OCTOBER 23, 2007

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, October 23, 2007, 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: Welton G. Cadwell, Chairman; Jennifer Hill, Vice Chairman; Elaine Renick; and Linda Stewart.  Commissioner Debbie Stivender was not present due to illness.  Others present were: Sanford A. (Sandy) Minkoff, County Attorney; Gregg Welstead, Assistant County Manager; Wendy Taylor, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; and Susan Boyajan, Deputy Clerk.


Mr. Ken Harley, Public Transportation Manager, gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.


Mr. Gregg Welstead, Assistant County Manager, stated that they had added Addendum 1-I to the Departmental Agenda and that they would like to pull Tab 9 for discussion because of the money amount.  He also related that he had received a request from the School Superintendent Monday, October 22, concerning a letter of support for the magnet high school in South Lake and suggested that it be placed on the Agenda for discussion.

Commr. Renick stated that she had talked to School Board Member Cindy Barrow, who stated that they had talked about that at the School Board meeting last night and that they were alright with it.

On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board moved to place the item regarding the magnet high school on the Agenda.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, stated that they had a small Procurement issue regarding a bid protest that he would like to bring under his business, and he thought it would require Board action.

On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board moved to place the item regarding the bid protest on the Agenda.


On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the County Manager’s Consent Agenda, Tabs 1 through 16, pulling Tab 9 as follows:


Request for approval of the following Budget Change Request and Direct Pay Request:

1.  Resolution No. 2007-168 to amend the Sales Tax Capital Projects Fund in order to receive unanticipated revenue for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 in the amount of $44,375 deposited into Interest including Profit on Investment and provide appropriations for the disbursement for improvements Other Than Buildings.  The County received interest earnings, which will be recorded for the purpose of capital project expenditures.

2.  Approval of Request from Public Safety for payment of expenditures from the COPS Funded Interoperable Communications Equipment Grant.  The request exceeds the County Manager’s approval limit of $25,000.  Total payment is for $195,261.00.

Growth Management

Request for approval of low and very low income impact fee waivers as refunds to lenders on behalf of qualified individuals.


Request for approval to (1) declare the items on the attached lists surplus to County needs, (2) authorize the removal of all of the items on the attached lists from the County’s official fixed asset inventory system records, and (3) authorize the Procurement Services Director to sign vehicle titles.

For Information Only - No action required: The procurement policy and procedure revisions enacted by the BCC on September 25, 2007 allow for the County Manager to complete certain individual purchase actions in excess of $25,000 under “term and supply contracts”. At the BCC meeting on October 2, 2007, there was discussion regarding a need to provide information in advance to the BCC regarding such actions for at least a limited time period. Two such actions are now in process.

1. Stormwater engineering to replace failing infrastructure along Black Boss Circle

2. Audit services to support various construction projects.

Request for approval to award a contract to Z-Coffee Corporation for the Cafe at Cagan's Crossing Community Library. The Agreement is for rent for the leased premises, five percent (5%) commission of pre-tax gross revenue to be paid to Lake County Board of County Commissioners. The term of this Agreement is for twelve (12) months with an additional four (4) one (1) year periods.

            Request to approve and execute a contract with Florida Hurricane Products, Inc. to provide installation of hurricane resistant wind windows and doors to Fire Station #10 and #112. The cost of the contract is not to exceed $68,652.00.

Request to approve and execute a contract with Savage Fire Protection, Inc. to provide fire sprinkler installation at the Public Records Center located at 122 East Main Street, Tavares. The cost of the contract is not to exceed $87,000.00.

Request for approval of a term and supply contract award to Freeman's Home Improvement, LLC to provide roadside mowing and litter removal for Lake County roads and to authorize the Procurement Services Director to execute the award section of the bidding document. The initial annual cost of the contract is $129,166.17.

Public Safety

            Request for approval of the update to the 2002 Interlocal Agreement for Automatic Aid between Lake County and the City of Umatilla.

            Public Works

Request for authorization to award (# 2824) Dewey Robbins Road Clay to Pave Project No. 2007-01, Bid No. 07-0119, to Art Walker Construction, Inc., in the amount of $576,832.78, and encumber and expend funds in the amount of $576,832.78 from the Road Impact Fee Fund for Benefit District 4. Commission District 3.

Request for approval of Resolution No. 2007-169 authorizing the raising of the speed limit on CR 448A (3064) from 35 MPH to 45 MPH from CR 448 to Duda Road in Commission District 3.

Request to accept the following maintenance bonds associated with the construction of the Groveland North/South Collector Road, now known as Wilson Lake Parkway: $265,163.07 from Levitt & Sons of Lake County, $35,515.83 from America's First Home, LLP, and $23,765.57 from America's First Home, LLP. Commission District 2.

Request to advertise bids for Countywide Resurfacing Project #2008-01 at an estimated cost of $1,327,557.19 from Sales Tax Capital Projects - Roads Fund.

Request for authorization to award #8165 Keene Road Phase II Project No. 2006-11 and CR 450A Sidewalk Project No. 2007-03, Bid No. 07-0120, to Art Walker Construction, Inc., in the amount of $776,657.83 and encumber and expend $670,652.93 from Renewal Sales Tax Capital Projects Roads and $106,004.90 from Renewal Sales Tax Capital Projects Sidewalks. Commission District 5.

Request for authorization to release a performance bond for construction of improvements in the total amount of $11,675,499.00 that was posted for Bella Collina. Bella Collina consists of 496 lots and is located in Section 11, Township 22 South, Range 26 East, Commission District 3.

Mr. Barnett Schwartzman, Procurement Director, stated that Tab 9 was a departmental item primarily because the dollar value was in excess of $200,000, but otherwise it was a normal procurement item with good competition and was awarded to the low bidder.

On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Tab 9, as follows:

Request from Procurement for approval and execution of a contract with Harry’s Painting and Enterprises, Inc. to provide sealing and painting at the Lake County Detention Center and Prelude building located at 551 W. Main St., Tavares.  The cost of the contract is not to exceed $224,451.00.


Commr. Cadwell commented that this item was a temporary measure to try to provide water until they could look at a long-range approach to what they needed to do.

On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Tab 17, a request from the County Attorney for approval of the interlocal agreement between Umatilla and Lake County regarding the water system.



Ms. Jo-Anne Drury from the Budget Office explained that this Agenda item was for the purpose of establishing the legislative priorities for Lake County.  She specified that 22 priorities were being recommended, five of which were direct appropriation requests specific to Lake County.  She commented that the priorities the Board set today would be communicated by the Chairman to the Lake County Legislative Delegation on October 31.

She related that they recommended that the County oppose any amendments to the Statutes that would increase the amount counties were required to pay towards State Medicaid match requirements and specifically the proposed increase in the per bed cost for Medicaid nursing home care from $55 per month to $189 per month, which would result in an unbudgeted expense of $422,000 this fiscal year.  They also recommended that the Board request a $10 million direct appropriation from the State to fund the construction of a new health department facility on land already owned by the County to respond to increased population growth.   Her department recommended that the State Aid to Libraries Operating Grant appropriation be increased by $10 million to prevent further erosion of the program and that the State support funding of the Florida Public Library Construction Grants.  Some of the other recommendations were related to funding for affordable housing, the Transportation Disadvantaged Program, and the Emergency Operations Center (EOC).  Recommendations regarding emergency situations were for power companies to provide electrical grid information to EOC in the event of an emergency and for support of requirements for all emergency shelters to screen and restrict sexual predators and violent offenders.  She also related the recommendation that the Board request a direct appropriation of $3.5 million from the State toward the total cost of $7 million to replace the Picciola Bridge, which had been found to be functionally obsolete, and to request $4.5 million to help fund safety improvements on County Road 44 between US Highway 441 and State Road 19, including turn lanes, safety lanes, resurfacing, widening of shoulders, and street lighting.  She recommended that they oppose any legislation that diverted funding from the intended purposes of State trust funds and the trend to use County dollars to support the State’s budget.  She also asked for support for the Florida Association of Counties legislative agenda, which would not be finalized until after their legislative conference in mid-November.

Commr. Hill asked Mr. Jim Stivender, Public Works Director, why CR 466A was excluded from this year’s legislative positions.

Mr. Stivender responded that they looked at projects that were currently ready to be built, and Picciola Bridge was permitted, the right of way was acquired, and everything was ready to go for that.  He noted that they could match the funds for that project and go forward with it right away.  He stated that County Road 44 was also another project that they were ready to do, and the construction on Hwy 441 added extra traffic and aged that road.  He added that they were finishing up design and had acquired a couple of parcels in Fruitland Park for the CR 466A project, which was still a Lake-Sumter Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) priority.

On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of  4-0, the Board approved the 2008 Legislative Positions, amending it to include the FAC (Florida Association of Counties) legislative agenda document when it came out, and authorized the Chairman to present Lake County’s positions to the Lake County Delegation on October 31, 2007.





            Mr. Fletcher Smith, Community Services Director, informed the Board that he was requesting approval for the 2007 Criminal Justice, Mental Health and Substance Abuse Reinvestment Grant Program.  He explained that this was a program that was sponsored by the State to allocate dollars for either operational or planning grants that were aimed at identifying mental health issues with prisoners who were coming into the Lake County Jail and developing a collaborative effort on behalf of agencies outside of the jail, including the jail, Sheriff’s Office, and local police departments to try to divert some of those individuals from jail who did not have a real serious need to be there and were minor offenders who could do well without being incarcerated.  He commented that this would be a benefit to them, their families, and the criminal justice system as far as not loading up the jail with inmates that did not necessarily need to be there.  He specified that the grant was for $60,000 and required a 100 percent cash match, and a majority of the grant dollars would be used for a position at LifeStream for someone who would be able to work with the various partners, develop the criteria for identifying the inmates or the individuals who were going through the criminal justice system, and build the collaborative effort of the partners outside of the jail to provide the services.

            Commr. Cadwell asked Mr. Smith whether he thought that about 40 percent of the current jail population would be eligible for this program.

            Mr. Smith stated that he was not sure about the percentage, but there were a large number of people in jail who had mental health and substance abuse problems that he believed could be handled outside of the jail setting.  He mentioned that the Public Safety Coordinating Council had endorsed the effort to do a planning grant like this and to develop a strategic plan to address these types of issues.

            Commr. Hill commented that the Board had already approved a variation of this, but they were bringing it back because there was a definite change to a planning document.  She stated that if the Board approved that modification, they would have to change the membership ordinance to comply with that particular grant application and they would ask the County Attorney to come back with those modifications.

            Mr. Smith noted that the request for approval to advertise the change was already scheduled for the November 6 meeting.

            On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Tab 19, the request from Community Services for approval of submission of the 2007 Criminal Justice, Mental Health and Substance Abuse Reinvestment Grant Program – Planning Grant and that the Board of County Commissioners would serve as lead agency with LifeStream Behavioral Center, Inc. serving as sub-recipient/service provider.



Mr. Jim Stivender, Jr., Public Works Director, gave a history of what had been happening with the alignment of State Road 46A and commented that this was one part of the puzzle regarding the Wekiva Basin and the SR 429 extension.  He explained that this issue started in August when Mr. Scott Taylor came before the Board to ask for some clarification on the issue of the right of way and buffers for this alignment, and he went through the discussions he had with the Florida Department of Transportation (DOT) regarding those issues and the location of the alignment on Mr. Taylor’s property.  He explained that they were bringing back the letter that they had already discussed to forward to DOT for the Board’s approval clarifying the County’s position regarding the 100-foot and the 150-foot right of way for SR 46A.  He noted that there were a lot of people there on both sides to discuss that issue.

Mr. Charles Lee, Director of Advocacy of Audubon of Florida and member of the Wekiva River Basin Commission, stated that they had dealt with that issue for quite some time and were familiar with and supported the letter that was drafted for the Chairman’s signature.  He mentioned that he was present at the Wekiva Commission meeting last week and heard the arguments from the individuals from the Heathrow area.  He believed that the issue that was paramount was the issue of good highway design and the question of protecting the natural assets of the area.  He related that the PD&E study that was being done by the Expressway Authority was going in exactly the right direction, and he opined that the road did not belong as a new slash through the State Forest.  He also commented that the recommendations that were made by a unanimous vote of the Wekiva River Basin Commission last week were appropriate, which were that the road should not be through the State Forest and should be pushed as far west on Mr. Taylor’s property as possible.

Commr. Cadwell commented that they were not going to consider the option of the State Forest lands, but if the people who wanted to address the Board had other alternatives or suggestions, they would be glad to hear them.

Mr. Bill Smalley, a resident of Heathrow County Estates in Sorrento, requested that Commr. Stewart abstain from any vote on this measure, because he believed there was a conflict of interest between Commr. Stewart and the current land owner of that property, Mr. Scott Taylor, who was a substantial contributor to her campaign recently.  He also commented that last week at the Wekiva Commission meeting, it was read into the record by Commr. Stewart’s representative that she supported alternative 1A, but he had over 150 signed petitions by taxpayers, voters, and residents of many different parts of the area who were opposed to the alignment 1A.  He thought that there was a complete ignoring of a public sentiment towards where this road was going, and the people elected to an office represented all the people and not just one person or one particular group or interest.  He was concerned about how this alignment would affect the bear population and believed that a lot more bears would be killed as a result of that.  He also commented that from 2002 to the present, 18 individuals had lost their lives on Hwy 46 and that the National Highway Transportation Authority in a 2007 release stated that intersections were not the way to go.  He was concerned about the intersection where the four-lane alignment came into the narrow current two-lane country road and thought that a lot of drivers would not stop at that light.  He pointed out that there was a stand of old oaks where the road was proposed to go that would be cut down and destroyed and that wildlife such as gopher tortoises and five other protected species that used their burrows would be affected.

Mr. Smalley pointed out that other alternatives were CR 437, which would bring a path straight down into an area which would be central to the Mount Plymouth/Sorrento area or to move the alignment more to the east on Mr. Taylor’s property.  He opined that there was no reason why they had to even reconstruct SR 46A, and they could just leave the road where it was and improve upon it, which would be a lot less expensive than building a new road.  He commented that the Wekiva Basin recommendation was to tie SR 46A into the interchange but that it did not mention whether to move it west or east.  He was also concerned that the proposed alignment would encourage development in the area in the future and that the noise level of tractor trailers, trucks, and other vehicles would create additional noise pollution in that area. He asked the Board to delay any vote or action for at least 90 days and recommended that a committee be formed within that time to review and explore other options.

Commr. Stewart commented that there was no conflict of interest because she actually received much more money for her campaign from Heathrow Country Estates than she did from Mr. Taylor.  She stated that she was representing 70 percent of the citizens of the County who voted to tax themselves to protect their environmental lands by recommending that the road go in the best area for the environment.

Mr. Scott Taylor, a resident of Sorrento, and the owner of the land for the proposed alignment, stated that there was unanimous support of both houses of the Florida legislature to build the Wekiva Parkway in a manner that respected the integrity of the public conservation lands and the tremendous commitment by elected leaders, citizens, conservation organizations, and the business community to make the Wekiva Parkway project a success.  He also pointed out that the Wekiva Commission voted to prohibit the relocation of SR 46A on any public lands and was not a subject for discussion at that meeting.  He commented that his 217 acre property would get split in half and he had no idea what he would do with the western portion of that land.  He noted that there were months and months of meetings where experts presented data to replace SR 46A and 46 with a well-engineered highway that would be good for habitat flow.  He pointed out that they were operating under and needed to follow the rules of the Wekiva River Parkway and Protection Act.  He also related that he was working with a company known for moving large trees on a plan to move the hundred-year-old oak trees that would be lost on the portion of the road that would go through there so that none of them would be destroyed.  He commented that he was offended that anyone would think he would support Commr. Stewart’s campaign in order to better his position and that he supported many people for a number of years, which he was allowed to do with resources that were available to him.  He stated that he hoped that the Board would consider signing the letter as written.

Mr. Ray Palmer, a resident of Heathrow Country Estates, stated that he made a decision to move to Lake County to get away from the congestion and traffic in the Longwood area.  He was extremely concerned that the proposed alignment would affect his quality of life and that there would be increased traffic and noise.  He commented that he was told at meetings that the location of SR 46A would be directly responsive to the Board’s recommendation.  He thought it would be an even exchange to take the State property in conjunction with the property that would be gained when they closed the current SR 46A.  He stated that he had researched this issue and believed that the rules had changed, but he wanted the rules to go back to what they previously were.

Mr. Rory Trumbore, a member of Friends of the Wekiva, advocated that the alignment be as far west as practical.  He opined that fragmentation of habitat was the biggest danger to the natural world and that putting the road further to the east would fragment the habitat more.  He commented that wherever the road went, it would cause a disruption, but the western alignment would cause the least disruption.

Mr. Keith Schue, who spoke on behalf of the Nature Conservancy, displayed pictures of the Ocala-Wekiva system and stated that the big picture was the Wekiva-Ocala system, protecting the integrity of public lands and fulfilling the intent of the Wekiva Parkway and Protection Act.  He stated that the decision the Board made was absolutely critical to the ultimate success of the Wekiva Parkway project and the statewide collaborative effort to protect the Wekiva basin.  He related that the Wekiva Parkway and Protection Act emerged as a need to solve a transportation problem and also to protect a precious natural resource, which was the Wekiva Basin.  He noted that SR 46 was the only way between Lake and Seminole Counties and that it was breaking down, was receiving more and more traffic, and was a killer for bears and other wildlife.  He reported that the Wekiva study group that was looking at the wild and scenic federal designation had indicated that seven bears had died in that corridor between 2005 and 2006.  He showed a picture of the area of the Wekiva basin that showed that SR 46A was currently in a peculiar alignment that virtually paralleled SR 46 and was in a configuration that was detrimental to wildlife trying to move from north to south.  He related that the Wekiva legislation stated that it needed to be moved to the west outside the ecological corridor.  He countered the claims of previous speakers about the location of bear and other wildlife habitat and submitted two pieces of information, which were strategic habitat conservation areas from the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and regionally significant habitat from the St. Johns River Water Management District.  He commented that there had to be a good reason to use state land that was bought for conservation for some other purpose, and that decision must be made and justified by the Board of Trustees and sent to the Governor and Cabinet for a decision.  He opined that there was no possible argument to be made that it should go through the public lands when there was a land owner who was working successfully with DOT to properly create a road alignment that avoided public land, and using public land would totally run contrary to the Wekiva initiative.  He pointed out that the recommendations of the Nature Conservancy were consistent with the recommendations of DOT and Seminole State Forest, and he submitted for the record a letter from the Department of Agriculture that talked about the alignment alternatives.  He stated that DOT had rules that related to looking at the placement of specific alignments, and ultimately the road would have to go somewhere on Mr. Taylor’s property to fulfill the intent of the legislation and respect the integrity of Seminole State Forest.

Mr. Mike Martin from the Division of Forestry stated that his agency was very much in favor of this alignment being as far west from their State Forest as possible.  He related that the plan for some of those public lands would be eventually for them to become part of the forest land or scrub community that gopher tortoises could survive on and that there were burrows found on a lot of those properties.

Ms. Allison Dray stated that the Wekiva Parkway Act, which was signed in June of 2004 by Governor Jeb Bush, had a map with a line drawn showing that the road was to go on the farthest western part of the State property and specifically giving a guideline that it should connect with the 429 interchange.  She opined that it has been regularly ignored that the road was already designated in that Act to be in State land.  She commented that there was also the option of leaving the road alone.  She pointed out that the Wekiva Parkway would be built with two to three proposed interchanges giving people plenty of directions that they could move in, and the road would automatically have people diverting down to CR 437 that wanted to use that interchange to go to Mount Dora, Apopka, or towards Disney and that the traffic would scatter naturally on its own once the highway came in.  She commented that this all came about because a community homeowner came forth and volunteered the use of his land after the Act was signed.

Commr. Stewart asked if Mr. Jim Stivender, Public Works Director, could explain that the initial roadway they were talking about was not the official roadway and the lines on the map were just to initiate it.

Mr. Stivender explained that the initial lines on maps usually represented four or five miles in width and they were narrowed down to a quarter of a mile and finally were narrowed down to the alignments like the ones they were discussing today.  He stated that engineers always wanted to fine tune the very fat, bubbly type lines that were on the concept drawings as quickly as they could, but they knew they had to start with the visions and the broad area of concepts and work to narrow it down to a small alignment as minimal as they could.  He clarified for Commr. Stewart that the lines that were on there were just the broad vision lines and not the final designation.

Mr. Brad Millsap, the Project Director for Heathrow Country Estates, stated that Heathrow Country Estates was built over the last six years as a project that would blend in with the area around them, and they spent a majority of their time on a tree survey which was started before a single road was ever built out there to make sure they did not cut down anything that did not need to be.  He commented that maybe the Board should step back, re-evaluate it, and look to see if there was another alternative, such as leaving SR 46A alone and building a bridge over it for the bears to go through or rebuilding CR 437 to bring traffic through, and that maybe a commission should be formed to explore other options.

Mr. William Anderson, a resident of Heathrow Country Estates, and a former resident of Seminole, Orange, Duval, and Broward Counties, stated that one of the things that attracted him to Lake County was the opportunity to get away from the highways and the sprawl.  He related that he wanted to have an opportunity to understand this and how it would impact them.  He also commented that they paid a lot of money to live there and that their property values were very important to them and should be considered as well.  He respectfully requested a delay so that they could better understand this issue.

Mayor James Yatsuk of the City of Mount Dora, related that they unanimously asked their City Manager to draft a recommendation to the Board to support the western alignment of SR 46A.  He stated that there were few who had spent more time on the Wekiva Commission and the Wekiva Coordinating Committee than he had and that there were some mischaracterizations about what was signed into law, which did not preclude this realignment.  He explained that the thrust was to protect the movement of the Wekiva-Ocala Greenway, and this alignment accomplished that to its utmost.

Mr. Bob Riegle, a resident of Sorrento, commented that it was obvious at this point that there was a lot of personalities involved and that it was adversarial.  He opined that he did not think there was enough objective input from the people who lived there that would be impacted most.  He wanted to see research into some other possibilities that they had not even discussed at that point.  He wanted the Commissioners to think about how they would vote if it was within 50 feet of their back yard.

Mr. G. G. Washington, a resident of Heathrow Country Estates, stated that they had paid a handsome tax to live there and that they came out there because the area was beautiful, peaceful, and tranquil.  He thought that the traffic and noise generated by the new road would make a big difference in their quality of life.  He commented that he was currently able to hear road noise from over a mile away on State Roads 46 and 46A, which would be much worse at only 50 feet or 100 feet away.  He was concerned about his property values and the fact that the considerations they made in the design would not be ample.  He asked the Board to stop the road as proposed and move it further east.

Mr. Thomas Montaldo, a resident of Sorrento, related that the goal of the realignment of SR 46A was to funnel high-volume traffic from the northern end of Lake County south to the proposed Wekiva Parkway, and opined that the 1A proposal of SR 46A would not do that.  He did not understand why the County would not choose to run the realignment of SR 46A into the Wekiva Parkway, but into State Road 46, which would only cause a high-volume intersection with unwanted traffic, pollution, litter, and a high chance of car accidents.  He proposed that they either leave it where it was, think of other options such as CR 437, or consider running it on the eastern aspect of Mr. Taylor’s property.  He hoped that the elected officials would take the community’s desires into account when a decision was made on the subject.

Ms. Catherine Hanson, a former County Commissioner and a resident of Sorrento, stated that during discussions she had had with Mr. Shue regarding this issue, the clear understanding was that the road would fall between her home and Mr. Taylor’s home, which would leave the road no closer to her house in the Seminole Forest area than SR 46A was already.  She explained that at that time, they did not consider the possibility of Mr. Taylor’s property being available for the road.  She thought that when the Act was signed, it was clear the road would be on the western part of the State-owned property.  She stated that with a short time frame to study the issue, they could look at the wildlife crossings in the area between Camp Challenge and Mount Plymouth on SR 46, which she did not think had ever been studied, before a determination was made.  She thought there might need to be considerations and design standards that needed to be put in place to protect the wildlife in that area.  She requested that the Board delay this issue, because she thought it was important that they had five Commissioners present for a decision as important as this was.

Commr. Stewart asked Mr. Schue for clarification regarding Ms. Hanson’s statements.

Mr. Schue mentioned that he had never stated that the best thing to do was to draw this through the Seminole State Forest.  He explained that when the Wekiva Committee met to talk about the whole entire alignment, there were broad corridors that were talked about, as explained by Mr. Stivender.  He further explained that some of the pictures that had been alluded to show a broad swatch that somehow made a connection from the northern part of SR 46A down to the Wekiva Parkway, but the fine details of that were not and could not be specified in the legislation, because they would have to go through a whole PD&E process to determine those things.  He also clarified that the Nature Conservancy simply requested that the Board honor the recommendations of the Wekiva Commission, which stated that it should not go through State lands or the Seminole State Forest and should go as far west as practical, respecting all the requirements and rules of DOT and those type of processes that had to be abided by.

Commr. Stewart expressed concern that many people in the audience were mistaking some misconceptions for truth, and she was disappointed that after spending a year on this issue, there were still misleading facts coming out of that.  She asked that everyone base their arguments on facts.

Mr. Jacob Martinez, a resident of Heathrow Country Estates, was concerned about his mother’s livelihood and safety, since she lived in the area where the proposed cul-de-sac would be.  He was also concerned about the danger of gangs that might choose to hang out in the area of the cul-de-sac where there were no neighbors for miles and cut off from Heathrow Country Estates.  He asked the Board to consider delaying the vote, to form a commission, and to allow the people to be heard and to be able to look at other alternatives for the road.

Ms. Jeannette Smalley, a resident of Heathrow Country Estates, was concerned about the possibility of sinkhole formations on the proposed site for the road since it formerly contained orange groves, which were known areas for development of sink holes.  She urged Commissioners to think about the taxpayers, the animals, the traffic, the intersection, the mortality rates, and the voters.

Mr. James Loyd, a resident of Heathrow Country Estates, stated he was an architect and a planner.  He commented that he did not plan his community, but his wife stumbled on it, which he thought was absolutely stellar and was one of the jewels of Lake County.  He opined that Lake County was a beautiful county with rolling, pastoral lands and equestrian areas, and they moved to the County for that beauty.  He also added that they specifically moved to Heathrow Country Estates because the beauty that was out there was unparalleled in Florida, but that the proposed road would be the death knell for that community.  He was concerned that Mr. Taylor would remove the trees, which he believed were the only buffers.  He opined that this road was in the wrong location, and they would be doing grievous harm to their community.  He thought they needed to move that road to another location further east and that they should stay the vote today.

Mr. Tom O’Brien, a resident of Heathrow Country Estates, stated that there were a lot of people contradicting each other, and he thought that if they were on a jury, they would have to look at people’s faces and try to determine who was telling the truth and who had a vested interest.  He thought that every time he went to a meeting regarding this, there was a new story.  He also added that three full interchanges were approved in a three mile stretch from the Wekiva River Bridge to Camp Challenge, as opposed to the one that was originally discussed, and that one of those would fall exactly where SR 46A currently was located.  He requested that the Board postpone this and commented that things were constantly changing with this issue, and opined that if they postponed it, it would change again.

Mr. Robert Curry, a resident of Eustis, near Hwy 44 and Blackwater Creek, related that he had started attending the Wekiva River committees from the beginning starting in the year 2002.  He noted that some of the conclusions of the Wekiva Basin Area Task Force which resulted in the law were quoted by other speakers, but they did not read far enough into those conclusions.  He specified that they read up to conclusion number 4, which was a summary conclusion that the SR 46A should join up with the Parkway, but conclusion number 7 stated that the interchange should be located at State Road 46 near the area where SR 46A should be relocated.  He concluded that there was no definitive statement, and that particular section was reiterated in the Act.  He related that five bears had been killed within a thousand feet of his house in the last year, which was on their migration route.  He commented that CR 437 was the center line dividing the Sorrento area from the Mount Plymouth area and noted that the community center, which was the culmination of 20 years of planning, would be at the end of that route.  He opined that the choice of CR 437 for the alignment would destroy everything that had been done in the last 20 years to protect the Mount Plymouth/Sorrento area, which was a consideration in all of the Wekiva commissions and committees since 2002, and he hoped that the Board would reject that choice.  He commented that he also hoped that the Board would ignore all the misinformation given today and consider the true facts.

Ms. Peggy Belflower, a resident of northeast Lake County, asked the Board to reaffirm the position that they had taken to not place the realignment of SR 46A in the heart of Mount Plymouth-Sorrento where CR 437 ran, which would kill that unique community and very special area, and she thought that it would be an abomination to place it in the Seminole State Forest.  She related that she traveled the road frequently to go to Seminole County, and she would appreciate if the Board would consider the offer of the property owner, Mr. Scott Taylor, to allow the realignment on his property and asked them to reaffirm their commitment to place it as far west of the Seminole State Forest as possible and keep it out of the Mount Plymouth/Sorrento area.

Mr. Stivender informed the Board that Mr. Mike Schneider of the Expressway Authority related that there would be a meeting in January or February to discuss the alignment in a public hearing.

Commr. Cadwell inquired why they were pushing the County so hard to clarify their position now.

Mr. Stivender responded that he thought this was initiated by Mr. Taylor to put this position in place to get it to DOT.

Mr. Scott Taylor commented that conversations he had with DOT and Orlando Expressway Authority convinced him that there was a lot of confusion about what they thought Lake County might want and that they wanted some kind of signal from Lake County.  He explained that all he did was to attempt to elicit from Lake County some kind of direction and that there were no hidden agendas.

Mr. Mike Schneider of the Expressway Authority clarified that Mr. Stivender was referring to the official public hearing of the PD&E process, and in order to move to a public hearing, they had to have a recommendation on the preferred alignment.  He related that DOT was looking to Lake County to give them some guidance on the CR 46A realignment so that they could get to the public hearing.

Commr. Hill stated that they had not finalized the Sorrento study regarding that core town center.  She was also concerned about any conflicts with their Comp Plan in this particular area, since that had not been finalized yet.  She commented that she did not want the road in a sensitive area, but she did not know exactly if these were the two other options that she wanted or if there were other options.  She wanted to know if DOT and the Expressway Authority had the power to avoid whatever was adopted in the Comp Plan.

Mr. Stivender responded that they would look for guidance from the MPO and the Board for priorities of alignments, and they took all that into consideration and put it into the PD&E study.  He also stated that the transportation part of the puzzle was in the Wekiva Parkway Study and that the whole Wekiva plan was tied and would be addressed in the Comp Plan as a transportation network, and this was just one piece of the whole puzzle.

Mr. Tim Bailey, a member of the Mt. Plymouth area study group, thought that one of the solutions they might have on the table was an area study done at the County’s bequest designed to take input and establish consensus.  He thought it might be more appropriate right now to take this to that committee, have them establish some consensus, and then come to the Board.  He stated that they had a meeting on November 14, and he thought that would be an adequate amount of time to get the community aware of things and then bring it back to them.

Commr. Stewart stated that what Mr. Bailey was saying made perfect sense, but they have already had many public meetings on this with much citizen input and considered every alternative the public ever suggested.  She related that it had been pointed out to the residents why each of those alternatives would not work.  She also pointed out that they still would have to purchase State land from the State, so that land would not be free, and she went over each option and the reasons it would not be viable.  She commented that she had never seen DOT and the Expressway Authority work harder with a group of citizens in her life than they had with the citizens on this issue.  She also mentioned that a noise study was done for the alignment, and they moved the roadway further away from the Heathrow property line with a berm and landscaping put in place.  She related that the noise study showed that when the noise level crossed all the barriers, the noise difference would be negligible.

Commr. Hill commented that she had reservations about putting a four-lane highway through virgin, gorgeous property without having heard from all of the citizens.

Commr. Stewart thought that they had dealt with this issue long enough and have had enough public input.

Commr. Renick commented that she did not think the Board had the final say on this issue, and they were just voting on sending a letter regarding this.  She noted that the letter should emphasize that it did not encroach on the Seminole State Forest.  She disclosed that Mr. Taylor also contributed to her campaign as well as probably many other candidates that were environmentalists or for slow growth.  She assured everyone that there was not a discussion ahead of time that suggested it was for the road issue.  She stated that she was influenced by the list of people or groups that had supported their letter, such as Friends of the Wekiva, DOT, the legislature, Audubon Society, Nature Conservancy, the Wekiva Commission, the City of Mount Dora, and the Division of Forestry.  She also felt that it had been studied to death, and they were just giving DOT some direction in the letter and could write a second letter in the future if something changed.

On a motion by Commr. Stewart, seconded by Commr. Renick and carried by a vote of 3-1, the Board moved to support the letter recommending the 1A alignment on Mr. Taylor’s property to the FDOT for the alignment of SR 46A.

Commr. Hill  voted “no.”


At 11:10 a.m., the Chairman announced that there would be a recess until 11:20 a.m.


Mayor James Yatsuk of Mount Dora addressed the Board regarding a letter that was delivered to them October 17, 2007.  He explained that when they met with the consultant from the DOT about the configuration of the intersection of SR 46 and U.S. Highway 441, which would link up to the Wekiva Parkway, it was narrowed down to two alternatives, one of which was an at-grade intersection that would take the now free flow down to a signalized intersection with a flyover from SR 46 heading north.  He related that the other alternative was to keep the current configuration with the flyover from SR 46 going north on Hwy 441.  He stated that they indicated very clearly to the representative from DOT that their choice was to have the free flow and not the signalized intersection, but at the last Wekiva Commission meeting, the DOT came out with a recommendation of the signalized intersection.  He commented that there would be a savings of money and better flow of traffic with the other alternative, especially considering what they were planning to do with the employment center that would be right off of the SR 46 bypass.  He requested that the Board write a letter of recommendation in support for Mount Dora having an interchange instead of a signaled intersection there.

Mr. Stivender stated that they originally spoke about modifying the interchange with a flyover and that it would be far more efficient for the flow of traffic to have it that way.  He added that at the first meeting, they talked about making sure that they did not have the Wekiva Parkway traffic hitting SR 46 going right into town by diffusing that traffic and making sure everyone knew to go another direction, because otherwise there would be bumper to bumper traffic into Mount Dora if they did not plan it properly.

Mayor Yatsuk pointed out that both of them contained a flyover, but the other one had the bridge that was in place now, which would not be there heading east to west towards Plymouth/Sorrento and would become a signalized intersection in the DOT’s proposed configuration.  However, they preferred to have that bridge or a rebuilt bridge remain and for that to remain a non-signalized intersection.

Mr. Stivender commented that the next signal up the road would be the impact to controlling traffic more than the interchange itself.

Mr. T. J. Fish, Executive Director of the Lake-Sumter Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) stated that these issues would be a topic of discussion at the next day’s MPO meeting, and they would be looking for the MPO governing board to do a resolution regarding SR 46A as well as the Mount Dora position.  He opined that Mount Dora was asking what was best for their community, and as long as the funding issue would not be a problem, he thought their position would be supported by the MPO.

On a motion by Commr. Stewart, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the request from Mount Dora to write a letter of support for Mount Dora’s recommendation for having an interchange instead of a signalized intersection at SR 46 and Highway 441.



Mr. Brian Sheahan, Director of Planning and Community Design, Department of Growth Management, placed on the screen the Proof of Publication for the day’s Rezoning public hearings and pointed out that they had two separate notices, one of which contained Eagle Dunes solely and the other which contained the remainder of the Zoning Agenda.  He related that they had received a request for continuance for all items with the exception of Agenda Item Tab 2, which was PH#36-07-4 and that staff was in full support of the request on PH#32-07-4 for Robert and Jane Walsh to be withdrawn from the hearing agenda only to go back to the DRS (Development Review Staff) process.


Mr. Sheahan explained that a 30-day continuance had been requested for Tab 3, PH#31-07-5, in order to allow the property owner to work through the PLAAC (Public Lands Acquisition Advisory Council) process.

Commr. Cadwell commented that he appreciated that request and suggested that they have a discussion about that item first.  He then opened the public hearing for the request for the postponement.

There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding the postponement, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

Commr. Renick commented that they had discussed this item before and that it was in the Public Lands Acquisition process.  She related that it was staff that asked for the postponement and asked what the time frame on the postponement was.

Mr. Sheahan stated that the next available meeting was the November 27 meeting.

Mr. Gary Cooney, who represented the applicant, stated that they just wanted to make sure that the people who wanted to speak had an opportunity to be heard and to have it advertised for that process.

Commr. Cadwell suggested that they left it for a 30-day postponement for now.

On a motion by Commr. Renick, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the request for a 30-day postponement of Rezoning Tab 3, Case No. PH31-07-5, Akron Meadows, LLC.


Commr. Cadwell inquired whether the Board needed to take any action on Agenda Item 1, Rezoning Case No PH32-07-4 by Robert S. and Jane E. Walsh.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, commented that this was only shown as an indefinite postponement to let the applicants come in and amend their application, in order to avoid repaying the application fees.

Mr. Sheahan responded that that was correct, and the applicant had requested to withdraw from the public hearing scheduled and to go back to DRS.

The Chairman opened the public hearing on the postponement.

There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this postponement, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

On a motion by Commr. Stewart, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the postponement of Tab 1, Rezoning Case No. PH32-07-4 by Robert S. Walsh and Jane E. Walsh.


Mr. Sheahan reported that Rezoning Case No PH7-04-4, Eagle Dunes II, LLC for John Gray, Jr. had requested a 60-day continuance, which would be for the December 19 meeting.

Commr. Cadwell noted that the attorney for the applicants was ill and not able to be there.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

Ms. Leslie Campione, on behalf of the property owners in the area, related that they had met with Ms. Cecilia Bonifay, attorney for the applicants, last week, who had indicated they needed 30 days based on some of the discussion that went back and forth between them regarding improving the design and the density for this request.  She stated that at that meeting, her clients agreed to that 30-day postponement, but she did not have authorization to support a 60-day postponement.  She was concerned that this had already gone on for a long time.

Commr. Cadwell commented that he would be more comfortable with a 30-day postponement and felt that this case had been there long enough.

Commr. Stewart stated that she was leaning toward denying the request for a continuance, because this development came before the Board last year and staff had recommended denial back then because it was not a development that fit in with the area.  She related that they withdrew it before it could be voted on because they perceived that they did not have a good chance to get it passed that day, and this year they came back with a plan that was not any better.  She felt that they needed to go back to the drawing board and work longer on this than 30 days.

Ms. Kathy Allison, paralegal with Akerman, Senterfitt, explained that they did exactly what they were supposed to do and met with citizens who had concerns on this, and their planners were now making changes to that plan.  She added that the reason they had asked for 60 days was that they just wanted to be sure there was sufficient time to get the changes to staff and to Ms. Campione and her clients.  She commented that the 30 days would be sufficient, and assured the Board that they were making changes to coordinate with the concerned citizens and the issues they raised.

Commr. Cadwell stated that he was concerned about everyone having due process, and he believed that since Ms. Bonifay was not there, they should move for the 30-day postponement.

On a motion by Commr. Stewart, seconded by Commr. Hill, and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board moved to postpone Rezoning Case No. 7-07-4, Eagle Dunes, II, LLC and John Gray, Jr. for 30 days.


Mr. Sheahan stated that this was Case No. PH50-06-2, Clonts Grove, Inc., represented by Ms. Cecelia Bonifay of Akerman, Senterfitt and that in this case they requested a continuance until February of 2008.  He explained that this again was a case which had been in the process for a very long time, and he believed that there were four continuances at the Zoning Board level.

Ms. Kathy Allison informed the Board that unfortunately Ms. Bonifay was ill and explained that they appeared before the Zoning Board last month, which actually made some suggestions to the owner for this site.  She related that after that meeting, the County asked them to sit down with its planner and try to incorporate those suggestions, which was in the works right now.  She further explained that they felt like they needed the extra time due to the holidays to get the plans to staff to give them sufficient time if they revised them.  She also noted that they copied the City of Clermont on their postponement letter.

Mr. Wayne Saunders, City Manager of Clermont, stated that they had hoped to get this resolved today, but they understood the circumstances.  He respectfully requested that it would only be a 30-day continuance, since this had already gone on for a long time.

Ms. Cindy Barrow, Lake County School Board member, District 3, stated that she was there to address the Board to give them information about the schools in her district.  She related that she was very sad to hear that Ms. Bonifay was ill and understood the circumstances, but requested that this would only be a 30-day postponement.  She reported that she was there for Planning and Zoning and that she planned to be there each and every time that this was on their Agenda.  She also expressed hope that the next time it was on the Agenda, it would not be postponed again.

On a motion by Commr. Renick, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board moved to postpone Rezoning Case No. PH50-06-2, Clonts Grove, Inc., Cecelia Bonifay, for 30 days.




Mr. Alfredo Massa, Division of Planning and Community Design, presented Case No. PH36-07-4, stating that the owner was the Lake County Board of County Commissioners and the applicant was Tom Eicher on behalf of Bobby Bonilla, Director of Parks and Trails Division, Department of Public Works.  He explained that they were requesting to rezone 20.14 acres from the Agriculture Zoning District (A) to the Community Facility District (CFD) for the purpose of expanding the existing Pine Forest Park, which was currently zoned CFD and consisted of 27.77 acres creating a total park area of 47.91 acres.  He noted that it was located on the east side of State Road 44, and that the zoning around the property was entirely Agriculture, with some Agriculture Residential to the west.  He added that the County was requesting to expand the acreage of the park to enable the completion of the facility as it was originally planned and approved, and he showed Exhibit B on the monitor to illustrate those plans.  He mentioned that in addition to all the other uses, the County wished to add the use of a radio and cellular tower and related accessory structures on the future site.

Commr. Stewart clarified that the softball field and the soccer field were not part of this park, but the baseball field was.  She also stated that there was an open field, which could be used for soccer practice as well as picnics, children playing, and other recreational uses.

Mr. Massa stated that at that time it was a conceptual plan, and there were multiple uses that were made available that did not necessarily come into existence.  He went on to say that it was documented in the environmental assessment that was required with the site plan review process that the northern part of the original site consisted of scrub jay habitat, and this area was now identified as passive recreation with only hiking trails through it.  He concluded that staff recommended approval of this zoning request.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

Mr. James E. Todd, a resident of Eustis, stated that he wanted to reserve the chance to counter any opposition and that he was totally in support of and pushed for this park.  He commented that it was badly needed in that area, and they needed to rezone it.  He added that it was unfortunate that it fell through the cracks two years ago, and they needed to move on with it.

Mr. Peter Moeller, a resident of Plantation at Leesburg, who did a lot of volunteer work at PEAR Park restoring the meadows, stated that he had been to Pine Park a couple of times and that it was probably the only park that had really good scrub jay habitat.  He commented that the south end there had been completely bulldozed, but the seed bank appeared to be fully in tact so that it would come back.  He stated that the question was a fair division between the needs of the local population for a ball field and getting some good scrub jay habitat.  He noted that it would appear from the map that was drawn that this was an equitable distribution and he would support that.

There being no one else who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.

Commr. Stewart pointed out that on Page 1 of 2 of the Zoning Agenda, they did write “open athletic field,” and that it should be titled “open field” instead so that it could be used for multiple uses, including picnicking, soccer practice or ballgames.  She also noted that on Page 3 of 6, the Summary of Analysis, No. 1 read “Recreational Uses/ Recreational Park includes a football/soccer field and support area,” and that was the open field, so the wording needed to be changed.  She also commented that they should be careful that when they do put activity-based recreation or active recreation in a rural park, that they did not overdo it, and they needed the ball fields to meet the needs of the citizens and not over-meet their needs.  She opined that this was a great park the way they currently had it planned.

Mr. Massa pointed out that the items they saw on Page 3 of 6 was part of the staff report and was taken from the old ordinance, but the new ordinance had actually had the items they saw on page 1 of 2, which was the memorandum item.

Commr. Stewart commented that it did say “open athletic field” in the new ordinance, so they just needed to cross out the word “athletic.”

On a motion by Commr. Stewart, seconded by Commr. Renick and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Rezoning Case No. PH36-07-4 by Lake County Board of County Commissioners,  Applicant Tom Eicher on behalf of Bobby Bonilla, Director of Parks and Trails Division, Department of Public Works, and Ordinance No. 2007-49, with the change on page 2 of the Ordinance from “Open Athletic Field” to “Open Field” in Section 1(A).



Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, explained that this was a renewal of the LYNX agreement, which essentially was the same agreement they had with them last year with the reduction of $35,000 in the price.

On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Renick and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Tab 21, the request from the County Attorney for approval of an agreement between Lake County in its capacity as the Community Transportation Coordinator and LYNX to provide two fixed-route bus networks operating in Orange, Osceola, and Seminole Counties.


Mr. Minkoff informed the Board that they had had a Public Works bid out on street sweeping, and after the department had recommended an award, they had a bid protest.  He related that they would like to use one of their specials masters to review the facts and make a recommendation to the Board on that protest and that they would pick a random one from their special master list.

On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the request from the County Attorney to use a special master to make a recommendation regarding a bid protest.




On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Addendum No. 1, the request that the 2007 tax roll be extended prior to the completion of the Value Adjustment Board hearings, as allowed by F.S. 197.323.



Mr. Gregg Welstead, Assistant County Manager, stated that he had received a request from the Superintendent of Schools yesterday asking for the Commission’s support for a medical magnet high school in south Lake County.  He understood from a conversation with Ms. Cindy Barrow, School Board member, that the School Board discussed it yesterday evening at their meeting and that they saw no problem with this.

Commr. Hill stated that she thought this was an educational curriculum type issue and asked if the Board had some responsibility in this.

Commr. Cadwell thought it was a workforce development issue.

Ms. Barrow explained that this was part of their legislative agenda, and they were asking for letters of support so they might be able to receive some State monies to help them out with that project.

On a motion by Commr. Stewart, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board moved to write a letter of support for the medical magnet high school in south Lake County on behalf of the School Board.



On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved the execution of Proclamation No. 2007-170 proclaiming November, 2007 as Epilepsy Awareness Month in Lake County.



            Commr. Renick stated that Ms. Barrow had called her that morning to find out whether she could give some input at this meeting.  She told Ms. Barrow that she could use her report time.

            Commr. Cadwell commented that they did not usually have public input on Zoning day, but any time another Lake County official wanted to speak to this Board, that was fine.

            Ms. Barrow stated that last night they had their School Board meeting, and they were requesting that they have the school impact fee hearing placed on the agenda very soon so they could move forward, and they would like to have a date named as soon as possible.

            Commr. Hill mentioned that they did have an impact fee workshop set up for November 20, where they would be considering the school impact fee, and the consultant would be there at that time.  She added that they would also be bringing forward the Implementation Ordinance.

            Commr. Cadwell stated that they should pick a date for that impact fee hearing so the School Board would know for sure when that would be.

            Commr. Renick was concerned about it falling anywhere near the holidays.

            Commr. Hill thought that they had it tentatively set at December 11, but she was not completely sure about that.

            Mr. Minkoff clarified that if the Board took some action at the workshop and gave them some direction, they could have it advertised and could have the public hearing on December 11.



            Commr. Stewart stated that on September 25, the Board voted to provide a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Greyhound Ranch Adoptions in Sorrento, but she has since heard from several surrounding residents that they were not aware of the application and would have attended the hearings.  She commented that the County did everything they needed to do to notice residents regarding this, but there was one sign that was left out because it was at the end of a road that the residents did not get to see.  She explained that the residents claimed they were not aware of it until after the Board had voted and felt they did not have any input.  She wondered if they should have staff look into bringing the matter back before the Board so that all of the concerned citizens could be heard.

            Mr. Minkoff explained that a concerned resident that felt he did not get noticed could appeal it, and he believed they were still within the appealing time to do that.  He stated that if that was not done, then the rezoning would be final.  He related that they could also bring it back as a staff-initiated rezoning, but there were some risks to that because the property owners purchased the property in reliance upon the Board’s action, so they may see a claim from them if the Board elected to move in that direction.

            Commr. Stewart stated that her concern was that the sign was posted where the residents could not see it, because it was at the end of a road that residents did not drive past.

            Mr. Minkoff related that in this case, the Code required mail notice to everyone within 300 feet, which was done, and that it required proper legal advertisement and posting.  He added that it was advertised and the posting was placed on the property, but the Code also required that it be posted on the nearest public road, and that was not done.

            Commr. Renick commented that she did not think it would change the vote, based on what she read and what they went through before.  She asked if it had not been properly noticed, however, whether they would have to go through that again.

            Mr. Minkoff responded that the ordinance was presumptively valid, but if one of the people who were entitled to be noticed challenged it, they might have a good chance of winning, but if the Board on its own motion took it back up, then they might see a claim.

            Commr. Cadwell commented that the only way they could take the issue back up would be for the County to rezone that property.

            Mr. Minkoff explained that in that case, they would reinitiate it, give appropriate notice to the property owner, and then bring back an ordinance for the Board to revoke the CUP that was issued.  He also pointed out that the fact that the notice was not posted may not be enough to overturn it in court, because people may have had actual notice by mail or other ways.

            Mr. Sheahan reported that they did check the notice, and all the notices were properly sent.  He stated that a couple of the individuals who had allegedly not received their notice were sent the notice, and two others who said they did not get noticed were outside of the 300 feet to get the notice.

            Commr. Renick commented that she thought the Board had agreed that they would notice the homeowners’ association if there was a neighborhood nearby.

            Commr. Cadwell responded that they could not just say they would do it, but would also have to change the ordinance.

            Commr. Renick suggested that they direct staff to look into that.  She also commented that the property owner Commr. Stewart was concerned about could have already had his concerns addressed, but just did not know it, because they talked about buffering and other issues.  She thought that the County staff could sit down with this particular individual and go over exactly what was approved.

            Mr. Minkoff suggested that they could get with staff, have a community meeting in the neighborhood, and have the applicant show everyone exactly what they were planning.  He thought that perhaps this would assuage some of the opposition, and if not, they could bring it back to the Board for direction.

            Commr. Stewart thought from what they heard the day of that zoning, that the citizen would perhaps be reassured about his concerns, but he was upset that he did not find out about it until the day after the Board voted on it.

            Mr. Richard Orenstein, the Treasurer of Greyhound Ranch Adoptions, stated that they had a meeting last Wednesday at Heathrow Country Estates, where several residents attended, including several people from Shetland Trail who had spoken to the Board members.  He related that they discussed what their plans for the property were and all of the issues in regard to odor, noise, and waste disposal, and the residents had told them after the meeting that they had no problem with their permit.

            Mr. Bill Smalley, a resident of Heathrow Country Estates, stated that Mr. Orenstein was correct that there was a meeting last Wednesday and that it went fairly well, but there were a couple of people that still had some concerns.  He thought it would be a good idea to have a public meeting that was talked about earlier to address the concerns, such as the amount of right of way.

            Mr. G. G. Washington, a resident of Heathrow Country Estates, stated that he lived outside the 300 feet and did not get notified, but he had a couple of neighbors who were within the 300 feet who said they did not get notified.  He stated that he did not get a chance to get his questions answered because there was a meeting afterward he needed to be at.  He stated that he would appreciate an opportunity to understand and find out more, because it was adjacent to where he lives.

            Commr. Stewart commented that the letters the County received regarding Greyhound Ranch Adoptions were very supportive and stated that it was very well run and quiet, so she thought they would be happy with the answers.  She thought that Mr. Orenstein could have a talk after the meeting with Mr. Washington and any other concerned citizens and try to work out any concerns with them.



            Commr. Cadwell stated that they would be presenting the Proclamation proclaiming November 5, 2007 as James C Watkins Day in Lake County at his retirement reception on that day.  He stated that he would like for the Board to participate in that presentation if they were able to attend it.

            On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Proclamation No. 2007-167 proclaiming November 5, 2007 as James C. Watkins Day in Lake County.


There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 12:35 p.m.



                                                                        WELTON G. CADWELL, CHAIRMAN