A regular MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
July 5, 2022
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 10:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chambers, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Sean Parks, Chairman; Kirby Smith, Vice Chairman; Douglas B. Shields; Leslie Campione; and Josh Blake. Others present were: Jennifer Barker, County Manager; Melanie Marsh, County Attorney; Niki Booth, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; Kristy Mullane, Chief Financial Officer; and Stephanie Cash, Deputy Clerk.
INVOCATION and pledge
Commr. Parks welcomed everyone to the July 5, 2022 Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting, and explained that the Pledge of Allegiance would be given by a leader who had served the County for a number of years in the Office of Public Safety. He elaborated that Chief Michael Vitta was the Division Chief for Lake County Fire Rescue, and that he had been with the County since 2014. He related that Chief Vitta was responsible for the County’s fire loss management programs, and that he had been a sworn Deputy with the Lake County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) since 2015, allowing for both agencies to effectively manage fire and arson investigations within the County. He commented that prior to serving Lake County, Chief Vitta was a Detective with the State Fire Marshal’s Office based out of Central Florida and was a member of the statewide response team, and he expressed his appreciation for that. He noted that Chief Vitta had 20 years of public safety service, and that he had served the residents of Lake County for the last 16 years. He then thanked Chief Vitta.
Pastor Michael Watkins, with Friendship CME Church in the City of Tavares, gave the Invocation and Chief Vitta led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Commr. Parks said that he wanted to remind everybody that July 2022 was proclaimed as Pride in America Month at a previous BCC meeting. He opined that they lived in a nation of greatness, and he encouraged everybody to continue to celebrate the independence and values of America through words and actions throughout the month of July.
Commr. Smith commented that the current day was National Apple Turnover Day.
virtual meeting instructions
Mr. Erikk Ross, Director for the Information Technology (IT) Department, explained that the current meeting was being livestreamed on the County website and was also being made available through Zoom Webinar for members of the public who wished to provide comments during the Citizen Question and Comment Period later in the agenda. He elaborated that anyone watching though the livestream who wished to participate could follow the directions currently being broadcast through the stream; furthermore, he relayed that during the Citizen Question and Comment Period, anyone who had joined the webinar via their phone could press *9 to virtually raise their hand, and anyone participating online could click the raise hand button to identify that they wished to speak. He said that when it was time for public comment, he would read the person’s name or phone number, unmute the appropriate line, and the speaker would be asked to provide comments. He added that everyone would have three minutes to speak, and after three minutes an alarm would sound to let them know that their time was up. He added that they previously notified the public that comments could be emailed through 5:00 p.m. on the previous day, and those comments were shared with the Board prior to the meeting. He stated that anyone wishing to provide written comments during the meeting could visit www.lakecountyfl.gov/commissionmeeting, noting that comments sent during this meeting would be shared with the Commission after the meeting was concluded.
Agenda update
Ms. Jennifer Barker, County Manager, mentioned that Tab 3 had been added as an addendum since the agenda was first published.
citizen question and comment period
No one wished to address the Board at this time.
public hearings: REZONING
rezoning consent agenda
Mr. Bobby Howell, Director for the Office of Planning and Zoning, commented that Tabs 1 and 2 were on the consent agenda, and that they were both for Expert Investments and included the Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the Future Land Use (FLU) ordinances. He mentioned that there would be a public hearing on Tab 3 for the Drake Pointe PUD, and that there would also be a public hearing on a utility waiver request for property in the City of Clermont area on the regular BCC meeting agenda, noting that all these had been advertised in the newspaper in accordance with the Florida Statutes.
Commr. Parks asked if any of the Commissioners would like to disclose any ex parte discussions for Tab 2 on the rezoning agenda.
Commr. Blake indicated that he had spoken to the applicant.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding any cases on the Rezoning Consent Agenda, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Rezoning Consent Agenda, Tabs 1 and 2, as follows:
Tab 1. Ordinance No. 2022-29
Rezoning Case # FLU-21-08-5
Expert Investments PUD
Amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) to change the Future Land Use Category (FLUC) on approximately 9.63 acres from Rural Transition to Planned Unit Development FLUC and amend associated Comprehensive Plan Policies to incorporate the proposed development program which will include 10 single-family dwelling units.
Tab 2. Ordinance No. 2022-30
Rezoning Case # RZ-21-28-5
Expert Investments PUD
Rezone approximately 9.63 acres from Rural Residential (R-1) to Planned Unit Development District (PUD) for a residential subdivision consisting of ten (10) dwelling units. This request also includes a utility waiver request to: LDR Section 6.12.01(A.); Comprehensive Plan Policy IX-2.2.2 Mandatory Central Water Connection; LDR Section 6.12.01(B); and Comprehensive Plan Policy IX-3.1.2 Mandatory Sewer Connection.
rezoning regular agenda
Tab 3.
Rezoning Case # FLU-21-05-3
Drake Pointe PUD (Transmittal)
Amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) to change the Future Land Use Category (FLUC) on approximately 293.810 acres from Rural Transition to Planned Unit Development FLUC and amend associated Comprehensive Plan Policies to incorporate the proposed development program for the Drake Pointe Development which will include 535 lots for single-family dwelling units, marina with restaurant and limited retail, and recreational facilities.
Drake pointe pud
Commr. Parks commented that it was not required to disclose ex parte discussions for Tab 3 because it was a Future Land Use (FLU) amendment; however, he said that he had met with the applicant, and the rest of the Commissioners indicated the same.
Ms. Emily Johnson, Senior Planner for the Office of Planning and Zoning, explained that rezoning case # FLU-21-05-3, Drake Pointe PUD, was located northeast of County Road (CR) 48 along Lake Harris in the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills area within Commission District 3 and was approximately 231.56 net acres and 293.81 gross acres. She related that the request was to amend the FLU map to change the FLU category from Rural Transition to PUD and to amend the associated Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) policies to incorporate the proposed development program for the Drake Pointe Development which would include 535 lots for single-family dwelling units, a marina with a restaurant and limited retail, and recreational facilities. She displayed maps showing the zoning and FLU maps, and related that the current zoning was Agriculture. She mentioned that the conceptual plan showed the 535 single family lots, and that the applicant would be seeking to rezone the subject property, which would come to the Board in a future rezoning application if the transmittal was approved. She commented that the proposed density was 2.31 dwelling units per net acre with a maximum impervious surface ratio (ISR) of 55 percent and a minimum open space of 46 percent, and that the property was situated between the Urban Low and Rural Transition FLU categories which allowed a maximum density of four dwelling units per net acre and one unit per net acre, respectively. She relayed that the proposed amendment would establish a maximum density of 2.31 dwelling units per net acre to serve as a transition between other FLU categories, and that the applicant had submitted calculations for surrounding developments as proof that the proposed development plan was consistent and transitional with the existing development. She displayed a chart showing a comparison to the surrounding developments, and stated that the application was not in conflict with any elements of the Comp Plan or provisions of the Land Development Regulations (LDR). She said that if the application for the Comp Plan amendment was approved by the Board for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (FDEO), the accompanying rezoning application would be presented to the BCC for approval at the same time the application for the FLU amendment was presented for adoption. She mentioned that staff had previously received two letters of concern regarding the applications, including one from the residents of the Yalaha area and one from a private citizen regarding the request for private utilities. She commented that the development was proposing to provide central water and sewer through an offsite private utility owned by North Lake County Water & Sewer Company, LLC, and that it would be managed by a professional company with utility operation experience. She elaborated that the subject property was located within the South Lake interlocal service boundary agreement (ISBA) area, and that the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills had maintained the position that the developer should connect to the potable water and public sewer services provided by the Town; however, based on the information provided by the Town, their potable water and sewer lines were not close enough to require the development to connect to their utilities. She related that the Lake County School Board had reviewed the application and stated that the project had a valid school concurrency capacity reservation for 555 single-family dwelling units, which would expire on August 5, 2022, and that the proposed Comp Plan amendment was not anticipated to adversely impact solid waste, park capacities, or levels of service. She mentioned that Lake County Fire Station 76 was located approximately 0.5 miles from the subject property, and that in regards to transportation concurrency, the standard level of service (LOS) for the impacted roadway of CR 48 was “D” with the capacity of 1070 trips in the peak direction. She noted that currently, the impacted segment from Lime Avenue to State Road (SR) 19 was operating at LOS “C” at 39 percent, and that this project would be generating approximately 528 peak hour trips, in which 333 trips would impact the peak hour direction. She stated that there were currently no County funded improvements scheduled for this segment of CR 48, and that staff found the request consistent with the LDR and Comp Plan.
Ms. Tara Tedrow, an attorney with Lowndes Law representing the applicant, gave a presentation outlining their request. She showed a conceptual aerial picture of what the built-out project would look like, and said that the project was delayed in October 2021 in order to work with staff to redesign the project to incorporate some changes recommended by staff. She stated that the conceptual aerial showed 293.8 gross acres with 535 single family residential lots, and that it included a minimum of 46 percent open space with 16.5 acres of stormwater ponds, noting that 20 percent of that total open space would be permanent conservation. She related that the project had about 1.25 miles of lakefront property on Lake Harris, and that the site had been laid out to take advantage of the natural topography; additionally, there would be different layers of homes which would all have a lakefront view because of the type of grading utilized. She stated that the site and the roads were designed in a curvilinear fashion to make it more harmonious with the existing topography, and that the lots were designed to ensure that the residential lots were not backing up to each other, pointing out that there were trails, green spaces, or rights of way behind all of the lots on this site. She displayed the location aerial, and said that the adjacent property to the north had a Rural Transition FLU, that the adjacent property to the south was Urban Low FLU, and that there were Urban Low and Rural Transition FLU categories to the west. She elaborated that the property was adjacent to existing Urban Low FLU designated properties on the southeast, and that there were other existing Urban Low FLU designated properties further to the west. She pointed out that to the southeast of the property, were the areas of the Bishops Gate and Mission Inn communities, which both allowed for denser residential development, townhomes, and multifamily uses, adding that the Mission Inn ordinance would allow a building height of 65 feet, and that theirs would stay consistent with what the current use would allow at 40 feet. She mentioned that there would be a companion rezoning at a future date, and said that she wanted the Board to have a holistic view of what the project was going to look like. She relayed that the project details included a gatehouse, clubhouse, marina, recreation facility, and nature trails, and that under Lake County code, active recreation was not included as part of the open space. She commented that while there were 139 acres of actual open space under the code definition, which was 46 percent open space, there were also 50 foot deed restrictions along the canal lots as well as active recreation areas, such as the marina, the clubhouse, and recreational courts. She pointed out that the gatehouse would be open during the day and closed at night, and that the public could come in and take advantage of the amenities provided, such as the trials, recreational facilities, and the marina. She said that there would be two access points into the project, noting that one was for residents only on the southern portion of the project, and that the other would be the main entrance with the gatehouse. She explained that they met and talked with residents over the previous year, and that they maintained email correspondence with some of the residents to keep them appraised of the progress. She stated that the clubhouse was about 10,000 square feet and included a fitness center, communal meeting spaces, virtual golf, a lounge, a commercial kitchen, and gathering spaces inside, and that outside there would be three saltwater pools which were Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible. She related that the marina was on 2.3 acres and would be less than 2,000 square feet, adding that it would have a rooftop food service area. She said that it would be located where the canal and lake intersected, and that the marina would not impact the wetlands on the property while providing access to the canal and to the lake; additionally, there would be two boat ramps that would allow boats access to the water. She commented that there was a community dock with 45 covered boat slips, noting that Mission Inn had 55 slips and Bishops Gate had 39 slips. She said that there would also be a launch area for kayaks and canoes, a gazebo, pedestrian friendly walking paths that led from the community dock to the boathouse, and a parking area that would accommodate members of the public who wanted to utilize the marina. She stated that there would be about 2.5 acres of recreation and 2.1 acres of a clubhouse pool area, adding that there would be tennis courts, pickle ball courts, tee ball areas, playgrounds, and a dog park, which would all be homeowners association (HOA) maintained. She related that there was a low impact trail already existing through the wetlands which spanned along the water’s edge of Lake Harris, and that they planned on adding crushed shell paths, lighting, and seating areas along the trails. She stated that there were 75 foot wide lots located along the north shoreline and 50 foot wide lots along the south canal line with all others being 65 feet wide, noting that many of the 50 foot wide lots were blocked by wetland areas, which would remain undisturbed. She related that there was limited visibility of the project because of the way it was set back 75 feet from the road, and that other areas were set back a few thousand feet from any other residence near the project. She displayed some of the 50 foot, 65 foot, and 75 foot lot elevation photos, and said that the development standards would be enumerated inside of the PUD ordinance. She mentioned that staff had reviewed some of the standards for review, including Chapter 14, Section 02.03 for Comp Plan amendments, and that staff had determined that they met all of those elements of the Comp Plan necessary for a recommendation for approval, including Policy I-1.2, which said that the County shall seek to provide adequate housing, promote compact growth through the use of innovative LDRs, including PUDs. She opined that they had achieved that compact development by having a minimum of 75 foot buffers along the property lines, noting that in the wetland areas, the setbacks were 600 to 1000 feet from any other residents; additionally, the nearest residential home across CR 48 was over 300 feet away, and that on the northwest, it was 650 feet from their closest lot line to a home. She elaborated that when compared to surrounding developments, their gross density and net density were less, their lot sizes were consistent or larger, and their smallest lots, of which there were 52, all backed up to the canal with 30 of those having golf course views to Bishops Gate; additionally, they would also provide the ability for golf cart access between Bishops Gate and their property. She said that the proposed amendment permitted 2.31 dwelling units per acre and would provide a transition from the maximum four dwelling units per acre of the Urban Low FLU to the maximum of one dwelling unit per net acre of Rural Transition FLU, and that there would be a transition in housing styles, noting that Bishops Gate to the south was a townhome style community while the proposed PUD would be single family homes that would transition to larger lot sizes from the south to the north. She mentioned that a limited commercial component was being provided as public amenities, which encouraged a transition between land uses, such as Mission Inn Resort and Golf Biodynamics School in Bishops Gate, adding that staff had concluded that the plan was consistent and transitional with the existing developments. She commented that the proposed amendment was not in conflict with any of the provisions of the LDR, and that during the rezoning application, further design restrictions could be implemented that would be more restrictive than the provisions of the LDR, including the following: architectural guidelines; lot sizes; setbacks; buffers; environmental restrictions, such as requiring drought tolerant sods and plants; HOA restrictions on the use of grass clippings in the drainage and waterways; the limiting of exotic and invasive plant species; and environmentally friendly supplies for the marina, such as paper straws and biodegradable utensils. She reiterated that The Falls at Drakes Point was proposing to utilize a PUD to have a maximum gross density of 1.8 dwelling units per acre and a maximum net density of 2.32 dwelling units per acre with 46 percent open space, and that staff had concluded that the proposed land use request was consistent with the existing surrounding land uses. She explained that they had submitted a residential justification statement, and opined that because of the accelerated growth with 800 people moving to the State of Florida every day and 1,500 people per week being absorbed into the Central Florida area, the necessity for local governments to absorb that growth in a smart fashion was critical. She elaborated that adding more houses to the available inventory could keep homes affordable, and that building on unused agricultural lands provided the ability for developers to reduce costs and offer a larger number of homes to the housing stock, which was currently projected to be deficient. She commented that staff had concluded that their project would not have undue burdens or demands on public facilities, such as solid waste, schools, parks and recreation, and transportation. She related that most of the property was clear cut with a significant amount of open space being preserved, and that approximately 20 percent of the reserved open space would be for the conservation of natural wetlands; additionally, they had undergone an environmental review and an archeological review to ensure there would be no adverse impacts. She stated that they had submitted a study to show that there would be no anticipated negative impacts on property values, and that based on the existing uses around them, the County had concluded that they would meet the standard of an orderly and logical development pattern as well as advancing the public interest and being in harmony with the purpose of the regulations. She displayed a chart of the progress of design from May 2021 to June 2022, and explained that it showed the following; the 20 foot and 15 foot buffers had been increased to a minimum of 75 feet; the lot count had been slightly reduced; the gross density had gone from 1.89 to 1.82 dwelling units per acre; the net density had gone from 2.4 to 2.31 dwelling units per acre; the open space had increased from 25 percent to 46 percent; the conservation easement would be placed over 20 percent of the property; the amenities would be opened to the public instead of being gated off; and there would be a cross connection for a golf cart trail to the subdivision to the south. She reiterated that the staff report found that the application was consistent with the Comp Plan and those associated policies, and that the application was consistent with the LDRs.
Commr. Blake expressed concern with allowing the public to use privately maintained trails and amenities, and he asked if it was something the developer wanted to do or if they felt pressured to do it.
Ms. Tedrow replied that part of the Comp Plan discussed these types of recreational elements, and that they could remove 2.5 acres of active recreation and make it a grass field that was only accessible to their residents. She mentioned that usable open space benefitted the County residents as a whole, and that the Comp Plan policies discussed the number of acres of parks the County wanted available per a specific number of residents. She commented that there were elements that would require payment, and that there were some amenities that would be closed off from the public at night. She opined that it was important to be able to have that type of access, and that even though it was not required under the Comp Plan or the LDR, they were happy to take that into consideration and include that as part of their plan.
Commr. Blake opined that it should be voluntary without any pressure to charge private residents to maintain amenities and provide access to the public.
Commr. Campione commented that the purpose of the Rural Transition land use was to be a transition from Urban Low to the more rural areas in the Yalaha area, opining that it would make sense to make the development plan fit into that Rural Transition land use, and she inquired why the density had to be increased.
Ms. Tedrow replied that the Comp Plan allowed for applicants to ask for PUDs as an FLU category and as a zoning category, taking into consideration the existing patterns of development surrounding the property and the anticipated patterns of future development. She said that they could build 200 houses on septic tanks at one unit per acre, but she opined that nobody wanted that on Lake Harris. She opined that the Comp Plan was not inclusive for every development, and stated that property owners were allowed the right to ask for these types of amendments to the FLU map and modifications to zoning designations and to take into account what would be best for future growth in the county and what was best for a specific piece of property and the residents overall.
Commr. Campione remarked that septic systems were not an issue because of the distributed wastewater treatment system (DWTS), which was the alternative that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) recognized as a central wastewater system, opining that they could have that added protection with the lower density. She then inquired if there would be a seawall.
Ms. Tedrow confirmed that there would be a seawall.
Commr. Campione opined that if there was a seawall, it would have to be built in a way that there would be stormwater retention, and she hoped that fertilizer would be taken into consideration on a communitywide basis because of the relief down to the lake and the waterfalls conveying water to holding ponds. She noted that the conceptual drawing showed many trees, but she opined that there were currently no trees where the houses would be built.
Ms. Tedrow remarked that there were few trees on the site, and that they wanted to preserve some of the larger ones, adding that others would be put in as part of the Florida-Friendly Landscaping Program.
Commr. Campione inquired if they would have a landscape plan.
Ms. Tedrow replied that it would be an enhanced landscape package, which would be enumerated specifically in the PUD, and that they would ensure that some of those conditions that were mentioned would also be in there.
Commr. Campione mentioned that there may be an issue with the trees if they wanted to guarantee a view of the lake for every house, and noted that as the trees grew they would impede the view, adding that she was in favor of the trees. She inquired how they could ensure that the amenities would be built at the quality that was being represented, and asked if they would be opposed to a condition that would require the amenities to be built before they could plat and sell lots. She expressed concern that the lot owners could be obligated to complete the amenities or to not have them at all.
Ms. Tedrow replied that she had seen that requirement in other PUD ordinances, and that they could work with staff on phasing in the three different amenity areas, such as the marina, the pickleball courts, and the clubhouse, adding that it would be brought back to the Board.
Commr. Campione opined that Rural Transition was the appropriate land use, and thought that the density should be lowered to at least 1.5 units per acre, making it more of a transition as opposed to an up-zoning.
Commr. Smith expressed appreciation that the applicant had opened these amenities to the public, and that the smallest lot was a 50 foot lot in addition to 65 foot lots and 75 foot lots. He opined that the marina, the tennis courts, and the pickleball courts would be a good addition to this area. He also opined that this was a good project, and that it would be good for the county due to the amenities, the quality, and the thought process that went into this project. He mentioned that he would abstain from voting, and that he had completed the proper paperwork.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Mr. Joe Kilsheimer, a concerned citizen, mentioned that he represented Woodard & Curran, which was a national environmental engineering company that operated water facilities in the State of Florida, and he commented that projects like this created opportunities for companies like his. He related that he had been briefed on the project, and opined that it would be a beautiful project; additionally, he said that in regards to water and wastewater, they had a good plan.
There being no one else who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commr. Campione asked if the applicant would receive water from the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills but not sewer, noting that the Town had sent a letter stating that they wanted to provide that service.
Ms. Tedrow replied that they were part of the utility connection area for the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, which was why they were asked, and that under their Ordinance 2003-307, Section 5, it stated that there should be connectivity where available. She mentioned that the County code, Section 6.12.01, provided how far a project would have to be in order for it to be determined available, which was 300 feet from water and 1,000 feet from sewer, and that their project was 3,500 feet from the Town’s wastewater system, 9,000 feet from a proposed unbuilt well, and 11,193 linear feet from the Mission Inn sewer plant. She added that under Chapter 381.0065, Florida Statute, they did not meet any of the parameters for that connectivity, and that was why their sewer and water was being provided privately, which was permitted under Lake County code.
Commr. Campione opined that ultimately, the Town would be the appropriate provider. She commented that as land was developed around the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, this property could be annexed into the city limits, and then they could provide the water and sewer, opining that it would be premature to have a project at this location.
Ms. Tedrow commented that they had spoken to the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills about future services, and that they had offered to discuss at that time the option to purchase and take over the facilities they built, which would be built to the same standards; however, currently, the existing utilities were too far away.
Commr. Campione commented that when making a land use decision about increasing the density on a project, this was something that should be considered, and that it could help determine if it was an appropriate change in land use.
Commr. Shields inquired how the issues of road maintenance and stormwater inside these subdivisions fit into the discussion.
Commr. Parks opined that those were good questions, and that they would have to be addressed in the PUD ordinance for the actual zoning.
Commr. Campione commented that the County could create a Municipal Service Benefit Unit (MSBU) or a Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU).
Commr. Smith pointed out that since they closed the development at night, they would be all private roads.
Ms. Tedrow remarked that they had anticipated that the roads would be privately maintained.
Commr. Parks mentioned that the Board had expressed support for using MSBUs for any subdivision that was over 200 units.
Commr. Campione commented that this would be for a subdivision that was open to the public, but if it was a private road, it would be the owners’ responsibility.
Commr. Parks remarked that it could be an issue if it was open to the public.
Ms. Marsh clarified that leaving their gates open to the public did not put the burden on the County to take care of the roads, and that the County could not use its taxing power for private roads; therefore, if it was platted as private and the HOA was maintaining it, the County could not impose an MSBU or MSTU.
Commr. Parks said that he had questions about the transportation impacts and buffering, and opined that it was good to have some open spaces that could be used publicly, which indicated that they were concerned about the interest of the community. He mentioned that he wanted to discuss some of the details on the site planning with them, such as the road, the buffers, the management of the open space, the wetlands, and the management of the trails. He opined that it was good to address the proper use of fertilizer by using best practices and educating the homeowners, and reiterated that he would want to go over some issues with them before the site plan was presented, such as bringing the open space percentage up to 50 percent.
Ms. Tedrow commented that they would appreciate that opportunity to review any concerns that could be addressed as part of the PUD plan approval, adding that they had not received anything specific from residents that had not already been addressed.
Commr. Parks mentioned that there was more involved now than there had been in the past, but the public interest was being addressed.
Ms. Tedrow expressed appreciation for being made aware of concerns ahead of time, and said that it would give them the opportunity to address them.
On a motion by Commr. Blake, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried by a vote of 3-1, the Board approved Tab 3, Rezoning Case # FLU-21-05-3, Drake Pointe PUD (Transmittal).
Commr. Campione voted no.
Commr. Smith abstained from voting.
PUBLIC HEARING:
WAIVER TO SEWER CONNECTION
Ms. Johnson explained that the Ridge Avenue property was located east of Ridge Avenue and north of Sunset Avenue in the unincorporated City of Clermont area in Commission District 2 and was about 2.44 acres, and that the applicant had requested approval of a waiver to the mandatory sewer connection requirement contained in Comp Plan Policy IX-3.1.2 and LDR Section 6.12.01.B to allow for the proposed five lot subdivision to utilize individual septic tanks. She elaborated that the property had a current FLU of Urban Low density and a current zoning of Urban Residential (R-6), and she displayed a site plan showing the five lots and the proposed location of the septic tanks. She related that on August 12, 2021, the Office of Planning and Zoning received an Application for Preliminary Plat approval for a proposed five lot single-family residential subdivision on 2.44 acres in the City of Clermont area of unincorporated Lake County, and that the proposed subdivision had an approximate density of 2.05 dwelling units per net acre. She commented that on September 7, 2021, staff provided the owner with a staff comment letter requesting verification of the utility availability and emphasizing that if utilities were not available, a waiver request would be required, which said that where a public sanitary sewer system was not available, a new development within the Urban FLU series which exceeded a density of one dwelling unit per net acre should provide a regional or sub-regional sanitary sewer system unless exempted by the BCC at a public hearing. She relayed that the applicant submitted a request for a utility waiver to the mandatory sewer connection requirement on March 10, 2022 to allow for the proposed five lot subdivision to utilize individual septic tanks, and that they provided a utility verification indicating that Utilities Inc. of Florida now known as Sunshine Water Services would be providing a central water connection but no central sewage connection. She stated that the City of Clermont provided a utility verification indicating that their existing sewer line was approximately 1,500-feet away, noting that the LDR required that all private treatment systems, unless exempted by the Board, should connect to and utilize a regional or sub-regional wastewater system when such a system was within 1,000 feet. She commented that based on the information provided by the City of Clermont, their existing sewer lines were too far away to require a connection to the existing facilities, and that the City had conveyed to staff that they had no objections to the request. She said that the preliminary plat had been reviewed by staff and deemed sufficient for approval, contingent upon approval of the utility waiver request by the Board, and that staff recommended the Board’s approval of the applicant’s request to utilize individual septic tanks for the proposed five lot residential subdivision in lieu of connecting to a central sewer system. She mentioned that if the waiver is granted, it would remain valid until the following conditions applied: the Board determined that the existing method of providing wastewater was endangering the environment, public health, safety, or welfare; the private system failed, and a replacement was required; the property was within the distance established by the LDR to be considered available; or the private system was relocated.
Commr. Smith inquired if staff was recommending the use of individual septic tanks in lieu of connecting to a central sewer system even though an Onsyte or advanced distribution system was an option.
Ms. Johnson replied that the applicant had proposed the individual septic tanks as their preferred method, and that if the Board would like to require an Onsyte or advanced distribution system, she would defer to the applicant for discussion.
Commr. Campione commented that the property was next to Lake Minnehaha, and she wondered if the surrounding properties were on septic tanks or if they were on a sewer system.
Ms. Johnson replied that this site was too far from the city to connect, and that they were approximately 800 feet from Lake Minnehaha.
Commr. Campione opined that this was an area where the better system would be wanted, and that the residents would just have a sewer bill, which would not be expensive; furthermore, it could protect the lake.
Commr. Smith mentioned that they could not change what had been done in the past, but that the County could move forward.
Commr. Shields relayed his understanding that it was cheaper to have one Onsyte system for five homes than five individual septic tanks, and that it would not be an economic burden.
Commr. Campione also opined that it would not be more expensive.
Commr. Parks relayed his understanding that it would be cheaper that the high performance septic systems, and said that the applicant could have the option of the high performance septic systems or the Onsyte, adding that this was a heavy consideration when it related to the protection of water resources. He asked if the applicant would agree to use an Onsyte distributed waste technology system instead of the traditional septic tank.
Commr. Campione inquired if the applicant was familiar with that system and had considered the possibility.
Mr. Mack Sarieddine, a representative of Dave Schmitt Engineering Inc., replied that he was not familiar with that, and that it had not been discussed with the staff previously. He questioned if it was one large system instead of five separate systems.
Commr. Campione explained that each house would have its own system, and that they would each get a monthly bill for their sewer system, adding that they were maintained as a utility.
Mr. Sarieddine opined that it would not be an issue as long as it did not affect the preliminary plat and the dimensions.
Commr. Smith wondered if it would be better to table the request and give them time to research the Onsyte or advanced waste treatment options, and then they could make their choice.
Commr. Campione commented that if the applicant chose to do the distributed waste water option, he would not need to come back for a waiver because it was considered by FDEP to be a central waste water system.
Commr. Smith said that he wanted the applicant to have knowledge of the system before committing to it.
Ms. Marsh confirmed that this was considered a sub-regional system, and commented that when this item came to her office, she raised this issue and asked staff to let the applicant know that this was likely to be required by the BCC. She asked staff if they had communicated this information, and staff indicated that they had. Ms. Marsh affirmed that the applicant was aware that this was going to be an issue, and that she did not know why the applicant was not prepared to answer these questions, adding that this item could be tabled.
Mr. Sarieddine remarked that he was not aware of it.
Commr. Parks mentioned that Mr. Sarieddine was just the applicant’s representative, and that the applicant was not present, adding that staff had communicated this issue to the applicant. He related that if the applicant wanted to install a distributive waste technology system, they would not have to obtain a waiver because it was considered a utility; however, if they still wanted a waiver, the Board could require an advanced septic system, which was more expensive than the distributive waste technology system.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board regarding this matter, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Smith, seconded by Commr. Shields and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to table Tab 2, for a waiver to the mandatory sewer connection for Ridge Avenue Lots, to the August 2, 2022 BCC meeting.
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
Ms. Marsh stated that Tab 3 was a consent agenda item requesting permission to terminate the lease agreement with the East Lake Chamber of Commerce for the East Lake Library based on some security issues at that location.
Commr. Campione commented that there was a situation there that required some action for the public’s safety and welfare, and that the County was having to make repairs because of vandalism. She recommended that the County acquire a portable or prefabricated library unit for the East Lake Sports and Community Complex area as quickly as possible, opining that this would create a void in the community because it had been well utilized.
Commr. Parks opined that the East Lake Sports and Community Complex was a good place for a library.
Commr. Campione remarked that it was planned there, but a building was required that could be used and possibly moved in the future to be used somewhere else.
Commr. Blake asked if any arrests had been made.
Ms. Marsh indicated that there had not been any arrests, and that there had been much vandalism at this facility at night when nobody was present. She commented that the County had repaired the air conditioning issue on at least one occasion, which cost about $8,000, and that within a matter of days, the system had been vandalized again.
Commr. Campione mentioned that there were disruptions from people coming in to use the restroom facilities, and that this happened often in more remote areas. She opined that if there was an issue with an adjacent property, there was not much that could be done about it. She related that the County’s long term plan was to have a library at the East Lake Sports and Community Complex site, and that this relocation would move this plan forward, adding that the community could wait for a regular facility to be built when it was time. She inquired if there had been any conversations with the East Lake Chamber of Commerce, and mentioned that they relied on the rent, adding that there was a clause regarding termination of the lease.
Ms. Marsh stated that if the Board approved this item on the current day, staff would reach out to the East Lake Chamber of Commerce and discuss the six month termination, and that the County would be paying them rent for six months unless something different could be negotiated with them.
Commr. Smith hoped that the East Lake Chamber of Commerce would negotiate with the County under the circumstances.
Commr. Campione opined that they should sell the property since it was the only developed area in the Mt. Plymouth-Sorrento area; additionally, she commented that the CR 437 realignment would be in close proximity, opining that it was a good time to seek a potential buyer.
Commr. Parks thought that it was unfortunate that this had to be done, and agreed with moving forward with the plan to relocate the library to the East Lake Sports a Community Complex. He mentioned that homelessness was an issue, and that mitigation was a countywide effort, adding that the County continued to make progress.
Ms. Barker commented that this issue of homelessness has been discussed with staff, and that they would start working on some strategies, noting that there had been some staff turnover in the Office of Housing and Community Services.
Commr. Parks remarked that Commissioner Campione had been a leader on this issue for the previous few years.
Commr. Campione mentioned that the details of this issue, such as people living in the woods, included helping them to connect with social services if they wanted to be a part of that, and that there was a possibility that people were living in the woods in order to escape attention from law enforcement. She relayed that the County had a good network for handling issues such as this, and that the question was how to help people participate and avail themselves of the services that were available. She commented that if they were trespassing, then the property owner had to trespass them and get them arrested, and she wondered what was accomplished with that, opining that it would be an opportunity to connect them with the help they needed. She said that she would like to start discussing this issue again; however, there were many different situations to be addressed, opining that the County could only help when people were willing to be part of finding a better situation for themselves.
On a motion by Commr. Shields, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved the Consent Agenda, Tab 3 as follows:
COUNTY ATTORNEY
Recommend approval to:
1. Terminate the Lease Agreement with the East Lake Chamber of Commerce for the East Lake Library located at 31340/31336 County Road 437, Sorrento.
2. Authorize the Property Manager to send the termination letter.
3. Authorize the County Manager and County Attorney to execute a termination agreement, if needed, to finalize the termination of the Lease Agreement.
The fiscal impact is $19,999.98 (expenditure - 6 months rent) and is within, and will not exceed, the Fiscal Years 2022/2023 Budgets. Commission District 4.
commissioners reports
commissioner shields – district 1
Florida
Association of Counties meeting
Commr. Shields commented that he had attended the Florida Association of Counties (FAC) meeting from the previous week, and relayed his understanding that many Counties were having to address similar issues, such as homelessness, workforce housing, and traffic.
Commr. Parks remarked that FAC was good for sharing information, and that one could see what other Counties were doing.
commissioner smith – vice chairman and district 3
Florida
Association of Counties meeting
Commr. Smith mentioned that while at the FAC meeting, he had met the County Commissioners from Osceola, Polk and Orange Counties that were working with Commissioner Shields in the Four Corners area, and that FAC was a good opportunity to learn how other Counties dealt with issues.
independence day
Commr. Smith commented on firework safety, and said that he was glad everyone had a safe and happy Independence Day.
commissioner parks – Chairman and district 2
Independence day
Commr. Parks thanked the municipalities in Lake County that celebrated Independence Day, and elaborated that he had participated in the parade in the City of Tavares. He related that he had enjoyed some events in the City of Clermont, and opined that the Cities of Eustis and Leesburg had good fireworks displays, adding that the Town of Montverde also had a parade. He stated that the County could keep celebrating Pride in America the entire month of July.
Florida
Association of Counties meeting
Commr. Parks commented that he had sworn in Mr. George Gadiel, Senior Traffic Engineer with the Public Works Department, as the President of the Florida Association of County Engineers & Road Superintendents (FACERS) for the current year.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:18 a.m.
_________________________________
SEAN PARKS, chairman
ATTEST:
________________________________
GARY J COONEY, CLERK