A regular MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

november 1, 2022

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chambers, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Sean Parks, Chairman; Kirby Smith, Vice Chairman; Douglas B. Shields; Leslie Campione; and Josh Blake. Others present were: Jennifer Barker, County Manager; Melanie Marsh, County Attorney; Niki Booth, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; Kristy Mullane, Chief Financial Officer; and Josh Pearson, Deputy Clerk.

INVOCATION and pledge

Commr. Parks welcomed everyone to the meeting. He indicated that the Invocation would be given by Mr. Fred Schneider, Assistant County Manager, and that the Pledge of Allegiance would be led by someone who worked in public safety, or who was a veteran who had served Lake County. He explained that Ms. Paola Robles recently joined the Office of Veterans Services as a Veteran Services Officer in September 2022, and that she served in the United States (U.S.) Army from 2008 to 2013 and was stationed at Fort Hood, Texas 1st Cavalry Division; additionally, she was deployed to Tallil, Iraq from 2009 to 2010, and Mosul, Iraq from 2011 to 2012. He added that for her service, Ms. Robles was awarded the Iraqi Campaign Medal, Army Achievement Medal, Meritorious Unit Commendation, Army Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, and the Army Service Ribbon. He thanked her for her service.

Mr. Schneider gave the Invocation and Ms. Robles led the Pledge of Allegiance.

virtual meeting instructions

Mr. Erikk Ross, Director for the Information Technology (IT) Department, explained that the current meeting was being livestreamed on the County website and was also being made available through Zoom Webinar for members of the public who wished to provide comments during the Citizen Question and Comment Period later in the agenda. He elaborated that anyone watching though the livestream who wished to participate could follow the directions currently being broadcast through the stream; furthermore, he relayed that during the Citizen Question and Comment Period, anyone who had joined the webinar via their phone could press *9 to virtually raise their hand, and anyone participating online could click the raise hand button to identify that they wished to speak. He said that when it was time for public comment, he would read the person’s name or phone number, unmute the appropriate line, and the speaker would be asked to provide comments. He added that everyone would have three minutes to speak, and after three minutes an alarm would sound to let them know that their time was up. He added that they previously notified the public that comments could be emailed through 5:00 p.m. on the previous day, and those comments were shared with the Board prior to the meeting. He stated that anyone wishing to provide written comments during the meeting could visit www.lakecountyfl.gov/commissionmeeting, noting that comments sent during this meeting would be shared with the Commission after the meeting was concluded.

Agenda update

Ms. Jennifer Barker, County Manager, said that Tabs 17 and 18 were added as addendums since the agenda was first published, and she requested that Tab 2, which was a presentation of a proclamation for National Homelessness and Hunger Awareness Week, be moved to the consent agenda; furthermore, they would have the proclamation presented at the November 15, 2022 Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting.

Minutes approval

On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the minutes for the BCC meeting of September 6, 2022 (Regular Meeting) as presented.

commissioner’s boards and committees updATE

Commr. Parks said that the BCC served on many boards and committees, and he mentioned that individuals could volunteer for one of their committees, noting that this was advertised on the County website.

Commr. Shields said that he had previously mentioned a League of Cities luncheon that he attended, and he mentioned that on the previous Friday, he attended another quarterly meeting with the other County Commissioners from the three other Counties in Four Corners, noting that they would be bringing back a map so that they would know what each of the BCCs considered to be Four Corners for their county. He also reported on a Lake-Sumter Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) meeting, noting that Lake County had reached a certain population and would be receiving funding instead of waiting on the State. He specified that they would be moving from an MPO to the next tier.

Commr. Smith indicated that an Elder Affairs Coordinating Council meeting had been canceled due to a senior expo that was held in the previous week at the Lake Square Mall. He added that 45 vendors had a great turnout, and that he was excited to see the people and vendors there. He thanked the mall for their assistance with this.

Commr. Campione remarked that she had several upcoming meetings that she would be reporting on at the next BCC meeting, and that she had spent a significant amount of time answering emails related to trash issues in northeast Lake County. She relayed her understanding that the County was making progress, and that they would be adding additional help over the following two weeks with the City of Tavares until the County could catch up and get their drivers familiar with the routes in northeast Lake County. She explained that she would receive input from citizens and then reach out to staff, who could then reach out to the hauler to try to follow up. She added that there was also a large bear population in northeast Lake County, and that this made it more challenging. She opined that they were making progress and that the service would get better if they could get through the next month or two, noting that residents needed to inform the County if they did not get their trash picked up.

Commr. Blake said that he had mentioned to Ms. Barker that for the areas that had been heavily affected by these issues, they could possibly look into a prorated refund of the annual solid waste fee that the County could take from reserves. He opined that they did not want to charge someone for a service they did not receive for that period of time.

Commr. Campione agreed that the County could potentially provide some relief in this regard.

Commr. Parks noted that the County was fining the haulers when they failed to provide service, and he commented that the Board could discuss this.

Commr. Campione mentioned that for the bear proof trashcans on the County’s legislative priorities for State funding, the County may possibly need to come out of pocket and provide some relief for this. She added that the County could possibly be reimbursed with the State grant, opining that it was a significant issue with having trash cans out on a regular basis and having bear encounters.

Commr. Parks thought that the County needed some short term plans to address the immediate issue, and then it was their responsibility to discuss solid waste long term.

Ms. Barker explained that the County had challenges with the new hauler learning routes, and that they were working hard to relieve the frustrations of residents. She indicated that the County had reached out to the City of Tavares, who had agreed to assist two days per week with providing curbside collection in some of the more urban areas of East Lake County, so that the County’s hauler could focus on the more rural areas and catching up with missed pickups. She stated that for debris removal for Hurricane Ian, the County had quadrupled the number of trucks throughout the County providing debris removal. She said that the County had a garbage collection email address that was received by staff and the Solid Waste Division, noting that they would respond to this and address the issues. She elaborated that residents could email [email protected], or call their phone center at 352-343-3776. She indicated that she would speak to staff and the County Attorney’s Office about looking into a prorated reimbursement, opining that it was appropriate given the challenges that the County had over the prior month.

Commr. Parks mentioned that there were many local companies that could also help with debris removal.

Ms. Barker remarked that for anyone who would like to register to assist with debris removal, or to be in the County’s database if they had an upcoming project that they would like to bid on, the County urged them to contact the Office of Procurement Services.

Commr. Shields relayed that a homeowners association (HOA) in his district had hired a private contractor to do this themselves.

Commr. Blake recalled that he had previously updated the Board about the Public Safety Coordinating Council meeting, noting that Mr. Tony Deaton, Director for the Office of County Probation, had been the de facto chairman and had done a great job. He added that regarding the Lake-Sumter MPO becoming a transportation management area (TMA), they also had a detailed presentation about how their list of priority projects (LOPP) would look in the future, noting that it would include extra data such as congestion numbers, which he opined could make it a clearer picture of why these items were their top priorities.

Commr. Parks stated that the Central Florida Expressway Authority (CFX) Board continued to move along the State Road (SR) 516 project, also known as the Lake-Orange Expressway.

Ms. Barker indicated that CFX was scheduled to give a presentation about this item at the November 15, 2022 BCC meeting.

Commr. Parks added that the presentation would also include the long range 2045 plan for CFX. He then stated that he was also a liaison on the Keep Lake Beautiful (KLB) Advisory Committee, and he recognized members of KLB who were in attendance. He reported that they had a great meeting recently with an update on America in Bloom, which was a nationwide effort to promote more plantings and beautification, particularly within more urbanized areas. He said that there were four cities with this designation in Lake County, and that they wanted all of the cities to receive the America in Bloom designation. He asked how many volunteer hours KLB had.

Ms. Veronica Dau, with KLB, replied that they calculated 3,882 volunteer hours through KLB in the current year, which was more than twice the hours in the previous year.

Commr. Parks then showed the 2022 Outstanding Education Involvement Award for KLB.

Ms. Dau indicated that it was a State award from Keep Florida Beautiful, and she dedicated it to Mr. Nick McRay.

citizen question and comment period

Mr. Jon Suarez, a concerned citizen, commented that his garbage had only been picked one time in eight weeks. He expressed concerns for issues with garbage pickup, noting that there were two different cans for garbage pickup and that it was not a recycle can. He indicated that he lived on Curle Road, which was a non-County maintained road that they had many issues with.

Commr. Parks indicated that Mr. Suarez relaying his issues helped the County direct the service back there to get his garbage picked up.

Ms. Barker mentioned that staff was meeting with the hauler on the current afternoon, and that this was the type of information that they needed to sort out with them, noting that they were meeting to understand what the challenges were and what the County could do to make it easier for the hauler to become acclimated to the routes and help the residents.

proclamation 2022-131 hospice month

On a motion by Commr. Shields, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Proclamation 2022-131 declaring November as Hospice Month.

Commr. Shields read and presented Proclamation 2022-131 to individuals with Cornerstone Hospice and Palliative Care.

Ms. Cheryl Rumbley, with Cornerstone Hospice and Palliative Care, thanked the BCC for their support, noting that they had been providing care in Lake County for over 30 years.

CLERK OF the Circuit COURT and comptroller’s CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller’s Consent Agenda, Items 1 and 2, as follows:

List of Warrants

Notice is hereby provided of warrants paid prior to this meeting, pursuant to Chapter 136.06 (1) of the Florida Statutes, which shall be incorporated into the Minutes as attached Exhibit A and filed in the Board Support Division of the Clerk's Office.

City of Clermont Ordinances

Notice is hereby provided of having received Annexation Ordinances 2022-034 and 2022-039 from the City of Clermont.

COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Consent Agenda, Tab 2, and Tabs 5 through 14, as follows:

PROCLAMATIONS

Recommend approval of Proclamation 2022-139 declaring November 12-20, 2022 National Hunger & Homelessness Awareness Week, per Commissioner Smith.

PUBLIC SAFETY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

Animal Services

Recommend approval:

1. To accept a donation of $50,000 from the estate of Joan Willhide to benefit the Lake County Animal Shelter; and

2. To adopt associated Unanticipated Revenue Resolution 2022-140 for $50,000; and

3. To authorize the County Manager, County Attorney, and the Office of Procurement Services to execute all supporting documentation. The fiscal impact is $50,000 (revenue/expenditure).

Public Safety Support

Recommend approval:

1. To utilize Contract 21-723 with ETR, L.L.C. (Sanford, FL) for ambulance refurbishment to include the purchase of ambulances and other equipment; and

2. To authorize the Office of Procurement Services to execute all supporting documentation.

The estimated annual fiscal impact for refurbishment of existing ambulances and the purchase of new ambulances is $900,000 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, each Fiscal Year's Budget.

Recommend approval of the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Eustis for Lake County to administer and process addressing within the municipal limits. The fiscal impact (revenue) cannot be determined at this time. Commission District 3 & 4.

PUBLIC SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Facilities Management

Recommend approval of a budget transfer in the amount of $135,000, reallocating funding from Building Services Reserves ($87,750) and General Funds Reserves ($47,250) for the interior renovation of the Tax Collector's Office located at 320 W. Main Street, Tavares, FL 32778. Planning and Zoning will occupy roughly 35 percent of the space and Building Services will occupy 65 percent of the space.

Fleet Management

Recommend approval to utilize Sourcewell (Formerly NJPA) Contract # 2023 091521-NAF & 060920-NAF to purchase a fleet service vehicle.

The fiscal impact is $97,583 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget.

Housing and Community Services

Recommend approval:

1. To accept 12 additional Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program vouchers under the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2022 (P.L. 117-103); and

2. Of Unanticipated Revenue Resolution 2022-141 adding $140,633 to the Section 8 Fund.

The fiscal impact is $140,633 (revenue/expenditure - 100 percent grant funding).

Recommend approval of Lake County to accept a third lien position when providing Down Payment Assistance (DPA) through the State Housing Initiative Partnership (SHIP) program when the client is also receiving assistance from the Florida Housing Finance Corporation. There is no fiscal impact.

Parks and Trails

Recommend Approval:

1. Of Contracts 22-753 for fence installation and related services with All-Rite Fence Services, Inc. (Orlando, FL) and Peter Built Fence, LLC (Summerfield, FL); and

2. To authorize the Office of Procurement Services to execute all supporting documentation.

The estimated fiscal impact is $150,000 (expenditure) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year Budget.

Public Works

Recommend adoption of Resolution 2022-142 to advertise a public hearing to vacate platted rights of way. The closest municipality is Clermont. The fiscal impact is $2,295 (revenue-vacation application fee) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget. Commission District 1.

Transit Services

Recommend approval of the agreement with the Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (LYNX) for the continuation of the Link 55 route bus service in South Lake County.

The fiscal impact is $207,000 (expenditure - 100 percent Federal Transit Administration grant funded) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget. Commission District 1.

public hearing: ordinance 2022-46 regarding solid waste

Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, placed the proposed ordinance on the floor for reading by title only as follows:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA; AMENDING CHAPTER 23, LAKE COUNTY CODE, ENTITLED SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL AND LITTER; MODIFYING VARIOUS REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Ms. Mary Hamilton, Operations Director for the Public Works Department, explained that the County was doing this to be consistent with the new contract with FCC Environmental Services, and she showed a map of the county, noting that FCC Environmental Services had taken over area one from GFL Environmental on October 1, 2022. She mentioned that there were some operational changes that necessitated the County having to amend Chapter 23, and she listed the following changes: additional garbage immediately following a holiday shift week shall be placed in garbage and recycling carts only; yard waste no longer using plastic bags would have to be biodegradable; and bulk waste would have 48 hours’ notice for the hauler. She also indicated that the County would be coming back with the other two haulers to also make their contracts consistent with these changes.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved Ordinance 2022-46 amending Chapter 23, Lake County Code, entitled Solid Waste Collection and Disposal and Litter.

public hearings: REZONING

rezoning consent agenda

Mr. Bobby Howell, Director for the Office of Planning and Zoning, displayed the advertisements for that day’s rezoning cases on the overhead monitor in accordance with the Florida Statutes.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding any cases on the Rezoning Consent Agenda, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

On a motion by Commr. Shields, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Rezoning Consent Agenda, Tabs 1 and 2, as follows:

Tab 1. Ordinance No. 2022-47

Rezoning Case # FLU-22-08-1

Wellness Way Utility Amendments (Adoption)

Amend Policy I-8.5.2 Potable and Re-Use Water Facilities, and Policy I-8.5.3, Sanitary Sewer Facilities.

Tab 2. Ordinance No. 2022-48

Rezoning Case # RZ-22-20-3

Charitable Ministry Support Inc.

Amend Community Facility District (CFD) Ordinance #2017-28 to revise Section 1.B, Setbacks.

rezoning regular agenda

Tab 3.

Rezoning Case # FLU-22-07-4

Sorrento Pines PUD (Transmittal)

Amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) to change the Future Land Use Category (FLUC) on approximately 199.39 +/- acres from Public Service Facility & Infrastructure to Planned Unit Development FLUC and amend associated Comprehensive Plan Policies to revise the development program for the Sorrento Pines Planned Unit Development to allow for an additional 399 dwelling units.

Tab 4. Ordinance No. 2022-49

Rezoning Case # FLU-21-05-3

Drake Pointe PUD (Adoption)

Amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) to change the Future Land Use Category (FLUC) on approximately 293.810 acres from Rural Transition to Planned Unit Development FLUC and amend associated Comprehensive Plan Policies to incorporate the proposed development program for the Drake Pointe Development which will include 535 lots for single-family dwelling units, marina with restaurant and limited retail, and recreational facilities.

Tab 5. Ordinance No. 2022-50

Rezoning Case # RZ-21-19-3

Drake Pointe PUD

Rezone approximately 293.810 +/- acres from Agriculture (A) and Estate Residential (R2), and establish a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to accommodate a 535-lot single family residential subdivision, marina with restaurant and limited retail uses, and recreational facilities.

sorrento pines pud (transmittal)

Mr. Howell presented Tab 3, Rezoning Case # FLU-22-07-4, Sorrento Pines PUD (Transmittal). He explained that this was a transmittal hearing for a large scale property, consisting of approximately 199.39 acres, from a future land use (FLU) designation of Public Service Facility and Infrastructure to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow an additional 399 dwelling units for the Sorrento Pines PUD. He said that the property was located east of Cardinal Lane in the unincorporated Sorrento area, and that there were no wetlands or floodplains on the property. He mentioned that the property was zoned Community Facility District (CFD) in accordance with Ordinance 1997-61, and that if this item was approved for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (FDEO), the companion rezoning of the subject project from CFD to PUD would be presented to the Board at the same time that the adoption hearing was considered. He said that the applicant had requested the FLU amendment to incorporate the subject property into the development program for Sorrento Pines to allow for a total of 727 dwelling units in the overall development. He displayed the concept plan and indicated that the request was consistent with the open space and impervious surface ratio (ISR) for the previously approved Sorrento Pines PUD. He stated that access to the proposed development would be routed internally through the previous phases, which were currently under construction, and that the access points would be on County Road (CR) 437. He mentioned that the concept plan depicted a clustered development consistent with the design standards specified for the Wekiva Study Area under Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) Policy I-3.4.5, and that this item had been approved unanimously on the consent agenda at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting on October 12, 2022; furthermore, staff found the amendment consistent with the Land Development Regulations (LDR) and Comp Plan.

Mr. Jimmy Crawford, an attorney representing the applicant, reiterated that this item had been passed unanimously by the Planning and Zoning Board, and he noted that they would have three further public hearings if the item was approved on the current day; furthermore, it would come back for the PUD zoning at a Planning and Zoning Board meeting, and for a FLU plan amendment and rezoning before the BCC. He clarified that on the current day, they were not asking for any approval to build anything; rather, they were only requesting the ability to ask for a PUD of up to two units per acre on the subject property. He mentioned that they had a well-attended community meeting and that they had made some significant redesigns based on this. He commented that one needed to show need for a land use plan amendment to increase density, and that it was noted that when the 2030 Comp Plan was adopted in 2010, the projected population for Lake County in 2030 was 412,400. He elaborated that in 2021, the projected 2030 population was 445,400; therefore, from the 2010 adoption, they were 30,000 units short of being able to allocate for residential needs based on projected population. He opined that this showed a need, and he thought that they were doing it in a responsible way for the environment and the community. He displayed a map and stated that after meeting with property owners, they included a 200 foot buffer on part of the proposed development, and that they were also going to have a berm, landscape planting and a six foot vinyl fence for about 12 feet of elevation, noting that one would not be able to see into the property from outside; additionally, this was done based on concerns from neighbors on larger tracts. He requested approval to move this item along and bring back details in a few months.

Commr. Campione asked if the subject property was previously a spray field, and if Mr. Crawford had represented the applicant regarding the PUD on CR 437.

Mr. Crawford confirmed this and added that it had been owned by the City of Eustis, and he said that he had represented this property when it came for approval in 2019. He also indicated that their transportation planner had told them that the main entrance would warrant a traffic signal with these additional units, and he said that they would offer a proportionate share agreement if the County approved it, opining that it could help people on CR 437.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

Ms. Judith Hamlett, a resident on CR 437, expressed opposition to this high density addition. She indicated concerns for traffic on CR 437 and for development, and she asked that the development be regulated to not be high density housing. She noted that these homes would require ambulance service, schools and hospitals, and she opined that their infrastructure was not able to handle this. She also opined that it could possibly be regulated in such a way that the developers could be responsible for some of these costs, in addition to environmental green spaces.

Ms. Katherine de Jongh, a resident of Cross Tie Ranch, relayed that this rezoning could bring the potential of 400 homes to this area, and she opined that they did not have the infrastructure in place to support this. She mentioned that there were other developments in the area, and said that she did not see the need. She remarked that she would like to see the subject property stay a CFD, indicating her understanding that a true PUD would have other items to support residents, such as an office space or restaurant. She expressed her understanding that there was only one main entrance in and out, and that everyone there had to use the same Publix and other local establishments. She thought that the concurrency plan for school students needed to be revisited, and she expressed concerns for all of the vehicles that would be coming in and out of the area. She opined that 400 homes was too much, and that residents wanted development to be safe, responsible, attractive, and not to look like other areas surrounding the county.

Ms. Cindy Newton, a resident of unincorporated Lake County, relayed her understanding that the subject 199 acres was type A high recharge sand, and she opined that since the property had been used a spray field, it would be beneficial to know the damage that had already been done to the soil, groundwater and aquifer before moving forward with disturbing the soil. She opined that the attached environmental studies did not address this part of the property, and she said that in 1990, it was reported that 1.11 million gallons were sprayed onto the field. She asked if the property was used for solid waste before it was used as a spray field, and she indicated that by 2012, 81 million gallons was being sprayed there per year before it was discontinued. She relayed her understanding that this could leach for a significant period of time, and she questioned if it was stabilized. She expressed concerns for adding more recharge as the proposed project was irrigated, and for chorine and nitrate that had leached into the groundwater already.

Mr. Suarez indicated concerns for 399 additional homes, for 328 homes that had already been approved, and for 200 homes at the White Rose Subdivision, opining that this was 1,860 cars per day. He expressed concerns for the roads in the area, and he relayed his understanding that there were 1,608 homes approved off U.S. Highway 441, and 300 apartments behind a nearby Lowe’s. He indicated concerns for there being over 4,000 cars in a three mile area, and for residents’ safety. He relayed his understanding that the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO), fire rescue and the hospital were short on manpower, and that the schools were overcrowded. He thought that the BCC should deny this item, and he opined that when the subject property was sold to the City of Eustis as a spray field, the County, the City and homeowners were involved. He indicated an understanding that there was an agreement at the sale of the property that nothing would go on the property but water for 99 years, noting that they were not close to the 99 years.

Ms. Joan Hill, a resident off CR 473, relayed her understanding that the Orlando Business Journal said that developers were looking to develop in Lake County because the county was friendlier to development than other municipalities, and that Lake County had the lowest median sales prices in the metro Orlando area. She expressed concerns for living in the county with the lowest home prices, and she expressed opposition to 700 homes and all of those people coming onto CR 437. She thought that the County needed to do a road study now that State Road (SR) 429 was there, and she requested for the zoning to be lower density if it was changed. She questioned why it could not be country estates of no more than one acre, and she indicated interest in an additional ingress/egress on Cardinal Lane. She mentioned that there was a borrow pit with many trucks on CR 437, and that there were long leaf pine trees on the Sorrento Pines property that had already been approved. She expressed support for letting the area be the country.

There being no one else who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

Mr. Crawford mentioned that they had concurrency for infrastructure, and he opined that the Florida Legislature had limited the County regarding traffic and zoning approvals. He said that the applicant would offer to enter into a proportionate share agreement to pay for any deficiencies caused by them, and probably the entirety of the traffic signal. He commented that they were setting aside 45 percent open space, which was more than the Comp Plan or zoning would normally require, noting that it was what the BCC had required for Sorrento Pines. He relayed that they had a school capacity letter which showed that there was not a lack of capacity at any of the schools for this development; additionally, they had a one year capacity reservation. He stated that they wanted the development to be responsible, attractive and safe, and he indicated that they had a phase one environmental study done which came back clean. He mentioned that they would have fertilizer and pesticide best management practices (BMPs) in their HOA documents and their PUD, and he relayed his understanding that urban standards for stormwater increased recharge. He said that he was unaware of the City of Eustis agreement for the subject property to be used as a spray field for 99 years, and that his client purchased the property, noting that this item did not show up on a title opinion. He relayed that the applicant would look into this, and he mentioned that they had a preliminary road study in the item backup with approved methodology; furthermore, the study would have to come before the BCC with the PUD rezoning. He clarified that the long leaf pine trees had been placed in a tree museum on the Sorrento Pines property, and said that gopher tortoises on the site would be moved to a mitigation facility.

Commr. Parks noted that if this item went to zoning, there was a basis of review and if the BCC viewed that there was an issue with public safety and the road, it could possibly require the applicant to do more than what was minimally required.

Mr. Crawford remarked that the Florida Legislature had limited the County on capacity, but not on safety, and that the applicant would discuss this with staff and the BCC and do their share.

Commr. Parks thought that Ms. Newton had asked about sampling for contaminants within the soil, relaying his understanding that the applicant had a phase one environmental study which did not recommend a phase two.

Mr. Crawford confirmed this.

Commr. Parks advised that it could be good to do soil sampling, and he thought that the applicant should investigate this.

Commr. Campione indicated her understanding that a phase one environmental study typically discussed what the property was historically used for, and she asked if there was a recommendation to take soil samples.

Mr. Crawford denied this and said that there were no further recommended actions.

Mr. Mike Galvin, the owner of the subject property, explained that they had no issues doing any groundwater soil sampling, and that they intended to do this. He reiterated that their environmental consultant had recommended that they did not need to do groundwater sampling.

Commr. Smith asked if he was willing to do a phase two environmental study with soil sampling, and Mr. Galvin confirmed this.

Commr. Campione inquired about the commitment with regard to the land not being utilized for development but only left undisturbed after it was completed as a spray field.

Mr. Galvin replied that he had never heard of this, and that there was nothing on title, nor did they receive anything from the City of Eustis during their transaction. He added that they had a title policy which ensured title, and that there was nothing on that policy regarding this item.

Commr. Campione wondered if this was something that came up during public meetings and was in a public record somewhere, but did not make it to the recorded public records that one could find in a title search. She thought that this was worth reviewing to find out what representations were made by the City of Eustis to the community.

Mr. Galvin commented that they had met with the City of Eustis several times and that nothing was mentioned, and Mr. Crawford said that the applicant could look into this.

Commr. Campione commented that the net density of the current PUD on CR 437 was 1.63 units per acre. She asked why the applicant did not request this for the current item so that it would be consistent.

Mr. Phil Martinez, with Poulos and Bennett and representing the applicant, pointed out that there were conservation areas in the middle, that they were preserving forested areas, and that there was a power distribution easement. He added that on the western phase, their geography was slightly different where they were doing clustering or buffering around the perimeter, noting that they were making some open space and conservation areas in the interior. He stated that altogether, the subject parcel phase had a density of two dwelling units per acre, whereas the overall Sorrento Pines PUD, should this item be approved, would have a density of 1.82 units per acre.

Mr. Crawford relayed his understanding that the applicant arrived at two units per acre instead of staying at 1.63 units per acre because of the restraints on the subject parcel and the applicant having to leave so much open that the number of houses per usable acre was comparable between the two.

Mr. Martinez confirmed this and indicated that they viewed this as a clustered low density development.

Commr. Parks inquired about buffer widths.

Mr. Martinez responded that on the western perimeter, they had a 200 foot wide buffer, and that the southern perimeter would have a 100 foot wide buffer. He added that the southeastern buffer was 100 feet, and that the east-central perimeter would have a 200 foot buffer, along with a 50 foot wide buffer where there was adjacency between the western and eastern phases of Sorrento Pines. He mentioned that there was an existing tree line around the perimeter of the subject property, and that their intention was to preserve it and provide wide buffers to create a clustered subdivision with ample open space.

Mr. Galvin commented that they had met with residents adjacent to the western side of the property, and that they were willing to limit the houses along that side to one story only, along with enhancing a landscape berm.

Mr. Martinez displayed the cross section of the landscape berm along the southeastern areas of the subdivision where there were adjacent neighbors, and said that they would be proposing a six foot tall polyvinyl chloride (PVC) fence and a hedge to help screen the subdivision with the existing lots on Equestrian Trail.

Mr. Crawford added that the smaller lots along the eastern boundary would also be limited to one story.

Commr. Smith noted that the current item was only the PUD FLU for the density so that they could take it to the State. He noted that the applicant would have to come back before the Board before they could build anything, and that they could ensure that the clustering was what the County wanted in the rural design standards. He asked if the applicant would be looking into the safety issues.

Mr. Crawford responded that their traffic engineer would be present and that they would be working with staff to address the BCC’s concerns. He expressed a commitment to make it better.

Commr. Campione recalled that when the PUD on CR 437 first came to the Board, it was somewhat controversial because it had come at various times to the County for rezonings. She thought that at one point, there was a decision that it should be one unit per acre, and she expressed concerns for CR 437. She opined that it was a safety concern, and she indicated that she would be opposed to increasing the density; rather, she would support a Rural Transition FLU, noting that this had previously been done for the White Rose subdivision for one unit per acre with 50 percent open space. She mentioned that they were able to achieve clustering and large buffers, and that it was more in keeping with the rural community and kept the density and number of cars lower. She stated that if there were some things that could not be done, but if they could still do one unit per acre and the applicant needed the flexibility of a PUD, then she would suggest to utilize a PUD but keep it at one unit per acre with some flexibility in their buffers and open space. She noted that they could possibly have some larger lots, and she thought that residents would probably prefer this. She thought that this was a solution, opining that adding additional homes was an issue because it was a congested area with significant safety issues. She also indicated an interest in finding out about representations made by the City of Eustis and things said to residents. She mentioned that there were stories from people who lived on Cardinal Lane about how the subject property was used, and that there was significant waste disposal that had occurred there, noting that the County had received odor complaints.

Commr. Smith asked if her suggestion would be to table this item until this was reviewed.

Commr. Campione confirmed this, and she expressed interest in answering this question, which could give the applicant time to process the possibility of changing their PUD to make it more like Rural Transition with additional flexibility.

Mr. Crawford believed that this process had that time built into it, noting that the BCC was not approving anything on the current day except sending it to the State; additionally, in 60 to 120 days it would come back before the Board. He relayed that the answers that the applicant would need to have before coming back regarded the phase two environmental study, traffic, and the 99 year restriction. He believed that they would have time to prove that they could do this legally and environmentally safely, and that they could delay their adoption process. He asked the Board not to hold it up at the current time because it could be another 60 to 90 day delay, and said that the applicant would like to move forward with the preliminary part of it while understanding the Board’s concerns for density, traffic, the environment, and deed restrictions.

Commr. Smith asked if the Board could legally approve the density of two units per acre, knowing that they wanted one unit per acre.

Ms. Marsh confirmed that they could do less density; however, she was concerned whether FDEO could challenge this if the Board transmitted this item on the current day to FDEO and they came back with no comments and objections, and if the BCC then substantially changed the project and adopted it without sending it back to FDEO. She recalled that this scenario had occurred several years prior, and that FDEO had an issue with the County making substantial changes when they had not seen it.

Commr. Blake inquired if the previous situation was that the County went from what was approved to less density.

Ms. Marsh said that she did not know the specifics, but that FDEO was upset that the County had changed it; furthermore, she believed that they had a filed a lawsuit against the County.

Commr. Parks noted that the BCC was not considering zoning on the current day, and that it would be up to a certain density if they transmitted this item. He asked if it would be defensible if the BCC went through the standards of review during the rezoning, noting that he would possibly like something that ended up being much less than the density.

Ms. Marsh confirmed that it would be defensible, and that FDEO may not care if the BCC did this as a maximum density and then did less density. She recommended for the BCC to be comfortable with what they were transmitting, and she also suggested to possibly table this item if they wanted changes.

Commr. Campione said that it was unique because they were using the PUD FLU, which was different than Urban Low up to a certain amount of density.

Ms. Marsh commented that the County’s rural conservation Comp Plan amendment was coming back for adoption on December 6, 2022, noting that they would have these provisions in their Comp Plan within about the next month.

Commr. Parks inquired that if this item was tabled, when would be the soonest that they could hear this again.

Ms. Marsh thought that it was up to the Board.

Mr. Crawford clarified that all the proposed ordinance did was add this FLU to Sorrento Pines and changed the maximum densities and intensities to 727 units for the entire acreage. He opined that the ordinance indicated that they could have less density, and said he could not imagine that FDEO would have an issue with going from two units per acre to less density. He indicated that timing was important to the applicant, and he said that they were confident that they could address the Board’s concerns before coming back if it was transmitted.

Commr. Blake opined that given the economic situation, adding a government obstacle to private investment was perhaps not warranted. He added that he would be opposed to tabling this item.

Commr. Shields expressed concerns for traffic and safety, and he thought that it was safest to table this item.

Commr. Parks said that he understood the perspective about tabling it and that he had many questions, but that they could address this during the zoning part of this item. He remarked that it could possibly be two or three months before the County heard back from FDEO, and that the applicant would have to get the question answered regarding if the 99 year use applied, along with soil sampling. He indicated that the bar would be high for him, and that he did not have an issue moving forward, noting that the density could end up being less for him through the site planning process. He thought that it would be good to review the zoning requirements for the McKinnon Groves PUD, particularly with buffering and the placement of some of the homes.

Mr. Crawford relayed his understanding that there could be three votes to table this item, and said that he did not want it to be denied. He requested tabling the item for 60 days, and he listed the following items that they needed to address: more details on the traffic study; the contamination issue of the site; having a phase two environmental study conducted and presenting it to the County; looking at the McKinnon Groves issues; discussing the density internally; and checking on the 99 year use restriction.

Ms. Marsh commented that 60 days would be the January 3, 2023 BCC meeting.

Commr. Smith suggested to reduce the density to what was previously approved.

Commr. Campione asked that they reduce it to the one unit per acre that went with Rural Transition, noting that the Wekiva River Protection Area line was CR 437. She also opined that this could help solve some of the traffic issues and be more consistent with the surrounding area which was rural and had an agricultural feel.

Mr. Galvin indicated that they were willing to commit to constructing a traffic signal, and that they were currently constructing an amenity center for their phase one, noting that they would also be committing to building a second amenity on the phase three property. He commented that they were also weighing the cost for safety amenities when they were considering density, and he opined that it was a fair assessment to at least match what had already been approved.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried by a vote of 4-1, the Board tabled Tab 3, Rezoning Case # FLU-22-07-4, Sorrento Pines PUD (Transmittal), to the January 3, 2023 BCC meeting.

Commr. Blake voted no.

recess and reassembly

The Chairman called a recess at 10:41 a.m. until 10:55 a.m.

drake pointe pud

Commr. Parks relayed that Tabs 4 and 5 would be heard together.

Mr. Howell presented Tab 4, Rezoning Case # FLU-21-05-3, Drake Pointe PUD (Adoption). He explained that Tab 4 was the adoption of the Drake Point FLU amendment, and that the property was located northeast of CR 48 and along the shores of Lake Harris in the unincorporated Town of Howey-in-the-Hills area. He recalled that this item had been transmitted to the State on July 5, 2022, and that FDEO had no comments. He stated that this was an adoption hearing for a PUD FLU change from Rural Transition to allow for a mixed use development consisting of 535 lots with single family dwellings, marina with a restaurant and limited retail, and recreational facilities. He relayed that the development would be gated, and that public access would be allowed during daytime hours; furthermore, staff found the application consistent with the Comp Plan and LDR. He then presented Tab 5, Rezoning Case # RZ-21-19-3, Drake Pointe PUD, noting that this item was the companion rezoning ordinance to PUD, and that this rezoning was for 293.81 acres from Agriculture and Estate Residential (R-2) to PUD to accommodate a 535 lot single family residential subdivision, marina with a restaurant and limited retail uses, and recreational facilities. He commented that 231.56 acres were uplands, and that 62.25 were wetlands. He relayed that the net density would be 2.31 dwelling units per acre, with a gross density of 1.82 units per acre. He displayed the concept plan and noted that it emphasized various lot sizes, including 75 foot by 150 foot lakefront lots, 50 foot by 170 foot canal lots, and 65 foot by 120 foot internal lots, as well as depicting two points of access and a landscape berm along CR 48. He mentioned that the concept plan identified that 46 percent of the development would be set aside as open space, with an additional 20 percent of the gross development area to be set aside as a permanent conservation area. He recalled that this item had been unanimously approved by the Planning and Zoning Board on October 12, 2022, and said that staff found the rezoning consistent with the LDR and Comp Plan.

Commr. Parks asked the Board to disclose any ex parte communications for Tab 5, noting that he had met with the applicant and their representatives, as well as the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills.

Commr. Shields indicated that he had met with the same individuals.

Commr. Smith relayed that he had met with the applicant; however, he was unable to vote on this item, and he would abstain.

Commr. Campione recalled that she had met with the applicant and their representatives early in the process, and that she had a follow up conversation with the applicant’s attorney.

Commr. Blake commented that he had met with the applicant and their representatives, along with the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills Mayor and Town Administrator.

Ms. Tara Tedrow, an attorney representing the applicant, showed the overview of their concept plan and noted that it was a private residential community that would be open to the public; additionally, it allowed a significant amount of community space to be available to county residents. She displayed an aerial image of the location, and stated that there were different FLU designations of Rural Transition, Urban Low, as well as different types of zonings in this area. She explained that there would be a gatehouse, with gates open to the public from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., seven days per week, for the public to enjoy their clubhouse, marina, pickleball and tennis courts, and their nature trails. She added that their main entrance came off CR 48 and that they had two access points, and she showed an image of a roundabout that the Public Works Department had asked them to add, noting that there could possibly be enhanced features on the roundabout. She relayed her understanding that the roundabout would reduce speeds along CR 48, and she displayed an image of the buffer along CR 48. She specified that the berm would be a minimum of 75 feet, and that in some areas they would have 100 or 200 feet of separation between some of the property’s neighbors; furthermore, from CR 48 one would see the berm and landscaping, and they would not really have a view of the homes behind the berms. She showed an image of the clubhouse features that they designed with pools and a gym, and she displayed images of the designed marina, noting that there were controls within the PUD to have a Clean Marina Program certification. She showed images of other facilities, including active recreational courts which would be open to the public, noting that they were being maintained by the private developer. She showed the existing nature trails, and also said that they would have various housing styles and PUD ordinance controls for specific design standards. She listed the following requirements for housing: driveways, walkways and pool decks constructed with complimentary brick pavers; certain types of tile or metal roofing materials on specific lots; waterfront lots must have environmental swales; on the same street, homes with the same architectural design cannot be immediately adjacent to each other; and each residential structure must have a minimum two car garage. She added that they also had controls for design features regarding visual relief along all the elevations of their single family units, and she displayed the 17 different styles that their homes would had to have at least three of. She added that they had requirements for the exterior building materials, and that single family residences shall be designed using craftsman, bungalow, Florida cracker/low country, or southern living front porch architectural design standards. She mentioned that they had bear safety and bear proof trash can requirements in the ordinance, and that they included requirements for perimeters to consist of canopy and understory trees utilizing 100 percent Florida native plant materials from the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS); additionally, exotic and invasive species would be removed and would not be allowed. She indicated that they had also incorporated a voluntary requirement to incorporate landscaping with regionally native plants that are attractive to pollinators. She mentioned that they had BMPs for native landscaping, and that the HOA had controls for the management of buffers area, along with smart irrigation BMPs having to be utilized for irrigation throughout the property. She remarked that the PUD had specific standards for the HOA maintaining a preferred vendor list, and that they had to have training for lawn maintenance and home contractors with regards to protection for Florida friendly BMPs for protection of water resources by green industries. She said that they would also apply for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Clean Marina Program, and she opined that the staff report did a good job in reviewing the Comp Plan and LDR policies that the applicant met as part of this project. She relayed that staff had determined that there were no conflicts envisioned with the LDR or Comp Plan policies, that they would be promoting the compatibility of uses, that they had a large amount of open space provided, that they were not requesting any variances, and that they would provide a transition. She noted that they had Urban Low FLUs directly bordering the subject property to the south and the northwest, and that there were many existing PUDs in the area, clarifying that the applicant was not asking for four units per acre under the Urban Low FLU, but instead to limit it to a transitional density. She mentioned that the Bishops Gate community to the south was a townhome community; however, the applicant was proposing single family homes, which she opined was keeping with the character of the rest of the area. She opined that they were consistent with existing and proposed land uses around the subject property, and she displayed a table with a comparison of different projects in the area. She relayed that staff had analyzed the following items and had determined that the applicant met all required elements: water and sewer; schools; parks; solid waste; public safety; and transportation concurrency. She commented that they had school concurrency vested through the following year for their project, and that they met the minimum level of service for the County’s parks. She added that they had done a traffic study which indicated that CR 48 had sufficient capacity, reiterating that they would be providing a roundabout as mitigation. She said that another standard of review was whether and the extent to which the proposed rezoning would result in significant impacts on the natural environment, noting that they had 20 percent of the reserved open space for conservation, and 46 percent open space generally, with environmental protection standards in the PUD. She displayed a table with the progress of design for the project, and she indicated that staff had found the applicant consistent with the Comp Plan and LDR; furthermore, she requested approval of this item.

Commr. Shields asked if they had discussed maintenance of the roads.

Commr. Parks said that a municipal service benefit unit (MSBU) for the roads was included in the ordinance.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

Mr. Sean O’Keefe, Howey-in-the-Hills Town Administrator, displayed a map of the area and noted that the proposed development was approximately 1,800 feet or less from the Town of Howey-in-the Hills. He pointed out the two developments to the south and southwest of the subject property, and said that Bishops Gate had an actual gross density of one unit per acre and that it was about 75 percent open space. He added that Mission Inn was unincorporated and had an Urban Low FLU, and opined that it had a gross density of about 0.6 units per acre. He mentioned that the current proposal was to change the FLU from Rural Transition to PUD, noting that Rural Transition was a maximum of one unit per five acres, unless it was zoned as a PUD, in which case the density could be allowed for one unit per one acre with 50 percent open space. He opined that the PUD FLU was density as granted by the BCC on a case by case basis, and that there were only six other projects in the county with this FLU; additionally, he opined that it was an unusual and limited FLU that had been used sparingly around the county. He opined that the Town’s projects provided existing and potential residential capacity without the need for land use changes, that the Town had adequate approved housing units to meet demand through its Comp Plan, and that all of the entitled developments had planned provisions for sewer and wastewater. He opined that the proposed amendment would not support the transitional land use intent, that the purpose for Rural Transition FLU was to provide a step down in density between more urban areas and rural areas, that Bishops Gate and Mission Inn already formed a density transition to rural area, and that Drake Point at 1.82 units per gross acre was an increase in development density versus the existing Rural Transition interface. He opined that the proposed development was premature for the following reasons: utilities were not yet in place; housing was not needed to fill demand beyond the Town’s existing approvals; it decimated the Rural Transition area; and it placed an undue burden on the Town, especially for police and parks.

Mr. John Petranovic, a resident of Yalaha, asked the Board to consider adding a stipulation that the water treatment plant be treated by a municipality, rather than being a privately owned facility. He relayed his understanding that the proposed facility would only treat the subject property and not be a benefit to the community. He also requested to go through the City of Leesburg if the applicant could not seek services through the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills.

Ms. Caren Petranovic, a resident on Yalaha Cut Off Road, relayed her understanding that there was an interlocal agreement signed for new communities in the area, and that the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills was supposed to be the provider of utilities. She displayed a map of the area, and indicated an understanding that the water treatment plant would be placed across the street from her property. She expressed concerns for this, and for a treatment plant for a property that would not assist local businesses or her property. She hoped that the Board would encourage the applicant to come up with an agreement with the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills or the City of Leesburg to make water and sewer available.

There being no one else who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

Ms. Tedrow clarified that the property that they were proposing the water treatment facility on was currently entitled by right under the County code for this use. She indicated that they were not legally required to connect to the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills sewer and water facilities, noting that they were 3,500 feet from the Town’s existing wastewater, and were 9,000 feet from the Town’s proposed unbuilt well. She stated that a Mission Inn sewer plant connection would require 11,193 linear feet of lines to be run, and that they were told that there was no capacity to serve them at the current time. She mentioned that even if there was capacity to serve them, the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills’s utility agreement, which was adopted in 2003 under Ordinance 2003-307, required developments to connect to City utilities where available. She elaborated that the agreement defined availability by referencing the County code and Florida Statutes. She explained that Lake County Code, Section 6.12.01, and Section 381.0065, Florida Statutes, defined availability in the present sense, and also had limitations on how close one would have to be for those connections. She said that Florida Statutes defined availability as a sewer system within 1,320 feet, and that Lake County defined it as a wastewater system within 1,000 feet and water within 300 feet. She mentioned that there was not anything under the Town’s agreements, the County’s interlocal service boundary agreement (ISBA), or the Florida Statutes that would require the developer to connect to the existing facilities. She commented that some nearby projects were not fully built out but were entitled for more density which was higher than what the applicant was requesting on a net and gross acreage basis. She opined that the request was consistent with what was permitted around them, and that it was for a lower density in most respects to what some of those entitled projects currently had. She relayed that the treatment facility would be built and managed by a third party professional company that managed over 25 of these facilities throughout the state, including Mission Inn’s facility. She added that they had also included in the PUD that if any local governing agency wanted to take over this facility on mutually agreeable terms and buy it out for their ability to have an increased service area, then this would be an option to have in the ISBA. She opined that the applicant had drafted an ordinance that met or exceeded the County code, and she believed that it would be a great amenity for the community. She opined that it would not be a burden on services, noting that for police the County had a voluntary cooperation agreement with the municipalities and that funding could be requested to compensate for a burden. She also said that she could not imagine this development being a burden on parks because it was providing community parks and recreation seven days per week. She requested approval consistent with the County staff and Planning and Zoning Board recommendations.

Commr. Parks asked to confirm if it was written that at some point in the future, a municipality could possibly manage, operate or purchase the water treatment facility, and Ms. Tedrow said that this was correct. Commissioner Parks then inquired if a municipality could purchase it at the applicant’s cost and how this would be addressed.

Ms. Tedrow thought that it depended on the terms, and said that the applicant included language that if in the future any local governing authority desired to take over control and operations of the offsite treatment facility, the developer shall have the right to negotiate those mutually agreeable terms. She clarified that it might not be an outright acquisition, and that it could just be a utilization agreement.

Commr. Campione asked for the location of the treatment facility to be shown.

Ms. Tedrow displayed this and added that its Agriculture zoning allowed for limited utilities.

Commr. Campione inquired about the requirements for buffering, fences and setbacks.

Ms. Tedrow explained that their buffering had a four foot berm around the perimeter of the property, along with a six foot fence and landscaping. She opined that there would be no visual impact, and that the tallest piece of infrastructure was only 19 feet. She added that for other design features, those plans were currently being taken through plan review with the Public Works Department.

Commr. Campione asked if the County code required a wall around the property, and Ms. Tedrow replied that the applicant had volunteered this. Commissioner Campione then inquired if this was part of the current zoning application.

Ms. Marsh said that this was correct and that the applicant was just going through site plan approvals and that it would be part of the applicant’s plan; furthermore, they would need to build it once the plan was approved.

Commr. Campione stated that she wanted to make sure that it was not something that could be modified, noting that having this level of buffer between a treatment plant and private property would be important.

Commr. Parks inquired if the buffer would be completely opaque, and Ms. Tedrow confirmed this.

Commr. Smith asked if this would be a community development district (CDD).

Ms. Tedrow commented that it was not contemplated to be a CDD at the current time.

Commr. Shields inquired if Onsyte sewage treatment had been considered.

Commr. Parks recalled that he had asked them about it, but that they felt that this was a better solution.

Ms. Tedrow explained that their engineer considered Onsyte, but it was not going to be as functional for this project. She added that the site was a challenging design, and that Onsyte was not going to work from an engineering or design perspective on the property.

Commr. Smith indicated an understanding that the applicant was building the wastewater treatment plan like it was a municipality, and Ms. Tedrow indicated that this was correct. Commissioner Smith then asked if the applicant would be doing the roundabout voluntarily.

Ms. Tedrow confirmed this.

Commr. Smith added that the County had some environmental concerns and recreation aspects, and that the applicant had voluntarily addressed this.

Ms. Tedrow said that this was correct, and that the applicant had changed the development from being private to being open to the public.

Commr. Smith indicated an understanding that the applicant placed many of these extra items on themselves to enhance the property for their customers.

Ms. Tedrow explained that they had spent a year redesigning this project so that it was not only a benefit for their customers, but so that it would also be a long term public and community benefit.

Commr. Smith mentioned that they were using plans to help pollinators, and Ms. Tedrow thought that they would have the largest butterfly garden in the county.

Commr. Campione noted that the applicant’s presentation showed many palm trees, and she asked if this was a landscape plan that the developer was going to use.

Ms. Tedrow thought that they were mock ups, and that they could only use specific and limited types of approved UF/IFAS plant listings. She did not think that the Miami-style palm trees would be included, noting that they would have to be replaced with what the approved list was going to be.

Commr. Campione expressed concerns that the plan was not how it was really going to look.

Ms. Tedrow noted that they were still committing to a dense planting of understory and canopy trees, and that they would also have to include their irrigation BMPs, noting that the PUD would control those design standards.

Commr. Campione mentioned that there were rarely issues with palm trees after storms, and she opined that the Board may possibly want to reconsider the types of the trees they were using.

Commr. Parks said that he liked that the buffers were 100 percent native and that it could only be maintained by someone with a license and who was trained. He opined that native plants would stand a better chance than exotic plants during a hurricane.

Commr. Campione inquired if the waterfall areas would have water in them all the time, and Ms. Tedrow confirmed that they were different retention areas. Commissioner Campione then suggested having a large budget to maintain all of these areas. She commented that she had not supported this request because she liked the Rural Transition FLU and thought that it provided the perfect buffer and transition from urban densities to the surrounding area of Yalaha. She also felt that the individuals who put those designations in place knew what they were doing for this property, and that one unit per acre with 50 percent open space could create a nice project; however, she expressed appreciation for the hard work that had gone into concessions and design attributes that could make this a quality project.

Commr. Blake indicated appreciation for hearing the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills’ perspective on this item, and he mentioned that he had concurred with them regarding the police situation, noting that the project had approximately two-thirds of the population of the existing town. He relayed that because of the way that public safety mutual aid agreements worked, one of the Town’s concerns was that citizens in the town’s limits would be responded to, and that they did not want to be subsidizing what should be a County law enforcement item. He indicated an interest in keeping an eye on this in the future, and if this was an issue, for the County to possibly allocate some funding to have an additional position as the tax revenue was received.

Commr. Parks mentioned that the County could ask for input from the LCSO or the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills.

Commr. Blake relayed that the County could potentially request a report from the Lake County Sheriff to make sure that the County was being fair.

On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried by a vote of 3-1, the Board approved Tab 4, Rezoning Case # FLU-21-05-3, Drake Pointe PUD (Adoption).

Commr. Campione voted no.

Commr. Smith recused himself from voting.

Commr. Parks said that he appreciated the applicant, and that he was glad to see that his concerns were addressed in the ordinance. He added that for environmental and architectural design, this ordinance was stricter than any City that he knew.

On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried by a vote of 3-1, the Board approved Tab 5, Rezoning Case # RZ-21-19-3, Drake Pointe PUD.

Commr. Campione voted no.

Commr. Smith recused himself from voting.

reports

county manager

VETERANS DAY

Ms. Barker commented that County Offices would be closed on November 11, 2022 in observance of Veterans Day.

commissioners reports

commissioner smith – vice chairman and district 3

THANKING THE CITY OF TAVARES

Commr. Smith thanked the City of Tavares for helping the County with garbage pickup issues.

meeting with 448 community club

Commr. Smith said that he had a meeting with the 448 Community Club, and he thought that it went well.

national authors day

Commr. Smith remarked that the current day was National Authors Day.

commissioner campione –district 4

distributed wastewater treatment system program

Commr. Campione mentioned that she was trying to get ahead of this issue with regard to the Onsyte distributed wastewater treatment system, so that the County would have a mechanism to use. She added that by getting an ordinance in place, they could use an MSBU or municipal service taxing unit (MSTU) for residents who wanted to utilize the Onsyte program, noting that they could make the grant available to residents. She added that the County could also use this mechanism for new subdivisions that did not have access to central sewer. She mentioned that she had also asked staff to receive the City of Apopka’s rate study, and at a future meeting the Board could consider if they needed to retain someone to perform a rate study, or if they could utilize the City of Apopka study to determine what it could cost per resident in order to charge for the service and to have enough funding in reserves to address capital costs. She clarified that this would not preclude the County from contracting with a City if a City wanted to work with the County to be a utility provider and do the billing on a monthly basis; furthermore, if a new subdivision was being done, then this cost could possibly be included with someone’s mortgage payments, insurance costs, etc. so that they would know upfront that this is what it would cost to address their sewer services on an annual basis. She asked for the Board’s support to move this item ahead and advertise it.

Commr. Parks expressed support for this, noting that there were water quality issues with lakes. He also thought that the County needed to do this to become available for future State funding.

Commr. Campione relayed that she knew someone who was considering the cost of getting a new septic tank, and she expressed concerns for missing opportunities like this to get the new systems in place.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to advertise an Ordinance creating Article V, Chapter 21, Lake County Code to be entitled Distributed Wastewater Treatment System Assessment Procedures.

2022 women’s hall of fame inductee ratification

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Smith and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to ratify Ms. Catherine "Micki" Blackburn Nagel as the 2022 Women's Hall of Fame inductee as selected by the Women's Hall of Fame Committee on October 27, 2022.

commissioner parks – Chairman and district 2

VETERANS DAY SPEECH

Commr. Parks relayed that he was honored to have spoken on the previous Saturday for Veterans Day, and he indicated that an individual from out of town had told him that Lake County was the most veteran friendly and patriotic county that they had visited in the State of Florida.

MONTVERDE DAY

Commr. Parks congratulated the Town of Montverde for another successful Montverde Day on the previous weekend.

Commr. Smith mentioned that the City of Tavares had a food festival, and he thought that the city did a good job.

Commr. Campione said that on the previous night, there was a great street party in the City of Umatilla for Halloween which was sponsored by the chamber of commerce and a karate establishment, noting that it was well attended.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 12:00 p.m.

_________________________________

SEAN PARKS, chairman

ATTEST:

________________________________

GARY J COONEY, CLERK