A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

DECEMBER 17, 1990

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in special session on Monday, December 17, 1990, 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: Donald B. Bailey, Chairman; C. W. "Chick" Gregg; Richard Swartz; Catherine Hanson; and Michael J. Bakich. Others present were: Annette Star Lustgarten, County Attorney; Alan A. Thelen, County Manager; Ava Kronz, Assistant to the County Manager; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.

ALL ELEMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT

Mr. John Swanson, Director of Planning and Development, appeared before the Board stating what procedures would be followed this date, in reviewing each of the elements of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated, upon conclusion of this meeting, staff would need action from the Board, as the Local Planning Agency, to transmit the elements of the Comprehensive Plan to the Board of County Commissioners. The Board would then sit on January 15, 1991, hear the elements once again, and, upon conclusion of that meeting, transmit the copy of the Comprehensive Plan to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), for their review and comment.

FUTURE LAND USE MAP

Mr. Swanson brought the Board up-to-date as to what had transpired, up to this point, regarding the Land Use Map. He noted that the urban, urban expansion, rural, and semi-rural areas, as well as each of the rural villages had been identified on the map; however, the Ocala Forest, Wekiva, and Green Swamp areas had been taken out and would be identified on a separate map.

Commr. Bailey questioned why staff had not allowed some sort of transition for a semi-rural classification for the area around Hwys. 19/27 and the turnpike.

Commr. Gregg questioned the same for the area around south Hwy. 27, near Highland Lakes, as well as the Lady Lake and Lake Yale areas, at which time Commr. Hanson questioned staff as to whether a rural village classification would apply to the Cassia area.

Commr. Swartz stated that, what the County is doing when they expand, or consider expanding, the semi-rural areas, is taking density that could go elsewhere and spreading it out over the countryside in wider and wider areas, of even lower density, noting he felt this was wasteful of the land the County has. He stated, to cut down on rural, and expand urban sprawl, is not good.

A brief discussion occurred regarding how the County's population projections fit in with the new Comprehensive Plan.

Mr. Frank Bouis, a local resident, appeared before the Board to discuss land value, stating that land value was just about all there is, and, in his opinion, what the Board was proposing was to destroy the speculative value of over half the property in Lake County. He stated the County must not "cop out" and ignore the question, as it reduces capital coming into the County.

Mr. Bouis then discussed agriculture in Lake County, noting that the principal activity is most likely going to be based on something related to agriculture, or agriculture itself, which he noted is risky. He stated an outside investor proposing to invest in citrus, in Lake County, cannot afford to do it, unless there is an alternative use for his investment, which he stated the Board has taken away, nor can a Lake County investor afford to continue to make risk investments, if he sees no other prospect for his land, in the event his investments fail. He stated the Board does not have the right to give property owners in the southeast part of the County a bonanza, simply because opportunities exist for them to utilize that bonanza, and deny other people in Lake County the opportunity to utilize a bonanza which exists for them; nor do they have the right to designate a tract in the center of the County, simply because the prior Board saw fit to obligate the

County concerning it. He stated he felt the term "urban sprawl" had been used, twisted, distorted and carried on as a "whipping boy", noting that, perhaps, it is good for other counties, but felt it was not good for Lake County, due to the fact that Lake County does not have a stable economy or sociology. He stated he felt the approach of drawing circles around municipalities was an approach that does nothing other than distort the future in ways that he felt will be detrimental.

Commr. Swartz stated Mr. Bouis made some major points which he agreed with and feels the Board needs to find an alternative solution.

Commr. Gregg stated he agreed with 99% of what Mr. Bouis stated; however, reminded those present that the Board had to meet the current administration's definition of urban sprawl, with the Land Use Map, in order to obtain approval and maintain sales tax funds and other funds from the State. He stated the only way to answer the problems involving land value is through performance criteria, which he noted he was not sure the County could do, and still meet the State's requirement for urban sprawl. He stated he did not feel good about the map, as he felt it takes away speculative value of property in the County.

EVALUATION & APPRAISAL REPORT

Mr. Larry Kirch, Director of Planning, appeared before the Board stating there was a requirement that an Evaluation & Appraisal Report be transmitted to the Department of Community Affairs and the Board of County Commissioners (sitting as the Land Planning Agency), along with the Comprehensive Plan.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Evaluation & Appraisal Report to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

HOUSING ELEMENT

Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, appeared before the Board stating that the train needs to slow down, concerning all the

elements, noting that the Board is approving elements that the public has not had a chance to review. She stated it has been difficult for the public to obtain changes which have been made, and they do not know what the final language of the elements will be. She stated there are a number of things that are related to what is happening in land use; however, the public does not have a final Land Use Element. She stated what the County does have, at present, is a concept for a map that was agreed upon at a meeting prior to this meeting, and, now that they see it in graphic form, realize there is a great amount of disagreement as to what happened regarding it. She stated staff used 1980 census data and a 1971 housing survey, which she stated is hardly the best available data. She also stated that south Lake County was not figured into the Comprehensive Plan, in terms of the population projections, traffic circulation, and the County's land use, which she feels is going to have an impact on housing. She stated the Board is approving an element that, when they change the language contained in the Future Land Use Element (if the County institutes the policies that the Board agreed upon, that are supposed to go hand and glove with the map), is going to considerably change what is in the Housing Element, the PUD process, and the Mixed Use Quality development process, etc. She stated there is not any language concerning rural villages, or performance criteria for new towns and urban centers, nor has the public been provided with an errata sheet of what changes the Board made at the last meeting in which the Land Use Element was discussed. She stated she felt the Board needs to hold some additional hearings regarding the elements, and felt there needs to be more availability to information. She noted, for the record, that she objects to the form and substance of this element.

In response to Ms. Bonifay's comments, Commr. Bakich stated that, by law, the Board is only required to hold two meetings, yet they have held approximately 20, in trying to obtain the public's involvement.

Commr. Gregg stated he felt the Board needs to hold another hearing, at least on the Land Use Map, as he felt it was too important a matter to the County not to. He stated he was not happy with what he was seeing, and was having problems justifying doing something like this, just to meet the expectations of those in Tallahassee, to which Commr Bailey concurred.

A brief discussion occurred regarding the issue of additional meetings, at which time it was the consensus of the Board to hold a workshop meeting on Monday, January 7, 1991, from 9:00 a.m. till 12:00 noon, and an additional meeting (Public Hearing) on Tuesday, January 8, 1991, at 6:00 p.m.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

MASS TRANSIT ELEMENT

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, appeared before the Board stating that this meeting was not properly advertised in the newspaper, therefore, felt it should be readvertised. He then requested the Board to hold another hearing regarding all the elements.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Mass Transit Element to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

AVIATION & RAILS ELEMENT

No discussion occurred regarding this element.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Aviation and Rails Element to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

RECREATION & OPEN SPACE ELEMENT

Mr. Larry Kirch, Director of Planning, informed the Board that the BMK Ranch property which the County and the Water Authority had purchased (which he noted was approximately 136 acres) had not been

incorporated into this element, with the intent being to keep the acreage involved separate, and not add it into the level of service. He stated the two options the County has is either to count said land as passive recreation, and not add it as a level of service, or to add it into the level of service calculation, which would mean that the County would not need any open space land for the next five years.

Mr. Jim Bible, Greater Construction, appeared before the Board and addressed the issue of the requirement for open space, in addition to active recreation. He stated PUDs today require 25% open space, and, within that 25%, active recreation can be included. He referred to Policies 8-1.5; 8-8.5; and 8-8.7, pertaining to same, as well as Policy 8-1.9, concerning abandoned railroad corridors, which he briefly discussed.

Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, appeared before the Board, representing several clients, stating, again, some concerns she has regarding the Comprehensive Plan, and questioned why the Board singled out only PUDs, yet, state they are going to handle all other developments in the Land Development Regulations. She stated she supports the comments made by Mr. Bible.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Recreation & Open Space Element to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

CONSERVATION ELEMENT

Mr. Larry Kirch, Director of Planning, appeared before the Board noting, page by page, changes which needed to be made to the Conservation Element.

Mr. David Edwards, Attorney, representing DeAnza/Mid-Florida Lakes Mobile Home Park, appeared before the Board stating a concern the mobile home park had regarding Goose Prairie, in that they felt it might be developed as a silica mine. He stated they felt it should be avoided, at all costs, as Goose Prairie had been designated in the Conservation Element as the fourth most

environmentally sensitive area in all of Lake County. He stated the Conservation Element, as it is presently written, does not prohibit mining in such areas - it only discourages it, however, seems to allow mining where land could be reclaimed. He requested the Board to amend Policy 7-13.2 to prohibit mining in environmentally sensitive areas and adjacent properties to environmentally sensitive areas, as well as to amend Policy 7-13.1, which sets forth certain areas where such mining is prohibited, to include Goose Prairie as one of them.

Commr. Bailey directed staff to address the concerns of Mr. Edwards and Mid-Florida Lakes, regarding Goose Prairie, in the Development Regulations.

Mr. Jim Bible, Greater Construction, reappeared before the Board to address some concerns he had with the Conservation Element, one being Policy 7-2.15, concerning septic tanks. He stated the language contained in this policy does not match what is stated in the Public Facilities Element, and suggested striking the last sentence of the second paragraph, in said policy, to which Commrs. Gregg and Bakich concurred. Mr. Bible then stated concerns he had regarding Policies 7-3.10; 7-14.1; and 7-18.4, at which time a brief discussion occurred regarding same.

RECESS & REASSEMBLY

At 11:20 a.m. the Chairman announced the Board would recess for five minutes.

CONSERVATION ELEMENT (CONT'D.)

Commr. Swartz brought up for discussion the issue of cost factors, relative to some of the different policies being discussed this date, at which time he referred to Policy 7-1.3, concerning staffing requirements necessary to develop, administer, and implement the County Environmental Resource Management Program, which he noted is the crux of everything that flows out of it. He stated it would be through that analysis that the County will identify what they are going to do; in what time frame they are

going to do it; how, and if, the County can afford to do it; and where they will obtain the funding.

Discussion occurred regarding the order in which said policy falls in the Conservation Element, as well as the date contained in said policy, at which time Commr. Swartz suggested placing said policy first, in the order, and expanding the language to indicate that it is not only talking about staffing, but other costs, as well, such as funding, the ability to accomplish goals, as stated, etc., which it was noted would keep the Board from going back and changing policies and trying to find new dates, etc.

It was noted that Policy 7-1.3 would be moved in its order so that it becomes Policy 7-1.2; language will be added to expand it, to indicate that the County is not only looking at staffing, but other costs, as well; the date of July, 1992, will be changed to March, 1992; language will be added to indicate that if the County does not have the resources to accomplish any of the requirements by March, 1992, and need to change the time frame, they will, in fact, do that; and the date for the establishment of a Citizens Natural Resource Advisory Committee will be moved up to January, 1991, due to the fact that said committee will be the one to start reviewing and working toward staff's accomplishment of Policy

7-1.2.

Commr. Bakich questioned Mr. Kirch as to whether, after the analysis comes back, and the Board feels they would like to change it, or move it back even further, they would have the power to do so, if they so chose, to which Mr. Kirch stated they would.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Conservation Element to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

ECONOMIC ELEMENT

Mr. Larry Kirch, Director of Planning, appeared before the Board and noted changes which needed to be made to various policies of this element.

Commr. Hanson noted that, under the agricultural policy, she would like to see the establishment of an Agricultural Advisory Committee, to act as a liaison between the Board and the agricultural community, in implementing objectives.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Economic Evaluation Element to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT

Mr. Larry Kirch, Director of Planning, appeared before the Board and noted changes which had been made to the Data Inventory & Analysis section of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element, as well as informed them of the addition of an extra policy in the Goals, Objectives & Policies (GOPs).

A brief discussion occurred regarding agreements which had been made with the various cities, pertaining to the element, at which time Mr. Kirch noted the County had produced one agreement with each municipality, and that the Joint Planning Area would be an optional part of the agreement, as many of the cities do not want a Joint Planning Area - they are more interested in the provision of water and sewer.

Commr. Swartz questioned, for clarification, whether the policy concerning the 80% density factor should not appear in this element, to which Mr. Kirch responded that he did not feel it was necessary, as it appears in the proposed Land Use Element. Commr. Swartz stated, however, that he felt it should be in this element, as it is an intergovernmental issue.

Mr. Jim Simpson, a local resident, appeared before the Board to address the issue of water and sewer being provided to property located at the corner of Hwys. 44B and 441, in Mt. Dora, noting that he was caught in a "catch 22" situation, as the City of Eustis had staked it out, in their interlocal agreement, as part of an area they want to service. He stated sewer and water is presently provided on the other side of the highway, and did not feel city or

county residents should have to provide it, or that a developer should be forced to provide it, when the City of Eustis could do so, being the facilities are in place.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Intergovernmental Coordination Element to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

RECESS & REASSEMBLY

At 12:05 p.m. the Chairman announced the Board would recess for lunch and would reconvene at 1:30 p.m. for purposes of discussing the Land Use Map.

LAND USE MAP

Commr. Bakich opened this segment of the meeting stating everyone involved in this process was becoming somewhat frustrated, and understandably so. He stated he keeps hearing from the public that the County is not creating value, they are, in fact, taking it away. He stated the Board does not want to take anyone's value away, nor do they want to give anyone value, however, whatever map the Board decides on, they need a premise to work from, and have been working with the various maps to do just that.

Mr. Paul Bethune, a local resident and committee member of the Conservation Element, appeared before the Board stating that change is going to come to Lake County, whether anybody likes it or not. He stated the Board has to look at fairness and responsible development, as one should not have the right to do what he wants with his property if it is going to hurt or affect the surrounding properties. He requested the Board to listen to what the public has to say.

Ms. Marian McKinney, a local resident, appeared before the Board to address Policy 1-12.1 of the GOPs, which states that a "community facility" shall be provided within the revised Land Development Regulations. She stated if the County goes to community wells, they will fall into the guidelines for testing, which will cost approximately $4,000, every other year; therefore,

it would not be feasible for the County to have them. She requested the Board to consider this fact when they are making their decisions.

Upon being questioned regarding the matter, Mr. Don Findell, Director of Environmental Services, stated the Environmental Protection Agency has passed regulations which will substantially impact the small private water treatment systems, as far as test requirements are concerned, as Ms. McKinney stated.

Ms. Rosemary Purdum, a local resident, appeared before the Board stating she was concerned about the employment center which is to be located east of the Leesburg Airport. She stated she had been assured the classification for said property would be changed to commercial; however, on the Land Use Map, it is still listed as an employment center. She stated it has no connection with the airport, nor does it have airport uses - it is more in the line of commercial and needs to be placed in a commercial classification.

Ms. Charlotte Lehner, a resident of Howey-in-the-Hills, appeared before the Board stating that, in the last few months, she had read about, and listened to, the endless rhetoric of spokespersons for landowners, each with his or her own private concerns, as well as those that stated Lake County would be devastated economically, if the Board does not grant "free rein" to protect what landowners believe is their privilege. She stated she listened to those that stated developers would seek land outside of Lake County, if the Board does not concede to their wishes, which she felt was ludicrous, as they will not be able to find land as beautiful and developable as what is in Lake County. She stated she had not heard, or seen, in any of the hearings a statement of any constitutional law granting major land owners rights different from those of the ordinary citizen or property owner, nor has anyone cited case law to show that one is entitled to special consideration if Mother Nature dealt a low blow, or if one's property happens to be far removed from an urban node. She requested the Board to remember, when they finally prepare the

Comprehensive Plan for submittal to Tallahassee, that they cannot please everyone, and if they do not do it right, when are they going to have the time to do it over, therefore, requested them to keep it simple, sensible, smart and steady on course.

Mr. Dick Seron, a local resident, appeared before the Board stating that two years ago the State Constitution was amended to abide for "blue law legislation", which he noted has not been enacted as of yet, however, should be some time soon. He stated he did not think anybody had considered the advantage many of the large landowners will have in undeveloped land, especially in the recharge areas, who will benefit greatly from the "blue laws", once they are enacted by the Legislature. He stated one has to take chances, as far as property is concerned, and that he felt some citizens are protesting too much. He stated the people of Lake County are asking the Board to consider the future of the County for all its citizens, noting there is only one way to deal with it, which is from a fiduciary responsibility the commissioners have to its citizens.

Commr. Hanson questioned staff as to whether the "blue belt" issue had been addressed, at all, in the Future Land Use Element, to which Mr. Kirch responded that it had not, however, noted that it could be addressed in the groundwater recharge section of this element, or in the Conservation Element. In response to Mr. Seron's comments, Commr. Hanson stated that, while the Board cannot be arbitrary in the County's land use designations, neither can they be arbitrary in not allowing land use designations - they have to be fair both ways.

Ms. Susie Bergman, a local resident, appeared before the Board stating she felt the "Mickey Mouse" map was a very good concept, from what she could determine. She discussed areas, one being around the vicinity of Howey-in-the-Hills, which she felt should be designated as urban expansion.

Mr. Dave Clapsaddle, Springstead Engineering, appeared before the Board representing Route 347 Corporation, stating that his

client was very concerned about the designation of the area covered by Harbor Hills and, also, the Little Lake Harris PUD, which he noted have both been approved. He stated all the previous maps had shown both of these areas as urban expansion, however, the present map shows said areas as semi-rural. He stated they do not see any need to do that, nor does it make sense to take something that has been approved - in one case, under construction, and in the other case, substantial monies have been spent to run water and sewer, and make them non-conforming. He stated he felt it was not good planning to do so, therefore, requested the Board to look at said areas, reconsider the designations, and go back to the other designation of urban expansion that was on the previous maps.

Commr. Swartz questioned staff as to how population densities will be handled, as far as DCA is concerned, to which Mr. Kirch responded that the County does not know the exact capacity of all platted subdivisions, at present, however, they will have to meet concurrency requirements.

Mr. Jim Bible, Greater Construction, reappeared before the Board to discuss the area around the intersection of Hwy. 27, the turnpike, and 561A. He stated said area has Clermont to the south, Minneola and Montverde to the east, and the County DRI and future major employment center and regional commercial center to the northwest. He requested the Board to consider redesignating those areas which are being designated semi-rural, as urban expansion, which will allow for one-quarter and one-half acre lot communities to be developed.

Ms. Marian McKinney submitted a letter to the Board (for the record) from Mrs. Casey Jones, expressing a concern she had regarding the Future Land Use Element.

Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, representing several property owners in the County, appeared before the Board stating the attention and focus of the general public has been on the map, because it is a visual, graphic representation of what the County is projecting the land use to be, and something that they can

identify with; however, the public is having a difficult time dealing with, and understanding, the goals, policies, and objectives, as they are more theoretical, noting that the two have to work together, because the land use map will only be as good, or as bad, as the goals, policies, and objectives that back it up. She stated the County needs to refocus and get beyond just colors on the map. She stated if a property owner sees there is flexibility, equity, fairness and an ability, if, in fact, they can provide what is legally required under the law, under concurrency (which is to provide the infrastructure that is required concurrent with development), then they should be able to move forward and develop their property. She stated they do not expect to be unduly enriched, but they do not expect to be unduly burdened either. She stated the County needs some flexibility and needs to define its terms.

Ms. Bonifay stated the County has talked about, in rural areas, giving flexibility to people who want alternate lifestyles -who want a rural environment and do not want to live in the cities. She stated, in these areas, the County needs a variety of low densities and classifications, of which rural village is one; however, they need to give performance standards on how to become a rural village. She suggested that the Board develop performance criteria that indicates if a certain area is not classified as a rural village today, how they can get to be one tomorrow - what the density is and what they need to provide, in terms of infrastructure. She stated the County apparently intends for a much larger area to be urbanized, and to provide for major highway access, yet this map reflects that said areas are to be rural.

In discussing urban sprawl, Ms. Bonifay stated it is not a state of mind, or an aesthetic - it is what happens when you require city dwellers to try to extend and pay for utilities in rural areas, so that they are not proportionately benefiting, noting that if a developer chooses to take upon himself or herself the physical burden of providing those utilities, then the County

does not meet the definition that DCA has for urban sprawl, therefore, the County is not contravening any State rule or ordinance - they are making development pay for itself. She felt, until the County has a new and accepted definition, they need policies which deal with an urban node concept, to say that if one can achieve the requirements, they will be allowed to go forward with development.

Mr. "Bud" Ward, a local resident, appeared before the Board stating that his property (located east of Astatula) had been classified as urban expansion; however, it is now classified as semi-rural. He requested the Board to reclassify his property back to urban expansion.

Mr. Ed Bergman, a local resident and businessman, appeared before the Board to discuss the area around Hwys. 19/27 and the turnpike. He stated (for informational purposes), as he understands it, the most recent DOT plans have been to change the toll road interchange from a two-way interchange to a one-way interchange, where, instead of being both a northbound on and off, it will be merely a southbound on and a northbound off, but the southbound off and the northbound on interchange will be south of Leesburg at the overpass of Hwy. 27, which he felt was something that DOT needed to reconsider, and perhaps go with two way instead of just one way.

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing several of his clients, appeared before the Board stating they need to develop some performance standards, before adopting the map before them this date. He suggested they develop some performance standards and adopt a general map, which would have the ability, depending on where land is located, to meet those standards. He requested the Board to look at it, as equity and fairness dictates them to do so, noting that he knows of large tracts of land owned by a lot of individuals that are not being treated with the equity and fairness that he feels they should be. He requested they look into the matter, before they adopt the map before them.

Mr. David Edwards, Attorney, representing DeAnza/Mid-Florida Lakes Mobile Home Park, appeared before the Board stating that, with the new Land Use Map, said mobile home park has been designated from urban to urban expansion. He stated their concern is that with their density, they will now become a non-conforming use, and may not be able to further expand the park and fully build out all the land they have, noting that they have two fairly substantial tracts yet to be platted.

Mr. Andy McCaw, of the Summit Group, representing the Bradshaw family interest, appeared before the Board stating that he would like to clear up the misconception that the large landowners have been given special consideration - they have not. He referred to a large parcel of property which runs along Hwy. 27 stating that, to have said parcel classified as rural (one dwelling unit per five acres), seems to go against the policy that says, "The rural area is not intended to be developed to urban or semi-rural intensity, and most urban services will not be available." He noted, however, that property immediately to the north and south of the property he alluded to is what they call urban expansion, which requires all the urban services. Therefore, he felt it should be addressed that, if it is the intent to have urban expansion to the north and south of said property, under DCA rules, this would not be compatible with one unit per five acres.

Mrs. Gena Swartz, Chairman of the Transportation Committee, as well as a member of the Executive Committee, appeared before the Board stating that the Executive Committee, as a whole, was against the Comprehensive Plan, as it now exists, noting reasons for their opposition, one of them being what they felt was an inconsistency in fairness. She then touched on the issue of urban sprawl, at which time she read a definition of it, as defined by DCA. She stated she sees what DCA describes as urban sprawl on the Future Land Use Map, and is bothered by that fact, noting that there should be mixed uses. She stated the map before the Board this

date is spreading urban sprawl, and is not taking into consideration the County's natural areas.

Mr. Dick Toole, a resident of Groveland, appeared before the Board stating he felt the County needs to get rid of the two acre lots between Groveland metro and the turnpike facility, as he felt it is not needed in that area, and one will not be able to sell them. He stated he felt it should be one acre tracts. He stated the property located in said area should be painted white on the Land Use Map, and then the County should let the land dictate what is going to be developed in that area.

Mr. John Whitaker, a resident of Grand Island, appeared before the Board stating he felt the government that governs least is the best, and that he felt the State is pushing the Comprehensive Plan down the County's throat. He noted he disagrees with what the St. Johns River Water Management District is saying, in that the County is running out of water. He stated the County does not have to believe what every government agency tells them, noting that he has more faith and trust in this Board than he does with the individuals in Tallahassee. He urged the Board to be as flexible as they can.

Mr. Bill Dameron, a resident of Clermont, appeared before the Board stating that he has a piece of property that is presently zoned R-1-7, however, according to the Land Use Map, it will become one unit per every two acres, even though it abuts four units per acre, and questioned why there is such a wide gap between the two properties. He questioned whether there was some way to lower the maximum density and spread more of the medium density, in accomplishing the same thing, at which time he suggested a closer look at these areas.

Commr. Hanson stated she felt the County needs some performance standards in place, before adopting the Land Use Map before them this date. She stated she appreciated staff classifying the Wekiva Basin, Astor, and the Ocala Forest on the map as rural areas; however, they need to work on some flexibility

in the rural areas, in giving some incentives for obtaining a higher density in certain areas, if performance standards are in place. She stated she believes the Transfer of Development Rights are a possibility, although everything she has read states they will not work, and the reason they will not work is because they are not market driven. She stated she thinks the idea is great, but compensation to the landowner is not there, and this is the reason they will not work, noting that she felt this was something the Board needs to work on.

Commr. Gregg stated he felt the Future Land Use Map should be transmitted, as required, however, sometime between now and the meeting which was set for Monday, January 7, 1990, they should try to arrive at something, in the way of performance standards, that will work with the map, as the County needs some means of responding to the needs of the property owners. He stated he felt the Board needs more time to review the map, noting that he was not totally happy with it as he felt it lacks a lot. He stated the Board was not here to offer property owners a profit, but, likewise, were not here to take away the value of their land either.

At this time, letters from Mr. Kendall Casey Jones and Ms. Ruth Gray were submitted (for the record), stating concerns they had regarding the Future Land Use Map.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried, the Board approved to transmit the Future Land Use Map to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State, with the recommendation that the map be reviewed further at additional public hearings, as scheduled.

Commr. Swartz voted "No".

TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT

Mr. Larry Kirch, Director of Planning, appeared before the Board stating that no changes had been made to the Data Inventory Analysis portion of the Traffic Circulation Element. He did note,

however, changes which had been made to the GOPs portion of the element.

Mr. Steve Godfrey, Kimley Horne & Associates, out of Orlando, appeared before the Board and referred to Policy 2-1.5, on Page II-2, of the GOPs, concerning flexible concurrency management, stating he felt the present wording might possibly cause some problems, as far as DCA was concerned, and suggested a way in which he felt said wording should read. He suggested that staff avoid the details of the types of approaches the County might want to take, as they can put them in the Concurrency Management System, as they see fit, when they are developing it.

Mr. Godfrey then referred to Policy 2-2.1, on Page II-5, of the GOPs, concerning future traffic circulation maps, at which time he encouraged the Board to make a commitment to update the future circulation maps, possibly by 1993, recognizing the land use pattern staff sees emerging and appropriately updating the 2005 transportation forecast.

It was noted that it was the consensus of the Board to do what Mr. Godfrey had suggested.

Mr. Godfrey then referred to Policy 2-2.6, on Page II-6, of the GOPs, stating that the year 1991 should be changed to 1992.

Concerning Policy 2-3.4, on Page II-8, regarding right-of-way acquisition, Mr. Godfrey suggested the wording "pursuant to State law" should be inserted after the words Development Regulations, on Line 7, as the present wording implies that the County can require right-of-way dedication, without any sort of compensation, noting that the County cannot just take right-of-way - it has to do something within the overall system to compensate for the dedication of same.

Mr. Godfrey then addressed the matter of the Department of Community Affairs' deadline for submitting the County's Comprehensive Plan, stating that DCA is not going to provide any written documentation regarding what happens if the County is late in submitting its plan, however, indicated to staff what they

should do, should they find themselves in a situation where they might need to be late. He stated the State is more interested in the plan being done right, and the public hearing process being comfortable for the local area, than meeting the expressed schedule.

Mr. John Swanson, Director of Planning and Development, interjected (for informational purposes) that the Land Development Regulations still have to be adopted by February, 1992.

Mr. Ed Bergman, a member of the Citizens Traffic Advisory Committee, as well as a local commercial real estate broker, appeared before the Board representing several of his clients who own property along Hwy. 441, between Leesburg and Lake Square Mall, to address the level of service on Hwy. 441, which he felt, in the latest edition of the GOPs, the level of service for principal arterials (which is presently listed as level of C for peak hours), should be changed to level of service D, for the section between Leesburg and S.R. 473. He also requested the Board to delete the sentence in Policy 2-1.3, concerning the development of level of service maximum volumes, that reads, "Until such time, the County shall use the most recent maximum volumes suggested by the Florida Department of Transportation."

Mr. Bergman then referred to wording contained in the first and second paragraphs on Page 2-11, of the Data, Inventory & Analysis section of the element, at which time he reiterated the request for the Board to adopt traffic level of service D, rather than C, for the County's principal arterials, particularly the section between Leesburg and Tavares, but, even more specifically, between Leesburg and S.R. 473 (Haines Creek Road). He then referred to wording contained on Pages 2-14 and 2-15, of the Data section, noting that what it states is that the County is deficient on Hwy. 441, all the way from Lady Lake to Tavares.

Mr. Bergman stated it is only good business to develop where the infrastructure is existing and is already concurrent, rather than go out and build new roads and have to put in new

infrastructure, due to the fact that the County is looking at an arbitrary level of service (C) that doesn't have any reason for being. He felt it would be good business to change the level of service from C to D. He referred to Policy 2-1.4, on Page II-2, of the GOPs, noting that it states what would happen if the County did not change the level of service as he recommended. He suggested the County look at all levels of service C on principal arterials and change them to levels of service D.

Mr. Larry Kirch, Director of Planning, informed the Board that the County has to use the rural tables for Hwy. 441, even though it is not considered rural, as far as volume is concerned, due to the fact that FDOT has steadfastly said the County has to adopt their level of service for their roads. He stated that, until the County urbanizes to a point where it can use the urban tables, it cannot change the level of service, as suggested.

Mr. Kent Lindemann, Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator, appeared before the Board suggesting that a period be inserted after the word "needs", and that they strike the remainder of the paragraph, of Policy 2-1.14, on Page II-4, of the GOPs, as well as to strike the wording "designated for non-motorized transportation" from the paragraph of Policy 2-1.15, noting that even though paved shoulders will be used for non-motorized transportation, they will not necessarily be designated for it. Policy 2-1.16, on Page II-4, of the GOPs, and Table 2-4, on Page 2-34, of the Data Inventory & Analysis section, was briefly discussed, at which time Commr. Swartz suggested adding an additional category to Table 2-4, pertaining to right-of-ways and pavement widths.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Traffic Circulation Element to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT

Mr. Larry Kirch, Director of Planning, informed the Board that no changes had been made to the actual text of the Data Inventory

& Analysis section of the Public Facilities Element, up to this point.

Mr. Don Findell, Director of Environmental Services, appeared before the Board and noted changes which had been made to the GOPs section of this element, stating that Policy 6A-1.11 and 6D-1.11 were both new policies that deal with franchise fees. He stated that Policies 6A-1.12 and 6D-1.12 deal specifically with public/private partnership issues.

The Blue Belt Amendment was brought up for discussion, at which time it was noted that Commr. Hanson would address the matter under her Agricultural Task Force, or that it might possibly be addressed in either the natural groundwater acquifer recharge subelement, or both the task force and the subelement.

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, appeared before the Board stating that, regarding Policy 6A-1.15: Adoption of Design and Construction Regulations of On-Sight Wastewater Disposal System, the Board needs to set forth criteria, in order to let the public know what the individual septic tank systems are going to be judged on.

A brief discussion occurred regarding the matter, at which time Mr. Findell, Director of Environmental Services, stated that every subdivision coming into the County will have to dedicate right-of-way, for future needs of septic tanks.

Commr. Swartz then read the portion of the Florida Statutes pertaining to septic tanks, at which time Commr. Gregg stated he felt there were a lot of cases where it is obvious that on-site septic tanks are workable, and will continue to work, and the grade change is such that a sewer system will never be able to be installed, therefore, could not see dedicating right-of-way that will never be used. He stated he felt it is something that should be based on good design practices and what staff sees as a potential need in the future; otherwise, it is an unnecessary cost that will be borne by somebody in the future.

Commr. Gregg suggested adding a sentence to the policy pertaining to septic tanks, stating that criteria will be established in the Land Development Regulations regarding them.

Mr. Jim Bible, Greater Construction, reappeared before the Board stating that there were two ways of looking at the future sewerability of subdivisions, at which time he indicated what the two ways were.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Public Facilities Element to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT

Mr. Dave Moon, Planner, Planning Department, appeared before the Board and distributed several charts pertaining to the Capital Improvements Element, at which time he reviewed and answered questions presented by the Board, pertaining to each.

Mr. John Swanson, Director of Planning and Development, explained what has transpired, up to this point, regarding this element.

Ms. Charlene Ready, a local resident, appeared before the Board stating that the Board needed to look at "wants" versus "needs", noting that the people of Lake County cannot afford "wants".

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried unanimously, the Board approved to transmit the Capital Improvements Element to the Board of County Commissioners, as required by the State.

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.

________________________________

DONALD B. BAILEY, CHAIRMAN

ATTEST:

_________________________________

JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK

SEC/12-17-90/1-19-91.BOARDMIN