Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board transmits Lakeshore Preserve plan after debate over road safety and lot sizes
Summary
Lake County commissioners voted 4-1 to transmit a proposed Lakeshore Preserve planned unit development (PUD) for state review after lengthy testimony on traffic safety, stormwater and lot-width standards. The developer and a traffic consultant offered two roundabouts and a speed reduction to address high crash rates on Lakeshore Drive.
Lake County commissioners voted 4-1 on July 1 to transmit the Lakeshore Preserve planned unit development (PUD) and companion rezoning for state review, sending the proposal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for the next step in the comprehensive-plan amendment process.
The project covers about 154 acres north of Lakeshore Drive and proposes 149 residential lots with a minimum of 40% open space on the area subject to the comp-plan amendment; overall open space for the full site was presented to the board as substantially higher. The developer said the plan preserves Green Swamp uplands and clusters homes to protect terrain and habitat.
The decision followed extended public comment and technical testimony about a hazardous stretch of Lakeshore Drive. Traffic consultant Hassan Anseidi said a five-year crash analysis showed roughly 37 accidents in the corridor studied, with about 20% resulting in incapacitating injuries and two fatalities. He recommended two roundabouts — one at the project entrance near a 90-degree curve and one at County Road 561 — and a reduction of the posted speed limit to 40 mph on the southern portion of the corridor. Anseidi and others said roundabouts typically reduce speeds and crash severity. He estimated the construction cost for a typical roundabout in the corridor at roughly $1 million each.
Neighbors and homeowners at public comment urged stronger protections. Major Glenn Tussing, who lives on Lakeshore Drive, said high speeds and frequent crashes already endanger residents and asked that any road redesign minimize additional travel time and avoid putting a roundabout where it would affect private yards. Several speakers asked that the Lakeshore Drive name be preserved for local addresses.
Commissioners and staff discussed consistency with the county comprehensive plan and an outstanding City of Clermont objection tied to minimum lot widths. Planning staff said the land-use amendment would not change the Green Swamp designation and that central water is available in parts of the area but central sewer is not; the applicant said on-site distributed wastewater treatment systems would be required for lots not served by central sewer.
The applicant, planner Jeff McNeil (AGMCI) and attorney Ryan Dugan said the PUD was designed to reduce overall density relative to prior entitlements and to use a combination of lot sizes and connected open space to preserve topography. Ryan Dugan said the petition is structured so the county would ultimately accept ownership of public roads under an interlocal/maintenance arrangement, and the petitioner agreed to coordinate road construction and long-term maintenance plans with county public works.
Commissioners asked staff to clarify the PUD language about utilities, open-space commitments and road maintenance standards; staff said technical details would return with the formal PUD and rezoning packet after transmittal review. Commissioner questions and a board condition pressed the applicant to commit to the county’s public-works “prescription” for pavement and resurfacing longevity when the developer dedicates roads to the county.
Votes at a glance Motion: Transmit Lakeshore Preserve PUD/future land use amendment to the state for review. Outcome: Transmitted for state review, vote 4–1.
Why it matters The Lakeshore Drive corridor has a documented safety problem cited by residents and the developer’s traffic study. The transmitted plan opens state review and creates a path toward a companion rezoning and site plan where road design, stormwater and on-site wastewater solutions will be reviewed in detail and conditions will be attached when the PUD is returned for final action.
What’s next The plan will proceed to state review as a comprehensive-plan amendment (transmittal). Staff and the applicant will return with a full PUD ordinance, roadway plans and specific conditions, including utility and wastewater proposals, before the Board of County Commissioners takes a final zoning vote.
