EUSTIS — The City Commission approved a package of voluntary annexations and comprehensive-plan amendments for several parcels near the intersection of County Road 44 and County Road 44A after residents urged the city to delay action until more specific development plans were available.

Planner Jeff Richardson presented a combined package of ordinances covering approximately 12.8 acres (two parcels) and a separate 2.8-acre parcel. The requested actions included voluntary annexation, a change in future land use to general commercial and assignment of the suburban corridor design district.

Multiple residents who live north of the parcels spoke at public comment, saying they learned about the proposal late and were concerned about commercial uses directly across from existing single-family yards. “If I looked across the street and I saw commercial development, I would not have bought my house,” said Trina Marquez, a nearby resident. Donald Doyle, who lives immediately north of the property, urged the commission to preserve the protections of the existing planned-unit-development paperwork filed with Lake County.

Commissioners debated whether to delay annexation until a specific development concept was proposed. Commissioner Aspati said the city needs a predictable land-use designation so utilities and infrastructure can be planned; Commissioner Lee said she was uncomfortable approving commercial designation without a defined development plan. That split appeared in the roll-call votes on the individual ordinances.

Votes and motions: On first reading the larger parcel package (Ord. 25-20 annexation / Ord. 25-21 future land use / Ord. 25-22 design district), the roll call showed Commissioner Holland voting Aye, Commissioner Lee voting Nay, Commissioner Aspati voting No, Vice Mayor Ashcraft Aye and Mayor Hawkins Aye (the ordinances advanced for second reading). On the smaller 2.8-acre parcel (Ord. 25-23 through 25-25), the commission again advanced the ordinances on first reading with similar split votes (Lee and Aspati recorded as Nay on several items; others voted Aye).

Richardson said utilities are available on the north and west sides of the properties and that the parcels are not within mapped wetlands or flood zones; he described soils and recharge as generally suitable for development. He also said staff had advertised the annexation and comprehensive-plan changes as required. The planner noted county-level PUD (planned-unit-development) restrictions remain recorded in Lake County records until extinguished by appropriate county action; residents sought clarification about whether a county PUD could remain effective after annexation.

What happens next: These were first readings. The ordinances will return for a second reading and final vote; commissioners and staff said they expect additional public comment during the process and asked staff to distribute full packet materials to residents. Several commissioners also urged the applicant to hold neighborhood meetings to present a development concept before final approvals.

Ending: Commissioners approved first readings to take the annexations through the required process, while several residents said they want clearer, project-level information before final votes.