A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

JANUARY 22, 1991

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, January 22, 1991, 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; James C. Watkins, Clerk; Robert K. McKee, Chief Deputy Clerk; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.

Mr. Watkins gave the Invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commr. Swartz.

MINUTES

Regarding the Minutes of November 29, 1990 (Special Evening Meeting - LPA), the following changes were requested to be made:

Change Thomas J. Windram to Catherine Hanson in the logo of the Minutes.

On Page 4, Lines 28 and 33, and on Page 5, Line 3, change Semoran to Seron.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of November 29, 1990 (Special Evening Meeting - LPA), as corrected.

Regarding the Minutes of December 18, 1990 (Regular Meeting), the following changes were requested to be made:

On Page 12, Line 32, change Leesburg to Tavares.

On Page 13, Line 9, change A.J. to H.H.

On Page 25, Line 13, delete unanimously.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of December 18, 1990 (Regular Meeting), as corrected.





CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS

CLERK OF COURT'S CONSENT AGENDA

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:

Accounts Allowed

Request for payment of Warrant No. 130510 through Warrant No. 130762, for the following accounts:



Landfills General Revenue

Capital Outlay County Transportation Trust

Aquatic Weed Mosquito Control

Emergency 911 Fund Countywide Fire District

Bassville Fire District South Lake Fire District

Northeast Hospital Countywide Library

Commissary Trust Fund Private Industry Council

Pasco Fire District Mt. Plymouth Fire District

Resort & Development Fund Tax Miscellaneous/Gas Fund

Law Enforcement Trust Fund Northwest Fire District

Road Impact Northeast Ambulance

Paisley Fire District



Accounts Allowed/Assessments/Subdivisions



Request for approval of Satisfaction of Assessment Liens (11), for the following subdivisions:



Lakeview Heights

James Howard Stewart $ 906.92



Mt. Plymouth



Gregory Steven Dunham & Mona Gayle Dunham 592.52

Gregory Steven Dunham & Mona Gayle Dunham 568.92

Larry Galloway 1,853.93

Larry Galloway 692.34



Western Shores Subdivision



David & Nancy R. Pinter 1,383.64



Forty Eight Estates



Alfonso & Gayle Ermitanio, Jr. 714.36



Ocala Forest Campsites



George & Earl Dean Wilhelm 248.85

George & Earl Dean Wilhelm 248.85

Jerrold L. Bushman 248.81



Silver Lake Estates



William Leroy Daniels & Annie Daniels 1,440.26



Accounts Allowed/Courts-Judges



Request for approval of Satisfaction of Judgment for Rachel Beth Chiodo, David L. Chiodo, and Rae Minn Chiodo, in the amount of $200.00 - Case No. 85-384-CJ, and authorized proper signatures on same.

COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA



On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Gregg and



carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:

Administrative Services-Budget/Bids/Budgets



Request for approval of specifications, quotes, encumbering funds previously authorized, payments to be made, and other services that do not require bids or quotes, as follows:

(1) Specifications:
The current purchasing policy requires that all specifications be approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to bidding.




DEPARTMENT/DIVISION




DESCRIPTION OF ITEM
BUDGETED

AMOUNT

(1) BCC - County

Attorney

Specifications for DOS Based Novell Network System.

Bid # 033-250-091.

$ 14,675.00



(2) Public Works -

Maintenance



Specifications for Roof Repair for New Courthouse.


est $ 12,000.00/

$ 15,000.00



(2) Award Bid and Encumber Funds:



DEPARTMENT/DIVISION
VENDOR DESCRIPTION OF

ITEM



AMOUNT


(1) BCC -Tourist

Development



Cecil Clark Chevrolet.

1990 Lumia 4 dr mileage 4192.

Bid # 026A-070-091.



$ 9,000.00


(3) Quotes:
All goods or services from $1,000 to $5,999 require written quotes (Department Heads authorized up to $1,000 for approval in accordance with current procedures adopted by the Board and authorized by County Manager).


DEPARTMENT/DIVISION
VENDOR/DESCRIPTION OF ITEM

AMOUNT
(1) BCC Support Danforth Sounds Systems.

10 ea Lapel Miers phone.

$ 1,500.00



(2) BCC -

Crim Justice



Auto Chlor System.

Diswasher with clean dish table and rinse table.



$ 5,770.00
(3) Environmental

Services Mosquito

Center - Mosquito

Control

InaComp Computer.

IBM personal system 2.

$ 3,728.29
(4) Environmental

Services Mosquito

Center - Mosquito

Control

Southern Micro Instruments Asso.

# 84213 trinocular body for Nikon microscope.

$ 1,774.00
(5) Public Works -

Maintenance

R & R Supply.

Compressor for new courthouse air conditioner.

$ 2,138.55







(4) Encumber Funds Previously Authorized:


DEPARTMENT/DIVISION
VENDOR/DESCRIPTION OF ITEM

AMOUNT


(1) Public Works -

Special Services



Ernie Morris Enterprises.

Furniture.

County Bid # 003-618-091.



$ 1,539.75
(2) Public Works -

Engineer Dept



Pride of Florida.

Traffic paint.

County Bid # 009-630-091.



$ 2,244.00
(5) Approve Other Payments and Encumber

Funds:



DEPARTMENT/DIVISION
VENDOR/DESCRIPTION OF ITEM

AMOUNT


(1) BCC -

Corrections



Magnavox Commercial Sales Division.

(8) 19" televisions for inmates.



$ 1,840.00


(2) Environmental

Services -

Aquatic Plant

Mgmnt



Convault FL Inc.

Steel storage tank. Sole source.





$ 5,559.00
(3) Environmental

Services -

Solid Waste

Florida Rock Industries.

Cover material for Astatula Landfill. Sole source.

$ 40,500.00



(4) Planning and

Development -

Administrative



Xerox Lease purchase. Xerox 5052 copier.

State Contract # 600-380-91-1.



$ 4,958.00


(5) Public Works -

Eng Dept



Cataphote.

50# bags of glass spheres.

State Contract # 550720-90-1.



$ 2,372.50
(6) Approve Services That Do Not Require

Bids or Quotes and Encumber Funds:











DEPARTMENT/DIVISION
VENDOR/DESCRIPTION OF

ITEM



AMOUNT
(1) BCC - Corrections Florida Power.

Blanket purchase order to encumber funds for utilities for Tavares annex for December 1990 thru September 1991.

$ 10,000.00



(2) BCC - Corrections


Florida Power.

Blanket purchasing order to encumber funds for utilities for main jail December 1990 thru September 1991.

$ 3,000.00



(3) BCC - Corrections


City of Tavares.

Blanket purchase order to encumber funds for garbage and water utilities for main jail December 1990 thru September 1991.



$ 20,000.00
(4) BCC - Corrections City of Tavares.

Blanket purchase order to encumber funds for water and garbage utilities. Tavares annex December 1990 thru September 1991.

$ 4,750.00



(5) BCC - Corrections


Peoples Gas System Inc.

Blanket purchase order to encumber funds for gas service for main jail December 1990 thru September 1991.



$ 7,800.00


(6) Planning and

Development -

Building



Dept of Health and Rehab Services.

Radon surcharge.



$ 10,616.92
(8) Chairman's Signature and Encumber Funds:


DEPARTMENT/DIVISION
VENDOR/DESCRIPTION OF

ITEM



AMOUNT


(1) Public Works


Delta Business Systems.

Copier maintenance Canon 1010 12 month or 24,000 copies.



$ 340.00

Courthouse/Communications



Request by Tampa Tribune to place a newspaper rack at the front of the New Courthouse.



Accounts Allowed/Corrections Department



Request by the Corrections Department for approval of payment of inmate medical bills, and to encumber and expend funds, in the amount of $12,845.97.



Accounts Allowed/Ambulances-Hospital Districts

Health & General Services



Request for authorization to reimburse Waterman Medical Center, and to encumber and expend funds, in the amount of $38,548.40, for rechassis of ALS Unit No. 104.



Accounts Allowed/Roads-County & State/Subdivisions



Request to release an Irrevocable Letter of Credit, in the amount of $167,750.00, for performance of Quail Point at Silver Lake; accepted an Irrevocable Letter of Credit, in the amount of $15,200.00, for maintenance; and accepted the following road into the County maintenance system: Joanie's Run (1-5134).



Bonds - Mobile Home



Request to cancel existing Mobile Home Bond for Robin Siegmund, W. Ferndale area, District 3.



Roads-County & State/Public Works



Request to accept an extension of Hollondel Road (2-3215) into the County maintenance system.



Roads-County & State/Public Works



Request to accept Park Avenue (4-5075) into the County maintenance system.



Deeds/Roads-County & State



Request to accept the following Right-of-Way Deeds:



Lot Approval



John E. Hansen Lake Yale Road (5-7753)



Site Plan



Galen H. Jack Causey Road (3-2240)



Public Works/Roads-County & State



Request to accept the "Dedications to the Public", from the Public Works Department.



Planning & Development/Subdivisions



Request for preliminary approval of Garden City Subdivision (87 lots in District 2).



Commr. Gregg declared a Conflict of Interest and abstained from the discussion and vote.











COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS



ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES/MUNICIPALITIES

Mr. Al Thelen, County Manager, explained this request.

Mr. Mike Stearman, City Manager, City of Eustis, appeared before the Board and reviewed site plans (which he displayed) for the Stormwater Treatment Demonstration Project, for the City of Eustis.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from the City of Eustis to support their application for funds, for a Stormwater Treatment Demonstration Project.

Commr. Bailey was not present for the discussion or vote.

CONTRACTS, LEASES & AGREEMENTS/HEALTH & GENERAL SERVICES

MUNICIPALITIES

Mr. Lonnie Strickland, Director of Health & General Services, explained this request.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried unanimously, the Board approved an Interlocal Agreement between Lake County and the City of Groveland, relating to social and economic services, and authorized proper signatures on same.

ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/GRANTS/LIBRARIES/HEALTH & GENERAL SERVICES

Mr. Lonnie Strickland, Director of Health & General Services, explained this request.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved Library Services and Construction Act (LSCA) Grant No. DLIS-90-I-10-B, Services to the Elderly, in the amount of $18,840.00; and LSCA Grant No. DLIS-90-I-02-E-07, Service to Youth, in the amount of $14,430.00, and authorized proper signatures on same.

ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/GRANTS/HEALTH & GENERAL SERVICES/RESOLUTIONS

STATE AGENCIES

Mr. Lonnie Strickland, Director of Health & General Services, explained this request.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request for subgrantee funding to the Lake County Association for Retarded Citizens, Inc., in the amount of $4,592.00, and a resolution in conjunction with an application for funds from the Community Services Block Grant program, Department of Community Affairs, State of Florida.

ROAD CLOSINGS/ROADS-COUNTY & STATE

Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, explained this request.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request to abandon maintenance and proceed with a petition to vacate a portion of North Hancock Road (3-1354).

ASSESSMENTS/COUNTY POLICIES/PUBLIC WORKS

Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, explained this request.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request for the Board of County Commissioners to authorize an exception to the written policies for special assessments, to allow the property owners on one (1) side of the road to be assessed for two-thirds of the cost, with the County maintaining its normal one-third share.

COUNTY ATTORNEY'S MATTERS

CORRECTIONS DEPARTMENT/SUITS AFFECTING THE COUNTY

Ms. Annette Star Lustgarten, County Attorney, informed the Board (for informational purposes only) that an inmate suit was filed against the Lake County Sheriff, noting that the County was originally given the pleadings, due to the fact that the incident occurred after the Board of County Commissioners took over jurisdiction of the Jail. She stated that the matter had been referred to the Sheriff's Office and he, in turn, referred it to the Florida Sheriffs' Self Insurance Fund. She stated she would

not be defending said suit, noting that it concerns an allegation of medical malpractice, which is a civil rights violation.

COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS

ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/COMMISSIONERS/FINANCE

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried unanimously, the Board approved ratification of the Board on financial items which needed to be paid prior to this Board Meeting.

COMMISSIONERS/COMMITTEES

It was noted that action regarding the Liaison Committee appointments would be postponed until a later date.

COUNTY EMPLOYEES/RESOLUTIONS

Commr. Bailey brought to the attention of the Board the fact that he would like to see them do something to honor and show appreciation to those employees and residents of the County who are involved in the Desert Storm operation, in Saudi Arabia.

A brief discussion occurred regarding the matter, at which time the Board directed the County Attorney to put together a resolution stating the County's support of our men and women involved in the Desert Storm operation, and suggested putting together some sort of care package to send them from the County.

RESOLUTIONS/PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT

Commr. Hanson brought to the attention of the Board a request for consideration of a resolution supporting the Blue Belt Amendment, at which time a brief discussion occurred regarding same.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried unanimously, the Board approved a resolution supporting the Blue Belt Amendment, which will give tax breaks for recharge areas.

OTHER BUSINESS

BUDGETS/SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

Mr. Al Thelen, County Manager, explained a request from Sheriff Knupp regarding his Health & Disability Insurance budget,

for FY 1990-91, due to the fact that representatives from the Sheriff's Department were not present.

Ms. Eleanor Anderson, Director of Administrative Services-Budget, for the County, suggested postponing action regarding this request until the County Manager has a chance to investigate the matter, as it may possibly fall under the County's budget.

Commr. Swartz requested backup documentation from the insurance carrier, relative to this issue, for review.

Ms. Anderson informed the Board that the reason behind the request was, with the County taking over Corrections, the Sheriff had not anticipated any increase in his insurance cost; however, it went up 50%. She suggested having the Sheriff's Department come into the County's program, as opposed to going out with a private carrier. She stated the Board may want to consider putting it under the self insurance program of the County, noting that she has requested the Risk Management Department to check into it.

Commr. Swartz stated he would also like to obtain an accounting of the Sheriff's fuel account, in order to determine whether or not his department is going to need the additional Contingency reserve, for fuel, and, in the interim, to request the Sheriff to determine if there are additional accounts or funds that could be used to help soften the blow of this request.

No action was taken at this time.

COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS (CONT'D.)

ROADS-COUNTY & STATE

Mr. Al Thelen, County Manager, brought to the attention of the Board the fact that he had received a letter from Ikler-Padman Land Trust, c/o Mr. Jack Prickett, regarding a request for an extension of Merry Road, in Tavares.

Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, explained the request, stating that it was the County's intent to enter into an agreement with the Ikler-Padman Land Trust and Mr. Francis Berens, Trustee, for the purpose of extending Merry Road from C-19A to

US 441, which will be referred to as the Merry Road Extension. He then stated the reason behind the County's interest in the matter.

A brief discussion occurred regarding the request; however, no action was taken at this time.

COUNTY PROPERTY/RESOLUTIONS

Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, appeared before the Board requesting them to postpone, indefinitely, action regarding a request for approval of a resolution providing for the exchange of property between the County and Ms. Ruth H. Dean, in order to allow staff time to work out a problem concerning the matter.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board postponed action regarding the above stated matter, indefinitely, as requested.

RECESS & REASSEMBLY

At 9:50 a.m. the Chairman announced the Board would recess until 10:00 a.m.

WATER AUTHORITY

Ms. Paulette Alexander, President, Alexander Engineering, Inc., appeared before the Board to discuss the possible acquisition of Double Run Swamp. She stated Mr. Arnold Stroshein, the major property owner (out of four) of a piece of property known as Double Run Swamp, had spoken with Commr. Swartz previously about a possible donation of a part, or all, of said property. She stated, originally, the owners had purchased the property with the intention of building a private reserve (maintaining the property in its natural state) upon their retirement. However, one of the partners met an untimely death and the heirs of his share of the property have no interest in keeping the property and just paying taxes on it - they want their investment. She stated this puts Mr. Stroshein in a position where he has to do something with it - he can no longer afford to hang onto it, therefore, he had asked her

to look at the property and see what could be done, in terms of development or the harvesting of timber from the site.

Ms. Alexander stated that, being she was familiar with the Baseline 85 study that was done by the Lake County Conservation Committee, she recognized the property as being one of prime natural resources and one that had been recommended for purchase by a local or state agency, for protection, therefore, requested Mr. Stroshein to allow her to approach the County and State and see if they were interested in acquiring the property.

Considerable discussion occurred regarding the matter, at which time it was noted that the St. Johns River Water Management District felt it was a prime piece of property that they would be interested in, however, their funds for acquisition had already been committed for this fiscal year. She stated they did indicate, however, that they had been looking for a piece of property which they could perhaps jointly purchase with the County.

Ms. Alexander suggested that, if the County is interested in pursuing the matter, to perhaps approve a resolution, or contact the St. Johns River Water Management District to see how much money they would be willing to pay. She stated the Lake County Water Authority is also looking at the property; however, they are trying to determine whether the property is all wetlands or uplands. She stated that the St. Johns River Water Management District (from a survey that was done on the property several years ago) feels that there are approximately 100 acres of uplands on the interior portion. She noted that St. Johns stated they would not be opposed to purchasing the property, even if it was classified as wetlands, in order to protect it. She noted that, if the County wanted to purchase the uplands, the owners would deed over the wetlands.

Mr. Will Davis, Lake County Water Authority, appeared before the Board stating that he and members of the Land Acquisition Selection Committee (who is an advisory committee to the Water Authority) had discussed this particular piece of property and the

possible acquisition of it, however, noted there some problems involving it concerning cost, access, and adjacent property owners. However, most of the problems concern the wetlands issue. He stated funds may be available to purchase a portion of the property at a later date.

Ms. Alexander informed the Board that her understanding, in speaking with the St. Johns River Water Management District Acquisition Committee, was that they were going to proceed with this particular parcel, based partly on how much interest there was in Lake County regarding it; however, if the County and Water Authority were not interested in it, at all, they would not try to pursue it either. She reiterated the fact that this piece of property is not just a swamp, or wetlands, it has some very unusual features and one of the reasons it is in such a beautiful state is because there is very minimal access to it, and it has been relatively untouched since the late 1900s.

Ms. Alexander stated her only disagreement with the Water Authority's position, about not acquiring or paying for lands that the State says are jurisdictional, is that if they develop the upland portion and it is made more easily accessible to the public, there is going to be some impact on the wetlands, just by the fact of it being open to where people can walk through it, or to where it can be developed, because government cannot watch everybody every minute of every hour. She noted this was one of the reasons she wanted to bring it to the attention of the Board.

Commr. Swartz requested Mr. Davis to keep this Board updated as to his committee and board's findings, after further evaluation of the property, and if, at some point, this Board can help in some way to encourage the purchase of the property, to let them know.

No action was taken at this time.

JAILS/COUNTY BUILDINGS & GROUNDS

Mr. Mike Anderson, Capital Improvements Director, appeared before the Board to discuss Space Study Standards for the new

Criminal Justice Facility, stating that part of the charge to Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum (HOK) for said facility was to also prepare a Space Study, relative to square footage, concerning future remodeling, new construction, etc. He stated that HOK now has a draft form of two sections of the Space Study, being Section 1, dealing with the overall goals and objectives of the program planning effort, as well as identifying major elements that will form the basis of recommendations to the Lake County Board of County Commissioners, to meet long-range master planning and facilities needs of all County departments; and Section 2, dealing with planning standards, which they would present this date.

Mr. Brian Seufert, Architect, HOK, appeared before the Board stating that HOK had conducted a series of squire section user interviews with various department heads, and the standards used were very conservative ones.

Commr. Gregg stated that he felt to add 200 square feet, as an allowance for an Appointed Official or Supervising Attorney; 160 square feet for Department Directors; and 110 square feet for Division Directors, to the space already allowed for Professional (Space Group III), of 120 square feet, as noted on Page II-8, Section II, of the Proposed Planning Standards, is a little excessive. He stated said footage may agree with other counties or with the State, but he would like to see Lake County be a little more conservative, and suggested cutting 20% off the square footage for the Professional staff.

Commr. Swartz stated he would like to see HOK list, on Page II-14, or someplace where it is appropriate, the approximate square footage that is currently being used by the various staffing groups. He stated another thing he felt would make a difference would be the availability of small Conference Rooms, to which Commr. Gregg stated it had been suggested at one of the Task Force Meetings some time ago to put joint Conference Rooms between the judges' chambers.

A motion was made by Commr. Gregg and seconded by Commr. Bakich to cut 20% off the square footage of the Elected Official/Judge; Appointed Official, Executive Assistant Staff, Supervising Attorney; and Department Manager/Supervisor, Attorney categories of the Comparison of Government Employee Space Standards - Office Spaces chart on Page II-12, under Section II, of the Proposed Planning Standards.

A brief discussion occurred regarding the motion, at which time Commr. Swartz suggested moving Appointed Official to the Elected Official/Judge category, for square footage, and reducing said footage by 20%; however, only reducing the square footage for the other two categories by 10%.

Mr. Al Thelen, County Manager, stated the important thing was the matter of Conference Rooms, to which Commr. Swartz stated having Conference Rooms connecting two offices, or having one immediately adjacent to several offices, so that it would be readily available, would be one way of getting around the reduced space issue, yet still being sure of Conference Room availability.

Commr. Gregg amended his motion to move Appointed Official to the Elected Official/Judge category and cut 20% off the square footage of said category, and 10% off the Executive Assistant Staff, Supervising Attorney; and Department Manager/Supervisor, Attorney categories.

Commr. Bakich seconded the motion.

The Chairman called for a vote on the amended motion, which was carried unanimously.

RECESS & REASSEMBLY

At 11:10 a.m. the Chairman announced the Board would recess for lunch and a tour of the existing and new detention facilities, and would reconvene at 2:00 p.m. for Rezoning.

REZONING

Mr. Gregg Stubbs, Director of Current Planning, explained each of the zoning cases before they were heard.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved withdrawal of the following case:

CUP#90/8/3-5 Brownlee Burris

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved a 30 day postponement for the following cases, as requested by the applicant and staff:

#185-90-2 Dale Bartch

#186-90-2 Marjorie Prevatte



On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved a 90 day postponement for the following case, as requested by staff:

#172-90-3 Barnett Bank/Carl Ludecke

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved a 30 day postponement for the following case, as requested by staff:

Florida Quality Development Designation Robert Chapman

PETITION CUP#87/8/4-2 REVISION OR REVOCATION OF CUP

TROY S. BRONSON

Mr. Greg Stubbs, Director of Current Planning, appeared before the Board stating that this CUP was the same one the Board acted on in April of 1990, noting that the major concern, at present, is the bond amount.

Mr. Walter McLin, Attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board stating that the last meeting in which this CUP was discussed was filmed and, in going back and trying to reconstruct what official action the Board took, he had a problem in doing so. He stated, apparently, staff had a similar problem, in trying to determine how to implement the action which the Board took on that day. He stated an attempt was made by staff to present an amended CUP, based upon action taken by the Board at that meeting. He then enumerated on what changes had been made to

the CUP, which was before the Board this date in its final draft, by staff.

Mr. McLin then discussed the issue of the $100,000 bond which was set for this case and the fact that the purpose of it was to ensure compliance with the CUP, at which time he noted reasons why it was an impossibility for his client to have agreed to sign the CUP in October. He then discussed complaints which were registered concerning alleged flies and odor from the farm (giving dates of each of the complaints), noting that an inspection was made in January of this year, and the farm was found to be in compliance with the CUP. He stated he felt the bond should be geared to something other than the $100,000, for compliance, as he felt there was no provision, as long as Mr. Bronson was in business, for the bond to be terminated, as it is presented in the CUP, under any circumstance. He stated it is felt by some that the odor and flies are coming from the Bay Lake area, rather than from the Bronson Farm. He also stated the rumor that Mr. Bronson is expanding the number of his chicken houses is false - he is not presently expanding and does not intend to.

Mr. McLin noted several grammatical changes which he felt should be made to the CUP, as certain criteria had been accomplished, at which time Commr. Swartz stated that staff could respond by letter that said criteria had been accomplished - that they should not be correcting the CUP at this time.

It was noted that, throughout the CUP, where the word "accomplished" had been inserted (in parenthesis), it would be taken out.

Further discussion occurred regarding additional changes which Mr. McLin requested the Board to make in the CUP concerning certain standards which the Bronson Farm is being held to, at which time Commr. Swartz questioned whether staff had seen said changes and whether or not they agreed to them, other than grammatical errors,

to which staff responded that they had and had agreed not to change them.

Mr. Don Findell, Director of Environmental Services, appeared before the Board and noted a material difference between what had been said regarding the standards which Mr. Mackland alluded to and the intent of the CUP. He stated that Mr. Mackland was correct in that the intent of the CUP says the farm shall operate within the normal generally accepted agricultural and management standards of the poultry industry. However, Section 2 (c), of the CUP, says that the farm will prevent the production and export of flies and odors off the property, regardless of whether that is in the norm of the poultry industry or not, therefore, there is a very large material difference between those two sections, and that is what the Board needs to deal with. He stated a normal agricultural operation will have some flies and odors associated with it, during its normal operation, however, what this CUP does is prohibit the export of those flies and odors off the property, beyond normally accepted agricultural practices for the poultry industry.

Mr. McLin stated that what Mr. Findell alluded to is an impossibility of performance and his client cannot comply with said provisions, unless they cover over the entire farm, as they cannot guarantee that the odor and flies will not cross the farm's property line - it is a scientific impossibility. He stated that the applicant wants to be held to the highest practical standard that will allow him to be in business, and has spent money and is doing everything he can to comply; however, it is impossible for the farm not to breed flies, and is impossible for them to keep the flies on their property.

Commr. Swartz stated the way the CUP is worded, it recognizes the fact that there will be flies and odor, however, states that upon discovery of the condition of flies and noxious and noisome odors, that the applicant act to take care of the problem and try to control it.

Mr. McLin once again brought up the issue of the $100,000 bond, noting that he realized only the Board could change the amount of it, however, felt that once the applicant reaches the point of compliance that the County is requiring, and proves that he is there, that he would like some provision for the applicant not to be held to the bond forever. Secondly, he felt the amount of the bond carries with it no correlation to what the County's expense would ever be, in posing fines against the applicant, or causing the applicant to pay for inspections, to prove that they are in violation of the CUP, or to make sure that the applicant complies with the CUP. He realized the purpose of the bond was to ensure compliance, and, if it is not complied with, to give the County a sufficient source of enumeration to ensure that it is complied with, however, would like the opportunity to work with the County Attorney regarding the matter.

Considerable discussion occurred regarding the matter of the bond and what costs the County would incur if Mr. Bronson walked off and left the County with solving the problem (staff stated it would cost the County approximately $10,000), at which time Mr. Mackland suggested an alternative of having the amount of the bond run for the length of the CUP, rather than for the period of time to convince someone that they have complied and can be released from the obligation. He stated if the Board does not want to go along with that recommendation, then suggested creating a bond that, as a condition of the CUP, if it is not going to be released by compliance, to require that the bond be replenished, should the applicant not comply with the provisions of the CUP.

Ms. Carole Bagony, a resident of Mascotte, appeared before the Board stating that she and some of the other residents of the area in question were a little confused as they understood that Mr. Bronson had refused to properly execute the CUP, therefore, it should have become null and void. However, he had been given numerous extensions, therefore, she questioned what CUP he is

operating under, to which she was told by the County Attorney that the existing CUP is the one that is in effect.

Ms. Bagony stated that on April 17, 1990, an amended CUP was passed, and questioned whether it did not render the original CUP null and void, to which the County Attorney replied that the County Code requires that the property owner sign the CUP, which he did not, therefore, the amended CUP did not go into effect.

Commr. Gregg interjected that part of the problem stems from the fact of due process, stating that he had made a comment, at the April meeting, that the County needs some criteria which would allow it to draw on the bond (which is presently too vague). He noted there were some problems with the CUP, which were discussed at that meeting, and felt that staff found it confusing to try to turn what was said into a document. He stated that, as of October 25, 1990, they reached an impasse - the owner received the revised document at that time, and the only way that staff and the owner could resolve the problem was to come back before this Board. He noted that the last paragraph of the CUP (paragraph E. on Page 6) is confusing, in that one would take it to mean that the document is null and void, but it is not.

Ms. Bagony stated that on February 20, 1990, Mr. Bronson made the statement that his whole life was in the farm and was very concerned, however, when asked if he would sign the CUP, he stated that he would not, and has lived up to his word. She stated the Board, through their actions, promised the residents around the facility restrictions to the operation, to relieve the conditions they are forced to live under. She stated the residents have suffered in silence while the cleanup of the operation began, noting that they were depending on the action of the Board to bring them some relief. She stated the residents have their life's blood in their homes, their families, and their properties and wanted the Board to know that, by their failure to demand compliance by Mr. Bronson, they have broken a trust with the people of southwest Lake

County. She stated they have tried to be patient and have tried to keep faith that the Board's mandate would be followed, however, the flies and odors have become increasingly worse since the Fall of 1989 and prior years. She stated they have brought the Board, in the past (for the record), all kinds of pleas from the residents and documents of flies and odors, asking for relief, showing the Board how their families' health, homes, and properties are at great risk. She strongly urged the Board, without further delay, to take immediate action to revoke the Bronson Farm CUP, as anything short of revocation would be a constant threat to the citizens around the facility and Lake County, as a whole.

Mr. Tom Brown, the owner of a parcel of property near the Bronson Farm, appeared before the Board stating that the County needs to clear up the problem today or in the immediate future, as he does not want money to come out of his pocket to clean up the property, should Mr. Bronson walk off and leave it.

Ms. Ann Westfall, a resident of the Mascotte area, appeared before the Board stating how the flies and odor from the Bronson Farm have destroyed the lives of the local residents as they are confined to their homes 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year, with no future to look forward to, because Mr. Bronson refuses to live up to restrictions and clean up his operation. She stated the residents of the area have been robbed financially, with greatly depreciated property values, but also their basic right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Their children have been robbed of the basic right to play outdoors in clean, unpolluted air, and their parents of barbecuing, gardening, etc. She questioned when the Board was going to set the residents free.

Commr. Swartz stated that, as he recalled, when the bond issue was discussed previously, there was a discussion regarding due process and the fact that it would be required with any bond, in order to draw against it.

The County Attorney, Ms. Lustgarten, stated that when a county or any entity draws on a Letter of Credit or performance bond, notice is given to the applicant that they are doing so and reasons why they are. She stated a due process hearing is not required, as the performance bond sets out what the conditions are, and if those conditions are violated, there is an automatic draw, which is done by administration. She stated very simple language could be added to the Letter of Credit requiring the opportunity to secure a notice to the applicant that the County was about to draw.

Commr. Swartz questioned the County Attorney as to what discussions she had with Mr. Bronson's representatives, relative to what would be acceptable from the County Attorney's Office, because the language contained in the CUP specifically refers to a bond in a form acceptable to the County Attorney, to which she responded that they discussed the amount of the bond, but never really discussed incorporating the conditions of the bond into the CUP.

Commr. Gregg stated the Board had stated at the April meeting that those conditions should be in the CUP, due to the fact that whether Mr. Bronson is operating right and proper, or not, before staff draws on a $100,000 bond, Mr. Bronson has due process coming to him to be able to come back to the Board and have the Board say that staff is correct and the County is going to draw on the bond, and his alternative to the County drawing on it is to go to court and stop them.

Commr. Gregg further stated that the County has allowed, on occasion, in the past, for someone to put up a Certificate of Deposit, in the required amount, and draw interest off of it, to which the County Attorney stated that a CD is difficult to draw from and is always the last choice, as far as security is concerned. Commr. Gregg stated, however, that he would rather have a Certificate of Deposit in hand than any Letter of Credit, because with the criteria that is contained in the CUP, the County would

spend a lot of time in court trying to draw on the Letter of Credit.

Discussion continued regarding the matter of whether or not Mr. Bronson was complying with the conditions of the CUP, at which time staff stated that, as far as they could tell, he was.

Commr. Hanson interjected that she had viewed the farm and feels that Mr. Bronson could not do anything more than what he is presently doing to have a better operation, noting that she felt this was a classic example of problems between agriculture and residential interest. She stated she felt this was a case that probably never should have been approved in the first place, because it is too close to Mascotte; however, the County has approved it, and feels it is in the County's interest to continue to work with Mr. Bronson. She stated she feels he does want to work with the County, at this point, regardless of the past, and that he is in agreement with the new CUP and everything pertaining to it, except for the $100,000 bond. She stated the Board is not here to put anyone out of business, but to work with them concerning their problems.

Commr. Gregg stated Mr. Bronson, according to the County staff, has been in compliance with the new CUP, whether or not they had the bond, and he had a problem with revoking Mr. Bronson's CUP when he has been abiding by the present one, as well as the old one. He then questioned the County Attorney as to whether there would be a problem in setting up an Escrow Account and putting a cash bond in it, to which she responded that there would not be a problem in doing so, however, a Letter of Credit, or cash bond, is easier to draw on than an Escrow Account. She stated the terms and conditions of the Escrow Agreement held by the third party could be worked out.

Commr. Gregg stated he would rather have $50,000 cash in an Escrow Account than $150,000 in a surety.

Commr. Swartz requested the County Attorney to give him language which would indicate that, within 30 days, if, in fact, the cash Escrow Account or Letter of Credit has not been established under the terms, as outlined, the CUP will be revoked, and, at that time, the County will take whatever action is necessary, in light of the fact that they would have a CUP that had been revoked, which would mean that the applicant was in violation of a Zoning Code and would then be turned over to Code Enforcement. He then instructed staff that it was absolutely essential that they draw up this change and get it into the hands of the applicant's representative by Friday, January 25, 1991, noting that the applicant would then have over three weeks to accomplish what is required of him and sign the CUP. He noted the only changes in the CUP were to strike a grammatical error (the word "and") on Page 1; to strike the word "accomplished" (in parenthesis) as it appears in the CUP; and to change upper case "A", on Page 3, to lower case "a".

Mr. Don Findell, Director of Environmental Services, stated, for clarification, that one of the primary problems the County has had with the Bronson Farm CUP has not been with Mr. Bronson operating under this CUP, it has been with the disposal of manure off site, to which Commr. Swartz stated that he had said in the past, and will say again, that the Board needs an ordinance back in front of them that would be similar to what they require for the spreading of sludge, as he recognized the fact that it is a serious problem.

Mr. Findell stated staff wants to incorporate a provision in the Bronson Farm CUP that requires a manure management plan that deals with its off site disposal. It was noted that, if the County has an ordinance that deals with that issue, the provisions of that ordinance would apply to any operation from the date of effectiveness, regardless of whether it is in the CUP or not.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved to incorporate the changes which Commr. Swartz alluded to above, with a requirement that the CUP be signed and the bond posted within 30 days, as failure to do so will mean automatic revocation of the CUP, and it will be turned over to Code Enforcement, at that time.

PETITION NO. 158-90-3 A TO PFD McKINNON GROVES

Mr. Greg Stubbs, Director of Current Planning, informed the Board that the following five (5) cases had been before the Board approximately two months ago and were postponed, at the request of the applicant, until this date.

Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, appeared before the Board stating that she was representing three of her clients: Ann Ackerman, McKinnon Groves, and Grafton Groves (the next five zoning cases on the agenda). She stated that, originally, it was their plan to bring a PUD for a very large tract of over 700 or 800 acres, however, as they began to work with the property owners, some of them dropped out, or decided not to go forward, so they ended up with three (3) separate parcels that are not contiguous to one another. She stated, at that time, they came to staff and requested some direction as to how they should approach the matter, questioning whether the parcels should come in as straight zoning or as separate PUDs, to which it was staff's recommendation to bring them in as three separate zonings. Due to the fact that large tracts of property were involved, they decided that, although they were not going to be PUDs, they needed to do something to assure the Board that there would be open space in them, therefore, they also filed rezoning requests for two PFDs (which are two separate parks).

Mr. Dick Wells, with Ivey Harrison & Wall, an engineering firm out of Orlando, appeared before the Board and reviewed some graphics and conceptual drawings of the two parks in question, noting that they are surrounded by significant development on the

Orange County side, and are very much accessible to some major traffic networks.

Ms. Bonifay stated she had received authorization from the applicants to enter into a voluntary agreement with the County, and come up with a Developers Agreement, wherein they would put a certain percentage of said projects in open space, and would agree to a unit cap. She stated the projects were recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and were advertised for either three quarter or one acre lots. She also stated they would be willing to look at the issue of impact fees, and due to the fact that the County does not have impact fees in place for two service areas, would be willing to discuss those, as they go through the cases this date, and would voluntarily agree to pay whatever the County is requiring, in PUDs, for both fire and schools.

It was noted that there was no one present in the audience in opposition to the request.

Discussion occurred regarding the request, at which time Commr. Swartz stated there will be an increase in taxes, in the County, if the Board keeps approving developments like these, that are located so far out that the Sheriff's Department cannot provide protection services adequately.

Commr. Bakich noted some concerns he had with the developments, as well.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PFD (Public Facilities District), for a private recreational facility.

Commrs. Bakich and Swartz voted "No".

PETITION NO. 159-90-3 A TO RE OR RR JEAN J. EDWARDS

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to RE (Rural Estates), for single-family residences.

Commrs. Bakich and Swartz voted "No".

PETITION NO. 160-90-3 A TO RE OR RR McKINNON GROVES

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to RE (Rural Estates), for single-family residential development.

Commrs. Bakich and Swartz voted "No".

PETITION NO. 161-90-3 A TO RE OR RR GRAFTON GROVES, INC.

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to RE (Rural Estates), for single-family residential development.

Commrs. Bakich and Swartz voted "No".

PETITION NO. 162-90-3 A TO PFD GRAFTON GROVES, INC.

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PFD (Public Facilities District), for private recreational facilities and open space.

Commrs. Bakich and Swartz voted "No".

PETITION NO. 151-90-5 A TO R-1-5, RM OR RMRP ALBERT YURKO

Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board stating that the tract involved is a very small one and consistent with the purpose and intent of both the

RMRP portion of the Zoning Code, as well as the RM. She stated it is in compliance with the County's Land Use Element; the Lake County Comprehensive Plan; is located within the Lisbon Urban Compact Node (or rural village in the County's forthcoming plan); and is compatible with the surrounding zonings and land use densities.

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the Lisbon First Baptist Church, appeared before the Board, in opposition, stating that access to the property in question is limited to two (2) easements, one being 15 feet and one being 25 feet. He stated while those easements may have been appropriate in the old days, to serve groves in the area, feels it would not be appropriate for purposes of doing a development in the 8.7 units per acre range. He informed the Board of a potential future problem the church is concerned about, involving access to the property. He stated that, under the current Comprehensive Plan, Compact Urban Node, and proposed map, a rural village is appropriate, as stated by Ms. Bonifay, but wanted the Board to understand that there is an access problem.

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 a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to RM (Mobile Home Residential), for single-family residential.

PETITION NO. 60A-90-3 RR TO RE CARL & BEULAH LOBALDO

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

Mr. James Treat, a building contractor, representing the applicants, appeared before the Board stating the reason the applicants were requesting approval to build a second home on their property was due to the fact that Mr. Lobaldo had suffered a heart attack and was in a wheelchair, and they needed a house large enough to house the facilities needed to properly take care of him, as their present home is too small to house said facilities.

Commr. Swartz stated he felt RE zoning was not appropriate for the area in question and, therefore, could not support it, noting that he felt the RR zoning was a reasonable compromise for the applicant to build a second house.

Commr. Bakich stated he was concerned about mixing residential in with the industrial and commercial uses that are in the area.

A motion was made by Commr. Swartz and seconded by Commr. Bakich to overturn the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and deny a request to rezone from RR (Rural Residential) to RE (Estate Residential).

A brief discussion occurred regarding the fact that the applicants only lacked three-tenths of an acre in having enough acreage required to build a second home on the property, under the RE zoning.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which failed with Commrs. Bailey, Gregg and Hanson voting "No".

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from RR (Rural Residential) to RE (Estate Residential), to subdivide property to construct a second dwelling.

Commrs. Bakich and Swartz voted "No".

PETITION NO. 183-90-1 A TO RR & AR WILLIAM BARBIEUX

Mr. Robert Cyrus, Attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board stating that the RR zoning (requested by the applicant) was denied at the Planning and Zoning Commission, at which time the applicant requested postponement, and the case was to be readvertised as rezoning to AR.

It was noted that the case had actually been readvertised as RR and AR.

Mr. Cyrus stated the request involves 220 acres of orange groves which were frozen and have not been replanted, on the Marion

County Line Road. He stated the reason for the original RR zoning request, and the reason the applicant was now requesting AR.

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing several clients who live on the Marion County Line Road, appeared before the Board, in opposition, stating a concern his clients had with the RR zoning was that it would increase the density from one unit per five acres to five units per acre, and felt that would be too great a leap. He stated in looking at the AR zoning they were concerned that the quality of homes which already exist on the Marion County Line Road (large tracts with ranch type houses), contiguous to the property in question, would be affected. He stated that, due to the fact that the applicant had reduced his request from RR to AR, and the fact that his clients now have an understanding that the quality of homes the applicant will be building will be compatible with what is already in the area, will support the request for AR zoning.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried, the Board overturned the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to AR (Agricultural Residential), for single-family residential homes.

Commr. Swartz voted "No".

PETITION NO. 168-90-4 A TO LM OR CP ROBERT A. CHUBBOY

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

A brief discussion occurred regarding the request.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to CP (Planned Commercial), to permit the establishment of mini storage for trailers, RV's, and boats.

Commrs. Bailey and Swartz voted "No".

PETITION NO. 196-90-3 A TO ER DOROTHY K. McPHERSON

Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board and reviewed a graphic (on display)

indicating the property in question. She stated that said property had previously been in citrus production, however, is no longer. She stated the request is compatible with surrounding land use and the current Lake County Comprehensive Plan.

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

Commr. Swartz stated reasons why he could not support the request.

A motion was made by Commr. Gregg to uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approve a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to ER (Estate Residential), for the creation of residential lots, for construction of single-family residences.

Commr. Hanson seconded the motion, for discussion, however, stated reasons why she could not support the request.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried, with Commrs. Hanson and Swartz voting "No".

PETITION CUP#90/12/1-5 CUP IN A MARLIN CASSIDY, SR.

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

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 a request for a CUP in A (Agricultural), for mobile home to be placed on site with residence, for care of an infirm relative.

PETITION NO. 198-90-3 RA TO CP ROPER & McALLISTER, INC.

Commr. Gregg noted that, under conditions of the CP, it states that the applicant shall provide transportation improvements, as required by the Lake County Public Works Department, however, questioned staff as to whether or not the County is now requiring anything for frontage roads, for any requests along Hwys. 27 and 441, to which Mr. Greg Stubbs, Director of Current Planning, replied that the County has a Frontage Road Ordinance that will soon be coming before the Board, noting that staff has been working

on it intensely, however, there is nothing as of yet, subject to the ordinance being adopted.

Commr. Gregg stated that due to the fact that it will probably be another year before the Frontage Road Ordinance is adopted, felt that the County needs to start doing something about the matter now.

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board stating that, as he understands it, the Frontage Road Ordinance states frontage road, dual access, or other abilities to limit, which the applicant would have no problem with (as part of this request), in accommodating some of the other CP and C-1 uses along Hwy. 27, if the Board wanted to add it as a condition. He stated that the request involves 700 feet fronting on Hwy. 27 and suggested deleting, from the CP uses, the southerly 200 feet, which would mean that the northerly portion of the property would be subject to the site plan, and the only use and condition that would be approved. He stated that the southerly 200 feet of the property would be zoned CP, with no uses and no site plan, which would simply require that the applicant come back before the Board, for any utilization of the property in the future, and have a site plan and use approved. He stated the applicants have agreed to limit their operating hours from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; all repairs will be internal; the facility will have no outside storage; and lighting will be directed onto the property itself and not on surrounding properties. He suggested moving the buffer 200 feet to the north, and placing a vegetative buffer at that location; and having the southerly 200 feet of property be open space, CP, with no uses.

Ms. Ruth Yancey Ray, past Senior Warden for the St. Matthias Episcopal Church, appeared before the Board stating that the church is not opposed to the request, as they feel it will be compatible with the church's future use. She stated the church's main concern is with the easement at the back of the property, due to the

church's day care services; however, the applicant has agreed not only to not use the easement, but to deed their rights to said easement to the church, which gives the church an additional 50 feet of property, and guarantees that not only will the church not be disturbed by the traffic, but the houses along the easement will not be disturbed by the traffic, as well.

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

Commr. Swartz stated he could not support the request, due to the fact that it encourages strip commercialization.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from RA (Ranchette) to CP (Planned Commercial), as amended, with the conditions outlined this date regarding access to said property, for an automobile and watercraft sales, and complete service and repair, including body work.

Commr. Swartz voted "No".

PETITION NO. 194-90-2 A TO CP WITH C-1 USES DIANE S. DEVIER

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

Ms. Vallei Ramey, a neighbor to the applicant, appeared before the Board in favor of the request, as she presently has to travel from 8 to 15 miles to purchase groceries or bait and tackle for fishing.

Ms. Lois Stacks, a local resident, also appeared before the Board in favor of the request.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to CP (Planned Commercial), with C-1 (Rural or Tourist Commercial) uses, for a grocery store and bait/tackle shop.

Commrs. Bakich and Swartz voted "No".

It was noted that Ms. Devier would have to submit a site plan to staff within the next two years.

PETITION CUP#90/12/2-2 CUP IN A LESLIE B. & VALLEI RAMEY

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gregg and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for a CUP in A (Agricultural), to place a mobile home on site for infirm relative, subject to receipt of an affidavit from a medical doctor confirming this need.

PETITION NO. 195-90-1 R-1-15 & RR TO RR ROBERT D. SNOOK

Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board stating that, over time, the applicant developed some green houses, in conjunction with his residence, therefore, no longer belongs in the R-1-15 classification. She stated the RR zoning, which is compatible with the applicant's residence, allows greenhouses as a primary use.

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from R-1-15 (Residential Estates) and RR (Rural Residential) to RR (Rural Residential), for residential development.

PETITION NO. 108A-90-5 A & ER TO ER PAR II FLORIDA PARTNERSHIP

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

On a motion by Commr. Bakich, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) & ER (Estate Residential) to ER (Estate Residential), for single-family development.

PETITION NO. 174-90-3 A & LM TO PUD W/WAIVER OF VARIANCES

ROBERT A. DAVIS

No one was present in the audience in opposition.

Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board stating that the applicant is proposing an 18 hole golf course with club house and residential community. He stated half of the property in question was zoned LM and the other half A, and what they are doing is putting a PUD on it, to combine the two properties together. He requested several changes be made to the PUD, at which time he noted said changes. He stated the proposed PUD is consistent with the Lake County Comprehensive Plan and with surrounding zoning and land use patterns.

Commr. Swartz noted some concerns he had with the request.

A motion was made by Commr. Swartz to approve the request for waiver of variances, amended, as follows:

(1) Strike 62 ft. from the centerline.

(2) Approve as is.

(3) Approve as is.

(4) Strike

(5) Approve as is.

(6) Approve as is.

(7) Approve as is.

(8) Strike

(9) Strike (a) and all of (b) with the exception of sidewalks, noting that there will be no later than two years per phase, but to include (c).

(10) Approve as is.

(11) Approve as is.

Commr. Bakich seconded the motion, for discussion, however, amended the motion to allow Waiver of Variance No. 4 to be included.

The Chairman called for a vote on the amendment, which was carried 4 to 1, with Commr. Swartz voting "No".

The Chairman then called for a vote on the Waiver of Variances, as amended, which was carried unanimously.

On a motion by Commr. Gregg, seconded by Commr. Bakich and carried, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) & LM (Light Manufacturing) to PUD (Planned Unit Development), with waiver of variances, as amended.

Commr. Swartz voted "No".

PETITION NO. 199-90-4 A & A + CUP#87/1/2-4 TO PUD

L. J. & MARTY NORMAN

Mr. Jerry Lockett, Attorney, representing the applicant in a litigation matter, appeared before the Board stating that there is pending litigation (Case No. 88-959 - Theophilus, Inc. vs. Lake County) involving this case and that this application is an attempt by Theophilus, Inc. to avoid said litigation. He stated if this application is approved, his client will dismiss said litigation.

Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney, representing the applicant, appeared before the Board and reviewed a site plan indicating where the pug mill will be located on the property in question. She stated the pug mill is portable - not permanent and should only be on the site a day or two at a time, several days a year. She stated she wished the record to reflect that when one looks at the applicant's entranceway, coming off Round Lake Road, there is a dirt or clay extension back to Mr. Simpson's property and her client is agreeing, when the project goes through the planning process, to show some sort of turnout, which will be maintained to county clay road specifications. She stated they will also grant to the County an additional right-of-way, making it a 66 foot right-of-way throughout, so that if Mr. Simpson wishes to develop his property, in the future, would have no problem meeting county road specifications. She noted that said right-of-way would be deeded to the County. She also stated the applicant has no problem with conditions in the PUD, nor with other conditions noted.

Mr. Jim Simpson, owner of a parcel of property (100 acres) to the west of the property in question, appeared before the Board, in

opposition, and requested the Board to deny the request and protect his property, as he feels that he will not be able to sell his property for what it is worth, if the pug mill is allowed to go in next to him. However, he requested the Board to put a time limit on the pug mill, should they approve the request, to which Commr. Hanson stated she would recommended a time limit of five (5) years.

Ms. Marty Norman, applicant, answered questions presented by the Board, from the audience.

A motion was made by Commr. Hanson and seconded by Commr. Gregg to uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approve a request for rezoning from A (Agricultural) and A (Agricultural) + CUP#87/1/2-4 to PUD (Planned Unit Development), including pug mill, contingent upon the 66 ft. right-of-way being provided, and addition of five (5) year time limit, to be reviewed at the end of that five (5) years, with a one (1) year annual renewal after that, as well as stated conditions pertaining to Pollution Control.

Commr. Swartz stated reasons why he could not support the request.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried 4 to 1, with Commr. Swartz voting "No".

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m.





_____________________________

DONALD B. BAILEY, CHAIRMAN



ATTEST:





___________________________________

JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK



SEC/1-22-91/1-30-91.BOARDMIN