The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, June 26, 2001, 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: Catherine C. Hanson, Chairman; Robert A. Pool, Vice Chairman; Jennifer Hill; and Debbie Stivender. Commissioners not present: Welton G. Cadwell. Others present were: Sanford A. Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager; Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney; Wendy Taylor, Executive Office Manager, Board of County Commissioner's Office; and Kathryn A. Schwartz, Deputy Clerk.
The Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance were led by Commr. Stivender.
AGENDA UPDATE
Commr. Hanson stated that she would like to add to the agenda a request from Ms. Barbara Newman, St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD), for a resolution supporting continued funding, through the state, of the Watershed Action Volunteer (WAV) program.
Mr. Sanford Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, stated that Mr. Terry Seawell, Acting Director of Emergency Services, Fire/Rescue, was present and would like to briefly update the Board on fireworks for the upcoming Fourth of July holiday, and the burn ban that has been in effect.
Mr. Minkoff stated that, under County Manager's Departmental Business, there was an addendum item to today's agenda regarding Interlocal Agreements with Solid Waste Management; that there were some city representatives present who wanted to address this issue.
WATER RESOURCES/ RESOLUTIONS/WATER AUTHORITY
Ms. Barbara Newman, Watershed Action Volunteer (WAV) coordinator for Lake County, informed the Board that, as of July 1, 2001, Ms. Cathy Benton has been hired to replace her in implementing the WAV program.
Ms. Newman stated that the main reason for her appearance today was the concern that the WAV program was going to be cut from the St. John's River Water Management District (SJRWMD) budget. She explained that WAV was a group of citizen volunteers, from 15 counties, who have been sponsored by SJRWMD since the mid-'90s. She stated that currently the program receives 50% of its financial backing from other outside sources. Ms. Newman described some of the accomplishments of the WAV program, such as water monitoring, training of volunteers, revegetation programs, education of the public in water conservation. She asked that the Board approve a resolution supporting the WAV program, for the entire region, to the SJRWMD Governing Board, attention Mr. William Kerr, Chairman, Post Office Box 1429, Palatka, Florida 32178-1429, to be received by their July 10, 2001, budget meeting. In closing, Ms. Newman expressed her appreciation for the support that the Board has given her in her efforts to lead the WAV program in Lake County through the past five or six years, stating that she hoped to be their number-one volunteer in the future.
Commr. Hanson stated that before the Board could continue to consider Ms. Newman's request, it would need a motion to put the item on the agenda.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the placement of Ms. Newman's request for a resolution, as stated, on the agenda.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
Commr. Hanson pointed out that Ms. Newman has done an outstanding job and that funding for the program was currently split between SJRWMD and the Lake County Water Authority (LCWA); that, certainly, it would be a loss not to continue the program that involves so many volunteers from the community. Ms. Newman stated that the LCWA has drafted a resolution in their support and was certain that a resolution from the Board would add a lot of strength to her endeavors.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution No. 2001-120, in support of the WAV program, to be sent to the SJRWMD Governing Board, as stated above, to assist in acquiring funding for the WAV program.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
COMMISSIONERS
Commr. Hanson stated that Commr. Cadwell would not be present today; that he was on vacation.
UPDATE FROM EMERGENCY SERVICES/FIRE PROTECTION/
OUTDOOR RECREATION/COUNTY MANAGER
Mr. Terry Seawell, Fire Chief, Lake County Fire Department, gave an update on the use
of fireworks and the ban on open burning (to be disseminated via press release), as follows: He stated that, earlier this month, Governor Jeb Bush lifted the ban on fireworks. He stated that due to the recent rain in the County, Emergency Services does not see the need to take any action as far as limiting the sale of legal fireworks in the County, however, emphasizing caution in their use. He stated that, effective today, Emergency Services was lifting the ban on open burning, again due to the recent rain in the County, which has improved the drought index.
Mr. Sanford Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, emphasized that people are still required to obtain the necessary permits for open burning, stressing the need, both in burning and the use of fireworks, for people to be careful.
COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
CONTRACTS, LEASES AND AGREEMENTS/MUNICIPALITIES
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT/ADDENDUM NO. 1
Mr. Bill Gilley, Senior Director of Solid Waste Management Services, requested permission to put the cities of Umatilla, Eustis, Mount Dora, and Fruitland Park, and the town of Howey-in-the-Hills on notice that the County does not intend to renew the Interlocal Agreements for solid-waste removal for the upcoming year as a result of the implementation of the Universal Collection System, which will include a 1-1-1 level of service, being once-a-week garbage, once-a-week recycling, and once-a-week yard-waste collection. Mr. Gilley stated that they are in the process of negotiating the rates with the haulers for the changed level of service. He stated that they are doing away with the method of residential customers, as well as cities, paying a flat fee.
Mr. Sanford Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, stated that he, Commr. Cadwell, Mr. Gilley and Mr. Jeff Cooper of Solid Waste Management Services, Support Services, met with Mr. Michael Stearman, City Manager, and Mr. Jim Myers, City Clerk, City of Eustis (City). He stated that Mr. Myers was present today to address some issues that the City had with the above changes. Mr. Minkoff explained that requesting approval to notify just signals the County's intent not to renew the interlocal agreements but that the County was open to discussing modifications to the agreements or requests for short-term extensions, which would help the cities and towns in dealing with their residents.
Mr. Myers addressed the Board, stating that the City applauds the County for going ahead with the Universal Collection System. However, he pointed out, one of the shortfalls that they were not aware of was the elimination of their Interlocal Agreement. He stated that at this point in time the City was uncertain as to what effect this was going to have on their customers, who, for approximately six years, have had fixed disposal rates that they were paying to the County. He stated that the City was uncomfortable with the information that the County provided, and, without further generation studies being done, they were looking at, just in disposal fees, approximately a 36% increase to their customers. He encouraged the Board to grant the City a transition period, during which it would do its own generation studies, so as to assure that the new costs passed on to their solid-waste customers were not more than necessary. Mr. Myers thought that maybe six months would be enough time in which to do their studies. Realizing, however, that the interlocal agreements expire on September 30, 2001, he stated he would welcome as much time as is possible. Mr. Minkoff assured Mr. Myers that the County would continue to meet and talk with the cities; that the County also wanted to make sure that its residents were not paying too much.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved Solid Waste Management's request to notify the cities of Umatilla, Eustis, Mount Dora, and Fruitland Park, and the town of Howey-in-the-Hills that the County is not electing to renew the interlocal agreements regarding the payment and application of Solid Waste System fees.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - ROAD VACATION
PETITION NUMBER 960 - BY PENNACHIO - CLERMONT AREA - DISTRICT 2
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, addressed the Board to discuss Petition Number 960, by Pennachio, represented by Mr. Robert Q. Williams, Esquire, to vacate an easement located in the Clermont area, the south side of Lake Minnehaha. Mr. Stivender stated that several issues have been addressed concerning this easement. There were some utility issues; there was a private easement; there were some lot splits. He stated that, all in all, this piece of right of way, which is right off of Lakeshore Drive, would be vacated. He noted that the two lots are owned by the same person at this time and that they have legal access; that the lots on the other side have legal access. Mr. Stivender stated there is a lot deviation but that it has been taken care of and an agreement has been worked out so that a private easement will be given if this lot were ever to be developed. Also, they have agreed to give a utility easement. With everything worked out as stated, Mr. Stivender recommended approval.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. It was noted that the applicant and the applicant's representative were present.
Mr. Robert Q. Williams, Esquire, applicant's representative, addressed the Board, stating that he was available to answer any questions. There was no opposition to the request.
There being no further public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved Petition Number 960, by Pennachio, to vacate easement in S31, T22, R26, recorded in the replat of Minnehaha Terrace, in the Clermont area - Commission District 2, Resolution Number 2001-116.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - ROAD VACATION
PETITION NUMBER 961 - BY HAZELRIGG - LEESBURG AREA - DISTRICT 1
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, addressed the Board to discuss Petition Number 961, by Hazelrigg, represented by Mr. Steven J. Richey, Esquire, to vacate a utility easement located in the Pennbrooke Fairways Subdivision, Leesburg. He stated that it is a very small piece, four-tenths of a foot in depth, encroaching into a utility easement, and recommended approval to vacate.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. It was noted that the applicant was not present but that the applicant's representative was present.
Mr. Steven J. Richey, Esquire, applicant's representative, addressed the Board, stating that he was available to answer any questions. There was no opposition to the request.
There being no further public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved Petition Number 961, by Hazelrigg, to vacate utility easement located in S19, T19, R24, recorded in the Pennbrooke Fairways Subdivision, in the Leesburg area - Commission District 1, Resolution Number 2001-117.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - ROAD VACATION
PETITION NUMBER 962 - BY ROHLAND A. JUNE, II
GROVELAND AREA - DISTRICT 2
Mr. Jim Stivender, Senior Director of Public Works, addressed the Board to discuss Petition Number 962, by Rohland A. June, II, to vacate two utility easements, near South Lake High School, Groveland. Mr. Stivender stated that the easements were dedicated on the plat as 8-foot easements, which would be a total of 16 feet. He stated that the easements were supposed to be a total of 10 feet, which would be 5 feet each side of the property line. Mr. Stivender requested that the 8-foot easements be vacated on each property line and that they be rededicated at 5-foot easements each.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. It was noted that the applicant was not present, and there was no opposition to the request. There being no public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved Petition Number 962, by Rohland A. June, II, to vacate utility easements in S15, T22S, R25E, recorded in Marsh Hammock, Phase 1, in the Groveland area - Commission District 2, Resolution Number 2001-118.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - REZONINGS
CASE NUMBER CUP 01/6/2-2 - GERHARD AND TERRY NICKERI
P. MARC RAZZANO, ACME TOWERS - CUP IN A
TRACKING NUMBER 90-01-CUP
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, informed the Board that the case has been withdrawn by the applicant.
CASE NUMBER PH 37-01-2 - GRAFTON GROVES, INC.
MICHAEL F. LEE - R-2 to A
TRACKING NUMBER 42-01-Z
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, informed the Board that the applicant, Michael F. Lee, is requesting down-zoning ,from R-2 to Agricultural (being in a rural land use), on approximately 80 acres. She stated that this request is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and recommends approval. She stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission had no opposition.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. It was noted that the applicant was present and that the applicant's representative, Mr. Robert Morris, Esquire, was present, and that there was no opposition to the request. There being no public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved Case Number PH 37-01-2, Grafton Groves, Inc./Michael F. Lee, R-2 (Estate Residential) to A (Agriculture district) to allow for those uses permitted in the Agricultural zoning district, Tracking Number 42-01-Z, Ordinance Number 2001-91.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
CASE NO. CUP 01/6/1-1 - CHARLES AND ORPHA COWARD
LINDA FORD - CUP IN A
TRACKING NUMBER 89-01-CUP
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, addressed the Board and explained that the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in Agricultural for care of the infirm. She stated that the property involves five acres and is in an urban land use; although, technically, it is in a rural area. Mr. Farrell stated that staff is recommending approval, the applicant having demonstrated the medical need. However, she requested that the following language, originally recommended as a condition of approval, be stricken from the ordinance (found at section C, page 2): "When the second mobile home is removed, any dedicated right of way will be returned to the property owner." She stated that staff was reasonably sure that the Dolan test would not require the dedication of a right of way for the care of the infirm, thereby eliminating the need for the said language, feeling that it would ultimately cloud the ordinance.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. It was noted that the applicant was present, and there was no opposition to the request. There being no public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved Case Number CUP 01/6/1-1, Charles and Orpha Coward/Linda Ford, CUP in A (Agriculture) for a temporary placement of a mobile home for care of an infirm relative, and striking the following language, "When the second mobile home is removed, any dedicated right of way will be returned to the property owner." Tracking Number 89-01-CUP, Ordinance Number 2001-92.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
CASE NUMBER PH 38-01-4 - ANDREW BARTHA - SILVER BASE, INC.
TED WICKS, WICKS CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. - AR TO A
TRACKING NUMBER 83-01-Z
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, addressed the Board and explained that the owner is requesting rezoning from Agriculture Residential to Agriculture, involving 60 acres in a rural land use. She stated that the request is consistent for the land use and provides for agricultural uses on the property. She stated that staff was recommending approval of the request and that the Planning and Zoning Commission also recommended approval.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment.
Commr. Hanson pointed out that of special note was the fact that all of the rezoning requests thus far have been for down zoning, back to Agriculture, thereby resulting in a reduction in densities in the County.
It was noted that the applicant and his representative, Mr. Ted Wicks, President of Wicks Consulting Services, Inc., were present, and there was no opposition to the request. There being no public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Commr. Hanson noted that the request was in District 4, and she had no objection.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved Case Number PH 38-01-4, Andrew Bartha - Silver Base, Inc./Ted Wicks, Wicks Consulting Services, Inc., rezoning from AR (Agriculture Residential) to A (Agriculture) to allow for those uses permitted in the Agricultural zoning district, Tracking Number 83-01-Z, Ordinance Number 2001-93.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
CASE NUMBER PH 39-01-2 - MINI-OMNI LAND TRUST
HIGHLAND REAL ESTATE - A TO R-3
TRACKING NUMBER 85-01-Z
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, informed the Board that this was a request for rezoning from Highland Real Estate Corporation, which is represented by Mr. Dale Ladd. She stated that the subject property was a relatively small residential parcel, representing 18 acres in south Lake County, and it is in the Urban Expansion Land Use category. Ms. Farrell stated that, after using the Urban Area Residential Density Point System (Point System), this particular request was difficult for staff due to the project not accumulating enough points to get to the desired density that was being requested. She explained that ,in this particular case, the numbers ran at 2.5 units per acre, and the request was for an R-3 zoning designation, which would not be consistent with the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) for this request; however, it being a small piece of property, they are only looking at comparing 45 units to 36 units. Ms. Farrell stated that staff's recommendation is for denial of R-3 (Medium Residential) zoning , and approval of R-2 (Estate Residential). She stated that at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting there was a lot of discussion as far as growth in the area, trends, and septic tanks, which reinforced staff's recommendation for R-2 zoning. She explained that staff was more comfortable with the lower density not only because of the Point System, but it also lessened the potential impact as far as urban services in the area. She stated that many of the lots around the north and west sides of Sawmill Lake are one acre or larger, so there is a consistency question; however, the property is in the Urban Expansion Land Use category. She explained that people who have property in that type of land-use designation do like to see the urban services available. In closing, Ms. Farrell stated that staff was recommending approval to R-2 and denial of R-3. She stated that at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting the recommendation was for approval to R-3, with a 7-0 vote, and one letter of opposition.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. It was noted that the applicant's representative, Mr. Dale Ladd, was not present at this point in the proceedings.
Ms. Peggy Cox, a local resident and former head of RURAL, a grassroots group which has opposed development at the intersection of the subject property, addressed the Board in opposition to the request for R-3 zoning. She encouraged the Board to grant a lower density, possibly to R-1 zoning, pointing out that across the road from the subject property is the Green Swamp area, of critical state concern, which is a high recharge area for water and that too many septic tanks in the area could pose a potential problem. She stated that the intersection at the subject property is zoned Urban Expansion on three of its corners and that on the east side is the old Clermont landfill. Ms. Cox stated that the landfill would create a problem if more intense development were to come in. In closing, Ms. Cox expressed her concern that, if R-3 zoning were to be approved, a future precedence would be set that would allow for the approval of higher densities in the surrounding areas. She asked that the Board deny R-3 and consider a lower density for the area.
Commr. Hanson noted that the applicant's representative was present at this point in the proceedings.
Mr. Dale Ladd, applicant's representative, addressed the Board in support of the request for rezoning to R-3. To give a brief history, he stated that originally the property was zoned R-6 and was then rezoned back to Agriculture; that it was then sold to Mini-Omni Land Trust (Mini-Omni), which bought the property with the idea that it wanted to use the property for commercial purposes. Having requested rezoning, it went as far as approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission, but, due to the amount of opposition by the residents in the area, Mini-Omni chose to withdraw its application, feeling that it would not be successful in acquiring Commercial zoning for the property. Mr. Ladd stated that last year a group known as Lake Utilities requested that a neighboring piece of property be rezoned in order to install a water tank but later backed down due to the Board experiencing a massive amount of opposition to their request. Subsequently, he stated, it appeared to Mini-Omni that probably the best use for their 18-acre parcel would be to request Residential. Mr. Ladd felt that they did not receive a massive amount of opposition to their request due to the fact that the request was for Residential and not Commercial.
Mr. Ladd stated that density and compatibility were the issues here and that Residential would be the proper zoning for this parcel. He directed the Board's attention to the zoning map (found in the Board backup material), which depicts the property in question, and stated that the property is surrounded, basically, by R-6, with the exception of the County landfill. He went on to discuss the various zoning in the area, which allowed anywhere from 2.5 units per acre to 2.8 units per acre. He stated that no new precedence was being set in the area with this request; that it was more of an infill situation. Mr. Ladd emphasized that their request for R-3 zoning was not to build three units per acre, which the Point System would not allow, but in order to build the 2.5 units per acre (a total of nine units) that was necessary to make the project viable. He pointed out that R-2 would only allow a maximum density of two units per acre.
Mr. Ladd discussed the water recharge area, stating that all rainwater would be retained in a retention pond located on site. He stated central water would be provided, thereby eliminating the problem of wells going dry. Lastly, he pointed out that this was, indeed, an urban expansion area; that the Comprehensive Plan allows for up to four units per acre. He opened the floor for any questions the Board might have, asking for the opportunity to rebut any comments in opposition.
Ms. Nancy Fullerton, a concerned citizen and President of Save Our Lakes Committee (SOLC), addressed the Board in opposition to the proposed R-3 rezoning request and in opposition to staff's recommendation for R-2 zoning. She pointed out that the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Mr. Ladd's request for R-3 contrary to staff's recommendation of R-2. She stated SOLC agrees with staff's analysis of keeping the density low. She pointed out that the applicant had made a similar request on June 7, 2000, having withdrawn it from the Board's agenda of June 27, 2000, with staff, at that time, recommending R-1 zoning.
Ms. Fullerton stated that SOLC has opposed most of the rezoning in south Lake in the past two years due to the potential negative effect that urban sprawl would have on the County's water supply and quality, and its schools and roads in order to keep pace with the growth in the area and the resulting quality of life upon its residents. She stated that SOLC believes that limiting the density in the area is the only way to control the negative impacts, and preferring staff's recommendation of last year of R-1. She described the surrounding zoning and housing developments, concerned that Mini-Omni's request would set a precedence for future higher-density developments. There was also the concern of the cumulative effect of septic tanks in the very sensitive Green Swamp area. She agreed with staff in that the critical issue in this case is determining what zoning was appropriate for the area. She disagreed with Mr. Ladd's analysis of the dominant development pattern in the surrounding areas around the subject property, feeling that it was a much lower density than described by him.
In closing, Ms. Fullerton asked that the Board govern itself in terms of what is the best growth management for this area, taking into account conservation of the Floridan aquifer and the lessening of cumulative demands on facilities. She felt that the best option at this time was to limit the pressures of development by limiting the density of development, denying the applicant's request for R-3 zoning, and, at the very least, accepting staff's recommendation of R-2.
Ms. Shawn Gurbacki, speaking as a resident, concerned citizen, taxpayer, owner, and a registered nurse, addressed the Board in opposition to the proposed rezoning request. She displayed for the Board's review Opposition's Composite Exhibit A, consisting of a newspaper article from the Lake Sentinel dated April 29, 2001, and entitled, "Clermont is flush with septic woes," and three computer-generated photographs depicting the property to the east of the subject property and which, in her opinion, depicts pipes for the ventilation of toxic gases from an unlined, closed landfill that was designed in the seventies. She questioned whether any studies had been done to determine what, if any, levels of toxicity were emitting from these pipes. She stated that the community services in the area were already overburdened; that the water quantity and quality was compromised; and that septic tanks were a must in the area due to no sewer service provided.
In closing, Ms. Gurbacki asked that the Board minimize the impact to the area, pointing out that it is a transitional zone, and to come down in density. She asked the Board to consider if not R-1 zoning then R-2 zoning, to help minimize the negative impact that would occur in this area.
Mr. Robert Smith, President of the Voters' League to Control Development, addressed the Board in opposition to the proposed rezoning request. He stated his concern at the number of houses that have been built in the subject area in an area where there should be a lot of green spaces. He expressed his desire that land be set aside for these green areas, fearing that if the County waits much longer it will be too late. He stated that putting even two houses per acre, in conjunction with the existing development, was too much. Mr. Smith stated that he does not consider what Mr. Ladd has proposed as infill. In his opinion, R-1 would be the right choice, and if not that then R-2. Commr. Hanson inquired of Mr. Smith if this was the type of property that he would like to see be bought by the Park System as a preserve. He responded that he would like to discuss with the Board, at a future date, their proposal for buying land. He hoped for a more systematic approach to preserving green spaces, feeling that it was already too late; that the subject area is already developing. He recommended that green spaces be developed with the big picture in mind and not on a parcel-by-parcel basis. He pointed out that there are many members of the community who would be willing to sit down and participate in discussions for future planning of the County.
Mr. Ladd addressed the Board in response to the above opposition, stating that the subject property is already in an urban expansion area and that he does not believe the request leads to a precedence being set for further expansion, considering that it is already surrounded by transitional land uses, suburban land uses, and open conservation to the south. He emphasized that the property to the south, if they had an updated photo, would show streets with houses and a density of about 2.8 units per acre, with some developments being close to three units per acre. To the west is the Green Swamp transition area that would be protected from any kind of precedence that this request may set. He expressed his disagreement with the statement that 2.5 units per acre would be high density, stating that it is certainly not maximizing what the Comprehensive Plan would allow, which is four units per acre. In closing, Mr. Ladd stated that they intend to abide by the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Restrictions (LDRs), which would be a maximum of 2.5 units per acre.
There being no further public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Commr. Pool expressed his appreciation for all the input given today. He stated that he found it perplexing that, instead of talking about hundreds or thousands of units, they were talking about a nine-unit difference, from 36 units to 45 units. He addressed staff's Findings, (found in the Board backup material), Sections C and G, respectively, and stated that, in his opinion, Mr. Ladd has proposed exactly as stated. He noted that the zoning map that has been referred to does not reflect what is currently located in the area. Ms. Farrell confirmed this, stating that all they have are 1998 aerials. Commr. Pool stated that he felt the request is truly infill of what is in the surrounding area and strongly felt that nine units would not hurt the area.
Commr. Hill inquired of Ms. Farrell, stating that she did not have any evidence of the ventilation pipes and toxic gases that Ms. Gurbacki was referring to earlier. Commr. Hanson clarified that Ms .Gurbacki was talking about a landfill. Commr. Hanson asked Ms. Farrell to elaborate on the topic, the location and exactly what it is. Ms. Farrell explained that it is a County landfill on Loghouse Road, about 80 acres in size. She stated that basically what was depicted in the computer-generated photographs were the mandatory gas vents for the landfill; that it was not toxic and was monitored by Water Resources and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). She stated that it is one of the County's closed landfills, with monitoring plans in place.
Commr. Stivender expressed her agreement with Commr. Pool, explaining that Section H of staff's Findings goes along with what he had stated earlier.
Commr. Hanson stated that she felt the Point System, as explained to her today, was very good, showing exactly what the requirements were to get a higher density, and showing that the fire protection was there and the water supply. She commended staff for the added information of the Point System. She stated that she would support rezoning to R-2, particularly because of the septic tanks, and agreed that nine houses was not a real issue.
Commr. Pool stated that, under the Point System, the applicant meets the 2.5-unit requirement exactly, and that is the key issue. He pointed out that Mr. Ladd was not requesting R-3 to elicit the maximum use but in order to get the 2.5 units per acre. He stated that nine units may have a cumulative effect but was not going to affect the area and, for that reason, would support approval of the request for rezoning from A (Agriculture) to R-3 (Medium Residential).
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hill, and carried by a 3-1 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved Case Number PH 39-01-2, Mini-Omni Land Trust/Highland Real Estate, A (Agriculture) to R-3 (Medium Residential), Tracking Number 85-01-Z, Ordinance Number 2001-94.
Commr. Hanson voted, "No," stating that she does agree that the request is for infill, and feeling that one unit to five acres, or even one unit to one acre would be too low of a density for the subject area.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
CASE NUMBER PH 40-01-2 - THOMAS FLEMING
REGENCY REALTY GROUP - A TO CP
TRACKING NUMBER 87-01-CP
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, addressed the Board regarding the applicant's request for rezoning. She stated that the parcel was currently zoned Agriculture, with an old Conditional Use Permit (CUP) attached; that the size of the parcel was a little over 14 acres and located at the intersection of State Road 50 and County Road 455. She pointed out that the intersection is in an urban expansion area. Ms. Farrell stated that the parcel does meet commercial-location criteria and that rezoning to Planned Commercial (CP) would fill some of the needs in the area for commercial services. She pointed out that there were some limitations, as outlined in the proposed ordinance, on the square footage; that the applicant was aware of these limitations and has agreed to abide by them. She stated that staff is recommending approval and that the Planning and Zoning Commission also recommended approval, 6-0, with no opposition. She stated there was some discussion with the Public Works Department as far as right of way and working out some issues with the roadway.
Commr. Stivender stated that she also has spoken with staff in Public Works regarding the subject roadway and confirmed that this was an area where Public Works has already been working on a project to take care of some problems at the intersection.
Ms. Farrell confirmed that today's request for rezoning and the roadway issues associated with it would be in conjunction with the previously started project. She stated that she believes Public Works is going to straighten out the roadway and fix the alignment.
Commr. Pool also expressed his concerns about the subject intersection, wanting to be assured that the road alignment was not going to be affected by anything that is being done today regarding the rezoning. Ms. Farrell stated that, to the contrary, the roadway situation would be helped.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment.
Mr. Trevor Hall, Jr., Orlando, representing the owner, as well as working with the applicant, Regency Realty Group (the developer), addressed the Board in support of the proposed rezoning, stating that they were trying to get the road realignment done. He stated that the documents have not been signed as of yet but that it was in the process; that the realignment would allow for a 90-degree intersection at State Road 50 and CR 455 and provide for a traffic signal, thus making it a much safer intersection.
No one present wished to speak in opposition to the request. There being no further public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Mr. Sanford Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, disclosed that his daughter is employed by the applicant, Regency Realty Group, based out of Jacksonville, Florida. He stated that she was employed in such a capacity that he did not feel today's request would benefit her in any way.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved Case Number PH 40-01-2, Thomas Fleming/Regency Realty Group, A (Agriculture) to CP (Planned Commercial) to allow for C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) uses, Tracking Number 87-01-CP, Ordinance Number 2001-95.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
CASE NUMBER CUP 01/6/3-2 - LANGLEY GROVES, INC.
P. MARC RAZZANO, ACME TOWERS, INC. (BAY LAKE SITE)
CUP IN PUD - TRACKING NUMBER 91-01-CUP
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, addressed the Board and explained that the applicant was requesting that a 280-foot self-supporting lattice communication tower be placed in the middle of an old Planned Unit Development (PUD) that has been down-zoned through a special master process. She stated that the size of the parcel is a 21-acre parent tract in the Green Swamp area, very rural in nature, completely surrounded by Agriculture zoning, and which is located off of SR 33. She stated that staff has recommended approval; that the Planning and Zoning Commission has approved the request by a 5-0 vote; and that the Board of Adjustment has granted a variance for the buffer requirement and approved the request by a 7-0 vote.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment.
Mr. Marc Razzano, representing the applicant, addressed the Board stating that it is difficult to present anything more effective than what the County's staff has already presented. He respectfully submitted the application for approval, stating that he was available for any questions that the Board might have.
No one present wished to speak in opposition to the request. There being no further public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Commr. Pool made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Stivender, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve Case Number CUP 01/6/3-2, Langley Groves, Inc., P. Marc Razzano/ACME Towers, Inc. (Bay Lake Site), for a CUP in PUD (Planned Unit Development - "Pretty Lake") for placement of a 280-foot self-supporting lattice communication tower, Tracking Number 91-01-CUP, Ordinance Number 2001-96.
Under discussion, Commr. Stivender questioned the waiver of the landscaping requirements and the necessity for approval by the Board of Adjustment.
Ms. Farrell stated that, if the applicant requests it, the landscaping may be waived by the Board of Adjustment. She explained that the only time a request for a tower will go before the Board of Adjustment is either to have it be centrally located or set back from residential properties.
Commr. Hill noted that the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the request by a vote of 5-1 as opposed to 5-0. She also noted that the Board of Adjustment had granted a variance as to the location of the tower. She questioned whether the variance language was included in the motion that had been made. Commr. Pool confirmed that it was.
Under discussion, Commr. Hill stated that she has noticed a lot of these towers dotting the landscape and expressed her concern that in certain areas there could be overlapping of the towers. She stated that the County was looking in this particular district for a tower and asked Mr. Razzano if the County were to need a tower for fire/rescue and Emergency Medical Services would this be an area that the County could lease the site from them.
Mr. Razzano stated that the tower was open for public use; that the tower itself could probably co-locate four or five carriers. To unify the 9-1-1 system, he stated there would probably be space available for it.
Mr. Sanford Minkoff, County Attorney/Interim County Manager, stated that the County is already looking at all of the existing towers to avoid building their own towers.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
CASE NUMBER CUP 01/6/4-4 - RICHARD AND CAROL C. CAVILL
TY MAXEY, AMERICAN TOWER MANAGEMENT, INC.
CUP IN AR - TRACKING NUMBER 92-01-CUP
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, addressed the Board explaining that the request was for a 250-foot self-support lattice tower. She stated that the existing zoning was Agriculture Residential and that the property in question is located in the Altoona area, north Lake County, a very rural area, and surrounded mainly by Agriculture zoning. She stated that staff has recommended approval. She stated that, based on the rural nature of the area, the request meets the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan; that staff knew of no environmental concerns, and it was found to be a consistent request. She noted that there was no written opposition but that two neighbors did come and speak at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Ms. Farrell stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 4-2; that this particular request also went to the Board of Adjustment, which granted a variance to the buffers on June 6, 2001.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. It was noted that the applicant was present.
Mr. Ty Maxey, representing the applicant, addressed the Board. He asked to reserve his time to respond to any questions.
Mr. Tyler Brackney addressed the Board in opposition to the proposed tower stating that, since he resided within the buffer zone of the tower, he was concerned about safety issues, in particular the fact that the proposed site was within a military fly zone. He stated that even though the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) believes that the military planes fly over 500 feet, that in this area they do not; they fly lower. He urged the Board to deny the application so as to limit the County's liability. He stated that the Department of Forestry could possibly provide an alternative site. Mr. Brackney recommended one site in particular, being in a power easement, which, through a variance process, could be obtained. He pointed out that many of these towers have been in power easements. He hoped that this approach would also help retain property values in the area. He acknowledged that the cellular service in the area was weak, but adequate.
Mr. Ty Maxey responded to the opposition by stating that they have received from the FAA a determination of no hazard. At this time, Mr. Maxey submitted Applicant's Exhibit A, a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation, from the Federal Aviation Administration, to Sprint PCS, dated October 6, 1999. He reminded the Board that they are regulated by the FAA with regard to the air space. He also submitted Applicant's Exhibit B, a letter from Mr. Jim Thorsen, the Seminole Ranger District, to American Tower Corporation, dated March 7, 2001. He stated they have looked at the other properties that Mr. Brackney has suggested as alternative sites, in particular the one situated in a power easement in the Ocala National Forest. He read portions of Applicant's Exhibit B into the record, which states, in summary, that the Forest Service does not prefer to be involved in this type of a request and normally encourages companies to explore other opportunities located on private land.
Mr. Richard Cavill, owner, addressed the Board, stating that he has lived on the subject parcel since 1972. He confirmed that the airspace above the property is a fly zone for Navy aircraft but that they fly much higher than the tower. He stated his primary concern was, living in a rural area, that his family frequently goes without regular telephone service, due to power failures and frequent lightning strikes; that, over the last five years, his telephone service has been marginal. He stated he was present representing most of his neighbors, who were in favor of the tower. He pointed out that the tower would not be observable from any point in the woods nor from neighboring properties, due to the dense woods; however, you could see it from the roadway.
There being no further public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Commr. Hanson stated that she was aware that there was a tremendous need for a tower in the subject area, especially up through Astor where you are completely without coverage. She stated that she was supportive of the request.
Commr. Stivender made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Pool, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, to include the variance from the Board of Adjustment, and approve Case Number CUP 01/6/4-4, Richard and Carol C. Cavill/Ty Maxey, American Tower Management, Inc., for a CUP in AR (Agriculture Residential) for placement of a 250-foot self-support lattice tower with equipment shelter and ancillary facilities, Tracking Number 92-01-CUP, Ordinance Number 2001-97.
Under discussion, Commr. Hill stated she had a concern with them going against the Land Development Regulations with the buffers, especially in critical areas. She stated that she is aware that service is needed in the area, but it is a critical environmental area.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which carried by a 3-1 vote.
Commr. Hill voted, "No."
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
RECESS AND REASSEMBLY
At 10:18 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would take a ten-minute recess.
CASE NUMBER PH 41-01-4 - EUGENE CALABRESE
GREGORY P. GERJEL, ESQ./R-1 TO A
TRACKING NUMBER 88-01-Z
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, addressed the Board explaining that this was a request, in the rural Wekiva River Protection Area (WRPA), involving 39 acres, to rezone from R-1 (Rural Residential) to A (Agriculture). She made note that the request was part of Agenda Item Number 10. She stated that the owner, Mr. Eugene Calabrese, was present and represented by his attorney, Mr. Gregory P. Gerjel, Esquire. She stated that staff was recommending approval; that the request was consistent with the Wekiva Plan in this particular area.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment.
Commr. Hanson disclosed that she has had conversations with Mr. Gerjel and with various individuals in the area who were in opposition to the request, with records of these conversations on file in the Board's office. Commr. Pool disclosed that he also has had conversations with Mr. Gerjel but that he has not had contact, other than through correspondence, with individuals who were in opposition to the request. Commr. Stivender and Commr. Hill disclosed that they too have had contact with Mr. Gerjel and individuals in opposition to the request. It was noted that, in fact, each of the Board members had spoken to the applicant's attorney, Mr. Gerjel, prior to today's meeting. Ms. Farrell further explained that staff has separated the request for rezoning from the request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Commr. Hanson and Commr. Stivender disclosed, then, that their discussions applied to both cases.
Mr. Gerjel, appearing on behalf of the owner, Mr. Calabrese, and Westwind Ranch, distributed Applicant's Exhibit C, a document containing applicant's position statement and related supporting documentation. He stated that he concurred with staff's recommendation and pointed out to the Board that Chapter VII of the Wekiva River Regulations, Section 7.00.03, Wekiva River Protection Area Overlay District 2, speaks to the purpose and intent of this area wherein it asks the Board to provide an area where low density, rural development can occur, preserving the continued use of land for traditional agricultural purposes, while encouraging rural uses which would prevent any further encroachment by urban uses, and to further conserve agricultural uses of the land. He explained that Mr. Calabrese has approximately 500 acres in the area, of which more than half is zoned Agriculture, and that he would also like to see this particular parcel zoned Agriculture, which would be consistent with the area. Mr. Gerjel made note that the Florida Trail runs through the subject parcel of land.
Commr. Hanson inquired if there was any opposition to Agenda Item Number 9, the case requesting rezoning from R-1 to A.
Ms. Lisa Petrey, an adjoining land owner and teacher, addressed the Board in opposition to the rezoning request. She wanted the Board to be aware that Mr. Calabrese, if granted the request for rezoning, has stated his intention to expand his Westwind Ranch that is currently in operation and surrounded by state lands. She expressed her concern over the types of animals that Mr. Calabrese intended to put in the specially designed, state-of-the art cages that are located on his property at this time.
Ms. Petrey discussed the fact that before the circus compound was built her family would be outdoors quite a bit and knew how to deal with the wild animals that were native to the area, such as bears or snakes. Now, she stated, she was concerned for her family's safety, if one of the lions housed in the area were to escape and get on her property. She inquired as to what guarantee, if the rezoning request were granted, her family would have that the livestock would truly be just cows, pigs, and chickens. Ms. Petrey stated that, from December to March, during the winter circus season, they have heard lions roaring, even, at one time, calling Commr. Hanson and asking for her help. She stated that she has heard a lot of conflicting stories regarding the operation of the circus compound. She asked the Board to look at the situation very closely and the possible intentions of the owner. She stated her opinion that if the zoning change were approved it would cause a whole new set of problems, with no way for the County to enforce the zoning and what would be housed in the existing barns and cages. She emphasized her desire for a guarantee from the Board that there would only be livestock, such as cows, chickens, horses, pigs, goats, and sheep, housed in the compound, and she pointed out that Mr. Calabrese currently houses exotic animals on his Westwind Ranch, with a license to do so.
Commr. Hanson reminded Ms. Petrey that the CUP issue, Agenda Item Number 10, would be dealt with later, after the rezoning issue. Ms. Petrey pointed out that without approval to Agriculture zoning, Mr. Calabrese could not keep large exotic animals on his property. Commr. Hanson explained that he, however, could go anywhere on his Agriculture zoned land and apply for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Commr. Hanson again asked that the discussion remain on the issues surrounding rezoning. Ms. Petrey pointed out that the owner currently houses exotic animals on his Agriculture-zoned land without a CUP.
Mr. Keith Schue, speaking as Chairman of the Wekiva Issue for the Central Florida Sierra Club and Vice Chair of the Central Florida Sierra Club (Sierra Club), addressed the Board in opposition to the rezoning request. He submitted, for the record, Opposition's Exhibit B, a copy of a one-page letter, dated June 26, 2001, from himself to the Board. He stated that the Sierra Club understands that the rezoning request and CUP are being considered as two separate items by the Board and that, at this time, the Board was only considering the rezoning request. He discussed the fact that normally he would not be speaking in opposition to a request for rezoning from R-1 to A in the WRPA. He stated, however, that the Sierra Club was reluctant to support this particular rezoning request due to the owner's intentions for the use of the property, namely, large carnivorous cats (lions and tigers). Mr. Schue stated his belief that Mr. Calabrese was under the misconception that these exotic animals could be housed on the property under the definition of livestock if the land were rezoned to Agriculture and who also believed that this was possible even without a CUP. Mr. Schue stated that this is not true; that Section 4 of the County's Land Development Regulations (LDRs) defines livestock as, "animals of the equine, ratite, bovine, or swine class, including goats, sheep, mules, horses, hogs, cattle, ostriches and other grazing animals." These, he stated, are farm animals, grazing animals, not carnivores for commercial use. Mr. Schue explained that Section 7.00.04 of the LDRs further identifies the type of livestock permitted within the WRPA, under Agriculture zoning, as, "mules, burros, horses, cattle, sheep and goats." He stated that, to his knowledge, the County regulations do not provide for the housing of large exotic carnivores in the WRPA, even with Agriculture zoning.
In closing, Mr. Schue stated that the Sierra Club could not support the rezoning request unless a legal position is taken by the County Attorney that would preclude the housing of large exotic carnivores and, also, unless the Board were to affirm this interpretation as well.
Ms. Nancy Fullerton, President of Save Our Lakes Committee (SOLC), addressed the Board in opposition to the proposed rezoning. She stated that it possibly would have been more helpful for all involved that both Agenda Items 9 and 10 be heard together, due to the rezoning issue having such a direct effect on the CUP; that the purpose for the rezoning was to then obtain a CUP. She requested that the Board deny the request for rezoning due to the owner not obtaining the appropriate permits, as stated in Section 6.01.03, Parts A and B, of the LDRs. She stated that SOLC's opposition to the request has a lot to do with the illegal clearing, filling, and dredging of state-protected wetlands, the disregard for the Seminole State Forest, and violations of County code. She stated that Part B of Section 6.01.03 specifically requires approval from other agencies and states as follows:
For activities that are regulated by other agencies, a copy of all applicable permits from the agencies shall be submitted to the County which shall constitute compliance with this section.
Ms. Fullerton stated that there has been no such permit obtained from the St. John's River Water Management District (SJRWMD). She asked that the Board consider that fact and whether it has any bearing on if the rezoning should be allowed.
Ms. Jennifer D. McMurtray, Transportation and Wildlife Ecology Coordinator, Defenders of Wildlife, addressed the Board in opposition to the proposed rezoning. She submitted Opposition's Exhibit C, a letter dated June 26, 2001, from herself to the Board. She summarized her letter, stating that it refers to both the rezoning and CUP issues. She discussed the owner's activities within the WRPA (as listed in her letter). Ms. McMurtray stated that it appeared to her that the owner was retroactively obtaining permits. She pointed out, however, that some of the activities were just not appropriate in the WRPA, particularly commercial activities and the bringing in of large exotic carnivores when there are groups that are out there trying to protect the local wildlife. She felt that by approving the rezoning request it would be easier to find loopholes and for the misinterpretation of the definition of livestock.
In summary, Ms. McMurtray asked the Board to consider the fact that rezoning changes are a privilege and not something that the Board is obligated to grant. She requested that the Board deny the rezoning request and the CUP.
Mr. Bill Petrey, an adjoining property owner and representative of surrounding property owners, addressed the Board in opposition to the request. He stated that his family lives directly south of the subject property, within approximately 500 feet of the owner's operation. He submitted Opposition's Composite Exhibit D, containing copies of miscellaneous documents, such as letters, photographs, zoning maps, and petitions. He also submitted Opposition's Composite Exhibit E, containing a computer-generated photograph of the circus compound depicting open gates around the perimeter of the property, and a series of 15 color photographs depicting, among other things, damage that has been done to state property; the entrance to the Royal Trails Subdivision; the blind entrance to the subject property (being located on a curve); the entrance from Highway 44, going up toward the property and depicting an illegal road cut-in and paved over back to the property; another entrance to the Royal Trails Subdivision that leads to the subject property; damaged wetlands and forestry; a playground in the Royal Trails Subdivision; the state forest where dumping of animal waste has occurred; a fence line installed by the Division of Forestry.
Mr. Petrey highlighted some of the items found in Opposition's Composite Exhibit D, as follows:
Mr. Petrey stated that the subject property is in the middle of the WRPA; that the Royal Trails Subdivision is a wildlife refuge and bird sanctuary; and that the area also includes the black bear migration corridor from the Ocala National Forest to Wekiva Springs. He stated that millions of taxpayer dollars have been spent buying and establishing this corridor. His concern was that development of the circus compound has interrupted wildlife activity in the area. He reminded the Board that the SJRWMD is requiring the total restoration of state lands and permits for all work done in the area.
Mr. Petrey asked the Board to enforce the existing laws and not allow the requested rezoning or CUP. He asked the Board to consider the environmental issues and the safety of the residents who would be affected by this rezoning, and to show the local and state residents that Lake County is serious about protecting the most sensitive wetlands in Central Florida by enforcing the County's zoning and building codes. He asked that the Board not set a precedence by allowing Mr. Calabrese to house exotic large carnivores in Agriculture zoning, based on the operations at his Westwind Ranch. Mr. Petrey, as a final point, displayed a photograph (from Opposition's Composite Exhibit E) depicting the Florida Trail. He wanted to clarify that although the Florida Trail has been in place on the subject property for many years, as pointed out by Mr. Gerjel, it is, however, currently boarded off with "Posted" signs.
Mr. Robert Bauer, president of the Royal Trails Land Owners' Association, addressed the Board in opposition to the rezoning request, stating that, through an oversight on the part of their association (the land having been at one time a part of the Royal Trails Subdivision), the circus compound developed in the area without their knowledge or agreement. He explained that when the Royal Trails Subdivision initially failed, due to financial problems, Mr. Calabrese stepped in and bought this piece of land. He stated that today's request involves a lot of consideration by the Board, especially since there is a playground in their subdivision which is located adjacent to the subject property. If a lion or tiger were to escape, the consequences could be serious. For those reasons, he recommended that the rezoning request be turned down.
Mr. Robert Smith, President of the Voters' League to Control Development, addressed the Board in opposition. He questioned the validity of the Board's decision to not hear the rezoning and CUP request at the same time, feeling that it would be in the best interests of the citizens to go ahead and combine the two requests. Commr. Hanson stated that his point was well taken.
There being no further public comment, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed on Case Number PH 41-01-4, a request for rezoning from R-1 (Rural Residential) to A (Agriculture).
Commr. Hanson stated that, at this point, she saw no compelling reason to vote in favor of the rezoning, but that, on the other hand, she also had no particular problem granting the request for rezoning.
Commr. Pool stated that he appreciated the information brought forward by both sides. He felt the citizens had eloquently stated their concerns and stated that it was very difficult to either support or embrace anything that the owner has tried to accomplish today.
Commr. Pool made a motion to overturn the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and deny Case Number of PH 41-01-4, a request for rezoning from R-1 (Rural Residential) to A (Agriculture) to allow for those uses permitted in the Agricultural zoning district, Tracking Number 88-01-Z.
Commr. Hanson, realizing that she had not given the applicant and his counsel, Mr. Gerjel, the opportunity for rebuttal, apologized and suggested that Commr. Pool withdraw his motion. Accordingly, Commr. Pool withdrew his motion.
Mr. Gerjel stated that being lead to understand that the two matters would be handled separately, first the request for rezoning and then the request for a CUP, he tried to comply and so withheld much of his presentation. He was concerned about some of the peripheral information that has been put before the Board and to learn that this information was going to be permitted to bear on the issue. He asked the Board for permission to present the facts, from the applicant's perspective, and to address those issues that have been put before the Board by the opposition.
Mr. Gerjel clarified that the LDRs proclaim that the land in the WRPA is designed for agricultural uses and not allowing for urbanization or development inconsistent with the LDRs. He pointed out that the Board has heard opposition statements from many organizations but that not one has cited Florida Statute 604.5, which states that in land where there is an agricultural exemption (which the owner has), you do not need a permit for certain structures, such as a pole barn, cages, and fencing, some of the same structures found on the owner's property. In defense of the owner, Mr. Gerjel also explained that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) had directed the owner to erect a fence and that, in this process, some wetlands were disturbed. The SJRWMD then requested the owner to take some remediation measures.
Mr. Gerjel stated that he had two supporting videotapes that he would like to present for the Board's viewing, explaining that he had not shown them earlier due to the Board's request that he hold off presenting anything to do with the CUP. He stated that the one videotape would show the parcel in question and the surrounding area; that the other was a copy of the videotaped deposition of Lt. Richard Brown of the FFWCC.
Mr. Gerjel requested that the Board reopen the public hearing, giving the owner the opportunity to present evidence in support of his case.
Commr. Hanson stated that she would allow Mr. Gerjel all the time necessary to present his case in support of the applicant but asked that the presentation by Ms. Mary Beth Corrigan, Managing Director of Advisory Services, Urban Land Institute (ULI), scheduled for eleven o'clock, go forward at this time. After discussion between the Board and Mr. Gerjel, it was agreed that the ULI presentation would go forward at this time, and that the public hearing in Case Number PH 41-01-4 be recessed at this time, with further presentation on behalf of the applicant scheduled for later today.
PRESENTATION - URBAN LAND INSTITUTE ADVISORY PROCESS
Commr. Hanson introduced Ms. Mary Beth Corrigan, Managing Director of Advisory Services, Urban Land Institute (ULI), Washington, D.C. She stated that although ULI Advisory Services was not mandatory, she still felt that their guidance would enhance the process of Smart Growth in the County. It was noted that Ms. Corrigan distributed a brochure about the program and some sample panel reports.
Ms. Corrigan addressed the Board, giving some general background information regarding ULI and its services. She explained that their membership comes from both the public and private sector and includes expertise from such disciplines as developers, planners, architects, environmental groups, and conservationists. She stated that ULI draws on its worldwide volunteer membership to serve on advisory panels that can last from three to five days. She discussed ULI's mission statement, which, among other things, is to foster good conservation practices in the use of land, as well as fostering good development practices, where appropriate, and to foster economic development. She stated that one of their functions is to hold workshops and conferences on subjects such as infill housing, Smart Growth, golf course development, and active-adult retirement communities. She stated that ULI also publishes numerous books that are policy related or product related, text books, and a magazine that goes out to all their members
Ms. Corrigan discussed the five-day advisory-panel process and what could be expected. She stated that ULI is first invited into a community where the local sponsoring agency puts together a scope of what they hope to accomplish. The right expertise is then gathered, having been screened for any conflicts of interest or vested interests. Their purpose: to provide third-party objectivity. Ms. Corrigan reviewed the advisory process, as outlined in the backup material.
To summarize, Ms. Corrigan stated that the expertise would help balance the public will by providing for economic diversity as well as environmental constraints. She envisioned for the panel in Lake County somebody with an environmental background and who had not only a good understanding of the environmental issues in Central Florida but also would understand the special nuances of Florida land planning. With that, Ms. Corrigan opened the floor for any questions that the Board might have.
After some discussion, the Board expressed the following concerns:
Ms. Corrigan addressed the Board's concerns by affirming the effectiveness of ULI and reiterating its strengths and potential.
Commr. Hanson stated that having already been through the Comprehensive Plan she was aware of the amount of effort involved in its formulation, the amount of time involved, and the number of mistakes that ultimately had to be addressed. She stated that she felt that ULI was an opportunity for the County to take a step ahead. She pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan, being a community consensus, did not resolve the conflict that exists in the Board meetings to this day. She expressed her greatest concern that while the citizens of the County are fighting about growth that growth was still going to continue, pointing out that it is not what the Board approves but what citizens have the legal right to do with their land, with or without their permission. She stated the goal of using ULI as a tool to get the County through Smart Growth. She expressed her feeling that, as the County moved into the future, a land acquisition program would be very important in the effort to preserve the total quality of life in the surrounding communities. Commr. Hanson discussed the idea that by using ULI's services fewer mistakes would be made in planning, with ULI's recommendations being used as a roadmap to continue the process on into the future.
The Board thanked Ms. Corrigan for her presentation. Ms. Corrigan stated that if the Board had any questions to feel free to give her a call.
RECESS AND REASSEMBLY
At 11:55 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would take a lunch break and reconvene at 12:45 p.m.
CASE NUMBER PH 41-01-4 - EUGENE CALABRESE
GREGORY P. GERJEL, ESQ./R-1 TO A
TRACKING NUMBER 88-01-Z (CONTINUED)
Commr. Hanson reopened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment on Case Number PH 41-01-4.
Commr. Hanson stated that at this point they would combine both Case Numbers PH 41-01-4 and CUP 01/6/6-4, Agenda Items 9 and 10, respectively, since there has already been a considerable amount of overlap of the two cases.
CASE NUMBER PH 41-01-4 - EUGENE CALABRESE
GREGORY P. GERJEL, ESQ./R-1 TO A
TRACKING NUMBER 88-01-Z (CONTINUED)
CASE NUMBER CUP 01/6/6-4 - EUGENE CALABRESE
GREGORY P. GERJEL, ESQ./CUP IN A
TRACKING NUMBER 94-01-CUP
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment on Case Number CUP 01/6/6-4.
Mr. Gregory P. Gerjel, Esquire, representing the owner, Mr. Eugene Calabrese, and Westwind Ranch, addressed the Board to discuss Case Numbers PH 41-01-4 and CUP 01/6/6-4, and stated that Mr. Calabrese was present and would like to speak to the Board.
Mr. Calabrese addressed the Board and explained his understanding of the situation at Westwind Ranch and the accompanying properties. He stated that he has been in the area since 1993 and owns over 400 acres in the subject area, which is zoned Agriculture; that, since that time, he has been using his land for just such purposes, putting barns and fencing up, which, to his understanding, was permitted under the Agriculture zoning. He denied any wrongdoing. He stated that he realized that there were issues from the state that would need to be addressed but did not believe that those issues had any bearing on today's requests.
Mr. Gerjel, in hopes of putting into perspective some of the issues that have been heard this morning, played for the Board Applicant's Exhibit D, a videotape depicting the animals and the subject property and its relationship to the surrounding land, narrating and pointing out what the videotape was trying to portray.
At this point, Mr. Gerjel played, in support of their case, Applicant's Exhibit E, the videotaped deposition of Lt. Richard Brown, Wildlife Inspector for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC), held June 25, 2001. He explained that Lt. Brown was not available to testify in person today, hence his videotaped deposition.
Mr. Gerjel stated that he hopes he has conveyed the message that this operation is not a frivolity but is undertaken with a great deal of responsibility, with agencies, such as FFWCC, assuring that responsibilities are met and regulations followed, both state and federal. Mr. Gerjel addressed the important issue of the property being located in the center of wetlands. He explained that the compound is located on high ground, not wooded lowlands; that the subject property was one of only a few parcels on the entire 40 acres that was not wetlands and, therefore, suitable for use. He pointed out that if Mr. Calabrese is not permitted to rezone the 40 acres to Agricultural that it would basically render the piece of property useless, since you cannot build on wetlands.
Mr. Gerjel discussed Applicant's Exhibit C, in particular the outline of the assertions and conclusions and the corresponding law applicable to these areas. He stated that, on June 7, 2001, he made a written request to Lake County Code Enforcement asking that they pull CUP requests that had been granted in the County for one of the following three reasons:
1) Recreational vehicles on agricultural property
2) Recreational vehicles within the Wekiva District
3) CUPs for exotic animals
Mr. Gerjel placed before the Board members, for their consideration, the resulting original CUP files from Code Enforcement. Mr. Gerjel made reference to these files in his presentation, pointing out some of the CUPs that have been granted in the past by the Board.
Commr. Hanson requested that, at this time, Ms. Sharon Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, make her presentation regarding Case Number CUP 01/6/6-4, Tab 10.
Ms. Farrell, Senior Director of Growth Management, informed the Board that, from a CUP aspect, staff has a lot of concerns with introducing this particular use into an area that, although it is rural, has a lot of residents in the area. Having looked at the request from many angles, the circus animals, the equipment storage, the housing of circus employees, she stated that staff has decided that the compound is basically a commercial endeavor in a rural area. Of particular concern was the fact that the parcel is adjacent to a conservation and preservation area in the Wekiva River Protection Area (WRPA). She pointed out that the purpose, goals and objectives of the WRPA have nothing whatsoever to do with agricultural endeavors but, rather, to protect water quality and habitat.
Ms. Farrell addressed the subject of the compound's operations being of an agricultural nature. Regarding Florida Statutes, Section 604.5, as cited earlier by Mr. Gerjel, she stated that staff is clear on what this section is all about, that is, nonresidential farm buildings being located on a farm is exempt from the Florida Building Code. Ms. Farrell stated that, obviously, the circus compound is not a farm and the buildings are not farm buildings; therefore, building permits should have been pulled. She referred the Board to an ariel map, found in the backup material, stating that the property in the center of the map is the subject site. She stated that to the north of the parcel is the Royal Trails Subdivision. When looking at what is being proposed for the area, she stated that you have to consider that it is not only the WRPA but that there are some residential components in the area. She clarified that staff's approval to recommend Agriculture zoning was based upon the land use being consistent. There was not a proven need for Agriculture zoning on the parcel, but the request to rezone to Agriculture was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; therefore, staff felt they could recommend approval for rezoning.
Ms. Farrell discussed the request for a CUP. She stated that, as it stands alone, staff could not recommend approval, based on Policy Number 1-20.8, restrictions on land adjacent to conservation or preservation areas, and also considering that the request is for a fairly quasi-commercial endeavor. Staff, therefore, found the request to be inconsistent. She pointed out that in protected areas there is a development checklist that needs to be addressed by any applicant, with teams of environmentalists being put together and submittal information, before any trees can be cut down. She stated that basic water-quality issues needed to be addressed before anything could be done in the WRPA. She stated her concern that the compound is already there and that staff has not taken a look at any of these conditions or issues. Ms. Farrell stated that there are, of course, additional environmental policies throughout the Comprehensive Plan that need to be addressed. She stated staff's concerns over the environmental impact, impact to the roads in the area, and the impact to the residential neighborhoods. Considering the above concerns, after going through the findings and the Comprehensive Plan, she stated that staff could not recommend approval. She noted that the request was denied 6-2 at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. In closing, Ms. Farrell stated that staff cannot support the request for a CUP; however, they can support the rezoning request to Agriculture, as it stands alone, for agricultural uses.
After some discussion and questions from the Board, Mr. Gerjel continued with the applicant's presentation in support of the request for a CUP. He addressed such issues as the public's health, safety and welfare, pointing out that the subject parcel is rural and remote, the cages are secure. He pointed out that, over the past ten years that Mr. Calabrese has been out there, there have been no problems. He also discussed the definitions of the terms livestock, agriculture, husbandry, animal, recreational vehicle, agricultural uses, and agricultural district, as found in the LDRs. Mr. Gerjel again referenced the original CUP files from Code Enforcement, pointing out that, in the past, recreational vehicles have been permitted for use on agricultural properties. Mr. Gerjel discussed the definition of commercial, as provided by staff, which, in the applicant's opinion, would support their contention that the compound is not for commercial uses. Mr. Gerjel also discussed agricultural housing/camps and the definition of campground.
In closing, Mr. Gerjel summarized the applicant's position in favor of the request for rezoning and CUP. He pointed out that, while there have been individuals who have appeared today in opposition to the requests, included in the Planning and Zoning Commission's backup material is a signed petition with approximately one hundred signatures on it from people who have no problem with the activities at the compound. He asked the Board to consider, in making its decision, what has been done in the past with Agriculture zoning and CUPS, as exhibited by the stack of files from Code Enforcement, and the fact that Mr. Calabrese's property would basically be rendered valueless, if maintained as Rural Residential zoning, but for an agricultural use.
Commr. Hanson inquired if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to speak in opposition to Case Number CUP 01/6/6-4, Agenda Item Number 10, request for a CUP in A.
Mr. Bill Petrey, an adjoining property owner, addressed the Board in opposition to the request for a CUP. He referred to Opposition's Composite Exhibit D, drawing the Board's attention to letters from the St. John's River Water Management District (SJRWMD) to Mr. Calabrese, asking that he cooperate in the resolution of violations and in a restoration plan. He stated he also interviewed Lt. Richard Brown, Wildlife Inspector with the FFWCC. He pointed out that Lt. Brown observed the cages when they were in the beginning stages of construction, in January, having not come back to the property until after all the complaints he had received; that he did not require the owner to clean up the lion feces on the state property; that he did not enforce the exterior gates being closed. Mr. Petrey addressed issues such as the animals escaping, lions roaring, commercial operations, recreational-vehicle housing, transient workers, and WRPA requirements.
Mr. Frank Ayers, a local resident, addressed the Board in opposition to the CUP request. He explained that his family has just recently moved to the area unaware that there was a circus compound in the vicinity. Had they known, they would not have bought their property. He emphasized that, due to the tremendous growth in the County, they purchased their property in a rural/agricultural setting. Of particular concern to Mr. Ayers was the fact that these wild animals were being transported via semi-trucks through the Royal Trails Subdivision and right in front of his home. He was also concerned about the water quality of his well, if the owner is permitted the continued use of recreational vehicles and wild animals on his compound.
Mr. Robert Bauer, president of the Royal Trails Land Owners' Association, addressed the Board in opposition to the CUP request. He stated his desire to protect the land values in the area.
Mr. Keith Schue, speaking as Chairman of the Wekiva Issue for the Central Florida Sierra Club and Vice Chair of the Central Florida Sierra Club (Sierra Club), addressed the Board in opposition to the CUP request. He presented Opposition's Composite Exhibit F, a packet of information containing letters, Land Development Regulations, and a copy of an Orlando Sentinel ad. Mr. Schue also submitted, on behalf of Friends of the Wekiva River, Opposition's Exhibit G, a letter dated June 25, 2001, from Mr. Jim Lee to the Board.
Mr. Schue addressed the issue of the owner's obligation to abide by county and state regulations and to obtain certificates of compliance. He pointed out that the SJRWMD still has outstanding issues regarding the activities taking place on the subject parcel. Mr. Schue stated the opinion that the proposed land use does not fit the requirements of Agriculture zoning with a CUP. He stated that the Sierra Club considers the circus compound not as a campground but the housing of employees who will be working on the site.
In conclusion, Mr. Schue read from a June 26, 2001, letter, from the Sierra Club to the Board (found in Opposition's Composite Exhibit F), which sets forth their request and reasons that the CUP should be denied.
Ms. Lisa Petrey, an adjoining land owner and a teacher at a local school, addressed the Board in opposition to the CUP request. She stated that the issue that concerned her the most was the distance between her property and the subject 39-acre parcel housing the eight to ten lions and tigers. She was concerned for the safety of her family. She also stated that the roaring of the lions disturbed the peace of her neighborhood, with no obvious solution to the problem.
Ms. Jennifer D. McMurtray, Transportation and Wildlife Ecology Coordinator, Defenders of Wildlife, addressed the Board in opposition to the request for a CUP. She stated her concerns that the rules and regulations, set out for the protection of the WRPA, were not being adhered to by the applicant She stated that exotic species are a big problem to natural areas. She stated that even if the cages are safe on the compound there is always the issue of human error. She stated her appreciation for all that the County has done to recognize and protect the WRPA, but stated that the job is never ending. She stated the theory of appropriate uses in appropriate places. She asked the Board to not approve the rezoning request or the subsequent CUP.
Mr. Gerjel addressed the Board concerning the hydrology issue. He confirmed that the SJRWMD is researching the fence issue that FFWCC compelled the owner to erect. He pointed out, however, that the fence issue is on the Westwind Ranch parcel, not on the subject 39-acre parcel. He reminded the Board that zoning is there to allow individuals to enjoy the use of their property consistent with its intended use. He read into the record the definition of a CUP, found at Section 14.05.01 of the LDRs. Mr. Gerjel spoke in defense of the people employed to take care of the animals. He pointed out that, in the three months since these folks have been on the property, there has not been one complaint of criminal activity, vandalism, or damages.
In conclusion, Mr. Gerjel again drew the Board's attention to the stack of CUPs, presented earlier, where similar types of activity have been permitted by the County in the past. He pointed out that Mr. Calabrese has demonstrated an exemplary record in the ten years that he has been in the area, with no problems presented to the community.
There being no further public comment, the public hearing portions of the meeting for Case Numbers PH 41-01-4 and CUP 01/6/6-4 were closed.
Commr. Hanson inquired if there were other similar CUPs in the County. She also asked if it has been determined that the applicant currently, or in the past, has an agricultural exemption and, if so, how it was acquired.
Mr. Max Forgey, Director of Planning and Development, responded that it has not been determined by staff. He stated that they do not grant exemptions through his department, and staff does not consider this a traditional agricultural activity.
The Board and staff then discussed similar CUPs in the area. Ms. Farrell stated that the County does not have an exotic-animal ordinance. She stated that staff was comfortable with leaving the CUP request, as part of the process, for this particular use, stating that the issue is not just the animals; that there are other activities on this parcel.
Commr. Hanson again stated that she had no compelling reason to vote either for or against the Agriculture zoning, pointing out that, according to staff, the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that she can support the rezoning request because the requirements would still have to be in place for a CUP. To be consistent with what is done in the rest of the WRPA, she stated that her leaning would be to rezone to Agriculture, recognizing that two different votes are needed on this issue.
Commr. Stivender made a motion to uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approve Case Number PH 41-01-4, a request for rezoning from R-1 (Rural Residential) to A (Agriculture) to allow for those uses permitted in the Agricultural zoning district.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
Commr. Hill noted that before a second motion would be made she would like clarified whether the applicant would be permitted to house these exotic animals on the subject parcel under Agricultural zoning. She stated her understanding that if the applicant's request were approved for rezoning, and if the applicant were to get the proper licensing from the state and federal governments, that the applicant could house the exotic animals on the parcel under Agricultural zoning. She stated her concern that the County would lose its jurisdiction over those types of animals, and it would become a state and federal issue.
Ms. Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney, responded that the County is preempted by the federal government from regulating, among other things, the types of animals, how the wild animals are handled, the types of cages, but that the animals still have to be housed in the proper zoning. She stated that she thought the way staff is interpreting the code is that Agricultural zoning does not allow exotic animals; therefore, exotic animals would not be permitted in that land use designation without a CUP. Ms. Fuchs clarified that the County is only preempted from regulating the situation if the applicant is found to be in the correct zoning; that staff's interpretation is that the applicant is not in the correct zoning.
Commr. Hill stated the concern that she had with the recreational vehicles. She pointed out that the recreational vehicles were not caretakers' permanent residences; that they were mobile; that they could be moved in and out of the compound. She also stated her concern over what she perceived as a commercial venture.
Commr. Pool commended Mr. Gerjel in the representation of his client. However, he explained, he had a lot of concerns regarding safety issues. He affirmed that the compound is probably a safe environment and that probably everything that can be done has been done to assure the safety of the surrounding communities but that he was convinced that there were some legitimate concerns expressed today, noting that exotic animals have escaped in the past, even if it is only once every ten to 15 years. He expressed his concern for the safety of the children in the area.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board overturned the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denied Case Number PH 41-01-4, Eugene Calabrese/Gregory P. Gerjel, Esquire, a request for rezoning from R-1 (Rural Residential) to A (Agriculture), to allow for those uses permitted in the Agricultural zoning district.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
Commr. Hanson inquired if any action was necessary on Case Number CUP 01/6/6-4. Ms. Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney, stated that since the request for rezoning to Agriculture was denied, Case Number CUP 01/6/6-4, being a request for a CUP in Agriculture zoning, was no longer applicable and therefore no action was necessary.
RECESS AND REASSEMBLY
At 2:45 p.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would take a ten-minute recess.
CASE NUMBER CUP 01/3/2-4 - FLORIDA RECYCLING SERVICES, INC.
DON CODDING - STEVEN J. RICHEY, P.A.
TRACKING NUMBER 27-01-CUP/AND
Mr. Allan Hewitt, Director of Lake County Water Resource Management, informed the Board that the applicant was requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) amendment to the existing CUPs for a Construction and Development (C& D)/Class III landfill located in a current mining area. He stated that staff has made a recommendation of denial, due to the possible impact to the Floridan Aquifer (aquifer). He stated that the land is adjacent to a sinkhole in a natural reservation, which has had direct access to the aquifer, in the past, through a relic sinkhole. He stated there is additional risk for new sinkhole formation; that should a sinkhole develop under this landfill, it could be very problematic to prevent stormwater and/or leachate from entering the actual aquifer itself. He stated that there is always the risk of materials being introduced into the waste stream and that any type of leachate going through there, if it has access to the aquifer, would possibly contaminate the aquifer. He stated that the relic sinkhole is conducting water downward into the aquifer. He pointed out that, even with a well-designed monitoring plan, once a problem is detected, it may be too late to correct it; that given the sensitive hydrogeologic nature of the area, this should be a major concern. Mr. Hewitt stated that the staff hydrogeologist was present and available to answer any questions.
Commr. Hanson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and called for public comment. It was noted that the applicant and the applicant's representative, Mr. Steven J. Richey, Esquire, were present.
Mr. Steven J. Richey, Esquire, stated that he represents Florida Recycling Services, and the applicant, Mr. Don Codding. He stated that they are requesting a CUP for C & D in a Class III landfill. He pointed out that the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation was for approval 6-3.
At this time, Commr. Stivender disclosed that she had a meeting with Mr. Richey, Mr. Codding, and Mr. Ted Wicks, President of Wicks Consulting Services, Inc., having also received phone calls and letters from opponents.
Commr. Pool disclosed that he also has had meetings with Mr. Richey and Mr. Codding and that he has received letters from the opposition.
Commr. Hanson disclosed the same.
Commr. Hill disclosed that she has had a site visit, having driven by the property. She stated that she has met with Mr. Wicks and Mr. Codding twice, having not met with Mr. Richey.
At this time, at the request of Mr. Richey, the deputy clerk administered the oath to the following individuals:
Mr. Mohammed Abdallah (Traffic Planning and Design, Inc.)
Mr. Charles Viggiano (Certified Environmental Specialist)
Mr. Ted Wicks (President of Wicks Consulting Services, Inc.)
Mr. Don Codding (Applicant)
Mr. Sid Vihlen, Jr. (Representative of Florida Recycling Services, Inc.)
Mr. Nicolas Andreyev (Andreyev Engineering, Inc.)
Mr. Tim Green (President of Green Consulting Group)
Mr. Steve Adams (President of LPG Environmental and Permitting Services)
Mr. Richey called Mr. Don Codding to present testimony.
Mr. Don Codding, applicant, addressed the Board. He gave a history regarding his family. He stated that they have been mining out on Highway 46 for approximately 30 years, with the pit having been in existence since the 1930s. He stated that they are now looking for ways to close out the operation; in particular, they are requesting a CUP to reclaim the mining hole and fill it back with C & D/Class III materials and cover it over.
Mr. Codding referred to the nine letters of endorsement from his neighbors and pointed out their locations on the ariel map (all found in the backup material). He explained that only one abutting property owner did not submit a letter of endorsement; however, the property owner has stated that he would not come out in opposition to the proposed project. He stated that, since the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, he has been made aware that there are some residents on Vista View that are unhappy with the proposed project. He stated that, after having spoken with them, he believed he was able to satisfy some of the concerns of most of these residents. Mr. Codding presented Applicant's Exhibit F, a petition in support of the land use request, and containing the signatures of 551 folks who endorse the project.
Mr. Richey called Mr. Sid Vihlen, Jr., to present testimony.
Mr. Sid Vihlen, Jr., representative of Florida Recycling Services, Inc. (the company), addressed the Board in support of the request. He introduced the company, giving some background information about the company, their services, location, employees, experience and involvement in the solid-waste industry. He stated that they are a solid-waste and recycling company, picking up approximately10,000 residences, with approximately 3,000 business accounts. He explained that when the County's new solid-waste program is implemented in the northeastern section of Lake County that they anticipate bringing on an additional 8,500 to 9,500 residential customers. He stated that in the state of Florida the company runs approximately 400 trucks, with about 1,000 employees. He stated that the company has joined with the Coddings to propose the reclamation of a 30-year-old sand and clay mine that will wind up as a fully reclaimed, graded property; that they will be bringing in the best engineers and land-use experts to make sure that the project is done right. He believed that from a scientific and engineering standpoint they have protected the environment in this proposal, ending up with a good, compatible land-use operation.
Mr. Richey clarified the fact that Florida Recycling Services, Inc., will meet the financial obligations regarding bonding, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) requirements, and CUP requirements for the project.
Mr. Richey called Mr. Ted Wicks to present testimony.
Mr. Ted Wicks, President of Wicks Consulting Services, Inc., addressed the Board in support of the request. He described his educational background and work experience, stating that he has been retained by Mr. Codding to evaluate and permit the proposed project. He testified regarding the current operations of the facility, being a vested mining operation with the ability to continue to extract the sand and clays, transporting it off site for sale. He gave detailed information about the proposed reclamation plan that would return the area to grade. He described the CUP currently connected with the property, and the vested rights connected with the property. He also gave a detailed description of what they are proposing to do as part of the amendment to the CUP. He stated that with the collection of solid waste being more economically feasible through private enterprise, they have seen an opportunity, looking at siting and construction-design requirements, to utilize and reclaim the old mined-out pits, or ones currently in operation, taking them back to a higher and better land use.
Mr. Wicks, referring to the ariel photograph found in the backup material, presented detailed testimony regarding the future plans of the project as follows: to provide stormwater management through two large retention areas; to provide transportation improvements at the entranceway to accommodate any increase in traffic flow and provide for public safety; to provide a control station at the entranceway, with scales for weighing of materials; to provide an on-site buffer of 200 feet of undisturbed landscaping, with 250 additional feet to accommodate for stormwater management in the area; to continue the 200-foot buffer on the portion of the property adjacent to the Wolf Branch Sink, with a 100-foot buffer around the remainder of the project; to design the stormwater system to meet or exceed the Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW) criteria; to build the stormwater system in phases, reestablishing the grades in phases as the project progresses, with no off-site discharge; to close the project in stages, reducing bonding requirements along the way; to design and install a leachate collection system; to re-create the natural topography on the site, grading and sloping the land as they close the project in order to collect and keep stormwater within the management system; to ultimately provide an open-space area for recreational use, agricultural pursuits, or raising of animals.
Mr. Wicks described in detail the operations of the facility to prevent leachate and putrefiable materials from filtering into the aquifer. He stated that they are required to develop a day-to-day operational plan prescribed by the state and DEP; to provide the proper training and certification to personnel operating the landfill; to provide bonding required by the DEP permit; to provide financial assurance of their capability to operate, close, and long-term care for the landfill; and to provide for safe ingress and egress to the project, also providing for a landscape buffer along the frontage.
Mr. Richey called Mr. Tim Green to present testimony.
Commr. Hanson noted that the Board would accept Mr. Green as an expert witness.
Mr. Tim Green, President of Green Consulting Group, stated that he was asked to evaluate this particular land use, providing expertise with regard to the County's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations (LDRs). He stated he evaluated staff's report in relation to the Comprehensive Plan and the LDRs. He described the subject property's zoning, being currently zoned LM (Light Industrial) with a future land use as an employment center.
Mr. Richey submitted Applicant's Exhibit G, a schedule of permitted and conditional uses by zoning district; Applicant's Exhibit H, future land use designations; and Applicant's Exhibit I, a conceptual site plan, for the Board's review.
Mr. Green discussed the zoning map (found in the backup material) for the surrounding area. He referred to Applicant's Exhibit G, and highlighted the zoning permitted under LM zoning, which do not require a CUP, being consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and LDRs.
Mr. Green also discussed Applicant's Exhibit I, depicting a regional trucking facility as one of the possible permitted uses on the site. He noted that there is an active railway on the property, with the potential of serving a future industrial operation. He testified in detail regarding the stream-to-sink criteria, which regulates land uses adjacent to natural reservations; the basis for Conditional Use Permits; a management plan to eliminate or minimize, to the maximum extent possible, potential negative impacts; and the future compatible, long-term use of the area as an open-space greenbelt. He concluded that from a land-use perspective there is nothing in the Comprehensive Plan or the LDRs that would preclude the CUP on this piece of property, and the employment center, with the LM zoning.
Mr. Richey called Mr. Steve Adams to present testimony.
Commr. Hanson noted that the Board would accept Mr. Adams as an expert witness.
Mr. Steve Adams, President of LPG Environmental and Permitting Services, stated that he has been working in the environmental field since 1978, with an expertise in wildlife biology and wetlands ecology. He explained that he went to the Codding site and did a preliminary environmental assessment of the site to review the site for endangered species occurrences. He noted that there is a marsh system on site which would not be affected by this particular operation as it is now or under the proposed future use. He also discussed in detail his evaluation of the adjacent property owned by the Lake County Water Authority (LCWA). He noted that the proposed buffers for the overall site plan were more than adequate to meet the requirements to protect the wildlife found on the land. He noted that the written reports with regard to the environmental assessments are found in the backup material. He concluded that, in his opinion, the proposed land use would not have an adverse effect on any of the threatened or endangered species observed on the property or in the area.
Mr. Richey called Mr. Nicolas Andreyev to present testimony.
Mr. Nicolas Andreyev, President of Andreyev Engineering, Inc., stated that he has been working in the geotechnical/hydrogeological business for 20 years.
Commr. Hanson noted that the Board would accept Mr. Andreyev as an expert witness.
Mr. Andreyev stated that he was retained to do an evaluation and put together a plan with regard to a C & D/Class III landfill on the Codding site. He referred to his summary letter marked as Applicant's Exhibit J. He testified in detail regarding the hydrogeologic assessment done on the site. He stated that, out of an abundance of caution, they did 14 site-specific soil borings, ran permeability tests, and did laboratory testing on the clay material, all to define what is actually on site. Based on the investigation, he stated that they could not identify any potential conditions that would likely cause a catastrophic collapse of materials. He stated that by taking out the heavier material on site and putting in a lighter material you were thereby reducing the potential for a sinkhole. He referred to the two geologic cross sections attached to Applicant's Exhibit J, describing in detail Figure 1, which depicts the current conditions on site, and Figure 2, depicting the proposed conditions. Mr. Andreyev stated that as a result of their findings they propose the following: install a clay liner in order to eliminate any possible leachate and install a clay plug at the bottom of the relic sinkhole as a secondary leachate collection system. In summary, he stated that this process would eliminate or minimize, to the maximum extent, any potential negative impact. He pointed out that the clay-liner process is a better process for this site than a synthetic liner, which is easier to puncture. He stated that in their design they are redirecting groundwater, making sure that nothing spills over into the Wolf Branch Sink.
Mr. Richey called Mr. Mohammed Abdallah to present testimony.
Mr. Richey submitted Applicant's Exhibit K, a traffic impact analysis, for the Board's review.
Mr. Mohammed Abdallah, of Traffic Planning and Design, Inc., stated that he was asked to do an evaluation of the traffic patterns in the area of SR 46 and the entrance to the Codding mine. He testified in detail regarding Applicant's Exhibit K, stating that their findings included the following: that SR 46 currently functions at an acceptable level of service; that the Codding mine itself will contribute a minimal amount of traffic to the road; that the proposed expansion to a C & D/Class III landfill will double the traffic flow, with the through traffic remaining steady. They concluded that there was not any potential traffic-flow problem with the addition of the proposed ingress/egress lanes.
Mr. Richey called Mr. Charles Viggiano to present testimony.
Mr. Richey submitted Applicant's Exhibit L, an environmental assessment prepared by Mr. Viggiano.
Mr. Charles Viggiano, Certified Environmental Specialist, summarized his findings, found in Applicant's Exhibit L, as follows: that there is more noise generated by traffic on SR 46 than there is coming out of the mine pit itself, with no anticipated increase in noise levels due to the proposed buffers and the fact that the vehicles coming into the facility will be below grade, thereby not generating any appreciable noise; that, as a Class III landfill, the material being dropped off is of a non-odoriferous nature, thereby eliminating the concern of odors; and that as far as dust is concerned, on observing the vehicles driving in and out of the facility, and based on the environmental controls in place and upgrading of the site's landscaping, dust will not be a problem.
At this time, Commr. Hanson called for public comment in opposition to the request.
Ms. Janet Haughton, a homeowner on Vista View, addressed the Board in opposition to the request. She stated that herself and a lot of her neighbors are not very happy about the proposed landfill. She stated her concern that not everything has been done to prepare for nature's disasters. She pointed out that sinkholes are common in the area and asked what would happen to the clay liner, or any liner, if a sinkhole were to occur. She stated her concern that all of the landfill material would slide into the aquifer. She wondered if there was a plan in mind if such a catastrophe were to occur. She addressed the issue of the Wolf Branch Sink that borders the Codding property, stating her concern for its preservation and protection of the wildlife. She stated her concern about any noise pollution generated from the landfill, or air pollution resulting from any burning being done. She stated her concern that the well water in the area would become contaminated as a result of the proposed project and that there would be a loss in property values. She emphasized the need for a plan to repair any possible damage resulting from the proposed project. In closing, she asked the Board to consider all of these items before making its final decision.
Ms. Julie Geisberg, a homeowner on Vista View, addressed the Board in opposition to the request. She stated that there are other residents on Vista View who are opposed to the
proposed landfill but, due to personal obligations, could not be present. She stated that she agrees and concurs with everything that Ms. Haughton, her neighbor, has said. She opposed the permit being granted. She stated her concerns for the possible noise, water, and air pollution. She asked that the Board deny the request.
Mr. Michael Perry, Executive Director of the Lake County Water Authority (Water Authority), addressed the Board in opposition to the request. He stated that the Water Authority recognizes and acknowledges the fact that the Codding sand mine has been in existence for a number of years and has no requirement to do any reclamation or restoration of the mine. He stated that the Water Authority Board did, however, have some discussion related to this item. He explained that since the Water Authority's property (the Wolf Branch Sink) is the largest piece of property adjacent to the mine that they felt it was appropriate to review the operation and have some comments and suggestions to bring before the Board. He stated that the Water Authority Board, prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, had initially talked about the issue and voted to oppose the project, but, having listened to staff's presentation, they realized that there was perhaps some information that was presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting that they did not have. He stated that, in fairness to the Codding folks, they were asked to make a full presentation to the Water Authority Board. He discussed in detail the Codding family's presentation at their May 16, 2001, meeting. Of particular concern to the Water Authority Board was the potential for sinkholes in the area and the potential of drainage from the landfill into the Wolf Branch Sink. Mr. Perry also discussed the clay liner, stating that clay liners may dry out and crack. He also addressed the issue of setbacks from the Codding property.
In conclusion, Mr. Perry stated that the Lake County Water Authority Board of Trustees voted 4-3 to continue to oppose this project. He stated he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Perry confirmed that the Water Authority did purchase property from Mr. Codding in order to have an additional buffer to the Wolf Branch Sink.
Ms. Nancy Fullerton, President of Save Our Lakes Committee (SOLC), addressed the Board in opposition to the request. She apologized for not having earlier written a letter of objection to the landfill. She reminded the Board of the need to balance the wants of man and the risks to nature. She asked the Board to consider that even though something is allowed or legal or possible the question one still has to face is whether or not you should do it. She stated, for the record, that SOLC urges the Board to vote on the side of environmental responsibility, for protection of the aquifer, and against potential harm. She pointed out that potential harm comes from the whims of nature, such as sinkholes; and from the errors of mankind, such as spills from trucks. She asked the Board to deny the CUP.
Ms. Susan Ryan, a board member from the Lake County Water Authority, addressed the Board stating that she felt compelled to come today to speak on the issue. She stated the belief that people are supporting the project due to the visual problems that are involved with a landfill and were not considering the ecological factors. She pointed out that, over 30 years, there would be 40 million cubic yards of C & D waste in the landfill. She explained that there is leachate with a Class III landfill. She discussed the difference between the reclaiming and the restoring of land, noting that the Codding plan was simply to put material in the pit and cover it over. She also stated her concern over sinkholes forming and the resulting catastrophic damage.
Mr. Joe O'Day, Sorrento, addressed the Board in opposition to the request. He stated that his neighbors could not make it today but that they too were against the landfill and were concerned about damage, from leachate, to their wells and the aquifer. He stated his concern regarding dump-truck traffic and the resulting road conditions of SR 46. He pointed out that the residents in the area will have a difficult time trying to get onto SR 46. He inquired if there was an alternative site for a C & D/Class III landfill. If not, he suggested regrading the property or possibly turning the pit into a lake, something more environmentally safe.
Mr. Richey re-called Mr. Wicks to present testimony in support of applicant's request, who touched on subjects such as closing of the vested mining operation and the potential uses for the site; monitoring of the site; types of allowable waste material and inspections of loads; the requirements for liners; the potential for pollution of the Wolf Branch Sink; the potential for sinkholes; the clay liner and possible breach in the limestone layer; property values; the request for C & D/Class III landfill with accompanying reports, financial responsibility (bonding), reclamation, and establishing setbacks; and permitting.
Mr. Richey, in closing, discussed the proposed landfill, stating that the reclamation project would be a better land use than the possible alternatives, when considering the LDRs, the future-land-use map (Applicant's Exhibit H), and the schedule of permitted uses (Applicant's Exhibit G). He stated that the proposed land use would restore the area to an 80-acre field compatible for such uses as a ball field or an open-space greenbelt in perpetuity versus an industrial use. He pointed out that the potential risks involved, as stated by the experts, were minimal in comparison to the benefits. He explained that Mr. Codding will have the ability to continue mining and operating and that Florida Recycling will have the ability to do the C & D/Class III landfill, while being regulated by the DEP and being held to a very high standard with regard to monitoring, training, and operations. He asked that the Board approve the applicant's request.
The Chairman called for further public comment. There being none, the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Commr. Hanson stated that, if the request is approved, she would ask that the clay lining remain as a means of monitoring for leachate. She stated that some of the listed alternative uses were not preferable. She pointed out that anyplace in the County would have the potential for sinkholes because they can form anywhere. She explained that earlier she did not understand that the liner would only be added if the DEP required it.
After some discussion and questions from the Board concerning issues such as the clay liner, DEP requirements, the monitoring and collection of leachate, and penalties for any violations, Commr. Hanson stated that, when considering all the alternatives, she thought the request was an appropriate use for the property, with LM zoning. She stated she would support the request, with the proper monitoring of the potential leachate.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved Case Number CUP 01/3/2-4, Florida Recycling Services, Inc., Don Codding/Steven J. Richey, Esquire, a request for a CUP amendment to the existing CUP Numbers 186-4 and 340-4 for sand, clay and clean fill material (borrow pit) with C & D materials disposed of as part of the project operation and reclamation plan, Ordinance Number 2001-98.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS (CONTINUED)
ACCOUNTS ALLOWED/CONTRACTS, LEASES AND AGREEMENTS
WATER RESOURCES/GROWTH MANAGEMENT
Mr. Allan Hewitt, Director of Lake County Water Resource Management, addressed the Board to discuss the request to approve the Cost Share Agreement with the St. John's River Water Management District (SJRWMD) to provide matching funds for a Water, Wastewater and Reuse Utility Master Plan for the Mt. Plymouth/Sorrento area in conjunction with the current small-area study, to be conducted by Hartman & Associates, with a $23,868 contribution by the SJRWMD, and an already budgeted, matching fund contribution from the County.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the request for the Cost Share Agreement with the St. John's River Water Management District in the amount of $23,868 for the Mt. Plymouth/Sorrento Water, Wastewater and Reuse Utility Master Plan, as noted.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
APPOINTMENTS/COMMITTEES/COUNTY MANAGER
HUMAN RESOURCES/COMMISSIONERS
The Board members discussed the following ten appointments (two members from each District) to the County Manager Recruitment Committee, to screen the County Manager position resumes and applications:
Commr. Cadwell: Mr. T. H. Poole and Ms. Nadine Foley (as relayed to Commr. Hanson)
Commr. Hill: Mr. Robert Q. Williams, Esquire, and Ms. Barbara Newman
Commr. Stivender: Ms. Dottie Keedy and Mr. Don McGruder
Commr. Pool: Mr. Carl Fimmano and Mr. Ray Freisinger
Commr. Hanson: Mr. Rich Dunkle and Mr. Steve Kurtz
The Board members discussed Mr. James C. Watkins as the eleventh member, being the constitutional officer and facilitator of the committee and having equal status and voting privileges.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the eleven appointments, as stated above, to the County Manager Recruitment Committee to screen the County Manager position resumes and applications.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS
APPOINTMENTS/COMMITTEES/MUNICIPALITIES
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender, and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the appointment of Mr. John Axon as a League of Cities representative on the county-wide Solid Waste Study Committee.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
APPOINTMENTS/COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONERS
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the appointment of Mr. Egor Emery to the vacant District 4 position of the Palatlakaha Environmental and Agricultural Reserve (PEAR) Advisory Committee.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
REPORTS/COMMISSIONER HILL - DISTRICT #1
OUTDOOR RECREATION
Commr. Hill informed the Board that she was at baseball all weekend and stated that the teams represented at Ocala, which were Tavares and Leesburg, displayed excellent sportsmanship; that it was a wonderful weekend and she enjoyed being around all of them.
REPORTS/COMMISSIONER STIVENDER - DISTRICT #3
Commr. Stivender informed the Board that she has a new granddaughter.
REPORTS/COMMISSIONER HANSON - DISTRICT #4
RESOLUTIONS/EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT/ROADS - COUNTY AND STATE
Commr. Hanson requested that the Board approve the execution of Resolution Number 2001-119, in support of a letter written by Mr. Roy Hunter, a concerned citizen of Lake County, to the President of the United States, Mr. George W. Bush, requesting assistance in the maintenance of the County's sand roads, especially for access by Emergency Medical Services.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool, and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution Number 2001-119, as noted.
Commr. Cadwell was not present at this meeting.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 5:32 p.m.
________________________________________ CATHERINE C. HANSON, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
___________________________________
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK
KAS/BOARDMIN/6-26-01/8-7-01