A
REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AUGUST
23, 2005
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular
session on Tuesday, August 23, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County
Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares,
Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Jennifer Hill, Chairman;
Catherine C. Hanson, Vice Chairman; Welton G. Cadwell; Debbie Stivender; and
Robert A. Pool. Others present were: Sanford A. “Sandy” Minkoff, County Attorney;
Cynthia W. “Cindy” Hall, County Manager; Wendy Taylor, Executive Office Manager,
Board of County Commissioners’ Office; and Judy Whaley, Deputy Clerk.
INVOCATION
AND PLEDGE
Commr.
Hill gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ELECTED
OFFICIALS
Commr.
Hill recognized Ms. Elaine Renick, Clermont Council Member, who was in the
audience.
AGENDA
UPDATE
Ms.
Cindy Hall, County Manager, stated that Mr. Fletcher Smith, Community Services
Director, will give a brief update, under the County Manager’s Departmental
Business, on a potential site for the Clermont Health Department Clinic.
COUNTY
MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
On
a motion by Commr. Stivender, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously,
by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the County Manager’s Consent Agenda, Tabs
1 through 5, as follows:
Budget
Request for Budget transfer – Building Services Fund,
Department of Growth Management, Building Services Division. Transfer
$102,600.00 from Reserve for Operations to Information Services – Other ($100.00),
Printing and Binding ($500.00), Reprographic Charges ($8,000.00), Other Current
Charges and Obligations ($51,000.00), Office Supplies ($22,000.00), and Books,
Publications and Dues ($21,000.00). Funds needed due to unanticipated bank card
fees, upgrading to increased software maintenance, additional profile server,
OnBase training, lien law mailings, and increased cost and number of code
books. The majority of the additional costs are directly related to the
unforeseen wind events of 2004. Funds available in Reserve for Operations.
Request for approval of Check Request (Direct Pay)
from Environmental Consulting & Technology, Inc. (ECT) for payment for
removal of contaminated soil at PEAR Park, below level of two feet, approved by
the Board of County Commissioners on January 25, 205. The request exceeds the
County Manager's approval limit of $25,000.00. Total payment is for $26,369.50.
Economic Development and Tourism
Request for approval to accept Local Arts Agency Grant
Number 06-8002 in the amount of $5,000.00 for the Cultural Affairs Council's
Marketing Program for the 2005-2006 year program, calendar year July 1, 2005
through June 30, 2006.
Employee Services
Request for approval of an offer to settle Teresa
Martinez's claim for property damage, subject to the County Attorney's review
and approval.
Growth Management
Request for approval of the Interlocal Agreement
between Lake County and the Lake County Sheriff's Office relating to the
Creation, Distribution, and Sharing of Geographic Information.
Procurement Services
Request from Procurement Services approval to award
and execute the contract with The Appraisal Group of Central Florida, Inc. for
on-call appraisal consultant services, RSQ 05-105.
COUNTY
MANAGER’S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
COMMUNITY
SERVICES - CLERMONT HEALTH DEPARTMENT CLINIC
Mr.
Fletcher Smith, Community Services Director, presented statistics showing usage
of the various Lake County Health Department Clinics (a copy is included in the
backup material). He explained that there is an opportunity to consider lease
space in the Clermont area for relocation of the Clermont Health Department
Clinic to a larger, modern facility that is ADA (Americans with Disabilities
Act) accessible. The current clinic is on Desoto Street, is approximately 1,300
square feet, is not ADA compliant and a number of services cannot be performed
there due to the confinements of the facility. The 10,000 square foot lease space is currently on the
market, is under construction, is approximately two blocks from South Lake
Hospital, and there may be an opportunity, if a lease is negotiated, to have
the facility built out specifically for Health Department use. Lease cost is
$21.00 per square foot and the build out for a Health Department Clinic is
between $400,000 and $500,000. Mr. Smith explained that a lease option might be
possible and the developer may be willing to look at doing the build out and
including those costs over a three year term. He reminded the Board that the
south Lake facility has been discussed for a number of years and he asked for
direction from the Board.
Commr. Pool commented that the
current Clermont facility is woefully inadequate and is much too small for the
demand and usage. He opined that this might be the only space currently
available. He stated that he supports the concept and the location but worries
about being able to pay for it.
Mr. Smith stated that Mr. Chuck Creel
and Mr. Doug Conway, Facilities Development and Management Department, and Ms.
Quinnette Durkin, Property Manager, County Attorney’s Office, have visited the
site. He confirmed that the lease cost is probably in line with other buildings
in that area.
Further discussion occurred regarding
the need for a new facility and the unavailability of vacant space.
Mr. Smith stated that the second
story of the block building could be used for storage and administrative
offices. While it is too far along in the process to have an elevator, a lift
could be installed to address ADA issues. If the Board chooses, he suggested
working with the developer and owner on a lease arrangement regarding costs,
the build out option and a lease purchase option.
Commr. Pool reiterated support for
pursuing this. He asked staff to be sure there is not a more cost effective way
to do this and to be sure this is the best location.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
stated that sales tax dollars cannot be used to pay for improvements on leased
properties. Funds would have to come from the general fund. He anticipates that
a ten-year term, or five-year term with a five-year renewal, or longer, would
be needed to recoup the half-million dollars for finishing the building. He stressed
that the landlord is pressing for a decision within a week or two.
Regarding subleasing a portion of the
space, Mr. Smith explained that the growth in south Lake County calls for 8,000
to 12,000 square feet to meet the needs through 2010.
Mr. Minkoff clarified that sales tax
money can only be used on property in public ownership, not on leasehold
improvements, even if property is leased with the option to buy.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded
by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the Board
approved to place the Clermont Health Department Clinic
on the agenda.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded
by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the Board
approved the request from Community Services to review all options with the
developer as promptly as possible on a 10,000 square foot lease
space in the Clermont area for relocation of the Clermont Health Department
Clinic; to bring back all
information on a lease rate with at least a ten-year lease, the cost for the
build out, the option to purchase, and funding opportunities; to continue look
for other sites.
PRESENTATION
PROCLAMATION - 19TH AMENDMENT AND
WOMEN’S EQUALITY DAY
On a motion by Commr. Hanson,
seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the
Board approved Proclamation 2005-119 proclaiming August 26, 2005, as the 85th
Anniversary of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Women's Equality
Day.
Commr. Hanson read the proclamation
and presented copies to Ms. Nancy Hurlbert, Immediate Past President, BPW/USA; Ms.
Shannon Suffron, President, Mount Dora/BPW; and Ms. Deborah Reagan, President,
South Lake/BPW. She noted that Ms. Barbara Milazzo, Vice President, Eustis/BPW,
was not present.
Ms. Hurlbert thanked the Board for
spotlighting the achievements and contributions of women and for encouraging
everyone in this country to exercise their right to vote. She noted that the
Equal Rights Amendment still needs to be passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ROAD VACATION PETITION NO. 1046 -
LAKE SAUNDERS GROVES LAND LLP, CHELSEA OAKS LLC - MERRY ROAD, TAVARES
Mr. Jim Stivender, Jr., Public Works
Director, presented Road Vacation Petition Number 1046 by Lake Saunders Groves
Land LLP, Chelsea Oaks LLC, a request to vacate right of way and cease
maintenance on a portion of Merry Road (Number 4455), in the Plat of James M.
Conner, located in Section 27, Township 19 South, Range 26 East, in the City of
Tavares, Commission District 3. He noted that this petition was postponed May
24, 2005, for more discussions and public meetings. Mr. Stivender showed Merry
Road on the map and added that staff recommends approval of the request to
vacate. He explained that David Walker Drive was designed to be the major road
in that area and it will only be a matter of time before a signal will be
warranted at the intersection with Old Highway 441/Alfred Street.
Commissioners Pool, Hill, Stivender,
Cadwell and Hanson disclosed, for the record, that they have spoken with
parties on both sides of this issue.
Ms. Cecelia Bonifay, Attorney,
Akerman Senterfitt, stated that she represented Bob Hester and ABC Fruit, and
later his estate, in the development of what is called the Lake Saunders PUD.
She explained the specifics of the original 1994 PUD and the planned
development of the different pods. She stated that a key issue is that Merry
Road is a very old road and was not up to County standards. She stated that
this client gave the right of way along the entire length of the property for
David Walker Drive and then entered into an agreement with Lake County for the
improvement of that road so that, as pods came on line, various portions of the
internal part of Merry Road would be vacated. Ms. Bonifay stated that a new
City of Tavares PUD was issued in 2003. She stated that some of the same people
present today, who say they did not know about this issue, were at earlier
meetings. She stated that her client sold parcels based on the development plan
that the City of Tavares signed off on at that time. She stated that, although
the property is in the City, we are dealing with County roads.
Commr. Cadwell asked what official action
the Board of County Commissioners took during this process.
Ms. Bonifay stated that, regarding
David Walker Drive, her client worked that out with the County. She stated that
they might have gotten some impact fee credits and they dedicated the right of
way without charging the County but the County actually built David Walker
Drive. She stated that the developer relied on the agreement with the City and
the commitments with Lake County in moving forward with the development.
Mr. Steve Richey, attorney
representing the developer, stated that the burden to vacate Merry Road as part
of their PUD with the City was put on them because of the inferior nature of
the road and the inability to improve it. He showed a color map of the project
(Applicant’s Exhibit A-1) which connects with Merry Road on the north and
south. If vacated, there would not be a thoroughfare but there would be two
ways through the subdivision. He stated that, if Merry Road is not closed,
traffic would still have to go through the subdivision.
Mr. Richey stated that he had
intended to ask for a 30-day continuance to allow for preparation of additional
legal descriptions but the vacation request today is less than what was
advertised.
Mr. Richard Wolf, engineer and planner
on Lake Saunders Phases 3 and 4, explained that some residents are concerned
that, as the road is rebuilt, there will be some existing median and
landscaping left in disarray. He stated that they propose to come back in,
repave and rebuild the median and redo the landscaping. He stated that, if the
residents will work with them, they will take care of that at their expense.
Secondly, some residents had concerns regarding double driveways. He stated
that the project manager will meet with residents. Their goal is to replace
whatever is there with something better or equal. He stated that their concern
is that Merry Road, at Old Highway 441, is not a good situation. He stated that
their goal is to have traffic come south and be forced to David Walker Drive,
thereby having a southern trail with a secondary entrance. Mr. Wolf stated
that, by losing two additional lots on the south side, the road can be opened
up again and connectivity can be provided. He asked the Board to consider that
today. He stated that they hear from residents that Merry Road, even though
substandard, is a speeding area. He opined that the traffic calming, as shown,
is a plus.
In showing Applicant’s Exhibit A-1, Mr.
Wolf confirmed that there would be driveways (on the 50 foot wide lots) on an
improved Merry Road if it goes straight through the subdivision. He reiterated
that, from an engineering perspective, they are trying to get people over to
David Walker Drive, which is safer. He explained that the residents have made
it clear they want a form of connection through the subdivision. Mr. Wolf
explained that they came into the subdivision and talked about making a
connection and the City took them in one direction. He stated that they have to
satisfy the residents, the County and the City of Tavares. He stated that they
must go back to the City for approval.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the
County’s problem is that once it is vacated, it is vacated.
Commr. Stivender stated that she has
to protect the County residents.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
explained that, if the Board chooses to go this route, the vacation would be effective
upon recording of the new plat so the new rights of way would be dedicated and
there would be a bond to improve them before being vacated.
Mr. Richey stated that it also has to
go back through the City’s preliminary process for approval. He stated that the
City put this condition in to stop traffic on an inferior road. He stated that
the developer is not stopping it but is significantly reducing it. He stated
that, if the City does not accept that, Merry Road will stay open.
Commr. Stivender stated that Merry
Road is a County road and if County staff is saying it is substandard, the
County has the responsibility to fix it.
Mr. Richey remarked that, when the
County asked for right of way, it got right of way for improvements to David
Walker Drive. That was an alternative to fixing Merry Road because Merry Road
right of way was not available.
Commr. Stivender stated that she
would like to hear from staff that right of way was asked for and was refused
to be given on that road.
Referring to Applicant’s Exhibit A-1,
Mr. Richey stated that there is no right of way on a southern portion and the
only way the County had the ability to get the right of way on David Walker
Drive was to have it in cooperation with the property owner. He stated that he
was not at the table then but Ms. Bonifay has represented that to be the case.
He opined that Mr. Stivender will affirm that is the case. He stated that was
the proposed fix. He reminded the Board that, at the meeting at City Hall, Mr.
Stivender went through a great deal of discussion regarding the importance of
funneling the traffic back to David Walker Drive and the potential
signalization which they are trying to accomplish and which is a goal of the
City of Tavares.
Commr. Hanson asked Mr. Stivender if
there will be other types of incentives to get people over to David Walker
Drive if Merry Road is not vacated.
Mr. Stivender stated that, if there
are speeding problems or complaints associated with the additional volume of
traffic on Merry Road, they may have to do some other things. Eliminating Merry
Road from the equation pushed all the traffic out to David Walker Drive, and, therefore,
reduced the maintenance costs associated with Merry Road. He stated that there
was logic behind that. He explained that staff cannot answer some of these
questions until they know how the traffic pattern will develop.
Commr. Stivender asked Mr. Stivender
if the County has ever tried to acquire right of way on Merry Road.
Mr. Stivender responded that David
Walker Drive was opened in 2000. Prior to that, this was going to be ingress
and egress so they had not pursued getting additional right of way other than
the 30 feet that was originally platted on Merry Road to the south.
Commr. Stivender asked Mr. Stivender
if saying that we have attempted to get right of way and have been turned down would
be incorrect.
Mr. Stivender confirmed that Commr.
Stivender’s statement is correct. He explained that the road is 20 feet wide
with about five feet for utilities on each side.
In response to questions by Commr.
Pool, Mr. Richey stated that the original subdivision configuration did not
have access from Merry Road; the second proposal had the top of the subdivision
open to Merry Road; and the latest proposal (Applicant’s Exhibit A-1), based on
the continued residents’ concerns, is open to Merry Road on the top and the
bottom.
Commr. Cadwell confirmed with Mr.
Richey once again that there will be development and driveways on each side of
the road if Merry Road stays open and goes straight through the subdivision.
Mr. Richey reiterated that they have
to go back to the City of Tavares either way because the City has a provision
in their PUD that requires that the road not go through. He confirmed Commr.
Cadwell’s comment that, if the Board does not approve the closing today, the
City can try to redesign it however they choose. He explained that they have
talked in terms of having the City take over Merry Road itself as far as what
is within the project. He stated that the City is willing to take the northern
improved section but are not willing to take the inferior part of the road. Mr.
Richey stated that he will let City staff talk about when they were asked to
give right of way because that is confusing based on Mr. Stivender’s answer.
Mr. Richey confirmed that the
subdivision has not changed much because it is fully engineered, there is a St.
Johns River Water Management District permit, construction plans have been
approved and construction is ready to begin. He remarked that, obviously,
nobody anticipated, based on the conversations of the two years’ work with the
County, that this was a problem.
Commr. Hanson remarked that she
assumed the top route would go out to David Walker Drive. If folks are to
accept that, there should be an easier route to David Walker Drive. She
suggested that the direct route to David Walker Drive should be where the
cul-de-sac is shown on the map, leaving the bottom part open to Merry Road with
curves and stop signs.
Further discussion occurred regarding
reconfigurations with sweeping roads and disincentives.
Ms. Bonifay stated that we need to look
at the project in its totality. She stated that the Board is concentrating on
one piece. She stated that the developer was told that the County had an
overall traffic transportation plan for this area and that plan was to
eliminate Merry Road in its current configuration because the County did not
have sufficient right of way, it is a substandard road and people who are
traveling it are complaining. She stated that the other key issue is that her
client did not own a lower portion of the right of way and the County is
forcing something through a very narrow opening. She stated that, if the road
is left open to allow a few people what they think is better access, rather
than using the improved road, a new safety problem is being created. She stated
that, when the first person is injured, these same people who are here today,
or the new people who got here yesterday, will be complaining about why the
County allowed that to happen. She stated that this owner gave as much as they could
all the way down to allow a road which they understood was a linchpin of the
overall traffic program in this area. She stated that it was also endorsed by
the City of Tavares and is now caught between the two jurisdictions. She
reiterated that the Board is creating an untenable situation. She stated that
there was an alternative to hear testimony but the Board had that option and
forced them to use something that was unsafe and inadequate. She opined that,
unless the Board can get the right of way and plans to do two major
intersections, they will continue to have a problem.
Commr. Stivender commented that the
people that will be buying these lots probably will use David Walker Drive. She
stated that the reason for keeping Merry Road open is for the residents that
already exist because they travel that road. She agreed that there are some
concerns which have been addressed with the Public Works Department and it is
up to them to bring that back to the County to have it fixed.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment.
Ms. Grace Gilbert stated, for the
record, that some of the remarks that they agreed with some of the decisions or
comments out front were not what they said. She stated that they did not agree.
She discussed the condition of the road, taking of blighted property and
differences of opinion. She stated that they are only one part of many
transactions being negotiated. She stated that she mailed each of the Board
members a notice of a meeting scheduled July 1, 2003, highlighting the
discussion of improvements to Merry Road. She stated that was proof positive
that their folks were told Merry Road would be improved, not closed. She stated
that the residents have not been complaining about the substandard condition of
the road. She stated that it is wrong to take the County road away, it is wrong
to appease the developers at the better welfare of 50+ families, it is wrong to
put clout and prestige over the promises that were made to residents in the
beginning. She further discussed a recent Supreme Court ruling that takes away
rights. She discussed problems in Lake County because of growth.
Ms. Gilbert suggested that roads on
the west side of Merry Road should be directed out to David Walker Drive and
that Farringdon Drive and all roads coming onto Merry Road should be dead ends.
She suggested that others on the north side should go north and that Lake
Saunders residents and those on the south should go out to Old 441 using that
end of Merry Road. That would allow three ways out instead of directing everything
onto David Walker Drive, there would be less congestion, it would be safer and
residents could travel in a more practical and convenient way, and emergency
vehicles could reach residents in a more timely manner. She stated that
residents of Lake Saunders feel they deserve the Board’s loyalty over
developers and big business. She requested that the Board keep Merry Road open.
She stated that Merry Road is not a safety or health issue if you are not
involved. Ms. Gilbert related that limerock is on their cars, in their hair and
is washing down into the lake. She stated that, in their effort to fix things,
they have cared little about the most important thing and that is the folks who
must live with this on a daily basis.
Mr. Nick Galos, a sixteen-year
resident of Lake Saunders Acres, stated that EMT service comes from the
Triangle Area and Old 441 and running it around David Walker Drive will add
four to seven minutes. He stated that four and seven minutes can make the
difference between living and dying. He pointed out that 300 new houses could
mean 900 vehicles.
Ms. Cindy Dutton McCoy stated that
she and her parents moved to Merry Road in the 1960s and she built her house
there in 1985. She stated that she has used this access nearly every day for
the last 40 years. She stated that the roads will be overcrowded and they need
every outlet possible. She stated that her husband suffers from a seizure
disorder and she does not want a second wasted when she calls 911. She stated
that they have been paying taxes all these years and feels their rights should
be respected. She remarked that they are in the middle of the building ruckus
everyday and they have to fight their way through the construction areas. She
asked the County to leave their road alone. For the record, she presented a
letter from a neighbor which was marked as Opposition’s Exhibit O-1.
Mr. Dennis Dutton stated that he has
lived in Lake Saunders Acres since 1984. He stated that closing Merry Road
would be a terrible thing for the more than 55 families who live there. He
stated that about 18 months ago the City of Tavares and developers hosted a
meeting to explain why they thought it is important to permanently close the
east-west section of Merry Road and allow the developer to build new homes
where the road is. At that meeting they changed plans to allow closing it for
three months while it was rebuilt to City of Tavares specifications. He stated
that residents left that meeting believing that the Merry Road issue was
settled. Mr. Dutton referred to the minutes of the Board’s May 24, 2005,
meeting. He stated that he asked Ms. Patti Harker, Right of Way, Public Works Department,
for a copy of any agreement between the developer and Lake County for
exchanging and closing Merry Road for the right of way of David Walker Drive.
Ms. Harker informed Mr. Dutton that, to the best of her knowledge, there was no
agreement. Mr. Dutton discussed the construction problems, including trucks in
the road whose drivers refuse to move. He stated that he has called Tavares
Police Department and the Sheriff’s Office 17 times and they were not
interested in clearing the road. He stated that driveways at 25 new homes on
both sides of Merry Road will make driving hazardous and leaving Merry Road
open to the south will help ease traffic problems. Mr. Dutton stated that,
instead of closing Merry Road, homeowners would like it widened, would like
storm sewers and sidewalks installed and would like to have it resurfaced with
a crown instead of the valley that is there now. He added that they would like
good turn lanes at Old 441 and he noted that 450 homes in Chelsea Oaks are
putting a strain on everyone. He asked the Board to vote to leave Merry Road
open.
Ms. Anastasia Galos stated that Mr.
Bob Hester came to a City of Tavares meeting and assured residents that there
would be no opening from the development onto Merry Road, yet that is being
proposed.
Mr. Dallas Miley stated that he
recently moved back to Tavares. He stated that Ms. Bonifay commented that it
was this Commission’s responsibility to give the developers what they wanted
and the occupants in the mobile home park what they could have. He stated that
he knows a little about safety because of years on the Kansas Highway Patrol. He
stated that more driveways on Merry Road will encourage accidents. He expressed
his concern about response time for ambulances. He asked the Board to leave
Merry Road the way it is.
Mr. Mike McHone, a resident of Lake
Saunders Acres, stated that it is almost impossible to use Merry Road at times
because of trucks and construction material. He stated that there are no signs,
flags or flagmen that even suggest that residents need to go another way. He
stated that another outlet is feasible and the latest proposal may be a good
compromise by the builders but a straight shot would be the best.
Mr. Jerry Deiuliis stated that he has
lived on Merry Road in front of the mobile home community since the early
1990s. In 2003 he asked the County what the plan would be for the development
of property across the street. Because it is in the City of Tavares, he asked
to see the City’s plan. There was no change in Merry Road on that plan and the
exits were to be on David Walker Drive. He stated that the apartments and
duplexes on the 2003 plan have been changed to residential homes. He stated
that he knows of no one in his area who was contacted regarding the road closing
and no one was given notice that the road would be graded. He stated that there
has been a lack of communication and he expressed his concerns regarding safety
at the intersection of Old 441. Because of speeding, Mr. Deiuliis stated that
he originally did not want Merry Road kept open. He stated that David Walker
Drive is not wide enough and that the police have done nothing to enforce the
speed limit on it. He asked the Board to keep Merry Road open and to install
some stop signs.
There being no further comment, the
public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
Mr. Richey stated that, if they
reengineered so that the road goes straight through, they would anticipate
18-20 lots fronting on that strip and that would be about the same as the
reconfiguration they are proposing. He stated that the latest proposal is
better, and far safer, than having the road go straight through; however, if the
road goes straight through it will not be unencumbered. He stated that the
densities are already approved. He explained that the multi-family was done
away with as part of the overall approval that was done with Ms. Bonifay and
her client. He stated that the road, even if not vacated, will be altered
significantly based on approved development plans.
Commr. Pool stated that he liked the
reconfiguration (Applicant’s Exhibit A-1) but the residents are convinced that
they do not like this plan. He asked if the four lots could be put in the green
space on the right, eliminating the driveways on Merry Road. He suggested the
use of four-way stop signs.
Mr. Richey stated that, if the road
is not closed, they will reengineer this. He noted the drainage issues with
Merry Road and stated that Commr. Pool’s suggestion will not work from an
engineering perspective because of stormwater.
Commr. Cadwell remarked that, if the
road is not closed, those lots would have to be marketed and might be designed
to minimize backing onto the road.
Mr. Richey confirmed that marketing
may mean four-way stops and different kinds of things to slow traffic which may
encumber and be more frustrating to folks than what they are proposing today.
More discussion occurred regarding
stop signs, engineering and the stormwater area.
Mr. Richey stated that the project
will be built, regardless of vacating the road, and the residents may not be
happy with the resulting conflicts.
Because the residents had not seen
this latest configuration (Applicant’s Exhibit A-1), Commr. Pool asked if the
residents wanted more time to consider it.
By a show of hands, the residents in
the audience indicated that they do not want the request to vacate to be
delayed.
Mr. Richey stated that he sees no
reason to delay it. If the Board chooses not to vacate it, they will proceed to
reengineer and build per the City’s plans.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender,
seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the Board
denied Road Vacation Petition Number 1046 by Lake Saunders Groves Land LLP,
Chelsea Oaks LLC, a request to vacate right of way and cease maintenance on a
portion of Merry Road (Number 4455), in the Plat of James M. Conner, located in
Section 27, Township 19 South, Range 26 East, in the City of Tavares, Commission
District 3.
RECESS AND REASSEMBLY
At 10:35 a.m., Commr. Hill announced
a ten minute break.
PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED)
ROAD VACATION PETITION NO. 1053 -
SCOTT F. AND MARY L. FROST - YALAHA AREA
Mr. Jim Stivender, Jr., Public Works
Director, presented Road Vacation Petition Number 1053 by Scott F. and Mary L.
Frost, Representative Mary Ludwig/Steve Richey, a request to vacate three
unnamed 16-foot wide rights of way, in the Map of Yalaha, located in Section
15, Township 20 South, Range 25 East, in the Yalaha area, Commission District
3. Staff recommended approval.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, was
present to represent the applicant.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being no comment,
the public hearing was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender,
seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the Board
approved Resolution 2005-126 for Road Vacation Petition Number 1053 by Scott F.
and Mary L. Frost, Representative Mary Ludwig/Steve Richey, a request to vacate
three unnamed 16-foot wide rights of way, in the Map of Yalaha, located in
Section 15, Township 20 South, Range 25 East, in the Yalaha area, Commission
District 3.
ROAD VACATION PETITION NO. 1054 -
HARRY LERNER - CLERMONT AREA
Mr. Jim Stivender, Jr., Public Works
Director, presented Road Vacation Petition Number 1054 by Harry Lerner, a
request to vacate a portion of the right of way for Citrus Tower Boulevard,
dedicated in the Plat of Lost Lake, Plat Book 50, Pages 64 through 69,
inclusive, located in Section 28, Township 22 South, Range 26 East, in the
Clermont area, Commission District 2. Staff recommended approval of those
portions that are excess right of way.
It was noted that the applicant was
present.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being no comment,
the public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Commr. Pool, and
seconded by Commr. Stivender, for approval of Resolution 2005-127 for Road
Vacation Petition Number 1054 by Harry Lerner, a request to vacate a portion of
the right of way for Citrus Tower Boulevard, dedicated in the Plat of Lost
Lake, Plat Book 50, Pages 64 through 69, inclusive, located in Section 28,
Township 22 South, Range 26 East, in the Clermont area, Commission District 2.
Under discussion, Commr. Cadwell
confirmed with Mr. Stivender that this does not involve any trail or drainage
issues.
The Chairman called for a vote on the
motion which carried by a unanimous vote of 5-0.
ROAD VACATION PETITION NO. 1059 -
LAKE COUNTY/FLORIDA ROCK/MOSS - UMATILLA AREA (TAB 10)
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN RONALD
STEVENOT, ET AL., VERSUS LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA (TAB 11)
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
presented Tab 10, Road Vacation Petition Number 1059 by Lake County/Florida
Rock/Moss, a request to vacate right of way and to cease maintenance on a portion
of Umatilla Road (Number 8047) in the Plat of Dream Lake Poultry Ranches,
located in Section 5, Township 18 South, Range 26 East, in the Umatilla area, Commission
District 5; and Tab 11, Settlement Agreement between Ronald Stevenot, Margaret
Stevenot, et al., versus Lake County, Florida. He reminded the Board that there
was a combination road vacation/zoning case for expansion of the Marion sand
mine in Lake County where the Board approved the rezoning for the sand mine but
denied the vacation of the road right of way. Tab 11 involves the settlement of
that litigation which has brought back the road vacation. He stated that a 12
to 14-hour mediation session in June resulted in the parties agreeing to settle
their lawsuit (Tab 11, Case No. 2003-CA-3911). The Settlement Agreement,
essentially, provides additional protections for the residents in terms of
additional setbacks, landscaping and other protections from the mining
activities, and concludes with the complete end to the litigation. As part of
the Settlement Agreement, all parties agreed to revisit the vacation of
Umatilla Road because the mine actually will mine across where that road exists
today.
Mr. Minkoff requested approval of the
Settlement Agreement, which will end the litigation, and reconsideration of the
vacation of the road. All of the other actions are by Florida Rock Industries
or the property owner. He noted a change to the Settlement Agreement, as
follows:
“Paragraph 2. Florida Rock Industries
agrees to a setback of two hundred fifty (250) twenty-five (225) feet
from the eastern property boundary for any mining of sand.”
Mr. Minkoff stated that, per the
Agreement, Florida Rock will pay approximately $20,000 in fees to the
Plaintiffs, which does not involve Lake County. He recommended approval of the
Settlement Agreement (Tab 11) and the request to vacate Umatilla Road (Tab 10).
He clarified that, at the Board’s discretion, the recommended action could be
one or two votes. He confirmed that this was brought up about a month ago and
was treated as approval to advertise.
Commr. Hill noted the presence of Mr.
Steve Richey, attorney representing Florida Rock Industries, and Ms. Leslie
Campione, attorney representing the plaintiffs.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
on Road Vacation Petition 1059 (Tab 10) and called for public comment. There
being no comment, the public hearing was closed.
Commr. Cadwell voiced his very strong
opposition to the expansion of this plant into Lake County from Marion County
and commented that the Settlement Agreement may help the neighbors to some
extent.
A motion was made by Commr. Cadwell
and seconded by Commr. Stivender for Board approval of (Tab 10) Resolution
2005-128, Road Vacation Petition Number 1059 by Lake County/Florida Rock/Moss, a
request to vacate right of way and to cease maintenance on a portion of
Umatilla Road (Number 8047) in the Plat of Dream Lake Poultry Ranches, located
in Section 5, Township 18 South, Range 26 East, in the Umatilla area, Commission
District 5; and approval of (Tab 11) Settlement Agreement between Ronald
Stevenot, Margaret Stevenot, et al., versus Lake County, Florida.
In response to Commr. Hill’s question
about opening a public hearing regarding the Settlement Agreement (Tab 11), Mr.
Minkoff clarified that the public hearing is required only for the road
vacation.
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the
motion which carried by a unanimous vote of 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - REZONINGS
REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT - REZONING CASE PH#50-05-2-
LAKE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS - HARRY FIX, AICP -
TRACKING NO. 56-05-CFD
Mr. Jeff Richardson, Planning
Manager, Planning and Development Services, announced that a request for
postponement has been submitted on Rezoning Case PH#50-05-2; Lake County Public
Schools; Harry Fix, AICP; Tracking No. 56-05-CFD, in order to hold a night
meeting in the Minneola area.
Commr. Hill disclosed, for the
record, that she has spoken to parties on both sides on Zoning Agenda Numbers.
1, 2, 3, 7 and 9.
Commr. Stivender disclosed, for the
record, that she has spoken to parties on both sides on Zoning Agenda Numbers.
1, 2, 3, 4 and 9.
Commr. Hanson disclosed, for the
record, that she has spoken to parties on both sides on Zoning Agenda Numbers.
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9 and 11. She announced that she will not be voting on Agenda Number.
2.
Commr. Cadwell disclosed, for the
record, that he has spoken to parties on Zoning Agenda Number. 1.
Commr. Pool disclosed, for the
record, that he has spoken to parties on Zoning Agenda Numbers. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7,
9 and 11.
Mr. Harry Fix, AICP, Director of
Growth Planning, Lake County Public Schools, stated that the Chair of the Lake
County School Board has written a letter requesting that the case be postponed
to a night meeting in the south Lake County area. The School Board has offered
to make available any of the school facilities. He stated that the night
meeting would give more of the public an opportunity to be present at the
hearing.
Commr. Pool remarked that the Board
has realized it wants the public’s input.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
stated that, should the Board choose to postpone this case, Minneola City Hall
has been reserved for Monday, September 19, 2005, at 5:00 p.m.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment on the postponement only, not
the rezoning issue.
Ms.
Christy Jarzemski presented a letter to the Deputy Clerk (Opposition’s Exhibit
O-1) from a neighbor who could not attend today’s meeting. She showed two
photographs taken at her Sullivan Road home (Opposition’s Exhibit O-2) and stated
that this is the third delay for this case. She stated that it is time to make
a decision on this issue so that the School Board can look for the correct
place. She stated that residents’ rights are being trampled and that the School
Board has had plenty of time to gather their sympathizers. She acknowledged
that schools are needed but this is about a rezoning in a beautiful area where
homes are spread apart. She stated that this is all about development because,
if the school is built, there will be more people and the schools will still be
in the same situation. She stated that, per the School Board’s meeting minutes,
the School Board was trying to get rid of other properties before they approved
the Sullivan Road site and even hired a real estate agent to rid them of extra
property. She stated that they put this on their agenda as an emergency item
knowing that it was not zoned. She stated that this Board cannot keep
postponing this hearing.
Commr.
Hanson expressed concern that, apparently, a lot of people have gotten the word
that this meeting may be postponed and probably are not here because of that
assumption.
Ms.
Jarzemski stated that the people who matter and will be affected the most, the
residents, are here. She reiterated that this is not the solution.
Mr.
Jeff Frisz asked if there is any way to move forward with this today and get it
done. He noted that Commr. Pool, at last month’s meeting, suggested another property
that might be available and the case was postponed for 30 days but, if that
property did not pan out, we would continue today. He stated that they would
like to proceed.
Ms.
Lorraine Frankenfield stated that this is the wrong place for a school. She
stated that they bought the property illegally. She asked the Board not to
reward them by giving them another postponement. She acknowledged that there
needs to be a school but this is not the place. She stated that it needs to be
further south. She asked who will pay for buses. She stated that the School
Board will not do anything until this Board rezones this property or leaves it
the way it is. She stated that, if this Board leaves it the way it is, the
School Board will find another property.
Ms.
Pat Donahue stated that she has been to many meetings. She stated that she
lives in the area and has four children. She stated that this is not the right
place for a school, that we need to get this decision made and we need to get
schools built where they need to be. She stated that we need to go ahead with
the hearing.
Ms.
Suzen Hillebrandt stated that she and other residents have taken off work four
times and a lot of residents could not be here today. She stated that she
represents a group of people from rural and not so rural areas who believe in
growth planning rather than growth management after the fact. She stated that
there have been four months of opportunity, for support or opposition, to
attend meetings and there will always be some sort of problem attending any
meeting. She pointed out that this meeting was advertised for today. She stated
that a large group of residents attended the Lake County Zoning Board meeting
in May but a group of 50 might go down to 20 and then to 10 when beaten down
again with another delay. She stated that she rescheduled her vacation in order
to attend the June meeting and that a lot of people are counting on her to
represent them. She asked why today’s hearing, which was advertised on the
County’s website, would be delayed. She implored the Board to continue with the
hearing today.
Mr.
Fred Morrison, attorney representing the Lake County School Board, pointed out
that people here today have said that others could not attend and that is the
reason why this needs to be postponed for an evening meeting. He opined that
the newspaper articles, since School Board Chairman Scott Strong sent his
request for a postponement, have uniformly lead everyone to believe this would
be postponed and that it would be inappropriate to proceed today. He asked the
Board to postpone the meeting.
Commr.
Hill asked about the status of the property that Commr. Pool suggested last
month.
Mr.
Morrison explained that the property is still being considered but there may be
some size problems. One problem is that the Lowndes site, which is before the
Board today, has a restriction that it can only be used for school purposes.
The School Board has asked the seller to consider releasing that restriction
but they do not have a response yet. If the restriction is not released, it
would not be feasible to do the swap but if it is done, the School Board can
look at the merits of the other piece of property.
Mr.
Egor Emery, who has children in Lake County schools, stated that the delays
drive him the wrong way. In disagreeing with Mr. Morrison, Mr. Emery stated
that the citizens pay a much higher price to attend repeated meetings than
those who are paid advocates. He stated that this needs to go forward and an
answer is needed. He stated that he will never agree with the School Board on
this parcel.
Ms.
Hillebrandt stated that the newspaper article did not mention a certain time or
place for a future meeting but did mention that the School Board had asked for
a continuance.
There
being no further public comment, the public hearing relating to the request for
a postponement was closed.
Commr.
Pool remarked that he felt the consensus of the Board at their August 9 meeting
was that an evening meeting would give more citizens an opportunity to speak.
He stated that he absolutely wants to get this over with and that he does not
want an evening meeting but it is important to give citizens on both sides of
the issue that opportunity. He added that the School Board is not present and
prepared today.
A
motion was made by Commr. Pool and seconded by Commr. Cadwell to postpone Rezoning Case PH#50-05-2; Lake County
Public Schools; Harry Fix, AICP; Tracking No. 56-05-CFD, until Monday,
September 19, 2005, at 5:00 p.m., at Minneola City Hall.
Under discussion, Commr. Hanson
stated that we ought to move forward today and that today’s meeting was
advertised. She stated that we ought to deal with the issue, while knowing that
a lot of people probably are not here because of the media. She stated that she
does not mind the night meeting but she will not be voting to postpone.
Commr. Stivender expressed
frustration because, at the Board’s July 26 meeting, she brought up the
scheduling of a night meeting but that did not get done. She stated that, had
it been scheduled sooner, the matter would have been handled before today. She
stated that, after the Board’s July meeting, she immediately asked staff to get
maps on the new site that Commr. Pool suggested but nobody wanted to address it.
Commr. Cadwell remarked that the
Board had not had a request from anyone at that time to hold an evening
meeting.
Commr. Pool explained that the School
Board came forward after the fact and asked for an evening meeting and now
things are being done to try to accommodate Commr. Stivender’s suggestion and
the School Board’s request.
Commr. Cadwell commented that the
School Board, another governmental entity, is asking for a postponement until
they think they would get a more fair hearing. He opined that this Board owes
it to them to do that.
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the
motion which carried by a vote of 4-1.
Commr. Hanson voted “No.”
REZONING CASE PH#41-05-4 - SWANSEA
PROPERTIES LLC - STEVEN J. RICHEY, P.A. - TRACKING NO. 48-05-CP/AMD
Commr. Hanson disclosed, for the
record, that she will not be voting on Rezoning Case PH#41-05-4; Swansea Properties
LLC; Steven J. Richey, P.A.; Tracking No. 48-05-CP/AMD but she will have
comments. (Form 8B Memorandum of Voting Conflict for County, Municipal, and
Other Local Public Officers was submitted by Commr. Hanson and is included in
the backup material.)
Ms. Jennifer DuBois, Planner, Lake
County Planning and Development Services, presented the case and showed the aerial
map of the subject property which is located southeast of the intersection of
State Road 46 (SR 46) and County Road 437 (CR 437) in the Mount
Plymouth/Sorrento area. The applicant wishes to amend CP Ordinance #20-88 to
allow additional commercial uses. At present, the parcel may be utilized for a
corporate office, a car storage area and a service center for a car fleet
leasing company. The applicant submitted a conceptual site plan depicting
130,000 square feet of retail and office space. Although the parcel lies within
an area designated Neighborhood Activity Center on the Lake County Future Land
Use Map, Policy 1-3A.1(3)(c) of the Lake County Comprehensive Plan restricts
development within the commercial node to a maximum of 50,000 square feet of
gross leasable area. The proposed project alone would exceed this maximum; and,
together with the existing commercial development, the total gross leasable
area would rise to 219,559 square feet. Ms. DuBois continued the Summary
Analysis, noting that the applicant has stated that they will be providing a
package water and wastewater plant on site. Staff believes that connection
should be mandatory at such time that a regional or subregional water and/or
wastewater system becomes available to serve the site. Ms. DuBois noted that
the project, as submitted, is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
staff recommends denial of the request.
In response to a question by Mr.
Steve Richey, attorney representing the applicant, regarding the Zoning Board’s
recommendation, Ms. Dubois stated that they recommended approval of the
project, with conditions, by a vote of 5 to 2. She reiterated that staff feels
it is inherently inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and recommends
denial.
Mr. Richey stated that they think
this is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, with the studies that have been
done in the Mount Plymouth/Sorrento area and with the current Land Development
Regulations.
Mr. Greg Beliveau, LPG Urban &
Regional Planners, land planner for the applicant, confirmed that he has been
qualified in the past as an expert on the Lake County Comprehensive Plan and
Lake County’s Land Development Regulations. Mr. Beliveau showed the Conceptual
Framework Plan prepared by Miller Sellen Conner & Walsh (Applicant’s
Exhibit A-1) during their year-long study which identifies the 437/46 location
as a market square, basically the commercial hub for the Mount
Plymouth/Sorrento area. The Miller Sellen study included participation by
property owners and community groups in creating the Framework Plan
(Applicant’s Exhibit A-2). Their final report was presented in July 2003. Mr.
Beliveau stated that the applicant used the location and description of the
type of uses from the report as guidance and made changes to his plans after
meeting with the community. He stated that the applicant down scaled some of
the structures and the scale of the project to break it up.
Mr. Beliveau presented a map with
current zoning (County Road 437 & State Road 46, Neighborhood Activity
Center, prepared by LPG, 08/22/05 - Applicant’s Exhibit A-3) which shows mostly
industrial type uses on the north side of SR 46. He stated that leaves a
pre-existing development that is commercial in nature that started in the 1950s
and it leaves the subject parcel as commercial opportunities to comply with the
market square concept at this intersection.
Commr. Hanson noted that there may be
a commercial property (R-6) on the southeast corner on the map.
Mr. Beliveau explained that the
realignment of CR 437 would swing through the subject parcel on what is
currently Hunter Avenue and the applicant is willing to go through a phasing
approval, not asking for 130,000 square feet today. He stated that the applicant
would ask for 25,000 square feet, having that as a condition of Phase 1; have
the 25,000 square feet be approved for the frontage only; then have the
remainder approved when the CR 437 extension goes in, and then allow for the
additional 105,000 square feet to be approved at that time. He explained that,
therefore, Phase 2 is conditioned on the CR 437 construction going through to
the new linkage. He noted that applications are being put together on land uses
to the south and southeast of the subject parcel that will provide for
intensive development. He stated that they can link to that development and provide
interconnectivity to pull traffic off SR 46 and, basically, SR 46 will become a
back door for all the projects in the southeast. He stated that those
conditions can be put in so that this project is fed also from the south on
Hunter as well as connecting to Payne Road, allowing for connectivity to the
south, to the east and to the west. He referred to the Preliminary Landscape
Plan (Applicant’s Exhibit A-4, prepared by CPH Engineers, 08/02/2005) which
shows the structures dispersed throughout the property rather than one large
box with a strip center design. He noted landscape buffers along future CR 437
and along SR 46 and showed a detailed illustration titled Town Center Blvd.
Cross Section (Applicant’s Exhibit A-5, prepared by CPH Engineers, 08/02/2005).
He stated that this planning was done through meetings with the committee as
well as looking at the directives of the market square concept. He added that
the size of the structures was reduced, reducing the grocery anchor to 45,000
square feet.
Mr. Beliveau confirmed that the
45,000 square foot structure will not be built unless the CR 437 extension is
built and the applicant is willing to include that as a condition of the CP. He
stated that, looking at the analysis for this intersection under the text, this
intersection would comply as community commercial. He confirmed that there are
a limited number of uses which are consistent with the market square concept
and a downtown feel. He discussed a market study (Summary Demographic Profile, Applicant’s
Exhibit A-6), with population estimates and projections and showed existing
commercial centers in proximity to the site (computer generated map, Applicant’s
Exhibit A-7). He concluded that there is a need for this type of center.
Mr. Beliveau presented the County
Road 437 & State Road 46 Neighborhood Activity Center map (Applicant’s
Exhibit A-8, prepared by LPG, 08/22/2005) and stated that the red dot did not
line up with the intersection when compared to the Future Land Use Map. He
explained the fluid nature of the red dots and stated that the text
(Comprehensive Plan) goes through specific details. He stated that the text
establishes this intersection as a community activity center allowing between
50,000 and 500,000 square feet. He confirmed that central water and sewer will
be provided by subregional facilities on site. He confirmed that the developer
has agreed that he will work with the committee to establish the motif of this
project through the next several years.
Mr. Beliveau presented the Spatial
Analysis (Applicant’s Exhibit A-9, prepared by CPH Engineers, 08/18/2005) and a
compilation of drawings depicting a pedestrian-friendly type environment
(Applicant’s Exhibit A-10). He stated that there are no problems making those
design constraints a condition in the CP. He stated that the CP could be
tailored to reflect the market square requirements and that this would look
like a downtown versus looking like a strip center.
Commr. Hanson pointed out that the
Orlando Sentinel property in the northeast corner is an industrial use although
the zoning is commercial. She asked if staff includes industrial when they
consider the 50,000 square feet.
Mr. Richey stated that staff, at the
Zoning Board meeting, talked about an additional 50,000 square feet at that
intersection.
Mr. Jeff Richardson, Planning
Manager, Lake County Planning and Development Services, explained that staff
typically has interpreted all of the commercial nodes and industrial, as they
have been set out, as anything that was approved prior to adoption of the
Comprehensive Plan as pretty much there and it has a certain vested right that
goes along with it.
Mr. Richey referred to the Preliminary
Landscape Plan (Applicant’s Exhibit A-4) which shows the anchor building
fronting Town Center Blvd., not SR 46.
Mr. Beliveau referred to Applicant’s
Exhibit A-3 and pointed out different existing zonings and residences. He
confirmed that residences will be behind commercial buildings.
Commr. Hanson stated that a real
concern is that the market square apparently cannot have any additional
commercial use because the Comprehensive Plan is set now at 50,000 square feet.
She asked how we deal with that issue.
Mr. Richardson advised that, while
hearing a representation today that the Miller Sellen Framework Study was
adopted as the plan, the Board only accepted the study and then appointed a
committee to do further study. He remarked that the ultimate development of
that market square might include creation of new policies and/or overlays to
amend the Comprehensive Plan to allow those uses to stay in place. A time
schedule for completion has not been set but the committee is moving forward
with the individual topics which will involve community meetings. He confirmed
that the only way to look at this request is under the existing rules, not the
Comprehensive Plan change.
Commr. Hill asked about Hunter Avenue
and Payne Road and the realignment of the road.
Mr. Fred Schneider, Director of
Engineering, Lake County Public Works Department, explained that the conceptual
plan alignment is envisioned by community groups and is on the County’s
unfunded program for a study to define the actual corridor. He stated that the
County has not said the right of way will be here. He stated that it will come
along the west side of the subject property but how it curves at the south end
and realigns to CR 437 will have to be worked through. He stated that the road,
south of CR 437, will more than likely have to be improved by this development
and the right of way may come off one side or the other. He stated that the
County has not approached the property owners to the west about dedicating
right of way.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment.
Ms. Jeanne Etter, a resident of Mount
Plymouth and a member of the Mount Plymouth-Sorrento Planning Advisory
Committee, clarified for the record that this particular petition has not been
presented to the Lake County Local Planning Agency (LPA) and has only been
heard by the Lake County Zoning Board. She explained that the committee began
meeting early this year and has devoted some time to this petition. She
presented a recap of public comments that were made at the committee’s August
11, 2005, meeting (Opposition’s Exhibit O-1). Speaking only as a member of the
committee, she explained that they will continue with the Framework Study,
using it as a guide. She stated that they want to see a village-type area, keeping
the rural feel. She stressed that it is a compact urban node and that they
envision something other than a potential shopping center. She stated that they
are not saying no to markets and they would like a park, a school, and bike
trails, all with a community feel. She stated that an Employment Center
designation is located a couple of miles to the west at Round Lake Road and SR
46. She confirmed that SR 46 is an arterial road but is only two lanes and a
bypass has been requested. She asked the Board to follow the Comprehensive Plan
which has this as a much smaller scale area. She stated that Hunter Avenue is a
dirt driveway that goes to two residences and Payne Road is not developed.
Development of these two roads, and some of today’s exhibits, have not been
presented to the committee. She emphasized that the residents want to maintain
their current identity. She asked that the committee be allowed to continue
meeting with residents in an effort to make this a special defining place. She
asked the Board to deny this request.
Mr. Egor Emery noted that Commr.
Hanson has recused herself because of a conflict. He asked if she will be able
to talk about what she has learned over the lifetime of the study.
Commr. Hanson confirmed that, according
to the County Attorney, she can speak, but not vote. She stated that she will
have some comments, particularly about the committee’s accomplishments thus far.
Commr. Cadwell pointed out that this
committee was set up because Commr. Hanson aggravated the Board to do it and
that the area is not represented by a city. He stated that she has caught a
little flak but she set the committee up to be sure there is some unified input
from that community.
Mr. Emery stated that he has attended
numerous meetings in the Mount Plymouth-Sorrento community and that he cannot
begin to tell the Board how far this vision presented today deviates from what
the community has talked about at every meeting. He agreed with Commr.
Cadwell’s perception that the Preliminary Landscape Plan (Applicant’s Exhibit
A-4) looks like a shopping center with areas dedicated completely to cars. He
remarked that the Miller Sellen study was greeted with gasps when it was
presented but people have become more comfortable with that particular concept
even though it is not the end product. He stated that all of the residents he
has been in contact with have recommended something of a smaller scale and the
residents want to craft a town that preserves the character of their longtime
lifestyle. He stated that the applicant has knowledge of projects nearby but
those have not been brought before the Board. He stated that the committee is
trying to bring all of these concepts together in a cohesive concept, not a
piecemeal thing. He stated that residents would have to get in a car to drive
to the proposed development and he noted that this area is littered with
shopping centers whose tenants have moved on. He stated that retail space is
available and more is not needed. He pointed out staff’s comments about
unfunded roads for the area and he asked the Board to consider how difficult it
will be to make this dream a reality. He concluded that we do not need another
parking lot. Mr. Emery stated that the Comprehensive Plan gives the Board the
opportunity to say no to bad ideas or to accept bad ideas. He stated that this
is a bad idea and the Board should use the Comprehensive Plan to send a message
to everyone in the community that the long-range vision will be followed, not
be deviated from.
Mr. Barry Blake, a resident of Mount
Plymouth and a Florida native, stated that he sees people who move to the State
and want to close the door to further growth. He stated that he would like to
see certain areas preserved such as the Wekiva area. He stated that it is very
scary when the State and community can take away individual rights. He opined
that a shopping center at Round Lake Road would be more detrimental to the area
because there is far more residential development and a school and it is a
busy, dangerous intersection. He stated that a shopping center of this type
looks nice and it looks like the developer is willing to work with the Board.
He stated that he is all for it and that it will help property values in the
area and take some of the traffic off of SR 46. He stated that he currently
drives to the Publix in Mount Dora or Sanford. He stated that, as a resident,
he supports the project.
Ms. Priscilla Bernardo, resident of
Sorrento and Vice President of the Mount Plymouth-Sorrento Planning Advisory
Committee, showed a black and white version of the Preliminary Landscape Plan
(Plymouth-Sorrento Town Center, Opposition’s Exhibit O-2) which does not
include trees. She stated that the realignment of CR 437 is not a particular
committee issue although they realize it is a possibility. She stated that the
committee’s focus has always been to maintain SR 46 as a two-lane road and that
it would become their Main Street, not this offshoot, reconnective thing. She stated
that she met with the developer, Mr. Lou Fabrizio, and talked about all the
things she had heard from the public, such as a park and strolling along the
street. Ms. Bernardo explained that the committee has had extensive educational
meetings and has learned about schools and zoning and planning and development
in an effort to be knowledgeable. She added that they have had public meetings
and have gotten public input. She distributed another recap of the public
comments from August 11, 2005, charrette (Opposition’s Exhibit O-3) where
participants talked about the market place idea, not the project being
presented today. She stated that participants know clearly what they want. They
want small parking pods, square footage for retail limited to 5,000 to 12,000,
small buildings, connectivity to be able to walk and bike. They do not want
chain stores. They want to protect existing local businesses. She stated that participants
want a town center with a small-town feel which would include churches,
school(s), “mom & pop” shops, playgrounds, parks, small retail shops, and
walkable storefronts.
Ms. Bernardo asked the Board to deny
the request because it does not fit with the Comprehensive Plan and because
this community needs this committee to define something for themselves. She
stated that it has been said that this reorientation was done because of input
from the community; however, she advised that there was no mention in the
minutes of a prior meeting of reorienting this to a road that does not exist.
She stated that there was mention of the Framework Study which, she stated, has
been used and abused by developers. She stated, for the record, that this is a
study; that all of this Board said, “Great, here, Mount Plymouth-Sorrento
committee, go make it work for what you need.” She stated that what is left out
by developers is “The market square will serve the demands of pass by traffic,
but more importantly, it will serve the overall community as a pedestrian
oriented, mixed-use center at the intersection of possibly a realigned 437 and
SR 46.”
Ms. Bernardo reiterated that this
plan is not pedestrian friendly but is a shopping plaza, a sea of parking that
people drive to. She stated that Mr. Fabrizio has been invited to work with the
committee repeatedly and has been told what they want. She stated that they
would like to continue to work with him and help him develop something that the
community will support. She asked the Board to deny the project as it stands
now, get back to the drawing board with Mr. Fabrizio, do the market center that
the community wants and continue with the process.
Mr. Curtis Duffield, President, Mount
Plymouth-Sorrento Planning Advisory Committee, stated that the August 2005,
charrette, planned by Mr. Richardson, had a remarkable turnout. He stated that
they asked the community what they really want and the resulting information
(Opposition O-3) probably represents about 75 people. He noted comments such as
an eclectic mix of architectural styles for store fronts, meandering walkable
sidewalks, trails, and no “big box.” Mr. Duffield stated that the anchor store
on the plan is about 44,000 square feet which is an acre. The area has two
grocery stores, three service station/convenience stores, a dentist’s office,
pizza places, a mower shop and a hardware store. He stated that a comment at
the charrette was that these local merchants will not survive if this
development happens. The survival of these businesses is important. Mr.
Duffield explained that the Mount Plymouth-Sorrento area is not a cookie cutter
area because every home is different and on different size parcels. He stated
that the public is telling the committee that they want it like they have it
even though some new commercial would be wanted, such as a coffee shop, an ice
cream stand, maybe a dry cleaner and other small businesses. He stated that
they are not, however, talking about Walgreen’s and Publix. He stated that
there are three shopping centers nearby which provide adequate shopping. In
conclusion, he stated that the committee has a job to do; the committee has a
schedule with meetings planned. He asked the Board to let the committee do its
work. He asked the Board to take staff’s recommendation and deny this request.
Mr. Paul Trembly, a resident of Mount
Plymouth, stated that he has participated in some of the meetings and that he
agrees with many of the statements made by previous speakers. The committee is
looking at the Framework Study and will report to the Board with implementation
suggestions. He stated that the citizens have overwhelmingly said they want to
keep their small town feel and the small community, neighborhood type of
intimacy that they possess. He encouraged the Board to let the committee do
what the Board has asked them to do. He asked the Board to deny this request.
Mr. Bob Walsh, who lives adjacent to
the subject property, stated that the applicant’s diagram depicts his property
as a school. He opined that they have stepped beyond their bounds and have
planned his life and are trying to plan everyone’s lives in Sorrento and Mount
Plymouth. He stated that the committee has stated a vision and he included his
input at the charrette. He explained that he moved away from large boxes about
two years ago and that he has dreamed of living in a small town. He stated that
this is not fair; that they are entitled to their piece of heaven.
Ms. Jane Walsh stated that these
roads are pie in the sky. She stated that they thought 300 acres around them were
zoned for one home to five acres but have been told it actually is five houses
to one acre. She stated that water and electricity are not available now. She
stated that the committee has the ability to make this a special place for Lake
County. She explained that the subject area is 17 acres and she lives on 25
acres behind it. She pointed out that, by keeping SR 46 a two lane road, this
special area can be spread between CR 437 and Mount Plymouth in an effort to
get a country feel. She asked the Board to vote this down.
There being no further public
comment, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Lou Fabrizio stated that they met
with the framework committee group after becoming involved with this property.
He stated that he was somewhat taken aback by the reaction and he subsequently
attended a public meeting. He stated that he then felt compelled to go out into
the community and get a feel for what the community wants. He stated that he
certainly does not want to be involved in a property that does not fit into the
community nor is not wanted by the community. He explained that he spent two
hours on two evenings knocking on doors and answering questions. He explained
that he showed residents a site plan that is different than the one shown
today. He presented a petition (Applicant’s Exhibit A-11) that was circulated
to 55 people and signed by all but two people. He stated that those people were
all for it and thought it would be a great thing for the area. Mr. Fabrizio
stated that he did not try to keep any exhibits away from the framework group.
He stated that the Preliminary Landscape Plan (Exhibit A-4) was shown to the Lake
County Zoning Board and it was available at the charrette although nobody
wanted to see it. He stated that the committee, prior to the charrette, voted
to send a letter to this Commission recommending denial. He stated that he met
with four of the eleven committee members; therefore, seven have not seen it.
He stated that not all of the committee members were against it.
Mr. Fabrizio addressed the other
concept plan (Spatial Analysis - Applicant’s Exhibit A-9) which is their idea
of how this proposed development would fit into his understanding of the Framework
Plan. He stated that they wanted to show how a town center would work as the
roadway system evolves. He stated that he did not want to offend anyone by
insinuating that their property would become something other than what they
want it to become. He stated that he understands that the realignment of CR 437
that has been in the County plan for some time will be looked at as part of the
PD&E with the beltway. He stated that, in a willingness to work with the
committee and community, they reoriented their property to front on that road.
He opined that they can make a statement with that road and that an image for
the community can be created. He stated that they are willing to do something
architecturally and aesthetically pleasing that works with the look of the
community.
Lastly, Mr. Fabrizio explained that
there is a ten-acre site with one residence immediately to the east, the
Walshes live to the south of the property and abut a portion of it. Two parcels
are on the other side of Hunter Avenue which is a County right of way. He added
that one is vacant and the one behind has one residence on about five or six
acres. Directly behind the property is a five-acre site which they own, which
has a residence and is rented out.
Mr. Richey stated that their proposal
is to have the Board approve, as Phase 1 of the project, 25,000 square feet
which would be the buildings that front on SR 46 (Spatial Analysis - Applicant’s
Exhibit A-9). He stated that they have indicated that, if they are not able to
put the road together, which would be on their property, then the only thing
being approved today would be 25,000 square feet. He stated that, if the road
system that they propose were to be built, they would have a right to complete
the site plan that they propose today with 130,000 square feet. He stated that
they have provided the buffering on the Preliminary Landscape Plan (Applicant’s
Exhibit A-4). He stated that Mr. Beliveau testified that this property is
pedestrian-friendly, car-friendly and it has trail systems interconnecting with
the future development they know is taking place around the area. Mr. Richey
stated that the intent of the plan was to ensure that it is viable. Simply
making it pedestrian or bicycle friendly will not make this a viable center. He
stated that he is talking about a town center and that it will not be viable if
there is not some element of vehicular traffic into this piece of property. He
stated that they think it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the
25,000 square feet clearly would be consistent with the 50,000 square feet
which is available at this intersection. He reiterated that, when the road goes
all the way through, the 130,000 square feet would be the maximum that would be
there with this kind of site plan. He stated that their testimony is that they
meet the Comprehensive Plan for the whole 130,000 square feet but, obviously,
they are willing to limit it to 25,000 square feet today as they proceed in the
staging of this project.
Commr. Hanson commented that she
harassed the Commission over a couple of years to continue with this effort.
She stated that there are some outstanding folks on the committee and that they
have worked hard to educate themselves. She opined that the charrette went very
well and stated that it is fortunate that SR 46 has been maintained as a two-lane
road. She explained that the Framework Study, in recommending to the Wekiva
study group, helped create that bypass around Mount Plymouth and Sorrento. She
stated that, if that happens, it will leave the opportunity for SR 46 to be a
local road and a Main Street. She opined that was critical and it was supported
by this Board. She remarked that the bike paths, the pedestrian-friendly
community and the height restrictions are all important. She commented that the
SR 437 extension has been on Public Works’ plans for a while but the funding is
not available. She stated that it is going to be very difficult to create a
town center on SR 46 and CR 437 as it currently dead ends at SR 46. She noted
that at least two of the corners are already developed. She stated that she has
had trouble getting a true definition of a big box. She stated that the Orlando
Sentinel building on the northeast corner is 48,000 square feet and would be the
approximate size of the recommended grocery store. She expressed concern that,
without a change in the Comprehensive Plan, we are not going to be able to
provide for additional square footage for commercial at the intersection of SR
46 and CR 437. She stated that a town center does have to have some commercial
uses.
Commr. Hanson stated that the
committee has talked about a lot of good concepts and has done a good job
building on the framework. She confirmed that the Framework Study was not
adopted by the Board, it was merely accepted. She stated that she believes this
original proposal, as presented, is premature. She stated that there needs to
be work on changes in the Comprehensive Plan and the advisory committee will
make their recommendations for those changes. Commr. Hanson stated that this
property was rezoned commercial more than fifteen years ago and what would be
changed would be the uses. She noted that she will not be voting but that she
would support, thinking it is consistent, a 20,000 square foot addition for
buildings, limited to 20,000, but that it would be designed so that it does fit
into a town center, if that town center ever moves to the south. She opined
that would be compatible with the Comprehensive Plan if we consider the Orlando
Sentinel as industrial, which is its true use. She stated that there is a lot
of commercial zoning along SR 46. Folks could come into those properties
anytime and put in a commercial building without scrutiny until the
recommendations by this committee become part of the Comprehensive Plan. Commr.
Hanson suggested that any future zonings would have to come back before the
Board, which is contrary to what Mr. Richey is requesting. He is asking to
allow the additional square footage after the road is built. She stated that
ought to come back to this Board as we look at, and are requiring, the site
plans that need to be approved by this Board. She stated that this Board would
need to look at whatever is being submitted, at that time, based on what the
committee has put together as part of the Comprehensive Plan. She reiterated
that she would not support the request as it is today but a modification of
that. She again noted that she is not voting.
Commr. Cadwell commented that, with
the change in the road system and SR 46 being the way it is going to be, there
really is a chance at four intersections to make that town center happen. He
expressed reluctance to let anything happen there until those Comprehensive
Plan changes are made. He stated that it is our one shot in that area. He
commented that he was defending Commr. Hanson today because she has aggravated
the Board to make sure they do something different than they have in other
places. He opined that this is not the vision the folks are working for, even
though it is not an unpleasant thing. He asked the committee to pick up the
pace if they can because the Comprehensive Plan will be changed quickly. He
agreed that this request is premature and if we do the smaller version it will
be there forever and they will have to work around it. He stated that he does
not feel comfortable moving forward.
Regarding a timeframe for completion
of the study, Mr. Richardson explained that the Wekiva area, maybe including
the compact node, may not necessarily be touched until they go through the
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). One of the things they can do is
continually provide information as the committee has their discussions. He
stated that they could hold a monthly community meeting or charrette-type
discussion but that would not leave the committee much time to do their
discussion. He stated that they will discuss that next month.
Commr. Cadwell pointed out that there
was enough evidence presented on this request on which to recommend denial but the
Board has to have some rules and regulations to try to create what the
community wants.
Commr. Pool commented that the
citizens feel very strongly. He applauded Mr. Fabrizio’s efforts in knocking on
doors. He stated that he met with several citizens in trying to figure out the
future for that area but today’s plan really does not accomplish that. He
pointed out that Groveland is begging for a Publix but the Mount
Plymouth-Sorrento community does not want one or want one of this size. He
stated that he would like to know what the smallest Publix is in Florida. He
remarked that it may be, with the right architectural design and the smaller
scale, something they could embrace. However, he stated that they have
convinced him they do not want to see this and he will not be able to support
this rezoning.
Commr. Stivender asked if there is a
way to postpone the case, rather than denying it. She stated they still will
own the property when the study is done. She suggested that they work with the
committee to come up with what they want at that intersection, or deny it
without prejudice, so that he can come back.
Mr. Richey asked, if the Board is not
going to approve it today, that it be denied without prejudice so, rather than
having to wait a year, if the committee has something available, that they
could work with them in the interim and bring that back.
Commr. Cadwell stated that does not
preclude them from having to go back through the whole process. It would not be
a start-over-from-today thing and the applicant would have to go back through
the process, but would be allowed to do it within a shorter time period.
Mr. Richey stated that he thinks they
could refile in 60 days.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
stated that the request would have to be changed somewhat.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell,
seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried by a vote of 4-0, the Board overturned
the recommendation of the Lake County Zoning Board and denied, without
prejudice, Rezoning Case PH#41-05-4, Swansea Properties LLC, Steven J. Richey, P.A.,
Tracking No. 48-05-CP/AMD; with the understanding that the applicant has to
begin the process over, including appearing before the Lake County Zoning
Board.
Commr. Hanson abstained from the
vote.
RECESS AND REASSEMBLY
At 1:00 p.m., Commr. Hill announced
that the Board would recess for lunch.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - REZONINGS
(CONTINUED)
REZONING CASE PH#60-05-2 - RODNEY L.
YAWN & RYAN L. YAWN - STEVEN J. RICHEY, P.A. - TRACKING NO. 73-05-CP
Ms. Jennifer DuBois, Planner, Lake
County Planning and Development Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#60-05-2; Rodney
L. Yawn & Ryan L. Yawn; Steven J. Richey, P.A.; Tracking No. 73-05-CP, a
request to rezone from A (Agriculture District) to CP (Planned Commercial
District) for professional office use and outdoor motor vehicle and boat
storage. She showed the aerial map of the subject property which is located in
the Clermont area, east of County Road 455, approximately 1/3 mile north of the
intersection of County Road 455 and State Road 50. The site will be served by
City of Clermont water and sewer provided municipal approval is granted. Ms.
DuBois read the Summary Analysis and indicated that staff finds that the
proposed rezoning is inconsistent with the Lake County Comprehensive Plan.
While professional offices are allowed in C-1 zoning district, truck yards and
self-service storage facilities are not. Staff recommends denial of the request
to rezone. The Lake County Zoning Board voted 7-0 for approval, not to exceed
five trailers.
Mr. Steve Richey, attorney
representing the applicant, stated that he presented evidence to the Zoning
Board that they have operated a home occupation internet truck distribution
center on these five acres. He stated that the property is fenced and heavily
wooded and dozens of people have asked if they could park their RVs
(recreational vehicles) and trucks there. He explained that Lake County passed
a rule several years ago that prohibits trucks in subdivisions. He stated that
the request is to allow use of the existing house as professional offices for
the internet business and to allow self-storage of boats, RVs and up to five
trucks. He stated that the site plan limits conditions of the uses
significantly, not opening it up to the heavy or more intense commercial uses.
He stated that the site is behind Publix, next to an asphalt/concrete plant and
across CR 455 from Tower Chemical. Mr. Richey confirmed that the abandoned
railroad will be used for the trail and that the heavy woods will not be
disturbed.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being no comment,
the public hearing was closed.
For the record, Commr. Pool disclosed
that he has spoken with Messrs. Rodney Yawn and Ryan Yawn. He stated that there
obviously is a need to park some of the vehicles in different locations. He
opined that this is an ideal location, especially with the heavy buffer.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded
by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the Board upheld
the recommendation of the Lake County Zoning Board and approved Ordinance
2005-67, Rezoning Case PH#60-05-2; Rodney L. Yawn & Ryan L. Yawn; Steven J.
Richey, P.A.; Tracking No. 73-05-CP, a request to rezone from A (Agriculture
District) to CP (Planned Commercial District).
REZONING CASE PH#71-05-4 - KRIS COX -
CHRISTOPHER SHIPLEY - TRACKING NO. 76-05-Z
Mr. Jeff Richardson, Planning
Manager, Lake County Planning and Development Services, presented Rezoning Case
PH#71-05-4; Kris Cox; Christopher Shipley; Tracking No. 76-05-Z, a request to
rezone a 24.1 acre site from A (Agriculture) to R-2 (Estate Residential) for
the creation of a single-family residential subdivision. He showed the aerial
map of the subject property which is located north of the intersection of County
Road 437 and Wolf Branch Road in the Mount Plymouth-Sorrento area. He noted the
subdivision would consist of approximately 30 new units and would be served by
individual wells, or a community well, and septic tanks. He stated that the
issue prompting staff’s recommendation for denial is the notice from the Lake
County School Board that Round Lake Elementary School is 61% over capacity. He
noted that Mount Dora Middle School is 2% under capacity and Mount Dora High
School is 29% under capacity.
Commr. Hanson remarked that we need
to analyze the number of students that come to Round Lake Elementary School
from other areas, including Orange County. It is important that the Board have
the correct information. She stated that we have not necessarily agreed with
the School Board’s analysis of under and over capacity, knowing that they do
not consider portables as part of their capacity.
Commr. Hanson disclosed, for the
record, that she met with the applicant. She stated that the City of Eustis is
not interested in providing utilities even though the subject parcel is close.
She stated that she would rather see this project be a cluster development with
more open space and mixed use with commercial on the corner.
Mr. Richardson commented that the
parcel is not within the City’s utility service area and he understands they do
not plan to serve much more than they currently serve.
Commr. Stivender stated that there
was a letter of support from the abutting property owner.
Mr. Chris Shipley, applicant, stated
that LPG Urban & Regional Planners compiled school capacity numbers. There
are still 148 students out of zone or out of county attending Round Lake
Elementary School and over capacity is now at 152%. Based on data available to
staff about a month ago, the number was 161%. He showed quotes from the staff
report (Applicant’s Exhibit A-1) and stated that this application is squeaky
clean from every perspective except school concurrency. He explained that the
Zoning Board members were torn between making a significant policy shift on
school concurrency. He agreed that legislation has been passed and is scheduled
to become effective in 2008. He stated that this situation, in his view, is
that staff is trying to impose standards of the future on this little development
today. He remarked that Mr. Kris Cox, the land owner, unlike large land owners,
has no mechanism of donating land for a school or a fire station or paying
large sums of money to get approval and to oversee the impact on the schools.
Mr. Shipley showed the Lake County Public Schools Residential Growth Impact
Report (Applicant’s Exhibit A-2) upon which staff’s report was based. He
pointed out that six children, according to the general rule of thumb, would be
added to the elementary school. He stated that number is de minimis. He stated
that a change in policy should be made by this Board, not the Zoning Board. He
stated that making this change on this development would be essentially
imposing a moratorium on all new growth. He stated that there is no way to get
an application for rezoning that is as uncontroversial and has such a minimal
impact as this one.
In response to a question by Commr.
Cadwell, Mr. Shipley replied that he believes it is the intention of Mr. Cox to
develop this property on half-acre parcels with individual wells and septic
systems.
Commr. Hanson asked if there is a
plan for sidewalks.
Mr. Shipley showed a very rough
conceptual plan (Applicant’s Exhibit A-3) which has no provision for sidewalks.
He stated that there will be a provision for additional dedicated right of way
on Wolf Branch Road for a turn lane.
Commr. Hanson expressed concern that
there is no open space. She suggested that some clustering could be done if the
homes have individual septic tanks with central water.
Mr. Shipley explained that much of
the surrounding property is Agricultural and R-1 and this is a good use for
this property given its location at the intersection of two collector roads. He
stated that most of Wolf Branch Road is developed less densely except in the
immediate vicinity of the subject property.
Commr. Hanson asked Mr. Shipley if
they have considered one-third acre lots, or townhouses, with a water system.
Mr. Shipley explained that Mr. Cox
has indicated that the size of the homes in this subdivision cannot be built on
one-third acre lots, however, nothing is set is stone and they are open to
suggestions by the Board. He stated that these will be high-end homes and the
development is envisioned to be a single-family residential community.
Commr. Hanson stated that, before
moving forward, she would rather see a site plan with a little more class than
just straight zoning, utilizing more environmental concepts.
Mr. Shipley asked if she would like
to see a PUD (Planned Unit Development).
Commr. Hanson responded that she
would love a PUD but that they could do clustering and central water without it
being a PUD. She suggested looking at that and bringing it back in 30 days.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
confirmed that the only way conditions can be imposed is by having it be a PUD.
Mr. Tony Roberts stated that he has a
contract with Mr. Cox to potentially purchase the property and develop it. He
stated that the site plan presented today (Applicant’s Exhibit A-3) was just
for feasibility. An engineered plan will cost $2,000 to $3,000 and he did not
feel he should spend that money until they know what they can do with the site.
The underlying land use under the Comprehensive Plan allows for 5.5 units per
acre but they are only asking for about 1.2 to 1.4 units per acre. He stated
that they are planning open space, a common area, saving oak trees and winding
the roads. He explained that the retention areas will eat up some of the lots.
Mr. Roberts stated that they want to build 25 to 35 upscale homes on generous
lot sizes. He explained that the design of the subdivision will depend on the
topography of the property and the park might be in the area with the existing
cluster of oak trees just off of Wolf Branch Road. He opined that the lots will
be 1/2 acre in size and may be a little larger in the corners.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he is a
little more comfortable with the request because of having seen the type of
developments the builder has done.
Mr. Roberts stated that he has been
here 35+ years and the money generated stays in Lake County. He confirmed that
he would like to try for 20% to 25%, or 20% not including the roads, open
space. He stated that he would love to have City of Eustis water but he is
being told that it is not feasible at this time.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment.
Mr. George Gideon, Wolf Branch Road,
presented a letter from Leslie and Andrew Garvis for the record. (The August
23, 2005, letter was marked as Exhibit O-1 for the Opposition.) He stated that
he and the Garvis’ are opposed to the request. He opined that the project will
need two turn lanes because it is a very dangerous intersection. He suggested
that they could give three acres on the corner to the County for a fire station.
Mr. Gideon remarked that their plan is very sketchy and he cannot see half-acre
lots as being Country Estate. He stated that schools are overcrowded. He stated
that he would not be opposed to three or five-acre lots but the applicant
should come back with a comprehensive plan before the Board considers the
request. He asked the Board to decline the request.
There being no further comment, the
public hearing was closed.
Mr. Shipley, in rebuttal, stated that
there will be one entrance on Wolf Branch Road and many of Mr. Gideon’s issues
will be incorporated in the final development plan. He stated that the owner
does not wish to have an entrance on CR 437 because of the danger of the
existing hill. Mr. Shipley stated that a new elementary school is on the top of
the School Board’s priority list and that the City of Mount Dora is considering
a fire station on the corner of Wolf Branch Road at Round Lake Road. He
suggested that the development process will be a long one. He remarked that the
School Board is always playing catch up and will continue to be that way until
the State decides to change the way it funds schools.
Mr. Shipley stated that Round Lake
Elementary is overcrowded because it is a very good school. In spite of how
many children are enrolled, the level of service is not diminishing.
Commr. Hanson asked Mr. Shipley if
they could live with one unit to the acre with the ability to cluster.
Mr. Shipley suggested that a nice
park area in the front, leaving the trees undisturbed, will require denser
development in the back.
Mr. Roberts stated that their ratio
might be 1.4 units per acre and that is perfectly acceptable to them. He
explained that the purchase price dictates that he be able to do one unit per
acre for a decent return on his investment but he does not want maximum density.
He remarked that they could be asking for R-3 which is three units per acre,
for a total of 75 units. He stated that they do not want that and are trying to
keep that from happening in Lake County.
Commr. Hanson advised that the Board
has not approved a density greater than one to one on the north side of Wolf
Branch Road in that area.
Regarding the 2.5 acre commercial
piece, Mr. Roberts stated that they may bank it for the future but it will be
an economic decision based on engineering the roads. He explained that he has
not purchased the property at this time so he is not willing to spend tens of
thousands of dollars until he knows what is feasible.
Board members expressed comfort with
the request for R-2 zoning.
Commr. Hanson expressed concern about
the continuation of the higher density down Wolf Branch Road, particularly on
the north side. She opined that they have shown a pattern of one unit to the
acre, some clustered, however, it is in the Urban Node, non-Wekiva, and there
is high density to the south in the old historic Sorrento subdivision.
A motion was made by Commr. Hanson
and seconded by Commr. Stivender for approval of the request for R-2, with the
25-30 units, no more than 30 and hopefully only 25.
Under discussion, Mr. Roberts
confirmed that their intention is to build upscale with stone front houses. The
trees and winding roads tie perfectly with the subdivision’s country feel. He
stated that every tree will be saved where feasible but a diseased tree would have
to be removed. He pointed out that he can get more money when the lot has a
beautiful oak tree. He confirmed that he would expect 1.2 to 1.4 units per acre
if the other 2.5 acre portion is incorporated but he expects coming back to the
Board should they decide to do that.
Commr. Hanson reiterated her request
for 25% open space, noting that the Board cannot condition the rezoning
approval.
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the
motion which carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, and the Board overturned the recommendation of the Lake
County Zoning Board and approved Ordinance 2005-68, Rezoning Case PH#71-05-4;
Kris Cox; Christopher Shipley; Tracking No. 76-05-Z, a request to rezone a 24.1
acre site from A (Agriculture) to R-2 (Estate Residential).
REZONING CASE PH#68-05-1 - PATRICK
MILLER - TRACKING NO. 79-05-Z
Ms. Stacy Allen, Senior Planner, Lake
County Planning and Development Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#68-05-1; Patrick
Miller; Tracking No. 79-05-Z, a request to rezone from CFD (Community Facility
District) Ordinance 36-91 and R-1 (Rural Residential) + CUP 834-1/5 to R-1
(Rural Residential). She showed the aerial map of the 1.39 acre site which is
in the Leesburg area at the end of Shady Acres Road. She stated that staff
recommends approval of the request and the Lake County Zoning Board voted 7-0
with a recommendation for approval. The applicant is requesting a zoning
district change to allow for a residential lot. She confirmed that the intent
is to leave the property as is and sell it.
Mr. Patrick Miller, owner/applicant,
explained that the lady leasing the house wants to buy the property.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being no comment,
the public hearing was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell,
seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the Board
upheld the recommendation of the Lake County Zoning Board and approved Ordinance
2005-69, Rezoning Case PH#68-05-1; Patrick Miller; Tracking No. 79-05-Z, a
request to rezone from CFD (Community Facility District) Ordinance 36-91 and
R-1 (Rural Residential) + CUP 834-1/5 to R-1 (Rural Residential).
REZONING CASE PH#63-05-3 - CHESTER
DAILEY - WILLIAM F. DABNEY - TRACKING NO. 83-05-Z
Ms. Stacy Allen, Senior Planner, Lake
County Planning and Development Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#63-05-3; Chester
Dailey; William F. Dabney; Tracking No. 83-05-Z, a request to rezone from A
(Agriculture) to R-1 (Rural Residential) to allow a minor lot split for a new
single-family dwelling. She showed the aerial map and stated that staff
recommends approval of the request and that the Lake County Zoning Board
recommended approval by a vote of 7-0. The 5-acre parcel is located in the
south Leesburg area, west of U.S. Highway 27 and east of the CR 33 and CR 48
intersection on Haywood Worm Farm Road. She noted that the applicant is not
able to be present due to injuries.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment.
Mr. Al Tindale stated that he received
a written notice of the proposed rezoning. He stated that he and his four
brothers own nearby property, less than five acres, and asked if R-1 zoning allows
one house per five acres.
It was confirmed that R-1 zoning
allows one unit per acre while the current Agriculture zoning allows one unit
per five acres.
Commr. Stivender suggested that Mr.
Tindale speak with staff. She noted that he and his brothers would need to
apply for R-1 zoning in order to build more than one house on their property.
There being no further public
comment, the public hearing was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender,
seconded by Commr. Cadwell, and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the
Board upheld the recommendation of the Lake County Zoning Board and approved
Ordinance 2005-70, Rezoning Case PH#63-05-3; Chester Dailey; William F. Dabney;
Tracking No. 83-05-Z.
REZONING CASE PH#67-05-5 - STEVE
& PAMELA HUNIHAN - LESLIE CAMPIONE - TRACKING NO. 80-05-CP
Ms. Mary Hamilton, Senior Planner,
Lake County Planning and Development Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#67-05-5;
Steve & Pamela Hunihan; Leslie Campione; Tracking No. 80-05-CP, a request
to rezone a 5.88 +/- acre parcel from A (Agriculture) to CP (Planned Commercial
District) to use the front 3.15 acres (the triangular piece) for retail
convenience and the rear 2+ acres for a single family residence. She showed the
aerial map and stated that the parcel is located at the northeast corner of CR
439 and CR 44A in Eustis. The Lake County Zoning Board recommended approval by
a vote of 5-2 with the condition of no more than three fuel pumps and that
architectural review standards would be provided. Ms. Hamilton presented the
standards which were received from Ms. Leslie Campione, attorney for the
applicants. (An August 17, 2005, e-mail message and the Commercial Design
Criteria are included in the backup material.)
Ms. Leslie Campione, attorney representing
the applicants, stated that she used City of Mount Dora criteria because of
positive feedback about the nice look of the City’s convenience stores, gas
stations and commercial retail areas. She added that she used criteria for
projects that are 5,000 square feet or less in size. She noted the required
design treatments such as canopies, raised cornices, arches, cupolas, bell
towers, metal or tile roofs, etc. She remarked that the Hunihans are interested
in developing something like the Florida Cracker, country look but with design
flexibility. Site design elements include landscape planting areas, specialty
pavers along walkways, water elements and specimen trees. She mentioned the
roof treatments, exterior building materials, and lighting requirements. She
stated that the applicants want a look that will blend with the rural area
which is developed mostly at one unit to five acres or more. The Hunihans
purchased the property about 18 months ago and live on the property. Their plan
would be to demolish the existing home and build a home on the rear portion of
the property.
Ms. Campione confirmed that there was
discussion at the Zoning Board meeting to limit the number of pumps should they
build a traditional convenience store or gas station. She stated that the
applicants, at this time, plan to do something of a neighborhood commercial
nature, perhaps a garden shop, a hardware store, a saddle shop or something
that would go with the rural area, while not giving away the possibility of
something along the lines of the convenience store in the future. She stated
that the design criteria assures something very nice and she suggested that the
Board might consider these requirements for incorporation into the Land
Development Regulations (LDR).
Regarding the site, Ms. Campione
pointed out that there have been substantial road improvements on CR 439, a
traffic light is planned for that intersection and the Public Works Department
indicated that access management requirements, as far as spacing from the
intersection, can be met. The entrances would be as far back as you could go
from that intersection in order to meet requirements in the LDRs.
Ms. Campione noted that the
applicant, Mr. Steve Hunihan, is present.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment.
Ms. Gesa Barto stated that she lives
on a beautiful property on CR 44A and that she and her husband, Tzimon Barto, a
concert pianist, want to keep the area as beautiful and original as possible in
order to provide worthwhile living in the future. She agreed that there is a
lot of traffic, especially at the peak hours, but they oppose deeply the idea
of a gas station and a convenience store. She remarked that a gas station would
provide the biggest profit for the Hunihan property if bought by a big chain.
Ms. Barto noted the presence of nearby gas stations and opined that another one
is not needed. She stated that big companies lease out gas stations and she
expressed concern that the concept will be dampening to the area rather than
uplifting. She stated that she would be agreeable to a pretty country store. Ms.
Barto stated that other neighbors do not want the kind of neighborhood that has
the potential of being dangerous. She remarked that there have been at least 25
deaths in the last eight years at the intersection of CR 44A and CR 439.
Ms. Gail M. Ling presented eight
letters of opposition, for the record, from homeowners. (Exhibit O-1 for the Opposition.)
She stated that she felt her dreams had been answered when she found this area
of rural charm. However, the zoning request change came two weeks after she
moved in. She stated that allowing the areas to remain rural actually increases
the tax base. She stated that once one property is rezoned it could start a
frenzy and once changed, it is forever changed. She suggested that once
businesses come to an area, they want the roads widened and that causes
easements to be taken and taxpayer dollars to be spent. Ms. Ling explained that
she lives on CR 44A less than one-half mile from the subject property.
Mr. Michael Wasco, who lives next
door to the subject property, stated that he is concerned mostly about crime
that might be associated with a convenience store. He stated that there are
plenty of other convenience stores in the neighborhood. He asked the Board to
consider the loss of aesthetics and loss of property values and asked them to
vote to save the neighborhood.
There being no additional comments,
the public hearing was closed.
Ms. Campione, in rebuttal, appealed
to the Board’s sense of fairness and of application of the rules and
regulations that are in place. She pointed out that, under the Comprehensive
Plan, there is a limitation of 5,000 square feet and these types of uses are
allowed. She stated that additional requirements have been put on the site to
assure that it would develop in a high quality way that would complement the
area. Regarding safety, she stated that great strides have been made at that
intersection and the light will make a big difference. She remarked that staff
will apply stringent regulations that will assure that this is designed in a
safe way. She stated that they will provide for the dedication of additional
right of way and that they are willing to go the extra mile to make this a good
project. She asked that the Hunihans be permitted to go forward with their
plans for the property. She stated that County staff suggested to Mr. Hunihan during
his research that this is a reasonable use and in compliance with County rules
and regulations.
Ms. Campione confirmed that the
triangle shaped piece would be for commercial and the back, northern piece
would be for one residence only.
Commr. Hanson commented that she
would recommend, if the request is approved, that the use be as a country-type
store and/or garden center, without the gas station, and include the
architectural standards. She agreed that other uses, such as a saddle store or
hardware store, would be acceptable.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
pointed out that the ordinance should include language that the property, the house
and commercial, would stay under one ownership. Otherwise, it would be creating
a lot that does not meet the Comprehensive Plan category.
Ms. Campione agreed that was the
intent and that language is included in the proposed ordinance regarding that
condition.
Commr. Cadwell asked staff if there
will be a way to avoid a less hazardous driveway into this property.
Mr. Fred Schneider, Director of
Engineering, Lake County Public Works Department, opined that they probably
would want two driveways, one off CR 439 as far north as possible, and one off
CR 44A. He suggested that, if there is a driveway off CR 44A, it should be mid
point between the two curves. He confirmed that there have been crashes at the
intersection and along the road length and the curve to the east has had a
significant amount of crashes. He stated that guardrails and other improvements
will help the situation. In response to Commr. Hanson, he confirmed that there
will be a flashing light, traveling from west to east, only when the through
traffic signal is on red and yellow. Public Works is planning to add test signs
that notify drivers of their speed as they come into the curves.
Commr. Hill commented that there could
be a lot of cars that would cut through in an effort to avoid the light if
there are two driveways.
A motion was made by Commr. Cadwell, and
seconded by Commr. Hanson, to uphold the recommendation of the Lake County
Zoning Board for approval of Rezoning Case PH#67-05-5, Steve & Pamela
Hunihan; Leslie Campione; Tracking No. 80-05-CP; including the Commercial
Design Criteria and limiting approval to no gas pumps/stations.
Under discussion, Commr. Hanson
stated that the approval should be limited to a country store, country
store/garden center, hardware store, and not left open for C-1 uses.
Ms. Campione stated that C-1 uses are
convenience, retail related and do not allow obnoxious type uses.
Mr. Minkoff remarked that taverns
might be allowed under C-1.
Commr. Hanson reiterated that they
might not want general convenience stores but would want more of the
country-type feeling.
Commr. Pool stated that he wants to
make sure that it is a country flavor, not a gas station.
Ms. Campione stated that it is hard
to tell the difference between a country store and a convenience store.
Continued discussion occurred
regarding the look of a country store.
Ms. Hamilton listed the allowable
uses under C-1 as follows: automotive service station, banking, bar or tavern,
car wash, personal care services, professional office, restaurant general,
retail convenience, retail general, and self-service laundry.
Commr. Cadwell stated that his motion
included striking the following from the C-1 uses: gas
pumps/stations/automotive service stations and bar/tavern.
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the
motion which carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, for approval of Ordinance
2005-71, Rezoning Case PH#67-05-5, Steve & Pamela Hunihan; Leslie Campione;
Tracking No. 80-05-CP; including the Commercial Design Criteria; striking the
following from C-1 uses: gas pumps/stations/automotive service stations and
bar/tavern.
REZONING CASE PH#70-05-3 - FRIENDSHIP CME (CHRISTIAN
METHODIST EPISCOPAL) CHURCH -
REV. MICHAEL WATKINS - WICKS
CONSULTING SERVICES - TRACKING NO. 86-05-CFD
Ms. Mary Hamilton, Senior Planner,
Lake County Planning and Development Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#70-05-3;
Friendship CME (Christian Methodist Episcopal) Church; Rev. Michael Watkins; Wicks
Consulting Services; Tracking No. 86-05-CFD, a request to rezone from A
(Agriculture) to CFD (Community Facility District) in order to continue the
Church Worship Facility with accessory education. She showed the aerial map for
the property which is located on Camp Road in Tavares. She stated that staff
recommends approval and the Lake County Zoning Board recommended approval by a
vote of 7-0.
Rev. Michael J. Watkins, Pastor,
stated that they just want to continue to worship. A lot of homes are being
built in the area and the Church wants to build a multi-purpose building to
help with after-school projects.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being no comment,
the public hearing was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender,
seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the Board
upheld the recommendation of the Lake County Zoning Board and approved
Ordinance 2005-72, Rezoning Case PH#70-05-3; Friendship CME (Christian
Methodist Episcopal) Church; Rev. Michael Watkins; Wicks Consulting Services; Tracking
No. 86-05-CFD.
REZONING CASE PH#66-05-3 - HOWARD H.
HEWITT - STEVEN J. RICHEY, P.A. - TRACKING NO. 85-05-MP/AMD
Ms. Mary Hamilton, Senior Planner,
Lake County Planning and Development Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#66-05-3;
Howard H. Hewitt; Steven J. Richey, P.A.; Tracking No. 85-05-MP/AMD, a request
to amend MP (Planned Industrial) Ordinance #57-89, to include the addition of
mini-warehouses on the west 10 acres. She showed the aerial map of the 25 +/-
acre subject parcel which is located on CR 48, east of CR 33, in the Leesburg
area. She stated that staff recommends approval of the request and the Lake
County Zoning Board recommended approval by a vote of 6-0.
Mr. Steve Richey, attorney
representing the applicant, was present.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being no comment,
the public hearing was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Stivender,
seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the Board
upheld the recommendation of the Lake County Zoning Board and approved
Ordinance 2005-73, Rezoning Case PH#66-05-3; Howard H. Hewitt; Steven J.
Richey, P.A.; Tracking No. 85-05-MP/AMD, a request to amend MP (Planned
Industrial) Ordinance #57-89.
REZONING CASE PH#69-05-2 - JEFFREY
& LYNN KNOWLES - TRACKING NO. 75-05-Z
Mr. John Kruse, Senior Planner, Lake
County Planning and Development Services, presented Rezoning Case PH#69-05-2; Jeffrey
& Lynn Knowles; Tracking No. 75-05-Z, a request to rezone from CFD
(Community Facility District) to A (Agriculture) to utilize the property for
its intended use. He showed the aerial map of the property which is located on
SR 33 in the south Groveland area, 500 feet north of the intersection with
Greengrove Boulevard. The 3 +/- acre site was originally Agriculture and was
rezoned to CFD in 1985 for a County fire station. He stated that staff
recommends approval of the request. The Lake County Zoning Board recommended
approval by a vote of 7-0.
Ms. Lynn Knowles, the applicant, was
present.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being no comment,
the public hearing was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded
by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the Board upheld
the recommendation of the Lake County Zoning Board and approved Ordinance
2005-74, Rezoning Case PH#69-05-2; Jeffrey & Lynn Knowles; Tracking No.
75-05-Z, a request to rezone from CFD (Community Facility District) to A
(Agriculture).
APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CASE CUP #05/8/1-4
- CLAYTON REYNOLDS III -
SHARON FARRELL, WICKS CONSULTING
SERVICES - TRACKING NO. 78-05-CUP
Mr. John Kruse, Senior Planner, Lake
County Planning and Development Services, presented the Application for
Conditional Use Permit, Case CUP#05/8/1-4, Clayton Reynolds III, Sharon
Farrell, Wicks Consulting Services, Tracking No. 78-05-CUP, a request to permit
an equestrian riding/training facility on a 41+/- acre site located in the
Agriculture zoning district. He showed the aerial map of the property which is
in the Pine Lakes area, east on Pine Road from SR 44 until it dead ends into
the property. The applicant anticipates that team events will be held
approximately twice a month and will include: barrel racing, team penning, team
roping, and cutting. In addition, the applicant is requesting twenty (20) RV parking
sites with water and electric hookup. No central sewer would be available and
the RVs would have to contain their waste and dispose of it at an approved
off-site dump station. Proposed buildings include: three pole barns, a
caretaker’s residence, a security residence, an office limited to 1,500 square
feet and restroom facilities. Other proposed uses include: passive recreational
horse trails and a primitive camping area. The events will be conducted with
portable temporary fencing, pens, and lighting with no permanent seating
provided. Mr. Kruse stated that he has spoken with the Health Department and
Chapter 64E-15 of the Florida Administrative Code states a site that “…has 5 or
more sites set aside for recreational vehicles, shall comply with all permitting
requirements of recreational vehicle parks included in this chapter.”
Therefore, staff recommends only four RV sites. The Lake County Zoning Board
recommended approval by a vote of 7-0 with the following conditions: up to four
RV hookups along with a primitive camping area, associated trails and other
support structures as outlined in the proposed ordinance; temporary lighting
only shall be permitted on this site during the events. Staff recommends
approval for the Conditional Use Permit in Agriculture to allow this type of use.
Mr. Kruse reiterated that pens and
lighting will be portable; however, they eventually want to build permanent
structures during several phases.
Commr. Hanson remarked that we have
been working on these types of things for a long time to give folks a little
bit of use of their land and to allow the public to use the land somewhat.
Ms. Sharon Farrell, Wicks Consulting
Services, the applicant’s representative, was present.
Commr. Hill opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting and called for public comment. There being no comment,
the public hearing was closed.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson,
seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, by a vote of 5-0, the Board
upheld the recommendation of the Lake County Zoning Board and approved
Ordinance 2005-75, the application for a Conditional Use Permit, Case CUP#05/8/1-4,
Clayton Reynolds III, Sharon Farrell, Wicks Consulting Services, Tracking No.
78-05-CUP.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER CADWELL -
DISTRICT #5
FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES -
LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR
Commr. Cadwell announced that Ms. Carol
Bracy, Legislative Director, Florida Association of Counties, is leaving to
become Chief of Staff for Florida’s Lieutenant Governor Toni Jennings.
REPORTS
- COMMISSIONER POOL - DISTRICT #2
MILLSTREAM DRIVE IN GROVELAND
Commr. Pool gave a brief update on
his August 20, 2005, meeting with residents in the Millstream Drive area of
Groveland (District #2). He thanked Public Works Director Jim Stivender for
attending the meeting.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER STIVENDER -
DISTRICT #3
SEXUAL OFFENDER ISSUE
Commr. Stivender asked for an update
on the sexual offender issue.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
reported that he is sending a memo to the Board with some options for
discussion at the Board’s September 6, 2005, meeting.
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB
Commr. Stivender reported that an
auction for the Boys & Girls Club held August 20, 2005, at the Savannah
Club in The Villages, raised about $70,000.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER HANSON -
DISTRICT #4
EMINENT DOMAIN
Commr. Hanson asked for an update on
information she gave to staff regarding a Douglas County, Oregon, resolution on
eminent domain.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
reported that the item will be on the Board’s agenda soon.
ADJOURNMENT
There
being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the
meeting was adjourned at 3:45 p.m.
__________________________
JENNIFER HILL, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
__________________________
JAMES
C. WATKINS, CLERK