A regular MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
April 4, 2023
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, April 4, 2023 at 9:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chambers, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Kirby Smith, Chairman; Douglas B. Shields, Vice Chairman; Sean Parks; 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 Stephanie Cash, Deputy Clerk.
INVOCATION and pledge
Commr. Smith welcomed everyone to the April 4, 2023 Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting, and said that the meeting was also being streamed live on the County website; furthermore, they were also broadcasting the meeting via Zoom.
Pastor Chase Allen, with First Baptist Church of Umatilla, gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
virtual meeting instructions
Mr. Levar Cooper, Director for the Office of Communications, 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, stated that there were no updates.
citizen question and comment period
Ms. Katherine de Jongh, a resident of Lake County, commented that she had been following the Lake County Historical Museum, and noted that it was operated by the Historical Society. She related that she was interested in participating with the Lake County Historical Society; however, she could not find any information about the membership meeting dates, board meeting dates, or the identity of the board members as she had not received any response to her questions. She asked for this information to be provided to her before the next membership meeting, which was supposed to be in April 2023.
Ms. Barker remarked that the County had her email address, and that this information would be sent to her.
Ms. de Jongh relayed that she was a citizen who would like to volunteer.
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. He stated that there were four cases on the agenda, and that Tabs 1 through 3 were on the consent agenda. He remarked that staff was requesting to pull Tab 1 to do a formal presentation, and that there were residents in attendance who wished to speak on the item. He commented that they were asking for approval on Tabs 2 and 3.
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. Campione, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Rezoning Consent Agenda, Tabs 2 and 3, pulling Tab 1 to the regular agenda, as follows:
Tab 2. Ordinance No. 2023-20
Rezoning Case # RZ-22-24-4
Swanson Chudeusz Property
Rezoning approximately 3.00 +/- acres from Agriculture (A) to Medium Residential District (R-3) to accommodate the creation of three (3) lots.
Tab 3. Ordinance No. 2023-21
Rezoning Case # FLU-22-12-1
Wellness Way Density Amendment: Capacity Allocation
Amend Policy I-8.2.1.1 Future Land Use Categories Capacity Allocation.
rezoning regular agenda
Tab 1. Ordinance No. 2023-19
Rezoning Case # MCUP-22-01-1
Rubin Groves Sand Mine
Establish a 10 +/- acre sand mine on a 136 +/- acre parcel within the
Agriculture (A) zoning district.
Tab 4. Ordinance No. 2023-22
Rezoning Case # RZ-22-28-2
Hills of Montverde PUD Amendment
Amend Section 1.C.1 entitled Development Standards/Design Criteria of Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinance #2018-44 and clarify the side and rear setbacks, noted in Section D.
Rubin Groves Sand Mine
Mr. Howell presented Tab 1, Rezoning Case # MCUP-22-01-1, Rubin Groves Sand Mine, and stated that the applicant was requesting to establish a 10 acre sand mine on a 136 acre parcel within the Agriculture zoning district. He explained that the property was located west of United States (U.S.) Highway 27 and south of County Road (CR) 474 in the unincorporated south Lake County area, and he displayed the location on the map. He related that the southeastern corner of the property was zoned as Planned Unit Development (PUD), and that the remainder of the property was zoned Agriculture, noting that the mining activities were planned to take place on the Agricultural property. He displayed the concept plan depicting the sand mining activities within the 10 acres on the Agricultural property, and stated that the remainder of the overall acreage was being set aside as open space, noting that the future land use (FLU) category of Green Swamp Rural Conservation required a minimum of 80 percent open space to be set aside. He relayed that Central Testing Laboratories, a third party consultant to the County, was contracted to review the application for consistency with the land development regulations (LDR) and had concluded that the data included with the application was consistent with standard industry practices and followed the general outline for requirements set forth in the County’s LDR, noting that it was sufficient to satisfy the mining conditional use permit (MCUP) process. He elaborated that on March 1, 2023, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to approve this item on the consent agenda, and he displayed an aerial map showing the portion of the property where the mining would take place and an existing sand mine on CR 474 north of the property. He stated that staff found the application consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) and LDR, and that the applicant was in attendance.
Commr. Parks asked how much of the total 136 acres was upland and wetland, including the proposed mined area.
Mr. Jimmy Crawford, an attorney representing the
applicant, stated that the staff analysis and report recommended approval and
served as substantial evidence in support of an approval. He opined that this project served a vital
need for the material due to an Interstate 4 (I-4) expansion project just south
of this location on U.S. Highway 27 starting in
2024, and that they would like this project to be the end use of the material
from this property. He relayed that
there would be a short presentation discussing the impacts on the aquifer,
which was a critical resource of the Green Swamp and must be protected. He opined that there was a critical need in
the Four Corners area for park properties as well as a community center, and
that this area felt neglected because it encompassed four jurisdictions. He stated that the applicant would like to
donate a minimum of seven acres of uplands with access to CR 474 to the County
for use as a public park and community center once the mine was completed with
a five year limit, and he displayed language that he would like to submit for
inclusion in the ordinance.
Mr. James Golden, with Groves Scientific and Engineering, displayed the site plan showing the entire 136 acres, and said that the percentage of uplands to wetlands was about 50/50. He stated that they were proposing to use the northern parcel of 18 acres as a sand mine, and that it was currently a citrus grove, noting that there was another citrus grove on the southern parcel. He related that the sand mine would be 10 acres within that 18 acres, and that the open space requirement of the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern would be approximately 118 acres. He displayed the site plan, and said that they requested no variances from County code. He explained that there would be 100 foot setbacks all around, a landscape buffer along CR 474, and turn lanes to increase safety for their sand mine and the sand mine across the street, which was a request of the Lake County Public Works Department, opining that it would be a good improvement on that road going towards U.S. Highway 27. He relayed that they had groundwater monitoring wells surrounding the sand mine to measure water levels in the shallow aquifer as well as up against a small wetland area located southeast of the site, and that there would be no dewatering. He elaborated that the mine would be dry until they reached the water table, which was about 20 feet down, and that it would then be dredged. He commented that some of the project details included the following: a proposed 18-acre sand mine site with 10 acres being mined out of 136 acres and 118 acres preserved as open space; the staff report and Planning and Zoning Board both recommended approval; it was consistent and compatible with Green Swamp Critical Area of Concern environmental protection and conservation goals; there were no wetlands or threatened or endangered species impacts; two acres of wetlands would be created from this project including a recreational lake; and there would be a reduction of water use saving almost nine million gallons of water per year from the aquifer because they no longer needed the grove irrigation well, which was approved for 16 million gallons of water per year for irrigation. He explained that the only water removed from the mine was the 10 percent held in the soil, which was less than 500,000 gallons per year, and that the total mine had only 600,000 cubic yards of soil in it indicating that it would have a short life of about five to six years. He related that they had two permits from the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) for water use including an environmental resource permit ensuring there was no drainage going offsite. He stated that there would be swales along the entrance road, and that the internal roads would be in the pit itself with no roads being outside the pit or in the setback areas; additionally, there was a requirement for periodic reports which could also be sent to the County. He mentioned that they had done a traffic study in which their traffic expert found no significant impacts to the level of service on either CR 474 or U.S. Highway 27, and he requested that the Board would approve the project.
Commr. Parks inquired about the trips per day, and if the hours of operation were from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Golden relayed his understanding that the mine could generate between 100 and 200 trips per day, and that it would be spread out during the whole day.
Mr. Crawford noted that the well was approved for about 17 million gallons of water per year, and opined that they would be saving almost nine million gallons of water per year.
Commr. Smith asked what the times of operation would be.
Mr. Golden relayed his understanding that they would be from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday.
Commr. Smith questioned if the dredge would be a quiet electric dredge, and Mr. Golden indicated that it would.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Ms. de Jongh related that in the current year, Lake County had partnered with 1,000 Friends of Florida and the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC), and that one of the objectives was to promote special places in the county, opining that this property was in one of these special places as it was identified at the state level in 1979. She opined that the County was obligated to be good stewards of the land, and that this project conflicted with that. She opined that even though the owner had a business and there was a need for this fill, this project was contrary to what the County had been making strides towards achieving in this area of environmental concern, and said that she would like the Board to reconsider approving this.
Ms. Denise Lapierre, a resident of the Four Corners area, commented that she was in opposition to the proposed sand mine, and opined that the Board, with the exception of Commissioner Shields, was unaware of the daily struggles faced in the Four Corners area. She opined that traffic was one of the main issues there, and that the only way in and out of their community was on U.S. Highway 192, noting that if there was an accident on U.S. Highway 27, they had to drive to Hartwood Marsh Road, which was 11 miles away. She related that two new housing developments were being added within one mile of this proposed sand mine, and opined that their roads could not handle the additional strain added by the trucks. She elaborated that residents were constantly complaining about traffic, and that this was before the construction of at least four new communities. She noted that the current proposal allowed trucks to be on the road 12 hours a day, six days a week, and opined that dump trucks coming from CR 474 cut drivers off on their way to U.S. Highway 192 and congested traffic all the way up to I-4. She pointed out that the area of this proposed sand mine was in the Green Swamp, which featured 56,000 acres of wetlands, flatlands, and low ridges that extended across Polk, Lake, Sumter, Hernando, and Pasco Counties, and that in 1979, the Florida Legislature designated the Green Swamp as an area of critical concern. She stated that in March 2021, the Lake County Water Authority (LCWA) passed a resolution opposing any Comp Plan or land use changes that would authorize additional mining within the Green Swamp due to communitive impacts to wetlands that provided water to the Clermont Chain of Lakes and the local rivers, and that in May of 2021, the Clermont City Council unanimously approved a resolution opposing a change in Lake County’s growth plan that would permit more sand mining. She pointed out that the Florida Aquifer was the main source of drinking water for Lake County, and that the sand in the Green Swamp recharged this aquifer and filtered the drinking water, opining that Sunshine Water Services already had a difficult time providing quality water to the current residents of Lake County without taking into account the new residents that will soon be added to area. She opined that the job of the BCC was to make the right decision for the residents who voted them into office and not to favor a single landowner who did not even live in the area, and she requested that the Board would vote against the addition of another sand mine in the Green Swamp.
Ms. Cindy Newton, a resident of Lake County, stated that she was opposed to any proposed industry, zoning type, land use, or construction that would impede the flow of water through the section of the Green Swamp from the north side of Lake Lowery in Polk County into Lake Louisa, which fed the Clermont Chain of Lakes, because of vital hydrology. She recalled that after Hurricane Ian, the water level was almost level with Lake Lowery Road, and that it took months for it to flow though this section of the Green Swamp to Lake Louisa even though it was flowing quickly. She displayed a map of the proposed sand mine, and opined that any alteration to this would change this flow and have an effect. She relayed that this provided clean water, and opined that this should be an application to deny.
There being no one else who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Mr. Bill Ray, with Ray and Associates, commented that the flow of surface water went from Lake Lowery to Lake Louisa, and that this project had no impact on the Big Creek drainage basin or the wetlands associated with it. He displayed a map showing the location of the proposed site and the Big Creek drainage basin, and noted that the wetlands flowed south, around the site, and then north through Big Creek. He mentioned that that there was a small section of wetlands to the west of the site; however, their property was farther east and in no way impeded the flow within the Big Creek Drainage Basin. He related that some of the land in this area had been controlled by his family, and that he had been associated with this property for many years, noting that it had been a grove for many years. He stated that he was an expert in environmental regions and activities in the Green Swamp and that he was a certified planner for the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP); furthermore, he was a member of the Council of Environmental Quality, and had a bachelor’s degree in environmental studies and natural sciences from Rollins College.
Mr. Crawford remarked that they would save millions of
gallons of water that was currently being used for the orange grove as well as
eliminate the pesticide, herbicide, and fertilizer use on the property, which
could leach down into the shallow aquifer.
He relayed that they would be providing turn lanes in both directions,
and that there was no permanent traffic impact from this. He explained that it would not put more
trucks on U.S. Highway 27 as the previous mine had,
causing sand and mud to be tracked onto the road near the traffic light at
Woodcrest Way, because the trucks would use an active haul road that currently
had eight sand mines on it. He stated
that the Comp Plan and the LDRs passed by this Board specifically allowed sand
mining in the Green Swamp with the strict conditions that they had applied, and
that they were not asking for a change in those regulations, noting that they
just needed an MCUP in compliance with all the County regulations.
Commr. Parks asked Mr. Crawford
to clarify the donation of seven acres to the County.
Mr. Crawford commented that
there would be a ten acre lake on the parcel after the mining was done, and
that there would be about eight acres of uplands around it. He related that they were in discussions to
buy an additional piece of property that had more frontage on CR 474, opining
that the County would prefer that property instead.
Mr. Ray explained that this
property was a 17 acre site with 10 acres of wetlands and about seven acres of
uplands, and that this site had a native habitat on it of mesic pine flatwoods which
was never impacted by growth, pasture, or development. He pointed out that the proposed sand mine
property was further to the east and was heavily impacted with no native
habitat, noting that it was an orange grove.
Commr. Parks stated that there
were sand mines in the area; however, this was a large issue as was development
in the Four Corners area. He mentioned
that part of the infrastructure provided by the County was parks, recreation,
and open space, and that there was not a provision for the Four Corners
area. He related that Commissioner
Shields had tried to assist the area by procuring a community center; however,
the County was not able to do that, and opined that this could be an
opportunity. He commented that another
concern was that the sand mine site could eventually be developed. He opined that if both of those properties
were dedicated to the County, there would be an assurance that it would not be
developed; additionally, this property could help meet the need of a regional
park.
Mr. Crawford commented that the
property would be encumbered by a conservation easement and was in the Green
Swamp; furthermore, that they had not discussed donating the entire 136 acres.
Commr. Blake disclosed that he
had communication with Mr. Crawford and had received emails from some of the
residents. He inquired if a member of
the BCC had asked them for property to be donated, and if it was implied that
there would be a condition of approval.
Mr. Crawford replied that it was
not implied that there would be a condition of approval, and that the
discussion of donated property for a community center or a park had been
ongoing for several years. He mentioned
that the owner was looking for a legacy project, and that they requested to be
included in designing the parcel, ensuring that it would live up to that
vision.
Commr. Campione questioned if
the property east of the proposed sand mine was the site of the illegal mine.
Mr. Crawford replied that it was
not an illegal mine, and that it was a grading project that was approved by
Lake County and settled in an administrative hearing with the State of
Florida. He said that there were issues
they had to resolve during the process; however, they had done what was granted
by the BCC.
Commr. Campione recalled that
the BCC had voted in favor of a housing project at the site with contouring,
grading, and some removal of sand to make the homes handicap accessible for the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which sounded legitimate; however, they
had then started mining the property.
She opined that what the Board had been told was not what had actually
been done, and that they could have contoured the land while protecting the
wetland area in a responsible way.
Mr. Crawford commented that all
of the grading plans had been reviewed by the County and adhered to when they
graded the property, and that it had been discussed at the hearing that it would
be about three million yards of property.
Commr. Campione opined that it
should have been presented as a mine that would then be developed, and then the
Board would have known exactly what it was.
Mr. Crawford pointed out that
the project had precipitated changes in the local code to not allow that much
material to be removed; however, at the time, it was legal and approved by this
Board and the State of Florida. He
opined that nothing had been misrepresented, and relayed his understanding that
there was case law stating that old code enforcement and old projects could not
be used to influence a decision on current projects.
Commr. Shields opined that the
local residents were still upset about the large mining operation that was
done, and noted that it had disrupted traffic and left sand everywhere.
Mr. Crawford remarked that the
mine came out on U.S. Highway 27 at Woodcrest Way, and that there were sand
tracking issues that they continued to work on.
He reiterated that this new sand mine would come out on CR 474, provide
turn lanes, and save millions of gallons of water per year; furthermore, mines
were allowed in the Green Swamp by the Comp Plan.
Commr. Smith asked if they had
given the Board the plans of exactly what they were going to remove.
Mr. Crawford answered that they
had submitted detailed construction plans to staff, and that there was an
overview of that in the Board packet at the time. He stated that the total amount was stated as
up to three million yards, which was exactly what it was when completed;
however, he agreed that it was impactful on the community.
Commr. Smith pointed out that
the application before the Board was a 10 acre mine.
Commr. Campione reiterated that
the previous property was being platted as a subdivision, and then it was
mined.
Commr. Smith inquired if that
property had been platted.
Mr. Crawford replied that it had
been platted and sold to Pulte Homes as a handicap accessible property, and
that there were restrictions in the PUD regarding the level nature, noting that
it was almost completely level.
Commr. Campione asked if houses
were being built currently.
Mr. Crawford replied that the
infrastructure was being constructed, and that there was vertical construction
on there currently.
Commr. Campione questioned if
they could still realize one unit per 10 acres with the conservation easement
on the uplands.
Mr. Crawford answered that the
conservation easement prohibited residential development and only allowed passive
recreational use, and he suggested that a trail or a boardwalk could be constructed
on it. He stated that if this was
approved, there was not an opportunity for it to be developed afterwards.
Commr. Campione commented that
they had offered uplands of the area that was being mined to the County.
Mr. Crawford clarified that it
was either that property or the other property, noting that they could donate
developable property not covered by the conservation easement to the County.
Commr. Campione stated that she had
not asked them to make any donations.
Commr. Blake expressed concern
about a septic tank being installed on that property if it was donated to the
County and eventually developed into a community center.
Commr. Parks opined that it
would be sewer, and that the community center was just an example of property
use.
Mr. Crawford related that there
was a prohibition on central utilities being extended to it, and opined that it
could be serviced by a distributed wastewater treatment system (DWTS).
Commr. Smith commented that he
wanted to ensure that this donation of property was the landowner’s decision.
Mr. Sheldon Rubin, the owner of
the property, opined that the best location would be the seven acres east of
the proposed sand mine, and he displayed it on a map.
Mr. Crawford added that the
property was about 18 acres total with about seven acres of uplands.
Mr. Rubin said that it was his
pleasure to donate the property, opining that it would be something good to put
his ashes on.
Commr. Campione relayed that the
County had previously had issues with illegal mines done under the auspices of
other uses or blatantly done illegitimately, and that she was a proponent of
those who put applications in for mining and followed the rules. She opined that doing this the right way
should be encouraged; therefore, she would support this application, noting
that they had applied correctly and were following the rules, including
dedicating the open space per the code.
Commr. Shields noted that he
would oppose this application because he had campaigned on protecting the Green
Swamp, and that he and his constituents were against adding more sand
trucks. He opined that there could be an
escape clause in the ordinance under the section regarding open space, noting
that if the Comp Plan definition of open space changed, they would be able to
comply with the amended regulations. He
opined that this should be stricken so that there would be no change.
Mr. Crawford opined that this
would only allow them to change it administratively, and said that he wanted to
ensure that they would not be prohibited from coming back to the Board for a
vote to change it.
Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, inquired if he was agreeing to delete the paragraph stating that if the open space standards for mining within the Green Swamp were amended to be less than 80 percent, the operating plan may be amended to comply with the amended open space restrictions.
Mr. Crawford said that it would be fine because the operating plan was approved at a staff level; however, they would like the ability to ask the Board for approval at that time.
Commr. Parks inquired if any changes to the open space standard would require them to come before the BCC to change their requirement, and Mr. Crawford indicated that this was correct.
Ms. Marsh recommended that this language be added to the ordinance, and that if any changes of open space definition occurred, it would require them to come back before the BCC to benefit from that change.
Mr. Crawford said that they were fine with that.
Commr. Campione opined that if there were limitations placed on operations, the process could be slowed, and that it could take more time to complete. She commented that she was not comfortable with land being dedicated to the County in the ordinance, and that if the landowner wanted to do that, then it could be done separately, opining that the application should stand on its own.
Mr. Crawford commented that they would stand by their word, and that if the BCC was uncomfortable placing this provision in the ordinance, then it could be excluded.
On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried by a vote of 3-2, the Board approved Tab 1, Rezoning Case # MCUP-22-01-1, Rubin Groves Sand Mine, modifying the open space provisions contained in Section 3, Part E by deleting subsection 2 and adding a requirement that if the open space definition or requirements changed, the ordinance must be amended to obtain the benefit of those changes. The Board also rejected the land developer’s proposal to dedicate a portion of property for a public park once the mining operation ceased.
Commr. Shields and Commr. Parks voted no.
Hills of Montverde PUD Amendment
Mr. Howell presented Tab 4, Rezoning Case # RZ-22-28-2, Hills of Montverde PUD Amendment, and said that the applicant was requesting to amend the development standards and design criteria of the PUD in Ordinance 2018-44 and clarify the side and rear setbacks. He explained that the project was located south of Fosgate Road and east of Florida’s Turnpike near the City of Clermont, and that the properties were currently zoned PUD and were designated with an Urban Low density FLU category. He displayed an amended concept plan and aerial map, and said that the Planning and Zoning Board forwarded the item to the BCC without a recommendation, noting that staff also did not have a recommendation.
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.
Commr. Parks recused himself from this vote and from participating in the conversation, explaining that he was the Town Planner for the Town of Montverde.
Mr. Berry Walker, an attorney representing the applicant, related that the objections filed by the Town of Montverde had been withdrawn, and that the Town was now in support of the application for the amendment, opining that the resolution would benefit the Town and the owner. He explained that the change was a minor one allowing the homes in the subdivision to be constructed to Lake County standards versus the Town of Montverde architectural standards and guidelines, including the garage size, the overhangs on the roof eaves, and the use of a stone or brick veneer versus natural materials. He commented that they had discussed the proposed design standards with staff, and opined that it would make the community better; furthermore, there were minor changes to the ordinance that clarified some typographical errors in the 2018 ordinance dealing with setbacks. He mentioned that there were no objections from anyone else, and that they were building to Lake County standards; therefore, he opined that it should be approved.
Commr. Campione reiterated that the objections had been withdrawn from the Town of Montverde, and she questioned if there had been a mutual agreement.
Mr. Walker answered that there had been a completely mutual agreement, and that the Town Manager and Town Attorney were in attendance to support the proposed amendment.
Ms. Anita Geraci-Carver, Montverde Town Attorney, stated that the Town was in support of the ordinance, and that Mr. Walker had pointed out the differences in the Town’s design standards, noting that they had withdrawn their objections.
Mr. Walker mentioned that they had been working in partnership with staff, and that there would also be a road agreement allowing them to construct Fosgate Road on both sides of the bridge, which would be a benefit to the County.
Commr. Shields expressed appreciation to the applicant and the Town of Montverde for working this out, and said that he was happy about the resolution.
Mr. Walker commented that the County had urged them to talk to the Town of Montverde, and that after much time spent discussing the issues, they had been resolved to their mutual satisfaction.
Commr. Blake disclosed that he had previously met with the applicant and the Town of Montverde.
Commr. Shields remarked that he had also met with the applicant and the Town of Montverde.
Commr. Smith noted that he had met with applicant and the Town of Montverde.
On a motion by Commr. Shields, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved to amend Section 1.C.1 entitled Development Standards/Design Criteria of PUD Ordinance #2018-44 and clarify the side and rear setbacks, noted in Section D.
Commr. Parks recused himself from voting.
commissioners reports
commissioner shields – vice chairman and district 1
Wellness WAy
Commr. Shields relayed that he had met with Mr. Brian Bulthuis, Clermont City Manager, and had discussed Wellness Way and the Olympus project as well as the water and sewer development.
Lake Louisa State Park
Commr. Shields mentioned that a constituent wanted to do Boy Scout projects in Lake Louisa State Park, and he inquired how to get permission to help in a State Park.
Commr. Smith opined that Representative Taylor Yarkosky could help.
commissioner campione – district 4
Lake May Park
Commr. Campione stated that there was an issue at Lake May Park with many laurel oak trees being removed, and that local residents did not like to see that level of tree removal. She explained that the restoration plan called for a replanting project with native trees, noting that laurel oak trees grew quickly and could affect other varieties of trees. She opined that it would have been better if the County had informed the residents before the project started.
Commr. Smith opined that it would be good to do outreach to let residents know what was going on.
Commr. Campione opined that tree removal was a difficult area, especially when it involved a preserve, and that outreach could have been helpful.
blueberry farm
Commr. Campione commented that on the first day of picking at a blueberry farm, there was much dust coming from mulch piles covering the blueberries, and that the owner had reached out to the County for assistance in the matter. She remarked that staff asked the contractor to hold off on construction for the day while the blueberries were being picked, and she expressed appreciation for staff’s participation.
commissioner smith – chairman and district 3
Joint meeting with the LCWA
Commr. Smith related that there was a joint meeting with the LCWA on the previous day, opining that it was productive.
National day designations
Commr. Smith said that it was National Chicken Cordon Bleu Day, and National Hug a Newsperson Day.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:18 a.m.
_________________________________
kirby smith, chairman
ATTEST:
________________________________
GARY J COONEY, CLERK