A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
november 20, 2012
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, November 20, 2012 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: Leslie Campione, Chairman; Timothy I. Sullivan; Sean Parks; Jimmy Conner; and Welton G. Cadwell. Others present were: David Heath, County Manager; Sanford A. “Sandy” Minkoff, County Attorney; Wendy Taylor, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; Neil Kelly, Clerk of Court; Barbara F. Lehman, Chief Deputy Clerk, County Finance; and Shannon Treen, Deputy Clerk.
INVOCATION and pledge
Pastor Skip Haymans from the First Baptist Church of Eustis gave the Invocation, and Sheriff Gary Borders led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Newly elected Commrs. Welton G. Cadwell, Jimmy Conner, and Timothy I. Sullivan were sworn into office. Mr. Neil Kelly, Clerk of Court, administered the Oath of Office for Commr. Cadwell and Commr. Conner, and Judge Mark J. Hill administered the Oath of Office for Commr. Sullivan.
recess and reassembly
The Chairman announced at 9:25 a.m. that there would be a 20-minute recess so everyone present could participate in a reception being held in honor of the newly elected Commissioners.
There were no changes to the agenda.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Minutes of October 23, 2012 (Regular Meeting) as presented.
citizen question and comment period
Mr. Ken LaRoe, a resident of Eustis, commented that the St. Johns River Water Management District was looking to sell about 800 acres of Eustis Meadows, which is across from the Lake May Reserve, so that the land could be used for peat mining. He added that they wanted to sell the land because it cost them $10,000 a year to maintain it, and he asked the Board to consider adopting a resolution to oppose the sale in hopes that it would shut down an attempt to get rid of conservation lands.
CLERK OF COURTS’ CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Clerk of Courts’ Consent Agenda, Items 1 through 8, as follows:
List of Warrants
Request to acknowledge receipt of the list of warrants paid prior to this meeting, pursuant to Chapter 136.06 (1) of the Florida Statutes, which shall be incorporated into the Minutes as attached Exhibit A and filed in the Board Support Division of the Clerk’s Office.
Request to acknowledge receipt of excess fees returned to Board of County Commissioners from Clerk of Circuit Court, in the amount of $2,418,278.79.
Southwest Florida Water Management District’s Budget
Request to acknowledge receipt of a letter from the Southwest Florida Water Management District informing that the District adopted its fiscal year 2012-2013 budget and approved its draft 2013 Five-Year Water Resource Development Work Program at its Governing Board meeting held on September 25, 2012 and that it was available on the District’s website at: watermatters.org/WRDWP.
Lands Available List
Request to acknowledge receipt of property placed on the Lands Available List. Lake County has until January 28, 2013 to purchase property from Lands Available List before it is available to the public.
Annual Audit Plan
Request to acknowledge receipt of the Annual Audit Plan, Fiscal Year 2012-2013.
Request to acknowledge receipt of the following audit reports:
a. BCC-100 Fixed Asset Verification, Fiscal Year 2012
b. BCC-101 Ongoing Review of ARRA Grant Reporting, Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2012
Public Risk Management of Florida Health Trust
Request to acknowledge receipt of a memorandum from Public Risk Management of Florida regarding the filing of, and including a copy of, an Interlocal Cooperative Agreement for the City of Eustis, Town of Lady Lake and City of Umatilla, together with an Affidavit regarding authenticity, executed for the purpose of providing insurance through Public Risk Management of Florida Health Trust. The Agreement, together with the Affidavit of Authenticity, will be filed by the Board Support Department as a part of the Minutes in compliance with Florida Statute Section 163.01, the Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1969.
Lake County Water Authority Board of Trustees Meeting Schedule for 2013
Request to acknowledge receipt of a memorandum from the Lake County Water Authority Board of Trustees listing the meeting schedule for 2013. All regular meetings are scheduled to begin at 3:30 p.m. The Budget meetings are scheduled to begin at 5:05 p.m. and the Budget Workshop time will be determined. All meetings will take place in the Lake County Administration Building, Board of County Commissioners Chambers unless otherwise noted as location to be determined.
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the County Manager’s Consent Agenda, Tabs 3 through 16 as follows:
Request for approval and signature on the Amended & Restated Agreement between Lake County and LifeStream Behavioral Center, Inc. for Funding for Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services for Fiscal Year 2012-2013. The fiscal impact is $873,987.00 and is fully funded by the General Fund.
Request for approval of the Lake County Public Transportation ADA Transition Plan. There is no fiscal impact.
Request for approval of a waiver from the 30-year Local Housing Assistance Program (LHAP) requirement to fifteen (15) years for State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) client (Gail Thomas), and a waiver of the prohibition against existing mortgages on the client’s property. The fiscal amount is projected to be $140,000.00 – expense (100% Grant funded).
Request for approval to accept the Emergency Food and Shelter Program (EFSP) Phase 30 funding award for $134,880. The Salvation Army shall serve as the local recipient organization/fiscal agent, and authorize the Department of Community Services to manage the program and prepare required plans, reports and other related documents as directed by the local FEMA Board and/or as required by FEMA. There is no fiscal impact to the LCBCC budget.
Request for approval of the request by Habitat for Humanity to be released from the Neighborhood Stabilization Program 3 (NSP3) Contract. There is no fiscal impact as these funds will be reallocated.
Facilities Development and Management
Request for approval of a GMP of $207,622.75, a contingency of $20,000, and a $4,300 IT Allowance for the project entitled “Lake County Public Transportation Administration Building Renovation”, and authorize County staff to complete all associated implementing documents. The fiscal impact is $ 231,922.75 of which $103,084 is ARRA Grant Funded.
Request for approval to provide management of Lake EMS’ Human Resources function, perform core HR services, and assume one (1) Human Resources position.
Request to approve re-award of RFP 12-0431, Mowing Group C (Bermuda Grass Mowing and Maintenance of Minneola Athletic Complex) to D & A Building Services, Longwood, Florida, due to default by previous vendor, and authorize the Procurement Office to execute all supporting documentation. The annual fiscal value of the new award is $21,462.90 (Expenditure).
Request for adoption of the FY 2012/2013 Annual Plan of Service and Combined Budget for the Lake County Library System. There is no fiscal impact.
Request for approval to purchase a Fire Engine/Pumper from Fire Impact Fees. The fiscal impact is $260,136 (Expense).
Request for approval to: (1) Pursue residual grant funds for the Emergency Communications and Operations Center (ECOC) from the Federal Department of Homeland Security, Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant program through the Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM). (2) Allow use of state and/or other existing contracts to expedite purchase of eligible equipment. No local match is required. (Revenue).
Request for approval to: (1) Pursue residual grant funds for the Emergency Communications and Operations Center (ECOC) from the Federal Department of Homeland Security, State Homeland Security Grant Program (SHSGP) through the Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM). (2) Allow use of state and/or other existing contracts to expedite purchase of eligible equipment. No local match is required (Revenue).
Request for approval and execution of the attached interlocal agreement between Lake County and the City of Tavares for traffic sign maintenance and emergency repairs. The fiscal impact is $7,950.00 annually (Revenue).
Request for approval of the Interlocal Agreement between Lake County and the City of Groveland relating to Marsh Hammock Way (County Road No. 1631), Water Fern Circle (County Road No. 1631A), Water Orchid Avenue (County Road No. 1631B), Marsh Elder Street (County Road No. 1631C), Winding Marsh Street (County Road No. 1631D), Golden Club Street (County Road No. 1631E), and Switch Cane Street (County Road No. 1631F) Right of Way Annexation and Transfer of Jurisdiction & Maintenance Responsibility. The estimated fiscal impact is $82,832.52 to be expended from the County Transportation Trust Fund, Road Repair & Maintenance (Expense). Commission District 1.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: REZONINGS
Mr. Brian Sheahan, Planning and Community Design Manager, showed on the monitor that the hearings had been properly noticed and stated that there were no changes to the agenda; however, staff did receive a continuance request from the applicant for Tab 3, the Pine Meadows Peat Mine, to continue the case to the January 22, 2013 BCC meeting in order to allow time to reduce the size of the application and to obtain additional data to answer questions from the Planning and Zoning Board Hearing.
REZONING consent AGENDA
PH #32-12-5 – Fire station #14-Tower Rezoning
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Conner and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Ordinance No. 2012-72 and Rezoning Case PH #32-12-5 by Lake County BCC/J. Jolliff, Fire Chief, Public Safety Director for the Fire Station #14 – Tower Rezoning, which was a request to rezone property from Agriculture (A) to Community Facility District (CFD) zoning district on approximately 8.81 acres to facilitate a fire station and communications tower facility.
PH #34-12-1 – Anderson property rezoning
Commr. Parks commented that since the property was on Lake Minnehaha, which was designated as an Outstanding Florida Water, he asked if they could take into consideration having a more advanced septic tank treatment system since there was no sewer system in that area.
Commr. Campione asked how that would be addressed in the Land Development Regulations.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, responded that it would be based upon the environmental considerations, and the County would have the ability to create some regulations, but they would have to be consistent with the state guidelines since the legislature preempted that area.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Sullivan, seconded by Commr. Conner and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Ordinance No. 2012-73 and Rezoning Case PH #34-12-1 by M. Anderson Family Partnership/Ladd Development Inc. for the Anderson Property Rezoning, which was a request to rezone property located northeast of Bronson Road from Rural Residential (R-1) to Medium Residential (R-3).
rezoning regular agenda
MSP #12/11/1-5 – pine meadows peat mine
The Chairman opened the public hearing regarding the continuance request.
Mr. Egor Emery, a resident of Eustis, spoke in opposition to the postponement, stating that he as well as others had invested time to be there to speak on the case and he preferred that it be heard that day. He added that the postponement request came through late yesterday and it was unfair to everyone there to be given such a short notice. He noted that he understood that the applicant had the right to make the request right up until the last minute, but there seemed to be a pattern with other applicants doing that to see if the opposition would go away.
Mr. Ken LaRoe, a resident of Eustis, spoke in opposition to the postponement and pointed out that the St. Johns River Water Management District Board would be having their meeting on December 11, 2012, so if the case was postponed it would not be heard until after that meeting.
Mr. Dave Hurley, a resident of Eustis, commented that many of the people who lived in the community near the proposed peat mine had come to the meeting to oppose it and were discouraged when they found out it was being postponed. He added that it was extremely inconvenient to them to postpone it, and he recommended hearing the case that day.
Mr. Richard Gonzalez, Vice President of Pineloch Management Corporation representing Center Lake Properties which is adjacent to the proposed site, stated that he was fine with the postponement as long as the additional data the applicant would be compiling addressed his concerns. He suggested designating one staff member as the contact person to address questions and concerns raised by the parties affected by the mine and also requested that a chemical evaluation of the area be done since peat mining could disturb the underlying layers of contaminants. He expressed that he was not opposed to mining, but he objected to the location of the peat mine since it was so close to a housing community. He added that it was the government’s responsibility to protect the people’s investments and related that the tranquility of their lifestyle would change and their property values would decline.
Ms. Joan Bryant, President of Trout Lake Nature Center, mentioned that she as well as others was opposed to the postponement because they were prepared to speak about the case that day.
There being no one else who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commr. Campione expressed that if they decided to grant the postponement, she wanted to make sure that that would be the last time because she would not support another postponement. She mentioned that the hydrological report needed to be comprehensive enough to address the issues that were raised at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting, such as toxicity, water levels, the potential impact on surrounding lakes, and downstream contamination.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he also had some of the same concerns, especially about the hydrological study, and suggested they include having the applicant complete that study as part of the motion.
Commr. Parks declared a conflict of interest because he worked on the project a couple of years ago, so he would not be voting.
Commr. Conner requested that the Board look at the policy in place regarding postponements and to update it so that applicants had to provide a more reasonable notice. He opined that over the years they have wasted a lot of time discussing whether or not to hear a case, so they should change the policy to state that an applicant must ask for a postponement by a certain date.
Commr. Cadwell related that they did tighten up their rules several years ago because people were abusing the system, but he opined that they did need to look at the policy because there was not language in there stating how far out an applicant could ask for a postponement.
Commr. Campione noted that staff could come back with some suggestions on how to deal with that, adding that the status of a case could be displayed online days in advance for the public to see.
Mr. Heath stated that he could look at how other jurisdictions handled continuances and could report back to the Board in January.
Mr. Minkoff pointed out that the current code provided a time frame for the applicant to automatically receive a postponement, but they could still ask the Board for a postponement at the meeting if they missed that time frame. He added that that was what occurred with that case.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Sullivan and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the Board approved the 60 day postponement until the January 22, 2013 BCC meeting in order for the applicant to reduce the size of the application and to obtain additional data to answer questions from the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. The applicant was also required to complete a hydrological study and provide any other information staff requested by that meeting.
Commr. Parks abstained from voting.
PH #25-10-3 – long and scott airstrip rezoning
Mr. Sheahan presented the case, stating that this was a continuation of a hearing from May 22, 2012, and that the request was to amend Community Facility District (CFD) Ordinance No. 2004-85 in order to remove a specific condition requiring approval by the Board of County Commissioners for any land use change on adjacent property in Orange County. He noted that the property in question was approximately six acres and comprised the end of the runway that was utilized for the Orlando North Airpark. He added that the property was originally rezoned in 2005 to accommodate the required length of airstrip to meet state and federal regulations, and there were a lot of concerns at that time relating to the noise and types of aircraft that would be flying over the airstrip and impacting Lake County property owners. He related that the Commission at that time placed the condition in the ordinance as a way to limit those impacts on the residents. He recalled that a request came in to Orange County to change the land use for an airport/industrial type land use on the Orange County side which triggered the requirement for it to be heard by the BCC, so the applicant wanted to eliminate that condition entirely and leave the remainder of the ordinance intact. He added that the land use change was needed to facilitate the property transfer to the West Orange Airport Authority (WOAA) and for the expansion of the airport for a commercial airport. He mentioned that WOAA had not received the latest feedback from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), so staff was recommending to adopt a status quo ordinance that would leave the existing restrictions currently applied to the property intact and then replace the condition that any change in land use on the Orange County side come back to the Board and that any violation of the ordinance would require a hearing for rezoning back to the original agricultural zoning. He then displayed a map showing the location of Long and Scott Farms, the North Orlando Airpark, and the airstrip and stated that expansion of the airport would be limited since the property near it was owned by the St. Johns River Water Management District. He noted that about 50 feet of the airstrip was paved in Lake County and that the parcel extended approximately 1,400 feet. He then compared the two ordinances and specified that the same conditions were placed on the property including limiting the parcel to 1,455 feet long by 50 feet wide for a paved airstrip; allowing stormwater retention only in Lake County; prohibiting structures in Lake County; allowing only daylight operation of aircraft; and prohibiting jets, helicopters, flight training, training facilities, parachutists, hang gliders, ultra lights and gliders. He related that the Runway Protection Zone extended 1,000 feet past the end of the airstrip, the object-free area extended 200 feet past the end of the airstrip, future approvals would require a site plan, and FDOT and FAA requirements would apply while it was an operating airport. He remarked that adoption of the ordinance would allow a broader discussion on where the most appropriate place would be for an airport of that type, but it would also allow time to get additional data and findings back from the FAA and FDOT.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Mr. Robert Williams, representing Long and Scott Farms and speaking on behalf of WOAA, stated that they supported the staff’s recommendation of the status quo ordinance.
Mr. Charles Lee on behalf of Audubon of Florida commented that there was no harm in continuing the existing use exactly as it was, but Audubon’s main concern was about the $150 million public investment that had already been made in the Lake Apopka restoration project. He noted that if the property became an airport, FAA would designate a 10,000 foot circle from the runway as a hazardous wildlife exclusion zone, and the restoration efforts could be subverted if the FAA instructed the Water Management District to drain the marshes and remove the wildlife that could be hazardous to airplanes. He pointed out that Audubon felt there was greater potential for economic development in Lake and Orange County with ecotourism rather than with expansion of the airport.
Ms. Constance Harvey asked the Board to keep the ordinance in place as it stood that day, and to open up a dialogue between Orange County, the City of Apopka, and WOAA.
Ms. Loretta Satterthwaite representing the Orange Audubon Society mentioned that they were asking the Board to support the status quo ordinance because they were fearful that a zoning change would facilitate the change of the airstrip to a jetport. She added that Lake County’s cooperation and communication with Orange County should be maintained, and she also noted that the St. Johns River Water Management District property next to the airstrip was going to be for sale or exchange without a conservation easement along with it.
Mr. Egor Emery with the Lake County Conservation Council explained that the Council believed that the millions of dollars the citizens have invested in the Lake Apopka area should carry a lot of weight. He commented that the status quo ordinance was a good solution for now, but they would like to see Lake County maintain as much leverage with the surrounding governments as possible. He added that the Leesburg airport already existed, and it made no sense to put a jetport in a bird area that was so important to everyone. He expressed that the economic development that ecotourism represented should be at the top of the list because it was the greatest asset Lake County had to market, and they also believed that although airports were important, that was not the place where one needed to be expanded.
Ms. Linda Bystrak, representative of the Oklawaha Valley Audubon Society, stated that if the airport were to take place and the wildlife had to be controlled, thousands of fish from those marshes would have to be removed and the cheapest and fastest way to do that was by chemicals. She added that those fish were very attractive to many of the birds that could pose a hazard to airplanes. She also mentioned that she hoped the ordinance would stay the way it was and reminded them that the Leesburg Airport was only 11.2 miles away.
Ms. Juanita Prescott, a resident of Mount Dora, noted that everyone in that area has fought the airport because it interfered with their way of life. She pointed out that the County had already denied an aviation community five years ago, and at that time the airstrip was not supposed to have planes flying over their houses, but they do. She suggested that either the County or Long and Scott Farms buy the properties that were out there so they could be included in the rest of the package for the airport and for the County to make a final decision on what Long and Scott Farms could do with that property.
Ms. Barbara Kemp, a resident of Mount Dora, commented that the airstrip was right in line with her house, and because the planes fly right over her house, she was most concerned about one of them crashing into her house. She expressed that she wanted to keep the ordinance in place the way it was and to not have anything bigger, such as jets, come to that airport.
Ms. Mary Remer, a resident of Leesburg, mentioned that she would hate to see one life lost or to see birds colliding with jets because of the jetport. She noted that hundreds of people go to Lake Apopka for bird watching and opined that developing a jetport would not provide as much economic income as did bird watching.
Ms. Sherry Wiercioch, a resident of Mount Dora, explained that a few years ago Long and Scott Farms was sold for millions of dollars for the purpose of conservation and to save Lake Apopka, but extending the airport would have a long-term impact to not only Long and Scott Farms, but to residents of Lake and Orange County. She added that what may start out as a simple choice could end up devastating the quality of life.
Ms. Deborah Parks, a resident of Mount Dora, thanked the County staff for meeting with her to answer her questions, and she welcomed having an open dialogue with the counties, the governmental agencies, and the environmental groups since it had become a very complex issue. She expressed that she supported the decision to keep the airport as it was.
Mr. Nicholas Shannin, Attorney representing Ms. Parks and the Lake Apopka North Shore Restoration Area, thanked the Board for their time and diligence on the matter and thanked the community partners at Long and Scott Farms for their economic contributions. He related that the current ordinance provided the Board the ability to stop something before it started and should the Orange County land use approvals change, the ordinance would become null and void unless the changes were approved by the Lake County Board of County Commissioners. He stated that Orange County wanted the ability to wait until a change had been made and then come after the fact and ask for forgiveness, and he urged the Board to keep the status quo ordinance because it was the only way to ensure they had a seat at the table and to stop something before it happened.
There being no one else who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commr. Parks asked how they could ensure that the larger discussion would continue.
Mr. Sheahan explained that the ordinance allowed the same uses of the property under certain conditions and it required the Board’s approval for any land use change, and the ordinance would come back to the Board should Orange County violate any of those conditions. He noted that the closing of this quasi-judicial hearing would allow the larger discussion to continue, which was the reason staff recommended closing the issue and allowing the same level of use of the property.
Commr. Parks asked if the Board needed to write a resolution to convey that they wanted to be a part of the larger discussion.
Commr. Campione mentioned that they sent Orange County a letter indicating that was their request and that the discussion needed to take place on a regional basis since multiple cities in Orange and Lake County would be impacted.
Commr. Cadwell commented that the County had current and future money invested in the bird watching activities, and the money might be wasted if they did not stay on top of what Long and Scott Farms was doing with their property.
Commr. Campione stated that she thought they would be sending the wrong message by approving the status quo ordinance and suggested changing the language in the ordinance to state that should Orange County approve an expanded runway for jetport uses, then Lake County’s ordinance would become null and void. She related that if they left the ordinance the way it was and the uses were expanded, then it would seem as if Lake County agreed to that expansion.
Mr. Williams pointed out that staff’s recommendation was a good compromise because Long and Scott Farms would have to come back before the Board for a hearing to approve any changes, and the Board would have the ability to rezone the property back to agriculture if the changes were not approved. He explained that Lake County only had jurisdiction over a strip that was 50 feet wide by 1,455 feet long and that they only had input into the Orange County property as a seat at the table.
Commr. Cadwell asked what would happen if Orange County went against the ordinance and then found out later that the ordinance was null and void.
Mr. Minkoff explained that staff attempted to make the existing ordinance stricter, and that in 2004 when the null and void was put in the ordinance, there was a due process argument as to whether or not there could be a self-effectuating zoning and how to change the zoning map. He noted that every case would have to come back to the Board to be rezoned because automatic rezoning would not be allowed unless it was a conditional use permit.
Mr. Sheahan stated that if the specific concern was the length of the airstrip, they could add language in section B(6) of the ordinance that states “Failure to adhere to any of these limitations, or lengthen the airstrip greater than 4,455 feet, shall constitute a violation of this ordinance.” He added that if they put in language stating that the ordinance was null and void, then they would run into the same issue they had with the current ordinance because it was interpreted in various ways, so this would provide a very clear course of action.
Commr. Sullivan commented that they would not get any say in the matter if they revoked the ordinance. He opined that staff had given them a reasonable recommendation to move forward so that they would have a seat at the table and so future expansion did not occur.
Commr. Campione asked who would be responsible to rezone the property back to agriculture if any of the limitations were not adhered to.
Mr. Sheahan replied that it would be a County initiated rezoning.
Commr. Campione suggested making that clear in the ordinance. She then asked if they were going to send staff to Orange County’s meeting when they discussed the rezoning.
Mr. Heath noted that he would update the Board with that information on December 4, 2012.
On a motion by Commr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the staff’s recommendation to adopt a status quo ordinance that would leave the existing restrictions currently applied to the property intact and then replace the condition that any change in land use on the Orange County side come back to the Board and that any violation of the ordinance would require a hearing for rezoning back to the original agricultural zoning. The language in Section B(6) of the ordinance was also changed to state “Failure to adhere to these limitations, or lengthen the airstrip greater than 4,455 feet, shall constitute a violation of this ordinance and shall be grounds for a County initiated rezoning of the Lake County portion back to Agriculture (A) Zoning.”
ordinance regarding floodplain regulations
Mr. Minkoff placed the proposed ordinance on the floor for its first and final reading by title only as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA; AMENDING THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE LAKE COUNTY CODE, APPENDIX E, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; CHAPTER II, ENTITLED DEFINITIONS; SECTION 6.06.01 ENTITLED GENERAL PROVISIONS (MINING); SECTION 6.06.02 ENTITLED STANDARDS FOR MINING; SECTION 6.06.03 ENTITLED MINING SITE PLANS AND OPERATING PERMITS; SECTION 7.00.05 ENTITLED GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (WEKIVA RIVER REGULATIONS); SECTION 8.00.04 ENTITLED DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (GREEN SWAMP); SECTION 8.00.05 ENTITLED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CRITERIA; SECTION 9.06.05 ENTITLED PERFORMANCE CRITERIA; SECTION 14.00.03 ENTITLED GENERAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS (SUBDIVISIONS); SECTION 14.07.04 ENTITLED PRELIMINARY PLATS; SECTION 14.09.01 ENTITLED GENERALLY (SITE PLANS); REPEALING AND REPLACING SECTION 9.07.00, LAKE COUNTY CODE, APPENDIX E, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, ENTITLED FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS AND LOT GRADING; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE FLOODPLAIN ADMINISTRATOR; PROVIDING FOR PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES AND FACILITIES EXEMPT FROM THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE; PROVIDING FOR INSPECTIONS; PROVIDING FOR VARIANCES AND APPEALS; PROVIDING FOR VIOLATIONS; PROVIDING FOR REGULATIONS ON MANUFACTURED HOMES; PROVIDING FOR REGULATIONS ON RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AND PARK TRAILERS; PROVIDING FOR TANKS; PROVIDING REGULATIONS FOR OTHER DEVELOPMENT; PROVIDING FOR LOT GRADING; AMENDING SECTION 14.15.00 ENTITLED VARIANCES AND APPEALS; PROVIDING FOR VARIANCES TO THE FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE AND THE FLOOD RESISTANT CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE; CREATING SECTION 14.20.00, LAKE COUNTY CODE, APPENDIX E, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, TO BE ENTITLED SITE IMPROVEMENTS, UTILITIES AND LIMITATIONS; PROVIDING FOR MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS; REGULATING SANITARY SEWAGE FACILITIES; REGULATING WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES; LIMITING SITES IN REGULATORY FLOODWAYS; LIMITING PLACEMENT OF FILL AND COMPENSATORY STORAGE; AMENDING CHAPTER 6, LAKE COUNTY CODE, ENTITLED BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION; AMENDING DEFINITIONS; CREATING SECTION 6-9 ENTITLED VARIANCES TO THE FLOOD RESISTANT CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE; AMENDING SECTION 6-22, ENTITLED ADOPTION AND ENFORCEMENT; PROVIDING FOR MODIFICATIONS OF THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE; PROVIDING THAT ISSUANCE OF PERMITS ON THE BASIS OF AFFIDAVITS WILL NOT APPLY TO FLOOD LOAD AND FLOOD RESISTANCE REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING FOR VARIANCES IN FLOOD HAZARD AREAS; MODIFYING SECTION R322.2.1 AND 16.12.4 OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE; AMENDING SECTION 6-45, ENTITLED APPEALS (BOARD OF BUILDING EXAMINERS); PROVIDING THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SHALL HEAR APPEALS OF FLOOD RESISTANT CONSTRUCTION REGULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Ms. Linda Nagle, Executive Director of the Home Builders Association, stated that the Association was in favor of the ordinance as presented, and she thanked Ms. Anita Greiner, Chief Planner, and Ms. Mary Hamilton, Interim Environmental Services Division Manager, for keeping her informed of the issue and listening to her recommendations for the ordinance.
There being no one else who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Sullivan, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Ordinance No. 2012-71 amending portions of the Lake County Code and Land Development Regulations concerning Floodplain Regulations.
COUNTY MANAGER’S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
transportation impact fee
Mr. Fred Schneider, County Engineer, showed a presentation discussing the Transportation Impact Fee, which had been suspended since March 2010, and stated that the current suspension would end on February 28, 2013. He explained that impact fees were charges imposed on new development to provide funding for the proportionate cost of capital facilities made necessary by the new development. He gave a brief history of the transportation impact fee noting that the first impact fee was implemented by Ordinance 1985-01 in March 1985 and that the current fee was put in place in January 2002. He pointed out that the Duncan Report was completed in 2010, but it was not adopted, and it outlined changes such as reducing the land use categories by 84 to 13, reducing the impact fee districts from six to three, and included an inflation index. He showed a map illustrating the residential, office, and commercial/retail impact fee amounts for Lake County and the surrounding counties, as well as which counties had currently suspended their impact fees. He then discussed the Capital Facilities Advisory Committee’s (CFAC) recommendation number 5 in which they suggested reinstating the transportation impact fee at a discounted rate and adopting other funding sources to further offset the fee charge, adopting the 2010 Duncan Report which provided a greater discount and savings for commercial and industrial properties, adopting other funding sources for capital construction to validate the discounted impact fee rate, and utilizing the County unemployment rate to further discount impact fees which meant the higher the unemployment rate, the greater the discount.
Mr. Schneider indicated that there were many benefits to transportation impact fees, including providing capital needs for infrastructure, assisting economic growth through timely investment in new infrastructure, encouraging public/private partnerships to help build roadway infrastructure, and enhancement of future economic growth areas which lacked the ability to finance new road infrastructure such as the Wekiva Parkway and the Sector Plan. He stated that the limitations to impact fees included a constraint on economic development, the Florida Statutes required the County to defend the impact fee at its risk, and they were typically not useful as the only source of funds for transportation capacity especially in slow growth areas. He related that the County’s options included adopting an updated fee based primarily on the recommendations of the Duncan Report with updated data, discount the fee, index the fee to the unemployment rate, continue the annual suspensions, or repeal the fee. He pointed out that the impact fee reserves would be depleted by the end of Fiscal Year 2013/2014 and that funding was not available to continue with a transportation capital improvement program which provided needed roadway capacity. He explained that if the Board decided to reinstate the impact fees, the Duncan Report would need to be updated, and it would need to be presented to the CFAC in January 2013. He related that if the Board adopted an ordinance, the fee would go into effect on June 1, 2013, and if the Board decided to suspend or repeal the impact fees, the suspension would continue on March 1, 2013.
Commr. Campione questioned why Lake County’s fees were much higher than other counties.
Mr. Schneider replied that that number may not necessarily be the actual fee calculated, because those counties could have adopted a lower fee.
Commr. Campione mentioned that Volusia County suspended their residential impact fee, but they did not suspend their commercial and office impact fee and asked if Lake County could do that.
Mr. Minkoff answered that they would not want to do that unless the revenue from the commercial and industrial was replaced with some other revenue source, because an impact fee must meet the same test as a special assessment. He added that everybody must be treated according to the impact they had on the roads, and if only one group was exempt, then the others would be treated unfairly.
Commr. Parks asked if they could have impact fees in only one of the three impact zones.
Mr. Minkoff replied that they could have an impact fee in part of the County, but the funds would be limited to certain roads such as the local ones that were area based.
Commr. Cadwell commented that they should not move forward with updating the study if they planned on suspending the fees again for another year.
Commr. Campione opined that she was in favor of getting the study done so they could see the results. She added that if they did put the fees back into effect, she would only support putting them at a percentage such as 10 or 20 percent.
Commr. Conner expressed that they should not support the study unless they planned on implementing some kind of impact fee effective in March when it expired. He added that their unemployment situation was not good and was not going to get much better, but jobs should be their number one concern, so it would be wise to waive the impact fee for another year.
Commr. Parks mentioned that the CFAC spent a lot of time trying to find ways to fund the County’s future transportation needs, and although the Board looked at the other recommendations from the CFAC, they have not implemented any of them. He stated that he was not a big fan of impact fees, but he thought it was necessary to go forward with the recommendation of tying it to the unemployment rate.
Commr. Campione pointed out that she would rather have the Board consider changing the impact fee discount when the unemployment rate fell instead of it being an automatic thing.
Commr. Sullivan stated that he believed in impact fees, so he thought they should move forward with the study, and if they decided to implement them, it should not be at 100 percent.
Commr. Cadwell commented that they needed to start looking at other funding sources for transportation because solely relying on impact fees would not work.
Commr. Conner asked what the results of the study were for the prices per gallon of gas in the Central Florida region for counties that had the five cent gas tax.
Mr. Stivender answered that they found that the price was tied to the accessibility of the fuel rather than the gas tax itself. He added that it depended on how far a county was from a port and how much it cost to get it there.
Commr. Campione asked how much money the five cent gas tax would bring in each year.
Mr. Stivender replied that the total gross amount was around $6.4 million, but they had to share that with the cities at a 60/40 split.
Commr. Conner opined that the five cent gas tax was a more diverse tax and it would have less of a negative impact on job creation than an impact fee. He suggested that the Board have conversations with their constituents about what they thought was the best solution for transportation and to also hold a public hearing to get the community’s input so that it did not look as though the Board was implementing something without getting feedback.
Commr. Parks stated that he thought it was a great idea as long as the conversation started with what the CFAC did and their portfolio of funding options.
Mr. Stivender mentioned that the impact fees were for capacity driven situations such as the need for roadways, the sales tax was for general operational improvements for highways such as intersection and curb improvements, and the gas tax was a user fee that was tied to resurfacing roads. He added that if they used that tiered approach, it would be a more balanced program.
Mr. T.J. Fish, Executive Director of Lake-Sumter MPO, explained that the MPO was ready to work with the County, but they needed a funded program. He related that the state and federal money was available, but when a grant required a match, there was not a funded program to match it with. He noted that Sumter County never suspended their impact fee mainly because they were concerned that it would take away the predictable process that was very important with economic development.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried by a 4-1 vote, the Board approved to have the Duncan Report updated and have it available in January 2013 so they could then make an informed decision on what to do with the Transportation Impact Fees.
Commr. Conner voted “no.”
appointment to the library advisory board
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Conner and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote by those present (Commr. Sullivan was not present for the vote), the Board appointed Ms. Phyllis B. Smith to the Library Advisory Board representing District 1 to complete an unexpired term ending February 28, 2013 and to serve an additional four-year term ending February 28, 2017.
reports – county manager
resolution regarding Aqua America, Inc.
Mr. Heath stated that the County was contacted by the Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA) with a proposal to buy all of the utility systems owned by Aqua Utilities in Florida, which included ones in Lady Lake, Fruitland Park, Leesburg, Eustis, Tavares, and Astor. He noted that Lake County had 30 days from the time they received the notice to approve, deny or not take any action which would constitute consent of the purchase. He related that staff met with the cities and representatives from FGUA to discuss the request and that there was a proposed resolution whereby Lake County would approve it under a certain set of conditions.
Mr. Minkoff explained that the conditions required a notice to the cities before rates were increased or there was a change in customer classifications, information must be submitted to the city each year, and an agreement stating that they would not extend the service area of the current systems. He noted that it also gave the County the right to allow the cities to acquire any of the systems upon negotiation, adding that some of the systems were completely surrounded by city systems so there may be opportunities for the cities to incorporate them into their systems. He mentioned that a group from Astor informed them that they were in favor of the resolution.
Commr. Cadwell commented that this was going to be good for the citizens who have had to deal with Aqua Utilities.
Commr. Conner asked if rate increases could be subject to approval by a government agency.
Mr. Minkoff replied that FGUA was subject to PSC regulation, so the County could create its own Lake County PSC to regulate private utilities, but they would not get jurisdiction over FGUA.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Conner and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution No. 2012-147 finding the acquisition of assets of Aqua America, Inc. is in the public's interest of Lake County subject to certain conditions.
traffic signal at summit greens
Mr. Heath noted that he had spoken with Mr. Darren Gray, Clermont City Manager, several times about having Clermont pay a portion of the traffic signal at Diamond Club Drive/West Point Blvd. on North Hancock Road and that Mr. Gray had brought the discussion up to the Clermont City Council on October 23, where no action was taken. He reported that on November 14 the City had a workshop on it where they decided to add it to their November 27 meeting agenda for action. He indicated that the Board did not need to take any action today unless they wanted to do something different, but he did not plan on putting the item on the agenda again until Clermont made a decision.
Commr. Campione asked if they could go ahead and get hard bids on the individual components of the project so they would have some numbers to compare to once Clermont had made a decision.
Mr. Stivender replied that he would be hesitant to go through the bidding process and not award something. He added that he could look at the numbers again and try to hone them down.
Mr. Heath reminded the Board of the upcoming budget workshops on December 4, 2012 for the Sheriff, December 11, 2012 for EMS, December 18, 2012 for Public Transportation, and January 8, 2013 for Parks and Libraries.
Commr. Campione mentioned that she wanted to allow public comment at the budget workshops after the presentations, and they would follow their normal guidelines. She also wanted to get some notice out about the workshops.
Mr. Heath commented that he could have the workshop dates posted on the website.
REPORTS – COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN – DISTRICT 1
Capital Facilities Advisory Committee recommendations
Commr. Sullivan mentioned that he was looking forward to the budget hearings so he could be brought up to speed, and he asked staff to provide him with the Capital Facilities Advisory Committee recommendations.
reports – commissioner parks – district 2
solid waste fees
Commr. Parks commented that a local business was going to be charged $400 to dispose of light bulbs in the warehouse where they operated. He added that they were not a contractor and they paid their taxes, and he asked if that could be addressed at a later date.
Mr. Stivender noted that he planned on having a discussion in the future about creating a program to assist businesses in disposing of those types of items.
St. Johns River Water Management District meeting
Commr. Parks reported attending the St. Johns River Water Management District governing board meeting where the South Lake Water Initiative was presented, and he thought the meeting went well.
email about parks staff
Commr. Parks mentioned receiving an email complimenting Parks staff.
reports – commissioner conner – district 3
Sheriff's Citizen Academy 10th Annual Alumni BBQ
Commr. Conner noted that he attended the Sheriff's Citizen Academy 10th Annual Alumni BBQ at Lake-Sumter Community College on November 15, 2012.
REPORTS – COMMISsIONER campione – CHAIRMAN & DISTRICT 4
Pancreatic cancer awareness proclamation
On a motion by Commr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Proclamation No. 2012-146 declaring November 2012 to be Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month in Lake County.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 12:51 p.m.
leslie campione, chairman
NEIL KELLY, CLERK