Loading...
05-02-1978 Regular MeetingCLERMONT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - MAY ?., 1978 The Public Hearing for the Clermont Comprehensive Plan was held on Tuesday, May 2, 1918 in the City Council Chambers. Comprehensive Planning Committee Chair- man Gordon Tiffany called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. with the following members of the Comprehensive Planning Committee present: Messrs. Meginley, Searles, and Blackburn. City Council members present were Mayor Claude E. Smoak, Jr. and Council- men Schroedel, Byrd, Cole, and Honey. Planniny & Zoning Commission members present were: Chairman Ray, and members Cook, Jones, M^ginley, Blackburn, Thompson, and Sargent. Alsc present were Jerry Sexton and Fred Richards of the Lake County Planning Department and about a dozen citizens. Mr. Tiffany gave a brief explanation of the 1975 statute requiring Florida counties and municipalities to prepare comprehensive plans, and how the plan came into existance up to the present meeting with the help of the County Planniny Department, Comprehensive Planning Committee, and public participation. The meeting was then turned over to Jerry Sexton, Planning Coordinator. Jerry Sexton gave further explanation of the planning process. Nis statement included the facts that the plan would be forwarded to other governmental agencies for comment and that the plan must be reviewed after five years and updated as necessary. Fred Richards reviewed the contents of the plan with the audience. The question was asked if the planning area would be defined in the Plan. Fred , Richards replied, explaining the planning area was the city limits and the area east of the city limits, around Jack's Lake. There was lengthy discussion on the pro"s and con's of commercial development aloe the two major arterials, Highways 27 and 50. People favoring highway commercial development were concerned with property owner rights; the resale value of the land, should further control be exercised over it; and the loss of tourists, by r?ot being able to stop along the highway. People against highway commercial development were concerned with the detrimental effects it would have on traffic and on ttre aesthetics. One compromise suggested frontage roads along the highways and other controls. The subject of whether it was necessary for the plan to be as technical as proposed was brought up. There was lengthy discussion on this matter, with the suggestion to minimize the plan to be as short as possible for state, regional, and county review, but to retain the detailed plan for use locally. questions were asked concerning the land left for residential uses after expected increase in population. Reply was that the plan had provided for future annexation, if necessary. With no further questions of comments on the plan, the meeting was adjourned at 9:04 P.M. Debbi~plan~ ~~~ Planning & Zoning Technician