Lake County commissioners ask Leesburg to re-examine Royal Highlands annexation; send joint letter

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners unanimously voted to ask the City of Leesburg to reconsider a proposed annexation tied to a 7.53-acre parcel in the Royal Highlands subdivision, voting 5-0 to have the board chair send a letter outlining the county's concerns.

The vote followed a lengthy public hearing during which attorneys and homeowners urged the county to oppose the annexation or to ask Leesburg to honor the original DRI/PUD terms. Attorney Jimmy Crawford, representing homeowners in Royal Highlands, urged the county to “oppose this annexation and express that opposition in the strongest terms possible” because the parcel is part of a master-planned DRI and removing it undermines restrictions negotiated when the DRI was approved.

The county attorney and planning staff told commissioners the board cannot block a contiguous annexation in Leesburg when an interlocal service boundary agreement (ISBA) and state statute permit noncontiguous annexations in some circumstances. Staff and county counsel explained the board’s formal role is limited to producing a report and, if desired, writing a letter expressing concerns to the annexing city.

Why it matters: The parcel at issue sits within the Royal Highlands DRI that was planned under a complex set of agreements and approvals in the 1990s. Opponents told the commissioners the DRI and subsequent PUD and access easement arrangements limit the uses allowed on that land and that annexation to Leesburg could enable multifamily development at higher densities than homeowners expect.

During the hearing several attorneys representing the Royal Highlands Property Owners Association argued the annexation would let a developer pursue multifamily uses and increased density that conflict with the DRI and the PUD’s original terms. They cited concerns about access, stormwater management, and whether the ISBA was intended to permit the kinds of changes Leesburg is proposing.

County planning staff and the county attorney explained state law and the 2014 interlocal agreement with Leesburg permit certain types of annexations and that the City of Leesburg has the authority to approve the annexation. County staff also noted the state’s “Live Local” statute can allow multifamily uses on mixed-use property in some circumstances, which complicates the county’s ability to control outcomes on the parcel if annexed.

Outcome: Commissioners agreed to have a joint letter—signed by the chair and representing the full board—sent to the City of Leesburg outlining legal concerns, asking Leesburg to honor the DRI/PUD commitments, and calling attention to potential conflicts with the ISBA. The board directed county staff to prepare a draft letter for the commissioners’ review; the motion to send a strongly worded letter passed 5-0.

What happens next: The county will send the letter to Leesburg ahead of the city’s second-reading action. Commissioners said they expect to follow up with Leesburg officials; Commissioner Smith offered to deliver the letter and speak with Leesburg personnel. Several Royal Highlands homeowners were urged by attorneys to attend Leesburg hearings and consider legal options if the city moves forward.

Context: The county’s action does not block the annexation; it creates an official record of county objections and legal arguments that county leaders hope will persuade Leesburg to preserve the DRI/PUD limitations or negotiate terms that protect the existing neighborhood.

Ending note: Commissioners and residents repeatedly framed the item as the latest step in a long, multi-decade development history for Royal Highlands and urged both municipalities to coordinate on a solution that honors earlier agreements while addressing larger regional planning concerns.