Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners deny PUD amendment that would have allowed neighborhood-scale auto service
Summary
On first reading the Town Commission voted to deny an amendment to the Hammock Oaks PUD that would have allowed motor vehicle service centers on a small commercial parcel after neighbors raised noise and property-value concerns and commissioners cited proximity to residences.
The Town Commission of the Town of Lady Lake voted on May 4, 2026 to deny the first reading of Ordinance 2026-01, a proposed amendment to the Hammock Oaks Planned Unit Development that would have added motor vehicle service centers as a permitted use for a small portion of the site.
Growth Management Director Thad Carroll introduced the item and said staff and the Planning & Zoning Board recommended approval and noted the application maintained existing density and intensity while adding one permitted commercial use. The applicant's representative, Margo with NV5, told the commission the site is in the northwest corner of the Hammock Oaks PUD near County Road 466 and Cherry Lake Road and that no new access points are proposed. She said the applicant would commit to a licensed sound study and require final site-plan approval to ensure any noise mitigation meets town residential standards.
Several commissioners pressed for details about likely services and layout. One committee member said many residents remained “adamantly opposed,” noting about eight properties fall within 300 feet of the site and expressing particular concern about intermittent sounds such as pneumatic air tools. Residents from the Spring Arbor subdivision — including Eric Hertel, who said he lives directly across from the proposed facility, and Carol Hartel — urged denial, citing noise, traffic and aesthetic concerns. Hertel said the amended use would be permanent and asked whether the community really needs another automotive facility; Hartel played a recording she said illustrates the additional, staccato noise residents fear.
A motion to deny the ordinance carried on roll call. Recorded votes were: Commissioner McLean — No; Commissioner Regan — Yes; Commissioner Roberts — Yes; Commissioner Sage — Yes; Mary Ed Raymond — No. Because the amendment was denied on first reading, the existing PUD zoning and list of permitted uses remain unchanged and the applicant would need to return with a different proposal to advance a change.
The commission’s discussion emphasized that any future proposal would need clearer mitigation measures on noise, final site-plan details and direct engagement with nearby households. The town indicated a sound study must be performed by a Florida‑licensed engineer and that final site-plan approval would be considered at a duly noticed public hearing.
