A regular MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

March 7, 2023

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 9:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chambers, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Kirby Smith, Chairman; Douglas B. Shields, Vice Chairman; Sean Parks; 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 Josh Pearson, Deputy Clerk.

INVOCATION and pledge

Commr. Smith welcomed everyone to the meeting. He said that they were meeting in person, that they were streaming live, and that they were also on Zoom.

Pastor Chase Allen, with First Baptist Church of Umatilla, gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

virtual meeting instructions

Mr. Levar Cooper, Director for the Office of Communications, 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, stated that there were no updates to the agenda.

regular agenda

2023 legislative priority for reclaimed water initiative

Commr. Parks said that this item was added to the agenda in the previous week, and that there was a request for approval of a legislative request. He mentioned that many times, an attestation form had to be signed by someone, and that the current item regarded an alternative water supply project being proposed in the Wellness Way area. He stated that the immediate request was approving Ms. Barker to sign the attestation form for the legislative request for this item, and he explained that a significant requirement of anything in Wellness Way was not using potable water resources for landscape irrigation. He explained that this project would provide an alternative water supply for irrigation within Wellness Way, and that this request was being made through Representative Taylor Yarkovsky.

Ms. Barker relayed that this was an item that Commissioner Parks had submitted on his own to Representative Yarkosky’s office, and that that office was now requesting for her to sign an attestation form basically stating that the information submitted was true and accurate; however, she did not have this authority because the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) had not voted on this legislative priority. She said that she would need the Board to approve the priority, as well as her signing the attestation form.

Commr. Parks mentioned that the Board had a process with the legislative agenda that started in advance of each legislative session, and that this item had come afterward. He said that it was becoming an issue because as development was starting to occur in Wellness Way, there was a question of where the long term alternative water supply would be. He explained that it was a proposed reservoir that had been designed, though there had never been any funding in place for it.

Commr. Campione asked if they were going to use water that would have otherwise been put elsewhere.

Commr. Parks confirmed this and added that it was reused water, noting that it was not a new water source and would be used for reclaimed water within Wellness Way.

Commr. Smith inquired if there was a thought process for any matching funds which would be required.

Commr. Parks said that it would be fully funded and that the County would not know yet if there would be a match.

Commr. Blake asked about the total amount.

Commr. Parks replied that it could cost up to $25 million, and that this was in the request.

Ms. Barker added that there had been some other grants identified that could be considered for additional funding.

Commr. Parks mentioned that waiting another year to place this item on the legislative agenda could possibly delay it further.

Commr. Blake inquired if it would be benefit any particular developers, and he asked where the location would be.

Commr. Parks clarified that it would benefit anyone within Wellness Way, and that it could go beyond Wellness Way if there was additional capacity. He also said that it would be located toward the north side of Wellness Way in Lake County. He reiterated that most of the engineering had been done, but that the project had been shelved and that no further action had been taken on it.

Commr. Blake asked who would own it.

Commr. Parks responded that it would be a partnership between Orange County, Conserv II, Lake County and the City of Clermont.

Commr. Campione relayed her understanding that the reused water was coming out of Orange County and recharged into the aquifer; furthermore, this project would take some of the water that would otherwise go to recharge.

Commr. Parks confirmed this.

Commr. Blake said that since the Board would be signing a form asking for $25 million in taxpayer funding, he wanted to know what the ownership would look like. He expressed a concern for benefiting a private developer with taxpayer funding.

Commr. Campione opined that it needed to be a public resource that could be used by any parties in Lake County, which could alleviate the need to utilize groundwater for irrigation.

Commr. Parks indicated that it was included in the Wellness Way plan that one could not use Upper Floridan Aquifer water for irrigation.

Ms. Barker mentioned that staff had included the legislative request and the attestation form to the agenda; however, these could be emailed separately to the Board. She mentioned that staff would be coming back for a presentation on the proposed Wellness Way branding, and that they could include an update on what was occurring in the area regarding development.

Commr. Blake stated that his concern was the ownership scheme, and he requested more information on how this was going to look.

Commr. Smith said that this item was just for the Board to approve Ms. Barker to sign the form that said everything was true to her knowledge.

Commr. Parks confirmed this, and added that Ms. Barker would be the contact point.

Commr. Blake indicated that this item would also be making it a County priority instead of a single Board member priority.

Ms. Barker said that this was correct.

Commr. Campione inquired if the legislation identified or created a liability on the part of the County.

Commr. Parks replied that there was no liability that had been specified or requested. He added that if this were the case, then the County did not have to accept it and could drop the project at that point.

Commr. Campione indicated interest in making it clear that it would be public ownership, opining that this amount of funding allocated should not be going to developers and that it should be a public resource.

Commr. Parks agreed, and noted that the Board could possibly make this clearer.

Commr. Smith asked if this item was time sensitive.

Commr. Parks responded that it was, because they were trying to include it in the current legislative session.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Parks and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to add an additional request to the County's 2023 Legislative Priorities entitled Lake County Reclaimed Water Initiative for South Lake County, and to ratify the Legislative Attestation Form executed by the County Manager on March 3, 2023, with the proviso that it be clear that the infrastructure would be publicly owned.

comment regarding town of howey-in-the-hills annexation

Mr. Erikk Ross, Director for the Information Technology (IT) Department, indicated that an individual had raised their hand to speak on Zoom.

The Chairman opened the floor for public comment.

Mr. John Blodget, a resident of the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills speaking via Zoom, asked if the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills had contacted the BCC in reference to the Town Ordinances 2023-006 and 2023-007, based on Florida Statute 171.042, regarding prerequisites for annexations. He mentioned that the Town would have a meeting on March 13, 2023 for this development.

Commr. Smith asked if he was referring to a development proposed in the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, and Mr. Blodget confirmed this. Commissioner Smith then indicated that this item had not come before the BCC yet, and that he had received an email from someone regarding 160 acres.

Mr. Blodget believed that this was the development, and he relayed his understanding that the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills was supposed to be contacting the BCC 15 days prior to any discussions about annexation that would go before the Town Council.

Ms. Melanie Marsh, County Attorney, explained that the County routinely received notice of annexations from the Cities, and that she was unsure if the County had received notice of this item. She added that they could look into it and provide that information.

Commr. Campione clarified that the County did not have a hearing when these notices were received, and that it was just a notice that the municipality was going to be having a hearing. She indicated that thereafter, the County had 30 days if they were going to raise a judicial objection based on the statute.

Ms. Marsh said that this was correct, and that her office could provide Mr. Blodget with the information they had on this item. She explained that if it was an initial discussion, then the municipality did not necessarily have to provide notice to the County, noting that it had to be a notice before their public hearing to annex.

There being no one else who wished to address the Board at the current time, the Chairman closed the floor for public comment.

other business

appointments to the board of adjustment

Ms. Barker recalled that at the previous BCC meeting, staff had requested approval of appointments to the Board of Adjustment, noting that they had identified District 1 as being a vacancy; however, District 1 was not vacant, and the term did not currently end until 2025. She mentioned that the current item was to rescind the original appointments and ask the Board to reappoint members. She also mentioned that additional applications were received since the original agenda item was created, and that staff had added those additional names and identified the candidates for each district. She commented that they had two at-large positions, and that four individuals were listed for this; additionally, two individuals were applying for the District 3 vacancy, and one of those two candidates could be considered for one of the at-large seats.

Ms. Marsh said that for District 3, Ms. Addie Owens had applied for reappointment and currently served in District 4; furthermore, those had been correct districts before the BCC redid their Commission maps. She related that this list had been organized based on their residency, and that it may not be the seat that they currently filled.

Commr. Blake expressed support for Ms. Owens, noting that she was the former president for the Realtors Association of Lake and Sumter Counties.

Commr. Campione commented that Ms. Owens was her appointee, and that Commissioner Blake had appointed Mr. Ray Powers from what had previously been District 5, noting that Mr. Powers now lived in District 4; however, Mr. Powers’ term did not end for a few more years. She also said that the BCC could appoint members out of district.

Ms. Marsh mentioned that Mr. Powers’ term did not expire until 2025, and that if he reapplied at that time, then the Board would have to consider where he could fit based on residency.

Commr. Parks stated that he would like to hold off on District 2 for two weeks because it was open, noting that there were a few new applicants.

Ms. Marsh said that there would still be a quorum so long as the Board made appointments for the other districts.

Commr. Shields indicated that he was going to move Ms. Maritza Garcia to District 1, though this could not be done; therefore, he would like to keep her in the at-large seat that she currently had. He added that she was located in Four Corners.

Ms. Marsh proposed to start with District 3, and then to possibly move whoever did not get appointed to be an option for an at-large member.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to appoint Ms. Addie Owens as a District 3 member.

Ms. Marsh mentioned that there was a new application for District 4.

Commr. Campione noted that it was Mr. David Williamson, and she requested to hold off on this appointment so that she could speak with him because these were important positions and to ensure that he understood everything that was involved.

Ms. Barker indicated that they would still have a quorum.

Ms. Marsh relayed that this left two seats for at-large members.

Commr. Parks indicated support for Ms. Bea Meeks.

On a motion by Commr. Shields, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to appoint Ms. Bea Meeks and Ms. Maritza Garcia as At-Large members.

Commr. Smith summarized that they would be bringing back appointments for Districts 2 and 4 on February 28, 2023.

Ms. Marsh asked if the Board could also rescind the previous appointments.

On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Campione and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved to rescind the previous appointments from February 28, 2023.

public hearings: REZONING

rezoning consent agenda

Mr. Bobby Howell, Director for the Office of Planning and Zoning, displayed the advertisements for that day’s rezoning cases on the overhead monitor in accordance with the Florida Statutes. He mentioned that there were three items in the agenda, and that two items were requested for approval on the consent agenda; additionally, they had been approved unanimously by the Planning and Zoning Board.

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.

Commr. Smith indicated that he would not be able to vote on Tab 3 on the regular agenda, and that he would have to abstain.

On a motion by Commr. Parks, 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. 2023-15

Rezoning Case # RZ-22-29-5

Light Point Farm

Rezone approximately 35.14 +/- acres from Rural Residential (R-1) to Agriculture (A) to accommodate agricultural uses.

Tab 2. Ordinance No. 2023-16

Rezoning Case # RZ-22-15-2

Clermont Baptist Church

Amend Community Facility District (CFD) Ordinance #2012-19 to revise the permitted use of the property to include a 175-foot monopole communication tower.

rezoning regular agenda

Tab 3. Ordinance No. 2023-17

Rezoning Case # MCUP-22-02-4

Lisbon Sand Mine

Amend Mining Conditional Use Permit (MCUP-20-03-5) Ordinance #2020-72 to expand the sand mining and sand processing plant use from 103.6 +/- acres to 392.8 +/- acres.

lisbon sand mine

Mr. Howell presented Tab 3, Rezoning Case # MCUP-22-02-4, Lisbon Sand Mine. He explained that this case was an amendment to Ordinance 2020-72 to expand the sand mine and sand processing facility from 103.6 acres to 392.8 areas, and that the property was located east of Emeralda Avenue, on the north side of County Road (CR) 44, in the Emeralda Marsh area; furthermore, the property was comprised of an assemblage of various parcels. He mentioned that the properties were currently zoned Agriculture, and were designated with a Rural future land use (FLU) designation. He relayed that this item was presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting on March 1, 2023, and had been approved unanimously on the regular agenda. He displayed a slide showing the boundary of the existing sand mind and the proposed expansion, along with the concept plan with the proposed sand mining operations. He related that following the Planning and Zoning Board meeting, the applicant had community meetings with surrounding property owners to discuss key concerns and questions.

Mr. Bart Allen, an attorney representing the applicant, said that they were present for the expansion of an existing mining conditional use permit (MCUP), referred to as the Lisbon Sand Mine. He explained that Blue Water Industries was a southeastern regional aggregates company doing sand mining, and that they had 23 facilities; additionally, Mr. Ted Baker, President of Blue Water Industries, and his family were previously associated with the Florida Rock Company and had a long legacy in the aggregate and sand mining operations. He added that it was a family owned business, and that previously, MCUP-02-03-6 had been approved by the BCC for about 103.7 acres of the operation, including around 9.3 acres for a plant site. He indicated that the applicant was requesting to expand the boundary of the MCUP, and that the total project ownership boundary would be roughly 392 acres. He displayed an image of the site, and clarified that this did not mean that all 392 acres would be mined. He mentioned that there had been some redefining of the mine boundary as they worked through the process, that the FLU was Rural, and that the zoning was Agriculture. He commented that sand mining was allowed as a conditional use under those designations, and he displayed the mine plan which helped to satisfy the conditions in Section 6.06 of the Land Development Regulations (LDR). He pointed out the original MCUP and the plant, noting that this would be remaining the same, and he highlighted the new boundary of the MCUP. He commented that the applicant had met with some residents after the Planning and Zoning Board meeting to discuss some of the issues, and that the applicant had voluntarily agreed to withdraw the northern 35 acres out of the mine boundary. He pointed out that the red area south of Goose Prairie Road, down to the original mine site, was now the mine area, noting that it was approximately 224 acres. He mentioned that the mine limit was 224 acres out of the 392 acre MCUP, noting that this would keep the mining south of Goose Prairie Road and away from the residents to the north. He added that there had been additional discussions between residents and the applicant’s team with regard to ensuring that buffering, landscaping, etc. were put in place. He mentioned that they would continue to have meetings with residents, and he believed that the applicant had committed to having monthly meetings as the project moved forward. He displayed the mining progression map, noting that it moved from the south portion of the site to the north portion with five to eight acres per year. He relayed that this would be a 30 to 40 year project, and he showed the haul route which was required to be included as part of the application. He clarified that it remained the same, and that there was no access to Goose Prairie Road or any of the adjacent local roads; furthermore, access remained through Dura-Stress and CR 44. He displayed the conceptual reclamation plan, commenting that there would be a large lake with some pasture around it, as well as plantings to rehabilitate the lakes. He showed an image of an electric dredge, opining that they were quiet and did not create any dust; additionally, he said that all of the mining activity was done underwater and that the material was piped to the plant to the south. He displayed an image of a previously mined property in the Green Swamp that had been fully reclaimed, opining that it could result in a beautiful property which could be used for a number of different activities such as fishing. He said that they had a staff recommendation and a Planning and Zoning Board unanimous vote of approval, and he clarified that this request was a life of the mine expansion and would not increase the number of trucks on the roads. He commented that this was an activity put in place to protect a critical resource, and he relayed that the Florida Legislature had defined sand, as part of construction aggregate, as a critical resource, noting that it was one of the most important resources that the state had. He relayed that Florida Governor Ron DeSantis had recently announced infrastructure expansions, particularly in this area, and that Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) quality sand, which this mine would produce, was important to support these initiatives. He commented that the applicant had removed the mine footprint from the northern 35 acres, along with including language specifically stating that mining would not occur north of Goose Prairie Road.

Commr. Campione asked if the land north of Goose Prairie Road would stay in the ordinance.

Mr. Allen confirmed this and added that it would remain as an agricultural use.

Commr. Campione then inquired if his client would be willing to limit those agricultural uses, opining that medical marijuana production was creating issues for surrounding property owners.

Mr. Allen relayed that he could discuss this with the applicant.

Commr. Campione asked if the plan was for the reclaimed lake to be an asset available to the public.

Mr. Allen was unsure if they had thought this far out, and he said that there was much opportunity for how it could be used whether it was open to the public or not.

Commr. Parks disclosed that he had spoken to Ms. Tracy Mouncey, an individual representing the applicant, and he asked Mr. Allen to discuss the buffers.

Mr. Allen explained that south of Goose Prairie Road, around the boundary was a 100 foot setback; additionally, they would have 50 foot setbacks around their wetland features.

Commr. Parks inquired if they would be amicable with Florida native landscaping, opining that it made sense to ensure that it was 100 percent native and looked natural. He indicated an understanding that it would look like Florida woods in 20 or 30 years, or sooner.

Mr. Allen said that they would meet any of the planning requirements in the LDR, and that they would have to place berms around certain areas, along with swales; additionally, they would have to ensure that stormwater was retained onsite.

The Chairman opened the public hearing.

Ms. Charlene Kolterman, a neighbor of the subject property, thanked the applicant for working with the public. She displayed an image of the area, and she thought that there was a 50 foot setback which contained a floodplain. She expressed concerns for protecting the integrity of the Goose Prairie Road area and its ecological value to this property and aquifer recharge. She indicated concerns for the project potentially endangering water supplies and the environment, along with contaminants which could enter the water supply and leach into the lake that would be created. She thought that staying further away from the marsh would be a safer route to consider, and she then showed a map of another project. She also indicated concerns for potential contamination of wells.

Ms. Amber Reisman, a neighbor of the subject property, expressed support for the mine. She relayed that the original plans placed the mine close to her family’s property, and that the applicant had heard their concerns and removed the top part of the mine. She felt that the applicant had addressed every environmental concern, and she opined that it would be better than a housing development. She expressed appreciation for Commissioner Campione’s statement with regards to ensuring that there would not be something such as a medical marijuana facility on the northern part. She also thanked the applicant for discussing this item with the community.

Mr. Kent Fuller, with Dura-Stress, stated that the mine was important to his company, noting that they currently received sand from two local sources; however, one of these was no longer a viable option. He opined that the sand coming from this new facility was of the highest quality, and would help Dura-Stress produce its FDOT products into the future. He opined that Blue Water Industries had been professional, and he believed that it would be a great project for Lake County and his company.

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

Commr. Parks asked about the hydrology, noting that there could possibly be some vulnerability to the aquifer. He relayed his understanding that there would be some water level monitoring, including water contaminant testing to alleviate concerns.

Mr. Allen clarified that four piezometers had been installed as part of the original approval, and that they had added an additional five; furthermore, monitoring would continue as the life of the mine moved forward. He mentioned that this was a heavily regulated activity as it related to different agencies outside of Lake County to ensure that there were no adverse impacts to aquifers or drinking wells in proximity to the site.

Commr. Parks asked if Mr. Howell was amicable with this, and Mr. Howell confirmed that it would be addressed just like the existing mine.

Commr. Campione asked to clarify the setbacks from wetlands.

Mr. Allen said that there would be 50 foot setbacks from any wetland boundary, that there would be 100 foot setbacks from the property boundaries, and that the applicant was agreeable to restricting the northern portion to ensure that there was no medical marijuana growth on the 35 acres north of Goose Prairie Road. He added that they would be happy to open the lakes to bass fishing for the community at the completion of mining activities.

Commr. Campione expressed appreciation for the medical marijuana item, noting that it could be negatively impactful to the surrounding community. She opined that this property remaining rural and agricultural was appropriate, and could help offset the activity on the south side of Goose Prairie Road. She thought that it was a good trade off to keep the community feeling rural, as well as the buffers. She indicated an understanding that it was typically quick growing vegetation, and that there could be a forest feeling around the buffers. She opined that opening the lakes as a fishing asset was a good thing in the community, and she said that the piezometers were checking to ensure that they were not impacting the water levels offsite, as well as for contaminants.

Commr. Shields mentioned the issue of a floodplain that a resident had brought up.

Commr. Campione thought that the issue was the setback, and she relayed that the applicant had indicated that they were doing their own stormwater storage onsite. She also thought that this addressed the concern of leaching. She disclosed that she had spoken with Mr. Baker, Ms. Mouncey, and Mr. Reisman.

Commr. Blake relayed that he had spoken with Ms. Mouncey on something to do with this general area, and that he had received some emails.

Commr. Shields remarked that he had not spoken to anyone.

Commr. Parks said that he had discussions with Mr. Baker and Ms. Mouncey. He then suggested for Mr. Baker to share the water quality sampling with the residents during their community meetings.

Mr. Allen said that he could encourage this, and clarified that the samplings were public record.

Commr. Campione relayed that there had been illegal mining occurring in Lake County over the past few years, where individuals started hauling dirt. She added that appropriate permits were not received, and sometimes they received permits that they claimed were for agriculture. She stated that from everything she had seen, when it was done the correct way with permits, then it would be highly regulated. She added that there were many safeguards in place, and that it was different than what was done with the peat mine operation that the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) had approved in the Emeralda Marsh area. She opined that it could hurt the community significantly when people did this the wrong way, and she expressed appreciation for the applicant doing this correctly and being sensitive to everyone who lived around them.

Commr. Blake provided an anecdote regarding an electric dredge he had been close to, noting that he would not have been aware of it without being told. He opined that electric dredges were a minimal impact.

On a motion by Commr. Campione, seconded by Commr. Blake and carried by a vote of 4-0, the Board approved Tab 3, Rezoning Case # MCUP-22-02-4, Lisbon Sand Mine, with the conditions discussed regarding the restriction of the agriculture property on the north side of Goose Prairie Road, and the utilization of the lake in the future for public use and access, along with all the conditions contained in the ordinance.

Commr. Smith abstained from voting.

commissioners reports

commissioner shields – vice chairman and district 1

four corners meeting

Commr. Shields mentioned that he had a Four Corners meeting with Hands of Hope America and other foundations.

city of groveland traffic meeting

Commr. Shields said that he had a City of Groveland traffic meeting and that it was well attended. He opined that staff did a great job explaining how complicated traffic and roads were.

south lake chamber of commerce meeting

Commr. Shields relayed that he had spoken at the South Lake Chamber of Commerce public policy meeting and that it went well.

meeting with mayor of minneola

Commr. Shields stated that he had a meeting on the previous day with Mayor Pat Kelley, with the City of Minneola, and that they had reviewed details of developments along Florida’s Turnpike. He added that there was also discussion regarding a possible Medical Examiner building.

commissioner parks – district 2

Eco Expo at Lake-Sumter State College

Commr. Parks mentioned that he had spoken at the Eco Expo at Lake-Sumter State College (LSSC) on the previous Saturday. He thought that it went well, noting that he had provided an update on Wellness Way, the conservation subdivision design guidelines, the upcoming joint planning agreement (JPA) process, and the countywide conservation strategy.

lake county picnic

Commr. Parks opined that the Lake County picnic was excellent and that everyone involved in planning it did a great job.

commissioner campione – district 4

proposed moratorium ordinance

Commr. Campione stated that there had been concern with the word “moratorium,” as opposed to the substance of what was in a recently proposed ordinance. She clarified that the proposed ordinance was intended to address the issue of a gap that the County had created when they removed from the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) the rule that if one had more than 50 lots, then they had to do a planned unit development (PUD). She elaborated that when the County eliminated this, they opened the door for straight zoning subdivisions, noting that they did not have their design criteria in place for the types of items that would be addressed in a PUD. She relayed her understanding that it was the industry standard to have site plan, architectural, aesthetic and environmental requirements, and that some of the PUD language that the County had created addressed items such as fertilizer use, protecting bees, and curb appeal for creating a sense of place and quality in Lake County subdivisions, knowing that they were a magnet for people wanting to build new subdivisions; therefore, she opined that the County wanted its neighborhoods to look nice and to be nice places to live. She recalled that they had a delay in those design requirements being adopted due to the Planning and Zoning Board members pointing out items that needed to be addressed; therefore, the County had a gap because they were taking their time to address issues. She explained that the purpose of the moratorium would be to say that if one was going to bring a straight zoning subdivision, then they would be on hold until these design criteria requirements were in place. She said that because this had become an issue, one solution could possibly be to include back in the LDR a requirement that a development of over 50 units had to be a PUD, as a temporary measure so that the County could undo what they did; furthermore, they could keep this until they had the design criteria in place, and then they could go back to the higher number of units which could have a straight zoning and not a PUD. She stated that the County could advertise the amendment, take it to the Planning and Zoning Board, bring it back to the BCC, and have it in place until they would be able to put the moratorium ordinance in place, noting that the moratorium ordinance would require two public hearings. She also opined that this would potentially alleviate the concern from the Home Builders Association of Lake-Sumter (HBA-LS) and local builders with regard to it being a flat moratorium. She clarified that it was not a building permit moratorium; rather, it would be a recording of plat moratorium, noting that it also had exception language. She added that a conservation design project could continue through, and that a project currently in the pipeline could also continue through; additionally, it would not prevent a project from being reviewed as long as the applicant was in agreement that when the design criteria were in place, then they would be applied. She elaborated that this could be timed so that the 50 unit criteria could be removed at the same time that the County had its design criteria in place and went back to 200 units.

Commr. Smith relayed that the 200 unit limit only came into play if the development was under the current LDR and Comp Plan. He opined that the design was market driven, and he said that he was not in favor of a moratorium or going backwards; however, he was in favor of having public meetings to help with the design standards.

Commr. Blake believed that beauty was subjective, and he opined that preferences and tastes changed over time. He believed that whether he found something attractive or not, it was a market decision. He thought that the important thing for working families in the county was whether it was affordable and a place to have their family out of the elements.

Commr. Parks thought that the County was trying to put in place a balance in planning and regulations, noting that they were one of the fastest growing counties in the State of Florida. He relayed his understanding that there were communities around the State of Florida where leadership had asked for a different standard, and he opined that there were people wanting to come to the State of Florida regardless. He opined that if a standard was specified, some companies may have concerns with this; however, what their communities looked like and the impact on future generations with regards to trying to provide service to the way they grew was of great concern. He did not think that the standards being discussed would be unreasonable, and he thought that builders and developers were concerned with predictability; furthermore, he opined that it should be a straightforward and predictable process, and that it should be expedited. He thought that it was easy for someone from a large corporate environment to say that something had to be done because of the free market, and that if there was a higher standard, based on other places they operated in, they would follow it anyway. He opined that it produced a better plan for the County and residents, and that this was what he was focused on.

Commr. Shields stated that he had asked staff about how large the issue was, and how many applications the County expected in six months between 50 and 199 units.

Commr. Campione relayed that it was common to see Urban Residential (R-6) and Medium Residential (R-3) zoning already in place in locations that already had an Urban Medium or Urban High FLU. She opined that the County had a rule and that it worked, noting that if it was over 50 units, then one would do a PUD; furthermore, when one did a PUD, then the Board included reasonable regulations about the way the houses had to look at a minimum.

Commr. Shields relayed his understanding that they would just be going back to where they were before starting working on their regulations for rural transition.

Commr. Campione opined that the regulations that they had been using in their PUD template were not excessive, and that it was the features that the County would like to see included in a house. She opined that she did not equate this to free market; rather, she equated it to builders that would build the cheapest thing that they could. She opined that they could probably build something more attractive, but it was the easiest thing to build. She opined that it was not fair to the rest of the community when all the County had to do was ask for slightly more, and then someone could live in a starter home with some curb appeal. She also opined that the County was trying to get it right without going too far over, and that they were discussing the kinds of things that could make something more attractive, noting that there were options.

Commr. Smith asked if she would like to agendize this.

Commissioner Campione expressed interest in a proposed item on the agenda to advertise going back to 50 units until the County had the design criteria in place.

Ms. Barker added that this could be added to the March 28, 2023 agenda. She added that from March 1, 2022 through February 28, 2023, there were 16 preliminary plat applications submitted. She also mentioned that during this time, two preliminary plats were submitted which had between 50 and 199 units that were not in the Rural FLU.

Commr. Parks agreed that there should be public meetings and that this was a good idea.

Commr. Campione noted that this could be in regard to some of the design criteria, noting that there could be some good ideas that the County did not encapsulate into their ordinance.

Commr. Smith believed that the County was set up to do public meetings on the design criteria that they were working on. He clarified that this was for design criteria, and was not adding more density.

COMMISSIONER BLAKE – DISTRICT 5

Meeting with Mayor of Minneola

Commr. Blake remarked that he would be meeting with Mayor Kelley on the following day, and that there would be an emergency meeting with the Medical Examiner Advisory Committee at the Lake County Emergency Operations Center (EOC) on the following Friday to discuss the Medical Examiner property issue.

commissioner smith – chairman and district 3

meeting with mayor of minneola

Commr. Smith related that he had met with Mayor Kelley in the previous week and that they did a tour, noting that there were items occurring near the City of Minneola with the private sector.

lake county picnic

Commr. Smith said that the employee picnic was great, and that he appreciated being able to see all the County employees.

national cereal day

Commr. Smith relayed that the current day was National Cereal Day.

comment on land development regulations discussion

Ms. Barker commented that on the March 14, 2023 BCC agenda, there would be approval to advertise for the moratorium ordinance previously mentioned by Commissioner Campione. She asked if the Board would like to do the LDR discussion at the March 14, 2023 meeting, or move the moratorium item to March 28, 2023.

Commr. Campione stated a preference to move it to March 28, 2023.

Ms. Barker commented that the County would have the discussion for the moratorium and the LDR on March 28, 2023 at the same time.

Ms. Marsh said that the Board could move the approval to advertise to March 28, 2023, and then it would move the two public hearings into April 2023, assuming that they moved forward with the moratorium.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:23 a.m.

_________________________________

kirby smith, chairman

ATTEST:

________________________________

GARY J COONEY, CLERK