The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in special session on Tuesday, January 25, 1995, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Rhonda H. Gerber, Chairman; William "Bill" H. Good, Vice Chairman; G. Richard Swartz; Catherine C. Hanson; and Welton G. Cadwell. Others present were: Tim Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney; Peter F. Wahl, County Manager; Mary Snell, Executive Assistant to BCC Office Manager; Paul Bergmann, Senior Director, Planning & Development Services; Mark Knight, Chief Planner, Planning & Development Services; Susan M. Strum, Planner III, Planning & Development Services; James E. Barker, Director of Environmental Management; Greg Stubbs, Director of Development Regulations Services Division; Russell Melling, Environmental Supervisor II; Rebecca Jetton, Planning Manager, Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern; and Marlene S. Foran, Deputy Clerk.
WORKSHOP - LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AMENDMENTS
PLANNING
Mr. Paul Bergmann, Senior Director, Department of Planning and Development Services, stated that the workshop this date was for the purpose of seeking direction on amendments to the Lake County Land Development Regulations. Mr. Bergmann directed the Board's attention to a memorandum from Ms. Susan M. Strum, Planner III, Planning and Development Services, dated January 5, 1995, which outlined the items for discussion and included a packet of information in regard to Minor LDR Amendments; Chapter XIV, Platting Procedures and Requirements for Minor Subdivisions of Land; Chapter V, Concurrency Management - Draft; memorandum from Timothy P. Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney, dated July 15, 1994; memorandum from Mark A. Knight, Chief Planner, Planning Services Division, date December 28, 1994; and a letter from the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) to Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, dated September 28, 1994. He noted that discussion
on Timing of Residential Development, and Commercial Locational Criteria would be continued to a later date. Mr. Tim Hoban, Senior Assistant County Attorney, interjected that the Board had received a letter from the Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission requesting that the Board not take action or have workshops on the issues of Timing of Residential Development, and Commercial Locational Criteria until such time that the Planning and Zoning Commission has had a workshop on said issues. Discussion occurred regarding this issue, at which time it was the decision of the Board to provide the Planning and Zoning Commission the opportunity to discuss the issues of Timing of Residential Development and Commercial Locational Criteria in a workshop and to provide a recommendation to the Board.
Ms. Susan Strum, Planner III, Planning & Development Services, brought up for discussion the Minor Land Development Regulations (LDR) Amendments, dated November 21, 1994, which contain proposed changes to the current Land Development Regulations.
Mr. James Barker, Director of Environmental Management, noted that the definition of "Private Potable Water System", on page 6 of the Minor LDR Amendments, had been pulled from the discussion this date.
Chapter II
Ms. Strum brought up for discussion changes in Chapter II of the Minor LDR Amendments, at which time discussion occurred regarding language on Page 8, Structures, which indicates that "Structure" also includes fences, billboards, swimming pools, poles, pipelines, transmission lines, tracks, and advertising signs. She noted that all structures must be permitted pursuant to Chapter XIV, Section 14.14.02 of the Lake County Land Development Regulations.
Commr. Swartz suggested that a minor modification be made to the above noted language to indicate clearly that it was not the intent to include barb wire fences, and agricultural fences on
property zoned and lands that are used for agricultural. He encouraged the Board to consider a fence ordinance that would apply in urban, urban expansion, or suburban categories where specific densities are in place.
Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planning, Planning and Development Services, noted that the Board had the option to strike the last sentence, which states that "Structure" also includes fences, billboards, swimming pools, poles, pipelines, transmission lines, tracks, and advertising signs, until such time that an ordinance pertaining to fences has been drafted, and said language could then be incorporated back in to the LDRs. It was the decision of the Board to leave the language pertaining to structures as proposed. Commr. Hanson expressed concern with the vague definition of "Discouraged use", at which time extensive discussion occurred regarding said definition. No change was made to the definition of "Discouraged use" at this time.
Commr. Good brought up for discussion the definition of Livestock and questioned why it was necessary to list all animals of the equine, ratite, bovine or swine class, including goats, sheep, mules, horses, hogs, cattle, ostriches and other grazing animals, in the definition.
Ms. Rebecca Jetton, Planning Manager, Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern, stated that major controversy has occurred in Polk County over species that are exotic, and non-exotic, and cautioned the Board in drafting the definition of "Livestock". She stated that the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission has classified animals into three categories and suggested that the Board obtain the definition of which animals are dangerous and/or exotic and dangerous.
Septic Tank Provisions
Mr. Knight brought up for discussion the Placement of Septic Tanks in the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern and directed the Board's attention to a memorandum addressed to
Mr. Russell Melling, Environmental Supervisor II, dated December 28, 1994, which addresses an amendment to the Lake County Comprehensive Plan, and a mandatory septic tank maintenance program. He stated that the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) had expressed a concern regarding the language, and noted that the proposed amendment complies with the request from DCA in regard to the placement of septic tanks in the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern.
Ms. Jetton noted the following changes to Policy 1A-2.8: Septic Tank Provisions, as addressed in the memorandum dated December 28, 1994:
Page 3 - Line 2 - delete "to vary the terms of the plan".
Page 5 - Paragraph 3 - change "six (6) months" to three (3) months; and change "three (3) months" to thirty (30) days.
Ms. Jetton stated that the Board had previously discussed the issue of withholding building permits in the event that the department does not receive proof that the septic tank has been cleaned and inspected within the appropriate time frame. She suggested that building permits be withheld and a code violation be issued; at which time discussion occurred regarding this issue.
It was the decision of the Board to insert language after "Notice of Violation", on Page 5, Paragraph 3, to indicate that a violation would be issued by the Lake County Environmental Protection Board.
Commr. Hanson brought up for discussion language on Page 3, which indicates that at least once every five (5) years the lot owner shall have all septic tanks cleaned and inspected in accordance with the requirements of the Lake County Public Health Unit. At this time, extensive discussion occurred regarding this issue, and it was the consensus of the Board to insert language that indicates that at least once every five (5) years the lot owner shall have all septic tanks cleaned and inspected in the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern applicable to all new septic tanks where severe and limited soil types are located.
Mr. Melling discussed the procedure for notifying the property owner of the septic tank regulations and explained that, at the present time, the property owner receives an informational packet, and that the new requirements would be incorporated into said packet.
Mr. Hoban discussed language stating that "No building permit shall be issued for a development proposing the use of a septic tank within the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern without first obtaining a permit approved by the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services", and stated that, in place at this time, was an informal system which works very well between Environmental Management and the Building Department. He stated that the proposed language was codifying said requirement in the Green Swamp, which has the legal implication that it was not required for the remainder of the County. Discussion occurred regarding this issue, and it was the decision of the Board to codify said language to pertain to the whole County, with Mr. Melling meeting with Mr. Jack Bragg, Building Department, to determine what should or should not be codified.
Mr. Knight noted, for clarification purposes, that Cyprus Walk Subdivision and Lake Susan Homesites should be added to the list of Subdivisions within the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern. Ms. Jetton interjected that, at this time, she has not indicated that DCA has agreed to said list.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 10:40 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for ten minutes, and reconvene at 10:50 a.m.
PLANNING (CONTINUED)
Minor LDR Amendments
Chapter II
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minor LDR Amendments, Chapter II, Definitions, as amended.
Chapter III
Ms. Strum brought up for discussion a change in Chapter III of the Minor LDR Amendments under Schedule of Permitted and Conditional Uses, which changes "Towers" from a permitted use to a conditional use in the Agriculture (A) zoning district.
Commr. Good suggested that the definition of "Towers" be defined to indicate "Communication Towers", at which time discussion occurred regarding what would be considered a tower.
At this time, it was the decision of the Board to delete the proposed language, on Page 9, and insert the following under Agricultural Uses: Change Communications Towers from a permitted use to a conditional use in all zonings where they are currently considered as a permitted use except in CFD (Community Facilities District) where they will continue to be a permitted use.
Commr. Good brought up for discussion Section 3.01.04, in regard to the Keeping of Livestock, and suggested that a list and a definition of dangerous animals be incorporated into said language to address the real problem of dangerous animals such as lions, tigers, and bears.
Commr. Swartz stated that the language in Section 3.01.04, regarding Keeping of Livestock for General Agriculture, Non-Intensive Agriculture, and Horse-Breeding Farms, was indicating that general agriculture would be a permitted use in the A (Agriculture), AR (Agricultural Residential), RA (Ranchette), and R-1 (Rural Residential) zoning districts. He stated that said intent was not what the zoning district map allows, and that general agriculture has been allowed in agriculture as a permitted use, and non-intensive agriculture has been allowed in other zoning districts. He stated that said language was not consistent with the chart, and modifications should be made to intensive and non-intensive agricultural. He stated that general agriculture was not and should not be permitted in the AR, RA, and R-1 zoning
districts, and that non-intensive agriculture should continue to be permitted in said districts.
Mr. Hoban stated that the language in Section 3.01.04, Key to Conditions in Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses, would be revised to reflect the language on Page 3 through Page 12 of the Land Development Regulations.
Commr. Swartz questioned whether Horse-Breeding Farms was in the definition and whether it was a general agriculture use, to which Mr. Hoban interjected that the intent of Section 3.01.04 was to address the individual in non-intensive agriculture who has horses on a small parcel of land, and wants to construct a barn adjacent to a neighbor's fence. Mr. Hoban indicated that a modification would be made to said language to provide clarification to the intent, and suggested that staff return to the Board with a revised non-controversial chart.
Discussion continued regarding Horse-Breeding Farms and the definition of non-intensive agriculture, at which time it was determined that staff would address the issue of horse farming as non-intensive agriculture.
Commr. Swartz clarified that the changes being proposed in Chapter III include clarification of the language under Section 3.01.04, Key to Conditions in Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses, regarding General Agriculture, Non-Intensive Agriculture and Horse-Breeding Farms, and that Horse-Breeding Farms would be deleted and moved into General Agriculture.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minor LDR Amendments, Chapter III, Zoning District Regulations, as amended.
Chapter VI
Mr. Hoban discussed language in Chapter VI of the Minor LDR Amendments under Section 6.02.02, Development Standards for Shorelines, Item 2, and requested that the following language be deleted: , unless vested for lesser setbacks,.
Ms. Strum explained that language pertaining to Mining, in Chapter VI, Page 12 through Page 23, had been previously located in Chapter XIV.
Commr. Swartz suggested that staff provide a cross reference at the end of Chapter VI to provide clarification.
Mr. Barker discussed Section 6.11.01, Connection Requirements, A. Central Water System and requested the following change: Page 24, Line 6 - insert and used after "connected". Discussion occurred regarding adding abandonment criteria to said language; at which time Mr. Barker indicated that abandonment criteria would be appropriate for Central Sewage System; however, was not necessary for Central Water System. He requested that abandonment criteria be added under Central Sewage System, as follows: Page 24, Line 6 -insert and abandoned after "connected".
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minor LDR Amendments, Chapter VI, Resource Protection Standards, as amended.
Chapter VII
Ms. Strum noted that an additional paragraph had been added under Chapter VII, B. General Requirements.
Commr. Hanson brought up for discussion language under General Requirements, which states that "All lots whether Lots of Records, Recorded Buildable Lots of Record or simply metes and bounds parcels, that are located within the Wekiva River Protection Area must go through either the Determination of Vested Rights or Non-Exempt Parcels of Land Application when applying for a building permit for a primary structure.". She noted that Lots of Record were vested and questioned why it was necessary to go forward for a vesting right. It was noted that additional language would be added under General Requirements making it consistent with vesting language in the Wekiva Amendment.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved Minor LDR Amendments, Chapter VII, Wekiva River, as amended.
Chapter VIII
Commr. Good requested clarification on language in Chapter VIII, Section 8.00.05, Development Review Criteria, regarding engineering design features, at which time a brief discussion occurred regarding said language.
Ms. Strum noted that one change was being requested in Chapter VIII, changing "Pollution Control" to Environmental Protection.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried, the Board approved Minor LDR Amendments, Chapter VIII, as
drafted.
The motion carried by a 4 - 1 vote.
Commr. Good voted "No".
Chapter IX
Ms. Strum presented the proposed changes to Chapter IX, Development Design and Improvement Standards.
Mr. Barker briefly discussed language under Section 9.02.04, Specific Requirements, which provides that all designated, planted and permanently maintained landscaped areas, unless specifically designated as open space or green area, shall have at least one (1) tree with a one(1) inch DBH at time of planting for every two hundred (200) square feet.
Commr. Gerber brought up for discussion language addressed in Section 9.04.03, Right-of-Way Provisions in regard to Obstructions, at which time it was the decision of the Board to change the word "erect" to construct.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved Minor LDR Amendments, Chapter IX, as amended.
COUNTY ATTORNEY/PLANNING
Mr. Hoban stated that the County Attorney's office has issued an opinion that a Lot Split could be done under the current regulations on a platted subdivision. He stated that the Mr. Rolon Reed, Interim County Attorney, has indicated the need for an interpretation from the Board regarding the question of whether a person can do a large lot split or a minor lot split on a platted land as opposed to just metes and bounds. He cited, as an example, Park Place, a platted subdivision, noting that, if said interpretation was followed, a lot split could be done in Park Place.
Discussion occurred regarding lot splits on platted lands, at which time Commr. Swartz stated that, to subdivide a tract in such a way that you increase and substantially change the density or character of the plat, created a problem. Mr. Bergmann interjected that, in effect, a platting procedure was being followed when the appropriate procedure would be to rezone the property to the proper zoning category.
Commr. Swartz stated that it may already be zoned and located in a land use that would allow those splits; however, it does not indicate that a plat should be change without replatting. He suggested that there should be a revision to the procedure.
Commr. Swartz made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Good, that lot splits not be approved in plats, that the determination of this Board was that a replat was necessary in a platted subdivision; and where a request to replat in existing subdivisions occurs, there be a procedure established which would require that the request proceed through the public hearing process.
Commr. Hanson requested that additional language be added to the motion which would indicate for the purpose of increased density, at which time Commr. Swartz indicated that he would prefer to address the request by Commr. Hanson separately.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which carried unanimously.
PLANNING (CONTINUED)
Minor LDR Amendments
Chapter XIII
Commr. Hanson made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Good, to approve Minor LDR Amendments, Chapter XIII.
Mr. Hoban requested that, under Section 13.06.02, Powers and Duties, Chapter 12 be added to the list for which the Code Enforcement Board shall have jurisdiction to hear and decide cases involving alleged violations.
Commr. Good withdrew his second to the motion.
Commr. Cadwell seconded the motion made by Commr. Hanson.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which carried unanimously.
Chapter XIV
Discussion occurred regarding Chapter XIV, Administration, pertaining to the Time Limitation and Exceptions for Comprehensive Plan Amendments, at which time Ms. Strum discussed the deletion of the waiver of time limits by the affirmative vote of the Board.
Mr. Hoban requested that the language on Page 29, Section 14.07.04, Wastewater Treatment Plants, be deleted, as follows: "Section 14.02.00 of these regulations (Environmental Protection Board Rules),". It was questioned whether the reference to Appendix C, wastewater design standards, was correct, and it was noted that said reference would be corrected.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved Minor LDR Amendments, Chapter XIV, as amended.
At this time, the Board scheduled a workshop on February 6, 1995, at 9:00 a.m., for the purpose of discussing the remainder of the issues in regard to the Lake County Land Development Regulations Amendments.
Mr. Knight requested clarification that it was the intent of the Board to go forth with the Lake County Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Lake County Land Development Regulation changes in regard to the Placement of Septic Tanks in the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern, and that the other LDR changes on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment are to be rolled into the next LDR Amendment cycle.
Commr. Swartz requested that staff provide the Board with the pros and cons of what was being proposed, and the alternatives available to the Board, in regard to the discussion on Platting Procedures and Requirements For Minor Subdivisions of Land.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 12:35 p.m.
___________________________
RHONDA H. GERBER, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
__________________________
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK
mf/1-25-95/1-27-95/boardmin