The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, May 16, 1989, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Courthouse, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: C. W. "Chick" Gregg, Chairman; Thomas J. Windram; Richard Swartz; Michael J. Bakich; and Don Bailey. Others present were: Bill Stearn, County Attorney's Office: James C. Watkins, Clerk and Acting County Manager; Robert K. McKee, Chief Deputy Clerk; Ava Kronz, Assistant to the County Manager; and Toni M. Austin, Deputy Clerk.
James C. Watkins, Clerk, gave the Invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commr. Windram.
MINUTES
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of May 2, 1989, (E911 Workshop), as presented, and the Minutes of May 9, 1989, as amended.
COUNTY EMPLOYEES/PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
Mr. John Swanson, Director of Planning and Development, introduced to the Board Mr. Larry Kirch, who has been employed as a Principal Planner for Lake County.
CLERK OF THE COURT'S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Courts-Judges
Request to renew the lease with Emery Dillard, Jr., and Margaret Ann Dillard, for Suite 2 and Suite 3 at 205 North Texas Avenue, Tavares, for County Probation, for five years, with a rate increase of 2% per year, the first year at the rate of $1,082.90 per month.
Accounts Allowed
Payment of Warrant #94297 through Warrant #94716, for the following accounts:
Landfills Private Industry Council
General Revenue Pasco Fire District
Revenue Sharing Mt. Plymouth Fire District
Bassville Fire District County Transportation Trust
Countywide Library Countywide Fire District
Fine & Forfeiture Northwest Fire District
Capital Outlay Aquatic Weed
South Lake Fire District Emergency 911 Fund
Mosquito Control Section 8
Eustis Section 8 Paisley Fire District
Road Impact Law Enforcement Trust Fund
Law Library Northeast Hospital
Northeast Ambulance Northwest Ambulance
Bonds - Contractor
New
190-89 Paul J. Gosnell, Class B Building Contractor
4383-89 Wilmon Ray Stevenson, Carpentry
4704-89 John C. Abner & Kenneth L. Welker, Jr. d/b/a
S. J. Electric
4705-89 Ray Holder, Masonry
4706-89 William G. Bowman d/b/a Bowman Electric, Inc.
4707-89 Russell C. Pike, Electrical
4708-89 T. H. Little, Electrical
4709-89 Ellis Kent Chavers d/b/a Chavers Electric
4710-89 John P. Garey, Heating & Air Conditioning
4711-89 Lynn Harold Gilbert d/b/a All Pro Pools, Inc.,
Residential Swimming Pool Contractor
4712-89 James N. Martin d/b/a Sunbuilt Roofing
4713-89 Harold Bivens, Concrete
4714-89 Myron D. Deetz, Mechanical
4715-89 Joseph V. Isola, Jr. d/b/a R & R Electrical Allstar
4716-89 Perry M. Coughlin, Electrical
4717-89 Certified Electric of Central Florida, Inc.
4718-89 Robert C. Arft, Electrical Contractor
4719-89 Tri-X Corp., Electrical Contractor
4720-89 David B. Sheppard d/b/a Sheppard Electric Co.
Cancellation
4522-89 Kevin B. & Mark E. Towne
Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges
Request for approval and signature authorization on the Satisfaction of Judgment, Case No. 86-348CFA, State of Florida vs. Walter John Vanham, in the amount of $250.00.
Reports
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Monthly Distribution of Revenue Traffic/Criminal Cases for the month ending April 28, 1989, in the amount of $107,980.96.
Jails/Reports
Request to acknowledge receipt of the First Annual Follow-Up Inspection Reports for the Lake County Jail (Main), dated April 27, 1989, and the Lake County Jail (Annex), dated April 27, 1989, received from the Florida Department of Corrections.
Public Health/Reports
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Final Medicaid Certification Study, March 27, 1989, from the North Central Florida Health Planning Council, Inc.
Reports/State Agencies/Laws & Legislation
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Advisory Council on Intergovernmental Relations Final Report, Increasing Section 27.3455, Florida Statutes, Revenues to Florida Counties.
COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Grants/State Agencies
Environmenta1 Services
Request for authorization to submit Recycling and Education Grant Application to the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, and request for signatures on the Recycling Program Interlocal Agreement.
Environmental Services/Grants/State Agencies
Request for authorization to submit the Waste Tire Grant Application to the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation.
Budget Transfers/Public Health
Request from Emergency Medical Services to transfer funds from #00l-8-599-999-1-00-99-000, to #00l-8-526-640-l-03-26-510, in the amount of $19,224.00.
E9ll/Roads-County and State
Request from property owners to change the road name of North Bluff Lake Road (#21811A), to Tom Chapman Road.
Bids/Building Department
Request to bid two (2) economy sized 4x4 vehicles for use in the Building Department.
Planning & Development/Subdivisions
Request for preliminary approval of Rolling Oak Estates.
Planning & Development/Subdivisions
Request for preliminary approval of Clarmart Subdivision, Phase I.
Accounts Allowed/Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Subdivisions
Request for final approval of Seybold on Cherry Lake; acceptance of a check in the amount of $5,720.00 for performance of common driveways: and execution of an Escrow Agreement.
Accounts Allowed/Subdivisions
Request to release a CD, in the amount of $3,300.00, for maintenance in Grand Ridge Estates.
Budget Transfers/Grants/Planning Development/Resolutions
Request to transfer, by resolution, funds that were budgeted for the 1987-88 fiscal year, over to the 1988-89 budget, for the Community Development Block Grant.
Bonds - Mobile Home
Request for Louis Francks, Pine Lakes Area, District #4, to live in a mobile home on the same piece of property on which his conventional dwelling unit is being built, subject to the proper bonds being posted, and with the understanding that the mobile home will be removed upon the completion of the conventional dwelling unit, or upon the request of the Board of County Commissioners.
Accounts Allowed/Road Projects
Request for Payment #4 to Trac Roadbuilders for project #6-88, CR-473 Widening and Resurfacing, in the amount of $95,138.23
Roads-County & State/Public Works/Resolutions/Signs
Subdivisions
Request to post 20 mph speed limit signs on the following roads in Plum Lake Estates:
#3-1746 Plum Lake Drive
#3-1746A Plum Lake Circle
#3-1746B Plum Lake Court
#3-1746C Plum Lake Lane
Right-of-Ways, Roads & Easements/Subdivisions
Request to accept a drainage easement, in Venetian Village, Fourth Addition, which was executed in 1976 as a replacement for a drainage easement that was vacated by the Board of County Commissioners (Vacation Petition No. 157).
Deeds/Right-of-Ways, Roads & Easements
Request to accept the following Right-of-Way Deeds:
Billy/Patricia Warr #3-2035 Apshawa Rd.
Emory B. Durrance #3-2038 E. Apshawa Rd.
Emory B. Durrance #3-2038 E. Apshawa Rd.
Carl B. Murphy #2-2729 E. Dewey Robbins
Diana/Myron Waye #l-6304 Spring Lake Rd.
Doris Waye #l-6304 Spring Lake Rd.
Melvin Waye #l-6304 Spring Lake Rd.
Road Closings/Subdivisions
Request to advertise Road Vacation Petition No. 545, from Terrence and Ernestine Browning, to vacate roads and lots, Plat of Riley Health Sanitarium Grounds, Eustis Area.
Road Closings/Subdivisions
Request to advertise Road Vacation Petition No. 549, from Ralph D. Suggs, to vacate roads, lots, and alleys, Edgewater Beach Subdivision, Montverde Area.
COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/BIDS/COUNTY PROPERTY/ROADS-COUNTY & STATE
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request to award the bid on Surplus Property sale of l0+/- acres, on Sugarloaf Mountain Road, to Bret Cipes, in the amount of $12,610.00.
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/BIDS/PUBLIC HEALTH
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request from Lake-Sumter Emergency Medical Services, to obtain bids on one (1) Type I Rescue Unit, at an estimated cost of $23,000.00.
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/E911/MUNICIPALITIES
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request from 9-l-l to install one additional E 9-l-l line for the cities of Eustis and Leesburg, at a cost of approximately $18,100.00.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT/SUBDIVISIONS/ORDINANCES
Mr. John Swanson, Director of Planning and Development, appeared before the Board and stated that the developers of the Lake Louisa Oaks Subdivision have asked County Staff to place their request on the agenda, to allow boat docks to be placed on lots not contiguous to the lots where the single-family unit will be constructed. Mr. Swanson stated that the Staff has reviewed the request and recommends denial, based on the information that has been provided to the Staff.
Mr. Lenny Baird, Attorney representing Mr. Tony Hubbard, appeared before the Board to discuss the Lake Louisa Oaks development, which contains a common area that was reserved for the use of each of the lot owners, with the common area being permitted for boat docks, pursuant to the rules established by the County. In preparing for the subdivision plat process, Mr. Hubbard inquired of the County Officials and the St. Johns River Water Management District, as to additional boat docks on additional property, and was advised of regulations, which are contained within the County Ordinance. In developing the subdivision, Mr. Hubbard granted to the County an Environmental Easement over 22 acres, with the County approving the common area. The original request was for eight to nine boat docks. Mr. Baird stated that his client met with the homeowners and discussed the additional boat docks, which would be constructed on the same type of property that was approved previously by the Board. Mr. Baird stated that he met with the County Attorney, who indicated this is not the intent of the ordinance. Therefore, Mr. Baird requested to be on the agenda to ask the Board to develop policy guidelines for this development, and for future developments in Lake County.
Mr. Baird requested that the Board postpone action on this matter, in order for the staff to develop a solution, so that Mr. Hubbard may work within the County guidelines. He stated that he and his client did not receive adequate notice of the hearing today, and that Mr. Hubbard should be allowed to appear before the Board.
At this time, Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, and Mr. John Swanson, Director of Planning and Development, discussed how this matter arrived to be placed on the agenda for this morning, and Mr. Swanson recommended postponement of the issue, until the staff could develop policy, with direction being given from the Board.
Mr. Baird stated that he did not feel it would be appropriate for the Board to approve to allow or disallow Mr. Hubbard's request today, until such time a countywide policy could be established, and once again suggested postponement of this issue.
Mr. Bill Stearn, County Attorney's Office, stated that this would need to be a policy decision by the Board, and he had no legal recommendation to make.
At this time, Commr. Gregg informed the Board of a scheduled public hearing, to be held at 9:30 a.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - ROAD CLOSINGS
PETITION NO. 542 - Judy F. Reisz - Umatilla Area
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
It was noted that the proper proof of publication was on hand as it appeared in the April 26, 1989, and May 3, 1989, editions of The Orlando Sentinel, The Lake Sentinel.
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request to vacate a plat of Minneola Heights Subdivision, Umatilla Area, as advertised in Petition No. 542, by Judy F. Reisz.
PETITIONS NO. 544 - Charles & Beverly Smith - Leesburg Area
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
It was noted that the proper proof of publication was on hand as it appeared in the April 26, 1989, and May 3, 1989, editions of The Orlando Sentinel, The Lake Sentinel.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request to vacate Tangerine Drive, Cisky Park, Leesburg Area, as advertised in Petition No. 544, by Charles and Beverly Smith.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT/SUBDIVISIONS/ORDINANCES (CONT'D.)
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney representing Cindy Reynard, appeared before the Board to discuss the request from Mr. Lenny Baird, regarding boat docks. Mr. Richey stated that his client is concerned with the County having no guidelines, as to how to utilize common areas in subdivisions. At this time Mr. Richey discussed the specific proposal from Mr. Baird, in relation to Mr. Hubbard's subdivision, with ownership being in one area, and utilization in another, and suggested that staff and Board look at the Lake County subdivision regulations, which talks in terms of the requirements of lots of standard, and feels that the issue being discussed today would not meet these standards. At this time, Mr. Richey discussed cases that have accessory uses, which show that any primary use that is separated from accessory use, the courts have said no, this is not allowed. Mr. Richey stated that the lakefront is physically remote from where the residential structure is located, and suggested that the County not to encourage this. Mr. Richey requested that the Board direct the staff to review how the County should approach the common usage.
Mr. Baird stated that, if it would be helpful, he would ask that the Board withdraw his request, in order for direction to be given to the staff to review and clarify permitting for such subdivisions. Mr. Baird stated that a formal request for a specific number of boat docks, from Mr. Hubbard, has never been submitted, and he and his client were only requesting clarification.
Mr. Bill Stearn, County Attorney's Office, discussed the areas of concern found by the County Attorney's Office, in reviewing this issue.
Commr. Swartz stated that two issues were being discussed today, one being the need for staff to establish a clear definition, for boat docks that are accessory uses, and if they have to be contiguous to the property, or certainly no more than separated by the right-of-way, and two being the concept of the common area.
Commr. Swartz agreed that subdivisions should be allowed to have some of these common area recreational facilities, but that the County needs to be very careful that those common areas do not intrude into, or interfere with, single family residential uses. He stated that the staff needs to also make sure that, within our subdivision rules, the County takes into consideration the location of these common areas, and somehow internalizes these areas into the project, so that they are not out on a wing creating what appears to be a modified commercial type of use.
Commr. Gregg stated that he felt that a common area ought to be contiguous to the overall development, in the case of a lakefront development, with Commr. Bailey indicating the need for internalization.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved to instruct staff to review the County Ordinance, with regard to the placement of accessory structures, to include boat docks, and to review the ordinance and subdivision regulations, and come back with a recommendation to the Commission, for either modification of the ordinance in the regulations that will insure that a set of structures will be contiguous to, or abutting the lot on which the primary structure is located, and also to come back with some clarification, or language within those regulations, dealing with a subdivision in a common area, and recreation facilities as well.
ORDINANCES/ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES/LANDFILLS
At 10:00 a.m., the Chairman announced that the advertised time had arrived for the public hearing on the proposed ordinance amending Section 21-58 of the Lake County Codification, controlling the disposal of garbage.
Mr. Don Findell, Director of Environmental Services, appeared before the Board to discuss the proposed ordinance and stated that the major purpose of the ordinance is to control the flow of refuse in and out of Lake County, with refuse generated within Lake County not being able to be disposed of outside of Lake County. The ordinance would allow the County to develop a waste stream generation study, in order to determine how much waste is generated in, and disposed of, in Lake County, and to make future projections.
Mr. Bill Stearn, County Attorney's Office, recommended an amendment in Section 21-58, Transportation of Refuse, Paragraphs (b) and (c) to allow the County Commission the option of accepting out of County waste, or allowing out of County disposal.
Commr. Swartz questioned Section 21-117, Required Equipment, (c), dealing with proof of annual inspection, and the 60 day period for automatic revocation for failing to obtain the proper inspection, with staff having no problem with an amendment being made to amend the 60 days to 30 days.
Mr. Hubert Hartman, Mt. Dora, appeared before the Board and stated that he was totally opposed to the idea of prohibiting residents of disposing of their garbage in their own manner.
Ms. Glenise Ford, Tavares, appeared before the Board and questioned the County's ability to allow Marion County to bring garbage into Lake County, and the ability to haul garbage outside of Lake County.
Ms. Marilyn Bainter appeared before the Board and stated her concerns for the citizens in East Lake County, and informed the Board that she was unable to obtain garbage pickup at her residence, and therefore had to contract with Volusia County.
Mr. Findell stated that, according to the County garbage franchise, the hauler is required to pickup garbage anywhere in Lake County.
Mr. Findell stated that this particular problem of Ms. Bainters should be placed on the Board's regular agenda for discussion as a separate item.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried, the Board approved the following amendments to the proposed ordinance relating to the disposal of garbage: (1) To add that the County Commission may determine whether or not to haul garbage in or out of the County, and the change of the time frame from 60 days to 30 days to automatically revoke a franchise for failure to obtain the proper inspection for the trucks.
Commr. Swartz voted "no".
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved Ordinance 1989-6, amending Section 21-58 of the Lake County Codification, controlling the disposal of garbage, as amended, and as read on its first and final reading by title only, as follows:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21-58 OF THE LAKE COUNTY CODIFICATION, CONTROLLING THE DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF LAKE COUNTY, REGULATING THE PARKING OF FRANCHISE TRUCKS, PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL INSPECTION OF FRANCHISE TRUCKS, PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO OBTAIN INSPECTION, PROVIDING FOR REQUIREMENTS OF PROPER TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT FOR LIMITED SERVICE PERMITTEES, PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/BIDS/ASSESSMENTS/ROAD PROJECTS
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved the request to advertise for bids for project #SA-64, Buttercup Lane, in the Sorrento Area, at an estimated cost of $39,600.00.
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/ASSESSMENTS/ROAD PROJECTS/SUBDIVISIONS
CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Windram and carried, the Board approved the request to accept Change Order #l to Project #SA-61, Haines Creek Heights Subdivision, to add the remaining 250' of Lakewood Drive, to the contract (South of Harbor Road), at a cost of $6,336.91.
Commr. Bailey was not present for the vote.
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/ASSESSMENTS/ROAD PROJECTS/SUBDIVISIONS
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Windram and carried, the Board approved the request to accept Change Order #2 to Project #SA-61, Haines Creek Heights Subdivision, to add a left turn lane at CR-44 and Harbor Shores, at a cost of $34,243.00.
Commr. Bailey was not present for the vote.
ROAD CLOSINGS
Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, appeared before the Board to discuss the recommendation for denial on the request to advertise for road vacation, Petition No. 546, from Dion and Deborah Shreiner, to vacate a road and lots, fifth addition to Section A, Mt. Plymouth. Mr. Stivender stated that the request was denied, because the road involved may be included in a future special assessment program.
Ms. Deborah Shreiner, petitioner, appeared before the Board to discuss the loop that would be involved with the special assessment project, and the gas pipe line in this area, and questioned the time frame for the determination of a future special assessment project.
Mr. Stivender stated that he would consult with the proper department and inform her of the time frame.
At this time, it was the determination of the Board that no action was necessary on this request.
COMMISSIONER BUSINESS
APPOINTMENTS-RESIGNATIONS/POLLUTION CONTROL
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved the appointment of Mr. Steve Adams to the Pollution Control Board, to serve as the Conservation Representative (in place of Jack Dequine, whose term expires June 5, 1989), and the reappointment of Mr. Phil Conant to serve as the Industrial Representative to the Pollution Control Board.
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/INSURANCE
Commr. Bakich informed the Board of a memorandum received from Mr. Gerry Jacobs, Risk Management, requesting approval of funding for a Risk Management Audit, to be conducted by Waters Risk Management, with a maximum cost of $8,400.00
Mr. Neil Kelly, Director of Administrative Services, appeared before the Board, in order to discuss the request from Mr. Jacobs.
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Windram and carried, the Board approved the above request for funding for a Risk Management Audit, to be conducted by Waters Risk Management, at a maximum cost of $8,400.00.
Commr. Swartz was not present for the vote.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 10:40 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for five minutes.
FINANCE DEPARTMENT/REPORTS
Mr. John Vodenicker, Partner, Arthur Young & Company, appeared before the Board to discuss the Lake County Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, for the Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 1988. Mr. Vodenicker presented to the Board Financial Highlights, which consisted of the following:
1. Overview of Changes in Major Balance Sheet Categories
2. Governmental Fund Type Activities, Revenues
3. Governmental Fund Type Expenditures Comparative Per Capita Data
4. Governmental Fund Type Expenditures Comparative Per Capital Data (Comparison of Counties)
Mr. Vodenicker referred to several of the sections within the Comprehensive Report, along with Authur Young & Company's opinion indicating that, in their opinion, the general purpose financial statements referred to present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Lake County, Florida, at September 30, 1988, and the results of operations and changes in financial position of proprietary fund types for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.
No action was needed by the Board regarding this matter.
COMMISSIONER BUSINESS (CONT'D.)
COMMITTEES/OUTDOOR RECREATION
Commr. Swartz discussed the memorandum pertaining to the Recreation Committee's recommendation for a consultant to put together a comprehensive approach to recreation in Lake County, with funding as follows: (1) Recreation Budget - 50%; (2) Open Space and Recreation Element - 50% (Comprehensive Plan Funds).
Commr. Gregg stated that he agreed with the comments made by Mr. Sonny Bell, Leesburg Recreation Department, pertaining to the dollar being expended on a per capita basis, to ensure that each area received its fair share.
Commr. Gregg stated that he perceives a general feeling that the County's involvement in recreation be capital, not manpower, and that the County make a cooperative effort to work with the cities, with the cities providing the operations, and the County providing the physical plan, or the property purchased. He stated that he would prefer not to see the County employing a major recreation staff.
Mr. Sonny Bell appeared before the Board to reiterate his statements made at the Recreation Committee meeting, and discussed the hiring of a consultant to analyse what the County has, as far as recreation, but stated that at some point of time, he felt the County would have to staff a Parks and Recreation Department, to some degree.
Commr. Swartz stated that he obtained the names of some organizations from Sandra Green, Eustis Recreation Department, and has contacted three of them, but suggested that, due to the time frame involved, the Recreation Committee could review proposed programs, and the funding necessary for them, and come back to the Board with recommendations, in order to meet some of the present emergency needs for recreation.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the recommendation from the Recreation Committee, for a consultant to put together a comprehensive approach to recreation in Lake County, funded as follows: (1) Recreation Budget - 50%, and (2) Open Space and Recreation Element - 50% (Comprehensive Plan funds), and directed the staff to assist in preparing the RFP's, to be brought back to the Board for authorization of bidding.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved to authorize the Recreation Committee to accept proposals, both from the municipalities, and other organizations, for the provision of recreation in both the cities and unincorporated areas, and to review the proposals and make recommendations to the Board, for the allocation of funding to those organizations.
Commr. Swartz stated that notices will be sent to the municipalities and organizations which have expressed an interest, and suggested that the newspapers express the intent of the motion for proposals.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT/ROADS-COUNTY & STATE/STATE AGENCIES
Mr. Henry H. Fuller, Project Manager, Florida Department of Transportation (DOT), and Mark S. Callahan, P.E., Project Manager, Greiner, Inc., appeared before the Board to make a presentation on the Northwest Beltway Study.
Mr. Callahan stated that the assessment of Lake County alternatives clearly reflected the most complex and varied issues of any Beltway segment. The trade-offs, with respect to potential impacts, involved a consideration of natural environment issues versus social environment issues. The added environmental issues, with respect to the Wekiva River Basin, the Wekiva Swamp, the proposed CARL properties and Camp Challenge indicate the overall complexity of the alignment evaluation for the segment.
Mr. Callahan stated that four viable alternatives developed for Lake County are referred to as Alternatives B, E, F and G. In addition, two interchange location options were developed for Alternatives B, E and F, which are referred to as Option 1 for the western location and Option 2 for the eastern location. The following presents the recommendations by alternative alignment:
Alternative B reflects the shortest alignment in length, located further to the east than the other alternatives. The advantages of Alternative B include no relocation of existing homes, moderate comparative cost, low total of right-of-way area, and least impact to Camp Challenge. The disadvantages of Alternative B include high amount of wetland impacts, high amount of floodplain impacts, two business relocations and significant amount of use and isolation of proposed CARL properties.
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners recommended Alternative B with interchange Option 2 to the Department based on what was felt as acceptable environmental impacts with reduced social impacts in comparison to the other options. However, based on informal discussions, it seems that environmental interests are generally opposed to Alternative B due to its proximity to the Wekiva Swamp, its impact to wetlands and its impact to the proposed CARL properties.
Based on detailed analysis, Greiner recommends that the Department eliminate Alternative B from consideration due to its natural environment impact.
Alternative F is located further west than Alternative B and then extends in a more southeastern direction. This Alternative is the least costly, with only one residential relocation and no business displacements. This option would have the least noise impact to existing development and reflects a low amount of right-of-way area. However, the disadvantages of Alternative F include significant wetland impacts, high level of impact and isolation of proposed CARL properties and high impact to floodplains.
Based on the high degree of environmental impacts, Greiner recommends that Alternative F be eliminated from consideration.
Alternative G is the northernmost alignment, crossing S.R. 46, and requiring realignment of S.R. 46. The advantages of Alternative G include the least amount of wetland impact, least amount of floodplain encroachment and the least impact to proposed CARL properties. The disadvantages to Alternative G include greatest cost, greatest residential impact, longest alignment, greatest noise impacts and greatest right-of-way requirements.
Based on initial input, it is perceived that environmental interests prefer Alternative G due to its low amount of wetland impact and proposed CARL impact. However, based on input at the Public Meeting and other informal input meetings, Alternative G is the least favored by Lake County citizens. Also, Alternative G has the greatest impact on Camp Challenge.
Therefore, based on the social impact of Alternative G and due to its general unacceptability to the local citizens, Greiner recommends that Alternative G be eliminated from consideration.
Alternative E is coincident with Alternative F for the western portion of the alignment and south of S.R. 46 it diverges from Alternative F and becomes common with Alternative B. Alternative E impacts no homes and reflects environmental impacts, including wetlands, floodplains and proposed CARL impacts, which fall between Alternative G and Alternatives B/F. The cost of Alternative E is less than the cost of Alternative G and the overall social impact is less than Alternative G.
Based on the fact that Alternative E offers the best balance between natural environment impacts and social environment impacts, Greiner recommends that the Department select Alternative E as the preferred alignment.
An examination of the two interchange options for Alternative E was undertaken to identify a recommended interchange location. Based on this analysis, it was found that interchange Option 2 (eastern location) has less wetland impact, lower cost and less impact to Camp Challenge. Also, it is suggested that with the purchase of proposed CARL properties, development adjacent to interchange Option 2 could be better controlled in comparison to Option 1.
Therefore, Greiner recommends that interchange Option 2 be identified by the Department as the preferred interchange location.
In conjunction with the presented alignment recommendations, Greiner respectfully suggests that the Department consider the following proposed commitments with the implementation of the Northwest Beltway - Part B:
1. Implement wildlife crossing(s) under the Beltway at appropriate location(s). The crossing area should be located where dedicated conservation lands are north and south of the Beltway.
2. Implement wildlife crossing on the reconstructed portion of S.R. 46 if dedicated conservation lands are located to the north and south. Additional wildlife crossing on S.R. 46 should be considered if and when other portions of this facility may be reconstructed.
3. Prior to the right-of-way acquisition stage of project implementation, the Department should coordinate with the Department of Natural Resources regarding potential joint acquisition.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved Alternative E, following interchange Option 2, as presented.
It was noted that there will be a public hearing June 1, 1989, at the East Lake County Chamber of Commerce Building regarding this issue.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 12:OO noon, the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for lunch, and reconvene at 2:00 p.m. for rezoning.
ZONING
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board approved the following:
Postponements
#53-89-5 Jack Austin June 20, 1989
#67-89-4 M. K. Citrus, Ltd. June 20, 1989
#68-89-4 M. K. Citrus, Ltd. June 20, 1989
#88-l-3 Greater Construction June 20, 1989
Withdrawals
#70-86A-3 Edward Schmidt
#64-89-l Mary Newhouse
#45-89-3 Viola Guthrie
Commr. Bakich was not present for the vote.
PETITION #157-88-2 A and R-l-7 to CP Prank J. Muscarella
Mrs. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney representing the petitioner, appeared before the Board to discuss the request. Mrs. Bonifay stated that staff was concerned with the consistency with the comprehensive plan. At this time, Mrs. Bonifay presented the Board with a layout of the proposed plans. She stated that there is mixed land use in this area, making this a large enough discreet tract of land, that you can impose conditions on, so that you can have a planned commercial area. She further stated that her client will maintain a 100 foot setback off of the centerline of the easement, with a 50 foot frontage road, which has been commited to by the petitioner.
Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, stated that the staff was concerned with the comprehensive plan referring to the locating of major commercial developments at intersections, with the amount of acreage involved with this request being considered as major.
Mrs. Bonifay stated that a engineering study had been done of the 27/19/48 area, with the findings indicating a tremendous increase in population in future years, and based on this information, rather than wait for piece zoning requests to be submitted, there is a need to offer the County some handle on the commercial zoning in the area, with quarantees for access, buffers, and the necessary frontage roads.
Commr. Bailey made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Windram, to overturn the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commmission for denial, and approve the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) and R-l-7 (Urban Residential), to CP (Planned Commercial), with presented conditions.
Commr. Swartz stated he felt that, if the request is approved, it will be difficult for the Board to not approve more CP (Planned Commercial), or some type of commercial zoning requests along this stretch of Highway 27, which is the concern of the County Staff.
It was stated that the intent of the motion is to include the 50 foot easement for the frontage road: 100 foot easement from the centerline of the Palatlakaha easement; that the setbacks, as shown on the preliminary site plan, be recognized after the petitioner gives the 50 foot easement: and one entrance way.
At this time, the Chairman called for a vote on the motion, with the motion being carried, and Commr. Swartz voting "no".
PETITION #36-89-4 A to CP Frank N. Richards
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney representing the applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, with both the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommending denial. Mr. Richey stated that the original request presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission was for a 13 acre site, zoned CP with C-l and C-2 uses. He stated that he is now proposing a 13 acre site, with five (5) acres being utilized for commercial, CP with C-l uses, and the rest of the site being utilized for a future fire station site for the County, with a conservation easement on both sides of the property. He stated that there is a school located across the street from the property. Mr. Richey discussed the studies supporting the development of the new school. Mr. Richey further stated that his applicant is trying to put a limited kind of commercial in area that has a need.
Discussion occurred regarding the zoning within the area of the request, and the proposed Emerald Springs, which has approximately 100,000 square feet of commercial use.
Commr. Swartz stated that it was his understanding that there are two fairly large developments, both of which have commercial zoning alreay approved. This was discussed during the hearings on the Wekiva amendment. He stated that, although the Board is not required to place any conditions on any rezoning in this area based on the Wekiva amendment, but as a policy this Board indicated that within the Wekiva Protection Act, the amendment to the comprehensive plan, this site would not be allowed for commercial development.
Mr. Richey stated that the recommendation for denial from the Planning and Zoning Commission was for a substantially larger development, with C-2 uses, which has been scaled down and includes buffers. Mr. Richey also stated that, under the Wekiva Protection Act, it did provide for interchanges and areas of road intersections, providing some limited commercial, which is in the plan submitted to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA).
Commr. Windram stated that the Board had spoken for the need of commercial development in this area.
Commr. Swartz stated that the staff was to perform a small area study within that area and to come back to the Board, and that any potential sites needed to be identified. The small area study was never completed.
Commr. Windram stated that, one of the reasons for opposing the request, was the question of access, and that he has no problems with the changes being made.
Mr. Skip Crawford appeared before the Board and stated that he is in the education business, and felt the Board should know that, by placing any commercial business near a school, you would be creating an attractive nuisance and a huge vandalism problem, and that the Board would be ill advised to approve this request.
Ms. Dee Myslick appeared before the Board and stated that there is a Circle K on the corner of 437 and 44, adjacent to which is a neighborhood commercial area, which is approximately 90% vacant, and is within one mile from the proposed site.
Commr. Swartz stated that the Wekiva Protection Amendment clearly states that this is not one of the intersections where commercial could be allowed, and that the Board wanted a small area study to determine what type of commercial uses are needed. Rather than make a decision, in light of these factors, Commr. Swartz suggested postponing the request, or denying it without prejudice, inviting the School Board to present its comments.
Mr. Richey stated that the development has been scaled down, and feels it would be inappropriate to delay action on the request.
Commr. Gregg stated that he had concerns with what has been proposed for the Wekiva amendment and sent to DCA, and would like to hear from the School System, after hearing from the public today.
Mr. Clapsaddle stated that it would take approximately 60 days to have the information needed by the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved to postpone the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural), to CP (Planned Commercial), for 60 days, until July 18, 1989, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible.
PETITION #3-89-3 A to RA and AR Arnold Stroshein
Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, informed the Board that this particular rezoning case was postponed from the April 18, 1989, meeting, due to a legal description problem, which has been alleviated and advertised correctly.
Mr. Arnold Stroshein, owner of the property, appeared before the Board to discuss the request. Mr. Stroshein stated that the request has been redesigned to show only one entrance from C-561, with a service/emergency entrance, and a large entrance from Highway 455.
Ms. Frankie Thorpe, owner of adjacent property, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, and stated that she was concerned with the traffic in this area, but was pleased with the reduction of entrances. She further stated that she was concerned with the wetlands, and the rezoning from A (Agricultural), with all property owners within a three mile radius having A zoned property. She felt that the rezoning may cause higher density. Ms. Thorpe was also concerned with additional noise in the neighborhood.
Commr. Swartz stated that it was his understanding that the petitioner will be placing deed restrictions on the properties, which are more restrictive than most found in agricultural zoning. He further stated that the property could be subdivided into five acre parcels, but Mr. Stroshein is only asking for 2.25 acre parcels, which meets the requirements within the Comprehensive Plan.
Commr. Swartz stated that, in regards to the wetlands, the developer will have to meet all of the County wetland ordinance requirements, and the St. Johns River Water Management District regulations.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural), to RA (Ranchette) and AR (Agricultural Residential), to create five, (5) acre RA (Ranchette) lots, and 21 (2.25) acre AR (Agricultural Residential) lots, with the Board directing their suggestions to staff, when the request comes before them for site plan approval.
PETITION #84-84A-5- C-1 and C-2 uses Leilani Harper
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request to amend CP Ordinance #34-84, to allow C-l (Rural or Tourist Commercial) and C-2 (Community Commercial) uses on the site.
PETITION CUP#89/4/2-5 CUP in A William & Mary Haker
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board overturned the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied the request for a CUP in A (Agricultural), to allow a temporary second residence on the site, for the care of an infirm/disabled relative.
At this time, Mr. William Haker announced that he was in the audience, and requested to be heard before the Board.
With the Board having no objections, Mr. Haker appeared and stated that the request was to provide a home for his mother-in-law, who is very independent, but needs constant care, and does not want to live in his home.
Commr. Bakich stated that the property is located off of a County maintained road, where emergency services could not be received, if needed, and therefore, the request was denied by staff.
Commr. Swartz stated that the Board is in the process of forming an ordinance to address such issues as presented today, and that Mr. Haker may qualify under the new ordinance. He cannot qualify under a CUP today.
Mr. Haker stated that the property is located less than two miles away from a County maintained road.
Commr. Gregg suggested Mr. Haker subdivide his property, and to communicate with staff, in order to proceed in the necessary manner.
Commr. Bailey removed his second to the motion, stating that he would like to deny the request without prejudice.
Mr. Clapsaddle stated that he could have the proposed ordinance for the Board within a 30 day period, regarding this issue, and that he will notify Mr. Haker.
Commr. Bakich agreed to withdraw his original motion.
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board overturned the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied the request, without prejudice, for a CUP in A (Agricultural), for a temporary second residence on the site, for the care of an infirm/disabled relative.
PETITION #56-89-5 A TO C-2 William R. Green
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
Discussion occurred regarding the stipulation that the applicant must submit site plans for review to the Planning and Zoning Commission before formal review by the Lake County Site Plan Advisory Committee.
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Windram and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural), to CP (Planned Commercial) , but without the stipulation, to allow C-2 (Community Commercial) uses on the site.
PETITION #65-89-5 R-l-7 to R-l-5 James A. Carroll, Sr.
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Windram and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from R-l-7 (Urban Residential), to R-l-5 (Mobile or Mixed Residential), to place a mobile home on the property.
PETITION #52-89-5 A to ER Elton & Lucille Westfall
Mr. Earl LaBelle, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request. Mr. LaBeLle stated that he appeared before the Planning and Zoning Commission, with the Commission asking if he would be able to tolerate RR (Rural Residential) zoning, which would allow for one acre lots. He stated that, because the property is L-shaped, it is almost impossible for this type of development, and therefore requested the Board to approve ER (Estate Residential) zoning.
At this time, the Board reviewed the preliminary plat of the property presented by Mr. LaBelle.
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board overturned the recommendation for RR (Rural Residential) zoning, by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural), to ER (Estate Residential), to allow creation of 22,000 square foot residential lots.
Commr. Windram was not present for the vote.
PETITION CUP#89/4/1-5 CUP in A Richard & Terry Ott
Mrs. Terry Ott, applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request. She stated that her husband is an artist, and they travel throughout the year to art shows.
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied the request for a CUP in A (Agricultural), to allow a caretaker's residence on the property.
Commr. Windram was not present for the vote.
PETITION #61-89-4 RR to A Charles F. Crites
Mr. Skip Crawford, owner of the property across the street, appeared before the Board and presented petitions for the denial of this request. Mr. Crawford stated that the area is strictly Rural Residential, and that he was in agreement with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission for denial of this request.
Ms. Mariam Crites, applicant, appeared before the Board in opposition to the recommendation for denial. She stated that the property is one mile off of C-44A, and the building permit on the property when she bought it was zoned A (Agricultural), when the greenhouse was built, and was dated one year prior to the purchase.
Mrs. Jackie Conn, property owner in the area, appeared before the Board and stated that she is in favor of the denial of the request. She stated that she purchased her property to get out of A (Agricultural) zoning, and bought the property for the protection for RR (Rural Residential) zoning.
Mr. Gary Thorn appeared before the Board and stated that, one of the points in the Comprehensive Plan is to establish agricultural areas, with this request being a prime example.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied the request for rezoning from RR (Rural Residential), to A (Agricultural), to allow a mobile home for use as a caretaker's residence, and greenhouses and nursery plants on the site.
PETITION CUP#89/4/3-4 CUP in RR Hugh Alger
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for a CUP in RR (Rural Residential), to allow training and boarding of horses on the property.
PETITION #51-89-4 A to R-l-5 Bobbie B. Wise
Ms. Bobbie Wise, applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request. She stated that the property involved in the request has been in her family for over 60 years, and that, for the last fifteen years, she has lived on a mobile home on this property.
Ms. Wise stated that the request is to allow her son to build a residence on the property, by creating a new parcel. She stated that she would agree with the recommended AR (Agricultural Residential), if this is the only way that her son will be allowed to build on the property, without her having to move.
Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, clarified for the Board that the R-l-5 (Mobile or Mixed Residential) was recommended by staff, because it is the only district which allows both a mobile home and a single family unit on one parcel of land.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural), to AR (Agricultural Residential), to subdivide a parcel to add a second residence on the site.
PETITION #54-89-4 A to RR Edward C. Havill
Mr. Gunter Brautchek, abutting property owner, appeared before the Board to discuss the request. Mr. Brautchek stated that he owns a dairy farm, which is an agricultural operation. At this time, Mr. Brautchek stated that, if the development takes place as requested, he would have a problem operating this farm. He further stated that there has been a traffic problem over the years, in regards to his cows crossing over Britt Road, with the road being between his pastures.
Mr. Brautchek discussed an application for rezoning made by his son in 1985, Case No. 39-84-85-4, to build a house on the family dairy farm.
Mr. Ed Havill, applicant, appeared before the Board and stated that the request depends on progress and change within the area.
Mr. Havill stated that, before the rezoning change, he has three five acre parcels here where he can place three mobile homes. He further stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended AR (Agricultural Residential), which means he can place six conventional homes. The staff recommended RR (Rural Residential), which allows five conventional homes. Mr. Havill addressed the concerns involving trespassing, and the safety of the children. He stated that the power company has a 100 foot easement.
Mr. Havill referred to the zoning regulations, which states that RR (Rural Residential) is also intended to protect prime agricultural areas from urban encroachment. He presented the Board with photographs of the property and stated that he has fifteen (15) acres, where he would like to develop thirteen (13) homes. He further stated that no other neighbor is opposed to the RR zoning.
Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, informed the Board that the Subdivision Advisory Committee will request adequate right-of-way.
Commr. Windram made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Bailey, to overturn the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission for AR (Agricultural Residential) zoning, and approve the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural), to RR (Rural Residential), subject to adequate right-of-way being obtained from the applicant.
Commr. Swartz stated that he has a concern with the agricultural nature of the area, and the dairy farm, and the enfringement of urban development on real agricultural property, where he feels there will be potential problems. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan encourages the County to avoid more urban, higher density development in the areas being used for agriculture.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, with the motion being carried, and Commr. Swartz and Commr. Bakich both voting "no".
PETITION CUP#89-4/4-4 CUP in A Amon L. Baucom
Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney representing Bobby and Shirley Tetter, owners of property in this area, appeared before the Board to speak in opposition to the request for a CUP, and in support of the recommendation for denial. She stated that, if the request was approved, it would be a change in character of the area, and would be creating the beginning of a mobile home community in this area.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied the request for a CUP in A (Agricultural), to provide agricultural housing for workers for greenhouses.
Commr. Bailey was not present for the vote.
PETITION #2-75A-4 Amend CP Ord. 3-75 Roxy A. McFall
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request to amend CP Ordinance 3-75, to allow the use of a pet grooming and retail clothing shop.
Commr. Bailey was not present for the vote.
PETITION #49-89-4 A to CP Robert Sherman
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural), to CP (Planned Commercial), with C-l (Rural or Tourist Commercial), and C-2 (Community Commercial) uses.
PETITION #50-89-4 A to CP Leonard Wiener
Ms. Katherine Hanson, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board and stated that the applicant is in the process of negotiating the purchase of the railroad right-of-way, and requested that the Board approve the request, subject to the purchase.
Ms. Hanson stated that it will be approximately 30 days before the purchase is made, but perhaps longer for the closing to take place.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board postponed action on the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural), to CP (Planned Commercial), to allow C-l (Rural or Tourist Commercial) and C-2 (Community Commercial) uses on the site, for 60 days, until July 18, 1989, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible.
Commr. Bakich was not present for the vote.
PETITION #69-89-4 CP to M-l Cecil Bodiford & P. Silcox
Mr. Dan Robuck, Attorney representing the applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request. Mr. Robuck stated that the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission is to leave the zoning at CP (Planned Commercial), and add under Classification of Uses, a commercial printing facility, in addition to the existing commercial uses allowed. Mr. Robuck stated that the applicant has no problem with the recommendation.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved not to change the CP (Planned Commercial) zoning, but to add a commercial printing facility, by amending the existing commercial uses allowed in CP zoning.
PETITION #70-89-4 R-l-l & RR to R-1-15 William Stratford
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney representing the applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, and stated that the R-1-15 (Residential Estates) would be more compatible to the area.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from R-l-7 (Urban Residential) and RR (Rural Residential), to R-1-15 (Residential Estates), to create 15,000 square foot residential homesites.
PETITION CP & R-l-7 to C-2 or CP
William K. Stratford & Sam Stephens
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney representing the applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request. Mr. Richey stated that one of the requirements is to perform the road improvements, as requested by Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from CP (Planned Commercial) and R-l-7 (Urban Residential), to CP (Planned Commercial), being limited to those uses permitted in C-2 (Community Commercial) zoning.
PETITION #55-89-5 RMRP to R-l-7 Shangri-La By the Lake
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from RMRP (Mobile Home Rental Park Residential), to R-l-7 (Urban Residential), to allow construction of 7,000 square foot residential homesites.
PETITION #57-81A-4 Amend CP Ord. #22-81 Ken Oliver
Mr. Ken Oliver, applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, and stated that he would like to have an antique shop, and similar uses, for the property. Mr. Oliver questioned the difference between C-l and C-2 uses.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request to amend CP Ordinance #22-81, to expand existing uses in the CP ordinance to allow C-l (Rural or Tourist Commercial) uses.
PETITION #66-89-3 A to AR Claude E. Smoak
Mr. Dan Robuck, Attorney representing the applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural), to AR (Agricultural Residential), to create 2 l/4 acre residential homesites.
PETITION #62-89-3 LM to PFD Shelton F. Wood
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request, as amended, for rezoning from LM (Light Manufacturing), to PFD (Public Facilities District), to construct a church, as follows: Amendment: B.
Screening/Buffering: (shall read " . ..vegetative buffer 4 l/2 ft. in height at the time of maturity....".
Commr. Windram was not present for the vote.
PETITION #63-89-3 AR to RR Herman M. Walters
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied the request for rezoning from AR (Agricultural Residential), to RR (Rural Residential), to place a second dwelling on the property.
Commr. Windram was not present for the vote.
PETITION CUP#89/4/5-2 CUP in A Otto C. Maron, et al
Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney representing the applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, with Ms. Bonifay stating that the applicant had no problems with the proposed amendments.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request, as amended, for a CUP in A (Agricultural), to allow the use of an ultralight ground school and flying fields, as follows: Amendment: I.A. Land Uses: " . ..limited to that of an ultralight and paraplanes ground school facility for club members and their guests only..." I.B. The applicant shall provide to the Development Coordination Department I, . . . of the ultralight and paraplanes ground school facility, if required, from appropriate State and Federal Aviation agencies...." I.C. The ultralight planes and paraplanes...." Documents indicating final approval by appropriate agencies, if required,..." III. c. (Delete) IV. B. Setbacks: "...minimum of SO ft. from all property lines."
Commr. Windram was not present for the vote.
PETITION #27-89A-2 Amend PUD Ord. #13-89 Richard H. Langley Tr.
Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, informed the Board that the request is to clarify a legal description in the original approval.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request to amend existing PUD Ordinance #13-89, to add land to the existing approved preliminary Planned Unit Development Ordinance #13-89.
Commr. Windram was not present for the vote.
PETITION #59-89-l RM to C-2 Cecil Clark Chevrolet, Inc.
No one present wished to discuss the request with the Board.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for rezoning from RM (Mobile Home Residential), to C-2 (Community Commercial), to construct an automobile dealership business.
Commr. Windram was not present for the vote.
PETITION #57-89-l RR to A D. C . Properties Partnership
Mr. George Albright, Oklawaha, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, and stated that the applicant has decided not to replant citrus, and RR zoning is compatible with the surrounding area.
Mr. Dan Robuck, Attorney representing 347 Corporation of Florida, Inc., stated that his client is in the process of developing Harbor Hills. Mr. Robuck stated that Mr. McNamara has purchased a substantial part of property to the north, from the MacKay family, and that there is a letter from the MacKays objecting to the rezoning being proposed today. He further stated that
Mr. McNamara has an option to purchase all property that the MacKays own within two miles, with the option agreement being filed in the public records.
Mr. Robuck stated that his client is objecting to the request, not to the agricultural zoning, but to the development of mobile homes, because Mr. McNamara is trying to develop one of the nicest communities in Lake County nearby. He stated that approving the request would be going against what is currently being developed in the area, and he would prefer the zoning to remain rural residential. Mr. Robuck stated that they would like to work with the applicant on a development that would be compatible with his client's development, in order for conventional homes to be placed in this area.
Mr. James Winn, owner of nine acres on Gator Lake Road, appeared before the Board and stated that, about one year ago, he applied for a permit to allow a mobile home on his property, in order to build his home, and the County turned down his application.
Mr. Winn stated that he does not want to see the a mobile home development around his property, and was opposed to the request.
Commr. Gregg stated that he had a problem with the request, and did not feel the proposal is compatible with the quality residential development being placed in the area at this time.
Mr. Albright stated that he would like to work with Harbor Hills, and discussed the buffer that would be located between the properties. He suggested that the Board postpone action on the request for 30 days, in order to allow him to discuss the problem with Mr. Robuck and his clients, and to come back to the Board with a proposal that would be more acceptable.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved to postpone the request for rezoning from RR (Rural Residential), to A (Agricultural), for agricultural uses, for 30 days, until June 20, 1989, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible.
PETITION #58-89-1 RR to A R. Hugh Douglas
Mr. George Albright appeared before the Board and stated that the applicant is a member of the same family involved with the above request.
Mr. Dan Robuck, Attorney, suggested that this request be considered along with Petition #57-89-l, E. C. Properties Partnership, and requested a 30 day postponement.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved to postpone the request for rezoning from RR (Rural Residential), to A (Agricultural), for agricultural uses, for 30 days, until June 20, 1989, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon therafter as possible.
PETITION #130-87A-1 Amend CP Ord. #58-87 Steven Donohue
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney representing the applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request, and stated that the request was being made for a caretaker's residence, in order to avoid vandalism.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Windram and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request to amend CP Ordinance #58-87, to allow a caretaker's residence and office space, to service an existing commercial nursery.
PETITION #60-89-3 R-l-6 to M-l or MP Mary Short
Mr. Tin Lee, buyer of the property, appeared before the Board and questioned the amendment requiring the vegetative buffer, with Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Planning Coordination, presenting clarification.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request, as amended, for rezoning from R-l-6 (Residential District), to MP (Planned Industrial), for the expansion of existing Truss shop, to add storage for lumber and ten rental units, as follows: Add: D. A six foot chain-link fence is required to be placed around the perimeter of the property. E. Access will be limited from C-561 only. F. A vegetative buffer 4 l/2 feet in height at the time of maturity shall be installed.
Commr. Windram was not present for the vote.
PETITION #238-86A-2 Extension on PUD Ord. #9-87 A. E. Langley
Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney representing the applicant, appeared before the Board to discuss the request. Ms. Bonifay stated that the request for a one year extension, of the approved preliminary development PUD Ordinance #9-87, was before the Board today strictly to follow the precedural outline in the PUD Ordinance. She further stated that Mr. Ted Wicks, the engineer on the project, is present to discuss the request, if necessary. She discussed the permitting with the St. Johns River Water Management District, and stated that the legal issue before the Board, is whether or not a good faith effort has been made, or the applicant has shown good cause, for a one year extension.
Mr. Gary Thorn appeared before the Board and stated that, it was his understanding that, if he could show that there is lack of diligence on the applicant's part, the Board could deny the request.
Mr. Thorn stated that he contacted the St. Johns River Water Management District, and at this time, explained to the Board the information received. He was told that no permits, other than for two wells, had been applied for in the two year period. Mr. Thorn stated that the development was to involve 268 homes, all with septic tanks, and he felt that the applicant has not been diligent in going through the proper channels for permitting approval.
Mr. Thorn stated that one of the nearby property owners informed him that he had placed two wells on his site, which turned into sinkholes.
Mr. Al Smith appeared before the Board to discuss the request and stated his concerns with whether or not the applicant has applied for the proper permits, for the septic tanks and sewage disposal. He further stated that the outcome of the Board will determine the protection of the surrounding lakes.
Mr. Joe Nussbaumer, representing 81 people, appeared before the Board to discuss the request. At this time, he presented the Board with a letter, outlining the correspondence with the Department of Environmental Regulations (DER), which he feels indicates that Mr. Langley failed to supply DER with the required information in a timely manner, and is reason for denial of the request.
Mr. Sam Moreno appeared before the Board to state his concerns regarding the lakes and water quality in the surroundiny area, with the construction of 268 homes.
Discussion occurred to determine whether or not the applicant filed for an extension in a timely manner, and made a diligent effort in accomplishing the necessary permitting for the project.
Mr. Clapsaddle stated that the County staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission determined that it was a timely submittal, with Ms. Bonifay stating that the original letter for extension was filed with the staff January, 1989.
Commr. Bailey made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Bakich, for the Board to uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approve the request for a one-year extension of the approved preliminary development PUD Ordinance #9-87, to allow completion of final development plans.
Under discussion, Commr. Swartz stated that, the County's PUD Ordinance allows two years to develop, and for a one year extension thereafter. He stated that, as a general rule, it may be wise for the County staff to review this policy, with regards to how long PUD's should be allowed to hold the current developmental permits that they have obtained.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously.
PETITION CUP#87/2/4A-4 CUP in A Maury L.-Carter
Commr. Gregg announced to the Board that he had received a letter from Mr. Charlie Lloyd in opposition to the request, and a letter received from Mr. Fred Morrison, Attorney representing the applicant, stating concerns regarding additional boring to the top of the aquifer. Commr. Gregg stated that he also had concerns with the additional test borings.
Mr. Morrison appeared before the Board to discuss the request, and to address the issue of the additional test borings. He stated that the applicant is proposing that the Board amend the CUP to change language to allow flexibility for the staff, in the course of considering the operational plan, to require a boring to the top of the aquifer, if they felt it was needed to ascertain the lithology of the site, but only if the other information already available is not sufficient.
Mr. Don Findell, Director of Environmental Services, stated that the CUP mirrors the content of the Mining Ordinance, where the staff can be petitioned for a technical opinion, which would be based on the knowledge the County has of the lithology of the site.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved the request for a CUP in A (Agricultural), to expand the existing sand facility, to create a lake for a future subdivision.
Commr. Swartz voted "no".
PETITION #48-89-4 Duane & A to R-l-5 Vaneb Corp. E.
Mary O. Eisnor
Mr. David Clapsaddle, Director of Development Coordination, stated that the request had been postponed, because of a conflict of ownership between two parcels of property.
On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied, without prejudice, the request for rezoning from A (Agricultural), to R-l-5 (Mobile or Mixed Residential), to replace a mobile home on an eight (8) acre parcel, which is proposed to be subdivided into two (2), four (4) acre parcels.
RIGHT-OF-WAYS, ROADS & EASEMENTS/SUBDIVISIONS
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Environmental Easement for Seybold on Cherry Lake.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m.
C. W. "CHICK" GREGG, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK
TMA/5-24-89/BCC