26,000.00 this year, to upgrade their software, and stated that they have been working with the Property Appraiser's Office, the Planning Department, Public Services, Environmental Services, the Building Department, Environmental Health, and the cities on various projects, which he elaborated on.
Mr. Davis stated that one of the things that has yet to be determined is a future GIS for Lake County. He stated that there are a variety of constitutional officers, departments, and agencies throughout the State that are getting heavily involved in GIS and that he sees a tremendous amount of duplication of effort occurring. He stated that the Water Authority tries to look at who has an interest in GIS, what interest that might be, and how they can figure out a way to incorporate those interests, so that there is no duplication of effort.
Mr. Davis stated that he would be coming back to the Board in mid-January with an Annual Assessment Report, updating the Board on where the County's money has gone, the programs that they have been involved with, and the percentage of the program costs that the County is assuming.
Discussion occurred regarding the GIS, at which time Mr. Davis answered questions from the Board regarding same.
Commr. Swartz stated that he felt the Board's action in 1989 was a good step toward preventing duplication in Lake County, however, he feels that the system is not being fully utilized by the County and that the County needs to look at what it has to do, to utilize it more.
Commr. Swartz stated that he felt the Board needed to give direction to staff to work with the Lake County Water Authority, the League of Cities, or those cities that are willing to enter into an interlocal agreement, the School Board, and perhaps other agencies, so that the County takes what is now a two-part interlocal agreement and expands it to those other agencies, so that more of them will get involved and utilize the system, without duplicating costs or programs.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board instructed staff to work with the Lake County Water Authority and bring back an expanded interlocal agreement, which includes other agencies, constitutional officers, etc., and move beyond the present interlocal agreement between the County and the Lake County Water Authority.
Commr. Swartz requested Mr. Davis to thank the Lake County Water Authority Board for their support of this project and appreciation of everything that they have done in working with Lake County.
COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
PUBLIC SERVICES/ROADS-COUNTY & STATE/SUBDIVISIONS
Mr. Jim Stivender, Jr., Director of Public Services, explained this request. He stated that he and Mr. Greg Stubbs, One-Stop Permitting Center Coordinator and Director of Development Regulations, were recommending denial of the request, noting the reason for same. He stated, however, that they were not opposed to proceeding with the advertising and going on to a public hearing.
Mr. Mike Croak, a resident of Clear Lake Estates, appeared before the Board stating that there were no objections to the request for advertisement, by any of the residents of the subdivision, as they wanted the opportunity to present their case at a public hearing, therefore, requested the Board to go forward with the advertising, in order to allow them to do so.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Public Services for approval to advertise Road Vacation Petition No. 744, by Michael A. Croak, to vacate a road in Clear Lake Estates, Section 31, Township 18, Range 27, Eustis area, Commissioner District 4.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 11:05 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for ten minutes.
COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, requested that Tab 27, a request from Public Services for approval to purchase an Assessment System, authorization for the Chairman to execute a contract between Lake County and the Main Line Corporation for the Integrated Special Assessment Management System, and authorization to encumber and expend funds, in the amount of $90,000.00, and Tab 31, a request from Public Services for authorization for the Chairman to execute a Statutory Quit-Claim Deed to the City of Clermont and the City of Minneola, for the County owned T & G Railroad right-of-way, which is in their respective city limits, be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda and discussed separately.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board approved the following requests:
Budgets/Budget Transfers/Community Services/Corrections
Libraries/Office of Budget/Resolutions
Request from the Office of Budget for approval of the following:
Budget Transfers
Fund: Landfill Enterprise
Department: Public Services
Division: Solid Waste Management
From: Capital Outlay $74,906.00 To: Operating Expenses $74,906.00
Transfer No.: 93-0405
Fund: General
Department: Property Appraiser
From: Contingency Reserve $18,810.00
To: Operating Expenses $18,810.00
Transfer No.: 93-0406
Fund: County Transportation Trust
Department: Public Services
Division: Roads
From: Operating Expenses $36,033.00
To: Personal Services $36,033.00
Transfer No.: 93-0407
Resolutions
Resolution requesting that the General Fund for 1993-94 be amended, to increase the total budget, to include unanticipated revenue received from the Women's Resource Center of Lake County, for the purpose of counseling abused children, in the amount of $750.00.
Resolution requesting that the Library Services Fund for
1993-94 be amended, to increase the total budget, to include unanticipated revenue received from Library Services and the Construction Act Grant, for the purpose of preparing a long range plan for the Lake County Library System, in the amount of $15,000.00.
Resolution requesting that the General Fund for 1993-94 be amended, to increase the total budget, to include unanticipated revenue received from the Electronically Monitored House Arrest/Work Release Program, in the amount of $11,575.00.
Resolution requesting that the General Fund for 1993-94 be amended, to increase the total budget, to include unanticipated revenue received from the proceeds of an Interlocal Agreement between the Town of Montverde and the Lake County Sheriff's Office, to provide public safety services, in the amount of $5,000.00.
Accounts Allowed/Community Services/Public Health
Request from Community Services for authorization to pay the monthly Medicaid hospital bill, in the amount of $36,329.15, and the Medicaid nursing home bill, in the amount of $35,501.68, for the month of September.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/County Buildings & Grounds
Facilities and Capital Improvements
Request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for approval to execute Amendment No. 1 to the agreement between Lake County and Superior Janitorial Service, for janitorial service, and approval to execute a purchase order for Fiscal Year 1993-94, subject to final review and approval by the County Attorney's Office.
Animal Control/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Municipalities
Fire and Emergency Services
Request from Fire and Emergency Services for approval and execution of Interlocal Agreement between Lake County and the City of Tavares, for animal control services.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/County Employees/Insurance
Human Resources
Request from Human Resources for approval of the Voluntary Payroll Deduction Long Term Disability Plan Proposal, as recommended by said review committee; approval to authorize the Risk Manager to negotiate a contract, in the best interest of the County, to be effective January 1, 1994; and authorization for the Chairman to sign the contract, subject to final review and approval by the County Attorney's Office.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/County Employees/Insurance
Human Resources
Request from Human Resources for approval of the Voluntary Payroll Deduction Dental Plan, as recommended by said review committee; approval to authorize the Risk Manager to negotiate a contract, in the best interest of the County, to be effective January 1, 1994; and authorization for the Chairman to sign the contract, subject to final review and approval by the County Attorney's Office.
County Property/Insurance/Human Resources
Request from Human Resources for authorization for the Chairman to sign the Release of Property Damage form submitted by Florida Mining & Materials.
Planning and Development/Roads-County & State/State Agencies
Request from Planning and Development for retroactive approval of Local Government Notification for S.R. 46 Wildlife Crossing and authorization for the County Manager, or his designee, to approve future Local Government Notifications for Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) roadway projects.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Planning and Development/Zoning
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance and execution of a Developer's Agreement between Lake County and Johnnie S. Warren, providing for restrictions on land use density.
Building Department/Contracts, Leases & Agreements
Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance and execution of an agreement between Lake County and The Plantation At Leesburg Limited Partnership, relating to the issuance of building permits while platting is in progress.
Deeds/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance of the following Non-Exclusive Easement Deed:
Frank and America Lehner
Deeds/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance of the following Non-Exclusive Easement Deed:
Roger L. and Joan E. Fox
Deeds/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance of the following Non-Exclusive Easement Deed:
Robert J. and Gloria J. Douglas, Jr.
Deeds/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance of the following Non-Exclusive Easement Deed:
Richard C. and Dorothy Scott
Deeds/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance of the following Non-Exclusive Easement Deeds:
MacKay-Fisher Partners
Clement J. and Teresa A. Oullette
William B. Whaley
Joseph E. and Camilla Elaine Leonard
Deeds/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance of the following Non-Exclusive Easement Deed:
Dorothy C. Shipes, et al
Bonds/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for release of a Reclamation Bond, in the amount of $50,000.00, for Highland Growth Properties.
Rights-of-Way, Roads & Easements/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for final plat approval of The Plantation At Leesburg and Oak Tree Village and for acceptance of a Conservation Easement. (40 lots in Commission District 2)
Accounts Allowed/Bonds/Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for final plat approval of Greater Groves, Phase III, and for acceptance of a Performance Bond, in the amount of $137,800.30, subject to final review and approval by the County Attorney's Office.
Grants/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval and execution of the Fourth Quarter Waste Tire Grant Reimbursement Request and authorized proper signatures on same.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval of a temporary renewal of a septic franchise for Roto Rooter Sewer Service, until a permit procedure is approved, and authorized the Chairman to execute the agreement for renewal, subject to final review and approval by the County Attorney's Office.
Landfills/Public Services/Solid Waste
Request from Public Services for approval of the recommended lender and authorization to negotiate the final terms and conditions and other like things necessary to complete the financing for the proposed solid waste projects.
Public Services/Roads-County & State
Request from Public Services for acceptance of a 2,400 foot extension of Lake Jem Road (CR3-3267) into the County maintenance system.
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for acceptance of the following Statutory Warranty Deeds:
Jonathan E. and Michelle K. Arbuthnot
Marion County Road (5-8010)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for acceptance of the following Statutory Warranty Deed:
Chandler D. Carter
Lake Yale Road (5-7753)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for acceptance of the following Statutory Warranty Deed:
Daniel W. and Colleen M. Halstead
Marion County Road (5-8010)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for acceptance of the following:
Statutory Warranty Deed
Odis and Lillie McFadden
Marshall Street (5-7367)
Non-Exclusive Easement Deed
Odis and Lillie McFadden
Mills Street (5-7264)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for acceptance of the following Statutory Warranty Deed:
Highland Construction Company of Clermont, Inc.,
a Florida Corporation
South Buckhill Road (2-2439)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for acceptance of the following Quit-Claim Deed:
Jovita Gonzalez Castillo, Clemente Castillo,
Benjamin Castillo, and Jose Valentin Castillo
Pine Island Drive (5-6043A)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for acceptance of the following Statutory Warranty Deeds:
Gerald R. and Robert J. Eulett
Orange Blossom Road (3-2831)
Ray L. Snow
Pruitt Street (1-4805)
Samuel and Margaret Snow
Pruitt Street (1-4805)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for acceptance of the following Statutory Warranty Deed:
Lynn Matthew and Melody Dawn Bishop
(87.12% interest) and
Glen and Myrtle Marie Bishop
(12.88% interest)
Florida Boys Ranch Road (2-0729)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for acceptance of the following Statutory Warranty Deeds:
Rufus Persley and Betty J. Humphries
(Joint Tenants)
Radio Road (1/5-5433)
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:
Deed: 977
Applicant: John D. and Margaret K. Jackson
Location: Three Lakes Subdivision, Dona Vista Area
Recommendation: Reserve 33 feet from centerline on Sunrise Terrace (5-6765) and 33 feet from centerline on Turner Drive (5-6764).
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:
Deed: 1171
Applicant: Rosaura Soto and Adam Soto
Location: North of Minneola, Section 19,
Township 21S, Range 26E
Recommendation: Reserve 50 feet from centerline on C-561.
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:
Deed: 1389
Applicant: Oliver Elliott
Location: Southeast of Lady Lake, Section 22,
Township 18S, Range 24E
Recommendation: Reserve 33 feet from centerline on Edwards Road (5-7009).
Deeds/Public Services
Request from Public Services for approval of the following recommendations on the release of Murphy Act State Road Reservations:
Deed: 2755
Applicant: Larry R. and Diane L. Mosley
Location: Mt. Plymouth, Section "A", Section 28, Township 19S, Range 28E
Recommendation: Reserve 25 feet from centerline on Sackamaxon Drive (4-4289).
Municipalities/Public Services/Road Closings
Request from Public Services for approval to advertise Road Vacation Petition No. 742, by Ruth H. Dean, to vacate road, Section 31, Township 17, Range 25, Altoona Area - Commissioner District 5.
Municipalities/Public Services/Road Closings
Request from Public Services for approval to advertise Road Vacation Petition No. 743, by Ward J. Griner, to vacate road, Sunset Hills, Section 34, Township 19, Range 27, Mt. Dora Area - Commissioner District 4.
Accounts Allowed/Purchasing
Request from Purchasing for approval to advertise for bids, proposals, and professional services; award and issue purchase orders for quotes, bids, proposals, annual bids, State Contract, G.S.A. Cooperative Bids, OEM Repairs, sole source and proprietor source; and approve and execute contracts and encumber funds, as follows:
B) Authorization to Waive Bid Requirements and Accept Quotes and Issue Purchase Orders.
DIVISION AMOUNT
1) PUBLIC SERVICES $ 8,300.00
Central Lighting Protection/Authorization to issue a Purchase Order for lightening and surge protection to five Public Services facilities. It is requested that the Bid process be waived and accept the low quote, due to the urgency of obtaining protection for Public Service's computer equipment and peripherals from lightening and surge damage. Two quotes were received, award recommendation is to the low quote. Estimated savings between high and low quote is $713.00.
D) Issue Purchase Orders for Services or Commodities from Annual Bids, State Contract, G.S.A., or Cooperative Bids.
DIVISION AMOUNT
1) SOLID WASTE $17,523.00
Rehrig Pacific Company/Authorization to piggy back off of the existing Bid for Recycling Containers, No.B-5-3-7, and issue a Purchase Order for 5,900 each recycling containers. The Board approved the award of the original Bid on August 17, 1993.
E) Authorization to waive Bid Requirements and Issue Purchase Orders for Services or Commodities that are Not Bid or Quoted, or if they are OEM Repairs.
DIVISION AMOUNT
1) FIRE/EMERGENCY SERVICES $ 8,292.82
Unisys Corporation/Authorization to issue a Purchase Order for a maintenance agreement on the Unisys Equipment used by the Lake County Property Appraiser for fire assessments. This payment by the Department of Fire and Emergency Services is part of an agreement with the Property Appraiser.
2) SOLID WASTE $ 15,360.00
Dickey Scales, Inc./Authorization to issue a blanket Purchase Order, within budgeted funds, for the maintenance and repair of Solid Waste's scales and computer equipment.
F) Approve and Execute Contract, Agreements, Amendments, Chairman's Signature and Encumber Funds.
DIVISION AMOUNT
1) Information Services $43,996.50
Telecommunications 29,703.36
Public Services 3,004.80
Fire & Emergency 375.00 Agriculture 756.00
Tourist Development 300.00
GTE Communications/Authorization to encumber funds and issue a contract, pending the County Attorney's approval, for repair and maintenance of the County's communications system. This agreement is effective from October 1, 1993 through September 30, 1994.
Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote on the County Manager's Consent Agenda.
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/ASSESSMENTS/CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS
Regarding the matter of Tab 27, of the County Manager's Consent Agenda, Commr. Swartz stated that it was always a concern to him when the County goes forward with a sole source item, such as in this particular request. He stated that he was not sure why the County would not bid the hardware, regardless of the situation, and stated that he would like to see a broader evaluation of what other counties may be doing, or what other types of programs they may have available. He stated that he had a problem with the County spending $58,000.00 for a consultant to do configuration training and data loading during the first year, noting that special assessments have been in use for a number of years.
Mr. Ron Roche, Director of Solid Waste, appeared before the Board stating that the County has an existing bid for the hardware, however, the hardware in this proposal is lower than that bid. He stated that the idea was to try to get the hardware and the software manufactured the same, in case something does not work, because no other such package exists. He stated that the bid of $58,000.00 is approximately $20,000.00 below the latest application for the installation of this software program.
Commr. Swartz stated that the Computer Committee was formed to review these types of computer purchases, hardware and software, even if it is a sole source matter, however, noted that the Computer Committee had not reviewed this request.
It was noted that this request is extremely time sensitive.
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, responded to Commr. Swartz's comments stating that, for particular specialized applications, the knowledge base of the Computer Committee is not broad enough to address comment on the subject and that is why specialized applications are rarely taken to the Computer Committee.
Discussion occurred regarding the number of work stations (6) being requested and the possibility of eliminating some of those stations. Commr. Swartz stated that he wanted to make sure the County gets what it needs, but that it not get more than it needs. He further stated that he did not want to see the County pay a consultant to show staff how to utilize something that Mr. Roche had stated he helped design.
Discussion continued regarding the matter, at which time Commr. Swartz stated that he did not see any sense in the County having a Computer Committee, if it was not going to have the committee review requests such as this one.
A motion was made by Commr. Cadwell and seconded by Commr. Bailey to postpone action regarding this request, being a request for approval to purchase an assessment system from the Main Line Corporation for the Integrated Special Assessment Management System, in the amount of $90,000.00, and that it be taken before the Computer Committee, for a recommendation, and that said recommendation be brought back to the Board, at the next regularly scheduled meeting, on November 23, 1993.
Under discussion, Commr. Hanson questioned whether this system was going to create savings for the County.
Mr. Roche stated that it would and was requested to have said figures available for the Board's review, before the November 23, 1993 meeting.
Mr. Jim Stivender, Jr., Director of Public Services, interjected that the main thing the system in question will eliminate is overtime pay.
It was noted that, with this system, the County would not be interrelating with the Property Appraiser.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously.
DEEDS/MUNICIPALITIES/RIGHTS-OF-WAY, ROADS & EASEMENTS
Mr. Frank Gaylord, Interim County Attorney, explained this request and answered questions from the Board regarding same.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Public Services for authorization for the Chairman to execute a Statutory Quit-Claim Deed to the City of Clermont and the City of Minneola, for the County owned T & G Railroad right-of-way, which is in their respective city limits, and directed staff to prepare the necessary documents, determine if a public hearing is required and, if so, to schedule said hearing.
COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA (CONT'D.)
CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS/COUNTY EMPLOYEES/INSURANCE
HUMAN RESOURCES (CONT'D.)
Commr. Cadwell referred back to Tab 12, of the County Manager's Consent Agenda, which was a request for approval of the Voluntary, Payroll Deduction Dental Plan and authorization for the Risk Manager to negotiate a contract, in the best interest of the County, to be effective January 1, 1994, and stated that he would like, over the next six months or so, an accounting of how many people sign up for the Indemnity Plan.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, noted that he would furnish Commr. Cadwell with same.
CITIZEN QUESTION AND COMMENT PERIOD
No one present wished to address the Board.
COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS (CONT'D.)
CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS/COUNTY PROPERTY
FACILITIES AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Mr. Mike Anderson, Director of Facilities and Capital Improvements, explained this request and answered questions from the Board regarding same.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Facilities and Capital Improvements for Martin Paving Company to lease four (4) acres of industrial park property, for approximately three months, for the purpose of installing a temporary asphalt batch plant.
BUILDING DEPARTMENT/HUMAN RESOURCES
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/ZONING
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, explained this request and noted that said position will not be filled until funding is identified.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Human Resources for approval to reclassify the Building and Zoning Supervisor position, Pay Range 605-00, to Building Inspector/Plans Examiner, Pay Range 130-01, in Building Services, One-Stop Permitting, Department of Planning and Development, subject to funding being available.
HUMAN RESOURCES/PUBLIC SERVICES/SIGNS
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, requested that Tab 50, a request from Human Resources for approval to reclassify the Senior Sign Fabricator position, Pay Range 223-01, to Sign Fabricator II, Pay Range 221-01, in Traffic Safety Services, Engineering Division, Department of Public Services, be withdrawn at this time.
No action was needed or taken.
COUNTY EMPLOYEES/HUMAN RESOURCES/OFFICE OF TOURISM
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, explained this request.
Commr. Gerber questioned whether it could be worked out to where the Welcome Center would only have one temporary part-time position.
Mr. Wahl responded, stating that the new temporary positions are necessary to cover the extended hours of operation at the Welcome Center.
A brief discussion occurred regarding the matter.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Human Resources for approval of funding for two (2) new temporary part-time positions for the Lake County Welcome Center, Office of Tourism.
COUNTY EMPLOYEES/HUMAN RESOURCES/OFFICE OF TOURISM
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Human Resources for approval of funds to cover the increased overtime at the Lake County Welcome Center, Office of Tourism.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/RESOLUTIONS
Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planner, Planning Division, Planning and Development, explained this request and answered questions from the Board regarding same.
Mr. Knight then stated that there had been some talk about a silva-culture amendment by the County, as well as a rural village extension, and questioned whether the Board wanted to hold a workshop meeting to initiate Comprehensive Plan amendments, prior to it going to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
It was noted that the Board did not feel that a workshop meeting was necessary, at this time.
Commr. Swartz stated that staff could prepare the amendments, however, at some point, the Board would need to see them.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Planning and Development for approval of a Resolution establishing a Comprehensive Plan Amendment Schedule for Calendar Year 1994 and authorized proper signatures on same.
CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS/MUNICIPALITIES
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Frank Gaylord, Interim County Attorney, informed the Board that, regarding the issue of annexing developed unincorporated enclaves of 10 acres or less, he had met with various city attorneys and was in the process of drafting procedures related to how an interlocal agreement works. He stated that it would be his recommendation to issue the agreements on a case-by-case basis and utilize a uniform agreement. He stated that the Board would need to decide whether they wanted to hold a public hearing and, if so, what body they would want to hold the hearing before. He stated that, if the County wanted a municipality to annex an area, then the County should hold the public hearing, however, if the municipality wanted to annex a particular area, then that municipality should hold the public hearing.
Commr. Swartz stated that he would like to have a review authority make that determination.
Mr. Gaylord stated that they are in the process of defining what "improved" means, under the Florida Statutes.
Discussion occurred regarding the reference of ten acres and whether it meant ten 10 acre parcels, or ten acres exclusively, and whether Section 171.046 of the Florida Statutes was clear, or whether it warranted the Attorney General's opinion on some points. Mr. Harry Glass, a local resident, appeared before the Board stating that he would like to continue coming before the Board, rather than the cities.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Planning and Development to authorize staff to work with municipalities to develop uniform interlocal agreements, pursuant to Section 171.046 of the Florida Statutes, and the process and procedures for the County to follow, for the purpose of annexing developed unincorporated enclaves of 10 acres or less.
ORDINANCES/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, explained this request.
Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planner, Planning Division, Planning and Development, appeared before the Board and answered questions regarding the request. He stated that, up to this point in time, the impact fee on a mobile home stayed with the property, however, the impact fee on a conventional home followed the home. He stated that, only in the event that a conventional home is destroyed on the property and does not move, does the impact fee stay with that piece of property.
Commr. Hanson stated that she did not feel it was right to carry the impact fee with the mobile home.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, interjected that the County is proposing that the impact fee be attached to the property. He noted, however, that, if one happens to move a mobile home from Property A to Property B, within the same impact fee district, and Property B has never had a mobile home on it, then one would have to pay an additional impact fee.
Commr. Hanson stated that she felt, if one knows that the property that one has moved their mobile home or house from will never have another dwelling on it, then the impact fee should transfer with the house.
Discussion continued, at which time Mr. Wahl, County Manager, stated that he had met with Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, a local attorney, and that she concurs with the fact that, if a piece of property has been developed for use as a meets and bounds lot, with a mobile home on it, it is going to have all the infrastructure in place to support a residential structure, which gives it the ability to have an impact on the system. He stated that, currently, the County is dealing with conventionally built homes and mobile homes differently and that is why staff is proposing that the County deal with mobile homes the same way they would deal with conventionally built homes.
Commr. Hanson stated that she did not feel there should be a difference between a conventional home and a mobile home.
Mr. Knight stated that Option 1 puts "prior to" in the School Impact Fee Ordinance, which means that, if a mobile home was ever on the site, the County is going to credit it, which he noted is the set up that the County is presently working with.
Discussion continued, at which time Commr. Swartz stated that the Board needed a determination of whether they meant "on the date of adoption" or whether they meant "from the date of adoption or prior to".
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved to insert the language "on or prior to" in both the School and Transportation Impact Fee Ordinances, concerning the issue of implementation of exemptions for the installation of replacement mobile homes, with the same number of bedrooms, legally existing when the impact fee ordinances are adopted, as requested by Planning and Development.
Mr. Knight interjected that said language does not change the relocation issue at all.
A motion was made by Commr. Hanson and seconded by Commr. Bailey that both school and transportation impact fees be carried with the land, for tracking purposes.
Under discussion, Commr. Swartz stated that he felt it should remain the way that it presently is.
Commr. Hanson disagreed, stating that she felt it was inconsistent.
Commr. Bailey called for a question, which was carried.
Commr. Swartz voted "No".
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried.
Commrs. Swartz and Cadwell voted "No".
ADDENDUM NO. 1
OTHER BUSINESS
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/COMMITTEES/ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
A brief discussion occurred regarding this request.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board appointed Mr. Bob Farner to the Lake County Environmental Protection Board, to fill the vacant position of Engineering Representative.
REPORTS
RESOLUTIONS
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved a Resolution proclaiming the month of December, 1993, as "Drunk and Drugged Driving Prevention Month".
MINUTES (CONT'D.)
Mr. Frank Gaylord, Interim County Attorney, requested the Board to refer back to the Minutes of September 14, 1993 (Special Meeting), which was the final public hearing for the Land Development Regulations, noting that he had requested Mr. Tim Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney, to inform him of needed changes, as follows:
On Page 2, Line 6, delete preliminary final, an individual would receive. That portion of the sentence would now read "a Lot of Record determination, Lake County would honor this".
On Page 2, Line 8, delete the word and.
On Page 15, Line 1, change 1985 to 1995.
On Page 17, Line 5, after the word "versus" delete lots of and insert of title after the word "unity" .
On Page 17, Line 9, insert the word not before the word "have".
On Page 21, Line 32, change the date of September 13, 1993 to September 14, 1993.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of September 14, 1993 (Special Meeting - LDRs), as corrected.
REPORTS (CONT'D.)
COUNTY MANAGER
COUNTY PROPERTY
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, requested approval from the Board to use a county owned tractor and trailer for Christmas parades to be held in the County on December 11 and 14, 1993.
A brief discussion occurred.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from the County Manager to use a county owned tractor and trailer for Christmas parades to be held in the County on December 11 and 14, 1993.
RESOLUTIONS
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a Proclamation declaring the week of November 18-24, 1993, as "Farm-City Week".
COMMISSIONERS
Commr. Hanson urged those Commissioners who are out speaking in the communities to make sure that any statements they make about the Board, or its actions, be made known that it is that Commissioner's opinion and not necessarily based on fact, and that, if it is based on fact, to provide said fact. She stated that she felt it was a matter of professional courtesy. She stated that some of the issues can be very emotional and, without the facts to back up an opinion, it can be very damaging, not only to the Board, but to the County, as well.
MUNICIPALITIES
Commr. Cadwell informed the Board, for informational purposes, that Thursday, November 18, 1993, was the Tavares Kiwanis Club Dinner, in observance of Farm-City Week.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 12:40 p.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess until 2:00 p.m. for a workshop meeting.
WORKSHOP - ODELL & ASSOCIATES
BUDGETS/COUNTY BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS/COURTHOUSE
Mr. Mike Anderson, Director of Facilities and Capital Improvements, introduced Ms. Debra Guglielmo, from Guglielmo & Associates; Mr. Terry Short, from Odell & Associates; Mr. Bill Horan, Museum Coordinator; and Mr. Doug Conway, Facilities and Capital Improvements Coordinator, to the Board and stated that the reason he had requested this workshop was to bring to the Board's attention three areas of the renovation project that he felt should be addressed, as a result of going through the schematic end of the design/development stage of the project.
Museum Relocation and Renovation
Mr. Anderson, Director of Facilities and Capital Improvements, stated that, in working with Odell & Associates about the relocation of the museum, he found that the building itself is as much a part of the display of the museum as the artifacts themselves. He stated that, to take the displays from the present museum and move them into a larger area will not do the museum justice. He stated that he had discussed the issue with Mr. Short and Ms. Guglielmo, who did the original museum layout and is recognized throughout the country for a lot of outstanding work.
Mr. Anderson stated that Ms. Guglielmo had been requested to work with Odell & Associates and talk about what could be done to properly display and house the museum in the Historical Courthouse. He stated that the reason he felt this issue needed to be addressed was that, in looking at the proposal, he was not aware of the work that the move would entail and that, in discussing the matter with Mr. Short, found that it was more than what Odell & Associates had originally felt it would entail.
Mr. James C. Watkins, Clerk, who had worked very closely with Mr. Glenn Burhans, past Commissioner of the Lake County Board of County Commissioners, and Mr. Bill Horan, Museum Coordinator, in obtaining a State grant for the purpose of creating the present museum, informed the Board that he originally felt they did not have the expertise necessary to truly design a museum and suggested that they contact Ms. Guglielmo. He stated that it was Ms. Guglielmo's expertise, much of which was volunteered, along with the help of Mr. Horan, that created the present museum. He stated that Ms. Guglielmo is an expert in her field. He stated that he felt the County would be shortsighted if they did not spend a little money now and have something that will last a lifetime, probably forever. He recommended that the Board approve the project and, specifically, Ms. Guglielmo.
Mr. Bill Horan, Museum Coordinator, appeared before the Board stating that, by the museum being relocated to the Historical Courthouse, he felt that the museum's exposure would increase, not only from the schools in Lake County, but from Lake-Sumter Community College, as well, and visitation from other schools and universities throughout the State. He stated that he felt the museum should be second to none in the State, because the County has everything to put in place a classic museum that will last forever.
Mr. Horan stated that Ms. Guglielmo was ranked third, out of 1,261 designers nationally, who will be competing in an indian exhibit movement competition that will be taking place at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D.C., so he feels that it is a credit to Lake County for her to put this County's museum on track.
Ms. Guglielmo, Guglielmo & Associates, appeared before the Board and commended the County on having the foresight to salvage and keep what is a part of the County's past, being the Historical Courthouse, noting that too many counties throughout the State are letting them go. She noted that Orange County and several other surrounding counties are watching this county very closely, as far as the museum and its location is concerned. She stated that so many of the projects she works with, in the State of Florida, as well as in the southeast part of the country, have a tendency to build new monuments to the past.
Ms. Guglielmo then gave a slide presentation, to give the Board some insight into the planning of the relocation of the museum, noting that it is vital, at this point in time, for the Board to decide what they want to do, when they relocate the museum.
Mr. Anderson stated that the County will be using grant money, when possible, during the relocation project. He stated that, regarding the consultant's fee for Guglielmo & Associates, he feels that, in talking with Mr. Short, the County can absorb that cost without affecting the bottom line of the budget. He stated, however, that there may be some costs associated with the construction and the County may have to make some adjustments.
Mr. Anderson stated that, since the renovation of the Historical Courthouse is a stand alone project, all the departments that will be moving into it can stay where they presently are, until the Historical Courthouse is ready to receive them, or are housed in facilities that are going to be renovated, so they can adjust the schedule and take advantage of the timing that is necessary for obtaining grant funding.
Commr. Swartz noted some concerns he had about the relocation of the museum to the Historical Courthouse and the need for expertise in designing it to accept the traffic that will be going through the courthouse, as well as to serve as a museum that is functional.
Ms. Guglielmo addressed Commr. Swartz's concerns.
Commr. Hanson stated that she felt it was very important that the museum be attractive, not only to the residents of Lake County, but to those that might be traveling through, noting that it will be an attraction.
Commr. Swartz stated that he felt the relocation of the museum to the Historical Courthouse was an opportunity that only comes around once every twenty or forty years, therefore, felt that the County should take the opportunity to make a significant improvement that will last for a long time. He stated that there is interest in the project, so he felt that now was the time to do it.
Asbestos Abatement within the Round Building
Mr. Anderson, Director of Facilities and Capital Improvements, informed the Board of areas where asbestos can be found in the Round Building (Administration Building). He stated that he had been informed by environmental engineers from Atec Associates, Inc. that the asbestos is not a friable material, unless it is deliberately scuffed up or abraded. He requested approval from the Board to let Atec Associates, Inc. prepare a bid package, for the asbestos abatement, at an estimated cost of $38,650.00.
Qualification Criteria for the Selection of General Contractor for Renovation Project and Review of Project Budget
Mr. Anderson, Director of Facilities & Capital Improvements, informed the Board that he and Mr. Terry Short, Odell & Associates, had come up with a contract methodology, which he noted would be a GMP (Guaranteed Maximum Price). He stated that they had put together the selection criteria for the general contractor - the steps that are going to lead up to the selection of a general contractor and not necessarily the content or scope of work contained within the G.C.'s (General Contractors) contract. He recommended going with a single general contractor.
Mr. Terry Short, Odell & Associates, appeared before the Board stating that one overall factor of this project is that they need someone who is responsible and in control of the project and another factor is the quality of work. He stated that the main advantage to a GMP approach (the approach that they are recommending) is the ability to have a contractor on board, so that there will not be disruptions and other types of problems.
Mr. Short discussed the various stages that will be involved in the process, if the Board approves the recommendation to go with a GMP (Guaranteed Maximum Price). He stated that they have had inquiries from the Orlando and Tampa market, as well as from some local general contractors, and that they will specifically question how the contractors from the Orlando and Tampa areas plan to involve Lake County contractors in the project.
Mr. Anderson stated that the County will need to create a selection committee, since this type of contract is not one that is formally covered under an ordinance with the County. He stated that he would like to follow the outline that the County has had success with in the past, with the design/build projects. He stated that he felt a five member selection committee would be sufficient, comprising the County Manager, or his designee; one of the County Commissioners; the Director of Facilities and Capital Improvements; an engineer from Public Services; and a member that could be selected by the Board, or named by the County Manager. He stated it has been suggested that the architect be a member of the selection committee, either in a non-voting or voting capacity. He stated that another consideration would be a contractor, but he felt that it should be somebody that has a better than layman's understanding of contract negotiations and construction, not necessarily somebody with a vested interest, directly related to the project.
Mr. Anderson stated that, if the members of said committee cannot be named this date, he would like to have a list of same by the first meeting in December, 1993, for approval. He stated that, to date, the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners has acted as the member of the committee representing the Board. He stated that, in the past, in dealing with a design/build project, he has always invited the County Attorney, or someone from the County Attorney's Office, to sit in on the meetings, as a non-voting member, to keep everyone straight, and that he would like to do so in this case, as well.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board authorized staff to go forward with the Museum relocation and renovation; asbestos abatement within the Administration Building (Round Building); and with the selection criteria, the GMP (Guaranteed Maximum Price), and the single general contractor concept for the renovation project, as presented to the Board.
PUBLIC SERVICES/ROADS-COUNTY & STATE/ROAD PROJECTS
Commr. Hanson brought up for discussion the issue of the Lake Shore Drive Road Project, noting that she had spoken with Mr. Jim Stivender, Jr., Director of Public Services, about the matter and that she would like to have the public hearing concerning it advertised as soon as possible. She stated that the Board had promised the residents that the public hearing would be held in November (1993) and, due to the fact that it will not be heard at that time, felt that, by advertising it, the perception will be that the Board is moving forward on the matter.
Commr. Swartz stated that he did not want to see the Board schedule meetings until County staff has had the opportunity to prepare adequately what they are proposing to do and be able to address any questions that might arise. He stated that he did not want to rush the project.
Commr. Hanson stated that she felt the Board needed a time frame, so that the public and staff will know that there is a goal. She stated that, at the present time, there is no goal and she did not think that was fair to the public.
Commr. Swartz stated that there are a lot of very critical issues that have to be dealt with, concerning this project, and that he did not want to select an arbitrary date for the public hearing to be held. He stated that he is concerned about the fact that there is a great deal of misunderstanding about the project and that a lot of information has been put out that is not correct. He stated that he has been working with staff and that a public hearing can probably be held sometime after the first of the year (1994). He stated that he had spoken with the Bicycle Pedestrian Coordinator and had received some ideas that staff is now looking into, that deal with the heart of some of the issues that some of the residents have questions about.
Commr. Bailey stated that he had received some calls about the project and the perception of the general public is that the Board is stonewalling the issue and nothing is being done. He suggested that the Board at least give the residents involved some kind of schedule.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he felt, if the road in question is completely in Commr. Swartz's district and he has set forth a path that he feels is appropriate to get the job done, that the rest of the Board should stay out of it. He stated that he felt an update would only get everyone involved upset again and may harm some of the work that has been done. He stated that he felt the Board should wait it out and let it take its course and, if the public feels that the Board is stonewalling it, then have them call the district commissioner.
Commr. Swartz stated he had informed people that he had spoken to about the matter that, if the Board cannot put together a proposal that addresses the concerns that they have, so that they do not believe the County is going to turn the road into a three or four lane super highway, at 65 mph, doing death and harm to the people and wildlife, and cannot convince them that it is a good project, he is not going to try and ram it down their throats, but he did not want to go forward and be unprepared. He stated that he had been working with Mr. Stivender in trying to get information together.
Commr. Hanson noted, for the record, that she had brought the issue up for discussion, but apparently the Board did not wish to set a time frame, at this time, to let the people involved know when they could receive a proposal.
Commr. Swartz stated Mr. Stivender informed him that he is not ready to go forward with the project and that his staff is working on the other thing that has significantly impacted this potential project, which is that the original cost estimate for doing the entire road is not sufficient, so they may be changing the scope of the work. He stated that what he is having Mr. Stivender do is what should have been done before the issue was ever put on the agenda for consideration, knowing the concern might be raised, which is to address all the other issues that are legitimate ones.
A motion was made by Commr. Hanson and seconded by Commr. Bailey that a date be set in January, 1994, to have some sort of update, report, or hearing on the matter.
Under discussion, Commr. Gerber suggested that Mr. Stivender, Director of Public Services, present to the Board what his scope of work has been, so far, and let everybody know what he has been working on, without public comment. She stated that it would be on the agenda, as an agenda item, and when someone calls, staff can tell them, for informational purposes, that they would be welcome to attend the meeting and listen to what has transpired, up to that point.
Commr. Cadwell disagreed with Commr. Gerber's suggestion, noting that he felt it would only give that much more of an appearance of impropriety.
Commr. Swartz stated that he is working as diligently as he can with staff and that he feels it is far worse to go forward with a proposal that does not deal with the issues, than it is to wait until the Board has a proposal that has a reasonable chance of answering the questions that will be raised.
Commr. Hanson stated that she felt staff will have had plenty of time to come up with a reasonable proposal and that she did not feel they would come back to the Board with a proposal that would not deal with the issues.
Commr. Swartz stated that he was trying to deal with what is an important issue for the people who live along that road and an important issue for a lot of other roads in the County. He stated that he would like to have the opportunity to meet with groups of people where they can have a dialogue, not just go to a public hearing where there are hundreds of people involved. He requested the Board not to approve the motion.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which failed by a three to two vote.
Commrs. Gerber, Cadwell and Swartz voted "No".
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:15 p.m.
________________________________
CATHERINE C. HANSON, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
_________________________________
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK
sec/11-16-93/1-12-94/boardmin
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in special session on Tuesday, November 16, 1993, at 5:05 p.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: G. Richard Swartz, Jr., Chairman; Catherine C. Hanson, Vice Chairman; Rhonda H. Gerber; Don Bailey; and Welton G. Cadwell. Others present were: Frank T. Gaylord, Interim County Attorney; Peter F. Wahl, County Manager; Ava Kronz, BCC Office Manager; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/ZONING
The Chairman called the meeting to order and opened the public hearing.
Mr. Greg Beliveau, Land Planning Group, Inc., appeared before the Board stating that he had appeared before the Board at a previous meeting, dealing with the Land Development Regulations (LDRs), and had requested clarification on Lots of Record, due to the fact that he was representing a woman who was involved in a Lot of Record issue. He then gave a brief scenario of the situation he was involved in and stated that he was told there were two options available to him, being (1) that he could request the Board to insert a variance procedure in the Lot of Record Ordinance, to handle cases such as the one that he was representing, or (2) request that the date of the Lot of Record be changed from 1982 to some other date, either the date of July, 1991, when the Comprehensive Plan was originally approved, or to the date of March, 1993. He stated that his client has two acres of land that she pays taxes on, but can do nothing with.
Discussion occurred, at which time Commr. Swartz stated that the matter in question could not be defined as a Lot of Record issue, therefore, questioned why it could not be taken before the Board of Adjustment, to find out whether or not a variance could be granted.
Mr. Greg Stubbs, One-Stop Permitting Center Coordinator and Director of Development Regulations, stated that the issue could be put before the Board of Adjustments, but that staff could not recommend approval of it. He stated that the only thing that could be done would be to change the definition of a Lot of Record.
Commr. Swartz stated that, if the Board were to change the Lot of Record definition, then they would be saying to all those people who went through the Lot of Record procedures correctly, that they spent their money needlessly because, in the end, they would have been able to obtain a Lot of Record after all. He stated that there were two possible recourses for Mr. Beliveau's client, being (1) that sometime in the future his client might be able to subdivide her two acres into two one acre lots, assuming timeliness occurred, or (2) she could go back through the process and the purchaser.
Mr. Rolon Reed, representing himself and the Lake County Conservation Council, appeared before the Board and stated that Section 163.3202 of the Florida Statutes states that the LDRs must be consistent with and implement the adopted Comprehensive Plan and that, according to Section 163.3194 of the Florida Statutes, inconsistent LDRs are illegal.
Mr. Reed stated that the Board has probably been told that they do not have to submit the LDRs directly to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), for approval, the way that they had to submit the 1991 Comprehensive Plan and all the various subsequent amendments, however, what the Board may not have been told is that it is rather simple for any affected person to bring DCA back into the process. He stated that all said person would have to do would be to file a written complaint with the County showing how the LDRs are inconsistent with the latest adopted Comprehensive Plan and 30 days later, unless the County agrees with them, that person is free to petition DCA to review the LDRs for inconsistency.
Mr. Reed stated that, if DCA agrees they are inconsistent, they begin another administrative proceeding before a hearing officer. He stated that he had no doubt DCA would agree that most of the LDRs being considered this date are totally inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that there is a brazen and deliberate effort to exempt as many paper plats as possible from the impact of the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Reed stated that Policy 1-12A.1 of the amended Comprehensive Plan contains a legally correct definition of statutory and common law vesting and the LDRs before the Board this date go far beyond the accepted limits. He stated that, instead of protecting what has traditionally been recognized as vested rights, he feels that the Board is trying to create vested wrongs. He stated that it is wrong to allow any person who ever submitted a piece of paper to any county office to do whatever he or she wants to do with their land and that it is wrong to pass the inevitable cost of it all onto the taxpayers, when State law mandates that new development pay its own way.
Mr. Reed stated that even handed enforcement of the 1993 Comprehensive Plan will cost some land owners a lot of money, especially those who expected to tax onto the rest of the people in the County the expense of new roads, new schools, more police, and more firemen, which their projects will obviously require the County to incur. He stated that it is very clear that recent growth in Lake County has totally failed to pay its own way. He stated that, in the last ten years, the County's property tax rate has doubled, going from virtually nothing to more than $130 million, and this is what growth management was designed to stop.
Mr. Reed stated that it is wrong to defy State law and foolish to listen to false prophets who tell the Board that they can change the law by changing lawyers. He stated that Lake County is a political subdivision of the State of Florida, yet today it is being run like a "banana" republic.
Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, a local attorney, appeared before the Board stating that, being she had heard the Board threatened once again, felt that she must speak out. She stated that, although the Board was asked initially to look at both consistency and concurrency, the only thing that the Board has been dealing with, for months, is consistency, in terms of vested rights. She stated that they have not addressed anything in the concurrency section, which deals with growth paying its own way. She stated that apparently Mr. Reed had attended different hearings than the ones she attended, or has failed to understand that nothing in the concurrency section has changed.
Ms. Bonifay stated that she felt Mr. Reed had used very strong words in accusing the Board of having an abusive office and being negligent in not following the Growth Management Act. She stated that nothing specific has been received from the Lake County Conservation Council, it is just that they do not like the Comprehensive Plan and anyone who allows development to go forward in any shape, form, or fashion in this county is on their wrong side and must be stopped at all costs. She stated that she felt the Board had held sufficient workshops and had received sufficient public input and that they needed to move forward with the adoption of the proposed LDRs.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Mr. Stubbs, One-Stop Permitting Center Coordinator and Director of Development Regulations, referred to the Draft Amendments to the LDRs, dated November 10, 1993, and noted the following changes:
On Page IV-1, in the first sentence of Paragraph 1. b., 250 feet should be changed to 150 feet.
On Page IV-2, in Paragraph 2. a. 2., the word and should be struck, as well as the wording for all other runways.
On Page IV-5, in the first sentence of Paragraph 4. a., the word in should be changed to is.
Commr. Swartz stated that he wanted to determine whether there was language that could be adopted and inserted in the LDRs that would deal with the period of time from the adoption of the new LDRs, in June 1992, until the adoption of the revised LDRs before the Board this date, that would put the road requirement back in. He stated that, over the course of that period of time, any parcels that may have gotten Lot of Record determinations would still have to put in a road, or would be required to aggregate. He noted that the road requirement is in the LDRs before the Board this date.
Upon being questioned as to how many Lot of Record determinations the County has granted since adoption of the new LDRs, in June, 1992, Mr. Tim Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney, informed the Board that, after June 1, 1992, the County granted final Lot of Record determinations for 58 applications and that, so far this year, the County has received approximately 91 applications that will be final Lot of Record determinations. He stated that each application will affect between one and twenty-six lots.
Commr. Hanson stated that many of the lots in question have already been sold.
Commr. Swartz interjected that the present language would not affect the lots that have been sold, because it only requires aggregation of those lots that are contiguous and under common ownership.
Commr. Hanson stated that she hoped the Board understood that what they were doing was eliminating the Lot of Record determinations being vested. She stated that the Board was really affecting much more than those lots that had been discussed, because some of those people got Lots of Records five years ago.
Mr. Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney, stated that the Lot of Record determinations issued before June 1, 1992 had the road requirement built in, due to the fact that they referenced the old Code sections.
Commr. Hanson stated that the road requirement is in place, but she felt the Board did not understand that one has to aggregate to five acres. She stated that, before the road requirement was for aggregation, one had to aggregate two or three lots together. She stated that she felt the Board was getting ready to open a can of worms and that they were going to affect a lot of little people. She stated that the Board had agreed earlier that they were going to vest the Lots of Record - that once an individual had gotten their final Lot of Record determination, filed a Unity of Record, and done everything that the County said they needed to do, that the County was going to vest them, however, the language before the Board this date negates that.
Commr. Swartz stated that the County has a road policy that has been in place since the early 1980s that staff has adhered to, in order to ensure that the County does not use special assessment funds for a development.
Commr. Hanson stated that the language in question does not exclude those roads that are in existing subdivisions, such as in Mt. Plymouth. She stated that there may be houses on every 100 foot lot, on one side of the road, and, on the other side of the road, one property owner may own 25 lots. She stated that, traditionally, those people have been able to get special assessments. She stated that the Board has already agreed that an individual is going to have to aggregate to five acres, in a rural designation, if the road is not paved, but, the Board is now saying they are going to take those Lots of Record away from those individuals and she did not feel that was fair.
Commr. Swartz stated that the way the language presently reads, if one owns a single lot and can get a septic tank permit, and they owned that lot prior to March 3, 1993, they can pull a building permit, whether or not there is a road in place, whether or not it meets the Comprehensive Plan requirements, and whether or not it meets the zoning district requirement. He stated that he is concerned about the fact that the County has an inconsistent policy that it has used for years, trying to ensure, in the old platted subdivisions, where no improvements were, that the road requirement would go in.
Commr. Swartz stated that that requirement has been there and, if the Board does not change the LDRs, where there are multiple lots that are contiguous, there will be no aggregation requirement and the lots will be sold off. He stated that, if this happens, the County is going to come up against a situation where all those lots will probably be in individual ownership and they will want to use them for special assessments.
Commr. Hanson stated that she is concerned about the costs involved for an individual to go through the process and pay the fees for the filing of a Lot of Unity. She stated that, when the Board did the LDRs, part of the process was to streamline. She stated that she did not have a problem with the road requirement, but she did have a problem with the Board going back on its word, after having assured people that they would be able to get a building permit for their lots, providing they could meet the County's requirements.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he felt the road requirement should be in the new LDRs and that it should stay in the LDRs from this point forward.
Commr. Hanson stated that, if the Board was going to use the date of March 1993, then she had a problem with it, because from June 1992 until March 1993, there was no road requirement.
Mr. Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney, stated that the March 2, 1993 date was chosen because it tied in with all the other dates and tied in with the 1992 tax roll that the County was using to determine it. He stated that it was a very easy date to use, from an administrative standpoint, and that it would require less time, effort, and staff.
Commr. Hanson questioned whether staff felt that, by putting the road requirement in, it would create an administrative nightmare.
Mr. Stubbs, One-Stop Permitting Center Coordinator and Director of Development Regulations, stated that it would be a very big task for staff to undertake, because they would have to deal with irate customers being told that they were going to have to start all over again, because what they originally submitted to staff was null and void, by action of the Board.
A motion was made by Commr. Hanson and seconded by Commr. Bailey that the Board not adopt the proposed changes to the Land Development Regulations, noted in the memorandum dated November 16, 1993, dealing with the road requirement for Lots of Record, as it pertains to those Lots of Record that the County has already approved.
Under discussion, Mr. Stivender, Director of Public Services, stated that the whole idea behind the original special assessment was to pave the roads in old subdivisions, where the property owners who had already built out, or had partially built out, had no other way to do it. He stated that it was not intended for a subdivision where an individual owner owned all the lots. He stated that the key point about this issue is that the County pays 1/3 of the cost of the assessment and the County has said that it does not want to be involved in a situation where an individual who owns 100% of the lots in a development ends up having county tax dollars pay for 1/3 of the road costs. He stated that the key point involving a special assessment is the number of owners in the subdivision. He stated that, if the County is not careful, a person that has aggregated lots and has built on those lots could qualify for a special assessment.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried.
Commrs. Gerber and Swartz voted "No".
A motion was made by Commr. Cadwell and seconded by Commr. Bailey to approve the draft amendments to the proposed Land Development Regulations, dated November 10, 1993.
Under discussion, Commr. Swartz questioned the effective date of said amendments and was informed that it would be December 1, 1993.
Commr. Gerber questioned the issue of "open water bodies" and was informed that same had been put back in the Lot of Record Ordinance, as required by the Comprehensive Plan.
Commr. Swartz stated that he felt the Board vested some zoning, by what was before them this date, which is inconsistent with the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and the State Growth Management Act and he felt that the Board has, by the actions taken through a number of workshops, delayed implementation of the requirements of the new LDRs, which is also inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the State Growth Management Act. He stated that he felt the Board had gone too far and that the LDRs were inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, therefore, he would not vote in favor of the LDRs before the Board this date.
Commr. Hanson questioned whether Mr. Hoban felt the LDRs before the Board this date were inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Hoban stated that he felt they could be defended.
Commr. Swartz questioned whether, by their actions this date, the Board was vesting PUD zoning.
Mr. Hoban stated that, in some cases, the Board was vesting PUD zoning.
Commr. Swartz questioned whether that was the only zoning being vested.
Mr. Hoban stated that it was.
Commr. Hanson stated that, often, the Board has approved much more than just straight zoning.
Commr. Bailey stated that he felt the LDRs have been too restrictive, in the past, and that the Board has devalued private property rights, as people know them in Lake County, however, he felt the Board had done the best job they could do, therefore, he would support them.
Commr. Hanson stated that the Board needed to remember that they will find glitches in these LDRs, just as they have in prior LDRs, but they will continue to modify them and, hopefully, improve them.
Commr. Gerber stated that, in wishing to remain consistent, she could not, in good conscience, support the LDRs before the Board this date.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried.
Commrs. Gerber and Swartz voted "No".
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Commr. Bailey brought to the attention of the Board the fact that he had received a call from the 5013C Corporation regarding fees involved in the displaying of holiday decorations and recommended that the Board waive said fees for the 5013C Corporation.
A brief discussion occurred regarding the matter, at which time Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, informed the Board that he had spoken with Mr. Jack Bragg, Building Official, Building Department, and that Mr. Bragg had indicated that he would not have a problem with the Board waiving said fees, for the holiday period, however, he wanted to make sure that the Board had approved said waiver.
It was noted that, in the past, a representative of the Building Department at the South Lake Annex had not charged the 5013C Corporation said fees, however, said individual was not authorized to do so.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried, the Board approved a request for waiver of fees, during the Christmas season, for permits needed for the construction of holiday displays that are sponsored by the 5013C Corporation.
Commr. Swartz voted "No".
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 6:10 p.m.
________________________________
CATHERINE C. HANSON, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
__________________________________
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK
sec/11-16-93/1-13-93/boardmin