Official Minutes of MARION COUNTY

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Book V, Page 733

July 19, 2016

CALL TO ORDER: The Marion County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session in Commission Chambers at 9:08 a.m. on Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at the Marion County Governmental Complex located in Ocala, Florida.

INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The meeting opened with invocation by Chairman Bryant and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of our Country. 9:00 AM ROLL CALL: Upon roll call the following members were present: Chairman Kathy Bryant, District 2; Vice-Chairman Carl Zalak, District 4; Commissioner David Moore, District 1; Commissioner Stan McClain, District 3; and Commissioner Earl Arnett, District 5. Also present were Clerk David R. Ellspermann, County Attorney Matthew G. Minter and County Administrator Mounir Bouyounes. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Chairman Bryant addressed upcoming scheduled meetings as listed on the Commission Calendar (Item 12B). 1. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS/RESOLUTIONS: Upon motion of Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Zalak, the Board approved and/or ratified the following: 1A. PRESENTATION - Special Recognition to the Board of County Commissioners - Joanne Black, Development Director, Habitat for Humanity of Marion County (Presentation Only) The following recommendation was presented by County Administrator Mounir Bouyounes, Administration:

Description/Background: Ms. Joanne Black, Development Director for the Habitat for Humanity of Marion County, FL, has requested this opportunity to recognize the Board for their continued support of community non-profit initiatives, such as Habitat for Humanity’s Strawberry Festival, which took place in March 2016. A plaque and certificates will be presented. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: None, presentation only.

Development Director Joanne Black and Executive Director Dave Layman, Habitat for Humanity of Marion County, recognized the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) for its continued support of community nonprofit initiatives and presented a plaque and certificates to Sheriff Emery Gainey, Marion County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO); Lacey Larramore, Solid Waste Department; and the BCC. Ms. Black advised of the support the organization received from the MCSO during the festival, as well as staff from the Solid Waste Department. She invited Sheriff Gainey and the BCC to come out and help raise the wall to a new home on Thursday, July 28, 2016.

July 19, 2016

Page 734, Book V

Mr. Layman thanked the BCC for allowing the organization to utilize the McPherson Complex to hold its Strawberry Festival, noting this was the 4th year the BCC allowed Habitat for Humanity to use the property. He stated the purpose of the festival is to raise enough money to purchase materials to build a house. Chairman Bryant opined that no one ever envisioned what the festival would turn into when it was originally conceived or how it would grow into what it is today. She stated the festival is for an amazing cause and thanked Ms. Black and Mr. Layman for all they do for the community. WALK-ON PRESENTATION: Chairman Bryant recognized Sheriff Gainey in the audience and invited him to come forward. Sheriff Emery Gainey, MCSO, advised of a special recognition award the Sheriff’s Office provides to law enforcement deputies, as well as citizens, who go above and beyond to involve themselves in suspicious incidents or issues that others may turn and walk away from. He advised of one such event that occurred on June 20, 2016, wherein, Commissioner McClain reported a suspicious incident that resulted in solving a stolen vehicle and multiple burglary cases. Sheriff Gainey noted it is his honor to present Commissioner McClain with the “Eagle Eye Award” and a special coin in appreciation for his actions. 1B. PROCLAMATION - Parks and Recreation Month - Jim Couillard, Parks and Recreation Director (Approval and Presentation) The Board presented the Proclamation designating the month of July, 2016 as “Parks and Recreation Month” to Parks and Recreation Director Jim Couillard and several young students who participated in the poster contest. Parks and Recreation Director Jim Couillard and Administrative Manager Leah Hoffman, Parks and Recreation Department, recognized poster winners from the 6-8 year old group, Emmalyn Gray; and the 9-12 year old group, Briana Miranda. Mr. Couillard advised that a survey was performed by the department, noting those who participated were eligible for prizes. He noted Henry Nelson of McIntosh received a complimentary park pass; Jim Casselman of Belleview received the VIP tubing package for the KP Hole; and Gera Fleming received a new kayak. 1C. PRESENTATION - Recognition of the Three Veterans Services Employees who Received Governor's Veterans Service Awards on June 7, 2016 at the Florida National Guard Armory, Crystal River, Florida (Presentation Only) The following recommendation was presented by Veterans Services Director Jeffrey Askew:

Description/Background: Marion County Veterans Services Office had three Veterans awarded the Governor’s Veterans Service Awards on June 7, 2016, at the Florida National Guard Armory, Crystal River, Florida. They were Jeffrey Askew, Director; Daisy Diaz, Supervisor; and Amy Cutchen, Veterans Services Officer. The Award consisted of a gold medallion with a red and white ribbon. Governor Scott stated that: WHEREAS, it is proper that all Floridians honor America’s military veterans, including Florida’s more than 1.5 million living veterans, through whose selfless service and sacrifice we enjoy freedom and liberty. As a result, the Governor of

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 735

Florida created executive order number 14-88 “The Governor’s Veterans Service Award” to honor Florida Veterans. See attached presentation pictures. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion for presentation only.

Veterans Services Director Jeffrey Askew stated it was an honor to receive the award from the Governor. Chairman Bryant thanked Mr. Askew and his staff for all their hard work to ensure that veterans receive the services they need. 1D. PRESENTATION - Automotive Blue Seal of Excellence Awarded to Fleet Management - Brian Hing, Fleet Management Director (Presentation Only) The following recommendation was presented by Fleet Management Director Brian Hing:

Description/Background: The National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence is a professional certification group that sets a bar of technical knowledge for qualified professionals and shops in the automotive repair and service industry. The organization aims to improve the quality of vehicle repair and service through testing and certifications of repair and service professionals. The Blue Seal of Excellence Recognition Program identifies Marion County for meeting and exceeding their standards of maintaining ASE-Certified Technicians and remaining committed to excellent customer service. Marion County Fleet Management is proud to receive this recognition for the fourth time in seven years. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: None, presentation only.

Fleet Management Director Brian Hing thanked his staff for their dedication and introduced Senior Technicians Clint Foley and Richard Hoffman, who is celebrating his 28th year in the Fleet Department. 2. GENERAL PUBLIC ITEMS: All members of the public wishing to speak during the “General Public” portion of the agenda will be limited to two (2) minutes to make their request or presentation and will be heard following scheduled requests, which are limited to five (5) minutes. For unscheduled requests, public comment request forms are available in the lobby. If the request or matter requires investigation by County staff, the Chairman will refer to staff for follow-up with the person making the request. 2A. Hagan Smith - General Hagan Smith, NW 105th Terrace, did not appear when called upon to speak. 2B. Beverly LaCross - General Beverly LaCross, NE 22nd Avenue, did not appear when called upon to speak. 2C. Gene LaCross – General Gene LaCross, NE 22nd Avenue, did not appear when called upon to speak. 2D. Gracelyn Honor - Road Dedication and Mount Canaan Gracelyn Honor, NE 58th Avenue, and her sister Sharon Madison, SE 64th Avenue, appeared before the Board to address the status of the Proclamation for a road designation in honor of their parents Elijah and the late Elizabeth Inez Davis, as well as

July 19, 2016

Page 736, Book V

a Proclamation dedicating the Township of Mount Canaan as a historical site and placing it on the historical map. Assistant County Administrator (ACA) Jeannie Rickman advised that information regarding the previous request made by Ms. Honor and her family to dedicate a section of SR 35 in honor of their parents was provided to the Legislature due to it being a State Road designation. Unfortunately the request did not pass legislature; therefore, it is now up to the BCC to decide if its wants to make the request again. In response to Ms. Honor, Chairman Bryant clarified that the BCC executed a Proclamation in support of her request for dedication and sent it to the state as part of Marion County’s legislative priorities, but it was not approved. She stated the Board can place the request in this year’s priorities and try again. Ms. Honor questioned if there is anything the family can do differently to help move the request forward. Chairman Bryant suggested Ms. Honor start collecting more letters of support from members of the community, noting she will direct staff to work with the family as the Legislative Session gets closer. Chairman Bryant clarified that if the request is approved by the Legislature and becomes a Bill approved by the Governor then the state will authorize Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to provide placement of the dedication signage. She directed Ms. Rickman to meet with Ms. Honor to further explain the process. In regard to dedicating the Township of Mount Canaan as a historical site and placing it on the historical map, Ms. Rickman stated Commissioner Moore has been working on this matter. Commissioner Moore advised that he spoke with Tourist Development Executive Director Loretta Shaffer about the possibility of utilizing Tourist Development Council (TDC) or Ocala/Marion County Visitors and Convention Bureau (VCB) funds to purchase the markers and signage; however, the original spot for the marker is on State of Florida property so another spot needs to be chosen to avoid having to get approval from the state. He noted he has also spoken to Parks and Recreation Director Jim Couillard to see if Mount Canaan can be included as part of the county’s historical trail. Ms. Rickman stated she will review whether or not staff can place Mount Canaan Township on the regular county map. County Administrator Mounir Bouyounes advised that staff may be able to put together a historical map of Marion County that is locally controlled and will include all historical Townships, noting he will review the matter further and bring the information back for Board consideration. Commissioner Arnett left his seat at 9:49 a.m. but did not exit Commission chambers and immediately returned to his seat. 2E. Calvin Brown - Infrastructure of Ocala Park Estates Pastor Calvin Brown, NW 61st Court, advised that his son was unable to attend this morning’s meeting to address the Board in regard to the lack of county parks in the north end of the county. Pastor Brown expressed concern with road conditions within the Ocala Park Estates subdivision, noting the county does come out to patch or grade the roads; however, they wash out every time it rains. He advised of other issues including grass that needs to be mowed in the drainage retention areas (DRAs), and trees that need to be trimmed. Chairman Bryant advised that Ocala Park Estates is a subdivision and the roads are not county roads, with the exception of 1 arterial road (NE 62nd Place) that the county does maintain. Pastor Brown noted NE 62nd Place is one of the roads that needs work. Chairman Bryant stated the BCC will have staff take another look at that road. She stated the rest of the roads would need to be maintained under a Municipal Service Taxing Unit

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 737

(MSTU) paid for by property owners within the subdivision. Chairman Bryant stated the community will have to go through the same process if it wants to build a park within the subdivision. She noted there are several communities in her District that have a MSTU for General Services (i.e., roads), as well as an MSTU for Recreation (parks, community centers, etc.). Chairman Bryant noted if Pastor Brown would like more information on this process, she will have MSTU Director Shawn Hubbuck provide him more details. 2F. Pam Ayers - General Pamela Ayers, NE 22nd Avenue, addressed Federal Corporation, Title 28, United States (US) Code, Section 3002, Chapter 176 and opined that the Federal Reserve is a privately owned corporation that controls the federal government. She stated the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation is the largest and singularly most powerful member of the Federal Reserve. 2G. Kathryn Taubert - Solar Amendment 4 Kathryn Taubert, SW 101st Place Road, noted she is present today on behalf of the Sierra Club and presented a 1 page (double-sided) pamphlet and a 10 page handout entitled, “Solar: Unlimited Energy for the Sunshine State” to follow along with a PowerPoint presentation. She addressed Amendment 4, which will be placed on the August 30, 2016 Primary Election ballot. Ms. Taubert advised that now is the time to switch from dirty fuels to clean energy, noting the technology exists and solar energy will help address issues of climate change by reducing the rate of air and water pollution, save water and fuel, create energy independence, save consumers money, and create jobs. It will also address the issue of fossil fuel price volatility. She noted 20 days of sunshine is equal to all the energy stored in the earth’s reserves of coal, oil and natural gas. Coal production, exports, imports and use is down and the top US producers are either in the penny stock range or are bankrupt. There were 1,609 active oil rigs in the US in October 2014, which is down to 515 in 2016. Ms. Taubert advised that approximately $600,000,000,000 in oil/gas projects have been cancelled, noting gas prices will not stay low forever. Peak natural gas rig count was at 1,606 in 2008 and is down to 135 as of 2016. She stated it is clear that supply is going down and the demand is going up. Ms. Taubert expressed concern that the US power grid will remain vulnerable to cyberattack in the foreseeable future. She addressed the features of solar energy, which includes: 1) cheaper than the grid in 42 of the 50 biggest cities; 2) created jobs 12 times faster than the USA workforce in 2015; 3) estimated to create 1,000,000 new jobs in the US by 2030 and 2,000,000 by 2050; 4) will create 109,000 new jobs in Florida by 2030 and 206,000 by 2050. The average Florida household spends 40 percent (%) more on energy than the national average. Solar is currently less than 1% of the State’s energy mix even though the cost of solar has dropped dramatically in the last 5 years. Some of the benefits of solar energy include: 1) it is clean, free, and abundant; 2) increases the value of homes and businesses; 3) provides for energy tax credits/rebates for installation; 4) provides for long-term reliability; 5) can save 50% or more on energy bills; and 6) the internal rate of return (IRR) consistently outpaces Standards & Poor’s (S&P). Ms. Taubert advised that states with less sun strength are generating more solar grid capacity than Florida and the results show up in the average monthly bill for consumers. She opined that Florida law needs to change and urges citizens to vote YES on Amendment 4 on the ballot in August, which will eliminate the taxes on businesses for the next 20 years, noting homeowners are already protected in the Constitution. Ms. Taubert requested the BCC join many other

July 19, 2016

Page 738, Book V

counties in the state by drafting a Resolution supporting the principals of Amendment 4, noting a draft copy is provided under this Agenda item. Chairman Bryant noted the County Attorney will have to review the proposed Resolution and bring it back for Board consideration. In response to Commissioner Arnett, Ms. Taubert advised that there may be some very small communities in opposition of Amendment 4 due to concern that there could be a loss in tax revenue; however, she has found no documentation that would back that up, noting this is a business oriented Amendment. Commissioner Moore commented on the BCC’s previous support of the Florida Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Funding Agency program, which provides financing for residential property owners to make clean energy and storm safety repairs or improvements to their homes. Commissioner Zalak questioned how utility companies will reimburse citizens. Ms. Taubert advised that will be addressed, in part, by another proposed Amendment/Bill, which is promulgated by the utility companies and is the most deceptive public relations campaign she has ever seen. She stated at this time a citizen does not have the right to create and sell or even give away their own energy. Ms. Taubert clarified that at this point, utility companies decide what they will charge a citizen for creating energy from the sun. General discussion ensued. Commissioner Moore out at 10:15 a.m. Ms. Taubert stated she will come back before the Board in September to further explain the proposed Bill by the utility companies. 2H. Bob Maxwell - Code Enforcement Bob Maxwell did not appear when called upon to speak. Commissioner Moore returned at 10:16 a.m. 2I. Mary Kearins - Rezoning of Juniper Road Chairman Bryant advised that Mary Kearins could not be present to speak at today’s meeting. 2J. Dale Kennedy - Zoning of Wormsor Dale Kennedy did not appear when called upon to speak. 2K. Julia Cathy Keck - Zoning of Juniper Road Julia Cathy Keck, Juniper Road, addressed the Board in regard to a rezoning request that will be considered at the zoning portion of today’s meeting (Agenda Item 14B5). She expressed concern relating to the ingress and egress to the subject property, which is currently land locked and shares its entrance with Legacy Elementary School. Ms. Keck opined that the proposed development is too close to the school and the request to go from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential will not only cause overflow at the school, but overwhelm the entire community. Commissioner Bryant advised of an update to the proposed application, which has been reduced from a maximum of 8 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) down to 3 du/ac. 2L. General Public Comment (Limited to 2 Minutes Each Speaker): Ron Raack, SE 131st Place, Ocklawaha, addressed the Board in regard to the US Constitution, noting the First Amendment provides that “Congress shall make no law

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 739

respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech”, and expressed concern that the BCC limits the time a citizen is allowed to speak at Board meetings. He stated Article 2 of the Florida Constitution, which gives people the right to own property and expressed concern that if a citizens fails to pay property taxes the government takes that property away. Chairman Bryant addressed the time limit policy placed on citizens at BCC meetings, noting Agendas are lengthy and in order to allow an opportunity for everyone to speak time limits were put into place. She clarified that the Board is always willing to meet with a citizen one-on-one to discuss any issues they may have. Maxine Connor, Browallia Court, Homosassa, addressed the Board in regard to the proposed Resolution in support of Amendment 4 as presented by Ms. Taubert (Item 2G). She opined that the Amendment will provide incentives for consumers to utilize clean, renewable energy and reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Ms. Connor expressed concern that fossil fuels produce greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming and climate change. She advised that Florida has an unlimited supply of solar energy, which is clean, renewable, non-polluting, reliable, and does not produce greenhouse gases. Ms. Connor noted solar installation has created more jobs than oil and gas pipeline construction, as well as crude petroleum and natural gas extraction combined. Janet Barrow, PO Box 370, Dunnellon, advised of her support for a Resolution by the BCC regarding Amendment 4. She expressed concern with population growth projections for the State of Florida, noting the need to protect agricultural lands and other natural resources. Ms. Barrow advised of a new sinkhole near the Pilgrim Processing Plant, which is in close proximity to the proposed Sabal Trail Pipeline. Chairman Bryant directed County Engineer Tracy Straub meet with Ms. Barrow to address the possibility of a new sinkhole in that area. 3. ADOPT THE FOLLOWING MINUTES: (3 sets) 3A. June 7, 2016 A 3B. June 7, 2016 B 3C. June 16, 2016 A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Arnett, to adopt the meeting minutes of June 7 (2 sets) and 16, 2016. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 4. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS / GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES: 4A. Marion County Sheriff, Emery Gainey - Request Approval to Apply for the 2016/2017 Florida Department of Law Enforcement Body Worn Camera Grant The Board considered the following recommendation as presented by Grants Coordinator Caitlin Edwards, Marion County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO):

Description/Background: The Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) has recently announced grant funds available for the Body-Worn Camera Program. The grant funds can be used to help develop, implement, and evaluate a body worn camera program as a law enforcement tool to enhance officer interactions with the public and build community trust. The grant program, which can be used to purchase body cameras, requires a 100% match from federal, state, or local sources. Budget Impact: None at this time.

July 19, 2016

Page 740, Book V

Recommended Action: Request approval from the Board to apply for the 2016-17 FDLE Body Worn Camera Grant.

Commissioner Zalak commented on the letter from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) attached to the Agenda Item, which advises of the requirement that the Sheriff’s Office or other entity on behalf of the Sheriff’s Office must make an in-kind or cash match equal to the amount of the grant. He expressed concern that there are unknown costs relating to the use of body cameras, not only by the Sheriff’s Office, but the State Attorney’s Office, Public Defender’s Office, etc. Commissioner Zalak opined that an outlined plan needs to be in place for all agencies involved with the use of body cameras. Clerk Ellspermann advised that the agencies involved with this program continue to meet to address related costs, noting it is his intent to meet with Information Technology (IT) staff in order to create a more finite plan. He commented on the possibility of downloading the information onto a compact disc (CD) to store the data rather than maintaining it electronically, which will lessen the cost. Commissioner Zalak referred to comments made at recent budget workshops by both the State Attorney’s Office and Public Defender’s Office relating to the possibility of needing more employees in order to review body camera data. General discussion ensued. In response to Chairman Bryant, Grants Coordinator Caitlin Edwards, MCSO, stated the application is due July 31, 2016, noting this is a “pass through” grant from the federal government to FDLE, which then distributes the funds to county agencies. She provided a brief overview of how the grant will work, noting the MCSO just received the letter from FDLE three weeks ago. Ms. Edwards clarified that as part of the grant application the Sheriff’s Office must come up with a program plan on how the body cameras will be utilized and what agencies will be involved with the process. General discussion resumed. In response to Commissioner McClain, Ms. Edwards stated MCSO has the matching funds required for the grant. Ms. Edwards clarified that MCSO must come up with a plan, purchase the body cameras and then each quarter the department will put in a reimbursement request in order to receive grant funds. Commissioner McClain noted the BCC is responsible for technology costs through the entire court system. Commissioner Zalak requested Chairman Bryant speak with Sheriff Gainey to see if he will hold off purchasing the body cameras until a plan is in place that addresses how the program will be funded on a long-term basis and then bring the matter back at the 2:00 p.m. zoning portion of today’s meeting. It was the general consensus of the Board to concur. Commissioner Zalak stated he did not want to ruin the chance for the Sheriff’s Office to apply for the grant due to the county being in the planning stages of the program. (Ed. Note: This matter was again discussed later in the meeting.) 4B. Marion County Sheriff, Emery Gainey - Request Approval of the Sheriff's Office to Continue the Task of Coordinating the 2016-2017 Countywide Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program; as well as, Authorize the Chairman to Sign the 51% Letter, Indicating where the Funds will be Allocated

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 741

The Board considered the following letter dated July 3, 2016 from Grants Coordinator Edwards, MCSO:

Attached please find the Certificate of Participation and the 51% letter for the Marion County Sheriff’s Office for the 2016-2017 Countywide Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. Over the past few years, the Marion County Sheriff’s Office has been designated as the unit of government responsible for coordinating the preparation of the countywide applications. Please sign where marked on the Certificate of Participation, indicating you approve for the Sheriff’s Office to continue the task of coordinating the JAG program applications for Marion County; as well as, sign the 51% letter, indicating where the funds will be allocated. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at 369-6761 or cedwards@marionso.com

A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to approve and execute the Certificate of Participation and 51% Letter for the 2016-2017 Countywide Edward Byrne Memorial JAG. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). WALK-ON: Clerk Ellspermann commented on the General Government Bond rating and presented a 7 page handout entitled, “S&P Global Ratings”. He advised that S&P recently addressed the county’s long-term General Government Bond rating, which reflects the following credit characteristics: 1) reliability of cash flow; 2) ability to make interest payments; and 3) entity management. Clerk Ellspermann commented on a request from S&P to hold a phone conference with Finance Director John Garri; Budget Director Michael Tomich; Senior Account Joe Pitonzo, Finance Department; Senior Managing Consultant Jay Glover, Public Financial Management (PFM); and President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Kevin Sheilley, Ocala/Marion County Chamber and Economic Partnership (CEP); wherein, they advised that S&P has upgraded Marion County’s General Revenue Bond rating from “A-” to “AA-”. He stated this is a substantial increase in rating and a positive for Marion County. Clerk Ellspermann advised that these are General Revenue Bonds used for operations, not utilities, and reflects credit characteristics of an adequate economy; strong management with good financial policies and practices; adequate budgetary performance; strong budgetary flexibility; very strong liquidity; very strong debt and contingent liability position; and a strong institutional framework score. Chairman Bryant thanked Clerk Ellspermann for a job well done. Clerk Ellspermann noted it takes many stakeholders to achieve this advancement and credited the BCC, County Administration, CEP, and the Finance, Budget and Internal Auditor Departments. 5. CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT: 5A. Request Adoption of the Following Budget Amendment Resolutions: Upon motion of Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Moore, the Board adopted the following Budget Amendment Resolutions transferring funds as presented by Clerk Ellspermann: 5A1. 16-R-205 – Building Department Fund - Building Department - $9,000 5A2. 16-R-206 – Fine & Forfeiture - Sheriff Regular - $3,302 5A3. 16-R-207 – General Fund - Animal Services Department - $20,000

July 19, 2016

Page 742, Book V

5A4. 16-R-208 – General Fund - Animal Services Department - $1,300 5A5. 16-R-209 – General Fund - Animal Services Department - $1,300 5A6. 16-R-210 – General Fund - Fleet Department - $15,000 5A7. 16-R-211 – General Fund - Clerk to County Commission Transfer - $5,251 5A8. 16-R-212 – General Fund - Community Services - $100,000 5A9. 16-R-213 – General Fund - Sheriff Emergency Management - $15,410 5A10. 16-R-214 – General Fund - Sheriff Jail - $30,217 5A11. 16-R-215 – MSTU for Law Enforcement - Sheriff Patrol & CID - $32,144 5A12. 16-R-216 – Rainbow Lakes Estates Fire Protection MSBU - Fire Control Service - $900 5A13. 16-R-217 – Rainbow Lakes Estates MSD - Rainbow Lakes Estates Gen Govt - $600 5A14. 16-R-218 – Rainbow Lakes Estates MSD - Rainbow Lakes Estates Gen Govt - $25,000 5A15. 16-R-219 – Silver Springs Shores Special Tax District - Silver Springs Shores Recreation Facility - $1,200 (Ed. Note: MSTU is the acronym for Municipal Service Taxing Unit; CID is the acronym for Criminal Investigation Division; MSBU is the acronym for Municipal Service Benefit Unit; and MSD is the acronym for Municipal Service District.) 5B. Request Appointment of Two (2) Commissioners to Serve on the Value Adjustment Board (VAB) for 2016 Clerk Ellspermann presented the following memorandum dated July 19, 2016:

To comply with Florida Statutes, 194.05, the Value Adjustment Board shall consist of two members of the governing body of the county as elected from the membership of the Board of said governing body and one citizen member appointed by the governing body of the county who must own homestead property within the county. In order for the Clerk's Office to schedule meetings on behalf of the 2016 Value Adjustment Board (VAB) the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) must appoint two (2) Commissioners and one (1) Citizen Member to serve on the VAB, pursuant to Rule Chapter 12D-9, Florida Administrative Code (FAC). Traditionally, the members appointed to the Value Adjustment Board have been Commissioners not currently up for reelection.

A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to appoint Commissioners Arnett and Moore to serve on the Value Adjustment Board for 2016. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Request Proof of Publication) at 10:00 am: Public participation is encouraged. When prompted, please step up to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Please limit your comments to the specific issue being addressed. None. 7. CONSENT: A motion to approve the Consent Agenda is a motion to approve all recommended actions. All matters on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion unless desired by a Commissioner. Upon motion of Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Moore, the Board acted on the Consent Agenda as follows:

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 743

7A. Administration: 7A1. Request Approval of the First Amendment to Economic Development Grant Agreement Between Marion County Government and Hotel Development and Management Group (HDG Hotels) (Budget Impact - None) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by ACA Rickman, Administration:

Description/Background: On July 7, 2015, the Board approved an Economic Development Grant with Hotel Development and Management Group, a/k/a HDG Hotels. The First Amendment to the agreement, as approved by the County Attorney, reflects a correction to a scrivener’s error, revised language pertinent to the Economic Development Grant, and an update to the contact information for both entities. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the First Amendment to Economic Development Grant Agreement between Marion County Government and Hotel Development and Management Group (HDG Hotels).

7B. Attorney: 7B1. Request Approval of the Mediated Settlement Agreement for the Southeast 92nd Loop Road Improvement Project Parcels 181, 182A, 182A(802), 182A(803), 182A(804), 182A(703), Parcel IDs #37515-000-05 and #37515-000-01 (Budget Impact - Neutral; expenditure of $755,022.25, as approved in the FY 15-16 budget) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by County Attorney, Matthew G. Minter, Legal:

Description/Background: Marion County is currently involved in an eminent domain case, Marion County v. Diane S. Counts, and others, Case No. 2014-CA-1573. This matter involves the County’s condemnation of two (2) Fee Simple Right-of-Way Takings, three (3) Drainage Easements and Construction Easement property interests on Project Parcels 181, 182A, 182A(802), 182A(803), 182A(804), 182A(703), which were required for the Southeast 92nd Loop Road Improvement Project in Marion County, Florida. The property taken was part of the Golf Park Master Plan development east of Baseline Road. County Attorney, Matthew Minter and Right of Way Manager, Shawn Hubbuck have reached a Mediated Settlement Agreement with Defendants Amarex Corporation and Golf Park, L.C. and their attorneys, the Law Firm of Forman, Hanratty, Thomas & Montgomery, pending Board approval. The County’s original offer had been $757,000.00. The landowners were originally seeking $2,539,100.00, based on their appraisal. Thus, the final settlement for “full compensation” was $492,861.00 over the County’s original offer and $1,289,100.00 less than the landowners’ appraisal. A copy of the Mediated Settlement Agreement is attached hereto. As outlined in the Agreement, Marion County shall pay said Defendants the total sum of the One Million, Two Hundred And Fifty Thousand Dollars ($1,250,000.00) as full compensation for the property taken. [The County shall receive a credit for Six Hundred Thirty-Eight Thousand, One Hundred Ninety-Three and 00/100 Dollars ($683,193.00) previously deposited pursuant to the Order of Taking dated

July 19, 2016

Page 744, Book V

September 4, 2014, for a net deposit in the sum of Six Hundred Eleven Thousand, Eight Hundred Seven and 00/100 Dollars ($611,807.00).] Additionally, the County shall pay attorney fees, to the Defendants’ attorneys, in the amount of One Hundred, Forty-Three Thousand, Two Hundred Fifteen and 25/100 Dollars ($143,215.25). Budget/Impact: Transportation Capital Projects Fund – 309–1279-561610 - $755,022.25 Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Mediated Settlement Agreement for the Southeast 92nd Loop Road Improvement Project Parcels 181, 182A, 182A(802), 182A(803), 182A(804), 182A(703), Parcel IDs #37515-000-05 and #37515-000-01, which authorizes entry of a Stipulated Final Judgment to the Court.

7B2. Request Approval of Workers' Compensation Settlement; Donna Borgioni The Board accepted the following recommendation to adopt Resolution 16-R-220, as presented by Chief Assistant County Attorney Dana O. Taylor, Legal:

Description/Background: Marion County is currently involved in a Workers’ Compensation claim by Donna Borgioni who was employed with Marion County Sheriff’s department. The claimant’s date of accident was March 2, 1994. The claimant’s employment ended in 2005. A closed session was held on June 21, 2016 to discuss this settlement of $285,968. Defense Counsel Dana O. Taylor and Risk and Benefits Manager Sheri Wiley recommend this settlement, pending authorization by the Board of County Commissioners. Budget/Impact: Budget impact is $285,968 to be paid from the Workers’ Compensation self-insurance fund. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Workers’ Compensation settlement for Donna Borgioni in the amount of $285,968 inclusive of all benefits under workers’ compensation, attorney fees and cost, and to be paid from the Workers’ Compensation self-insurance fund.

7B3. Request Approval of Workers' Compensation Settlement; Trisha King The Board accepted the following recommendation to adopt Resolution 16-R-221, as presented by Chief Assistant County Attorney Taylor, Legal:

Description/Background: Marion County is currently involved in a Workers’ Compensation claim by Trisha King who was employed with Marion County Fire department. The claimant’s date of accident was July 2, 2015. The claimant’s employment ended in 2015. A closed session was held on June 21, 2016 to discuss this settlement of $83,250. Defense Counsel Dana Taylor and Risk and Benefits Manager Sheri Wiley recommend this settlement, pending authorization by the Board of County Commissioners. Budget/Impact: Budget impact is $83,250 to be paid from the Workers’ Compensation self-insurance fund. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Workers’ Compensation settlement for Trisha King in the amount of $83,250 inclusive of all benefits under workers’ compensation, attorney fees and cost, and to be paid from the Workers’ Compensation self-insurance fund.

7C. Building:

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 745

7C1. Request Approval of Amended Fee Resolution for Construction Fees (Budget Impact - Neutral) The Board considered the following recommendation as presented by Building Safety Director David Galassi:

Description/Background: Current Resolution 15-R-227 was approved by the BCC on July 6, 2015. In coordination with the Marion County Clerk of the Court’s Office, the Building Safety Department has agreed to offer customers the option of submitting Notices of Commencement (NOC) to the Permitting Office for processing rather than travel to the Clerk’s office downtown. A contractor vendor will be used to e-file the NOCs to the Clerk of the Court’s Office to be recorded and returned. This service will be provided for a $16 fee, which includes the $10 fee charged by the Clerk of the Court, the vendor’s $2 processing fee, and the Building Department’s fee of $4.This new administrative fee will be added to the current fee schedule. Budget/Impact: Neutral; amount charged will cover the Clerk’s and the vendor’s fees. The remaining amount will cover staffing expenses to facilitate this service to our customers. Recommended Action: Motion to approve request to amend fee resolution.

In response to Commissioner McClain, Building Safety Director David Galassi advised that the department was contacted by Chief Deputy of Administrative Services Jack Suess, Clerk’s Office, who presented the opportunity to improve customer service by offering customers the option of submitting their NOCs to be processed and recorded within the Permitting Office rather than traveling to the Clerk’s office downtown. He stated a third party vendor will be used to electronically file (e-file) the NOCs to the Clerk of the Court’s Office to be recorded and returned to the Building Department in approximately 10 minutes. Mr. Galassi clarified the Permitting Office will collect the fees, including the $10 fee charged by the Clerk of the Court, $2 vendor fee and a $4 processing fee for the Building Department for a total of $16 per NOC. Commissioner McClain questioned if Building Department staff is prepared to help homeowners/contractors with any questions relating to the NOC. Mr. Galassi stated that is correct. Commissioner McClain commented on the $4 processing fee for the Building Department and questioned how this process will increase the workload for Building Department staff. Mr. Galassi provided a brief overview of how the process will work and stated it will take approximately 20 minutes of staff time to process each NOC, noting there is also a vendor fee for customers utilizing a credit card for payment. Commissioner McClain opined that Building Department staff already performs most of those steps and expressed concern with charging customers a $4 processing fee. General discussion ensued. Chairman Bryant questioned when staff plans on implementing the new process. Mr. Galassi stated it should begin the first week in August, 2016. A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to adopt Resolution 16-R-222, as amended, modifying the fee schedules for construction permits, to reduce the fee for NOC’s to $12, plus the credit card charge if applicable. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 7D. Community Services:

July 19, 2016

Page 746, Book V

7D1. Request Approval of Third Amendment to Contract with Florida Housing Finance Corporation to Perform Advisor Services for the Hardest Hit Fund Program (Budget Impact - Revenue generating) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Community Services Director Cheryl Amey:

Description/Background: Community Services is an Advisory Agency for the Florida Housing Finance Corporation’s (FHFC) Hardest Hit Program and as such receives payments to perform services for this program, to include: reviewing applications and making eligibility determinations, facilitating closings and performing quarterly eligibility checks for those assisted. Since its inception in Sept. of 2007, this program has generated almost $100,000 in revenues. Revenues are used to offset costs in the department’s general revenue budget – 5220. Last year, the agency enacted a sliding payment scale for eligibility determinations paying between $100 to $500 for each eligibility determination based on completeness and accuracy of the package sent to FHFC for review. Community Services continues to be paid at the highest rate for all reviews submitted. Budget/Impact: Budget Impact - Revenue generating. Recommended Action: Motion to approve third amendment to contract with Florida Housing Finance Corporation as attached and authorize Chairman to execute.

7E. Development Review Committee: 7E1. Request Approval of Final Plat for Spruce Creek Plaza Subdivision, Application #18222 (Budget Impact - None) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Growth Services Director Sam Martsolf, on behalf of the Development Review Committee (DRC):

Description/Background: On July 11, 2016, the Development Review Committee approved the Final Plat for the Spruce Creek Plaza Subdivision, and it is recommended that the Board approves and authorizes execution by the Chair and the Clerk. This subdivision is located in the southeast portion of the County and contains 2 lots and 0 tracts on 16.18 acres with 0 miles of road. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the subject plat and to authorize the Chair and Clerk to execute the same.

7E2. Request Approval of Final Plat for Via Paradisus Phase IIIA Subdivision, Application #18715 (Budget Impact - None) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Growth Services Director Martsolf, on behalf of the DRC:

Description/Background: Pending approval at the July 18, 2016 Development Review Committee meeting, the Final Plat for the Via Paradisus Phase IIIA Subdivision is recommended for Board approval and authorization for execution by the Chair and the Clerk. This subdivision is located in the southeast portion of the County and contains 9 lots and 0 tracts on 78.59 acres with .96 miles of private road. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the subject plat and to authorize the Chair and Clerk to execute the same.

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 747

7E3. Request Approval of Final Plat for Villages of Marion Phillips Villas Subdivision, Application #18663 (Budget Impact - None) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Growth Services Director Martsolf, on behalf of the DRC:

Description/Background: Pending approval at the July 18, 2016 Development Review meeting, the Development Review Committee approved the Final Plat for the Villages of Marion Phillips Villas Subdivision and recommended for the Board approval and execution by the Chair and the Clerk. This subdivision is located in the southeast portion of the County and contains 165 lots and 14 tracts on 34.55 acres with 1.43 miles of private road. Approval is contingent upon approval of the improvement agreement located in the Transportation - Office of the County Engineer portion of this consent agenda. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the subject plat and to authorize the Chair and Clerk to execute the same.

7F. Facilities Management: 7F1. Request Approval of 09Q-013-PA-08 Project Closeout – Newton Recycling Center Rebuild/Contamination Assessment & Remediation - ACA Construction Group, LLC (Budget Impact - Reallocation of $450,000, leaving a balance of $2,507,383.06) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Facilities Management Director Andy Race:

Description/Background: On July 7, 2012 the Board approved the Newton Landfill Site Development Master Plan. A contamination assessment was completed, and the results confirmed the impact and necessity of the ongoing monitoring activities. Work began to remediate the old landfill for the purpose of rebuilding the Newton Recycling Center, providing drinking water for the center and the co-located Northwest Road Substation. On December 3, 2013 the Board approved a project amendment for ACA Construction Group, LLC, to perform the rebuild of the recycling center. Funding for this project was derived from funds as approved in the corresponding adopted line item and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budgets. This project was overseen by Facilities Management staff and was completed within the budget. A balance of $2,957,383.06 remains in the budget line item that was not part of the original scope or bid amount. A project closeout meeting was held on May 4, 2016, and it is staff’s recommendation that $450,000 of the balance from this Project Code #4230005, #401-4230-563102 be assigned between multiple Solid Waste CIP projects as follows: a new CIP Project called “Newton Contamination Remediation”, Project Code #4230030, for continued monitoring of the Newton site; and Project Code #4230027 – Citizen Drop off Facility at Baseline; with a balance of funds in the amount of $2,507,383.06, to remain in the lines where they currently reside. Attached is the project closeout paperwork for review. Budget/Impact: A total balance of $2,957,383.06 was turned back in from this project. Facilities Management Department recommends that $250,000 be assigned to a new CIP Project called “Newton Contamination Remediation”, Project Code #4230030; $200,000 be assigned to Project #4230027 – Citizens Convenience Center, and the balance of the funds in the amount of $2,507,383.06

July 19, 2016

Page 748, Book V

remain in the lines where they currently reside. All funds are to be in account #401-4230-563102. Recommended Action: Motion to approve reallocation of funds as listed above.

7G. Human Resources: 7G1. Request Approval of the Utilities Departmental Reorganization (Budget Impact - Neutral; expenditure of $70,419.87) The Board accepted the following recommendation to adopt Resolutions 16-R-223 and 16-R-224, as presented by Human Resources (HR) Director Amanda Tart:

Description/Background: The Utilities Director is requesting a reorganization to streamline the Utilities Department by adjusting roles and redistributing responsibilities. These changes will improve customer service, improve the backflow and cross connection control compliance, enhance execution of the Capital Improvement Program, and enhance the overall effectiveness of the department. Three (3) positions are proposed for reclassification as part of this overall department reorganization. This will more accurately match the duties of the three (3) positions to their job descriptions. The Utilities Director is also requesting salary adjustments of two (2) manager positions as part of the overall department reorganization to correct conflicts on functions and responsibilities, as bulleted below. Revising the salaries of the Utilities Customer Service Billing Manager and the Utilities Maintenance Manager to the 2015 American Waste Water Association Water Utility Compensation Survey median for those positions will help stabilize senior management within the Utilities department which has seen a turnover of 50% in the last seven months.

• Field services related to customer service requests, meter reading, and cross connection control will be moved from the maintenance division to the customer service division. This will allow for streamlining work orders related to customer services.

• Field preventive maintenance programs related to water mains, sewer mains, and lift stations will be moved from the operations division to the maintenance division. This will improve the sharing of resources among preventive maintenance and reactive maintenance crews.

Through attrition and open positions the Utilities Department has the funds within the personnel line items of each department to cover this additional cost for FY 15-16. For FY 16-17 this additional cost will be accounted for in the proposed budget. We respectfully request the approval of the Utilities departmental reorganization. Budget/Impact: Neutral; expenditure of $70,419.87 in the Utilities department budgets as allocated below:

Department # Expenditure 7130 $13,955.54 7145 $42,942.64 7160 $13,521.69

Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Utilities departmental reorganization, along with the attached resolutions and corresponding job descriptions and pay grades.

(Ed. Note: Resolution16-R-223 reclassified 1 Utilities Maintenance Mechanic IV position to a Field Services Supervisor position and 1 Utilities Maintenance Mechanic I position, a

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 749

vacant position, to a Backflow and Cross Connection Control Coordinator position within Utilities Department Budget #7145; and Resolution 16-R-224 reclassified 1 Staff Assistant III position, vacant, to a Project Coordinator I position within the Utilities Department Budget #7160.) 7G2. Request Approval of the Reclassification of Twenty-Two (22) EMT/Firefighter Positions, Pay Grade 401, to Twenty-Two (22) FF/EMT Trainee Positions, Pay Grade 401 (Budget Impact - None) The Board accepted the following recommendation to adopt Resolution 16-R-225, as presented by HR Director Tart:

Description/Background: In an effort to fill several vacancies within the Marion County Fire Rescue Department, the Fire Chief is revitalizing their non-certified firefighter recruiting program. The retention rates of the last non-certified class in 2007 are nothing short of impressive. To ensure the success of this program, the Fire Chief is requesting the reclassification of twenty-two (22) EMT/Firefighter positions to twenty-two (22) FF/EMT Trainee positions along with the corresponding job description and pay grade, within the Fire Rescue department budget #3355. Therefore, we respectfully request the approval of the reclassification of the twenty-two (22) EMT/Firefighter positions within the Marion County Fire Rescue department #3355. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the attached resolution for the reclassification of twenty-two (22) EMT/Firefighter positions, pay grade 401, to twenty-two (22) FF/EMT Trainee positions, pay grade 401, along with the corresponding job description and pay grade, within the Marion County Fire Rescue department budget #3355.

(Ed. Note: EMT is the acronym for Emergency Medical Technician and FF is the abbreviation for Firefighter.) 7H. MSTU: 7H1. Request Approval to Accept Petitions from Property Owners for Lake Weir Heights Subdivision Second Addition Replat, Plat Book Y, Page 013 (Budget Impact - None) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Acting MSTU Director Shawn Hubbuck:

Description/Background: Petitions were sent via certified return receipt mail within Lake Weir Heights Subdivision Second Addition Replat at the request of the property owners. Those petitions were returned to the Clerk of the Court Internal Audit Department which has provided the following results of the petition count: Total Property Owners Petitioned: 63 Total Owners Responding Timely: 32 Total Owners Responding in Favor: 19 (59.4 %) Total Owners Responding Not in Favor: 12 (37.5%) Total Owners Responding Invalid: 1 (3.1%) Percentage of Property Owners in Favor: 59.4% Budget/Impact: None; all costs associated with this proposed road assessment will be shared by the affected property owners within the project boundary.

July 19, 2016

Page 750, Book V

Recommended Action: Motion to accept the petitions and approve moving forward with the engineering design phase for the Lake Weir Heights Subdivision Second Addition Replat Road Improvement project.

7I. Parks and Recreation: 7I1. Request Adoption of Revised Fees Resolution (Budget Impact – Revenue generating) The Board considered the following recommendation as presented by Parks & Recreation Director/Landscape Architect Jim Couillard, PLA, ASLA:

Description/Background: At the May 18, 2016 Parks and Recreation Advisory Council meeting, the Council unanimously supported staff’s recommendations to update the Parks and Recreation Fee Resolution as mandated by Florida Statute 125.029 County park entrance fee discounts. This statute mandates that park entry fees be partially or fully discounted for:

1. Current members of the United States Armed Forces, their reserve components, or the National Guard.

2. Honorably discharged veterans. 3. Honorably discharged veterans who has service-connected disability. 4. A surviving spouse and parents of a deceased member of the United States

Armed Forces, their reserve components, or the National Guard, who died in the line of duty under combat-related conditions.

5. A surviving spouse and parents of a law enforcement officer, a firefighter, or an emergency medical technician or paramedic employed by a state or local government, who died in the line of duty.

These proposed changes to the attached fee resolution will provide the listed members with a 10-percent (10%) discount on Marion County resident park passes. Budget/Impact: Revenue generating. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the revised Fee Resolution as presented and authorize the Chairman and Clerk to execute the same.

Commissioner Zalak commented on the proposed Resolution and opined that an additional line needs to be added to address wounded combat veterans, noting he would prefer to see the county offer them a free park pass or at least a 50% to 75% discount option. General discussion ensued. Veterans Services Director Jeffrey Askew advised that there is a slight difference between a combat wounded veteran and a disabled veteran, noting a combat wounded veteran probably received the Purple Heart medal. Commissioner Zalak stated he would like to see a Purple Heart recipient receive a free park pass. It was the general consensus of the Board to concur. A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to adopt Resolution 16-R-226, as amended, to include a free park pass to all Purple Heart recipients. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). Resolution 16-R-226 is entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR COMMITMENT OF REVENUES, ESTABLISHING REVISED FEES FOR MARION COUNTY

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 751

PARKS, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 15-R-476, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

7J. Procurement Services: 7J1. Request Approval of Standardization: 16ST-171, InMotion Technology (Budget Impact - None) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Procurement Services Director Susan Olsen:

Description/Background: On behalf of Marion County Fire-Rescue (MCFR), Procurement requests the approval to standardize InMotion Technology for all onBoard Mobile Gateway (oMG) units. These units are used to quickly provide MCFR’s crews with critical information needed to respond more efficiently and effectively to emergency calls. Standardization will keep oMG units consistent throughout the fleet; 100% of all MCFR vehicles are equipped with InMotion units at this time. These units are purchased as they’re needed for new vehicles; however, single purchases exceeding $50,000 will be brought before the Board for approval. Currently, the only authorized distributor of the InMotion oMG units is Sierra Wireless America, Inc., however, it is not the intent to declare them a sole source as part of this standardization at this time. Budget/Impact: None; standardization carries no impact. Recommended Action: Motion to approve standardization of InMotion Technology.

7J2. Request Approval of Contract: 16Q-020, SW 49th Avenue Capacity Preliminary Engineering Report (PER), South Phase (from Marion Oaks Manor to Marion Oaks Trail) (Budget Impact - Neutral; expenditure of $160,867.19, as approved in FY 15/16 budget) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Procurement Services Director Olsen:

Description/Background: During the May 3, 2016 meeting, the Board authorized staff to enter into negotiations with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the South Phase (RFQ 16Q-020). Pending approval at today's meeting, the contract will be forwarded to the Engineer, and upon return of this signed contract and approval by Legal, it will be routed to the Clerk and Chairman for signatures. The firm may then begin work on the Preliminary Engineering Report (PER), which shall be completed within ten (10) months. Budget/Impact: Neutral; the cost to produce the PER is $160,867.19, as approved in the FY 15/16 budget. Recommended Action: Motion to approve recommendation and allow staff to issue contract, and upon approval by Legal, authorize the Chairman to execute contract with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the Preliminary Engineering Report for the South Phase of the SW 49th Avenue Capacity project under 16Q-020.

7J3. Request Approval of Bid Award: 16B-103, CR 200A Resurfacing Phase II - Art Walker Construction, Inc, Lowell, FL (Budget Impact - Neutral; expenditure of $1,629,000, as approved in FY 15/16 budget) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Procurement Services Director Olsen:

July 19, 2016

Page 752, Book V

Description/Background: On behalf of the County Engineer, Procurement advertised a bid for the resurfacing of CR 200A (NE Jacksonville Rd), including shoulder widening and stabilization from NE 35th St, north to SR 326. The subject bid opening was conducted by Bryan Matus, representing Procurement Services. The list below summarizes bids received:

COMPANY TOTAL BID Art Walker Construction - Lowell $ 1,629,000.00 Anderson Columbia Co., Inc. - Ocala $ 1,795,250.00 CW Roberts Contracting, Inc. - Ocala $ 1,944,873.00 DAB Constructors, Inc. - Inglis $ 2,414,444.44

The low bid is within the estimated budget of $1.8 million, attached for review is a draft of the contract. Pending approval at today’s meeting, it will be sent to the contractor for execution as written and upon return, will be forwarded to the County Attorney, Clerk of the Court, and Chairman for signatures. Budget/Impact: Neutral; project cost is $1,629,000. Recommended Action: Motion to approve recommendation and allow staff to issue contract, and upon approval by Legal, authorize the Chairman to execute contract with Art Walker Construction, Inc., the lowest responsive, responsible bidder for bid 16B-103.

7J4. Request Approval of Task Order for Prequalified Road/Right-of-Way/Drainage Contractor: 12Q-064-TO-07, SE 135th St. Quiet ZoneMarion South - Art Walker Construction, Inc, Ocala, FL (Budget Impact - Neutral; expenditure not to exceed $77,135, as approved in FY 15/16 budget) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Procurement Services Director Olsen:

Description/Background: During the January 10, 2012 meeting, the Board approved contracts with several contractors for various projects involving road, right-of-way, and drainage work. All firms were proposed a detailed task order to widen shoulders, install traffic separators, and hot mix asphalt (HMA) overlay at the railroad crossing on SE 135th St. between S US Hwy 301 and SE 80th Ave. The tabulation below summarizes the offers received:

Contractor Bid Amount Art Walker Construction, Inc. $ 77,135.00 Magnum Construction Solutions $ 85,343.33

County Engineer, Tracy Straub requests award to the low bidder. The bidding documents stand as the contractual obligation to perform the work, and only a purchase order (PO) will be issued. Completion of the project shall be within 45 days. Pending approval at today’s meeting, the PO will be entered and forwarded to the contractor, along with a start date. Budget/Impact: Neutral; the work under the base bid shall not exceed $77,135; up to 25% is being added for contingency to allow for railroad crossing flaggers. Recommended Action: Motion to approve task order award and allow staff to issue purchase order to Art Walker Construction, Inc. for 12Q-064-TO-07 for the SE 135th St. Quiet Zone Marion South project.

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 753

7J5. Request Approval of Bid Award: 16B-129 Rainbow Lakes Estates 2016 Road Improvement Project - CW Roberts Contracting, Inc., Ocala, FL (Budget Impact - Neutral; expenditure of $844,401.75, as approved in FY 15/16 budget) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Procurement Services Director Olsen:

Description/Background: On behalf of the MSTU/Assessments Department, a bid for approximately 5 miles of road improvements was advertised, and six (6) firms responded. The subject bid opening was conducted by Jenn Carpenter representing Procurement. The list below summarizes bids received:

Firm Name Bid Bid upon Scope

Reduction C.W. Roberts Contracting, Inc. – Ocala

$994,500.00 $844,401.75

V.E. Whitehurst & Sons, Inc. - Williston

$1,016,352.49

Pave-Rite, Inc. – Ocala $1,054,254.00 D.A.B. Constructors, Inc. - Inglis $1,092,444.44 Anderson Columbia Company, Inc. – Ocala

$1,109,900.00

John L Finch Contracting Corp - Summerfield

$1,225,656.11

CW Roberts Contracting, Inc.’s (CWR) low bid of $994,500 exceeds the construction estimate of $850,000. A reduction in scope to meet budgetary restrictions was completed by MSTU on June 27, 2016, reducing the amount of roadway to 4.17 miles, which decreased the low bid to $844,401.75. After a pre-award meeting to ensure the work is fully within the contractor’s understanding of the department’s scope and timeframe, it is MSTU Acting Director, Shawn Hubbuck’s recommendation that CWR be awarded the contract. Budget/Impact: Neutral; expenditure for the work under this project is $844,401.75 as approved in the FY 15/16 budget. Recommended Action: Motion to approve recommendation and allow staff to issue contract, and upon approval by Legal, authorize the Chairman to execute contract with CWR, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder for bid 16B-129.

7J6. Request Approval of Bid Award: 16B-145, Silver Springs Shores Unit 55 Stormwater Retrofit - Hartman Civil Construction Co., Inc. - Hernando, FL (Budget Impact - Neutral; expenditure of $293,720, as approved in FY 15/16 budget) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Procurement Services Director Olsen:

Description/Background: On behalf of the Office of the County Engineer, Procurement advertised a bid for a stormwater retrofit project in Silver Springs Shores for stormwater system improvements to include reshaping two dry retention areas (DRAs), placing “Bold and Gold” filtration media in the bottom of the DRAs and swale reconstruction. The bid opening was conducted by Shari Chinevere representing Procurement. County Engineer, Tracy Straub requests to contract with the low bidder based on the tabulation below:

FIRM NAME, CITY BID

July 19, 2016

Page 754, Book V

Hartman Civil Construction Co., Hernando $293,720.00 Craggs Construction Co., Ocala $331,723.59 Art Walker Construction, Ocala $358,558.58 Hamlet Underground, LLC, Ocala $361,138.80 GWP Construction, Ocala $362,951.10 Villages Construction, Inc., Leesburg $366,880.00

The low bid is below the estimated construction budget of $400,000, with all work to be substantially completed within 90 days. Attached for review is the draft contract; pending approval at today’s meeting, it will be sent to the contractor and upon return, will be forwarded to the County Attorney, Clerk of the Court and Board Chairman for signatures. Budget/Impact: Neutral; contract shall not exceed $293,720.00 as approved in the FY 15/16 budget. Recommended Action: Motion to approve recommendation and allow staff to issue contract, and upon approval by Legal, authorize the Chairman to execute contract with Hartman Civil Construction Co., Inc., for bid 16B-145.

7J7. Request Approval of Project Amendment for Pavement Repair and Resurfacing; 14B-169-PA-01, NE 97th Street Road – Asphalt Paving Systems, Inc., Zephyrhills, FL (Budget Impact – Neutral; expenditure not to exceed $352,538.80, as approved in FY 15/16 budget) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Procurement Services Director Olsen:

Description/Background: At the December 16, 2014 meeting, and on behalf of the Office of the County Engineer (OCE), the Board approved the award of bid 14B-169 to Asphalt Paving Systems, Inc. for Pavement Repair and Resurfacing. The contract provides unit pricing on common items and standard labor and equipment rates to be used on projects covering single sites or similar activities within close proximity. The contract specifies that all purchases exceeding $50,000 must be brought before the Board for approval. The Office of the County Engineer (OCE) is requesting approval of a Project Amendment in the amount of $352,538.80 for chip seal and micro-surfacing of NE 97th Street Road which includes spot paving, minor shoulder work, and the replacement of pavement markings under bid 14B-169. Budget/Impact: Neutral; project cost for this work shall not exceed $352,538.80 as approved under FY 15/16 transportation capital projects for Road and Drainage Repairs. Recommended Action: Motion to approve Project Amendment and upon review and approval from the County Attorney and execution by Clerk and Chairman, allow staff to issue purchase order to Asphalt Paving Systems, Inc. for NE 97th Street Road.

7K. Risk and Benefit Services: 7K1. Request Approval for the Renewal of the Medical Care Provider Services Agreement with Express Care of Ocala, Inc. (Budget Impact - Neutral; expenditure of $225,000, as proposed in the FY 2016/2017 budget) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by HR Director Tart:

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 755

Description/Background: Express Care of Ocala was chosen to provide Medical Care Provider Services last year as the result of Request for Proposal (RFP) #15P-085. Express Care provides occupational and non-occupational medical provider services including medical evaluations and treatment of injured workers, referral for specialty care, x-rays and imaging services, pre and post-offer employment physical exams, fitness for duty exams and also acts as the Medical Review Officer (MRO) for all urine drug screens performed. Express Care also provides the services of a Physician’s Assistant housed at the Employee Clinic. Human Resources, the Employee Clinic and Risk and Benefits Services work closely with Express Care and the Physician’s Assistant to review processes and procedures to ensure the most effective services are being provided to Marion County and its employees. This is the second year of a three-year rate guarantee; therefore, there is no increase to the current cost of $225,000 which has been included in the FY 2016/2017 proposed self-insurance budget. Budget Impact: Neutral; the renewal of the contract results in an expenditure of $225,000 and is included in the FY 2016/2017 proposed self-insurance budget. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Medical Care Provider Agreement with Express Care of Ocala, Inc. effective October 1, 2016, in the amount of $225,000, to be paid from the Self Insurance Fund.

7L. Transportation - County Engineer: 7L1. Request to Reject All Bids Received Associated with the Surplus Sale of Parcel #28420-005-00 and Approval of Setting a Minimum Bid Amount of $790,000 (Budget Impact - None) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by County Engineer Tracy Straub, PE, Office of the County Engineer (OCE):

Description/Background: This is a request to reject all bids received associated with the Surplus Sale of Parcel #28420-005-00 (former Withlacoochee Regional Office Building) located at 1241 SW 10th Street. Additionally, the Board is requested to set a minimum bid amount at the appraised value of $790,000. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to reject all bids received on the Surplus Sale of Parcel #28420-005-00 and set a minimum bid of $790,000.

7L2. Request Approval of Declaring Parcel #3285-015-001 as Surplus and Authorize Staff to Proceed with the Sale (Budget Impact - Revenue of $10,501) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by County Engineer Straub, OCE:

Description/Background: This is a request to declare Parcel #3285-015-001 as surplus and approve the Sale and Purchase Agreement and FS 125 Deed between Marion County and Daniel Thompson in the amount of $10,501 plus closing costs. This parcel was acquired as a Tax Deed and staff recommends approval of this Bid. Budget/Impact: Sale of Surplus Land - 000001 – 0001 - 36400022 - $10,501. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the request to declare Parcel #3285-015-001 as surplus, approve the Sale and Purchase Agreement and Deed and authorize the Chair and Clerk to execute the same.

July 19, 2016

Page 756, Book V

7L3. Request Approval of Improvement Agreement for Villages of Marion Phillips Villas Subdivision (Budget Impact - None) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by County Engineer Straub, OCE:

Description/Background: The County Attorney has reviewed and approved the Improvement Agreement with Pledge of Certificate of Deposit in the amount of $1,905,337.79. This subdivision is located in the southeast portion of the County and contains 165 lots and 14 tracts on 34.55 acres with 1.43 miles of private road. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the attached Improvement Agreement and to authorize the Chair and Clerk to execute the same.

7M. Utilities: 7M1. Request Approval to Refund Customer for Credit Issued to Account in June 2016 (Budget Impact - Refund of $1,497.41) The Board accepted the following recommendation as presented by Utilities Director Angel Roussel:

Description/Background: Marion County Utilities is requesting a customer refund due to inadvertently billing the customer for wastewater service. The customer was offered a credit towards future monthly water bills, but due to the low amount of the water bills the refund time would be lengthy and the customer prefers an immediate refund. Budget/Impact: Refund of $1,497.41 from 7130-549112 – Other Current Charges - Refunds. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the attached Refund Application and authorize Chair and Clerk to execute the same.

8. COUNTY ATTORNEY: 8A. Request Approval of the Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement between Bay Laurel Center Community Development District (CDD) and Marion County The Board considered the following recommendation from County Attorney Minter, Legal:

Description/Background: The Interlocal Agreement between Bay Laurel Center Community Development District (CDD) and Marion County was adopted on May 4, 2004. Among other things, this was adopted to authorize the CDD to provide water, wastewater, and reclaimed water services to developed areas within the On Top of the World (OTOW) Communities Utility Service Area. The proposed Amended and Restated agreement, attached hereto as Attachment 1, is a “clean-up” of the original agreement, providing a more detailed graphic of the service area, and provides a revised statement as to how the County can request a reservation of capacity from the CDD plant, to serve areas outside of the OTOW service area. A “mark-up” document is attached as Attachment 2 to indicate the revisions that are proposed. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the amended and restated Interlocal Agreement between Bay Laurel Center Community Development District and Marion County.

County Attorney Minter advised that the original Interlocal Agreement (ILA) between Bay Laurel CDD and Marion County was adopted in 2004, noting the main function of the

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 757

agreement is related to the provision of water, wastewater, and reclaimed water services to developed areas within OTOW utility service areas. This amendment enables them to provide their own utilities within that service area and provides a more detailed graphic of the service area. He noted a revised statement as to how the county can request a bulk utility agreement to utilize the CDD plant to serve areas outside of the OTOW service area is also included in the proposed agreement. A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Arnett, to approve and execute the Amended and Restated ILA between Bay Laurel Center CDD and Marion County. In response to Commissioner Zalak, Mr. Minter advised that the Amended and Restated ILA does not change the current service boundary. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). UPDATE: County Attorney Minter commented on an Ordinance recently adopted by Dade County relating to the marijuana issue, noting he will be bringing a report back to the Board at the next regularly scheduled BCC meeting. 9. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR: 9A. Request Approval for a Partial Release of Lien on Code Enforcement Case No. 461705-AL and 565471-GF (Budget Impact - None) The Board considered the following recommendation from Growth Services Director Martsolf:

Description/Background: A request for Code Enforcement lien recension was considered by the Board of County Commissioners at the May 17, 2016 meeting. The request was to rescind the lien against a property purchased by Mr. and Mrs. Robinson which was not the subject of the code case resulting in the lien, instead, it was “all other real property” under the ownership of the individual, Maryrose Colbert, responsible for the fines on another property. At this meeting, the Board voted unanimously to assess half the amount to each property. Mr. and Mrs. Robinson were not in attendance due to my office providing the incorrect date for the meeting. Mr. and Mrs. Robinson came before the Board on June 21, 2016 to request the Board reconsider their request and give them an opportunity to demonstrate the merit in their request. The Board agreed to reconsider and directed staff to place on the July 19, 2016 agenda. The total amount due for the lien on the case is $9,542.30. The Robinson’s purchased the property by Quit Claim deed and have cleaned up the overgrown property, as well as, cleaned and updated the home. They are requesting reconsideration of the original recommendation to grant a partial release of lien on their property only. A lien against parcel 2091-004-016, the source of the original and remaining violation, would remain in full force for the entire amount. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to grant a partial release of lien on their property only, a lien against parcel 2091-004-016, the source of the original and remaining violation, would remain in full force for the entire amount.

Mr. Martsolf advised that the request is for reconsideration of Board action at its May 17, 2016 meeting to distribute a code enforcement lien over 2 different properties owned by Maryrose Colbert. He stated Mr. and Mrs. Robinson purchased one of the parcels that was not the source of the code violation; however, the lien was split amongst the 2

July 19, 2016

Page 758, Book V

properties. Mr. Martsolf stated the Robinsons have provided receipts relating to the purchase of the parcel, back taxes, recording fees and repairs to the property. In response to Commissioner Zalak, Mr. Martsolf stated the lien was on the property prior to being sold to the Robinsons. A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to grant a partial release of lien on the Robinson’s property only, a lien against parcel 2091-004-016; however, the source of the original and remaining violation, will remain in full force for the entire amount. Chairman Bryant clarified that the entire lien will be placed on the other parcel. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). Commissioner Moore out at 11:11 a.m. 9B. Administrative Updates Public Information Officer (PIO), Elaine McClain, Office of Public Information, gave a brief overview of the latest County Connection newsletter and advised that those wishing to receive the newsletter can sign up on the county website at www.marioncountyfl.org, using the computer in the lobby or by contacting the Office of Public Information at PIO@marioncountyfl.org. Facilities Management Director Andy Race provided a brief update of 2 main projects the department is currently working on. He advised that staff is currently in Phase 1 of the bowling alley renovation project for the Veterans Service Center, noting demolition is 50% complete. Mr. Race stated the other project is the roping arena at the Southeastern Livestock Pavilion (SELP), noting the area has been cleared and 5 of the 20 pads that will support the steel beams have been poured. He noted the steel building is due to be delivered by July 28, 2016. Commissioner Moore returned at 11:13 a.m. 10. COMMITTEE ITEMS: 10A. Board of Adjustment - Request Acceptance of One (1) Resignation and Approval to Advertise for Vacancy Executive Assistant Nadja M. Griffis, Commissioners Office, presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: Mr. Peter Clark has submitted his resignation from the Board of Adjustment effective immediately. This will create a vacancy for an unexpired term ending May 2017. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to accept Mr. Clark’s resignation and approve advertising the vacancy for the unexpired term ending May 2017.

A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to accept the resignation of Peter Clark from the Board of Adjustment (BOA); execute the appropriate letter of appreciation; and advertise vacancy. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 10B. Industrial Development Authority - Request Approval to Advertise for Two (2) Full Members Executive Assistant Griffis, Commission Office, presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: There are two (2) upcoming vacancies on the Industrial Development Authority, with terms expiring the end of July, both applicants are

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 759

eligible for re-appointment though neither are seeking re-appointment. The new terms will expire July 2020. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve advertising of two (2) full members for full terms to the Industrial Development Authority, expiring July 2020.

A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to authorize advertising Industrial Development Authority (IDA) vacancies. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 10C. Land Development Regulation Commission - Request Approval to Advertise for Two (2) Full Members and One (1) Alternate Member Executive Assistant Griffis, Commission Office, presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: There are two upcoming vacancies on the Land Development Regulation Commission, with terms expiring at the end of July, both applicants are eligible for re-appointment, although only one has submitted an application. The new terms will expire July 2020. There is also a current vacancy as an alternate on this board, term expiring July 2020. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve advertising of two (2) full term members and one (1) alternate full term member to the Land Development Regulation Commission, all terms expiring July 2020.

A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to authorize advertising Land Development Regulation Commission (LDRC) vacancies. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 10D. License Review Board - Request Acceptance of Resignation and Approval to Advertise for Vacancy Executive Assistant Nadja M. Griffis, Commissioners Office, presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: Mr. Joseph Carrasco has submitted his resignation as a consumer member of the License Review Board. His term was set to expire in September 2019. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to accept the resignation of Mr. Carrasco and approval to advertise for the consumer vacancy with a term expiring in September 2019.

A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to accept the resignation of Joseph Carrasco from the License Review Board (LRB); execute the appropriate letter of appreciation; and advertise vacancy. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 10E. License Review Board - Request Appointment of Two (2) Alternate Members for Two Unexpired Terms Executive Assistant Griffis, Commissioners Office, presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: There are currently three open vacancies for alternate members of the License Review Board. These vacancies are not classified as

July 19, 2016

Page 760, Book V

contractor or consumer. We have had two applications by contractors for the Board, both would like to be considered as alternates. These two terms expire on September 2018 and October 2019. The two applicants are:

• Faustin Gallegos, roofing contractor – FNF Enterprises Inc. • Alan O’Cull, electrical contractor – O’Cull Electric, LLC

There are also two vacancies on the Board as full members (with the acceptance of the resignation today). Both of these vacancies must be “consumer roles”, and as such, neither applicant can be considered for them. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to appoint Mr. Gallegos and Mr. O’Cull to the License Review Board as alternates for vacancies expiring September 2018 and October 2019.

Clerk Ellspermann advised that the applicants received the appropriate votes. A motion was made by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Zalak, to appoint Faustin Gallegos and Alan O’Cull to serve as alternate members on the License Review Board (LRB). The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 10F. Marion County Hospital District Board of Trustees - Request Appointment of One (1) Full Trustee for a Full Term Executive Assistant Griffis, Commissioners Office, presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: David Cope has applied for re-appointment to the Marion County Hospital District Board of Trustees and Wade Smith has applied for a first appointment for a term ending June 30, 2020.

• David Cope, real estate – Cope Properties, Inc. (incumbent) • Wade C. Smith, Jr, retired – education/college professor

Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Request appointment of Mr. Cope or Dr. Smith to the board for a term ending June 30, 2020.

Clerk Ellspermann announced the results of the Commissioners’ ballots for the Marion County Hospital District Board of Trustees. A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to re-appoint David Cope to serve as a member on the Marion County Hospital District Board of Trustees. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 10G. Value Adjustment Board - Request Appointment of One (1) Member for Full Term Executive Assistant Griffis, Commissioners Office, presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: One application has been received for the 2016/2017 citizen member seat on the Value Adjustment Board. The applicant is an incumbent member seeking re-appointment.

• Paula Adams, certified public accountant Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to re-appoint Ms. Adams to the Value Adjustment Board.

Clerk Ellspermann advised that the applicant received the appropriate votes.

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 761

A motion was made by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to re-appoint Paula Adams to serve as the citizen member for the 2016 Value Adjustment Board (VAB). The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 11. NOTATION FOR ACTION: 11A. Request Approval to Reschedule the Tuesday, September 6, 2016 Board of County Commissioners Meeting to Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 9 a.m. County Administrator Bouyounes presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: The Labor Day holiday falls on Monday, September 5, 2016, and as such, the majority of the County offices will be closed. Currently the first regularly scheduled board meeting in September falls on Tuesday, September 6, 2016. In order to have adequate preparation time for this meeting, it is requested that this meeting be rescheduled to Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 9 a.m. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to reschedule the Tuesday, September 6, 2016 Board of County Commissioners Meeting to Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 9 a.m.

A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to reschedule the Tuesday, September 6, 2016 BCC Meeting to Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 9 a.m. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 11B. Request Approval to Schedule and Advertise a Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of a Final Assessment Resolution for Fire Services, Annual Rate Resolutions for Stormwater and Solid Waste and Certify Non-Ad Valorem Assessment roles for County-wide Fire, Stormwater and Solid Waste Assessment Rolls on Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. County Administrator Bouyounes presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: This is a request to schedule and advertise a Public Hearing to consider adoption of a final Assessment Resolution for Fire Services and annual rate Resolutions for Stormwater and Solid Waste. These rate resolutions are required to certify the Non-Ad Valorem assessment rolls for the County-wide Fire, Stormwater and Solid Waste assessments. These annual rate resolutions will need to be adopted on an annual basis and there are no proposed increase to the Stormwater and Solid Waste rates. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to schedule and advertise a public hearing to consider adoption of a final assessment resolution for fire services, annual rate resolutions for Stormwater and Solid Waste and certify non-ad valorem assessment rolls for County-wide Fire, Stormwater and Solid Waste assessments on Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 9:00 am.

A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to schedule a public hearing on Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. to consider adoption of a final assessment resolution for fire services, annual rate resolutions for Stormwater and Solid Waste and certify non-ad valorem assessment rolls for County-wide Fire, Stormwater and Solid Waste assessments. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0).

July 19, 2016

Page 762, Book V

11C. Request Approval of Letter to Stephanie C. Hodges, United States Department of Agriculture, in Support of Francis Marion Military Academy Seeking Loan for Purchase of Property in Marion County County Administrator Bouyounes presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: Mr. Charles deMenzes, Chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Francis Marion Military Academy, has requested a letter of support from the Marion County Commission in their pursuit of a federal loan to purchase property from the Associated Grocers of Florida. This property will be used for the Academy. The United States Department of Agriculture has required the Academy obtain a letter from the Board in support of their purchase. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve and authorize Chairman to execute a letter to Stephanie C. Hodges, United States Department of Agriculture, in support of Francis Marion Military Academy’s loan application for purchase of said property.

A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to approve and authorize execution of a letter to Stephanie C. Hodges, United States Department of Agriculture, in support of Francis Marion Military Academy’s loan application for purchase of property from Associated Grocers of Florida. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 11D. Request Ratification of a Letter Dated June 20, 2016 to Senator Charles Dean Requesting the Purchase of Parcel Adjacent to Paradise Spring to Aid in Springs Protection County Administrator Bouyounes presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: Due to time constraints the attached letter was sent out to Senator Dean on June 20, 2016. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to ratify the attached letter sent on June 20, 2016 to Senator Dean regarding the purchase of parcel adjacent to Paradise Spring to aid in springs protection.

A motion was made by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to ratify letter dated June 20, 2016 to Senator Dean regarding the purchase of parcel adjacent to Paradise Spring to aid in springs protection. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 11E. Request Ratification of a Letter Dated July 11, 2016 to St. Johns River Water Management District Governing Board Regarding the Acquisition of the Hart Trust Property in Marion County County Administrator Bouyounes presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: Due to time constraints and the deadline requirements for St. Johns River Water Management District the attached letter was sent out to Mr. John A. Miklos on July 11, 2016. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to ratify the attached letter sent on July 11, 2016 to the St. Johns River Water Management District regarding the acquisition of the Hart Trust Property in Marion County.

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 763

A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Zalak, to ratify letter dated July 11, 2016 to the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) regarding acquisition of the Hart Trust Property in Marion County. In response to Commissioner Zalak, Parks and Recreation Director Jim Couillard advised that this property is located on Highway 464C near Moss Bluff, noting the request was unanimously approved by the SJRWMD Governing Board on Tuesday, July 12, 2016. The closing on the property is scheduled for October, 2016. He stated the property contains a 187 acre parcel that will be set aside for wetland protection by the District and a portion will be set aside for the trail segment linking Silver Springs State Park to the Sunnyhill Conservation Area. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). WALK-ON: Request Approval to Schedule a Budget Workshop on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. County Administrator Bouyounes presented the following recommendation:

Description/Background: During the budget workshop on Monday, July 18, 2016 the Board consented to hold a workshop on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. Budget/Impact: None. Recommendation: Motion to schedule a budget workshop on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 2:00 p.m.

A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to consider the Walk-On item. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. There being none, Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Zalak, to schedule a budget workshop on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 12. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: 12A. Commission Comments 12A1. Commissioner Arnett - Request Consideration and Approval of One (1) Appointment to the Fire Rescue/EMS Advisory Council Commissioner Arnett advised that his appointee to the Fire Rescue/EMS Advisory Council Mr. Randy McVay has resigned and he has chosen Chad Christianson, CEO of Ocala Health System as his new appointee. A motion was made by Commissioner Arnett, seconded by Commissioner Zalak, to ratify the appointment of Chad Christianson to the Fire Rescue/EMS Advisory Council. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). Commissioner Zalak advised that he has nothing further to add today. Commissioner Moore commented on the attack on law enforcement officers in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, noting the BCC supports its law enforcement and public safety officers. He also extended condolences to the family of Phil Royal who recently passed away, noting Mr. Royal was running for Citrus County Sheriff. Commissioner McClain congratulated Chairman Bryant on being elected as the President of the Florida Association of Counties (FAC). Chairman Bryant advised that she has nothing further to add today.

July 19, 2016

Page 764, Book V

12B. Commission Calendar The Chairman acknowledged receipt of the Commission calendar covering the period of July 19, 2016 through August 5, 2016. 12C. Additional Public Comment: All members of the public wishing to speak during the “Additional Public Comment” portion of the agenda will be limited to two (2) minutes to make their request or presentation. If the request or matter requires investigation by County staff, the Chair will refer to staff for follow-up with the person making the request. Bruce Borders, S. Highway 441, High Springs, opined that Veterans Services Director Jeffrey Askew is one of the best Veterans Service Officers in the world, noting he is pleased that Mr. Askew received the Governor’s Veterans Service Award. Mr. Borders addressed the proposal for construction of a turnpike extension into Marion County and thanked Commissioner McClain for standing up for the community. He stated another meeting will be held on August 12, 2016 at the SELP and requested residents attend the meeting to object to the proposal, noting the project is estimated to cost $2.6 billion if approved. Mr. Borders thanked law enforcement, military personnel and other first responders for all they do for the community and their country. Henry Munoz, Marion Oaks Boulevard, thanked the BCC for accepting and listening those who object to government infringement. Virginia Gale, SW 39th Circle, expressed her concern for the bloodshed that is occurring throughout the nation. She commented on the importance of praying for law enforcement officers, first responders, and their families, noting all lives matter. 13. NOTATION FOR RECORD: For information and record, the Chairman acknowledged receipt of the following Notation for Record correspondence, items A through C from County Administrator Bouyounes, and items D and E from Clerk Ellspermann: 13A. County Administrator Informational Items: 13A1. Present Solid Waste Monthly Operation Report for April, May and June 2016 13A2. Present DRC Waiver Request LDC 2.16.1.B(10) - Family Division for the Eugene Poole Property Parcel #12316-000-02, Application #18804 13A3. Present Status of Establishing an Inventory List of County Owned Real Property Held in Fee Simple Appropriate for Affordable Housing 13A4. Present Ocala/Marion Chamber and Economic Partnership (CEP) Activity Report for June, Performance Matrix YTD 2016 and Marion County Quarterly Report (April through June 2016) 13A5. Present Activity Report for the Acceptance of Agricultural Manure and Stall Waste at the Baseline Landfill - June 2015 - June 2016 13A6. Present Building Safety Productivity Report for Month of June, 2016 13B. Present Walk-On Items From Previous BCC Meeting: NONE 13C. General Informational Items: 13C1. Marion County Health Department – For the Latest health news and information, Visit the Website at http://marion.floridahealth.gov/ 13D. Clerk of the Court:

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 765

13D1. Present Regular Report of Utilization for Reserve for Contingencies 13D2. Present Monthly Report for the Building Department Budget and Actual 13D3. Present Report No. 2016-06 Regarding MSTU Lake Weir Heights Subdivision Second Addition Replat Road Improvements Petition Count 13D4. Present Memorandum from David R. Ellspermann, Clerk of Circuit Court and Comptroller, Regarding the Filing of Ordinance 15-27 (Correcting Scriveners Error - Comprehensive Plan) with the Secretary of State's Office 13D5. Present Memorandum from David R. Ellspermann, Clerk of Circuit Court and Comptroller, Regarding the Filing of Ordinances 16-16 (2016 CIP Update to the CIE), 16-17 (Land Development Code), 16-18 (MSTU for Emergency Medical Transportation Services), 16-19 (EDFIG), 16-20 (EDIG) and 16-21 (Zoning) with the Secretary of State's Office 13D6. Present Report No. 2016-07 Regarding EDFIG Compliance Review of Ansafone Contact Centers, LLC. 13D7. Present the Acquisition or Disposition of Property Forms Authorizing Changes in Status, as Follows: 28876, 32655, 32798, 33536, 33728, 38614, 39423A, 40486, 43335, 43954, 44385, 44558, 45283, 45337, 45340, 45963, an Attached List from the Marion County Clerk of Court, an Attached List from Marion County Fire-Rescue 13D8. For the Month Ended June 2016, a List of Checks Drawn on Commission Accounts, Pursuant to Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes, are Located at the Following Website Address: http://www.marioncountyclerk.org/public/index.cfm?Pg+boardcheckregisters 13E. Present for information and record, minutes and notices received from the following committees and agencies: 13E1. Development Review Committee (DRC) - June 6, 13 and 20, 2016 13E2. Dog Classification Board - May 4, 2016 13E3. License Review Board (LRB) - May 10, 2016 13E4. Marion County Hospital District Board of Trustees (MCHD) - May 23, 2016 13E5. Marion Oaks MSTU Advisory Board (Recreation Services and Facilities) - May 10, 2016 13E6. Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) - June 1, 2016 13E7. Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) - For Minutes and Agendas, Visit the Website at http://www.WaterMatters.org 13E8. St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) - For Minutes and Agendas, Visit the Website at http://www.floridaswater.com 13E9. Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) - For Minutes and Agendas, Visit the Website at http://www.ocalafl.org/tpo 13E10. Withlacoochee Regional Water Supply Authority (WRWSA) - For Minutes and Agendas, Visit the Website at http://www.wrwsa.org There was a recess at 11:28 a.m. The meeting reconvened at 1:36 p.m. with all members present. Also present were Clerk Ellspermann, County Attorney Minter and County Administrator Bouyounes. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of our Country. 4. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS / GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES:

July 19, 2016

Page 766, Book V

4A. Marion County Sheriff, Emery Gainey - Request Approval to Apply for the 2016/2017 Florida Department of Law Enforcement Body Worn Camera Grant Chairman Bryant advised that before moving into the public hearing the BCC will address an item from the meeting earlier this morning. She noted that Sheriff Gainey was invited back this afternoon to clarify a few questions before approving this item. Commissioner Zalak stated he did not want to stop the grant process from moving forward, but did want somewhat of an agreement, as there are still some pieces of the puzzle that need to be put together. He noted from his perspective, he wants to know what they are entering into long-term with the Sheriff’s Office and what is entailed in the coming years, as well as on the court system side, even before the expenditure comes through; although it will help the county save money. Sheriff Emery Gainey, MCSO, commented on the grant solicitation, which recently came out and was reviewed by MCSO. A decision was then made to apply for the grant even though it specifically states that priority will be given to agencies with more than 500 sworn officers. MCSO clearly has well under 500 sworn officers so the chances of being awarded the grant are very slim; however, making an application is the right thing to do financially. It is the intent of MCSO to proceed with the grant application and if awarded then the Sheriff will have to make sure there are no planning issues, as these are dollars that can potentially reduce that liability. Sheriff Gainey addressed the body cameras and how they affect other partners (e.g., State Attorney, Public Defender and Clerk’s Office). He advised that he spoke with the prospective vendor, including their staff who specifically works with and handles the legal portion, as well as other staff members to verify that the cost presented to the Board last week includes 200 licenses for the State Attorney’s Office so that there will be no additional cost for downloading. Sheriff Gainey advised that copies of videos are currently being made and are then provided to the State Attorney’s Office. The only thing that will change is that the State Attorney’s Office will have the ability to sign on themselves and directly download those videos. The procedure changes, not necessarily the process and there will be no additional cost. The State Attorney’s Office will be able to email a link to the Public Defender or any defense attorney for them to download the video. In response to Chairman Bryant, Sheriff Gainey noted the video will likely be part of the case package, but the Clerk’s Office will also have the licenses to be able to download as needed. Of course, if one is storing the media then they will have the cost of a thumb drive or compact disc (CD), which for the most part may not be necessary as they will always have access to the Cloud. Commissioner Zalak inquired if there are people within MCSO who will have to go through the video and process it. Mr. Gainey concurred, noting they are doing that today. He noted the State Attorney’s Office, as well as defense attorneys will want to review the videos, which is done today, it will just be a different storage capacity that will be simpler. In response to Commissioner Zalak, Sheriff Gainey advised that he does not anticipate needing additional staff early on to review the videos. Commissioner Zalak questioned whether the Sheriff is okay with holding off on the purchases (not the grant application) until the County Administrator can bring back a total cost analysis. Sheriff Gainey stated his problem is getting this done in the current fiscal year and giving the manufacturer enough time to deliver the equipment onsite as required by law, which is about an 8 week window. He noted he has about 2 weeks to make that decision, but beyond that they run the risk of not being able to execute the contract for this fiscal year.

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 767

In response to Commissioner Zalak, Sheriff Gainey advised that the contract proposed can be done from current year funding and is the $273,000 as addressed. The grant funding will run past October 1, 2016; however, it is a multi-year process. He opined that any particular grant funds for future years will be able to be addressed. Commissioner Zalak noted the Sheriff is talking about the regular purchase of all the body cameras the department wants to purchase today. He inquired if MCSO is already moving forward with the purchase of body cameras. Sheriff Gainey stated that is correct. Commissioner Zalak advised that is where his consternation is at, noting the BCC does not yet have a full plan and if MCSO moves forward to purchase the body cameras and the Board approves the item then it is saying yes to all of the other opportunities that may come. He noted staffing levels and office space needs may increase. The costs are greater than just the cost of buying body cameras. Commissioner Zalak stated this is his only issue, noting they are going down this road, but is unsure as to how those costs will be handled. He advised that those costs are certainly not in this budget year. Sheriff Gainey stated when looking at this from the standpoint of technology, there is clearly no additional costs; however, more staff time may be required, which is dependent upon the total number of videos. He noted no significant cost factor was seen 10 to 15 years ago when going to car videos, as current staff members were reassigned to review the video. Sheriff Gainey advised that for MCSO in particular, current in-house staff will review the videos, noting he did not ask for additional staff. He stated the department is comfortable that this is very doable and frankly, as a law enforcement agency they will have more video since not all videos will make it to the State Attorney’s Office or defense attorney levels. Chairman Bryant commented on the fact that the video does not have to be downloaded and stored since it is available right from the Cloud. People can get what they need and send it over the different agencies, which will make a huge difference. Chairman Bryant advised that she does not think this will create a lot of extra staff. Clerk Ellspermann stated once the video is entered into the court then the Clerk’s Office will take possession or release the link. Chairman Bryant opined that it will be like any other records the Clerk’s Office has to handle. Clerk Ellspermann concurred. Sheriff Gainey clarified that staff is not looking at 12 hours of video related to 1 particular case. While they may have a whole day’s worth (shift worth) of video, oftentimes individuals are looking at that portion of a video only related to their case, which should be a minimum amount of time to review the video. Commissioner McClain noted the challenge is if the BCC makes a decision about this today, then we as the Board, are committing to whatever the cost is in the future. He stated the difficultly is that all this is speculation, which is part of the problem. The Public Defender is saying he may have to hire another 5 to 7 people to review all the video in order to defend clients. The Public Defender’s Office is statutorily required to store their portion of whatever video portions they might use. Sheriff Gainey opined that the statutory requirements will be on MCSO, since they are the ones who will produce the video to the primary agency, which does not prevent them from storing the video. Commissioner Zalak stated the grant portion of this is not an issue at this time so it can be moved forward and the Sheriff can give the Board two weeks to consider the bigger package. He asked if the rollover monies will be on the next agenda to fund the body cameras. Sheriff Gainey advised that those dollars are in the current budget, noting rollover monies would be talking about future years. He clarified that the money is in the current budget so that he can move forward this fiscal year. Commissioner Zalak noted

July 19, 2016

Page 768, Book V

they are yearend dollars that the department wants to move forward to purchase the body cameras. Sheriff Gainey concurred. Commissioner McClain inquired if the money is all in 1 budget. Support Services Bureau Chief Jerry Holland, MCSO, advised that it will not occur until yearend. Sheriff Gainey stated the money is in the Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU) for Law Enforcement since these are patrol officers, noting the body cameras will not be deployed to everyone within the agency. Commissioner Zalak clarified that the money is in the MSTU budget and yearend funds will be used. Sheriff Gainey concurred, noting it is yearend, unspent funds, in this current budget. Commissioner Zalak inquired as to when the money will actually be spent. Sheriff Gainey advised that his goal is to have this in place before the end of the fiscal year and are shooting for the first week in September; conceivably, within the next 4 to 5 weeks. Commissioner McClain inquired if any fund transfer will be required and asked if the $1.7 million is sitting in Reserve for Contingencies. Chief Holland stated funds will probably have to be transferred from salaries, noting the money is coming from vacant salaries into Operating. Commissioner Zalak reiterated that the grant funding can be moved ahead and the County Administrator can bring back a report to compile all the different cost factors (whether building, technology, etc.) and future obligations within the next few weeks. He stated Chief Holland can work with the County Administrator to bring back future obligations, noting the $1.7 million is for the first 3 years, but what will it be afterward in regard to anticipated costs into the future. Sheriff Gainey advised that the contract is a year-by-year contract, which clearly states it is contingent upon available funding. He stated even if the body cameras are purchased from current yearend dollars or next year’s (2016-17) budget; and if funds are not available then the contract is null and void. Sheriff Gainey noted neither he nor the Commissioners have committed to anything beyond a year-by-year contract. Commissioner Zalak opined that the problem is that once body cameras are deployed then they are telling the public that body cameras have been deployed. Everyone knows that once deployed the body cameras will not go away regardless of whether or not that contract is cancelled for a different one. Sheriff Gainey advised that he totally agreed, but based on what is occurring in this country today is exactly why the body cameras need to be deployed. He realized that this also needs to be looked at fiscally as well and understands that it is the totality of the circumstances; however, we are living in a time that we do not know how to not use body cameras. A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Arnett, to apply for the 2016-17 FDLE Body Worn Camera Grant. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). There was a recess at 1:54 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 2:08 p.m. with all members present. Also present were: Growth Services Director Sam Martsolf, Development Review Coordinator Jon Harvey, Senior Planners Chris Rison and Kimberleigh (Kim) Dinkins, Planner II Natalia Cox, Strategic Resources Project Manager Kevin Smith, Administrative Staff Assistant Stephanie Soucey, Staff Assistant Kate Jane, County Attorney Matthew G. Minter and County Administrator Mounir Bouyounes.

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 769

14. PLANNING & ZONING AND DRC WAIVER REQUESTS (AT 2:00PM): Deputy Clerk Bonvissuto advised that there are several Proofs of Publication to be presented for this afternoons meeting. The first Proof of Publication is No. A000892013 entitled, “Notice of Intention to Consider Adoption of an Ordinance” published in the Star Banner newspaper on July 5, 2016. The Notice stated the Board will consider adopting an ordinance approving zoning changes and Special Use Permits. The second Proof of Publication is No. A000892079 entitled, “Notice of Public Hearing”, published in the Star Banner newspaper on July 9, 2016. The Notice stated the Board will consider a request from Southeast 73rd Avenue, LLC to terminate a Developer’s Agreement regarding Parcel No. 48347-000-00, currently proposed for development as the Heritage Oaks Village Planned Unit Development (PUD). The final Proof of Publication is a display ad entitled, “Notice of Public Hearing”, published in the Star Banner newspaper on July 9, 2016. The Notice stated the Board will consider Comprehensive Plan Amendments 16-L02 (14B5), 16-03 (14B7) and 16-L04 (Item 14B3), Large Scale Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendments. Chairman Bryant explained the process for today’s zoning hearings. She advised that the Consent Agenda Items will be addressed first, noting 4 items (Items 14A2, 14A5, 14A8 and 14A10) have been requested to be pulled for separate consideration after the balance of the Consent Agenda is considered. The individual Planning and Zoning (P&Z) items will then be considered. Staff will make a presentation on each individual item, followed by the applicant’s presentation and then the floor will be open to public comments. Public comment will be closed after everyone wishing to do so has an opportunity to speak. The applicant will then have an opportunity to respond to comments or any questions the Board may have. The Board will then come back for deliberation. As a courtesy to others, Chairman Bryant asked that those in attendance silence cell phones and/or other electronic devices before entering the auditorium. Those needing to take a call are asked to step out into the lobby. To encourage participation today, as well as to ensure equal access to all participant and foster mutual respect it is asked that those present refrain from clapping after individual speakers and any heckling. She noted the agenda today is large and in order to keep things running smoothly and be effective the proceedings will be stopped, at which time the meeting will be in recess; and the auditorium will be cleared if the audience becomes out of control. The public is asked to keep their comments to 2 minutes. There is a timer on each podium; the green light will stay on for 1-1/2 minutes, the yellow light is an indication that 30 seconds remains and time is up when the red light appears. Speakers are asked to state their name and address for the record when they reach the podium, as well as refrain from making sales pitches or personal remarks directed at Commissioners and to focus on specific issues. 14A. Planning and Zoning Consent Items: Eleven (11) petitions listed on the consent agenda are recommended for approval by both the Planning Division and the Planning & Zoning (P&Z) Commission to be acted on in one motion, as follows:

ITEM

NUMBER OWNER FROM – TO ACREAGE

Vote #1 1 160701Z Glen M. Lambert A-1 to B-4 3.33

July 19, 2016

Page 770, Book V

2 160702SU Hasty Greene Inv. Inc. Renewal of Special Use Permit in B-4

0.73

3 160703Z John S. Rudnianyn A-1 to B-2 1.29 4 160704SU Buck Sales and Leasing Inc. Special Use Permit in B-2 1.77 5 160705SU Daniel R. Craig Special Use Permit in B-4 2.51 6 160707Z Jo-Mar 17 LLC. M-1 to M-2 10

7 160708SU Church of the Springs Renewal of Special Use Permit in A-1

67.5

8 160709Z Kathryn Kaufman R-1 to PUD 39.67 Vote #2

9 160710SU Sleepy Creek Lands LLC. Special Use Permit in A-1 640 10 160711Z Ocala Meadows Farm Ltd. Modification of PUD 661.87

11 160712SU Stan Salser, SHS Properties LLC.

Special Use Permit in A-1, B-1, B-5 and R-1

59.61

PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Vote #1 Motion was made by Mr. Colen, seconded by Mr. Lourenco, to agree with staff’s findings and recommendation, and recommend approval of the following Consent Agenda items (160701Z, 160702SU, 160703Z, 160704SU, 160705SU, 160707Z, 160708SU and 160709Z), based on the following findings of fact: 1. Will not adversely affect the public interest 2. Are consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan 3. Are compatible with the surrounding land uses Motion passed 5 to 0. Vote #2 Motion was made by Mr. Colen, seconded by Mr. Lourenco, to agree with staff’s findings and recommendation, and recommend approval of the following Consent Agenda items (160710SU, 160711Z and 160712SU), based on the following findings of fact: 1. Will not adversely affect the public interest 2. Are consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan 3. Are compatible with the surrounding land uses 160710SU – Condition #7 was revised 7. Prior to beginning operations, the applicant will provide a reasonable groundwater monitoring plan for ongoing operations to ensure that discharge nitrogen concentrations are not exceeded. Groundwater monitoring will also be included. Motion passed 4 to 0 with Mr. Bailey abstaining due to a conflict of interest with all 3 items.

Chairman Bryant advised that following 4 Items have been removed from the Consent Agenda: 14A2, 14A5, 14A8 and 14A10. Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. There being none, Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. Commissioner McClain commented on Item 14A7, application by the Church of the Springs, to renew its Special Use Permit. He noted the 5-Year timeframe and questioned whether it is reasonable to let that be an Administrative approval. It was the general consensus of the Board to concur. A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to approve consent agenda items 14A1, 14A3, 14A4, 14A6, 14A7 (as amended), 14A9 and

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 771

14A11, agreeing with the Growth Services Department staff and the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the proposed uses are compatible with the surrounding land uses, are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not adversely affect the public interest. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). The motion approved the consent agenda items as follows: 14A1. 160701Z - Glenn M. Lambert, A-1 to B-4, 3.33 Acres The Board granted a petition by Glenn M Lambert (owner) / Chris Howson (applicant), 451 SW 165th Street, Ocala, FL 34473, for a Zoning Change, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, from A-1 to B-4 on approximately 3.33 acres of Parcel Account No. 41579-000-00. 14A3. 160703Z - John S. Rudnianyn, A-1 to B-2, 1.29 Acres The Board granted a petition by John S. Rudnianyn, TR (owner/applicant), 2441 NE 3rd Street, Suite 201, Ocala, FL, for a Zoning Change, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, from A-1 to B-2 in an A-1 zone on approximately 1.29 acres of 38.56 acres of Parcel Account No. 35695-025-04. 14A4. 160704SU - Buck Sales and Leasing Inc., Special Use Permit in B-2, 1.77 Acres The Board adopted Resolution 16-R-227 granting a petition by Buck Sales and Leasing Inc. (owner) / Michael E. Counts (applicant), P.O. Box 4698, Ocala, FL, for a Special Use Permit, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, to allow additional storage for adjacent B-5 Business. “Buck Sales and Leasing, Inc.”, in a B-2 zone on approximately 1.77 acres of Parcel Account No. 13872-000-00. Resolution 16-R-227 contained the following Conditions:

1. A conceptual plan addressing the items in the remaining conditions shall be approved by the Growth Services Department prior to the use of this Special Use Permit. Services showing the location of the proposed outdoor storage.

2. To screen nearby residential uses, a “B” type buffer consisting of a 15 foot wide landscape strip with a 6 foot tall buffer wall or opaque fence shall be required.

3. The special use permit shall run with Buck Sales and Leasing, Inc./Michael E. Counts and not with the property.

4. The Special Use Permit shall expire July 19, 2019. The applicant may submit a new Special Use Application for consideration to review and extend this permit in the future.

14A6. 160707Z - Jo-Mar 17 LLC, M-1 to M-2, 10 Acres The Board granted a petition by Jo-Mar 17, LLC (owner) / W. James Gooding, Esquire (applicant), 186 NW 68th Avenue, Ocala, FL, for a Zoning Change, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, from M-1 to M-2 on approximately 10 acres of 16.47 acres of Parcel Account No. 23188-001-04 14A7. 160708SU - Church of the Springs, Renewal of Special Use Permit in A-1, 67.5 Acres The Board adopted Resolution 16-R-228 granting a petition by Church at the Springs/ Michael Ferguson (owner/applicant), 5424 SE 58th Avenue, Ocala, FL, for a Renewal of Special Use Permit 100804SU (10-R-326), Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land

July 19, 2016

Page 772, Book V

Development Code, to allow a Pre-K school and day care in an existing church in an A-1 zone on approximately 66.65 acres of Parcel Account No. 35800-008-01. Resolution 16-R-228 contained the following Conditions, as amended:

1. The site shall be developed and operated consistent with the submitted conceptual plan and the conditions as provided with this approval.

2. Use of the site shall be limited to the church and church related activities, the pre-K school (VPK) and daycare. A private school use (K-12) is NOT approved for this site.

3. The pre-K school and daycare operations shall be limited to a maximum of 129 students and shall be located in the existing on-site facilities as indicated on the submitted conceptual plan. Any increase in the number of students or physical school or daycare facilities will require obtaining a new/revised Special Use Permit.

4. The Special Use Permit shall run with the church and not with the property. 5. The Special Use Permit shall terminate upon any division or subdivision of

the land. 6. The Special Use Permit shall expire on July 19, 2021; however, it may be

renewed administratively for up to two consecutive 5-year periods, not to exceed July 19, 2031, by a. There have been unresolved violations of the County Land

Development Code, the County Code of Ordinances, and/or the conditions of the Permit,

b. Neighboring property owners within 300’ of the subject property have complained to the County Code Enforcement, Zoning, or equivalent/ similar Departments/Divisions about the uses of the subject property by this Permit, or

c. The Growth Services Director determines that renewal should be considered directly by the Board of County Commissioners through the Special Use Permit review process (or review process equivalent at that time).

d. The applicant may submit a new Special Use Permit application for consideration to renew and extend this permit in the future.

14A9. 160709Z/2007-L06 - Termination of Southeast 73rd Ave. Developer's Agreement (Kaufman) Kathryn Kaufman, 73rd Avenue LLC, P.O. Box 4394, Ocala, FL, for a Zoning Change, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, from R-1 to PUD on approximately 39.67 acres of Parcel Account No. 48347-000-00. The Board approved the following recommendation from Growth Services Director Samuel Martsolf:

Description/Background: The Board of County Commissioners approved Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2007-L06 (Amendment) along with a corresponding Developer’s Agreement (Agreement) for a Medium Residential future land use designation on a series of parcels owned by the Southeast 73rd Avenue, LLC (Owner). The Agreement sets a residential dwelling unit cap for the site, along with a series of design and development requirements. In support of that land use amendment, a rezoning to R-1 was obtained in 2010, subsequently, no other development applications or activity occurred in regards to the site until

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 773

the Owner submitted a recent Rezoning Application (20160709Z) to establish a PUD on the site. The proposed PUD exceeds the maximum number of units authorized by the Agreement. Since the time of the Agreement’s approval, Marion County updated the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code (Plan and Code) to functionally incorporate the Agreement’s other design and development requirements for all development projects, essentially negating the need to itemize those requirements in a separate Agreement. The remaining issue for the proposed PUD is it exceeds the Agreement’s dwelling unit cap. The PUD’s proposed total number of dwelling units is consistent with the future land use designation, and, if approved, any increase in the number of dwelling units in the PUD would require reconsideration by the Board. Staff has recommended approval of the PROPOSED PUD and recommends termination of the existing Developer’s Agreement subject to the approval of the PUD request scheduled to be considered concurrently with this request. Budget/Impact: None. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the attached Developer’s Agreement Termination and authorize the Chairman to execute the Agreement.

14A11. 160711Z - Ocala Meadows Farm Ltd., Modification of PUD, 661.87 Acres The Board granted a petition by Ocala Meadows Farms Ltd., 940 NW 75th Street, Ocala, FL, for a Zoning Change, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, from PUD to PUD for modification of existing residential subdivision on approximately 661.87 acres of Parcel Account Nos. 14699-001-00, 14606-002-00, 14605-002-00 and 14699-000-07. 14A2. 160702SU - Hasty Greene Inv. Inc., Renewal of Special Use Permit in B-4, .73 Acres The Board considered a petition by Hasty Greene Investment, Inc. (owner) / Mitalben Patel (applicant), P.O. Box 1956, Ocala, FL, for a Renewal of Special Use Permit 140408SU (14-R-230), Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, to allow package liquor sales for off premise consumption within 500 feet of a public park in an B-4 zone on approximately 0.73 acres of Parcel Account No. 09529-002-01. Growth Services Director Sam Martsolf commented on the Special Use Permit renewal request for a packaged liquor store for off premise consumption at the intersection of CR 318 and CR 315, in Ft. McCoy. The packaged liquor store occupies one of the end units in the plaza. The original Special Use Permit (Resolution 14-R-230) was approved in April of 2014 and is being renewed in anticipation of next year’s sunset of the Special Use Permit. He advised that he spoke to Mr. Patel earlier today, who indicated there are no changes or expansions to the operation. The reason for the Special Use Permit is because the subject site is within 500 feet of Cougar Park, to the southwest; as well as property belonging to the Ft. McCoy Church of God, to the north; and a little over 700 feet from the First Baptist Church of Ft. McCoy, to the west. A petition from the Ft. McCoy Church of God was received by staff and presented to the Deputy Clerk for the record. Both Growth Services Department staff and the P&Z Commission recommends approval of the Special Use Permit with the following Conditions:

July 19, 2016

Page 774, Book V

1. This Special Use Permit shall run with Mitalben Patel, lessee of a unit or units in the commercial building on the subject property, and not with the property or any subsequent tenants of the unit.

2. Liquor sales shall be limited to the hours of 10:00 AM to 9:00 PM, Monday through Thursday, and 10:00 AM to 10:00 PM, Fridays and Saturdays. No liquor sales will be allowed on Sundays.

3. The Special Use Permit shall expire on July 19, 2021. The applicant may submit a new Special Use Permit application for consideration to renew and extend this permit in the future.

Commissioner Zalak inquired as to police reports or incidents due to the Special Use Permit. Mr. Martsolf advised that he is aware of no such incidents or reports, nor have there been any Code Enforcement violations. Commissioner Moore asked if the First Baptist Church of Ft. McCoy had any objections. Mr. Martsolf advised that the church is outside of the notification area, but no letters or objection were received. The applicant was present and advised from his seat in the audience that he has nothing further to add at this time. Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. There being none, Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. A motion was made by Commissioner McClain, seconded by Commissioner Zalak, to adopt Resolution 16-R-229 granting the Special Use Permit with Conditions 1 through 3, agreeing with Growth Services staff and the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not adversely affect the public interest. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 14A5. 160705SU - Daniel R. Craig, Special Use Permit in B-4, 2.51 Acres The Board considered a petition by Daniel R. Craig (owner) / Keith A. Craig (applicant), 15800 E. Highway 40, Silver Springs, FL, for a Special Use Permit, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, to allow yard sales on Friday’s, Saturday’s and Sunday’s in a B-4 zone on approximately 2.51 acres of Parcel Account No. 3239-005-000. Planner II Natalia Cox, Growth Services, commented on the Special Use Permit request to allow yard sales on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays in a B-4 (Regional Business) zone. The subject property is located at the southwest corner at the intersection of East Highway 40 and South Highway 314A, within the Country Corner Plaza First Replat Sudivision. The applicant has requested to conduct yard sales on the weekends from 7a.m. to 6p.m. with a maximum of 10 vendors. Current access is proposed off of East Highway 314A via the 2 existing driveways. Both Growth Services Department staff and the P&Z Commission recommends approval of the Special Use Permit with the following Conditions:

1. The site shall be developed and operated consistent with the submitted conceptual plan and the conditions as provided with this approval.

2. Ingress shall be via E. Hwy 314A via the two existing driveways. 3. The days and hours of operation for the yard sale shall be limited to Friday,

Saturday, and Sunday from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm.

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 775

4. The yard sale setup area shall be limited to the northwestern portion of the site, as depicted in the submitted conceptual plan, it shall be limited to the sale of household items.

5. No new permanent structures shall be erected or established on the subject property to conduct the yard sale (e.g., vendor booths, etc.). All vendor related booths and materials shall be cleared and removed from the site and not stored or maintained on the property at any time other than the authorized days and hours of operation established consistent with Condition #3.

6. The yard sale operation shall comply with the requirements of the Florida Department of Health (DOH) regarding restroom facilities. The existing onsite ±1,423 SF building may be used to provide restrooms, if acceptable to DOH, however no yard sale operations shall occur within said building (e.g., food preparation, food service, sales, etc.).

7. The existing natural vegetative buffer located on the western and southern boundaries shall remain.

8. The Special Use Permit shall run with the owner, Daniel Craig, and not the property.

9. The Special Use Permit shall expire July 19th, 2019. The applicant may submit a new Special Use Permit Application for consideration to renew and extend this permit in the future.

Ms. Cox noted this item was pulled from the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Zalak questioned the setup and breakdown of the yard sales, noting the need to ensure that no materials are left behind or stored on the subject site. Ms. Cox advised that Condition No. 5 addresses that issue. She noted the yard sale is limited to the northwestern portion of the property and has restroom facilities within the existing real estate office on premises. Ms. Cox advised that this activity occurred in the past and they were cited by Code Enforcement, which resulted in the Special Use Permit request. Commissioner McClain noted this is in a commercial B-4 zone and inquired if the nature of the yard sale is the reason for requesting a Special Use Permit. Ms. Cox concurred, noting B-4 requires a Special Use Permit because of the outside vending. Commissioner Zalak inquired as to other issues aside from the Code Enforcement violation. Ms. Cox stated the Code Enforcement issue occurred in 2008 and was also closed in 2008. She noted an anonymous call was received in opposition. The applicant was present and advised from his seat in the audience that he has nothing further to add at this time. Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. There being none, Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Arnett, to adopt Resolution 16-R-230 granting the Special Use Permit with Conditions 1 through 9, agreeing with Growth Services staff and the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not adversely affect the public interest. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 14A8. 160709Z - Kathryn Kaufman, R-1 to PUD, 39.67 Acres The Board considered a petition by Kathryn Kaufman, 73rd Avenue, LLC (owner) / Shannon Stewart, Rogers Engineering (applicant), P.O. Box 4394, Ocala, FL, for a

July 19, 2016

Page 776, Book V

Zoning Change, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, from R-1 to PUD on approximately 39.67 acres of Parcel Account No. 48347-000-00. Planner II Natalie Cox, Growth Services commented on the Zoning Change from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to PUD (Planned Unit Development), which is located approximately 670 feet north of SE Highway 42 and on the east side of SE 73rd Avenue across the street from St. Mark The Evangelist Roman Catholic Community Church. She referred to the conceptual plan (shown on the screen), noting the applicant is looking to have 130 buildable, single-family residential units with an average size of 65 feet wide by 125 feet deep. Open space and passive recreation are on 3 tracts (A, B and C) for a total of 1.42 acres. Central water and sewer will be provided by Marion County Utilities (MCU). Buffering will be provided along the southern boundary, 2 drainage retention areas (DRAs) and a gated entrance/emergency access are also shown on the conceptual plan. Also considered was an Amendment to an existing Developer’s Agreement, as that agreement allowed up to 100 lots and the proposal is for 130. Ms. Cox noted this item was also pulled from the Consent Agenda. She clarified that the Developer’s Agreement is being terminated, not amended. In response to Commissioner Zalak, Ms. Cox advised that this is the preliminary conceptual plan and the only thing being considered is the zoning change from R-1 to PUD at this point due to the discrepancy in the number of units. Commissioner Zalak inquired if the PUD will be brought back before the Board. Ms. Cox stated that can be part of the Board’s direction. Commissioner Zalak advised that he wants to make sure that the PUD comes back to the Board. Fred Roberts, SE 11th Avenue, attorney, representing the applicant, developer and property owner, appeared to answer any questions. He noted the property was limited to 100 units pursuant to the Developer’s Agreement and is currently proposed at 130 units; however, 160 units would normally be allowed under the R-1 zoning. The Developer’s Agreement is being terminated and the PUD Plan as presented is a little more detailed than one might see prior to the Master Plan coming back, but is not the final detail plan, which will be coming back very quickly. He stated the Preliminary Plat Master Plan will come back next and is subject to approval; and finally the Improvement Plan once it is done. Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. Gene Couture, SE 73rd Avenue, Summerfield, questioned what will occur with the roads and improvements. He noted when the church has services they have patrols for those exiting on the road. Chairman Bryant advised that a traffic study will have to be conducted and any improvements deemed as necessary will have to be made. Leo Couture, SE 73rd Avenue, Summerfield, commented on the bad condition of the road, as well as traffic issues. Chairman Bryant reiterated that the Developer will have to conduct a traffic study for the PUD and any improvements deemed necessary will have to be completed. Commissioner Zalak inquired as to what road is being addressed. Mr. Couture stated he is referring to SE 73rd Avenue, which already has a lot of traffic with large farm equipment and heavy vehicles. Commissioner Zalak questioned whether road improvements are anticipated. Mr. Bouyounes stated road improvements are not anticipated on SE 73rd Avenue, noting the Developer’s Agreement with Ecklestone was to do some improvement, but that development never materialized. He advised that it is an old 2-lane, slag type road. Chairman Bryant noted access to the development will be off SE 73rd Avenue. Mr. Roberts

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 777

stated the Code requires a traffic study and if improvements are required they will be part of the Master Plan prior to the Improvement Plan. He advised that in reality, no improvements are anticipated as 130 units is relatively nominal and will not be triggered from this phase of the development; although future development of the adjacent property that has already been zoned PUD improvements are likely as it is a much more significant piece. Commissioner Zalak clarified that the traffic study would have to show a capacity limitation, not whether the street is in bad condition, which he opined is a problem. Mr. Roberts stated he misunderstood the comment and clarified that the developer will be required to address capacity issues. In response to Chairman Bryant, Mr. Bouyounes opined that SE 73rd Avenue is not on the 5-year plan for resurfacing. He stated staff will have to look at that with the development going in that area. Mr. Bouyounes stated the only thing substandard on this road is probably the rights-of-way (ROW) and asked if the applicant is willing to dedicate some additional ROW. Staff will look at the 5-Year Plan to see how they can fit this project in to have resurfaced and improved to support the additional traffic. Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Arnett, to approve the Zoning Change from R-1 to PUD, agreeing with the Growth Services staff and the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding land uses, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not adversely affect the public interest. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). The Deputy Clerk received an 11x17 Conceptual Plan prepared by Rogers Engineering, LLC, via email. 14A10. 160710SU - Sleepy Creek Lands LLC, Special Use Permit in A-1, 640 Acres The Board considered a petition by Sleepy Creek Lands, LLC, in care of (c/o) Adena Springs South (owner) / W. James Gooding III, Esquire (applicant), 15045 NW 141st Court, Williston, FL, for a Special Use Permit, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, to allow modifications to square footages as previously approved (14-R-551), in an A-1 zone on approximately 1,611 acres of Parcel Account No. 04728-001-01. Senior Planner II Natalia Cox, Growth Services, commented on the Special Use Permit request to modify an existing Special Use Permit (Resolution 14-R-551) to increase the square footages of previously approved facilities by a maximum of 119,605 square feet and to calculate the square footage collectively instead of building-by-building. These additions are proposed to the food processing, pet food production and the harvesting facility buildings. Of course, the owner, Sleepy Creek Lands, LLC, also known as (a/k/a) Adena Springs South has an existing facility. She referred to the conceptual plan (found in the Agenda packet) and addressed the proposed expansions. Additions are proposed to the food processing building, which includes cooking and is labeled as #1 on the Concept Plan, for a modification of up 25,325 square feet. The harvesting facility and pet food production buildings are also being expanded. The existing hot house is also being expanded, as is the wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) expansion with treated effluent disposal system. Both Growth Services Department staff and the P&Z Commission recommends approval of the Special Use Permit with the following Conditions:

July 19, 2016

Page 778, Book V

1. This Special Use Permit amends and supplements (a) the Special Use Permit (the “Original Permit”) approved pursuant to Marion County Resolution No. 11-R-422 on October 18, 2011 which allowed the development of a cattle harvesting facility and supporting uses (collectively the “Original Permitted Uses”) on the property that is the subject of this Special Use Permit; and (b) the Special Use Permit (the “First Amendment to it”) approved pursuant to Marion County Resolution No. 14-R-551 on October 21, 2014, which allowed development of food processing and pet food production facilities (collectively the “Amended Permitted Uses”) on such property.

2. This Special Use Permit ( a)revises the sizes of the facilities that may be constructed pursuant to the Original Permit and the First Amended Permit (collectively the “Existing Permits”) and (b) clarifies that treated wastewater effluent may be disposed of in spray fields outside of the areas subject to the Existing Permits.

3. The modified and/or expanded facilities include: food processing (includes cooking), pet food production, two harvesting facility building expansions, W.W.T.F. building expansion, water plant building expansion, domestic septic tank and drainfield addition, parking/pavement expansion, and additions/expansions to ancillary structures and supporting site infrastructure.

4. The site shall be developed and operated consistent with the Current Permits, the “Site Plan” submitted in connection with this Special Use Permit (the “Revised Site Plan”), and the conditions as provided with this approval.

5. The square footage of the improvements (other than stormwater retention areas) may not exceed a maximum of 130% of the collective square footages of the proposed improvements depicted on the Revised Site Plan.

6. Any wastewater effluent, treated as required by the Existing Permits, may be disposed of on real property owned by the owner of the property subject to Existing Permits outside of the area in which the Permitted Uses are allowed.

7. Prior to beginning operations, the applicant will provide a reasonable groundwater monitoring plan for ongoing operations to ensure that discharge nitrogen concentrations are not exceeded. Groundwater monitoring will also be included.

8. This Special Use Permit amends and supplements the Existing Permits. Except as expressly set forth herein, the Existing Permits are not amended or modified.

9. This Special Use Permit shall run with the property. Ms. Cox advised that according to the applicant, the business has been quite successful and requires expansion of several of the facilities, which will not occur today or tomorrow, but are asking for what they consider important expansions and modifications for the ongoing use of the facilities and to support the harvesting facility to come collectively before the Board. She noted this item was also pulled from the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Moore inquired as to any environmental impacts this will present. Ms. Cox advised that staff has no specific information and is the reason for including the monitoring of the nitrogen levels in the Conditions. She noted the owner is looking to responsibly dispose of water on their own property and opined that the applicant will provide more

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 779

information. Jimmy Gooding, SE 36th Avenue, attorney, representing the owner, noting their engineers are present to answer any technical questions. He advised that the only potential environmental impact is that they are using their water through reuse, which is the reason for the Condition for a groundwater monitoring plan to ensure they do not exceed the required nitrogen level. Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. Fred Kahn, NE 199th Street Road, Ft. McCoy, commented on information he received regarding this request, which he opined is very vague. He noted the harvesting facility was originally for cows and asked if it includes chickens and hogs. In response to Mr. Kahn, Chairman Bryant advised that a Special Use Permit is required for withdrawal of water for bottling. She clarified that chickens are harvested at another facility, not on the subject site. Ms. Cox noted she spoke with Mr. Kahn at length in her office and advised that the applicant indicated that the ancillary facilities are supportive structures for the harvesting facility. Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. Mr. Gooding confirmed that this is just for cows. A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to adopt Resolution 16-R-231 granting the Special Use Permit with Conditions 1 through 9, agreeing with Growth Services staff and the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not adversely affect the public interest. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). Chairman Bryant advised that this concludes the Consent Agenda portion and those who are here today for that portion may leave at this time to make seats available. 14B. Planning and Zoning Items for Individual Consideration: Chairman Bryant stated the Board will now go into the individual items for consideration. Mr. Minter stated, as a general comment for members of the audience and those who are here to oppose any of the applications. As to the items that the Board is dealing with in regard to a rezoning or a Special Use Permit, which are considered court type proceedings (quasi-judicial proceedings) and the important thing to know is when stating an objection it is not sufficient to just say, “I don’t like it”. What the Board needs to hear is the specific concern; such as: a concern with a road or environmental issue. The Board can deal with those types of comments, but to just say a number are opposed to it, legally has no bearing on the decision the Board has to make. Speakers need to state the specifics of their concerns. Chairman Bryant reiterated that a number of people have signed up to speak on various items today and advised that everyone will have an opportunity to address the Board; those who signed up will be called first, followed by anyone else wishing to speak. Once again, she asked that the audience refrain from making personal comments, remarks or attacks on Commissioners, applicants or others. Chairman Bryant stated comments should focus on facts, noting each person will have 2 minutes to speak. She also asked that conversations and applause be kept down between speakers. Chairman Bryant noted this is in an attempt to be able to move through the agenda and give everyone an opportunity to speak. 14B1. 160508SU - Angele Manoogian, Special Use Permit in B-2, 7.23 Acres

July 19, 2016

Page 780, Book V

The Board considered a petition by Angele Manoogian (owner/applicant), 6151 SE 59th Avenue, Ocala, FL, for a Special Use Permit, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, for outside storage of vehicles and equipment in a B-2 zone on approximately 7.23 acres of Parcel Account No. 9018-0000-01.

WRITTEN OPPOSITION WITHIN 300 FEET: 4 of 61 = 7%. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Motion was made by Mr. Lord, seconded by Mr. Lourenco to agree with staff’s findings and recommendation, and recommend approval based on the following findings of fact: 1. Will not adversely affect the public interest. 2. Is consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. 3. Is compatible with the surrounding land uses. The motion passed 6 to 0 (Azim Saju arrived at 5:45 PM) Condition # 4 changed to expire on July 19, 2019.

Growth Services Director Sam Martsolf commented on the Special Use Permit request for the outside parking of commercial vehicles in a B-2 zone on a 7 acre site across South Baseline Road from Church of the Springs and the Marion County solid waste facility. A surplus open piece of property on the southeastern corner of the property, which has been screened with an opaque screening shade cloth and the applicant wishes to store allowed commercial vehicles (construction equipment) for up to 3 years. He noted 61 property owners were notified and 4 letters of opposition were received, which is the reason this matter is before the Board today; however, no one appeared at the P&Z Commission meeting to speak. Both Growth Services Department staff and the P&Z Commission recommends approval of the Special Use Permit with the following Conditions:

1. Commercial vehicle and equipment parking is limited to approximately 2 acres in the SE corner of the parcel, as depicted on the submitted site plan.

2. A minimum 6ft high, opaque buffer will be provided along the north, east and south property boundary and will be maintained for the duration of the special use permit.

3. Ingress and egress is limited to one location. Presently, this is the County-permitted driveway at Dogwood Rd. Any change to the location of the driveway will require coordination and approval through the Office of the County Engineer.

4. The Special Use Permit shall expire July 19, 2019. R. Manoogian, SE 58th Avenue, applicant, was present and stated he has nothing further to add at this time, unless there are any questions. Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. There being none, Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to adopt Resolution 16-R-232 granting the Special Use Permit with Conditions 1 through 4, agreeing with Growth Services staff and the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not adversely affect the public interest. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 14B2. 160706SU - Joe C. Brown, Trustee, Special Use Permit in M-1, 4.18 Acres The Board considered a petition by Joe C. Brown-Trustee (owner) / Robert L. Rogers (applicant), P.O. Box 2407, Belleview, FL, for a Special Use Permit, Articles 2 and 4, of

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 781

the Marion County Land Development Code, to allow the installation and operation of a waste water treatment facility on approximately 4.18 acres of 35.39 acres of Parcel Account No. 38510-001-00.

PERCENT WRITTEN OPPOSITION WITHIN 300 FEET: 4 of 26 = 15%. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Motion was made by Mr. Lord, seconded by Mr. Lourenco, to agree with staff’s findings and recommendation, and recommend denial based on the following findings of fact: 1. Will adversely affect the public interest. 2. Is not consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. 3. Is not compatible with the surrounding land uses. The motion passed 6 to 0.

Senior Planner Kim Dinkins, Growth Services, commented on the Special Use Permit request for a septage treatment facility. The site is located west of Highway 484 across from the jurisdictional area of Belleview, about 1/4 mile north of the public library. The site is currently vacant, but was previously used as a limerock mine. The future land use designation is medium density residential and the zoning is a blend of A-1 (General Agriculture) and M-1 (Light Industrial). The intent of the request is that septage will be hauled to the site in pumper trucks; material will be chemically or physically dewatered and the wastewater will be pumped or hauled to a treatment plant; and the solids will transported to a composting facility or private vendor. No disposal of the material will occur onsite. Septage from septic tanks or Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems (OSTDS) is defined in the Code as residuals; and composting or treating of residuals is allowed by Special Use Permit in most of the Industrial and Agricultural zoning classifications. Additionally, wastewater treatment facilities are allowed in any zoning classification. The project is being pursued due to rule changes at the state level that require the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to permit all septage and bio-solid disposal sites. Although non-operational since 1992, this is a relic limerock mine as previously discussed. Some of the other staff findings are that the current zoning classifications are inconsistent with the designated future land use designation. The surrounding area is comprised of a variety of uses (i.e., business, churches, residences and vacant lands). Neighbors expressed concerns at the P&Z Commission meeting about odor and traffic. Staff is concerned about impacts to the neighboring community and ultimate disposal of the residual materials. Both Growth Services Department staff and the P&Z Commission recommends denial of the Special Use Permit. If the Board grants the Special Use Permit, staff recommended the following Alternate Approval Conditions:

1. The site shall be developed in accordance with the submitted conceptual plan, except that no portion of the septage treatment process may be placed within 100’ of any property boundary and the site is limited to Block 81 Lot 14 of the Town of Belleview.

2. The maximum daily treatment is limited to 40,000 gallons. 3. This special use permit limits the facility to a total of 100,000 gallons of total

capacity which includes 40,000 gal/day process (average monthly rate), 40,000 gal of secondary storage and 20,000 gal finished water.

4. All processing and storage tanks must be double lined and above ground for easy inspection and leak detection.

5. Raw solids and process sludge must be removed from the site within 5 business days of processing.

July 19, 2016

Page 782, Book V

6. A minimum 100ft vegetated buffer must be maintained between the process area and adjacent properties.

7. The portions of the process area that includes the pumper truck connection to the holding tank and residual storage and handling must be completely enclosed, and the applicant must employ adequate odor scrubbers, filtration or similar methods to control odor from emitting offsite.

8. The applicant will submit water quality monitoring reports to Marion County Growth Services, consistent with Sec. 6.16.3F (5).

9. This special use permit will be repealed if the applicant is unable to obtain necessary DEP permits for wastewater treatment and disposal within 365 days of issuance.

10. Provided that necessary DEP permits are obtained and maintained, this special use permit is valid until June 21, 2021. At that time, an administrative extension may be granted, based on compliance with conditions 1-8.

11. This special use permit will be issued to Michael Wicker, who intends to purchase the property for the purpose of a septage treatment facility. In the event that Michael Wicker does not purchase the property, or if any division of the land occurs, this Special Use Permit shall terminate.

Ms. Dinkins referred to a site plan submitted by the engineer and commented on the area to be designated as the subject site. Bob Rogers, Rogers Engineering, Inc., consulting engineer, SE 3rd Avenue, noted the applicant, Joe Brown, sold the property to Michael Wicker. He stated there are 3 things people do not want in their neighborhoods or county: 1) prisons; 2) landfills; and 3) wastewater facilities. This is not a wastewater facility, it is a dewatering facility, but it does treat wastewater. There are 2 types of wastewater treatment facilities: 1) anaerobic process; and 2) aerobic process. The anaerobic process is septic tanks and drain fields. The aerobic process needs air whereas the anaerobic process is void of air. Over time the septic tank will eventually clog and will require pumping in order to recharge. The aerobic wastewater treatment plants do smell, as they are exposed to the atmosphere. Anything over 5,000 gallons is required to have a DEP approved wastewater plant. Recently the Department of Health (DOH) ruled that septic tanks can be pumped out to be taken to a process, which is put into a tank where lime is added to run the pH level (potential of Hydrogen) up to 12.0 and hold it for 4 hours before pumping out to spread over the field. Tanks were not required to be lined or above ground. As of July 1, 2016 the State of Florida requires a different process and allowed individuals to make an extension. Mr. Rogers stated as he understands it now, Marion County has 6 facilities that are still operating and received extensions from the state. All inert materials that are not broken down by bacterial decomposition are able to be pumped out and spread over the field for those types of facilities. The amount of treatment to wastewater by running the pH level up to 12.0, which kills all bacteria, but everything else is spread over the field and is why the State of Florida addressed the issue. The second process that the State of Florida is now allowing is the process (aerobic) being addressed at this time for a dewatering facility. The request proposes to bring in material from septic tanks that are pumped for discharge of the contents over a screen to catch all inert materials that will not break down by bacterial decomposition to be discharged into above ground tanks to avoid groundwater contamination. A pumper truck holds about 4,000 gallons of material and a normal septic tank holds about 900 gallons. The proposed facility will have 4, 10,000 gallon tanks. The applicant is asking for 40,000 gallons per day capacity. Another

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 783

4, 10,000 gallon tanks will be installed in the event of electrical or equipment failure to provide a days’ worth of supply as backup so that the facility can continue to operate. The tank that is stored has no added pH, nor has it been affected whatsoever, is pumped through a polymer system and then to a centrifuge. A Centrifuge rapidly rotates where the liquid leaves, but the solids remain, which is piped to an enclosed facility where it is hauled off and made into fertilizer. The liquid that is discharged is held in another tank and is ultimately pumped to a regional wastewater facility. In this particular case, the City of Belleview’s Wastewater Treatment Plant. DEP requirements must be met before the material can touch Mother Earth. The subject site will separate solids from liquids, then sending the liquids to the City of Belleview and taking the solids for disposal in either the landfill or by a process where it can be made into something else. The total size of the facility is about 1.5 acres and is located within a 4.71 acre parcel zoned M-1. The facility is placed in a location that will provide the maximum distance from neighbors, as the major objection will be odor. Mr. Rogers noted staff’s major concern is groundwater contamination, which he opines they can handle with the above ground tanks, piping through the tanks that is pumped to a facility. He opined that the odor situation can be handled in a two-fold processes: 1) exposed to atmosphere when discharged from the truck onto the screen of a 3-sided, enclosed building with charcoal filters to draw the smell for further filtering; and 2) when the solids are separating from the liquid to be put into another tank for hauling to be made into fertilizer. Mr. Rogers commented on the abandoned limerock pit, noting the future potential of development is not economically feasible. The buffer of trees will be retained as the limerock pits do not need to be filled. The proposal does not include using the entire 35 acres for 1 facility. He noted the City of Belleview has written a letter and the intent is to annex the property into the City of Belleview. Chairman Bryant noted the letter from the City of Belleview was in opposition to the project. Mr. Rogers concurred, noting the city expressed the same concerns (i.e., odor, groundwater pollution and what is going on around the area). He commented on a meeting with Belleview, noting they did not have an opportunity to have a hearing before the City of Belleview to explain what they are doing. Chairman Bryant noted the City of Belleview letter states their concerns. The city has envisioned development of this corridor to include uses such as retail stores, restaurants, and future residential. The proposed industrial use will be incompatible with the current surrounding area, which includes a church, single family homes and the county library, as well as the anticipated future uses. Mr. Rogers noted the city is talking about 1 potential use, noting they did not plan on tying up the entire 35 acres. He opined that this facility will not be a detriment to future development. Commissioner Zalak inquired as to a capacity issue at this point, noting the facilities within the county have plenty of capacity to take care of these issues. In response to Mr. Rogers, Commissioner Zalak advised that he is talking about the huge facility at American Pipe & Tank, not wastewater treatment plants. Mr. Rogers stated there are currently 6 facilities. Mr. Bouyounes noted that last time they checked American Pipe & Tank has capacity, as well as 3 other facilities adjacent to Marion County that are accepting that material. Commissioner Zalak stated the Utility Department already prepared an analysis that says there is ample capacity. Mr. Rogers noted this is one of 6 facilities located off Baseline Road and as of July, 2017, it cannot be done as it is being done today (land applications). Commissioner Zalak advised that he is talking about facilities that are not using land

July 19, 2016

Page 784, Book V

applications. Mr. Bouyounes clarified that sewage is taken and some treatment is added before it is transported to a treatment facility. General discussion ensued. Mr. Rogers noted the concern is costs. Commissioner Zalak stated there is no need to locate more facilities in Marion County than is needed. Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. Ronnie Sheffield, Marion Pumpers, SE CR 484, Belleview, commented on the cost efficiency. The normal charge to pump septic tanks is $0.18 per gallon and rounding up to a 1,000 gallon tank will be $180. It will cost about $0.11 per gallon extra to haul the material, which will have to be added to the $0.18 per gallon. Commissioner Zalak inquired as to how much someone will be charged to dump the material at the new proposed facility. Mr. Sheffield opined that he can save his customers a minimum of $0.06 per gallon. In response to Commissioner McClain, Mr. Rogers stated the City of Belleview has capacity at their facility, noting they have a 750,000 gallon capacity plant with 380,000 gallons. He commented on the impact fee to hookup to the City of Belleview, which is about $400,000. Mr. Rogers noted he met with Belleview Mayor Christine Dobkowski and Fred Landt, City Attorney, but not with staff. Caroline Guary, SE 53rd Court, Belleview, addressed her concerns with regard to expansion and suggested going to an industrial area. Deborah James, SE 53rd Court, Belleview, owner of Diverse Realty Group where she is also a Broker, noting her concerns are with real estate. Phil Schmidt, SE 130th Place, Belleview, voiced his concern with spills and odors. He opined this is not the appropriate place for the facility. John Lorito, SE Highway 464, Belleview, noted the applicant is going through precautions, which means there is a possibility of danger. He stated there are a number of schools, a nursing home and a nearby college, which are his concerns. The facility is on the 2-lane road; although there may be a need in the future, but in another location. Tim McCormick, SE 130th Street, Belleview, advised that he lives about 3/4 mile (as the crow flies) away from the facility and has no problem whatsoever with this facility. Joe Lunardelli, SE 41st Terrace, Belleview, voiced his concerns with his real estate values and odors. Gene Lagassee, SE 134th Street, Belleview, noted his objection initially is that he was notified of this by a neighbor who found the notice in the grass. He stated he objected due to property values. Joy Macaluso, SE 130th Place, Belleview, voiced her opposition due to the impact of property values and odors. She opined there is a better location rather than near a library, day care and 2 churches. Ed Smith, SE 127th Place, Belleview, opined that he may be the closest resident to the proposed facility and is opposed to the Special Use Permit. He requested that it not be in his backyard because of the smell, property values and truck traffic, noting this is not a done deal with the City of Belleview. Luci Southard, SE 53rd Court, Belleview, advised that her concerns are the same as Mr. Smith’s; the smells, location and traffic on Highway 484. She stated this should not be in their backyard. Milton Hames, SE 53rd Court, Belleview, noted he has 3 concerns: 1) traffic; contamination in the open aquifer; and 3) the City of Belleview not accepting the wastewater (per newspaper article).

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 785

Daniel H. Osborne, SW 148th Place Road, noted this is a very divisive issue. It is not the individuals that are willing to pay an additional cost that is being addressed, but rather households where the median income is between $32,000 and $45,000 a year. Those are the people who are hardest hit when there are additional charges of $60 to $110 for a service that done appropriately is every 3 to 5 years. He commented on the cost/benefit analysis, which should be contingent upon the health of springs and rivers. Tim James, SE 53rd Court, Belleview, stated this is a human waste facility and commented on letters from the Belleview Mayor and Commission. He questioned whether the Board received the petition, phone calls and emails from residents in opposition to the proposal. Chairman Bryant advised that the Board has received everything that was submitted to this office. Darol Eby, SE 47th Court, Belleview, noted his objection to the proposal is several fold. He does not object to paying an extra $110 to have his septic tank pumped, but does object to a loss in value to his property, as well as the quality of his lifestyle from odors. Peggy Sheffield, SE 130th Street, Belleview, stated she can see where everyone is coming from, but wants the pumping costs to stay down. Edison Sheffield, SE 130th Street, Belleview, advised that he supports the Special Use Permit and opined that the odor can be controlled. He stated he believes this will be needed in the near future. Carol Crowley, SE 49th Court, Belleview, voiced her opposition to the facility being located in their neighborhood and truck traffic. John Oral Blackmon, SE 150th Street, Summerfield, stated putting this facility in an area where so many people will be affected is the wrong thing to do and urged the Board to deny the request. Don Browning, SE 158th Lane, Weirsdale, stated for full transparency, he is a candidate running for office on the BCC, as well as an investor in Marion County and Belleview. He opined that this is not the correct place for this type of facility and should be addressed with the Legislature, as this is a new requirement. David Moore, SE Highway 464, Ocklawaha, did not appear when called to speak. Debbee Smith, SE 127th Place, Belleview, presented a copy of an article that appeared in the Voice of South Marion on June 30, 2016 entitled, City Commission Opposes Treatment Plant”. Janet Bunn, SE 145th Avenue, Belleview, voiced her opposition to the proposal due to odors, which will curtail their lifestyle, as well as declining property values. Carolyn Richardson, SE 48th Terrace, Belleview, stated this proposal should never have come about as it is too close to residential areas. She voiced her concerns with property values, groundwater, odors and traffic. Gary Young, SE 130th Place, Belleview, voiced his opposition as there has not been much information about it and opined that it should come under the public health and sanitary nuisance. The facility will also give out pollutants, gases and odors. Don Studley, SE 87th Place, Ocklawaha, advised that he is a real estate developer and commented on the nearby church, school, burial ground, concert pavilion and an outdoor market. In response to Mr. Studley, Chairman Bryant advised that Commissioner McClain represents this District, noting he has served this community for 12 years and will be losing him to the House of Representatives in November, 2016. Paul Thornton, SE 94th Avenue, Belleview, stated he heard during the P&Z Commission meeting that the solids would be covered with a pole barn type system and would be

July 19, 2016

Page 786, Book V

transported to the landfill within 5 days. Chairman Bryant noted those are alternate conditions upon approval, as presented by staff. She clarified that staff is recommending denial, but offered alternate conditions should the Board approve the Special Use Permit request. Mr. Thornton noted the proposed facility is less than 10 miles from American Pipe & Tank and suggested this be put in an industrial complex on the northeast side of Marion County. Don Goolsby, SE 53rd Terrace Road, Belleview, addressed his reasons for opposing the proposal since his family owns land nearby that at some point should be a nice up-scaled subdivision. He stated a waste facility like this across the road could be a real detriment to that development, due to odors and traffic. Mr. Goolsby opined that this is not a suitable location and urged the Board to deny the request. Scott Jewell, SE 49th Court, Belleview, advised that he is an environment specialist for the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Department of Justice, noting federal prisons bring communities, not chase them away. Federal prisons also regulate their waste, chemicals and have spill preventions in place. He questioned whether a waste analysis has been done. Charleen Lagassee, SE 134th Street, Belleview, advised that she is a chemist by trade and understands the process that was spoken of, which is probably new technology coming this way and may be something that needs to be investigated; however, it should be in an area that is more industrial in nature. She noted her opposition to the location. Matthew Timbert, SE 125th Place, voiced his concern with the rock pit, which is an open aquifer. Jeremy James, SE 53rd Avenue, Belleview, voiced his concerns with the quality of life, traffic and odors. He stated the community does not want the facility in the neighborhood. Verlin Kelly, SE Highway 484, Belleview, advised that he is a business owner within 3/4 of a mile from the subject site and his biggest concern is with the daycare center that is within 900 to 1,000 feet of the property. Georgia Hames, SE 53rd Court, Belleview, noted her property is less than 1/4 mile from the subject site and opined that a lot of what was said at the P&Z Commission meeting by the engineer was contradicted today. She stated the applicant will do their best to control odor and is not saying there will be no odor. Ms. Hames opined that this is for the convenience of Marion Pumpers and there seems to be too many open ended questions with no definitive answers. Michael Monti, SE 48th Terrace, Belleview, noted his property abuts the subject parcel where he has a lot of farm animals and voiced his concern with contamination of the water and his well. He stated he is opposed to the proposal. Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. Mr. Rogers stated he has no rebuttal at this time, but can pretty much assure there will be no groundwater pollution as there will be solid tanks with pipes and pumping stations. The location is in a remote area where the material can be processed and the water has to be trucked to a wastewater treatment plant that is DEP approved, which adds another $2 per gallon to the cost. The location also has access to the City of Belleview’s wastewater treatment facility and the only thing needed is a pumping station, which is much cheaper to operate than a truck. The amount of vegetation and separation from the property line provides distance. The amount of smell is based on the time that it is exposed to the atmosphere. Aerobic wastewater treatment plants are 24 hours a day/365 days a year operations. The process of this facility has about 12 minutes to discharge the truck and about 8 minutes where it is coming from the centrifuge and is discharging into

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 787

a container. The faster the material is separated from the atmosphere, is the less time for potential smell. The facility that can be built will contain any spills that occur so that they do not get into the atmosphere. He stated they knew coming in that odor was going to be an issue, noting the City of Belleview’s facility and others are not the type of facility being proposed. Chairman Bryant inquired as to the number of trucks per day that will be going in and out of the facility. Mr. Rogers stated there will be 10 trucks per day at 4,000 gallons each for a total of 40,000 gallons. He opined that 10 trucks will not impact traffic, noting there will be no noise or lights and the only issue will be odor. Chairman Bryant commented on acceptance by the City of Belleview of the end product (water). Mr. Rogers addressed the City of Belleview Ordinance regarding this issue. He referred to the letter from the Public Works Director/City Engineer stated they will accept the treated septic tank pumpage meeting requirements of Ordinance 2016-02. Mr. Sheffield commented on growing up near a sewer plant in Belleview, noting a church, grocery store, housing developments, elementary school, etc. were built around the plant. He commented on traffic, which will not increase since he is already at this location. Mr. Sheffield advised that this is a dewatering plant, not a sewer plant and opined that people will not see or smell the facility. James Michael Wicker, South US Highway 301, Summerfield, owner of the subject property, advised that he has been involved with the land application of Baseline Road for 4 to 5 years. He commented on the new change and increased costs to homeowners to pump septic tanks. Mr. Wicker stated he visited several places to see if there were odors on this same type system and the system being proposed has hardly any smell. He advised that he is trying to make improvements, not depreciate the property. Commissioner Moore commented on building on top of a limerock pit. He addressed comments made by speakers in regard to location and devaluing properties. Commissioner Moore noted this is not compatible with the surrounding area and will negatively affect the public interest. A motion was made by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to deny the Special Use Permit, agreeing with Growth Services staff and the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the proposed use is not compatible with surrounding land uses, is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will adversely affect the public interest. Commissioner McClain commended the business owners, noting it is not through any fault of theirs that they are asking for this change. The business model presented and the justification is absolutely correct; however, the regulatory environment has caused an unfortunate hardship for which they are trying to find a solution. The future of development around this area was set in place several years ago when land uses were designated and the best use for this property in the future it will continue to be residential with some light business type development. Commissioner McClain advised the Board that it will have to help these businesses find some solutions to this matter, unless the state changes the regulatory requirements. Commissioner Zalak stated it is the right idea, but the wrong location, as it will adversely affect the public interest. He noted the Board is not making this decision based on the City of Belleview’s comments. Commissioner Zalak stated where the City of Belleview may have a future corridor plan they cannot tell a property owner that they cannot come in and make a request. Commissioner Arnett agreed that this is not the appropriate location at this time.

July 19, 2016

Page 788, Book V

Chairman Bryant reiterated what others have said; commended the business plan and understands that what the state has set forth will require something like this, but unfortunately this is the wrong location. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). There was a recess at 4:27 p.m. The audio resumed at 4:37 p.m. Chairman Bryant asked those present to find their seats as the meeting will resume in about 2 minutes. The audio was paused at 4:37 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 4:39 p.m. with all members present. Chairman Bryant reiterated that in order to encourage participation and ensure equal access to all participants, as well as fostering mutual respect, those in attendance are asked to follow these guidelines: as a courtesy to others please silence cell phones and other electronic devices; please step outside to take a call; address Commissioners about the item public comment is being made on; state your name and address for the record when stepping up to the podium; provide any documentation to the Deputy Clerk, which will become part of the official public record; please keep comments to no more than 2 minutes as indicated by the lights on the podium (green – go, yellow – caution and red – stop); focus on specific issues and refrain from making sales pitches or personal remarks directed at staff or Commissioners; and refrain from applause between speakers in order for everyone to have an opportunity to speak, as well as keeping the proceedings running as smoothly as possible. Senior Planner Chris Rison, AICP, Growth Services, advised that the next 6 items are a series of Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendments and accompanying zoning actions. The large scale amendment applications came forward initially to the P&Z Commission in April, 2016 and that body provided a recommendation regarding the applications. In May of 2016, the BCC considered the applications for transmittal to state agencies for review. In June of 2016, the state agencies completed their reviews and sent back any comments they had; however, most agencies did not have any comments. Today is the adoption consideration for the comprehensive plan amendments, which have a concurrent rezoning application accompanying them, which is provided for by Florida Statutes to allow for simultaneous considerations for the requests. For the Board’s reference, as well as the public, there is a set of potential actions that the BCC can undertake in regards to the requests. The Board can ultimately approve the requests or have any number of other actions that may come into play as the public hearing proceeds for each of the items. 14B3. 16-L04 - Donna Wormsor, Rural Land and Low Residential to Low and Medium Residential, 379.20 Acres The Board considered Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L04 by Donna Wormsor (owner) / J. David Tillman, Tillman & Associates Engineering, LLC (applicant), from Rural Land and Low Residential to Low and Medium Residential.

PERCENT WRITTEN OPPOSITION WITHIN 300 FEET: 22 of 37 = 59%.

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 789

PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Motion made by Mr. Lord, seconded by Mr. Lourenco, to disagree with staff’s findings and recommendation, and recommend denial based on the following findings of fact: 1. Will adversely affect the public interest. 2. Is not consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. 3. Is not compatible with the surrounding land uses. The motion passed 6 to 0, with Mr. Bailey abstaining.

Senior Planner Chris Rison, AICP, Growth Services, advised that the first item is Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment 16-L04 and rezoning case 160506Z (Item 14B4) by Donna Wormsor, owner. This is an amendment request, initially to request to change the urban growth boundary (UGB), which was provided by staff in anticipation that the BCC might want to consider the matter. In discussions at the transmittal, that was dropped from the request so it was removed by staff. The applicant is requesting to change approximately 120 acres of the site to Low Residential and another 259 acres to Medium Residential, for a total 379 acre site. The property also includes approximately 126 acres of existing Medium Residential to the eastern portion of the overall property. The 120 acres of Low Residential rezoning request is proposing to go to an R-E (Residential Agricultural Estate) and the remaining 385 acres to R-1 (Single-Family Dwelling). The location is on the north side of Highway 40 between NW 100th Avenue and NW 80th Avenue. Under the current Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation the overall property is eligible for approximately 598 units; 91 where the amendments are involved and 507 where the current Medium Density Residential is located. The proposed FLUM will allow for a potential of 1,662 units for an overall increase of approximately 1,064 units. The current FLUM as illustrated is rural and low density and the request is to go to medium and low density. Existing land uses within the area includes large rural activity areas for agricultural properties, clusters of single family developments and other residential subdivisions. Also illustrated are different subdivisions within the surrounding area, some of which are 3 acre tract subdivisions and others are 1/4 acre tract subdivisions. In regard to the zoning, the site is currently predominantly A-1 with an area of A-3 (Agriculture Residential Estate), which is left over from a hamlet, which was once considered, but was never pursued by the original property owner. The proposal is to take a portion of that hamlet area to R-E, which is essentially a minimum of 1 acre lots and the remainder to R-1, 1/4 acre lots that are standard for Marion County. When actually developed it typically becomes a 3 unit per acre density rather than 4 units per acre as provided by land use designation. The surrounding area consists of a road network consisting of Highway 40, NW 80th Avenue, NW 100th Avenue (west boundary), and NW 110th Avenue further west; 3 of which are collectors or arterials, with NW 100th Avenue as a major local roadway because it does connect from SR 40 to US Highway 27. The site is located within the Golden Ocala Regional utility facilities service area for both water and wastewater. There are 3 schools within the area, plus another 20 acre school site that is available, but has not yet been developed. The Meadow Wood Farms is the closest fire station and is located to the west and the Golden Ocala fire station is to the northeast, on NW 70th Avenue Road. The MCSO main operation center is back toward the City of Ocala. There are a variety of different subdivisions within the area; many of the closest are more rural or acreage type subdivisions with other urban types mixed in the area. The review agency comments received were from the Department of Education (DOE), Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Southwest Florida Water Management

July 19, 2016

Page 790, Book V

District (SWFWMD). The DOE had a concern that 2 of the schools are at/over their capacity at 105% and 107%; however, attendance has actually dropped by the end of calendar year for the school system. This is something the county school system does annually, as well as balancing-in development as it goes along, districtwide. The DOT had questions regarding some potential for transit; however, transit operations do not run west of I-75 at this time. The SWFWMD had concerns about the Rainbow Springs springshed; however, any site development that occurs will have to comply with the Marion County stormwater floodplain and the springs protection measures as required. The P&Z Commission recommended denial of the Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment and rezoning. Growth Services staff recommends approval of the Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment; however, it is recommended that the rezoning go to a PUD after discussion by the Board. Should the Board take that action staff will be looking for direction on some of the ideas that may come through the PUD, which the Board is allowed to regulate through the Master Plan process. David Tillman, Tillman & Associates Engineering, LLC, SE 16th Avenue, representing the applicant, was present and presented a map entitled, “Wormsor Residential Community”. He noted the presentation will be brief, as it was previously given on May 17, 2016. Mr. Tillman advised that Mr. Rison addressed the request in regard to land uses, noting the map as presented is basically an access map. He stated he was contacted by someone who wanted to limit traffic on NW 100th Avenue; however, he was unable to get back in touch with the individual. Mr. Tillman noted it was addressed at the previous meeting, but will go over it once again. NW 100th Avenue is the one road that is of a rural nature. Gate access on either side of the 118 acres, where the request is for 1 unit per acre, is to limit the number of cars that have access to NW 100th Avenue. Only houses within the 1 unit per acre section will be able to access NW 100th Avenue, as it will be gated to where they can travel out to SR 40 and NW 80th Avenue, which will be encouraged. The medium density section cannot travel back through the 1 unit per acre section out to NW 100th Avenue, which will limit access. Another concern is that people feel this does not fit within the community; however, a portion of this property is already medium density residential. The property owner did not ask for the whole piece to be extended so as to limit the amount being requested as it is pushing into the Farmland Preservation Area. There is adequate buffering and the applicant feels that the project fits within this community and is compatible with the surroundings. Mr. Tillman stated he will listen to comments and try to address anything else. Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. Jimmy Carroll, SW 85th Terrace, advised that he supports the recommendations from SWFWMD regarding wetland area, which he would like for Mr. Tillman to address, as well as previous comments in relation to a historical or archeological site. Sara Hauenstein, NW 80th Avenue, questioned which property owner’s rights are more important. She stated the request should be denied. Solveig Reich Frings, NW 28th Place, read a portion of a letter of opposition from her neighbor, Dr. Jonathan McLellan, who was unable to appear. It was noted for the record that the letter was presented to the Deputy Clerk. Rebecca Morales, NW 100th Avenue, continued reading the letter from Dr. Jonathan McLellan into the record. She advised that she is also representing other neighbors who are in opposition and could not be here today: Allen Yager, 10100 NW 8th Lane; Lynda Purves, 10066 NW 8th Lane; and Ms. Colleen Reynolds Fernandez, 1000 NW 100th Avenue; all of which are located within the 300 feet notification area.

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 791

Jackie Miller, NW 77th Avenue, noted there is undeveloped property that is available where people can relocate rather than building on the Wormsor property. She opined that the majority of people present today would not object to development of 3 plus acres as opposed to the density requesting. James DiMare, NW 110th Avenue, owner of Rising Hill Farm, advised that he has 150 acres fronting NW 100th Avenue. He voiced concern with traffic as he has horses and foals in every paddock on NW 100th Avenue. Mr. DiMare noted he had 2 parcels (20 acres) on NW 100th Avenue that were bona fide, confirmed sales, both of which were cancelled because of this development. He advised that he reduced the price to $2,500 per acre and they still would not buy, which shows what will happen to land values on that road. Paul Damien, NW 70th Terrace, stated he is opposed to this, noting he grew up in a rural development and opined that this part of the area should stay rural. Patricia Youngquist, NW 82nd Court, advised that she owns a 5 acre horse farm and represents the Hamlet of Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association (HOA), who strongly object to the change to medium density as it is irresponsible and inappropriate. She stated the area cannot support having 1,000 houses in the rural community from a water, road, schools, electric and flood plain perspective. Ms. Youngquist commented on protected species in the area and recommended the Board consider denial. William Thomas, NW 14th Street, noted Marion County is the Horse Capital of the World and people moved here because of that and the strong horse industry. He opined that if the request was for 5 acre properties this discussion would not be occurring. Mr. Thomas urged the Board to deny the request and protect the character of the area. Burt Stephens, NW 75th Terrace, advised that he is representing the Derby Farms HOA. He stated there are many concerns, but wants to focus on the road capacity and safety on SW 80th Avenue, noting he worked with the Federal Highway Administration for 30 years. Not knowing the intention of the property owner he had to make assumptions since he does not know how many homes will be located in that area, but calculated an additional 1,125 trips during peak mourning hours. According to the Florida Highway Manual this volume would be sufficient to interrupt smooth traffic flows. Myna McCown, NW 8th Lane, stated most of her questions are in regard to the gating on NW 100th Avenue and voiced her concern with construction vehicles using NW 100th Avenue and tearing up the roads. Bruce McCown, NW 8th Lane, commented on the P&Z Commission vote to deny the requests and asked the BCC to follow their recommendation. Mike Grosvenor, NW 2nd Street, advised from his seat in the audience that he is declining to speak at this time. George Haile, NW 80th Avenue, noted his concerns are with water use, crime, schools and roads needing widening. He stated demographically, this does not fit in the area and does not belong here, noting his property will lose its value. John Werry, NW 80th Avenue, stated he just acquired a 3 acre farm and does not want to see the area change. Denise Evans, NW 8th Place, stated the 3, 5 and 7 acre parcels are the types of acreage being purchased and are what people want. She stated there is more to lose if the zoning changes and recommended the Board deny the request. Ron Smith, SW 85th Avenue, was not present when called upon to speak. Brigitte Smith, SW 85th Avenue, voiced her opposition to the rezoning and referred to the Florida Right to Farm Act and 823.14, Florida Statutes (FS), which states:

July 19, 2016

Page 792, Book V

The Legislature finds that agriculture is a major contributor to the economy of the state; that agricultural lands constitute unique and irreplaceable resources of statewide importance; that the continuation of agricultural activities preserves the landscape and environmental resources of the state, contributes to the increase of tourism, and furthers the economic self-sufficiency of the people of the state; and that the encouragement, development, improvement, and preservation of agriculture will result in a general benefit to the health and welfare of the people of the state. The Legislature further finds that agricultural activities conducted on farm land in urbanizing areas are potentially subject to lawsuits based on the theory of nuisance and that these suits encourage and even force the premature removal of the farm land from agricultural use. It is the purpose of this act to protect reasonable agricultural activities conducted on farm land from nuisance suits.

She further commented on the Future Farmers of America (FFA) and concern with losing the ability for students to meet the vision of the FFA if the proposal is approved. Ms. Smith stated the Comprehensive Plan was written to discourage urban sprawl. Colleen Stringer, NW 82nd Court, noted she owns 7 acres in the hamlet of Sherman Oaks and stated the zoning and land use change goes against the Comprehensive Plan. She advised that all of the neighboring homeowners and horse farms are against the R-E and R-1 rezoning change, but would support A-3 zoning. Ms. Stringer noted her property is up for sale, but will take the For Sale sign down if denied. Ronald Stringer, NW 82nd Court, stated his house is currently up for sale and he will move his horses and belongings. He commented on the horse industry in the area. Cindy Yonge, SE 100th Avenue, Summerfield, commented on the opportunity for success and a compromise here to expand the small farm area. James Scott, 615 NW 82nd Court, General Manager of Kinsman Stud Farm and President of the Florida Thoroughbred Farm Managers, as well as having served on the Equine Advisory Board for the State of Florida, noted he has watched the development in the area. He commented on vehicles that have run into the fence at Kinsman. Mr. Scott advised that he represents some of his neighbors who stand in solidarity in opposition to the proposed development. In response to Chairman Bryant, Mr. Scott advised that he is also speaking on behalf of the Florida Thoroughbred Farm Managers. Maryanne Orloff, NW 8th Lane, commented on Housing & Urban Development (HUD) housing and questioned where people will work when 1,000 homes are put in this area. She opined that this development does not belong in horse country. Jacqueline Musler, 1621 NW 100th Avenue, noted she owns a 100 acre horse farm just north of the subject parcel and is opposed to the change. She presented a newspaper article published in the Star Banner newspaper on June 26, 2016 entitled, “Urban Sprawl? Development Question Riles Neighbors”. Dr. Michelle Sivilich, NW 70th Terrace, advised that she is the archeologist who spoke at the last meeting (on May 17, 2016) and has submitted letters. She noted Point 1 of the Marion County Comprehensive Plan is to protect natural and cultural resources and opined that the proposed project is against both. Ms. Sivilich noted she brought up the known historical resources in the area, natural and cultural prehistoric and historic resources, as this was a historic community. She stated the property is also within the Farmland Preservation Area and is outside of the UGB. Ms. Sivilich urged the Board to deny the request. Carl Wagner, 7571 NW 10th Street, commented on the substantial increase in truck traffic on NW 80th Avenue and is concerned with speeding, as well as the entrance to the

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 793

proposed development that will probably exit onto NW 80th Avenue and is also very close to NW 10th Street exit. He questioned whether there are any traffic or transportation studies have been conducted to see what the impact is on traffic. Mr. Wagner commented on the density, noting if the request was for 5 acre lots no one would be here today. He noted concern with urban sprawl and the effects it has on the rural way of life and urged the Board to deny the request. Mike Grosvenor, NW 2nd Street, stated he has been in the horse industry for almost 40 years and commented on the impact of jobs the horse industry creates and supports (e.g., veterinarians, farriers, feed, hay, landscaping, fencing, etc.). Stephanie Webster, NW 100th Avenue, stated her family bought the property in 1843 where they continue to pay the taxes and maintain the tree farm where they grow pine trees. Gennelle Council, NW 100th Avenue, advised that she is representing the Herman R. & Juanita Miller Trust; the Tomlin Betty Menchan family; Albert & Judy Hill; Juanita Miller; Hellen Hope; Moses Menchan; Hilton Menchan; and Herman Miller (her grandfather, who passed away on May 1, 2010). She stated she is opposed to the new development because of a decrease in security, increase of pollution, noise, traffic and litter. David MacKay, SW College Road, presented a 5 page handout from the Marion County Comprehensive Plan 2035 and a map labeled 1 through 5. He advised that he is representing several different parties and has spoken at previous meetings on their behalf: Dr. Rebecca Lord, who resides on NW 82nd Court in Sherman Oaks; Charlotte Weber, whose business address is NW Highway 27, Suite 201; and Terri Salcedo, who lives on NW 100th Avenue; all of which are vehemently opposed to the proposed changes. Mr. MacKay referred to the map he presented, noting the parcel labeled No. 1 is north of the Hamlet at Sherman Oaks; this portion and that directly to the west are within the UGB. He stated he filed a letter early on stating it was improper for that to be considered already medium density residential under the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Section 3.1.1.4, which defines the UGB as the whole section of Policy 3. Staff says it does not apply as they intended the line to go north/south so everything to the east of it is already incorporated as urban uses. Regardless of the Policy that said if less than 50% is in, then it is not considered to be within the UGB. Be that as it may, it is an issue that could be litigated at some point in the future as to whether or not that property is already properly included. Parcel No. 1 is not part of this land use and is strictly a zoning that staff says is already medium density residential. The Board’s only option on that 125 acres is to consider what density between 1 and 4 it wants to apply to that property. Directly to the south of that and west of the Sherman Oaks properties is some portion of a couple of properties that are low density residential, after being brought in to the UGB; and a small section abuts that within the UGB, which is also low density residential and is part of the request to go to medium density. He urged the Board, should it consider the UGB to be the dividing line, to leave that as low density residential. Combined with what shows as medium density residential, if it is the Boards position that already exists, the density can be moved around between them in a PUD zoning classification, under the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. MacKay addressed the need to create a zoning that recognizes the low density and if there is a transitional density against the Sherman Oaks properties it should be large lots against the existing large lots. He stated it is an issue to be discussed in the zoning, but urged the Board to leave the low density piece that can be combined with the medium density to create a lower cap on the overall uses around the Sherman Oaks property.

July 19, 2016

Page 794, Book V

Mr. MacKay noted he highlighted different sections of the Policies in the Comprehensive Plan that he presented. The entire Objective 3.1 deals specifically with the UGB. The other issue is that staff says the urban boundary line does not need to be changed in order to put urban uses over in the area to the west, outside the UGB. It is ironic that part of that area is also part of the Farmland Preservation Area, which has specific limitations on density under the Comprehensive Plan. The area to the west of the UGB is highlighted separately on the map presented because it has a completely different standard by which you have to judge it compared to what you may consider to the east of the UGB. The section labeled No. 3 deals with the UGB. Policy 3.1.6 addressed 2 different considerations; the first sentence of that section seems to restate the definition of what is urban use and then goes on to say who can apply for urban land use that would otherwise be inside an UGB and the 3rd sentence addresses the process to be followed when someone applies to areas outside of the UGB. The last sentence addresses expansion or creation of new urban areas outside the UGB. Policy 3.1.3 contains the standards by which you have to judge any modification of the UGB. Policy 5.1.2 is the review criteria for changes to the Comprehensive Plan and zoning. He stated he would argue that the applicant and staff have presented no valid assumptions or projections that meet the standards of that review criteria. The question to staff is how do they see that you can go ahead and put this urban area in what is now a rural area, which is in total disregard to this policy. Policy 3.1.6 specifically states, “urban areas outside of the urban growth boundary”. How does that not apply to this request, as the property under consideration is rural land, which is defined in the Land Development Code (LDC) and is basically everything outside the UGB, excluding lands that already bear an urban area land use as defined by the Comprehensive Plan; therefore, that property is rural. Policy 3.1.6 defines how you proceed to create urban areas outside of the UGB. Commissioner Moore out at 5:53 p.m. What the Board is being asked to do is to create an urban area, which is defined in the LDC is the converse of the rural area. Urban areas are lands within the UGB as designated by the Comprehensive Plan or those lands in the rural area bearing an urban land use designation. The Board is being asked to create an urban area in what is now a rural area. Staff says the policies in the Comprehensive Plan governing how that should occur, given the UGB and the rural lands to the west have no relevance. Mr. MacKay argued that it is a totally incorrect position that staff is leading the Board to take. Reading through Goal 3 of the Comprehensive Plan speaks to how that defined line should be the bright line for where urban development exists. East of that line has already been designated as urban area and is rural area to the west. The requirements have not been met to change that UGB or justify an urban area outside of the UGB. He urged the Board to follow the Comprehensive Plan and deny all of that portion that is west of the UGB. Also, for purposes of highlighting the absurdity of staff’s position, part of their justification is in regard to need because there are age restricted developments nearby, as well as high-end development and could use a better mix of properties. Commissioner Moore returned at 5:55 p.m. Immediately adjacent to the north is 866 acres that is undeveloped and on the other side of the UGB is another 200 acres (approximately) that is currently rural land. The Board will be hard pressed to not create more urban areas for that user. Mr. MacKay referred to the map showing densities around the subject site, noting there is no small acreages within 1 mile of this, except for the existing medium density that has been created and is yet undeveloped. He advised that he respectfully disagrees with staff’s position and will

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 795

ask the Board to deny the request, especially the property to the west; the portion to the east within the UGB should be left where it is at low density residential, as there is already land use that can be mixed with the medium density; and make it a PUD. Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. Mr. Tillman commented on the Comprehensive Plan issues, noting there is distinct language in the Comprehensive Plan that looks at this one way and then looks at it in another. Policy 2.1 addresses the definition of medium density residential and how they are defined and where their location is supposed to be and where they are supposed to be used. Policy 2.1.15: Medium Residential (MR) states:

This land use designation is intended to recognize areas suited for primarily single-family residential units, but allows for multi-family residential units to allow for a mix of uses for existing development and new development along the outer edges of the UGB or Urban Area. The density range shall be from one (1) dwelling unit per one (1) gross acre to four (4) dwelling units per one (1) gross acre, as further defined in the LDC. This land use designation is allowed in the Urban Area.

He noted the language is very specific and when reading the others it talks about being inside the UGB versus being outside the UGB; this Policy specifically says, “being on the outer edges”. The Board has used this language in the past to approve things outside of the UGB and is a policy that has been followed. It is understood that Mr. MacKay brought up things that the Board can look at as potentially being a complication; however, everything that he read from is talking about the modification of the UGB, which was not requested. When looking at the modification of the UGB those criteria can be met if so pressed, as a market demand study can be created for these types of uses. From a planning point of view, just because there is a type of use within so many miles of this region does not mean that this area will not flourish if brought to these types of densities and developed at that rate. Mr. Tillman opined that the arguments for that are necessarily the most reasonable, but the language being pointed out (Policy 2.1.15) this does fit and is on the outer edges of the UGB. Mr. Tillman addressed other comments brought up in regard to wetlands, historical and archeological potential, noting any wetlands have to be addressed with the water management district. Marion County also has springs protection criteria in place that is a little above and beyond what is required when it comes to protecting the aquifer, which will be met. A study will be required to evaluate what areas exist and what has to be done to preserve the historical and archeological potentials or whether or not they actually meet the criteria requiring preservation when going through the water management district permitting with the appropriate agency. He addressed comments in regard to traffic and road widening; DOT did an analysis of the roadway system within this region and there is no widening requirement with this development moving forward. The roadway has capacity to carry all of the traffic as it exists today. Mr. Tillman expressed his feelings in regard to comments about the horse industry, or at least from those living in this area, looking at this with an “us or them” attitude, unable to coexist. He opined that the two can coexist as a lot will be done in the design phase of this project to make sure it fits within the community. Water and sewer is available; the county’s tiered pricing system for water rates discourages individuals from wasting water. This is not an urban sprawl type of development since the city limits run adjacent to NW 80th Avenue. Admittedly, there is a development with small tracts 1 mile to the west of the subject site. Mr. Tillman stated comments were made that the development was completely outside of the UGB; however, Mr. MacKay pointed out that it did fall within the

July 19, 2016

Page 796, Book V

boundary. Comments were made by people living in Sherman Oaks in opposition to medium density. A portion of this project is adjacent to Sherman Oaks and already has existing medium density. Questions were asked in regard to the type of housing, which will not be multi-family type housing, as they are looking at single family homes at around 3 units per acre, based on the zoning. Mr. Tillman noted staff is requesting a PUD. People have asked that construction vehicles not be on NW 100th Avenue, which is a reasonable request of the neighbors and can easily be added within that PUD to keep construction traffic off that roadway. He stated comments were made that the development does not fit, but the intention is to come back with a design that will work within the community and provides neighbors adequate separation and buffering so as not to impact their way of life. Mr. Tillman asked the Board to approve the request and will answer any questions. Commissioner Moore addressed comments made as to small farms and asked if there has been any consideration for 3 or 5 acres. Mr. Tillman advised that they have not gotten into the final design of the PUD and layout, but with the density being asked for he does not see that type of layout they will be moving forward with; however, it will not be ruled out as a possibility. Commissioner Zalak questioned the interpretation of the UGB and Farmland Preservation. Mr. Minter stated the reality is that there is language in the Comprehensive Plan that provides some area for discretion or a more pejorative term “some wiggle room”. He noted Mr. MacKay highlighted the last sentence of Policy 3.1.6: Urban Areas Outside of UGB, which states:

Any expansion or creation of new Urban Areas outside the UGB shall require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, analysis to demonstrate the potential need for the creation of a new UGB, and other appropriate documentation in accordance with the UGB, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and other policy requirements of this Plan.

However, the sentence just above that states: The lands outside of the UGB that have a Future Land Use designation other than Rural Land, other designation that addresses rural or agricultural-related activities, or other allowable designation of this Plan may request a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a designation that would typically be encouraged or permitted only within the UGB.

Mr. Minter stated this portion of the Comprehensive Plan is referring to lands outside of the UGB. He opined that looking at the general tenor of Goal 3: Priority Development Area(s), which appears to be the “default”. The default is that the county should protect rural areas outside of the UBG. There is supposed to be a demarcation between the rural and urban growth areas. There are a number of criteria in the Comprehensive Plan to demonstrate what the Board is supposed to be trying to do to preserve these rural areas. He opined that is the default, but there is some language in the Comprehensive Plan that will allow the Board to provide for urban land uses and zoning outside of the UGB. The emphasis is that if it is outside the UGB it is defined as a rural area. Commissioner Zalak inquired as to cases within the Farmland Preservation Area and how that impacts the line. Mr. Minter stated he would defer to Mr. Rison. Mr. Rison advised that part of the material that was provided included a sheet that spoke to those points by Mr. MacKay where the staff response was provided, noting that was also one of the things cited by DOT in their comments. Staff felt it was an appropriate response. In response to Chairman Bryant, Mr. Rison noted he is referring to page 9 of

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 797

the Agenda packet. When the UGB was developed for the Comprehensive Plan in the 2010 update staff did not pursue the Urban Service Boundary provision that was provided for in Florida Statutes, at that time. It was simply used as a vision or planning type tool that they wanted to work within. When the Comprehensive Plan was updated in 2014 it was left intact. The primary focus of the UGB at this point in time is that it identifies where areas are eligible to receive transfer of development rights (TDR), when working with the TDR programs, and at what densities. The Farmland Preservation Area program sets out properties that says, if you are within this designated area, you are automatically eligible to participate in the Farmland Preservation Program; and by placing your property under a Conservation Easement you are issued development credits that you are then eligible to sell in favor of placing or putting in that Conservation Easement. Commissioner Zalak questioned if the point of the Farmland Preservation Area was to take development credits out of the Farmland Preservation Area, not to add entitlements. Mr. Rison clarified that it is to allow properties within the Farmland Preservation Area to participate and create development credits that they could then sell. He noted a number of amendments have been granted within this area that increase land use designations. Commissioner Zalak stated it was because you have these pieces all over the place and instead of having development there you wanted to focus it where the urban services (i.e., water and sewer) were available. Mr. Rison concurred. Commissioner Zalak questioned how the entire piece of this property becomes eligible for the land use. Mr. Rison stated that is where this property is uniquely situated, because of its physical location it is in proximity to the Golden Ocala utility facilities (within 2 to 3 miles) and sits on a major roadway. He referred to the map on screen and pointed out the subject property and the UGB. The difficulty staff runs into is with subdivisions that were platted and created in 1983 (e.g., Derby Farms, etc.), which are situated near the City of Ocala, but 33 years ago was much further to the west and isolated. The subdivisions are not as isolated as they once were, especially now that SW 80th Avenue fully connects between US Highway 27 and SW SR 200. What also occurs is that the historic subdivisions platted before 1983 provides a mix in this region. This site is part of the one single area of undeveloped property and if kept in the same rural development pattern it then pushes any kind of development more to the western side of the City of Ocala so it will truly have to leap further out; whereas this site is actually in proximity to an existing water and sewer plant, major roadways and within 2 to 3 miles of the commerce areas. The City of Ocala Airport and their commerce district and just off the edge of this map is the new Ocala/Marion County Commerce District. In trying to work within this area between Highway 40, Highway 27, Highway 225A and the City, in the center of all that, will require a lot of property acquisition and consolidation. Aside from this site, the only other site is the Golden Meadows property, which is a large holding to the north; and the only other large holding is the property that lies immediately west of the Trilogy project. Commissioner Zalak inquired if page 9 also addresses the Farmland Preservation Area. Mr. Rison advised that the Farmland Preservation Area is not referenced, but noted urban designations are allowed within the Farmland Preservation Area. He stated the best example is at the Irvine Commerce District where the Employment Center (EC) and Commerce District were established, which is also within the Farmland Preservation Area. General discussion ensued. In response to Commissioner Zalak, Mr. Rison advised that at this point the only thing he can note is that since the Farmland Preservation Area was created; the only thing it did

July 19, 2016

Page 798, Book V

was prohibit hamlets and rural clusters, but did not prohibit placing urban designations in the Farmland Preservation Area. Chairman Bryant stated because there is an already existing subdivision (Sherman Oaks) and if this is approved, part of the PUD would have some transitional density. Mr. Tillman stated he understands. In response to the Board, Mr. Rison advised that both items (14B3 and 14B4) can be discussed together, but will require separate actions. Chairman Bryant noted there is a 20 acre site that has already been purchased by the School Board for future growth in the area. Mr. Tillman assumed that the School Board would do some redistricting before constructing a new school. He noted when speaking to the School Board in regard to having sufficient numbers and capacity; redistricting is the method for dealing with anything that has an overage. A motion was made by Commissioner McClain to approve the Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L04, agreeing with Growth Services staff and disagreeing with the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the land use change will not adversely affect the public interest, is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, is consistent with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (FS) and the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner McClain stated the issue is in talking about a future land use, noting this is not going to be industrial or commercial, but will be some type of residential development. The PUD can be addressed during the Zoning (Item 14B4) portion. He opined that the land use is correct. Commissioner Zalak stated he is struggling with the land use demarcation outside of the UGB at 4 units per acre. He opined that the land use should be low density at the maximum. Commissioner McClain stated the zoning PUD can better control density by allowing the developer or engineer to make a drawing in the PUD process. The motion died for lack of a second. In response to Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Zalak suggested a low density residential land use with a Developer’s Agreement that does not allow the parcel to be less than 3 acres. A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to approve the Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L04, as amended, for low density residential with a Developer’s Agreement to not allow any parcel to be less than 3 acres in size, and agreeing with Growth Services staff and disagreeing with the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the land use change will not adversely affect the public interest, is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, is consistent with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (FS) and the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner McClain advised that he would not require a Developer’s Agreement, noting they are no longer recognized by the State of Florida. Commissioner Zalak asked if the 3 acre requirement can be included in the PUD. Mr. Rison concurred. Commissioner Zalak withdrew the motion. A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Arnett, to approve the Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L04, as amended, for low density residential, and agreeing with Growth Services staff and disagreeing with the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the land use change will not adversely affect the public interest, is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area,

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 799

is consistent with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (FS) and the Marion County Comprehensive Plan Commissioner McClain opined that it is a mistake. To say the whole property should be developed at low density is a mistake, noting part of the property is already designated as medium density. He noted this property is located on Highway 40, which is a 4-lane highway, where most of the property fronts the highway. In response to Commissioner Arnett, Commissioner McClain stated the fact of the matter is that normally, even under medium density at 4 units per acre you can only get about 3 units per acre. Commissioner Zalak commented on mini-acre farms. Commissioner McClain opined that it should be addressed in the PUD. Commissioner Zalak stated they can do that, noting the low density reduces the number of units. Commissioner McClain suggested a number of units be set. Commissioner Zalak stated the number of units can be set in the PUD. Commissioner McClain disagreed. Chairman Bryant asked if Commissioner Zalak is recommending the whole piece have low density. Commissioner Zalak stated the piece that is currently under the land use consideration, not the portion that is medium density outside this land use right now. Mr. Rison clarified that the portion that is currently low density residential would stay low density and not be converted to medium density, which is the request. Commissioner Zalak concurred. Mr. Rison further clarified that the portion that is currently rural would be going to low residential, so that the full 379 acres that is the subject of the amendment would be low density residential. Commissioner Zalak concurred. Chairman Bryant inquired as to the acreage that is currently medium density. Mr. Rison noted it is approximately 125 acres. He noted there is a 10 acre parcel and a 30 acre parcel, which are the 2 parcels to the southeast that are the full parcels inside the low density residential area that are designated. The whole area of low density to the east of the UGB is about 60 acres total. General discussion ensued. The motion, as amended, was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). In response to Chairman Bryant, Mr. Rison clarified (and pointed out on the screen for the audience) that the Board action designated a portion of the property as low density residential, which is a maximum of 1 dwelling unit per acre (1 du/ac) by the land use designation; another portion will remain unchanged and continue to be designated as low density residential; and the historic, existing medium density residential portion will also remain as medium density residential. 14B4. 160506Z - Donna Wormsor, A-1 and A-3 to R-1 and R-E, 504.46 Acres The Board considered a petition by Donna Wormser (owner) / J. David Tillman, Tillman & Associates Engineering, LLC (applicant), 8999 W. Highway 40, Ocala, FL, for a Zoning Change, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, from A-1 and A-3 to R-1 and R-E, on approximately 504.46 acres of Parcel Account Nos. 21087-001-02, 21069-007-01 and 21087-001-00 (16-L04).

PERCENT WRITTEN OPPOSITION WITHIN 300 FEET: 22 of 37 = 59%. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Motion was made by Mr. Lord, seconded by Mr. Lourenco, to disagree with staff’s findings and recommendation, and recommend denial based on the following findings of fact: 1. Will adversely affect the public interest. 2. Is not consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. 3. Is not compatible with the surrounding land uses.

July 19, 2016

Page 800, Book V

Motion passed 6 to 0, with Mr. Bailey abstaining. This matter was addressed with Item 14B3 (16-L05). A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to approve the Zoning Change from A-1 to PUD, to come back within 6 months, and agreeing with Growth Services staff and disagreeing with the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the proposed use was compatible with the surrounding land uses, was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and would not adversely affect the public interest. In response to Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Zalak stated the Board needs to have discussion on some of the conditions. Commissioner Zalak advised that the low density residential will have the requirement for no parcel to be less than 3 acres, noting the rest of the units can be moved around. Mr. Rison asked if the Board is authorizing that the developer can move some of the units from the medium density to the low. Commissioner Zalak stated they do not need to be moved. Chairman Bryant question the number of units that could be put in as it stands right now, without that requirement. Mr. Rison stated with the existing medium density and all remaining in low density they would have an allowance for 886 units on the full 505 acre site. In response to Chairman Bryant, Mr. Rison stated it is 1 unit per acre on the low density residential portion, which is 379 acres (379 units) and 507 units in the medium density portion. Commissioner Zalak stated the medium density can also be reduced in the zoning portion. He noted the number of units can be reduced and it is fine if not broken into 3 acre sections, but you would reduce the total number of units, even on the medium density. Chairman Bryant inquired as to how many units he was trying to get to. Commissioner Zalak stated he wanted to get the rural part of this and opined that unfortunately the process is taking medium density and spreading that out over the course of the rural land. He opined that the UGB and Farmland Preservation Area means something and that section should stay as mini-farms, or close to it. If the applicant wants to build medium density residential in this area then he wants to see a plan that has that, as they can design some pretty neat things in that section of medium density. Mr. Tillman stated he would appreciate the opportunity to bring a plan forward to staff that can be reviewed by the Board and comments can be sent back. Then come back to this public hearing process to discuss what works with this PUD at that point in time rather than putting all those conditions on this right now. Commissioner Zalak stated the only reason there is a blank slate now is because a PUD was not brought back. Mr. Tillman advised that he was not aware of the need to bring back a PUD at this time as the request was to go from R-E to B-2. He stated he wanted the opportunity to come back before the Board one more time rather than putting a 3 acre limitation on the property. In response to Commissioner Zalak, Mr. Tillman stated he understands what the Board is saying. Commissioner Zalak stated it is in the Farmland Preservation Area, is outside the UGB, and it needs to come back looking like farms of some sort. Mr. Tillman commented on hamlets that were done in the past that have 1.5 acre tracts on a portion that go out to 9 acres on the outer edges, which averaged 5 acres a piece. Commissioner Zalak stated that is more amenable. Mr. Tillman advised that is what he wants the opportunity to do as not every tract needs to be 3 acres in size because sometimes that is not what somebody wants. Commissioner Zalak stated he did not mind allowing Mr. Tillman to bring back a plan. Commissioner McClain noted there is a roomful of people here who are expecting

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 801

the Board to make a decision and is the bottom line. If the Board wants 886 units or 820 units then it should be limited to that and allow Mr. Tillman to go back and draw whatever it is you want him to draw and be done. He stated it is easier to make a decision and let these folks go home knowing what they are or are not facing. In response to Commissioner McClain, Mr. Tillman stated he sees what he will get approval on right now. Mr. Bouyounes stated the PUD will be brought back to the Board before the Master Plan. Commissioner McClain stated back in 2006 the Board would approve the PUD and allow the applicant to go back and make a drawing to be brought back to the BCC with the preliminary where the public is invited. The Board would have a discussion about it to make any changes and agree or disagree and then send it back; it will then come to the Board for final approval. Commissioner Zalak stated he is fine with that scenario. In response to Commissioner Zalak, Mr. Rison opined that the motion is to bring back within 6 months. It was the general consensus of the Board to bring it back before 6 months. Commissioner Zalak stated that was not in the motion, noting he made the motion for a PUD approval and would put the condition on that. He questioned when the Board wanted the matter to come back. Chairman Bryant suggested it be brought back at the October meeting. Mr. Bouyounes stated the Board is not asking for the Master Plan, but rather the layout of the PUD. It was the general consensus of the Board to agree. Chairman Bryant asked how long it will take to bring back a preliminary plan. Mr. Tillman stated he will meet the October 18, 2016 deadline, but would prefer November 15, 2016. Commissioner Zalak stated October 18, 2016 will work. Chairman Bryant clarified that the Board will look at the preliminary PUD at the October 18, 2016 meeting. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). There was a recess at 6:37 p.m. The meeting resumed at 6:58 p.m. with all members present, except Commissioner Arnett. Chairman Bryant expressed her appreciation for everyone’s patience today while the Board works through some of the issues on the Agenda. 14B5. 16-L02 - Harvey Vandeven, Low Density Residential to High Density Residential, 39 Acres The Board considered Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L02 by Harvey Vandeven/Ag Properties of Marion, LLC (owner) / J. David Tillman, Tillman & Associates Engineering, LLC (applicant), from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential.

PERCENT WRITTEN OPPOSITION WITHIN 300 FEET: 5 of 31 = 16%. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Motion made by Mr. Lord, seconded by Mr. Lourenco, to disagree with staff’s findings and recommendation, and recommend denial based on the following findings of fact: 1. Will adversely affect the public interest. 2. Is not consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. 3. Is not compatible with the surrounding land uses.

The vote was 4 to 2, with Messrs. Saju and Gaekwad dissenting and Mr. Bailey abstaining.

July 19, 2016

Page 802, Book V

Planner II Natalia Cox, noted the next 2 items (14B5 & 14B6) are by Harvey Vandeven, as Ag Properties of Marion, LLC and the applicant is Tillman & Associates Engineering, LLC. The proposed project time at this point is Chestnut Hill Community and the overall parcel contains 39 acres. The subject parcel is located immediately north of Legacy Elementary School, west of Silver Springs Shores, Unit 25 and is inside the UGB and the Primary Springs Protection Zone. Commissioner Arnett returned at 7:00 p.m. She referred to the aerial photo and noted the current FLUM is low residential, which is 1 du/ac for a total of 39 units. The request is for high residential, which has a maximum of 8 du/ac for a total of 312 units. The applicant recently submitted a finalized PUD conceptual plan. The generalities of the proposed plan is for 123 units at a density of 3 units per acre, which is less than the medium residential density of 4 du/ac. The overall community shows a total of 38 buildings with 4 drainage retention areas (DRAs) and 2 access points. Primary access is off of Juniper Road and the secondary access is through SE 85th Street. Buffering is proposed along the north, east and south boundaries. The western portion will remain undisturbed and a park is proposed on the eastern boundary. Ms. Cox commented on the staff analysis and findings. An environmental assessment will need to be conducted at the development review stage. Preliminarily, the School Board advised that if developed at 312 units a maximum of 50 elementary school units, which is based on the multiplier in the Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for elementary schools. Since the number of units is less then there would be less than 50 students at the elementary school level. Regional water and sanitary sewer will be provided by the City of Belleview. Access of options are: a) Securing access from Marion County via the re-configuration of the water retention area located immediately east of the subject property which would provide direct access to Juniper Road; b) Securing land clips from adjacent property owners along the site’s eastern boundary along Juniper Road; and/or c) a combination of A and B. The potential traffic impact will require a traffic study. The current zoning is A-1 and is proposed to be changed to R-3 (Multiple Family Dwelling). The P&Z Commission recommended denial; however, Growth Services staff is recommending approval. Ms. Cox provided a recap, noting the existing low residential proposed to high residential is being amended to probably medium residential (3 du/ac) on 39 acres, the existing zoning is requested to change to R-3 and the number of units has decreased to 123 from 312. The Board has the option to approve the request as presented, with the concurrent zoning; approve a lower density, as well as a different zoning classification; or deny the request. David Tillman, Tillman & Associates Engineering, LLC, SE 16th Avenue, representing the owner, was present and presented a concept plan for Chestnut Hill Community. In hopes of satisfying the majority of the neighbors the layout presented is based on comments made by members of the community at the first public hearing. The back portion of the property is environmentally sensitive with open karst features that connect to the aquifer, which should be preserved and is set aside for 2 reasons. A potential exists for the State Greenway Trails Division to connect to their trail, but having met with them they advised that was not the region they were interested in at the time as the connection was planned for further north; however, that portion is set aside in case their plans change. The original request was for high density on this site, but after laying out a product that was felt would fit within the community the number of units was considerably less than the allowed 320 that would have been allowed at 8 du/a. The number of units has decreased to 123, which fits nicely on the parcel and gives room, park space and greater buffers along the edges

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 803

of the property line so as not to have as great an impact on neighbors. Water and sewer is available and the school is adjacent to the subject site on the south side. Typically, a school is one of the more noxious uses you can have adjacent and does not feel that having single family residential would be something that would function on this property. Connected housing that would serve more as rental would be more of what would fit, as similar type uses are up and down Juniper Road. Triplexes are located in the area and are similar to the exact types of units they are looking to put in here. Chairman Bryant commended Mr. Tillman and the owner for listening to what was said at the first hearing and bringing back a revised plan. Commissioner Zalak inquired if the access will work better. Mr. Tillman stated they will have to work with Marion County on the access and pointed out the stormwater pond, which they may have to modify and potentially expand some of the pond onto the proposed site to make up for the area they will need to fill in to make that connection point. He noted the secondary connection point was negotiated when the property was sold to the school and will be on SE 85th Street. The secondary access is for emergency purposes. Mr. Tillman commented on the sidewalk connection that will be provided for direct access to the school. Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. Jimmy Carroll, SW 85th Terrace, advised that he submitted written comments at the previous meeting and has nothing to add to those. He commented on the process, noting when the packet came out for today’s meeting his written comments were not included and suggested all written comments be included in the Agenda packets. He noted his main concern is with protection of Paradise Springs. Domenic Ferrelli, Chestnut Drive, voiced his objection to the location and number of units, even though it has been reduced. He noted his concern with HUD (Section 8) housing, increased crime and traffic. David Jones, SE 84th Lane Road, advised that he is a teacher and is aware that capacity for schools have to be met. He voiced his concern that the development will damage the aquifer, the impact on increased traffic and declining property values. Tom McDermott, Chestnut Drive, commented on public transit needs. Brian K. Jones, Juniper Trail Circle, did not appear when called upon to speak. Roy Paite, Juniper Road, did not appear when called upon to speak. Mary Kearins, SE Juniper Road, commented on the P&Z Commission recommendation for denial and stated there are no clusters of buildings on the west side of Juniper Road, as it is all farmland. She voiced her concern with the impact on traffic, runoff into the aquifer and declining property values. In response to Ms. Kearins, Chairman Bryant advised that she is familiar with the area, as is most of the other Commissioners. Larry Yonge, SE 100th Avenue, Summerfield, advised that he is objecting to the land use and zoning change, noting many reasons have already been stated in regard to traffic and environmental concerns with Paradise Springs. He noted this change will devalue property and urged the Board to deny the request as there is no need for more R-3 zoned property in the area. Cindy Yonge, SE 100th Avenue, Summerfield, voiced her opposition and stated it should remain as agricultural. Adam St. Louis, Juniper Road, voiced his opposition, noting he has the same concerns as addressed by others. He noted the Sheriff’s Office is already stretched thin in the area and agreed that it should remain as it is so as not to affect property values.

July 19, 2016

Page 804, Book V

Polly Boileau, Juniper Road, expressed her opposition and concern with noise, wildlife, water, aquifer, Paradise Springs and runoff. She urged the Board to deny the request. Lori Jones, SE 84th Lane Road, addressed environmental concerns and contamination. She urged the Board to deny the request. Bill Mohler, Silver Springs Shores, stated his reasons for opposing the request is the same as everyone else’s, but more personal, as he boards his horses with the Boileau’s and does not want people coming up to feed or pet his horses as it is a hazard. Cathy Keck, Juniper Road, stated there should be absolutely no entrance into the school from the subject property. Darlene Weesner, SW 80th Street, commented on the years she has spent protecting and trying to connect the greenway, which is an important asset. Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. Mr. Tillman agreed with comments made regarding protecting the springs and aquifer, which is the reason for setting a portion aside as referenced in the concept plan. He noted that portion is not suitable for development as it is an open karst feature to the aquifer. A DRA is between the development and the karst feature to collect water and treat it prior to it being discharged. The additional spring’s protection criteria will also be designed. Mr. Tillman addressed need, noting rentals are currently staying on the market for less than five days. People cannot qualify for mortgages, even with 2 jobs. He referred to comments in regard to wells, noting the intent is to connect to water and sewer from the City of Belleview that was brought to the area for the school. Mr. Tillman opined this is the best use for the property adjacent to the school and commented on the surrounding area. In response to Mr. Tillman, Chairman Bryant stated the School Board will have the authority to determine the need for a sidewalk. Mr. Tillman stated this is a good use with significant distances away from the adjacent neighbors; about a 50 foot buffer with a planted buffer in between. Commissioner Moore commented on HUD housing and inquired as to the type of rentals. Mr. Tillman noted his family has built a lot of HUD housing, but advised that he never said HUD housing when addressing the concept plan or in talking with the owner. HUD housing is not what they were thinking. This same use exists across the street from the subject property and the plan is design what fits and matches in the neighborhood and will ask for the same rents. Commissioner Moore inquired as to safeguards to avoid decreasing property values. Mr. Tillman commented on sales comparisons of property values adjacent to mines, before and after that use changed; however, the values did not change. He stated it is a perceived change in value, which will not change the value of homes. In response to Commissioner Moore, Mr. Tillman stated a DRA will be between the sink and this development and will not allow direct discharge into the sink. Commissioner Moore questioned what will be done to mitigate for asphalt runoff. Mr. Tillman stated that is why the DRA is put in place. Chairman Bryant inquired as to the buffering in the conceptual plan and whether there will be a fence and buffering on the DRA. Mr. Tillman stated the PUD is sensible and if a fence is required they can add it in the concept plan. Chairman Bryant opined that a fence would be needed between the school and the development. Commissioner McClain noted the school already had a fence. Mr. Tillman stated they will be putting in a buffer and a fence is not too unusual to add. Commissioner McClain asked if costs have been estimated for the amenities (i.e., roads, etc.). Mr. Tillman stated they have not estimated costs. Commissioner McClain inquired

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 805

as to the current impact fees for the City of Belleview. Mr. Tillman stated he did not recall at this time. Commissioner McClain opined that the rents will be higher as the development across the street is on septic tanks and wells. Ms. Cox noted the land use is currently low residential and the applicant is asking for high residential, but by them reducing the number of units the density has turned out to be 3 du/ac rather than 8 du/ac, which is lower than medium residential. She stated the applicant is agreeable to medium density and a PUD if tied into the conceptual plan. Ms. Cox referred to agency comments, noting various agency comments were received, with no opposition to the project. The only concern was by DOT, as they were concerned with certain sections failing when looking at the adopted level of service (LOS) in 2040. Chairman Bryant clarified that the applicant is asking for medium density rather than high density. Ms. Cox advised that the land use will go from low residential to medium residential and the zoning will change from A-1 to PUD. A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to approve Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L02, from low density to medium density; agreeing with Growth Services staff and disagreeing with the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the land use change will not adversely affect the public interest, is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, is consistent with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (FS) and the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 14B6. 160504Z - Harvey Vandeven, A-1 to R-3, 39 Acres The Board considered a petition by Harvey Vandeven/Ag Properties of Marion, LLC (owner) / J. David Tillman, Tillman & Associates Engineering, LLC (applicant), 16 SE Broadway Street, Ocala, FL, requests a Zoning Change, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, from A-1 to R-3 on approximately 39 acres of Parcel Account No. 36640-004-00 (16-L02).

PERCENT WRITTEN OPPOSITION WITHIN 300 FEET: 5 of 31 = 16%. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Motion made by Mr. Lord, seconded by Mr. Lourenco, to disagree with staff’s findings and recommendation, and recommend denial based on the following findings of fact: 1. Will adversely affect the public interest. 2. Is not consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. 3. Is not compatible with the surrounding land uses. The vote was 4 to 2, with Messrs. Saju and Gaekwad dissenting and Mr. Bailey abstaining.

This matter was addressed with Item 14B5 (16-L02). A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Arnett, to approve the Zoning Change from A-1 to PUD, agreeing with Growth Services staff and disagreeing with the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the proposed use was compatible with the surrounding land uses, was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and would not adversely affect the public interest. In response to Commissioner McClain, Chairman Bryant stated the PUD will be brought back on October 18, 2016 or before. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). Chairman Bryant advised that a letter was sent to the State and are awaiting a response; should the State respond favorably, then something else will be done with the property. Mr. Tillman advised that Mr. Vandeven stated that just because the land use goes through

July 19, 2016

Page 806, Book V

he is not changing the price and will still sell the property to the State for what he was asking. He noted he is aware that the Commission requested the State look at purchasing the property and if that happens it will move through and there will be no development. Chairman Bryant stated a letter was sent to the State after the first public hearing asking if they would possibly be interested in purchasing the property as preservation land, which was sent to Senator Dean’s Office and they are awaiting a response. The applicant/owner of the property has stated that should that come back favorable that is the route he will take. 14B7. 16-L03 - Floyd S. Salser III, Rural and Medium Density Residential to Medium and High Residential, 76.65 Acres The Board considered Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L03 by Floyd S. Salser III (owner) / J. David Tillman, Tillman & Associates Engineering, LLC (applicant), from Rural and Medium Density Residential to Medium and High Residential.

PERCENT WRITTEN OPPOSITION WITHIN 300 FEET: 1 of 39 = 3%. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Motion made by Mr. Saju, seconded by Mr. Gaekwad, to agree with staff’s findings and recommendation, and recommend approval based on the following findings of fact: 1. Will not adversely affect the public interest. 2. Is consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. 3. Is compatible with the surrounding land uses. The vote was 3 to 3, with Messrs. Thompson, Lord and Colen dissenting and Mr. Bailey abstaining. Marion County Land Development Code Section 3.5.4. – Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) recommendation. c) In the event the Commission action results in a tie vote, the Commission may

deem its consideration of the amendment complete and the amendment shall proceed to its subsequent consideration(s) without a formal recommendation.

Strategic Resources Project Manager Kevin Smith, AICP, Growth Services, advised that the last three items (14B7, 14B8 and 14B9) are a combination of a land use amendment, a rezoning request and a Special Use Permit. The application was submitted by Tillman & Associates Engineering, LLC for Floyd Salser, SHS Properties, LLC, requesting a Comprehensive Plan amendment, along with a rezoning application for a mobile home park community. The last item (14B9) involves the same property and is asking for an extension of the Special Use Permit to continue the sand mining operation. The site request is on a 74 acre parcel located on east Highway 25, east of the City of Belleview. The land use request is for 41 acres to medium residential density and 33.7 acres to high density. Then proceed with a mobile home park zoning, which will be an age restricted community. Future land use for the most part is residential land; however, the western portion of the property is actually medium residential at the present time. The property is a mined area, used for sand mining and is located along east Highway 25. Also on the property is a commercial area that was used for greenhouse type sales in the past. Staff review indicated a previous Special Use Permit, both in 2006 and 2012 for the existing sand mine land use. The site is partially located in the UGB and is not in an environmentally sensitive zone. The requested designation is for a maximum of 463 dwelling units proposed on the property. Sewer and water service is available in the area. Staff review indicates this will be a way to restore the previously disturbed landscape from

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 807

the mining operation to a potential residential use. DOT comments stated there will be a drop in the LOS by 2040 on East Highway 25. The DOE had concerns with regard to public school capacity should the land use change be approved. No other comments were received on this matter. Staff recommends approval on 16-L03 as requested; however recommends denial for the associated rezoning, as the land unit development option should be used to provide more detailed information on potential development impacts and more detailed standards for development, which will also provide a way to deal with the potential future traffic impacts through traffic impact study and analysis. The P&Z Commission made no formal recommendation due to a tie vote. David Tillman, Tillman & Associates Engineering, LLC, SE 16th Avenue, representing the applicant, was present and presented an 8x10-inch density map and an 11x17-inch site plan for the SHS Active Adult Community. In response to Commissioner McClain, Mr. Tillman stated they are looking to get water and sewer from Del Webb, noting the county has water and sewer in this region. Mr. Smith noted there are fire hydrants along the roadway that are county water. Commissioner McClain inquired as to sewer. Mr. Tillman stated the City of Belleview also has water and sewer available down the road. He noted there is more than 1 option available. Mr. Tillman referred to the Density Map, which shows the breakup in between medium density residential and high density residential; realistically, the only reason the parcel was broken up was that asking for high density would allow for more units than could ever fit on the property. The larger map (11x17-inch) shows somewhat of a road layout with the community center located inside the property and lots around the roadway system. He noted this is the one he needed to do a little more concept planning on, but the idea is to try to put the community center toward the inside of the property as it is more of a noise generator. The only negative comment was made from DOE about the school system; however, this is an age restricted community and will not be generating children for the school system. Mr. Tillman referred to the existing berm along a portion of the property, noting Stan Salser is in the process of constructing a berm in another region, which will be left in place as a buffer for neighbors. The berm acts as a very substantial buffer. Commissioner Zalak commented on the reclamation process, noting he saw what was done at the Adena Club and asked if there will be varying degrees of elevation. Mr. Tillman stated they do not plan on bringing the whole property back or filling it in, but plan to design a stepped retention pond area so that portions can be used as amenities. He opined that it will probably impede them from reaching the maximum densities as proposed. It may be cost prohibitive to bring all that fill material back in with less desirable soils. Commissioner Zalak stated it would look totally different than anything else available in the community if an elevation was added and would be a plus. Mr. Tillman noted Adena had some features being a limerock mine, which is considerably different than this with the sheer rock faces that they were able to design around, which were quiet impressive. Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. Alfredo Santos, SE 49th Court, did not respond when called upon to speak. Floyd Ballard, East Highway 25, did not respond when called upon to speak. There being none, Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. Mr. Martsolf advised that Mr. Ballard left 12 photographs for the record. He noted the pictures look like the same as those they received at the main hearing of the debris on

July 19, 2016

Page 808, Book V

the property. Mr. Martsolf stated they have been patiently working with Mr. Salser to clean up the debris. A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to approve Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L04, agreeing with Growth Services staff recommendations, based on findings that the land use change will not adversely affect the public interest, is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, is consistent with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (FS) and the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 14B8. 160505Z - Floyd S. Salser III, A-1 to P-MH, 76.65 Acres The Board considered a petition by Floyd S. Salser, III, Manager, 4171 SE 20th Street, Ocala FL, for a Zoning Change, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, from A-1 to P-MH on approximately 76.65 acres of Parcel Account Nos. 39279-000-01, 39279-026-00, 39279-028-00 and 39279-005-01 (16-L03).

PERCENT WRITTEN OPPOSITION WITHIN 300 FEET: 1 of 39 = 3%. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Motion made by Mr. Saju, seconded by Mr. Gaekwad, to agree with staff’s findings and recommendation, and recommend approval based on the following findings of fact: 1. Will not adversely affect the public interest. 2. Is consistent with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. 3. Is compatible with the surrounding land uses. The vote was 3 to 3, with Messrs. Thompson, Lord and Colen dissenting and Mr. Bailey abstaining. Marion County Land Development Code Section 3.5.4. – Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) recommendation. c) In the event the Commission action results in a tie vote, the Commission may

deem its consideration of the amendment complete and the amendment shall proceed to tis subsequent consideration(s) without a formal recommendation.

This matter was addressed with Item 14B7 (16-L03). A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Arnett, to approve the Zoning Change from A-1 to PUD, agreeing with Growth Services staff recommendations, based on findings that the proposed use was compatible with the surrounding land uses, was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and would not adversely affect the public interest. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 14B9. 160712SU - Stan Salser, SHS Properties LLC, Special Use Permit in A-1, B-1, B-5 and R-1 Zones, 59.61 Acres The Board considered a petition by Stan Salser, SHS Properties, LLC, 8545 E Highway 25, Belleview, FL, for a Special Use Permit, Articles 2 and 4, of the Marion County Land Development Code, to request a 20-year extension of the current Special Use Permit (12-R-411), 10-year approval with a 10-year administrative approval, in A-1, B-1, B-5, R-1 zones on approximately 59.61 acres of Parcel Account Nos. 39279-026-00 and 39279-028-00. This matter was addressed with Item 14B7 (16-L03). Chairman Bryant noted the Board received all the information in the agenda packet and asked if staff has to make a presentation on renewal of the Special Use Permit if there are no questions. Mr. Minter indicated there was no need for a presentation.

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 809

It was noted that both Growth Services Department staff and the P&Z Commission recommends approval of the Special Use Permit with the following Conditions:

1. The site shall be developed and operated consistent with the submitted conceptual plan and the conditions as provided with this approval.

2. The sand mine hours of operation shall be limited to Monday through Saturday, 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

3. Access to the sand mine shall be via CR 25 using the existing paved driveway for PID #39279-026-00 (Parcel "A") which is to be maintained. When mining activity moves into PID #39279-028-00 (Parcel "B"), the parcel's "flag" driveway shall not be used for any mining related activities (hauling, personnel, maintenance, etc.); all mining related activity shall use the existing paved driveway to Parcel "A".

4. The existing acceleration/deceleration/turn-lanes provided for the mine access via Parcel "A" shall be maintained, and trucks may not be parked, stacked, or allowed to remain in these lanes.

5. Prior to moving into or commencing any mining activity on Parcel "B", the applicant shall submit a new/updated traffic study encompassing the full mining site (Parcels "A" and "B") to the Marion County Growth Management Zoning Division and the Office of the County Engineer through the staff review process, and once the study is approved the applicant shall be responsible for completing any improvements required by the study prior to commencing mining activity on Parcel "B".

6. The truck/vehicle parking area for the sand mine operation shall be located within the boundary of the sand mine site, and not within the required 25' wide buffer/setback.

7. The site's existing fence shall remain along the perimeter of the subject property. A Land Development Code Type B Buffer (minimum of 25 feet wide, with a minimum of 5 trees and 30 shrubs per 100 linear feet, and a 6 feet high berm in lieu of a wall) shall be constructed inside the existing fence and around the perimeter of the site except areas adjacent to existing on-site structures (mobile home, barns, tennis courts, etc.) If the existing structures are removed, the buffer shall then be provided. The buffer and berm, where adjacent to residentially developed property (including where adjacent to the "flag" driveway of such property), shall be maintained, including mowing, a minimum of every 6 months.

8. The site shall be reclaimed by back-filling with "clean fill" as defined by the Marion County Land Development Code: "Manmade deposit of debris or waste material which is virtually inert, which is not a pollution threat to ground or surface water, is not a fire hazard, and is likely to retain its chemical and physical structure under expected conditions of disposal or use. The term includes earth, brick, glass, ceramics and uncontaminated concrete including embedded pipe or steel."

9. The conditions related to fencing and gating the sand mine site to provide for access control shall terminate upon the completion of reclamation activity for the site.

10. A minimum of three feet (3') of soil cover or "stiff clay" shall be maintained above the limestone layer located approximately ten feet (10') below the ground surface.

July 19, 2016

Page 810, Book V

11. The general ground slope across the bottom of the sand mine “pit" shall be maintained as a generally level plain to discourage surface water pooling.

12. Sand mining shall occur in managed geographic units with appropriate surface cover (vegetation, filter cloth, etc.) to limit/prevent extensive open sand areas subject to wind erosion creating airborne dust/sand.

13. Copies of all jurisdictional permits will be provided prior to commencement of operation to the Marion County Growth Management Zoning Division.

14. This Special Use Permit shall expire on July 19, 2026. The applicant must begin reclamation of the site within one (1) year following cessation of mining activities or the non-renewal of the Special Use Permit.

15. Special Use Permit 120906SU, Resolution No. 12-R-411 is hereby repealed and replaced by this Special Use Permit.

16. Inoperable vehicles and junk not related to the extraction of sand shall be removed from the site within 45 days of approval of this application.

Chairman Bryant opened the floor to public comment. There being none, Chairman Bryant advised that public comment is now closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to adopt Resolution 16-R-233, as amended (see below), granting the Special Use Permit with Conditions 1 through 17, agreeing with Growth Services staff and the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not adversely affect the public interest.

CONDITION NO. 3: Access to the sand mine shall be via CR 25 using the existing paved driveway for PID #39279-026-00 (parcel “A”) which is to be maintained by the operator of the mine. When mining activity moves into PID #39279-028-00 (Parcel “B”), the parcel's “flag” driveway shall not be used for any mining related activities (hauling, personnel, maintenance, etc.); all mining related activity shall use the existing paved driveway to Parcel “A”. CONDITION NO. 4: The existing acceleration/deceleration/turn-lanes provided for the mine access via Parcel “A” shall be maintained by the operator of the mine, and trucks may not be parked, stacked, or allowed to remain in these lanes. CONDITION NO. 8: The site shall be reclaimed as provided in Condition #15 by back-filling with “clean fill” as defined by the Marion County Land Development Code: “Manmade deposit of debris or waste material which is virtually inert, which is not a pollution threat to ground or surface water, is not a fire hazard, and is likely to retain its chemical and physical structure under expected conditions of disposal or use. The term includes earth, brick, glass, ceramics and uncontaminated concrete including embedded pipe or steel.” CONDITION NO. 13: Copies of all required regulatory agency permits will be provided within 90 days of this extension approval to the Marion County Growth Management Zoning Division. CONDITION NO. 14: This Special Use Permit shall consist of a 10 year extension approval which shall expire on July 19, 2026; however it may be renewed administratively for up to one (1) consecutive 10-year period, not to exceed July 19, 2036, by a written instrument signed and issued by the Growth Services Director (or position equivalent to the Growth Services Director at that time), unless:

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 811

a. There have been unresolved violations of the County Land Development Code, the County Code of Ordinances, and/or the conditions of the Permit,

b. Neighboring property owners within 300’ of the subject property have complained to the County Code Enforcement, Zoning, or equivalent/similar Departments/Divisions about the uses of the subject property by this Permit, or

c. The Zoning Manager Growth Services Director determines that renewal should be considered directly by the Board of County Commissioners through a Special Use Permit review process (or review process equivalent at that time).

CONDITION NO. 15: The applicant must begin reclamation of the site within one (1) year following cessation of mining activities or the non-renewal of the Special Use Permit. CONDITION NO. 16: Special Use Permit 120906SU, Resolution No. 12-R-411 is hereby repealed and replaced by this Special Use Permit. CONDITION NO. 17: Inoperable vehicles and junk not related to the extraction of sand shall be removed from the site within 45 days of approval of this application.

The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). 14C. Adoption of Ordinance 14C1. 16-L02 A motion was made by Commissioner Zalak, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to adopt Ordinance 16-22 adopting Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L02, agreeing with the Growth Services staff and disagreeing with the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the land use change will not adversely affect the public interest, is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, is consistent with Chapter 163, FS and the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Minter asked if the Ordinances include the adjustments made by the Board. Chairman Bryant stated that is correct. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). Ordinance 16-22 is entitled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA; ADOPTING THE FOLLOWING LARGE-SCALE AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES OF THE MARION COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:

2016-L02, AG PROPERTIES OF MARION, LLC (HARVEY VANDEVEN);

+39.38 +/- ACRES; PID# 36640-0004-00;

LOW RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 163, FLORIDA STATUTES; PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR APPEALS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

14C2. 16-L03 A motion was made by Commissioner Arnett, seconded by Commissioner Zalak, to adopt Ordinance 16-23 adopting Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L03, agreeing with the Growth Services staff recommendations, based on findings that the

July 19, 2016

Page 812, Book V

land use change will not adversely affect the public interest, is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, is consistent with Chapter 163, FS and the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). Ordinance 16-23 is entitled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA; ADOPTING THE FOLLOWING LARGE-SCALE AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES OF THE MARION COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:

2016-L03, SHS PROPERTIES (FLOYD S. SALSER, III); 76.65 +/- ACRES;

PID# 39279-000-01, 39279-026-00, 39279-028-00, 39279-005-01; RURAL LAND & MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (±43.42 AC)

& HIGH (±33.23 AC) RESIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 163, FLORIDA STATUTES; PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR APPEALS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE

14C3. 16-L04 A motion was made by Commissioner Arnett, seconded by Commissioner Moore, to adopt Ordinance 16-24 adopting Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 16-L04, agreeing with the Growth Services staff and disagreeing with the P&Z Commission recommendations, based on findings that the land use change will not adversely affect the public interest, is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, is consistent with Chapter 163, FS and the Marion County Comprehensive Plan. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). Ordinance 16-24 is entitled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA; ADOPTING THE FOLLOWING LARGE-SCALE AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES OF THE MARION COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:

2016-L04, DONNA WORMSER; +319.71 +/- ACRES;

PID# 21087-001-02 (pt); RURAL LAND TO LOW RESIDENTIAL

PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 163, FLORIDA STATUTES; PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR APPEALS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

14C4. Zoning The Deputy Clerk presented Affidavits of Mailing and Posting of Notices received from Deputy Growth Services Director Sam Martsolf and Deputy Clerk Bonvissuto regarding petitions for rezoning and Special Use Permits heard earlier in the meeting. A motion was made by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner McClain, to adopt Ordinance 16-25 amending the Marion County Zoning Map pursuant to individual decisions made by the Board on each application heard in the public hearing. The motion was unanimously approved by the Board (5-0). Ordinance 16-25 is entitled:

July 19, 2016

Book V, Page 813

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPROVING REZONING AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT PETITIONS AND AUTHORIZING IDENTIFICATION ON THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting thereupon adjourned at 8:09 p.m. ________________________________ Kathy Bryant, Chairman Attest: _______________________________ David R. Ellspermann, Clerk

July 19, 2016

Page 814, Book V

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK