A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF
MARCH 29, 2005
The
Lake County Board of
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commr.
Stivender gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
INTRODUCTIONS
Commr.
Hill recognized Ms. Nadine Foley, Soil and Water Conservation Council; Ms.
Nancy Fullerton, Lake County Water Authority; and Mr. Ted Wicks, Mayor, City of
AGENDA UPDATE
Mr.
Bill Neron,
Commr.
Stivender informed the Board that a representative is present for Tab 5, and he
did have some comments, but she feels that this item should be pulled, as
stated by Mr. Neron.
Commr.
Hill stated that she has two items to be placed under her business, and both
will need Board approval; one item is regarding outside review; the other is regarding
the proposed Impact Fee Bill that is going to the legislature.
On
a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously
by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to add the two items, as noted, to the agenda
under Commr. Hill’s business.
On
a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried
unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the County Manager’s Consent
Agenda, Tabs 1 through 9, as follows, with the exception of Tab 5, which was
pulled:
FEMA Board/Local Recipient Organization
Request from Community Service for
approval to appoint Fletcher Smith, Director, Community Services Department, or
an alternate designated by him to serve as Lake County Government's
representative on the FEMA Board; appoint Jerry Smith with the Public Safety
Department or an alternate designated by the Public Safety Director, as the
representative from Public Safety; authorize the submission of a direct
application for funding as a Local Recipient Organization or Fiscal
Agent/Conduit for a Local Recipient Organization if directed by action of the
FEMA Board; and authorize the Community Services Department to manage the
program and prepare required plans, reports and other related documents as
directed by the FEMA Board and/or required by FEMA.
Equipment Acquisition Grant
Contract/Department of Community Affairs
Request from Public Safety for
approval of the Equipment Acquisition Grant Contract between the State of
Assistance
to Firefighters Grant
Request from Public Safety for
approval of the Assistance to Firefighters grant that is to be submitted by
April 8, 2005, in the amount of $51,000.00 of which 70% ($34,000.00) will be
federally funded and the remaining 30% ($17,000.00) will require a local cash
match by Lake County; also approval that the Chairman be authorized to sign any
other documents required for acceptance of the grant.
Memorandum
of Agreement/Participating Orlando UASI Agencies
Request from Public Safety for
approval of the Memorandum of Agreement for Participating Orlando Urban Areas
Securities Initiative (UASI) Agencies by the Lake County Board of
Resolution – Vacation Petition
Number 1047 – Permission to Advertise
Amantha
B. Musselwhite - Tavares/Lake Jem Area – Commission District 3
Request from Public Works for
approval and signature on Resolution 2005-31 to advertise Public Hearing for
Vacation Petition Number 1047 by Amantha B. Musselwhite to vacate a Drainage
and Utility Easement, in the Plat of Musselwhite Farms, located in Section 3,
Township 20, Range 26, in the Tavares/Lake Jem area – Commission District 3.
Resolution – Vacation Petition
Number 1048 – Permission to Advertise
Pennbrooke
Fairways – Leesburg Area – Commission District 1
Request from Public Works for
approval and signature on Resolution 2005-32 to advertise Public Hearing for
Vacation Petition Number 1048, by Pennbrooke Fairways, to vacate a portion of a
Utility Easement in the Plat of Pennbrooke Fairways, Phase 1K, Units I and II,
located in Section 19, Township 19, Range 24, in the Leesburg area – Commission
District 1.
Maintenance
Map –
Request from Public Works for
approval to accept a Maintenance Map for
Amendment
to Interlocal Agreement/St. John’s River Water Management District
Sleepy
Request from Public Works for
approval of the Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement between St. John's River
Water Management District (SJRWMD) and
PUBLIC HEARING –
RESOLUTION – ROAD VACATION
PETITION NUMBER 1046
PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE – LAKE
SAUNDERS
CITY
OF
Commr.
Stivender stated that yesterday a group of residents from this area came in to
talk to her about Road Vacation Petition Number 1046, Lake Saunders Groves Land
LLP, and they said that there had not been a meeting about this section of
Mr.
Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, informed the Board that he has a map
with him today, if they want to discuss it, but the Board members felt that,
since they have pulled the item, there was no need to proceed today. Mr. Stivender noted that the item would be
rescheduled for April 26, 2005, as a request to advertise, and there will be a
meeting with all parties before that meeting.
Mr.
Peter Monaghan, the engineer representing the developer of this project, addressed
the Board and stated that they do not want to deny a public hearing on this
issue. Mr. Monaghan explained that, as a
requirement of the Planned Unit Development (PUD), they can vacate the
Commr.
Stivender noted that the problem stems from the PUD, which is within the City
of
The
Board discussed pulling the item versus postponing it until April, in order to
avoid further delay in the process, and Commr. Stivender stated that the Board
can proceed and approve to advertise it for April and, if they do no have the
issues resolved by that time, they can postpone it.
Commr.
Cadwell asked that Mr. Managhan not misconstrue their desire to advertise today
as the Board agreeing that it should be vacated, and Mr. Managhan stated that
he appreciated the clarification, and he realizes there will be a public
hearing. Once again, he stated that he
will be very happy to attend that meeting and explain their intent, as well as
the meeting with all parties prior to that hearing.
On
a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously
by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the request from Public Works for permission
to advertise a Public Hearing for Vacation Petition Number 1046, by Lake
Saunders Groves Land LLP, Chelsea Oaks LLC to vacate right of way and cease
maintenance on a portion of Merry Road (Number 4455), in the plat of land of
James M. Conner, located in Section 27, Township 19 South, Range 27 East, in
the City of Tavares - Commission District 3, and signature on Resolution
2005-30, with the understanding that it does not indicate that the Board is vacating
it; they are advertising it so that they can have a public meeting in the
Tavares City Hall with the residents, the engineer, the City and the County
prior to the public hearing before the Board.
PRESENTATION
–
PROCLAMATION
– COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK 2005
Ms.
Liz Eginton, Community Development Grant Director, addressed the Board and
stated that staff would like to present each of the Board members with a
Community Development Block Grant poster.
She also asked Mr. Fletcher Smith, Director of Community Services, to
come forward at which time a poster was presented to him.
Commr.
Hill read into the record Proclamation 2005-28, which was approved by the Board
on March 15, 2005, declaring the Week of March 28 through April 3, 2005 as
Community Development Week 2005.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS - VACATIONS
ROAD VACATION PETITION NUMBER
1040 – CASCADES OF GROVELAND
GROVELAND
AREA –DISTRICT 2
Mr.
Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, explained Road Vacation Petition
Number 1040 by Cascades
of Groveland, Representative Bowyer-Singleton Associations, Inc., to vacate
right of way and cease maintenance on a portion of Libby Road Number 3, located
in Sections 26, 27 and 34, Township 21 South, Range 25 East, in the Groveland
area – Commission District 2. Mr.
Stivender stated that this is a very substantial road vacation associated with
an existing County clay road, and the realignment is part of a subdivision that
the Board has seen before them in the past, as shown on the map (backup). He explained that the existing clay road, as
shown in red, would be vacated, and the new dedication will be the yellow line,
as part of the construction of the subdivision; it replaces it, based on the
design of the subdivision. The site is
currently under construction and this public hearing would eliminate and cease
maintenance, and any public rights-of-way, as shown in red, would not be closed
until the dedication and construction of the yellow line.
Commr.
Pool stated that this will provide access for the residents throughout the area
on the new road, once the old road is vacated and abandoned but no one will be
denied opportunities to access the property during construction.
Commr.
Stivender clarified the ownership of the property located above and below the
construction area and noted that the owners were notified of the hearing.
Commr.
Hill opened the public hearing and called for public comment.
Mr.
Stivender stated that there were three phone calls in objection but no letters
in favor or objection.
Commr.
Pool stated that, in January, he attended a public hearing on this and there
were questions and answers and, for the most part, he believes the people
understand that it will be a new and improved road in lieu of a clay road.
Mr.
Stivender noted that staff did address the letters received in opposition.
Mr.
Craig Langley, Broad & Cassel, addressed the Board and stated that he is
here representing BLR/Libby Road LLC, which is the property owner to the north
of the eastern most portion of the road to be vacated (two parcels). Mr. Langley stated that they did provide a
letter of objection yesterday that was faxed to Ms. Jan Goodman, Public Works
Department, and hopefully that made it into the record and, if not, he can give
them another copy today. Basically there
were a couple of things in the petition that seemed to be flawed on the face of
it. The petition itself claimed to be
signed by the abutting property owners when, in fact, it was signed by the
engineer who he believes represents the Cascades Development. It also claims to be signed by all of the
abutting property owners; his client is one of those owners, and he was not
contacted to sign the petition, or represented by the engineer who did sign it. He stated that there will be a significant
amount of right-of-way abutting his clients’ property that is proposed to be
vacated. His clients will lose
approximately 1,200 feet of road right-of-way on the southern boundary of their
property, as a result of this vacation. As
far as their objections to this vacation, they would ask that a meeting be
provided to allow an opportunity for those affected property owners to comment
on the alternate alignment. In the
notification, along with the petition that was sent to his clients, there was
no information with respect to the alternate alignment being shown today. They did contact Public Works and were able
to get a sketch of the proposed road, but there was really no great level of
comfort on whether this was the final design, or who had input in selecting
this road; there was also no information on timing of the swap out. He understands from this morning that the
vacation would not be effective until the new right-of-way is dedicated but
that information was not provided in the petition.
Mr.
Stivender explained that it is prescriptive rights-of-way in this area, so they
do not have any deeds. They are vacating
any prescriptive rights, so their property line would stay the same; it just
does not have any cloud on the title associated with the road. The County did not survey that actual area,
and he was not aware of the issue being presented by Mr. Langley.
Through
discussion, it was noted that Mr. Langley’s clients have about 2,000 feet of
frontage on
Mr.
Stivender clarified that there is a loss of frontage for that section, because
the clay road will go away.
Commr.
Cadwell explained that frontage on a prescriptive clay road does not really add
any value to anyone’s property; it does not really allow anyone to do anything
else. Mr. Langley clarified that he understood
that it does not currently add value but, with the development potential in the
area, loss of any frontage, at this point, would affect their development
rights, and they want to preserve those rights.
Commr. Cadwell clarified that, with a prescriptive clay road, there are
no development rights.
Commr.
Pool stated that it would be different if the Board was closing off
opportunities for them to access their property and, clearly, there are none; this
road will be a much improved corridor, because this clay road has been a
problem for many years.
Mr.
Langley explained that this was one of the things that they would like to have
the opportunity to comment on and perhaps even to discuss the necessity of
vacating that public right-of-way by having to create the alternate alignment
of the connector road. He questioned
whether it would be possible to keep that there as an east-west intersection,
even after the north-south connector is put in place.
Commr.
Pool explained that, if Mr. Langley’s client wants to put a clay road through
that corridor and maintain it to get access to the south side of the property, then
that would be up to them, but the traveling public will continue to use the new
alignment with the new pavement, not the clay road. He also clarified that they are not going to
deny them the access to the south side of their property in any way by granting
this vacation and, as pointed out by Mr. Stivender, it is an objective of the
Board to eliminate as many clay roads as they can in
Mr.
Stivender addressed the time frame involved with this request and explained
that there are two developments taking place but he does not know the phasing
of those projects. It was noted that
alternate realignment will connect to
Commr.
Hill called for further public comment.
There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On
a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously by a
5-0 vote, the Board approved Petition Number 1040 and execution of Resolution
2005-33 by Cascades of Groveland, Representative Bowyer-Singleton Associations,
Inc., to vacate right of way and cease maintenance on a portion of Libby Road
Number 3, located in Sections 26, 27 and 34, Township 21 South, Range 25 East,
in the Groveland area – Commission District 2.
ROAD VACATION PETITION NUMBER
1043 – MARY & WHITAKER FAMILY
PARTNERSHIP,
LTD./JOHN WHITAKER - GRAND
Mr.
Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, explained Road Vacation Petition
Number 1043, by Mary & Whitaker Family Partnership, Ltd./John Whitaker, to
vacate the lots and right of way in the Plat of Sarah A. Schwer's Subdivision,
located in Section 29, Township 18 South, Range 26 East, in the
Commr.
Hill opened the public hearing and called for public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion
of the meeting was closed.
On
a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously
by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Petition Number 1043 and execution of
Resolution 2005-34 by Mary & Whitaker Family Partnership, Ltd./John
Whitaker to vacate the lots and right of way in the Plat of Sarah A. Schwer's
Subdivision, located in Section 29, Township 18 South, Range 26 East, in the
Grand Island area – Commission District 4.
PUBLIC
HEARING –
SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT/DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
Mr.
Sandy Minkoff,
Commr.
Hill opened the public hearing and called for public comment.
Mr.
Steve Richey, Attorney representing the applicant, addressed the Board and
stated that they support this Agreement, because one of the concerns they had
was that everything is sent to DCA for review, but normally that would not
happen in this case until, for example, they did a plat, and then the plat
would be sent to DCA. This particular
situation allows DCA to review it early, so that, if they have any questions or
concerns, his clients have not gone to the expense of doing detailed engineering
and construction plans. He clarified that
the PUD would require the conditions contained in the Agreement, so now there
will be no misunderstanding.
Commr.
Hill called for further public comment.
There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Commr.
Pool made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Stivender, to approve the Stipulated
Settlement Agreement, Department of Community Affairs (DCA) versus Lake County,
Case Number APP-03-020.
Under
discussion, Commr. Cadwell stated that he did not support the original
development, and he does not believe the Stipulated Settlement Agreement does
anything other than what the initial zoning approval did and, therefore, he
does not intend to support it.
Commr.
Hill called for a vote on the motion, which was carried by a 4-1 vote.
Commr.
Cadwell voted “no”.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS – REZONINGS
REZONING CASE PH#5-05-3 – JOHN
NELSON/NELSON FAMILY TRUST
TIMOTHY P. HOBAN AND CARL LUDECKE
– R-1 TO R-2
TRACKING
#10-05-Z
Mr.
Jeff Richardson, Planning Manager, Planning and Development Services Division,
addressed the Board and stated that staff has received a request for a 30 day
postponement in Rezoning Case PH#5-05-3, John Nelson/Nelson Family Trust,
Timothy P. Hoban and Carl Ludecke, Tracking #10-05-Z. The applicant’s representative is here. Staff does not have an issue with the
postponement; he believes the parties are still trying to work out some issues.
Commr.
Hill opened the public hearing and called for public comment on the request for
postponement. There being none, the
public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On
a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously
by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved a 30 day continuance, until April 26, 2005, for
Rezoning Case PH#5-05-3 John
Nelson/Nelson Family Trust, Timothy P. Hoban and Carl Ludecke – R-1 to R-2, Tracking
#10-05-Z.
Commr.
Stivender disclosed that she has talked to both sides on this issue over the
last 30 days, and she will continue to talk to them.
DISCLOSURES
Commr. Hill wanted
to disclose that she had some contact with individuals involved with Agenda No.
2, Ph#25-05-2, Ladd Development, Inc.; Agenda No. 7, PH#20-05-1, Dewey &
Laura Waddell (Wayne Grosch); and Agenda No. 9, PH#21-05-2, Carroll Fulmer
Management Co. Inc., and Commr. Stivender and Commr. Pool disclosed the same.
REZONING
CASE PH#25-05-2 – LADD DEVELOPMENT, INC. – STEVEN J.
RICHEY, P.A. - A TO R-4 - TRACKING #21-05-Z
Ms. Jennifer Dubois, Planner, Planning and Development
Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#25-05-2, Ladd Development, Inc., Steven J.
Richey, P.A., a request to rezone from A (Agriculture) to R-4 (Medium Suburban
Residential), Tracking #2-05-Z. As reflected
in the staff Summary, the applicant wishes to rezone the 9.04 acre subject
parcel, which is presently vacant, to add this property to the abutting 133
acre tract, which was originally intended as the construction site for the
Commr. Cadwell clarified that, as a policy, DCA is not
approving any of the County’s land plan amendments until the Board is through
with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff,
Ms. Dubois explained that the property that was originally
intended for the school site, for the
Mr. Minkoff stated that the other alternative would be to
continue the case, for 90 or 120 days, to allow staff to work out that issue.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney representing the applicant,
addressed the Board and explained that, based on the concerns raised by the
neighbors, the school site was relocated to another part of the property and,
in the same month, they rezoned everything but this piece of property; now they
are rezoning it all to R-4. The large
rezoning is subject to the Comprehensive Plan issues being resolved DCA; this
one would also be subject to that. He
stated that they have no problem with having the effective date being when they
resolve their issues with DCA. He
explained that DCA objected all three of the large scale Comprehensive Plan
Amendments that were done that month, and they put all three of those in
abeyance while they provide them with additional information. On this particular site, DCA has asked them
to provide the Wekiva Water Balancing Study, because it is an area of high
recharge. They also asked them to
document the testimony of Mr. Wayne Saunders, City Manager, that this was in
Clermont’s 180 District, and Clermont has the capacity to provide water and
sewer. Mr. Richey noted that his
testimony is being transcribed because they have been unable to get a letter
independent of that testimony to the State. They are also documenting that
through the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) who issues the permits
for wastewater and through the St. Johns River Water Management District
(SJRWMD) who issues the consumptive use permit.
Mr. Richey stated that these are the two issues on this particular
Comprehensive Plan, and they anticipate this information being completed in the
next 60 days or so; then it will be provided to the State; and then it will come
back to the Board with a stipulated settlement on all three of them.
Commr. Cadwell noted that, even if Mr. Richey and his
client had provided the information to DCA ahead of time, they would have still
found it to be in noncompliance because of the Comprehensive Plan issue.
Mr. Richey explained that Mr. Welstead, Deputy County
Manager/Director of Growth Management, and Ms. Amye King, Planning Manager,
Growth Management, met with DCA the day before they were there, and the
attitude of the staff at DCA was extremely positive, based on the meetings they
had with County staff. They felt that
Commr. Stivender stated that her question has to do with
the schools. In the backup there is a
letter from Mr. Harry Fix, Director, Growth Planning Department, Lake County
Schools dated March 2, 2005, addressing the school situation in South Lake but,
in the minutes from the Zoning Board hearing, Mr. Larry Metz, School Board
member, approved it, because there is a charter school in the area. So basically the School Board is giving them
the information that they are over capacity in that area, however, it is being
addressed by the new school being built there.
Mr. Richey clarified that they will not be turning dirt
next week on that school, because it is going to take a long period of time to
resolve the Comprehensive Plan issues, and to go through the detailed
construction and engineering process.
Commr. Pool explained that their hope is to have the
school operating by this August, but this school will be on-line prior to this
development taking place.
Commr. Stivender wanted to know if charter schools have
to meet the same building requirements as public schools, and Mr. Richey
explained that they do not follow the County’s construction rules, but they are
required, under the Statute, to follow land use and zoning. It was noted that they also have to meet all
southern building code standards. They
do go through site plan review with the County, and the plans are approved by the
State.
Commr. Hill called for further public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion
of the meeting was closed.
On
a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously
by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Zoning Board and
approved, subject to the Comprehensive Plan approval, Rezoning Case PH#25-05-2
Ladd Development Inc., Steven J. Richey, P.A., a request from A (Agriculture)
to R-4 (Medium Suburban Residential),
Tracking #21-05-Z, a request to rezone the 9.04 acre subject parcel for
the creation of a single family residential subdivision, and Ordinance 2005-21.
REZONING
CASE PH#24-05-2 – STEVEN GUPTA – R-1 TO CP
TRACKING #25-05-CP
Ms. Jennifer Dubois, Planner, Planning and Development Services,
presented Rezoning Case PH#24-05-2, Steven Gupta, a request to rezone from R-1
(Rural Residential District) to CP (Planned Commercial District), Tracking
#25-05-CP. As reflected in the staff
Summary, the applicant wishes to rezone the subject parcel, which is presently
vacant, for retail and professional office use.
The site is located east of the intersection of CR 455 and CR 50 south
of the Florida Turnpike. The property is
located within the adopted Clermont Joint Planning Area (JPA), and the site
will be served by City water and sewer.
Staff finds that the rezoning complies with the Land Development
Regulations (LDRs) and Comprehensive Plan, however, staff notes that the
forested wetland system comprises approximately 12.81 of the subject parcel’s
18.24 acres and that roughly 14.14 acres lie within the 100 year
floodplain. The applicant shall be
required to comply with all of the County’s wetland and floodplain protection
policies. Ms. Dubois clarified the
boundaries of the subject property.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing and called for
public comment. It was noted that the
applicant was present. There being no
public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender
and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of
the Zoning Board and approved Rezoning Case PH#24-05-2, Steven Gupta, a request
to rezone from R-1 (Rural Residential District) to CP (Planned Commercial
District), for retail and professional office use; uses shall be limited to
convenience retail, general retail, and professional office, Tracking
#25-05-CP, and Ordinance 2005-22.
REZONING
CASE PH#22-05-1 – JOSEPH NOLETTE – GREG A. BELIVEAU, AICP
LPG – R-1 TO R-3 – TRACKING #23-05-Z
Ms. Shannon Suffron, Senior Planner, Planning and
Development Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#22-05-1, Joseph Nolette
(Owner); Greg A. Beliveau, AICP, LPG (Applicant); a request to rezone from R-1
(Rural Residential District) to R-3 (Medium Residential District). Ms. Suffron explained that the property is
approximately 44 acres in size and, as shown on the map, it is located in the
Leesburg area on CR 44 Leg. A approximately 1.2 miles northeast of US 441. The future land use of the property is urban
expansion. As reflected in the staff
Summary, the applicant wishes to rezone the property for residential
development. The property is currently
vacant and undeveloped; the current zoning of R-1 only allows one dwelling unit
per acre; it is located in the Urban Expansion land use category that permits
up to four dwelling units per acre. Based
on the Urban Area Residential Density Analysis conducted by staff, the
applicant obtained a total of 30 points, which allows for a maximum density of 2.5
dwelling units per acre. Pursuant to
Policy 1-1.6A of the Comprehensive Plan, residential development within the
Urban and Urban Expansion areas are required to have central potable water
service. The property lies within the
City of
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing and called for
public comment.
Mr. Greg Beliveau, AICP, LPG, approached the Board to
answer questions.
Commr. Stivender pointed out that CR 44 is going to be
widened and she wanted to know if the applicant took into consideration the
planning of additional right-of-way. Mr. Beliveau noted that they did take that
into consideration.
Commr. Hanson wanted to know if, in their plans, the
applicant is going to try and incorporate any clustering, and Mr. Beliveau
explained that they have talked to the applicant about that and have done some
extensive research on the eastern portion of the property. They would like to incorporate some of the wooded
area, but they are trying to work on something that is innovative and make sure
that the areas to the south and to the east are buffered. He explained that, because the Blueberry Hill
Apartments are in close proximity, and they have been annexed and approved for some
additional development to the north, they decided to go strictly single
family. Mr. Beliveau explained that Mr.
Nolette applied for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) last year but it was withdrawn
because it was too intensive and too similar to what was down the street, and
it was not conducive to the neighborhood.
Commr. Hill pointed out that the City of
Commr. Hill called for further public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion
of the meeting was closed. She noted
that the request is in her district, and she has no problems approving it.
On
a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously
by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Zoning Board and
approved Rezoning Case PH#22-05-1, Joseph Nolette (Owner); Greg A. Beliveau,
AICP, LPG (Applicant), a request to rezone from R-1 (Rural Residential
District) to R-3 (Medium Residential District), for residential development,
Tracking #23-05-Z, and Ordinance 2005-23.
REZONING
CASE PH#23-05-2 – SOSA RELATED INVESTMENTS – GREG A.
BELIVEAU, AICP, LPG – A & PUD TO PUD – TRACKING
#30-05-PUD
Ms. Shannon Suffron, Senior Planner, Planning and
Development Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#23-05-2, Sosa Related
Investments (Owner); Greg A. Beliveau, AICP, LPG (Applicant), a request to
rezone from A (Agriculture) and PUD (Planned Unit Development – Ord. #2004-59),
to PUD (Planned Unit Development). She
explained that the overall size of the parcel will be 55 acres; there are
currently 30 acres existing that were adopted through PUD Ord. #2004-77. They will be adding 15 acres of unplatted
agriculture and 10 acres that were adopted through PUD Ord. #2004-59. A new Ordinance will be created that will
replace both the existing 2004-77 and 2004-59 Ordinances. The parcels are located in the urban land use
category that permits up to seven dwelling units per acre, and they will
develop 4.5 dwelling units per acre, based on the Urban Area Residential Chart. Staff is recommending approval of the request
and, on March 2, 2005, the Zoning Board unanimously recommended approval. Ms. Suffron noted that the applicant was
present. After further discussion, she
clarified that the development was designed so that they will be accessing the
development through the existing
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing and called for
public comment. It was noted that Ms. Tiffany
Kapner, representative from LPG, was present.
There being no public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting
was closed.
Ms. Suffron explained that the development is going to be
consistent with the rest of the development and have short term rentals and
timeshares.
It was noted that the request will not impact the school
system, and it will generate tourist development dollars.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Cadwell
and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of
the Zoning Board and approved Rezoning Case PH#23-05-2, Sosa Related
Investments (Owner), Greg A. Beliveau, AICP, LPG (Applicant), a request to
rezone A (Agriculture) and PUD (Planned Unit Development – Ord. #2004-59) to PUD
(Planned Unit Development), to amend the existing PUD (Ord. #2004-77) to
include 25 acres +/- for a total of 55 acres +/- (30 acres existing – PUD Ord.
#2004-77; 15 acres – Agriculture; and 10 acres – PUD Ord. #2004-59), and
Ordinance 2005-24.
REZONING
CASE PH#17-05-5 – DAVID J. BAMBER AND RUTH G. SERPENTINO
BAMBER – LM & R-7 TO CP – TRACKING #26-05-CP
Mr. Rick Hartenstein, Senior Planner, Planning and
Development Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#17-05-5, David J. Bamber and
Ruth G. Serpentino Bamber, a request to rezone from LM (Light Industrial
District) and R-7 (Mixed Residential District) to CP (Planned Commercial
District. As reflected in the staff
Summary, the applicants wish to rezone the subject parcel, which is presently
being utilized as a self-service storage facility under a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP#89/5/2-5), so they can expand the facility. The proposed rezoning does not conflict with
the Land Development Regulations (LDRs), however, the site is not in compliance
with all applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan; it does not meet
commercial location criteria. Staff
recommends denial of the request as the subject parcel fails to meet commercial
location criteria but, if this rezoning is approved, then CUP#89/5/2-5 would be
revoked with the adoption of the attached Ordinance.
In cases like this where staff knows this is location
criteria, Commr. Stivender wanted to know if they are looking at that when they
are working on redoing the Comprehensive Plan, and staff noted that they are.
Mr. Hartenstein explained that, even though the Board
previously required LM zoning for storage facilities or warehouses, they now
prefer the CP. It is still a permitted
use in LM, but it requires a CUP in the old Ordinance.
Commr. Cadwell noted that, because this is planned
commercial, he wanted to know if the access questions had been spelled out in
the Ordinance, because that seemed to be the biggest concern of the residents
that he talked to.
Mr. Hartenstein explained that it was added to the
Ordinance that it will be emergency vehicle access only, as shown on Page 2 of
the proposed Ordinance, Section 1. A. Land Uses e., “The back access entrance
on
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing and called for
public comment. It was noted that Mr.
Bamber was present.
Ms. Sheila Pike,
Commr. Hill called for further public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion
of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Pool and
carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the
Zoning Board and approved Rezoning Case PH#17-05-5, David J. Bamber and Ruth G.
Serpentino Bamber, a request to rezone from LM (Light Industrial District) and
R-7 (Mixed Residential District) to CP (Planned Commercial District, to expand
the self service storage facility, and Ordinance 2005-25.
REZONING
CASE PH#20-05-1 – DEWEY A. & LAURA W. WADDELL – CP TO CP
TRACKING #28-05-CP/AMD
Mr. Rick
Hartenstein, Senior Planner, Planning and Development Services, presented
Rezoning Case PH#20-05-1, Dewey A. and Laura W. Waddell (Owners), Wayne Grosch
(Applicant), a request to amend the existing zoning CP (Planned Commercial
District, Ordinance #26-81) permitting a plumbing supply facility, to amended
zoning classification CP (Planned Commercial District) permitting a plumbing
supply facility and a well drilling company. As reflected in the staff Summary,
the applicants wish to expand the existing plumbing supply facility located on
the property to include the use of a well drilling company together with an
associated well drilling equipment maintenance shop and storage facility. The proposed rezoning does not conflict with
the Land Development Regulations (LDRs); however, the site is not in compliance
with all applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan as it does not meet the
commercial location criteria. The
subject property is located approximately 1/3 mile north of the intersection of
CR 468 and CR 44C (Griffin Road), and there is limited commercial development
between the property and the intersection.
Staff recommends denial of the request.
The Zoning Board unanimously recommended approval of the request. Mr. Hartenstein stated that, even though it
is an additional use and would be an expansion of a use of nonconformity, staff
does not think it would be more negative for the surrounding area.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing and called for
public comment.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney representing the applicant,
addressed the Board and stated that, in 1973, half of this property was rezoned
to allow it to be used for the plumbing supply business. In 1981, the land that is subject to this
rezoning today was added to it, and the plumbing supply uses were allowed to
increase from the 1973 Ordinance to the 1981 Ordinance, and it doubled the size
of it. Today they are taking the
property that was added in 1981 and taking away from it the plumbing supply use
and substituting it with the well drilling operation. He believes that it was the thought of the
Zoning Board that substituting the plumbing supply business with a well
drilling operation was not an increase; it was a change but it was not anymore
intense and, in fact, there was evidence that there would be less traffic, because
it is not retail. He clarified that they
are not expanding a nonconforming use; they are changing it from one kind of
use to another but not more intense, and the testimony was that it would be
less intense on this half of the property than what can be done there now.
Commr. Hill called for further public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion
of the meeting was closed.
Commr. Hill stated that this is in District 1, and the
applicant did say that, at site plan review, they would look at buffering and
other things, and this was confirmed by Mr. Hartenstein. She did not have any problems with the
request.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr.
Stivender and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the
recommendation of the Zoning Board and approved Rezoning Case PH#20-05-1, Dewey
A. and Laura W. Waddell (Owners), Wayne Grosch (Applicant), a request to amend
the existing zoning CP (Planned Commercial District, Ordinance #26-81)
permitting a plumbing supply facility to amend zoning classification CP
(Planned Commercial District) permitting a plumbing supply facility and a well
drilling company, to amend CP (Planned Commercial) Ordinance #26-81 to include
the use of a well drilling business, and Ordinance 2005-26.
REZONING
CASE PH#18-05-4 – JAMES AND BARBARA TENNEY – AMEND CFD
TRACKING #24-05-CFD/AMD
Mr. John Kruse, Senior Planner, Planning and Development
Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#18-05-4, James and Barbara Tenney, a
request to amend current “CFD” Community Facility District Ordinance #87-87 to
allow the use of an existing church building for a funeral parlor, Tracking
#24-05-CFD/AMD. The subject parcel is
approximately 4.1 acres in size. There
is one building on-site that was previously used as a church. The owners wish to use the existing church
building for a funeral parlor. During
the Development Review Staff (DRS) meeting on January 6, 2005, the owners
indicated that there would be no expansion to the existing building and no
additional buildings are planned at this time.
The use of the building would only consist of a viewing area, and an
area for funeral services. No embalming
and/or cremation will take place at this location. The owners estimate that two services would
occur weekly. Staff has reviewed the
application and found that it is consistent with the Land Development
Regulations (LDRs) and Comprehensive Plan and recommends approval with
conditions, for the site to be used as a funeral parlor. The Zoning Board unanimously recommended approval.
Commr. Hill stated that, in reading the minutes from the
Zoning Board meeting, they seemed to say that, rather than have one or the other;
it could have a duel function of a church and a funeral parlor.
Mr. Kruse referred to Page 2 of the proposed Ordinance 1.
Terms, A. and noted that staff has included the following language: “Use of the site shall be limited to a church
or a funeral parlor.” It was
clarified that, if they decided to have part of this acreage as a cemetery,
they would have to come back to the Board, as well as meet the requirements of
the Florida Statutes.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing and called for
public comment. It was noted that the
applicant was present. There being no
public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and
carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the
Zoning Board and approved Rezoning Case PH#18-05-4, James and Barbara Tenney, a
request to amend current CFD (Community Facility District) Ordinance #87-87 to
allow the use of an existing church building and site to have a dual function
of a church and a funeral parlor, with conditions, Tracking #24-05-CFD/AMD, and
Ordinance 2005-27.
REZONING
CASE PH#21-05-3 - CARROLL FULMER MANAGEMENT COMPANY
INC.
– STEVEN J. RICHEY, P.A. – A TO MP WITH LM AND HM USES
TRACKING #27-05-MP
Mr. John Kruse, Senior Planner, Planning and Development
Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#21-05-3, Carroll Fulmer Management
Company, Inc. (Owner); Steven J. Richey, P.A. (Applicant), to rezone from A
(Agriculture) to Planned Industrial (MP with Light (LM) and Heavy (HM)
Industrial Uses, Tracking #27-05-MP. As
reflected in the staff Summary, this is a 40 acre parcel in the
Commr. Stivender pointed out that the request is actually
in the District 3 area, and it was so noted by staff.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the applicant is one of the
original people that had faith in what they were trying to do with the
industrial park, and he knows that, if they are handling this project, it will
be done right. He clarified that this
piece of property has always been cut out of the Development of Regional Impact
(DRI).
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing and called for
public comment.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney representing the applicant,
addressed the Board and noted that Mr. Carrol Fulmer is here today, and he
looks forward to developing these 40 acres into a diversification of jobs and
industry for
Commr. Hanson stated that they are very fortunate that
Mr. Fulmer chose
Mr. Richey stated that they already have two of these
five acre tracts ready to close, so they are seeing activity right now.
Commr. Pool stated that Mr. Fulmer has contributed
greatly to the community, in many other areas, not only in jobs, and he has
been a great asset to the
Commr. Hill called for further public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion
of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool
and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of
the Zoning Board and approved Rezoning Case PH#21-05-3, Carroll Fulmer
Management Company, Inc. (Owner), Steven J. Richey, P.A. (Applicant), to rezone
from A (Agriculture) to MP (Planned Industrial) with Light and Heavy Industrial
uses, and Ordinance 2005-28.
ADOPT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES/PUBLIC LANDS
Mr. Gregg Welstead, Deputy County Manager/Director of
Growth Management, addressed the Board to answer any questions the Board may
have regarding the drafted policies and procedures for the acquisition of
public lands noting that Ms. Nadine Foley, Chair of the Public Land Acquisition
Advisory Council (PLAAC) is here today. Mr.
Welstead stated that the Board has before them the best compilation of the best
of a number of different counties’ policies.
Commr. Hill referred to Page 2, IV. Development, C., the
language “in order to properly manage the lands acquired under this Program,
the BCC may, at its discretion, levy up to ten percent (10%) of the total
millage cap of 0.33 mils”, and questioned whether they could legally do this
and whether it was going to be put in trust for management.
Mr. Welstead clarified that this is not the bond money;
the bond language prohibits use of bond money for management.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff,
Mr. Bill Neron,
Mr. Welstead stated that staff will need some of this
money levied in order to put the staff together to run the program while they
are acquiring land.
Commr. Cadwell questioned whether this program was
envisioned to stay under Growth Management and, once they approve this and they
are moving forward and staff is deciding where it should fit, on a day to day
basis, as people contact the Board members, he wanted to know where they send
that information, because the Board members need to stay out of that loop at
that point.
It was clarified that any requests and/or information the
Board members receive should be submitted to Mr. Welstead, who is the contact
person at this time, for him to take to the PLAAC and, once the property goes
through the approval process and meets all criteria, the
Commr. Pool and Commr. Stivender noted that they have
information on Castle Hill, which they will submit to Mr. Welstead.
Commr. Hanson stated that, after reviewing the information
presented by staff, she feels that the process is working very well.
Commr. Hanson made a motion, which was seconded by Commr.
Stivender, for the Board to adopt the policies for acquisition of public lands
pursuant to the November 2, 2004 referendum.
Under discussion, Ms. Nadine Foley addressed the Board
and stated that this involves several months of work and PLAAC is very happy
that they have gotten to this day, because offers are starting to come in and
they needed clear direction on how to handle them.
Commr. Hanson explained that they are still in the
process of trying to develop a master plan of sorts, the green printing, so
that is still ongoing, to give them some idea of where the County wants to be
as a whole, so they are not picking and choosing without a master plan.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the workshop suggested by
Commr. Hanson, which is scheduled for April 12, 2005, for some visioning and such,
is something they were lacking and he believes they will come out of that
meeting with some ideas.
Ms. Foley stated that PLAAC enjoys the continuing support
of Trust for Public Lands, and they are still anxious to work with them, so
that they can partner for other State grants.
She stated that, in their review of the items in front of them today,
they hope to work on partnerships for funding possibilities all across the
Board.
The Board members extended their appreciation to Ms.
Foley and PLAAC for all of their hard work.
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the motion, which was
carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
ADDENDUM NO. 1 –
REPORTS –
REPAYMENT OF SCHOOL IMPACT FEES
Mr. Bill Neron,
Mr. Harry Fix, Director, Growth Planning, Lake County
School Board, stated that the School Board’s Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Tom Crosby,
has been in contact with Ms. Hall on this issue, and these figures are
correct. Mr. Fix stated that the only
other thing that the School Board asked is that the balance be repaid within a six
month period, and to not go over six months.
Mr. Crosby had indicated that this would probably be more than likely to
happen, based on the way the fees are being collected.
Mr. Neron stated that the County will pay the School
Board back as quickly as possible, based on the amount of impact fees that are
paid.
Mr. Fix stated that Mr. Crosby did explain to the School
Board the situation, with the understanding that they both have budgets
constraints that they have to work within, and they felt this would be somewhat
more palatable to the Board to do it this way.
The School Board did ask if there could be a review of the fee rate that
is charged, now that the impact fee is so much higher, to see if, in fact, they
could look at an administrative fee rate that would be somewhat less than the
3%, or more reflective of administrative handling costs.
Commr. Hill explained that the Board was within their
legal bounds at the five percent (5%) so, if they reduce the fee to three
percent (3%), it will have to come through an Ordinance change, but Mr. Sandy
Minkoff,
Mr. Neron stated that, as part of the budget process, Ms.
Hall is working with the Budget Office staff to look at the administrative fee,
not only for the school impact fees, but what they charge in other programs, so
they are going to take a comprehensive look at that and come back to the Board
with any needed changes.
Commr. Pool noted that, even though the School Board has
made a request for a reduction in the amount of money that this percentage
would generate, the Board has contributed greatly to school funding programs,
about $781,000 in 2001, and about $1.7 million dollars in 2005 so, on one end
they are doing far more than they have ever done, and he does not disagree that
they need to pay them the true amount it costs them to provide that service,
but he did want it noted that the Board has provided a lot of additional
funding over the last four years.
Mr. Fix stated that he hoped he was not representing that
there was not some recognition of that on the School Board’s part; it is simply
a matter of reviewing the percentage and their hope that, when the study is
done, the three percent (3%) would be somewhat less but, regardless, it is to
look at that fee.
Commr. Pool wanted to publicly show that the Board does a
lot and has continued to do more than in the past, and Commr. Hanson opined that
she was not sure that the School Board or the public has been completely aware
of their assistance over the years.
Commr. Hill pointed out that the information in the
backup certainly does not show the many grants and other moneys that come in
through other avenues; this is just General Fund dollars, and it was $1.7
million for this year alone that they budgeted, but they provide other programs
within the schools through grant money that may not be reflected in these
numbers.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the Board will ask for a 90
day update on the repayment of the fees to the School Board.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr.
Hanson and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to adopt the
County Manager’s recommendation on the payback of the administrative fee to the
School Board, as outlined above.
REPORTS – COMMISSIONER HILL – CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT #1
AUDITS/PROCUREMENT SERVICES/OFFICE SUPPLY CONTRACT
Commr. Hill stated that she will address the two items
she added to the agenda, since Commr. Cadwell, President-elect, Florida
Association of Counties (FAC), will be leaving shortly to attend a meeting in
Commr. Hill wanted to first ask the Board to authorize
the
Mr. Sandy Minkoff,
Commr. Pool made a motion, which was seconded by Commr.
Stivender, to approve to authorize the
Under discussion, Commr. Cadwell wanted to know if
Procurement Services is under Budget, and Mr. Bill Neron,
Commr. Cadwell felt that, because the findings of the
internal audit are saying they need an external audit, it appears that they may
be concerned about some inconsistencies at a minimum and, if there is a
problem, they need to move quickly.
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the motion, which was
carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION - HB 1173 – IMPACT FEE BILL
Commr. Hill addressed the Impact Fee Bill that is being
proposed by legislators and stated that the Florida Association of Counties
(FAC) has asked the Board members to oppose this because it limits who can
receive a refund, and the time period in which those impact fees can be
imposed. The bill does not contain any
alternative revenue source to make up the difference lost from the impact fee reductions. The FAC, as well as two of their legislators,
Representative Alan Hays and Representative Hugh Gibson, have asked them to
oppose this and have asked for their comments.
It was noted that
Commr. Cadwell made a motion, which was seconded by
Commr. Stivender, to approve to instruct the Chairman to write a letter to
their Legislative Delegation opposing the legislation, Impact Fee Bill (HB
1173), as noted.
Under discussion, Commr. Hill stated that she can give
the Board members a copy of HB 1173 so that they can see the repercussions the
bill would have for counties.
Commr. Cadwell stated that, even though he is going to
Commr. Hanson noted that the alternative is probably
going to be documentary stamps, which gets back to affordable housing.
Mr. Bill Neron,
Commr. Cadwell stated that he had no problem with that
because the Board has always given the Chairman leeway to note the local issues
and, if the Chairman was not comfortable with it, the information would be
brought to the Board, or the Chairman would just not address it.
Commr. Hill noted that, even though the Board members may
have a difference of opinion on impact fees, although she has not seen where
they have had that problem, she still wanted to make sure that they were aware
that this was going through because it is very detrimental to the County and is
far more restrictive than it has ever appeared.
Commr. Cadwell stated that it is so easy for the Board
members to concur with different bills, until they look at their mission and
their main goals, and those are to make sure they protect their home rule power
and their ability to govern themselves and, if they always look back to that,
then it gives the Chairman a chance to say yes or no, and if she is not
comfortable with it, she can always bring it to them, or leave it on her desk.
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the motion, which was
carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
COMMISSIONERS
At 10:40 a.m., it was noted that Commr. Cadwell left the
meeting, to go
OTHER BUSINESS
APPOINTMENTS/HISTORICAL MUSEUM ADVISORY COMMITTEE
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr.
Hanson and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the following appointments
to vacant positions on the Historical Museum Advisory Committee: Bob Grenier (Historical Society member);
Carol Coggshall (Historical Society alternate member); and the reappointment of
Cele Oldham (Member of the Public at Large).
Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or
vote.
REPORTS –
RENTAL AGREEMENT/BEST AMERICAN STORAGE/RECORDS
MANAGEMENT
Commr. Hanson made a motion, which was seconded by Commr.
Pool, to approve the request and to give authorization to encumber funds and
execute the rental agreement to Best American Storage for records storage space
for Records Management.
Under discussion, Mr. Sandy Minkoff,
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the motion, which was
carried by a 4-0 vote.
Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote.
LEASE – SARVIS/WILSON INVESTMENTS, INC.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff,
Commr. Stivender made a motion, which was seconded by
Commr. Hanson, to approve the three year lease with Sarvis/Wilson Investments,
Inc. for 2,200 square feet of office space at 908 North Sinclair Avenue,
Tavares for Lake County Community Access Network (LCCAN) Program/Citizens'
Commission for Children/Volunteer Program.
Under discussion, Commr. Hill stated that Library
Services is across the street, and she wanted to know if there was any way that
they would have room to put them in a building.
Mr. Fletcher Smith, Director of Community Services,
addressed the Board and explained that the space is not large enough to move
the people in the
Mr. Bill Neron,
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the motion, which was
carried by a 4-0 vote.
Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or
vote.
REPORTS -
APPEALS - ADJUSTMENT IN SCHOOL IMPACT FEE - DAVID
MELONEY
Mr. Bill Neron,
Mr. David Meloney addressed the Board to present his
appeal. Mr. Meloney stated that he owns
a small machine shop business in
Ms. Wickwire clarified that, in September, 2002, the
other fees would not have been filled in on the receipt, because they had not
been approved by the Board. She
explained that, at the time this form was created, the County was reviewing
fees for parks and recreation, libraries, law enforcement, and
corrections. To make this form work if
those fees were ever adopted, staff added extra fields at the bottom of it rather
than having to go back and redesign it every time the Board approved a fee.
Commr. Pool explained that the County received thousands
of individuals prepaying their impact fees, and today they have really only two
people who have an issue, but Commr. Stivender noted that she has two more appeals
on her desk, which Ms. Wickwire has not seen.
Discussion occurred regarding individuals having the
opportunity to pay only part of the fee, with it being clarified that the
majority of the certificates were only for the fee that was going up and that
seemed to be the normal process.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff,
Ms. Wickwire explained that she has many permits issued
that have three prepayment certificates, one for road, one for school, and one
for fire. It was noted that the road
impact fee went up substantially on October 1, 2002.
The Board discussed the fact that many people would have
the money to pay the fees, but they may choose not to put the money out at that
time, even though Mr. Meloney is saying that he had wanted to pay all of the
fees at that time. Even though staff has
a standard dialogue with every single person that comes to the office, they
agreed that perhaps the form could be improved but, from the face of it, it appears
that Mr. Meloney only wanted to pay this one fee at that time.
Mr. Meloney explained that he has no problem paying
the money, but he should not have to pay the higher fees, because it was his
intention to pay all of the fees at that time.
Commr. Pool wanted to make sure that the Board was not
setting a precedent, or opening the flood gates, for others, if they should decide
to approve Mr. Meloney’s request.
Commr. Stivender explained that the two appeals she has
on her desk are not similar to the ones today.
They actually had their permits and paid for everything last year, and
then they had ongoing inspections and plans got changed which affected the
timing, so they paid the original amount before they raised the fees, and then
they got their final the day after and were charged the additional amount.
Commr. Pool stated that there appears to be very few individuals
out of the thousands that who paid that have an issue. He felt that the County really had a pretty
good system for the most part and that people did understand and he wanted to
know if there was any opportunity to even negotiate a difference.
Mr. Minkoff explained that their role today is as a judge
and not as doing what is the right thing, so the only way an appeal would be
successful is if it shows that the rules were not complied with or something
like that; if they start negotiating, then they will have thousands of people
coming in to negotiate. This is an
appeal and staff has made a decision, the fact is he only paid the road at that
time, and he had to pay the correct ones then.
The Board would have to find an evidentiary reason to overturn that
decision.
Commr. Pool stated that, based on Mr. Minkoff’s
clarification and, based on what the receipt said and what the fee structure
said, it was an oversight on Mr. Meloney’s part, even though he believes his
intentions were there, and he does not believe the receipt was misleading.
Commr.
Hanson stated that she did not feel that the Board had any choice but to go by
staff’s recommendation. She stated that
it is confusing and she appreciates Mr. Meloney bringing it to their attention,
and Ms. Wickwire, Mr. Minkoff, and the Board can try to work on that language,
so it is clear, but she agrees that, if they make a change here, they will have
thousands that will come before them also asking for changes.
On a
motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried by a 4-0 vote, the
Board denied the appeal for David Meloney for an adjustment in the School
Impact Fee and other fees.
Commr.
Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote.
APPEALS - ADJUSTMENT IN SCHOOL IMPACT FEE –
Mr. Bill Neron,
Mr. Baney addressed the Board and explained that he came
to Tavares and paid his property taxes, and then he went to prepay his school
impact fee and, at that time, Ms. Wendy Wickwire, Impact Fee Coordinator, was
not there. He explained to another girl that
he was doing a lot split and wanted to prepay the school impact fee, but she said
she did not know how to handle the matter.
He asked if he could leave a check for the $3,500.00 and she explained
that he would have to wait for Ms. Wickwire to get back, and she would call him
when she got in, which she did that afternoon. He explained that he does
extensive traveling because he does communication work for the Highway Patrol,
Department of Law Enforcement, Game and Fish, Marine Patrol, and others, and he
was down south, and he had taken that one day off to take care of these
matters. He was told to come back in and
it would be taken care of and the first time he got a chance was February 4,
2005, at which time Ms. Wickwire was on vacation and, after consulting with Mr.
Bill Neron,
Commr. Stivender wanted to know if Ms. Wickwire is the
only individual that can handle such an issue, and Mr. Neron explained that,
when they realized they were going to get a rush on prepayments, staff set up a
special office with extra help and, as being stated by Mr. Baney, due to the
complexity of this issue and lot splits, Mr. Baney was told that no one but Ms.
Wickwire could handle that problem. He
stated that it is really a question of whether the gentleman was aware of the
February 1 cut off date.
Commr. Stivender stated that it is her concern that this
could happen anywhere and they should have somebody to back up staff. Mr. Gregg Welstead, Director of Growth
Management, or someone from the fifth floor, should have come down and
clarified this so that Mr. Baney could have paid the fees.
Mr. Neron explained that they have since made some
staffing changes, and they have gotten a new part time position that is going
to be fully trained, and staff is cross training some other people so that they
do not have this situation of only one person being able to handle things.
Ms. Wickwire stated that she had no argument that Mr.
Baney was here to pay the fee, in December, 2004, but it was a more complicated
issue and, because of the complexity of the lot split, other staff members were
not sure what to do. In order to avoid
an error, he was told that he would need to speak specifically with her. She did return his call but Mr. Baney had to
go back to work. She noted that the
decision was made by the Board, on December 21, 2004, that the effective date
would be February 1, 2005. On December
27, 2004, Mr. Baney would have known about the effective date.
Commr. Hanson felt that the Board still needed to go by
the staff recommendation, because some of the burden does fall back on the public
to know the effective date.
Mr. Baney stressed that he was there on December 27, 2004,
to prepay the fee, and he even asked if he could leave his check. He stated
that Ms. Wickwire did not return his call until about 3:45 p.m., and he would
not have been able to return on that same day before 5 p.m.
Commr. Pool stated that Mr. Baney was here and staff did
not know how to help him, and he cannot fault him for making the effort to
prepay, and it was his intent to prepay the school impact fee, but obviously
they did not have the ability, or the knowledge, or the person on staff to take
that dollar at that time. He did think
that Mr. Baney made a mistake in not coming back in and he thinks staff’s
recommendation is probably a good recommendation, but his intentions were clearly
to pay the school impact fee.
Commr. Hanson discussed the fact that Ms. Wickwire came
back to her office at 12:30 p.m., and Mr. Baney was in to pay at 11:45 a.m., so
they are talking about 45 minutes difference in time. She felt that, because of the importance of
the issue at hand, she would have waited to see Ms. Wickwire at 12:30 p.m.; however,
staff did not know how to handle his situation; he was told that Ms. Wickwire
would call him back; and she was probably swamped when she got back from lunch,
so she did not have an opportunity to call until later in the day. It was noted that Mr. Baney was asking to pay
the amount of $3,489.00.
Commr. Stivender made a motion, which was seconded by
Commr. Pool, to approve for Mr. Baney to pay the school impact fees that were
in effect at the time he came in on December 27, 2004, the amount of $3,489.00.
Under discussion, Commr. Pool stated that he feels this
was an honest attempt to pay the fee; it was understood that the fee was due;
and he feels it is fair and equitable. Mr.
Baney was here to pay and they could not accept those funds, because of lack of
information, or knowledge, on their part, which he thinks is a fair
argument. He wanted staff to know that
he was not upset with them, and he thinks they made the right decision, and it
came to the Board.
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the motion, which was
carried by a 3-1 vote.
Commr. Hanson voted “no”.
Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or
vote.
REPORTS – COMMISSIONER POOL – DISTRICT #2
HURRICANES/REIMBURSEMENT FROM STATE
Commr. Pool informed the Board that he received a call
from Mr. Nathan Cook, Representative Randy Johnson’s Office, last night, and he
thought there was a $103,000 windfall coming to
Mr. Bill Neron,
Ms. Frazier addressed the Board and explained that the
moneys would be for any infrastructure repairs, for roads or buildings, and it
would cover the County’s out-of-pocket expenses.
Mr. Neron stated that staff did provide Representative
Johnson’s Office with the information, as they had requested, and the County
was asking for $103,000.
Commr. Pool explained that Mr. Cook wanted him to know
that the item had been appropriated out of committee and through the House, and
it now goes to the Senate.
Commr. Stivender wanted to know if staff had included the
bridge damage that was done at
Mr. Neron stated that he wanted to congratulate Ms.
Frazier and her staff for their expeditious response to the call for
information from Representative Johnson’s Office.
Commr. Pool stated that he also wanted to thank
Representative Johnson’s Office for his due diligence in helping the Board and
bringing that information to them.
MINNEOLA ELEMENTARY
Commr. Pool informed the Board that he had the privilege
and the pleasure of teaching a fourth grade last week for the entire day, at
Minneola Elementary. He wanted to
applaud them and to acknowledge that the classroom of 23 children was well
behaved. The school is well disciplined
and well structured and he had a tour of the facility during the break time. He noted that it was a Junior Achievement
Program, and it was an all day structured event, and he thanked them for having
him there as part of the event.
MINNEOLA AREA WIDE STUDY ON TRANSPORTATION MEETING
Commr.
Pool stated that he would like to update the Board on what happened at the
Minneola Area Wide Study on Transportation.
He stated that it was a very well attended meeting, with hundreds of
people there. Even though there was much
criticism aimed at him personally and/or them as Commissioners, he tried to get
them focused on the reality that they were not talking about projects that may
come or preliminary projects. He
explained that, if you look north of Minneola and east of US 27, there are
thousands of homes in that corridor that were approved by Minneola, not by the
Lake County Commission, and it is their responsibility to plan for and prepare
for transportation initiatives and that is improving existing roads and
building new roads. Commr. Pool stated
that Tindale-Oliver did a very good job of trying to explain what is already on
the ground and what will come. Commr.
Pool stated that he wants the Board to focus on how they can have people
understand that it is their responsibility to plan and prepare for these new
roads and, if they do not do that today and, if they act as though it will go
away tomorrow, these projects are coming anyway. It is their responsibility, along with the Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO), to identify and continue to work for improvement
in these areas, and where they have a chance and an opportunity, they need to
cease it. He wanted to inform the Board
that the citizens there felt that they could stop whatever was going to come
and he does not think that is something they can do, since Minneola approved a many
of those projects.
Commr. Pool explained that, even though “The Orlando
Sentinel” had negatively reflected some of his remarks, he is glad that people
have come to
Commr. Hanson stated that the County is working on joint
planning areas (JPAs) with the cities, but she wanted to know how the cities
are dealing with concurrency and transportation.
Mr. Gregg Welstead, Director of Growth Management, stated
that, in one of the developer agreements between the City of
Commr. Pool stated that the County has challenges and
opportunities, and he thinks they need to cease those opportunities where they
can and where they find willing participants to help work with them, and that
would be the development community, along with the citizens. At that meeting, it was clear that the brunt
of the conversation was on growth, and they have nothing to do with the
thousands of homes that have been approved north of Minneola and east of US 27.
REPORTS – COMMISSIONER HANSON – DISTRICT #4
ADOPT A ROAD PROGRAM/ARIZONA
Commr. Hanson reported that she spent last week in
Mr. Bill Neron,
REPORTS – COMMISSIONER STIVENDER – DISTRICT #3
STUDENTS-ATHLETES
Commr. Stivender informed the Board that she and Ms. Wendy
Taylor, Executive Office Manager, will be working on acknowledging all of the
student athletes, or teams within Lake County, who have made it to districts,
or farther, and will be bringing those back to the Board hopefully in May. She would like each Commissioner to make the
presentation to those teams within his/her own district. Commr. Stivender noted that it will probably
take a couple of meetings to acknowledge all of them, because there are quite a
few student athletes and teams in the County that have excelled this year. She asked each Commissioner to let Ms. Taylor
know if there is a team, or someone in their area, that needs to be recognized.
Commr. Stivender noted that the Florida Association of
Counties (FAC) starts tomorrow and, on Thursday, they will have Lake County
Day, with a reception that night. She
has a meeting with the Secretary of Transportation on Thursday morning, and she
will be introducing Mr. T. J. Fish, the Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO) Executive Director.
THOMAS THE TRAIN
Commr. Stivender noted that Thomas the Train will be in
Commr. Stivender informed the Board that she traveled
last week to
REPORTS – COMMISSIONER CADWELL – DISTRICT #5
PROCLAMATION/NATIONAL COUNTY GOVERNMENT WEEK
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr.
Hanson and carried by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the request for approval
and execution of Proclamation 2005-35 designating the week of April 10 through
16, 2005 as National County Government Week.
Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or
vote.
REPORTS – COMMISSIONER HILL – CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT #1
SALES SURTAX OVERSIGHT COMMITTEES
Commr. Hill informed the Board that the Sales Surtax
Oversight Committee will meet at 8:30 a.m., on April 19, 2005, in the Board
Chambers. The Board will meet at that
time, with the regular meeting beginning at 9:00 a.m.
ADJOURNMENT
There
being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the
meeting adjourned at 11:35 a.m.
___________________________
JENNIFER HILL, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
__________________________
JAMES
C. WATKINS, CLERK