Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 9, 1990 (Continuation) e I~ ~ l ~'RANSCRI PT BOARD Q~ ~OUNTY COMMISSIONERS ~ LUCI E COUNTY. FLORI DA COMPREHENSI VE p~$~ MEETI NG CONTINUATION = JANUARY ~ 1990 Mr. Virta: straw b, i call the pre- motions that you ta] z itself, and I believe at this poir E" Transportation Element of the Plan, ~ ,o have asked to speak. ~yl.~~~"p~~". ~ Chairman Trefelner: ~ j'~~:r,{ iew an thin on ~f~ Y g that first, or go were there any significant points t ~,r ~b =.t • ,,,_w u that weren' t resolved in the mati p * ~.~3CEE GOl~~l~'~9 F~.~Rt~~; f"` " Mr. Vi rta: No s i ! J e,..~- ti cul ar that we wish to emphasis, b~ R~:,~ F..~ ~ x~^. ° r . ~ ; Chairman Trefelner: rst speaker then pl eas e. i Mr. Virta: Betty : l Q~,~ ~ ` • ~ ~ ~ Mrs , Wel l s: My na l at 1 12 4 Jas mi ne Avenue, and Mr. Vis „ zderstand, which segment are we on? ~ ~ ~Vi~_s ~i'~/j/Yl(~~~ . N~. Vi~ta: Transpc ~~~~}f ;1" ;P; v ~c_ ~ Nrs . Wel l s: Tha~ :he Cons ervati on Alliance of St. Lucie ~:ounty. we nave a recommendation on the tra~~ic circulation element, page 1 and following, and anything that I' m speaking about relates to the staff' s latest print out of their responses to the DCA recommendations. So, that' s on page 1 and following. Where ever level of service E, intoierable levels of circulation appear, our recommendation is to detail how this intolerable level is to be rectified and by what date so that St. Lucie County have adopted definite goals for a level of service not 1 ower than C except f or peak hour, peak s eas on D. And, 1 evel of service E, of course, is the next one below that and it is described in the Plan as intolerable delays. And, this as a personal. aside, is the thing that I think mixed the taxes most peopl~"~re~ent about unmanaged growth. Their having to sit for ~ hours in traffic and be endangered by bad traffic situations that cause accidents or near accidents. Thank you. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Thank you, Mrs . Wel l s. 1 ` ~ TRANSCRIPT ~4&$I2 9~ ~OUNTY SOMMI SSI ONERS ,~T.~ ~F~ COUNTY, FLORI DA ~OMPREHENSIVE PLAN MEETING ~ONTI NUATI ON = JANUARY 1 9 90 Mr. Virta: straw ballot motions, or whatever you call the pre- motions that you take prior to acting on the Plan itself, and I believe at this point we are ready to discuss the Transportation Element of the Plan, which I do have two people who have asked to speak. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Were you going to review anything on that first, or go j ust directly in to the, were there any significant points that you had intended to bring up that weren't resolved in the matter with DC~? Mr. Vi rta: No s i r, there was nothi ng i n parti cul ar that we wish to emphasis, but. . . . Chairman Trefelner: Okay, if you'l1 call the first speaker then pl eas e. Mr. Vi rta: Betty Lou Wel l s. Mrs. RTe11s: My name is Betty Lou Wells, I live at 1124 Jasmine Avenue, and Mr. Virta I' m sorry, i co~~~ d not understand, which segment are we on? N=. V~:;.a: Transportation Mrs . Wel l s: Thank you. I' m s peaki ng f or the Cons ervati on Alliance of St. Lucie County. We have a recommendation on the traf~ic circulation element, page 1 and following, and anything that I~ m speaking about relates to the staff' s latest print out of their responses to the DCA recommendations. So, that's on page 1 and following. Where ever level of service E, intoierable levels of circulation appear, our recommendation is to detail how this intolerable level is to be rectified and by what date so that St. Lucie County have adopted definite goals for a level of service not ~ower than C except for peak hour, peak season D. And, level of service E, of course, is the next one below that and it is described in the Plan as intolerable delays. And, this as a pers onal. as i de, i s the thi ng that I thi nk mi xed the taxes mos t geopl~"~re~ent about unmanaged growth. Their having to sit for r~ours in traffic and be endangered by bad traffic situations that cause accidents or near accidents. Thank you. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Thank you, Mrs . Wel l s. ~ . Mr. Virta: Edward Becht. Mr. Becht: Good afternoon gentlemen, Z feel' like you all have become close friends in the last two days. At this point in time I'd like to bring to your attention an offer from my client O. L. C. , in regard to a proposed roadway which is arterial A. Yesterday you were able to obtain a commitment from a land owner to the north of Glades Road in regard to arterial A, and last night we were able to convince my client, O. L. C. , Mr. Campbell that it was probably in his best interest to consider entering into an agreement with the County for the dedication of approximately one mile, 1.2 miles, 120 foot wide strip of land across the~property he owns on the south side of Okeechobee Road. Part of the deal involves an amendment of the designations that you all dealt with yesterday and I don' t know if the Board of a mind to do, I hope you are. The County has a chance to improve its roadway system and you have a land owner here willing to cooperate with you, if you are willing to entertain an agreement with him. ~ If I may refresh your memory, hello Chairman Trefelner: I think the battery died on that yesterday. Mr. Becht: Well, I' m going to try anyway. Hello. I think it' s working. Mr. Campbell owns approximately 1100 acres south of Okeechobee Road in this vicinity. The outlines are approximate here with our eastern border, eastern border, being just outside the current mixed density designation. Yesterday we were able to come to an agreement with the County for RS on the balance of the property. In reviewing the matter with Mr. Campbell, he was of a mind since the south county people ' had been able to obtain the mixed density designation that perhaps it was appropriate for him to go ahead and enter into an agreement for the same type of arrangement that they had, which will be to dedicate this yellow strip of land, which is approximately 1.2 miles and consists of roughly 18 acres to the County. Mr. Campbell' s property is unique in that a north-south corridor can traverse his property at an e~isting bridge. You have a concrete bridge across the 10 Mile Creek here which we're currently using for access to a north and south road, and because of that bridge we were approached by the other group for joining in with the dedication of the property. Again, we didn't believe it was appropriate, we thought it was premature, but apparently it's not premature in light of the developments in the south county. As you probably were aware that I, of the problems with creating a bridge over an existing and consequently you feel that we have a unique benefit in dedicating the property to the County because we do have, apparently the narrowest point for a bridge to cross. I have a letter ~rith me, if I can find it in my papers, from Mr. Campbell, actually it' s from Mr. Beale, the secretary of O. L. C. agreeing to enter into that agreement. Mr. Beale is here should you wish to talk with him. Chairman Trefelner: First, let me ask the Board if having dealt with the land use matters yesterday, if it wishes to consider 2 , r further any changes on this particular parcel in light of propos al to dedi cate ri ght-of -way. I gues s s i nce we' re i n the transportation section it deal~with future right-of-way. This is an identified future right-of-way corridor? Mr. Murphy: Yes s i r, Mr. Chai rman. Thi s s hows up on the ultimate thoroughfare map within the traffic circulation element. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Okay. Mr. Murphy: It does not show up as a bonafide need to the year 2015 though. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Including the southern portion. Mr. Murphy: Including that southern portion. Chairman Trefelner: All right. Well, before we get into this in too much detail, then let me ask my Board if the majority wishes to consider this. Com. Minix: Mr. Chairman, let me say this. I certainly would be interested in acquiring future right-of-way. I talked with Mr. Becht and Dennis at lunch time in reference to this and the o.n~_y _thinc~ that causes me to hesitate now is what would this, how 'would this ~ffect us, if at all. We' re going to have to go to the Cabinet I feel anyway, I don' t think DCA is going to apprcve what we're re-submitting. Chairman Trefelner: You don't? Com. Minix: No, not at all. I' d just like to hear staff' s comments on it. I'd certainly entertain the idea of accepting dedicated right-of-way for future use. Com. Fenn: But, my concern, Mr. Chai rman. Chairman Trefelner: Commissioner Com. Fenn: Jim, but on the other hand they're asking for basically the same thing that we did allow to take place in the southern end of the County so, wondering whether or not you would want to even say that yes, we'll accept the right-of-way, but we were going to be hesitant on that proposal for that mixed unit up there. Mr. Becht: Well, it' s a deal, it` s not like you' re going to take the land and not qive us the mixed use. Com. Fenn: I thought that' s where you were going. 3 . 0 Mr. Becht: Yes sir. Com. Fenn: I didn' t want to say that, you know, but I thought that is where he was getting to. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you. Mr. Becht: This is, in my opinion, a more appropriate site th~-r~ the mixed density on Okeechobee Road which is a State Road. The other road is Glades Road and is Non-State Road, as you all know, and the mixed density was applied to that parcel. Chairman Trefelner: Mr. Murphy tell us where we ended up with yesterday and what your opposite comments are on, on this propos al . Mr. Murphy: Where we ended up yesterday relative to the arterial A concept is that the Board dealing with, I believe it was called the L.T.C. Ranch property accepted in concept the idea of the road passing in a north-south direction commencing at the intersection Palmer Expressway and, proposed Palmer Expressway, and Glades-Cut-Off Road and then going northward. The Board tentatively granted a mixed use classification with varying degree of intensity zones on a portion of the L. T. C. Ranch property the north-south arterial. The petitioner right now, for the lack of a better descriptive word, is looking to see a similar type action done on what would constitute the northerly section of this roadway as it comes across Okeechobee Road, approximately two to three miles north of Midway Road. Now, my concern with this whole concept is that we're pulling ourselves back into the situation where we're just giving a bigger target to hit. I can rationalize differences~ from a land prospective point of vi ew on the L. T. C. Ranch as oppos ed to thi s property i n that, the Board' s action showed the higher intensity uses located at the northern end of the property, which is adjacent to, or within immediate proximity of the Midway Road interchange. This particular area, the lower in~ensity uses, were down around a future concepts of the Palmer coming across and really, you know, nobody' s really sure exactly where that' s going to come down yet as to whether it be an at grade crossing or a grade separated crossing cause that has a bearing on exactly where the road comes i n. I would be very hard pressed right now to recommend that you go along with the concept of extending the mixed use in this area for fear that it's just going to come around and have to be taken off later on. I think if we have to make an argument we can make a better, stronger argument for the time being on the RS application of the property and then when it's ready to develop, then the petitioners can come back in, or the subsequent developer, can come back in and file for the appropriate land pl an amendment s howi ng the hi gher i ntens ity us es , poi nti ng as a reason for that, the existence of the north-south connecting roads and the north-south arteries. I think it' s just gone for a little bit too much, too soon. 4 Chairman Trefelner: Mr. Murphy, we ended up yesterday with RS for the entire deed of that parcel, correct? Mr. Murphy: Yes sir, with .the exception of the conservation area along the river. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Ri ght. The exi s ti ng mi xed us e towards the Turnpi ke, does that, what' s the overl ay f or that? Mr. Murphy: The intensity zone closest into the Turnpike is, closest in, right next to it, is a medium and then as you come away it' s a low. Chairman Trefelner: So then this would be by extension Mr. Murphy: If we took a logical extension of it, it would be a 1 ow. Chairman Trefelner: A low category. Which would allow a residential density of . . . . . Mr. Murphy: Not to exceed five units to the acre plus all commercial zoning options. Chairman Trefelner: Okay, Board? Going once, going twice, thank you Mr. Becht, the Board is going to maintain I guess the way that we finished with the meeting yesterday. Mr. Becht: Thank you. Chai rmar. Tre f el ner: Thanks . Okay, Mr. Murphy, or Mr. Vi rta. Mr. V~ rta: Mr. Chairman, we have no one else registered to speak. I think it's important to note one thing about the element as it's currently recommended with the changes that staff has suggested, and that is the level of service standards that we have employed are consistent with FDOT level of service standards and the Department of Community Affairs level of service standards; however, they are slightly out of sink~`>with `~i~~ ~ those of the Regional Planning Council, and upon the~lanning Council's review, we can expect to find them objecting to our level of service standards. Bottom line being, is that FDOT allows a little more traffic, or a little more capacity on the roadways than do o~t.~ P. C. standards, but we' re suggesting, in our case, that the e are indeed the appropriate one, the FDOT standards. ~ r Chai rman Tref el ner: Okay. Have you, you' ve revi ewed thi s subject and item with DCA staff? Mr. Vi rta: Yes s i r. 5 Chairman Trefelner: Okay, and you don't see any significant problem on this issue, today? Okay. Mr. Murphy: Mr. Chai rman, we di d di s cus s thi s i n our meeti ng the other day with DCA staff. They are aware of the inconsistency that exists between the regional LOS standards and the DOT standards, it's not something that's going to be presented for the first time and is something that has cropped up in every other jurisdiction within this region. Chairman Trefelner: Okay, thank you. Anyone else wishes to address the traffic circulation element. Is that all we had signed up? , Mr. Virta: On that element, yes sir. Chairman Trefelner: Then, unless there are any proposed changed by the Board, the Chair will entertain a motion to tentatively approve this section and we'll move to the next. - Will anyone move to tentatively disapprove this section? Com. Mi ni x: I' 11 move that we tentati vel y approve thi s s ecti on, so we can Chairman Trefelner: Okay, is there a second? Com. Culpepper: Second Chairman Trefelner: Second, all in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. - Com. Kri eger: Aye. Com. Mi ni x: Aye. Com. C~:lpepper: Aye. Com. Fenr.: Aye. Chairman Trefelner: Any opposed? Motion carries. Next, next issue. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, as far as the mass transportation element is concerned, nobody has signed up to speak on this element. This is the one that's generated the least amount of conversation over the course~of the development of the Plan. And, I might point out that the emphasis on the additional changes are primarily to spell out exactly what' s going on right now in regards to the MPO' s efforts .~-nd regards to transit. ~ Chairman Trefelner: Okay, any further comments, then? 6 Com. Minix: Move that we move one tentatively approve this. Chairman Trefelner: Motion by Commissioner Minix. Com. Kri eger: Second. Chairman Trefelner: Seconded by Commissioner Krieger to tentatively approve and move to the next section. All in favor of the moti on s ay aye. Aye. Com. Krieger: Aye. Com. Mi ni x: Aye. Com. Fenn: Aye. Com. Culpepper: Aye. Chairman Trefelner: Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.? Next. . Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman for the next element is port and aviation, and before we call on the citizen's that are signed up to speak on it, Joan Sanchez from Post, Buckley, S~re and Jernigan, our consultant, r=YYO~- has a statement she would like to make. SCf~Gt~i` Chairman Trefelner: Ms. Sanchez. ~ ~ Ms, Sanchez: Thank you Terry. My name is Joan Sanchez, I'm with the consulting firm of Post, Buckley, ~ and Jernigan. - We've been responsible for preparing the Port Master Plan and I would just like to make a comment. I would like to clarify, can you hear me correctly? Chairman Trefelner: Yes, very well, thank you. Ms. Sanchez: I would like to clarify the significance of a $50, 000 per acre figure that was used in our financial section, and it was quoted in a recent study which has been described in the press and several articles that have come to my attention. I would like to say that once in our research we determined the viable use of the land designated for port use. And, once we had identified the economic benefit to the community in terms of both financial impacts and jobs, we considered the means of bond financing from the revenue stream to be derived from port use, and we looked very carefully on whether the land acquisition could feasibly be included in a revenue bond. Our analysis indicated that only if the land were valued at a nominal $50, 000 or less, would the revenue bond be a suitable means of financing this acquisition. Clearly the land is worth much more than that. We never intended this $50,000 to be an established value of the land, but merely, but let me say perhaps as a caution that in looking at means of 7 financing the project, that the land acquisition not be included and that you should seek other financing for this, for this important aspect of the proj ect. The purpose of ) the figure down was just as a caution against including it as part of the bond financing. I would also like to add that while self- financing of a port, such as the one proposed for this community, is a very desirable long-term goal. There are other ports throughout the state that have used other types of additional financing to get their operation off the ground. That includes large ports such as the port of Miami, Port Everglades, it also includes the smaller ports such as Manatee, Fernandina and many others . So that, I would just like to make sure that our interpretation of this number is understood. Do you have any questions? Chairman Trefelner: Any questions? I believe that point was brought out at the last meeting. The $50,000 figure that you put in and you recognized and it was discussed, at least as I recall at that time, that that was a low figure for the real value of that property, so. Ms. Sanchez: Yeah, and you do understand that it' s not. It was brought to our attention, as I said in several articles in the press, so. Chai rman Tref el ner: Thank you. Ms. Sanchez: You~welcome. Mr. Vi rt a: B1 ai ne h'i 11 i ams . Mr. Williams: Good afternoon. For the record, my name is Blaine ~ Williams, here representing the Treasure Coast Wildlife Federati on. Li ke to read to you a 1 etter whi ch was compos ed by our attorney, Clifford Barnes, who is unfortunately unable to be here today. Dear Commissioner Trefelner, other Commissioners: Enclosed please find my July 27, 1989 letter to the Chairperson, Judy Culpepper, outlining objections and challenges to the Port Plan in St. Lucie County's Comprehensive Plan made on behalf of myself, my immediate family and the Treasure Coast Fish and Wildlife Federation. At this time we reiterate each and every one as further that my letter of January 5, 1989, which included the value study that Port included for the record. Also in regards to the other environmental issues in the Comprehensive Plan, please be advised that we hereby adopt each and every objection and recommendation by the State to St. Lucie County's future land use, capital improvements, coastal management, recreation open space, ports and aviations, conservation and consistency elements. Thank you for your consideration and your comments. I'm sure most of you probably read the press, that was just alluded to, so I won' t go further into the study unless you' d like me to. I do have that study with me now, which I' d like to present to you. I think it's readily apparent that the 8 : information contained in the~ Port Plan has not been altered substantially to reflect the actual value of the property, assessed value or the true market value of the property at this time, and I think that you might consider, in light of your consultant's comments today, reviewing financing possibilities and what your options might be. Because as it exists currently, it is not going to be a viable proj ect, I can quote to you from several places within 9J-5 in the statute that tells that the port has to be economically feasible in its development. It violates, well I'll just run briefly through these. We first objected to the Port Plan being extremely tardy. It was not presented in sufficient time to allow sufficient public research and comment. Then, we obj ected to, the obj ections and policies in the Port Plan which call for public funds to be used to acquire and develop land for port development expansion violate Section 18 7. 201. That Statute, of cours e, i s the State Comp Pl an whi ch requires the present facilities be used to the maximum extent possible before being expanded. That has not been proven. The Port Plan violates the coordination and consistency requirements set forth, 163. 3177, this directs the indirect environmental damage caused by the expansion deepening is completely inconsistent with 163. 3177. Protection and restoration of the resources to be effected. Likewise it conflicts with the same element of St. Lucie County's Plan which require the same. The Plan is inconsistent with the goals and policies of 187.201, coastal and marine resources which provide for the protection and restoration of fisheries and important and natural resources. The Port Plan violates 163.3177 in that it calls for public expenditures for development at a high hazard coastal area which flood zone. The Port Plan is inconsistent with 187.201 which provides that we - shall maintain as one of the state' s primary economic assets, the environment. The Port Plan is inconsistent with 7. 1, objective 7. 12 of the St. Lucie County Comp Plan which provide for protection and enhancement of natural resources. It's inconsistent with 163.3177 which requires that the Comp Plan be economically feasible. And, as it relates to the capital improvement element, the Port Plan violates 163.3177 which requires that the Plan set forth projected revenue sources to fund the facilities. Generally, the Port's Plan environmental impacts were not studied or covered adequately in the Plan. Studies show that the federally protected species such as sea turtles actually live in the impact area and will themselves be severally impacted. Also the importance of sea grass has been down played contrary to 7- 11, 7-45, 7-46 with the coastal management element. Thank you very much for considering these comments and making them a part of the official record. I'd like to submit this to you today. I do have another letter 9 I'd like to read to you dated JUnuary 5th from our attorney Cliff Barnes. Enclosed please find a value study conducted by Hoyt C. Murphy's Chief Appraiser, Mark Tierney, for the property proposed for purchase by the taxpayer's in accordance with the Port Plan. As indicated, the property' s taxed assessed value alone, 1. 87 and 2.11 per square foot is substantially higher than the maximum price of $50, 000 per acre suggested that your consultant 's have indicated can be paid without the Port failing economical y. As the study further indicates, the minimum fair market value is more than three times that figure in recent sales at less, on less desirable parcels in the area that have netted up to 13 times that figure. It should now be clear that the Port Plan is not only an environmental disaster as previously shown, but an unmitigated disaster as well. We feel it is the~ perfect time to put this well meaning, but ill conceived Plan to rest once and for all. I have also enclosed a provision 9J-5.012 prohibiting public funds from being spent to encourage development in high hazard areas like our Port as well as the State's objective to aur Comprehensive Plan on that ground. What is truly disturbing is the County' s attempt to slip in the Port as an exemption to that provision when this is not allowed by law. The only exemption is for restoration of enhancement or enhancement of natural resources. The lessons of Hurricane Hugo should not have to be re-learned in St. Lucie County. That provision of the law was put there by the State for a reason and should be respected by the County. We at the Treasure Coast Fish and Wildlife Federation look forward to your comments on this matter and to working with you to develop a Plan for the Port which will not be environmentally or economically destructive to the citizens of St. Lucie County. Sincerely, Clifford H. Barnes, P.ttorney, Treasure Coast Wildlife ~ Federation. ~,~i. y We also__a,rew_submitting today a report that was put together by - Mr. Walter Votunak~who is Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on the ~,j s tudy of the Ft. Pi erce Port f or the Cons ervati on Al l i ance. Thi s is dated June, 1985, and we' d like to have that included as part of the record as an alternative to your Port Development Plan today. Thank you. Chairman Trefelner: Was that previously submitted at the other hearings? Mr. Wil li ams : I don~ t thi nk s o, I had to di g that out of Walter' s files. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Mr. Wi 11 i ams : I t probabl y was n' t. Com, Fenn: We did have it in our packet though. 10 Mr. Williame: It was in your packet? Com. Fenn: It was in our packet, yes, it was in there. Mr. Wiliams: No, this is the legal side. Com. Fenn: This is the legal side, oh. Mr. Williams: It would be a different. Chairman Trefelner: Are you the only ones you have? You don~ t have copies for everyone. Mr. Wi 11 i ams : Sorry. Chairman Trefelner: I' 11 have copies made. _ Mr. Wi 11 i ams : Let me s ee, I thi nk I mes s ed up there. 2 gave you the wrong one, I gave you my copy. No, you get that, you get that, you get this. No, this is all I have, I don' t have a copy you can Sorry about that. Chairmar. Trefelner: Okay, thank you. Mr. W~11iGms: Be glad to answer any questions. You have any? Chairman Trefelne:: P.ny questions from any member of the Board? Thank you, Bl ai ne. Mr. V~ rta: Mabel Fawcett. Mrs. Fawcett: Good afternoon. Mabel Fawcett, 2417 North Ocean Drive. I' m speaking in behalf of Mr. Buck Bryant who is our attorney, who could not be here, he' s meeting with Mr. Malfait, over Ridgehaven, so he had to give up one or the other. St. Lucie County Commission: Dear Sirs: I write on behalf of Ai rport Watch, I ncorporated, and the vari ous parti es I have represented at previous hearings relative to the airport element of the Plan. We have reviewed the proposed responses by the County to the concerns expressed by the DCA. We do not believe that these, those concerns or objections have been satisfied by the proposed staff responses. Specifically, the response to recommendation 10 is not responsive and really does not answer anything. The same can be said for recommendation number 11. In so far as recommendation four is concerned, the County has incorporated by reference the~Airport Master Plan; however, that Master Plan is out of date both due to time and substance. The 11 incorporation of the Master Plan should not alleviate or satisfy the recommendation. In summary, we continue to object to the airport element of the Comprehensive Plan as specifically submitted that the State concerns have not been met. It is clear that the County objects, expects to continue development at the current site without any objective data to establish the demand for same, and without any serious study of the viability of the sites, should a demand be established. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Buck Bryant. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Thank you, Mrs . Fawcett. Next. Mr. Virta: I. A. Mascuolli. Chairman Trefelner: I didn' t see him here. Was he here? He was here yesterday, but Mr. Virta: I have some of yesterday' s names. Okay, Is Mr. Pruitt out there? Chairman Trefelner: No. Com. Culpepper: Yesterday. Mr. Vi ~ta: I f not, that' s all that have s i gned up f or thi s el ement Mr. Chai rman. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you. (Someone speaking in audience, can't hear them). Chairman Trefelner: Someone, please step forward. Mr. Vi r''t a: Mr. Thei s s, I' m s orry. Mr. Thei s s: Mr. Chai rman, Commi s s i oners . My name i s Bi 11 Theiss, I' m the Vice-Mayor of St. Lucie Village, I reside at 114 St. Lucie Lane and my comments are on behalf of the Village. From the very beginning of this process, we' ve, the Village, has been opposed to this document statin~_ that anything inferring ~,E; t~ that i t woul d be devel oped to a j et,` poi nt~ ~~atus . I thi nk we' re aware of that dialogue over the years t~~t have transpired. You have made some changes that have pleased us. You did delete the recommended land use actions for ultimate development that showed the Village being re-zoned to other uses other than residential. We appreciate that; however, the element, the last version I read that is the current version u till the adopted __._-r~,~;. Plan comes out still incorporates the ~fa~-part 150, noise capability plans by reference, and in those documents that 12 figure sti~~ exists that shows the Village being re-zoned to uses other th«n residential. So, that objection still lies there. All the objections we submitted previously in writing, other than that one of that particular figure being in the document, still hold true. I n the current vers i on of the document, the two thi ngs that are at this point most disturbing to us are first, the facility requirements description, that begins on page 4-8, that description describes the need for a Regional Jetport. That description should describe a general aviation airport with a 6,500 foot runway and all things that go with that. figure 4-6, the Airport Layout Plan on page 4-10, that's the Airport Layout Plan from ultimate development that shows 10,000 foot the runway and the parallel 8,000 foot runway. At this point in time, in this planning document should be the 1992 Airport Layout Plan which shows a 6,500 foot runway. Those are the main obj ections, as I said, the prior obj ections still stand, and that's all I care to bring forward today. Thank you for your time. _ Chai rman Tre f el ner: Thank you, Mr. Thei s s. Mr. Vi rta: Mr. Chai rman, there' s no one el s e s i gned up to s peak on thi s el ement. Chairman Trefelner: Miss Jackson. M_es Jackson: Sorry I didn`t sign up, I didn't realize or ( ? ) wouldn' t be here. I' ve got a couple of questions because I didn' t understand Mrs. - Fawcett's comments regarding not exploring alternative sites, nor the fact that, are we not going to proceed and do a DRI study that will look at alternative sites? I think we're funded for that next year. Chairman Treielner: Either next year, or the year after. Mi s s Johns on: And, i n that s tudy, we wi 11 be expl ori ng alternatives sites. Chai rman Tre f el ner: That' s ri ght. Mi s s. Johns on: Thank you. Chairman Trefelner: Anyone else? Then let's attempt to resolve this tentatively. Let me make a few comments before I-a~ entertain a motion. In as much as I cannot make a motion, and I presume that the motion that I would make wouldn't be made by my fellow members, the, and ~ust to get my two cents in, particularly on the airport section, for the most part, I believe, for the most part, that the Plan as submitted to DCA would meet with my favorable vote particularly in light of the 13 inclusion of the statement that there will be a development of regional impact study performed which will include exploring alternative sites, and although it' s not mentioned in there, a part of the DRI process would be an exploration and examination of both the environmental impacts of such a facility as well as the impacts on the surrounding infrastructure. So, I believe that's an important thing and I'm glad to see that in there. I understood that there were no direct references to the County's long range and Master Airport Plan; however, is that still correct? Mr. Vi rta: Yes s i r. Chairman Trefelner: It's not in there as being to the ultimate airport build out. Mr. Virta: No sir, it calls for prior to proceeding beyond what's been permitted to this point, a development of regional impact would be developed and applied for. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Okay, i f that' s the cas e, f or the mos t part, I would favor this part of the Plan; however, I feel I see a large inconsistency with what this Plan says and what the action of the Board has been heretofore in the acquisition of the long range and the ultimate range properties. My feeling, as well know, and have voted consistently against the acquisition of those properties at least prior to the conclusion of the development of regional impact study, because if we do decide as a Board that the ultimate Plan of that airport is not either economically, environmentally or otherwise desirable, that property is not a liquid asset. It could not be disposed of in my opinior., very easily, if at all, in a short period of `ime, and woul~ be inappropriate. I wish not to delay for this part of the Plan any further, I- simply wanLed to add those comments at this time. Is there any other discussion or alternatively a motion to tentatively adopt. Com. Minix: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I' d like to make a statement. As you know, we have a lawsuit that has been filed by the Airport Watch Group and I would like to, and it has to do with what you're just talking about which is the acquisition of land. And particularly, in I think, Article 4 states that in 1986 at a Melbourne meeting there was a deal made with the FAA and the Florida Department of Transportation that we were going to agree to go to a regional airport and buy all this property and that a part of that deal was that I would come back to this County Commission, I think and get acceptance to it. And I think that I --'haveY~at~at this microphone many times exactly what transpired ~n r~~~ 1986,~ and I think that I would like to repeat that here today because that's why I vote consistently to purchase the land around the airport. And that isn't that Jack Johnson the head of the Florida Department of Transportation, Aviation Division, in 1986 at a Melbourne meeting of the Florida Airport Managers As s oci ati on, Mr. Johns on, that was the f i rs t ti me I met hi m. Curtis King introduced him to me, and he asked if he could have a few moments of my time, that he had something important to say to me. And he and I, at a hospitality room went over in a corner and sat down, and he informed me that he felt the international 14 airport in St. Lucie County would one day be a regional airport of significance. In fact, he said it would be the largest regional airport, in his opinion between Miami and Jacksonville. He further stated that we could allow this airport to be closed in like Palm Beach and Ft. Lauderdale airports and in order to avoid that he would promise that the state of Florida and the FAA had, were willing to put money into this airport but he needed to know how serious the Commissioners were in St. Lucie County as to accepting their help, and asked me to go back to my Commission at a public meeting and find out if this support was there. Now, the only two people that were at that meeting was Mr. Johnson and myself. I came back to the next meeting of the Port and Airport Authority as Chairman, I told this Board in this public meeting exactly what I was told, and it was agreed that we would in fact accept the help of the State and the Federal Government in order to make sure that if this airport ever became a regional airport it would have the necessary land and would not be closed in. Just for public information, Palm Beach Airport is 1, 300 acres, Ft. Lauderdale Airport is 1, 200 acres and according to Mr. Johnson we needed to have this airport be in the neighborhood of 4,200 acres and that is the reason that this County has been puttinq the money taken from the state and purchasing land around the airport. It was also stated to us at a later date, at another convention that anytime that this was found not to be a feasible site for a regional airport, that any excess land that was owned by the County could be sold and the money could be converted to use in a regional airport at another location in the County as long as that money went into another airport they would both, both agencies, would approve. So, that' s the position I have and that' s the reason that my votes have been consistently to go ahead and purchase because we did make that agreement to accept their help. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you Commissioner. Any other comments? Is there a motion then to dispense with this particular element of the Plan by either approval or der.ial. Com. Minix: I will move that we approve, temporarily approve this particular phase of our Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Trefelner: Is there a second? Motion dies for a lack of a . . . . Com. Krieger: second. Chairman Trefelner: Motion and a second by Commissioner Krieger. All in favor of the motion say Aye. Com. Minix: Aye. . Com. Krieger: Aye. Com. Fenn: Aye. 15 Com. Culpepper: Aye. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Any oppos ed, nay. Nay. Next element. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, the next element is the housing element and we have Geneiveve Jackson signed up to speak. Ms. Jackson: I really don't have to much to say on housing except for I found it amusing that the Stuart Mayor, or whatever he was came up and made that request yesterday. Chairman Trefelner: Vice-Mayor. ~ ~ Ms. Jackson: There are a couple DRI'%s that have come through, and I could point them out to you. I' m sure you' re probably familiar with them, one being ~;est Jensen, where it' s my understanding that they satisfy their affordable housin~by using . our numbers in Port St. Lucie. I would hope that; their is a goal ~~~~f~~+itl in this Comprehensive Plan that would not allow that in the future since we need to use our own calculations so that we can support hopefully, estate type housing without running into any conflicts. And, that' s really the only comment that I had, and I hope that there' s something in this element, it' s one that I truly haven' t read. Thank you. Com. Fenn: May I just say something or. that? Chairman Trefelner: Commissioner. ' Com. Fenn: Genevieve, you know when we are dealing with the Treasure Coast Planning Council, and you've been there and you've seen us in action. When I say us, I' m talking about the entire body. Sometimes our neighbors to the south get kind of carried away and I' m speaking in terms of the Palm Beach County group. And, there are those of us to the northern end of this Regional Planning Council, sometimes, eventhough we are there and we are heard, but when it comes down to voting, you know how the vote goes . So, I(?) s trongl y what you j us t s ai d and I j us t hope that in our Plan that we can have something in there to protect us from such intrusion by another government, in this case, County Government. The same thing would be true if it had happened with Indian River County. We did have somewhat of a problem with Indian River County sometime ago with the housing issue up there, on the County line but, we resolved it. But, sometimes our neighbors to the south take it upon themselves to tell us what we should be doing up here to the north end of the County, north end of the Regional Planning Council, but I endorse what you say. Me. Jackson: well, I appreciate that and I hope that you are aware that I do run the governmental end of the Chamber and if 16 you ever feel that you need to, contact us ana we' d be happy to support on an issue like this. Com. Fenn: Thank you very much. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you for your comments. Mr. Virta. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman there is no one else signed up to s peak. I would like to point out; however, that in the refinement of the housing element one of the areas that we done some work on is an area the Board had concern previously, and that is to show that we do i ndeed have a de f i ci t i n hous i ng i n the hi gher end i ncome ranges and that is incorporated in the changes we're suggesting. Chai rman Tref el ner: Thank you. I f there' s no other publ i c comment with regard to the housing element of the Comprehensive Plan, the Chair will entertain a motion to tentatively approve._- Com. Fenn: So moved. Com. Culpepper Second. Chairman Trefelner: Motion and a second. Discussion? All in favor to tentatively approve the housing element say Aye. Aye. Com. Kri eger: Aye. Com. Mi r.~ x: P.ye. Com. Fenn: Aye. Com. Culpepper: Aye. Chairman Trefelner: Any opposed? Motion carries. Next element, Mr. Virta. Mr. Virta: Next element, Mr. Chairman, is infrastructure and as the Board is aware there's several sub-elements within infrastructure and I have two people signed up to speak. The f i rs t one, i s Betty Lou Wel l s. Com. Fenn: Mrs. Wells. This~is the one on potable water sub- element. Mrs . Wel l s: I am Betty Lou Wel l s, 112 4 Jas mi ne Avenue, and I' m at thi s poi nt weari ng a di f f erent hat, I' m repres enti ng 1000 Friends of Florida. Patricia McKay who studied the Plan for 1000 Friends and wrote a Comprehensive Report on the potable water el ement was not abl e to be .Y~.a.~~ as s he had pl anned and s he as ked ~~,;k,~~,~ _ 17 that I present this for the re~ord. I believe you have each been furnished a copy of a cover letter and her report on this element which relates to some other elements also, but the subject is potable water. 1000 Friends is concerned about our potable water. As you know, 1000 Friends is an organization that was formed to try to support the working of the Plan state-wide and they have made their services available to any local government that requests or to any citizen or group of citizens that request their aid insofar as their staff permit. One of the specific figures that they were alarmed about was that there are, in St. Lucie County, 111 treatment plants and 40, 000 private wells. This was a subject that came up at the end of your meeting before this one began today I believe, and 1000 Friends is concerned that the Plan makes no indication of whether the facilities are meeting current needs or needs proj ected for the future, as well as how capital expenditures are tied to projected needs. There are also mention of the necessity for inter-governmental coordination when you're dealing with water resources because so many different groups of regulators are involved in this. ~ ~ They specifically said that they thought others than the South Florida Water Management District should be named in the inter- governmental element because while they're very important, they felt that there are other entities involved in meeting the water needs of the County that have specific policies for coordinating, there should be specific policies for coordinating among them. It's a rather comprehensive report so I don't want to belabor the record or your time, but I do certainly recommend their recommendations for your consideration, and would like to go on record as saying as a citizen and as a member of, individual member of 1000 Friends, I too endorse their recommendations. Thank you. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Thank you, AZrs . Wel l s. Mr. Virta: Patricia Ferrick. Mrs. Ferrick: Patricia Ferrick, 4802 South 25th Street. In looking over the drainage sub-element, I had noted in December that there were six pages in it and I had written several comments in response to the comments that were in that particular handout. As a(?) person went around here and picking up a copy Monday of the drainage element, I noticed that the questions that I had addressed myself to under the drainage element in the handout that went before the Local Planning Agency in December had been amended or expanded upon and instead of six pages now had 12 pages in and some of the questions I had written a response to had been taken care of in this more in-depth version. The only problem, or question that I still had and in the answer whi ch was i n the ori gi nal handout on page three, but now appears on page 8. : ~.7.~ i ~/;n When we were going through the Comp Plan onr_d,r~~inage, a policy had been instituted for a 25 year, three dayt_(?)'event which has now been changed to a level of service standard for drainage shall be a 10 year, one day~~(?.) event and then it goes on to say a more refined level of servic~$ standard will be determined by ti 18 the Storm Water Master Plan and will be adopted through a Comprehensive Plan amendment. My question today relates to when are you looking at a Comprehensive Plan amendment where we would be going back to 1 ooki ng at pos s i bl y the 2 5 year, three day event as oppos ed to the 10 year, one day event and I have a great problem with the 10 year, one day because it hasn' t been sufficient in the past and with all the build out we're having in the County we're going to need to be able to stop some of that fast water run off that _ r.._- we' ve had coming into the Nort rk at di~ferent times, which can V~ only be done by this 25 year, three day which concerns me greatly for the reason and I wondered if we have any idea when we are looking towards amending this, or what the time frame is on this Storm Water Management. Chairman Trefelner: Okay, as you may be aware we have retained a consultant in order to do that study for the County. I believe they anticipated completion date was six months, or perhaps Mr. Virta can, who has a mind like a steel trap, can fill us in. Mr. Virta: Yes Mr. Chairman. The Board authorized and the staff has advertised for Request for Proposals. Those are in- house and there is a Committee now looking at, reviewing those requests and will be coming back for the recommendation of the Board. The initial dead lines for the Master Plan is June and the final product is due in October of this year. Work to change the Plan would follow accordingly. Also, I think there' s a point here that needs to be made, and that is the level of service standard that we're referring to is that for the conveyance systems, the canals, the ditches, etc., that the County provides between development sites and the primary canal system that is handled by the various Water Management Districts as well as the river itself. y~~~ ' 6 As opposed to development,-pursay,' where development itself it is required to meet the 25 year, three day evenL. We're talking . about level of service on that intervening system and that intervening system, the reason we have projected a lower level of service is simply we've never had a Master Plan. We really don't know what' s there, so we' re trying to take a very conservative view point in the short run until we've got a better handle on what we' re dealing with. Chairman Trefelner: Okay, those intervening systems of canals and ditches that you refer to draw not only from development, existing development, but from road rights-of-way, vacant land, etc. Mr. Virta: That' s correct. Chai rman Tref el ner: And, what you' re s ayi ng, you hes i tate to put in a higher level of service in that we don't actually what it is at this point in time. Mr. Virta: Yes sir. That' s why we' ve taken a very conservative approach in establishing this interim level of service standard. 19 Chairman Trefelner: Okay. I think the answer to you question is Mrs. Ferrick: Thank you very much. Yes, that clarified it, it j us t was n' t, there j us t was n' t enough speci f i ty and I wanted to check having been a victim of a lot of water during 1985 I wanted to see where we were going to. Thank you very much. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you for your comments. Next. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, there' s no one else signed up to speak on this element. We did have a request made yesterday, that staff would like to recommend to you to a minor change in a policy in the sanitary sewer sub-element. Which is found on page 12, Item C, and that right now, that item reads: "That area just west of the I-95, Gatlin/Savage Boulevard Road,"~ and what the suggested change is, instead of saying "That area just west, " to change it to read, "That area surrounding the I-95, Gatlin/Savage Interechange." So we've changed "Road" at the end to "Interchange" and the term " j us t wes t" to " s urroundi ng. " Chairman Trefelner: Where is that on page 12 again? Mr, Vir~a: Page 12, Item C. And, what this refers to is the provision of sewer services in high intensity development areas and the change in language would also then bring into that same discussion the enclave that exists within the City of Port St. Lucie that lies to the east of the Interchange. That request was made by Genevieve Jackson and staff is suggesting that the change be made. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you. With the suggested change from staff, is the Board prepared to tentatively approve this element? Please. Com. Krieger: So moved. Com. Culpepper: Second. Chairman Trefelner: Motion and a second. Is there further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Com. Krieger: Aye. Com. Mi ni x: Aye. Com. Fenn: Aye. Com. Culpepper: Aye. Chairman Trefelner: Any opposed? Motion carries. Next one, Mr. Virta. Mr. Virta: Yes Mr. Chairman, the next element is coastal management, and the first name I have is Holly Tetzloff. 20 Mre. Wells: (Speaking in audience) Mr. Virta: I' m sorry, I thought you were speaking on that el ement. Mrs. Wells: That was for 1000 Friends, I had two sheets in there one for Conservation Alliance and one for 1000 Friends. Chairman Trefelner: Okay, if you want, go ahead and speak, we've already tentatively adopted it and, so we'll listen to what. Mrs. Welle: It is tentative though, right? It could make a difference. Chairman Trefelner: The Board could change its mind if it wanted to. Mrs . Wel l s: Okay, fi ne. Mi racl es happen. Thi s has to do wi th drainage in the infrastructure section, and, the question here that we have is that it does not seem to us that the wording makes clear in several diff.erent sections, how it' s going to be determined what the 100 perjcent share of future growth of their - own costs is. For instance, Table 11-1 showing drainage through, I believe that 1995, is that correct, is that the 11-1, is that date through date of 1995? Mr. Virta: Which page is that~ on? Mrs . Wel l s: I' m taki ng thi s f rom your respons e to DCA. Mr. Vi rt~: What' s the page number? Mrs. Wells: It` s Table 11-1 and it' s on, I' m not finding the ' page now. Gotta be in here, I sure didn' t make it up. It' s Tabie 11-1, oh, I'm sorry, the 11-1 may be in the capital improvement section where they're talking about costs of maintenance and repairs and replacement, correction of deficits and future needs. But you can't really totally separate them and tal k about one wi thout tal ki ng about the other. I n that, i t' s not clear how the. We've got a million dollars in repairs and replacement and a$1,143,000 to correct efficiency in the canal system. Future needs; however, are shown as $500,000 then other i s $ 4 10, 000 and the expl anati on there i s that that' s f or s tudy. Particularly, I'm wondering, what section of tnat $410,000 is for future growth and what is for current needs anyway. And, it's also not clear how another section on equipment needed costs will be divided so that new development would pay the share that was caused by new development. Did we take it, also, that there will be nothing spent for sewer or potable water within the next five years except study? Chairman Trefelner: Mr. Virta on the tape, I think I can answer your 1 as t ques ti on. Si mpl y s ayi ng, yes there' s al ot goi ng to be spent on sewer and potable water. The County I anticipate will be in the business itself in about three months. Mrs. Wells: Within the next five years. 21 Chairman Trefelner: Within the next three to five mon~hs. Mre. Wells: Oh, well, I didn' t find it in there, I didn' t find it in the Plan. Chairman Trefelner: It' s not in the Plan, because at the time, is it? I don' t believe it' s in the Plan. Mr. Vi rta: No s i r, i t' s not i n the Pl an, and the reas on f or that is that what we're attempting to show here is cost to the taxpayer, the cost of the potable sewer, potable water and sanitary sewer will be borne by the customer of that service as opposed to the taxpayer at large and; therefore, the revenues will off set the expenses so it doesn' t occur, show up in this f orm. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. ~ Mrs. Welle: This total cost will become from user services? Mr. Virta: For sanitary sewer and potable water, yes it will. The drainage figures right now, are those areas that we know of just simply because we have problem areas that have been identified by our Engineering Department. Once again, the Board very shortly will be contracting with a consultant to prepare a master drainage plan for St. Lucie County, and at that point the total needs of the County will be clearly identified and a capital program to address those needs will be defined as a part of that effort. The product expected to be delivered in October of this year. So, right now, the figures that are identified in ;.he capital improvements element are simply those areas that we know of right now, where we have a need. Mrs. We?ls: The Conservation Alliance also is concerned over . wnat plans there are for future drainage of this County because our files contain numerous studies that seem to show that this County has a great deal of drainage now, and that Florida has a whole is over drained; therefore, our water, drinking water is at risk from that and our whole rain system potentially is at risk, and we are concerned that there should be a compelling public r.eed shown for drainage and that the water should be saved rather ~han diverted and taken out to the ocean. Chairman Trefelner: Let me just respond to that too, and then Commissioner Minix may. Betty Lou, I can' t agree with you anymore, I mean I totally agree with you, with what you're saying, I can' t emphasi~~'how much I do agree with you on that ~ statement~. When I was in discussion with some of the engineers who are proposed on this study, I personally emphasized that I felt that not only should the, should we examine ways to get the water off of property so that flooding does not occur to individuals, but that also we should be very much concerned of the amount of water that's being discharged particularly into the Indian River Lagoon area from upland sources. Their comments to me, and i feel that they were appropriately made that they agreed. I certainly agree and I think that there may be a possibility of being able to •work in conjunction with the SWIM Program in our drainage needs so that not only are we getting water off the property that we need to get it off for public safety and health purposes, but that it's diversion is such that 22 it has an opportunity to settle before it's discharged into any sensitive area. So, I agree with that statement. I think what we' 11 f i nd though, I thi nk we can di s cus s i t. I can tel l you, I agree with you, I don't think we can put anything into this Plan until such time as we have the benefit of that study and analysis. ~ Commissioner Minix. Com, Mi ni x: Yes , I too agree wi th what you' re s ayi ng. As a matter of fact have talked with the South Florida Water Management District to see what can be done with a,resovoir } in~ ,~~~;<,.~,~.~'r;=- St. Lucie County. As youu_ well know, we' re one of the few ' counties without a~resovoir~to save water from running into the Lagoon. And not only do we lose the fresh water, but the Lagoon i doesn' t need the fresh water, so it' s a two way street. As you ~~-s Q__..know, the one i n Marti n County has been turned down, the ~,resovoir, Martin County has been turned down primarily because of i the cos t, but the s outh, Dr. Cynthi a, and I have tal ked s everal times about South Florida Water Management, and she's brought this to them of having a smaller,resovoir iri St. Lucie County. I think that there is definitely a need and we're not, without tfie resovoir what' 11 we do with the water. We can save it but all we can do is flood areas that where we don't need the water. Mrs. Wells: Well, of course, some hard-core environmentalists would say you should leave it where it is because it's doing its functioning thing for clouds and rain and all that kind of stuff. Com. Minix: In the holes because that' s where a lot o~ it is. Mrs . P7e11 s: I' m tal ki ng about where we' d not ger the to drai n i n other areas . I did also want to read a recommendation on the solid waste sub- el ement. Our recommendation is to include wording for instituting the best available method for recycling of solid waste at the earliest possible date. Staff response on page 22 and a previous page states "While a reduction in the waste stream due to recycling is the goal of the 1988 Solid Waste Management Act, the Landfill has been able to handle the waste brought in to date." This statement does not progress toward its goal in reducing the volume of waste by recycling as much as possible. To say that we've been able to handle it up to now does not talk about reduction of the volume. Chairman Trefelner: On that point, there must be some additional language, is there not Mr. Virta? We' re under a state requirement to reduce by 25 percent or whatever that percent is. Mr. Virta: Yes sir, Mr. Chairman. There are obj ectives that relate to the state requirement, mandatory requirement for reduction through recycling. That was simply a point of clarification. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Mr. Vi rta: That s ays that we' ve been abl e to handl e our tras h, 23 but in other parts of the Plan we do recognize the need to do other things. Mrs . Wel l s: What poli cy numbers are thos e, Mr. Vi rta, I di dn' t find them and it' s maybe because I didn' t have the right report. It's in the Plan that went in? Mr. Vi rta: Yes . Mrs. Welle: Okay. Chairman Trefelner: Perhaps, what you have are the ones in which there were comments and specific comments and recommendations that was the part that met with their approval, I guess we're not dealing with that at this point in time. Mre . Wel l s: Al l ri ght. Thank you. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you. It' s hard to believe that there was more than the six inches, but there was. Next. Oh, we already dealt with that element so we' re moving to the next element. Mr. Vi rta: Ri ght, Mr. Chai rman. The next el ement i s coas tal management. Holly Tetzloff. Mrs. TELzlOrf: My name is Holly Tetzloff and again I' m here on beh~l,f of my husbanc, Larry Tetzloff, who is the head of the Audobori Society for St. Lucie County. Although the issue of ~,;:ti~ percentages for the preservation of native habitat was ' ; tentativel y(?) at yesterday' s hearing, t-~ie-7-Audobont Soci ety still would like to submit its official recommendations that were voted on at the January meeting in the following letter that was signed by my husband. And, this letter does both cover coastal management and conservation so it's not necessary for me to come up for the ne~:t issue. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Mrs. Tetzloff: To the County Commission, St. Lucie County, dated January 8, 1990. 1. Reference Department of Community Affairs recommendation 9 and 10 f or cons ervati on el ement and new pol i cy 8. 1. 8. 6. , Audobon , Society recommends: Y,; , A. Substitution of a sliding scale of 15 to 35 percent instead of 15 to 25 percent; B. Add after "occurrence of endangered and threatened species on site," occurrence or use of other wildlife of the site, continguousness of reserved habitat; C. More specific wording to show how sliding scale would 24 be us ed; D. Wording to require a perpetual inventory of percentage of habitat's reserved. The inventory should show a minimum of 25 percent saved each year in order to be in compliance with Treasure Coast Regional Plan; 2. Reference coastal management element, new, page 7-106, obj ective 7. 1. 2. The Audobon Society recommends: A. Substituting 35 for 25 and sliding scale for protecting wetlands and wildlife habitat. B. Add after occurrence of endangered and threatened species on site, occurrence or use by other wildlife of this site, continguousness of the deserved habitat. 3. Reference coastal management element, background wording, page 7-36. Addition also mentioned__~ e of sliding _scale for _ . . . preserving native upland habitat. ~ lAudoborn Society recommends: j,At.,~, On page 7-36 and where ever else in any element the use of a sliding scale for habitat preservation is mentioned, recommendations A& B in 1 and 2 above should apply as should C& D of our recommendation number 1. The~Audobon Society's recommendations arise from our concern that the ~appearance, character and function of St. Lucie's environment are being altered by our growth to the detriment of man as well as wildliie. The beauty of our native Florida landscape and the wildlife it supports for what made many families locate in St. Lucie County. We don't know the exact amount of native growth needed to sustain now abundant species of birds, mammals and other animals. We do now that every acre destroyed means permanent loss of animals as well as plants. What we would most like to see in the Plan, and here from elected officials and the staff, is the assurance that above and beyond grudgingly meeting the minimum requirements of the State Growth - Managemer~t Plan, this community really desires an intense to try to mend the siting pace amount and type of growth that will be to the long range benefit of St. Lucie County and its citizens. _ - Larry Tetzloff, President, St. Lucie Audobon. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you. Mrs. Tetzloff: And, I' ve been here for several days and I have a few personal comments. That I hear a lot about the commitment to our environment but I don't really see that commitment coming through in the form of vote and commitment to our environment. And, I hear a lot about next summer in the LDR Reports, and we will be watching closely that the commitment to the environment i s done. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Thank you. Mrs. Tetzloff: Thank you very much. Chairman Trefelner: Have you previously submitted that letter to the staff? Mrs. Tetzl~ff: I did yesterday. 25 Chairman Trefelner: Thank you. Mr. Virta: Nick Wilbur. Nick Wilbur. Com. Culpepper: He was here yesterday. Chairman Trefelner: He' s not here. Mr. Vi rta: Robert Ll oyd. Mr, L1 oyd: Mr. Chai rman and. Commi s s i oners, f or the rec ord my name is Robert M. Lloyd, with offices at 311 South Second Street, in Ft. Pierce. I' m here on behalf of Mr. Roger Toflawn, a property owner on South Hutchinson Island. Mainly, I want a point of verification. Yesterday, in the future land use element we talked about uplands preservation and the 15 to 25 percent for the scale was discussed in that element. The same wording, not the same wording, but the same percentages appear in the coastal element, management element, and on page 5 of the response from staff, and I didn't know that if your comments yesterday were directed to this element also, or strictly to the future land use element. In other words, what I' m saying is if this wording remains in the response, it seems to be inconsistent with what you direct to staff to do yesterday with future land use. Chairman Trefelner: Let me find out for you. Mr. Virta. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, when we took the Board direction to mean to make that policy consistent throughout the Pian so that the Plan itself is consistent. Mr. L1 oyd: Okay. , Chairman T~efelner: That part in the coastal element was parallel or was required because of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council's comments end recommendations? Mr. Vi rta: Yes s i r. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Mr. Vi rta: And that i s Mr. Chai rman, that woul d hol d true f or c ons ervati on as wel1. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Thank you. Mr. L1 oyd: But, what I' m s ayi ng i s that di dn' t we yes terday i n the future land use element took out percentages, references to percentages . . . . Chairman Trefelner: Correct. Mr. Lloyd: Even though there's language to that 26 , Chairman Trefelner: For consistency the identical language should appear i n thes e two el ements . I s that what you' re s ayi ng Mr. Lloyd? Mr. Lloyd: That' s my question and I guess, and evidently staff has, has, that's the position of staff to be consistent throughout the . . . . Chairman Trefelner: Correct. Mr. Murphy: Mr. Ll oyd, we j us t haven' t got that f ar through thi s thing yet. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Mr. Lloyd: Okay, fine. Thank you very much. ? Chairman Trefelner: Anyone else? Mr. Vi rt a: Mari a Ti theri ngton. Ms. Tither~ngton: Good afternoon. Maria Titherington, and on behalf of the Uniola Chapter of the Florida Native Plant Society we would l~ke to go on record as being in concurrence with statements made by the Audobon Society on this element. Thank you. Chairmar. Tre~elner: Thank vou. Mr. Vir~a: Blaine TnTilliams. Mr. Williams: Do I have to tell you everytime I come up here, for the record? Com. Fer.n: Yes. Mr. Williams: For the record, my name is Blaine Williams and I'm here representing the Treasure Coast Wildlife Federation. I' 11 try and make this brief, although it' s difficult to render prai s e when we' re s earchi ng f or thi ngs we don~ t 1 i ke, but I s ee a lot of things I like when I' m looking for things I don' t like. So, I' d like to go ahead and say there are some good things in here, so that you don't get the wrong impression. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Thanks , Bl ai ne. Mr. Williams: There's a lot of work these people have put 27 together here, staff' s done a qreat j ob. Chairman Trefelner: I agree. ~ ; ~ Mr. Williams: Okay, Policy ,7~423, I' ve been harping on that one so I' 11 harp on it again. All Port and Airport Authority activities related to the Port shall be consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Okay, you' ve heard that from ~ me before. Obj ective, following page, I didn' t find out until yesterday at noon that I didn' t have the most current, current, current revisions and changes. I had the current, current, but I had not the most current, current, current. So, consequently, I' m revising my current, current, current comments to coincide with the most current changes. _ The obj ective `~71111 future development of coastal areas of St. Lucie County shall continue protecting natural resources of the coastal area from adverse impacts caused by future development by strengthening and/or adopting environmentally related laws by August 1, 1990. Well obviously, if you were to adopt your Port Plan, which you tentatively have done, that's not in compliance i n our opi ni on. Thank you. _ , . , Objective, where's the next one..rhere,A I get these page numbers messed up. Okay, Obj ective 715,~~ a Comprehensive Beach Dune Management Program shall be adopted by 1995 which enhances the natural functions of the beach dune system while reducing unnatural disturbances of the primary dune. I've become, I've come before this very Board stating our concern of the environmental community with the, 1. Destruction of the dune system, what little we have left in St. Lucie County by four wheel drive vehicles and other peop~e - who seem to feel it's their natural right to abuse the dune system. We have laws on the book that protect coastal vegetation. They have been on the books for quite some time and eventhough I sit on the Environmental Control Hearing Board, Revi ew Board, we' ve never had a heari ng regardi ng any vi ol ati ons whatsoever, and I think waiting until 1995 is G little bit too long to wait. we've already go the appropriate ordinance already in place and I don't think that we need to do anything more on the way of a study or adopting a program, all we need to do is simply enforce the existing Ordinance that we have. And I think that reference to that existing Ordinance, or request for increased enforcement by the appropriate law enforcement authorities would be more than adeauate in addressing something rather than waiting for four years to try and come up with some kind of way to stop this. Chairman Trefelner: I need some clarification on that element then, I thought that element it was in referencing a restoration of dunes, was it not? Mr. Williams: It` s protection and restoration. Chai rman Tref el ner: Then I pl ace the maj or emphas is on 28 restoration. we certainly . . . . . Mr. Williams: But if we save it now, we don`t have to restore it. Chairman Trefelner: But restoration certainly will require a thorough analysis so that it's restored in the proper manner. I think you' 11 agree with you don' t go out and grab some loads of dirt and go dump it on the beach. Mr. Williams: No, but I can tell you from the Native Plant Society's standpoint, we've seen it in action where you try to convince the Parks Department of St. Lucie County that by simply observation and intelligent application they could easily turn the entire process by doing what occurred as part of the development order for the Kemper Corporation when they were ~ trying to develop John Brooks Beach Park. Elimination of the canopy cover of exotic species.allows for re-generation naturally without any expenditure of any money whatsoever of the natural beach vegetation which immediately begins to start so, it starts to build up. So, while they are waiting until 1995 to figure out what to do, the Australian Pines have gone from five feet to 25 feet. I mean these things grow, you know how Australian Pines grow. When you have the Australian Pines create a total canopy, the beach dune vegetation disappears and you have increased erosion and you end up having breeches and we're going to see some, probably some closings of A-1-A if we' re not careful if we don' t stop this severe problem. And, I don't think we need to wait five years to figure out what to do. I think it's very clear. Com. Mi r.? x: Mr. Chai rman. Chairman Tre~elner: Mr. Minix , Com. Minix: I think that we could ask for a report from staff. If there is something we're doing we shouldn't be doing or waiting on, I think we should know about it. I certainly agree we don't want to wait until 1995, but I think a report back to us on this so we know what we should be doinq. Chairman Trefelner: Staff have any comments on that issue? Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, a couple comments if I could. One is, and this is a frustration that a lot of us have held. It says by 1995 that doesn' t mean in 1995 necessarily. Secondly, those activities where we have an Ordinance right now to the extent that it can't be done, enforcement is taken place and should take place to the point that the Parks and Recreation Department may have programs for enhancing of native species on lands the County holds, there' s nothing to say that that can' t take place very timely. I think the conversation here is confusing a couple things. One this is identification of an effort to do an overall analysis of the beach dune system throughout both North Beach and South Beach and that is going to take some time to do, some time to see where we are, what' s gone on, what can be done, in the meantime there are activities that have to be, that have to be undertaken, certainly. 29 . The intent was here was not to sit on our hands while we wait for 1995 for a study to be done. The intent here was simply to identify a need for an overall look and to place it w~thin an overall work program for the staff. That's all it was intended to be. Mr. Williams: May I comment to that sir? Chairman Trefelner: Yes. Mr. Williams: Consistently we have tried and attempted to work with the Parks and Recreation Department. They have insisted on rather than following their own coastal vegetation Ordinance they have planted exotic species in lieu of native species on, in their beach development activities. There a lot of excuses given for that availability, cost whatsoever. We have consistently advised them, the volunteer organization activities have planted over 2,000 sea oats ourselves as well as mangroves on the coastal area. We have tried to convince them that simple alimentation without mechanical means, simply by the use of herbicides would allow for the natural regeneration of vegetative coastal communities. They have consistently rejected our comments and rejected any effort we have made to assist them. The activities that you just mentioned which should be taking place, are not taking place, so. Chairman Trefelner: Let me respond to that, if I might. Nr. Williams: Right. Chairman Trefelne~: Rather than, and I don' t feel that this would be appropriate to put in our Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Wil l~ ams : Well, al l I want Chairman Trefelner: Let me finish Blaine. That spelling out how the Recreation Department should handle it~fs beaches, I don't think it was meant to get that specific. What~I would like to do is be able to, this is the first time I' ve heard this, is to be Gble to sit down and discuss it with you and the County Administration and see if there, in fact, is some inappropriate action is being taken and if there's a method to remedy it. Can we handle this outside of the scope of this Comp Plan, As Mr. Virta said, there are things that we can do prior to that full scale analysis and I agree with you and would like to get together with you outside and apart from this Comprehensive Plan to look at those issues and if necessary, resolve them. M~. Williams: Well, I welcome the opportunity to do that. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Mr. Williams: I will re-state my request which is the number of dates I see for 1990 in here are going to have the staff climbing the wal l s and I don' t thi nk that what I' m s ayi ng i s that you' re 30 ~ not going to intentionally pu~ it off until 1995, but I know without having a date a li~tle bit sooner, the inclination is to take care of other things before you have something that doesn't have to be done until 1995. That' s all I' m saying. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Okay. Mr. Williams: And, I think the date should be moved up whether it' s 1991, since everything else seems to be 1990, move it to 1991. Gives them a little bit more time but doesn't allow for an overworked staff to put it off until a later date. That was my request. Chairman Trefelner: Okay ~ ~ t ~ l Mr. Williams: Obj ective , 721: Here again, this is in reference to development and re-development of the coastal area by enacting land development regulations by August lst, 1990 which will: A. Minimize the danger to life and property from hurricanes and floods. Well, that refers back to our objection to the Port Development P1 an; and, B. Restricts building and population growth in coastal high hazard areas. Here again, that is also a direct conflict with the Port Plan. That' s i n our opi ni on. ~ Objective i721: When I try to cross-reference some of these things, I see two, there appears to be a redundancy there. There' s a;721` on page 22 and a_'721 on page 24 which ~re identical and I didn' t see how they fit in there. I don' t know, I can understand how they have a little problem with that given the - constraints of trying to put all these changes together. 1 ; t By Policy -'7139. Here again, by December 31, 1993, which is essentially -~our years from today, the County shall identify coastal areas that provide habitat for known, threatened and endangered species. It goes on to say that protection measures shall be established tnat are consistent with the policies in the conservation element. Here again, the need to wait that long is not there, Mr. Virta will say that we have to do it by then, that doesn' t mean we' 11 put it off to that long, but, I' d like to point out that the data is available, it's been collected and developed by Harbor Branch, Department of Natural Resources. We had in our Petition for an Administrative Hearing concerning the silos dredging application. We had to come up with all this information. So, we have a tremendous amount of information available that was gathered at a relatively high cost and we'd like to share that with you and make it available to because it has been all put together. We go big stacks of it, so we' 11 gladly turn that over to you so that you don't have to search that material out on your own. Chairman Trefelner: Thanks. ~ ~ Mr. Williams: Here we go again with ~ 7213,. Construction of County funded public facilities in the co~~as~al high hazard areas 31 ; shall be prohibited unless a facility is necessary for public access or natural resource restoration or enhancement or to provide for existing recreational facilities in other appropriate existing water dependent facilities. I' d like a clarification if I can before I make an objection to this policy of what constitutes public access. Would development of a bulkheaded freight terminal be considered public access? Mr. Virta: I' m trying to find the page Mr. Williams: Page 35, sorry. Chairman Trefelner: While he' s looking, Blaine, I interrupted a developer yesterday to ask him how much, how long, how much longer he expected to speak in front of the Board, and I'll do so now. Mr. Wi 11 i ams : Yes s i r, di d my 10 mi nutes run out? That' s my last comment. No, I see one more green line, that' s it, that' s all I got. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, the wording in the policy I have before me says access, natural resource restoration or enhancement or to provide for recreational facilities and otner appropriate existing water dependent facilities. Mr. Wi 11 i ams : That' s exi s ~i ng. I t s ays provi de f or exi s ti n, , recreational facilities. Chairmar. Trefelner: Water dependent. Mr. Williams: ~r other appropriate existing water dependent facilities. Mr. Vi rta: Okay, the i ntent on s taf f' s part i s to del ete the word "existing" from that policy. Mr. Williams: Do you have a version I don' t have. I got yesterday's version at 12 noon and I don't see any stamp out through that. Mr. Virta: There . . . . Mr. Wi 11 i ams : There i s n' t one. You' re s ayi ng that that was the intention, but it didn't get conveyed to the paper. Okay. So, that es s enti ally changes the, s o we' re goi ng to obj ect to that policy. If it only applied to existing recreational facilities or other appropriate existing water dependent 32 facilities, then we don't have too much of a problem with the clarification of ~hat' s public access. But, if you' re allowing for construction of other or additional water dependent facilities in addition to what's existing, then we do have an obj ection. We find it in violation of the spirit of the prohibitions found throughout this element against the very same thing. Mr. McIntyre: Mr. Chairman, I' m probably the culprit on that particular item. When I went through this originally, I looked at the word existing and it concerned me that this may preclude the County from constructing recreational facilities on the Island, new recreational facilities on the Island, and I didn't think that was necessarily consistent with what I understood the Board' s policy was. So, I asked Mr. Virta if that was the intent and he said "no", and he suggested after discussing that we would recommend that the Board delete that word. Again, I want to make s ure, that' s not Mr. Vi rta, that was my thought there. Chairman Trefelner: I recall that. I believe we discussed this at the point of our previous hearings on it with the Board, was it not? Mr. McIntyre: I do recall some discussion, I don' t know whether we focused on that particular word or not, but I, that was my concern when I read this paragraph. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Com. Minix: Mr. Chairman, I' m a little confuseC. Blaine, are you saying that we're never to build anything on the beaches for the public or what. Mr. Williams: No, no, this relates to the port development. ' Chairman Trefelner: He was relating that particular one to the water dependent activities. Mr. Willi~,ms: Right, e~actly. Recreational facilities we were concerned about where it says "existing water dependent facilities can be added to or enhanced for County funded public facilities can be constructed, in addition to, as an addition to existing water dependent facilities. But, if you're constructing new water dependent facilities such as a bulkhead, freight terminal, we are opposed. That' s all we' re trying to clarify here. Cause the language does include "e~isting" it has not been deleted, it' s been added according to the underline, as a new pol i cy. Policy 7116. We'd like to amend the first sentence. After consulting with Department~ of Natural Resources and a representative of the South Florida Water Management District, SWIM Plan Co-ordinator, I suggested that it be altered to the County shall improve coordination rather than continue to coordinate with. 33 And, that concludes our comments. Did you get that. Chairman Trefelner: I heard it, but I didn't comprehend the difference. Mr. Williams: The County shall continue to coordinate with. We would like to say, have it say, the County shall improve coordination. Put a direct effort into improving coordination. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Mr. Williams: The existing level of coordination is not sufficient in our opinion. Does that clarify it? Chai rman Tre f el ner: Okay, al l ri ght. Mr. Williams: Thank you very much. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you. Mr. Virta. Mr. Virta: Genevieve Jackson. Chairman Trefelner: How many more speakers do we have on this element? Mr. V_rta: One, one more. Chairmar. Trefe~ne~: One more after Genevieve? Mr. V~ rta: ves sir. Chairman T~efelner: Okay. Ms. Jackson: For the record, my name is Genevieve Jackson, I reside in Port St. Lucie. My questions were actually addressed by Mr. Lloyd's comments earlier, so I won' t have anything else to say. Thank you. Chai~man Trefelner: Thank you, Genevieve. Mr. Virta: Betty Lou Wells, Mrs. Wells: Betty Lou Wells, and I'm speaking again for the Conservation Alliance. And it's a very specific recommendation here, and maybe you'll be able to go along with this one. It' s a matter of wor~ing of the background material. It' s on 34 paoe 5, the new language that has to do with protection of wildlife habitat and plants and animals. Unique environmental res ources i s the wordi ng, I bel i eve. I n the added 1 ar.guage i t was noted that there are several areas of upland habitat on Hutchinson Island that are considered unique and the Dolman Tract, is specifically mentioned, but then it goes on and it says the only possible unique uplands in the mainlands coastal area would be in the lower St. Lucie River area where scrublands have been identified; however, these may not be within the 10 foot contour that is the coastal area delineation and will~~therefore, be addressed further in the conservation element. Or resident botanical expert, Jane Brooks, says that there are uni que upl ands on the mai nl and and thi s was her s ugges ti on: To strike the language in the paragraph beginning with the only possible unique uplands, and substitute "unique uplands in the mainlands coastal area which need special protection are the scrublands between the FEC Railroad and US #1 both north and south of Ft. Pierce and the tropical hammock lands between FEC Railroad and the Indian River Lagoon south of Ft. Pierce." This is a matter of, I would say correcting some mis~information that is in that background material, and I think it' s a little important because if you forget about these things then you're certainly are not going to try and protect them if you have not specifically mentioned them. Chairman Trefelner: Let me ask Mr. Virta a question on that. The reference of a defini ~ion of a 10 foot contour line is that what defines the coastal corridor as opposed to something else? N;r. Vir~a: Yes sir. ChairmGn Trefeiner: And the elevations are significantly higher , than 10 feet in those areas that we' re talking Mrs. Wells: we just suggested dropping that about the St. Lucie River since there, it would seem to be auestionable whether it even applied or not, but we thought that it should be mentioned about the mainland, scrub and the tropical. M~. Virta: What we're dealing with here is the coastal and conservation are not identical elements but in some areas they overlap and that's the point at which we differentiate between what' s bei ng addres s ed i n coas tal vers us what' s bei ng addres s ed in the conservation element, and that is indeed the way we defined it was based on the contour line. Mrs. Wells: Yeah, but this is in the coastal area, this scrublands and this tropical hammock land. Mr. Virta: The scrub would not be. Mrs. Wells: Why would it not be? 35 Mr. Vi rta: Becaus e i t' s f ar above the 10 f oot el evati on. You~. talking about the area up around in the same general vicinity as the Savannas and that is outside of the coastal. Mrs . Well s: Ri ght. Oh, okay, that was a mi s-apprehens i on, a mistake on my part. Chairman Trefelner: Not that this issue cannot be addressed; however, in the conservation element. Correct. Mr. Virta: That' s correct. Also, just as a matter of information, the area that Mrs. Wells is talking about is in the background arY~, anal ys i s porti on of the P1 an whi ch although i t' s,_~ important to have accurate information, I don' t want it to~gnean that in any way whatsoever. The Ordinance that will be before the Board for adoption of the Plan would adopt the goals, objectives and policies and accompanied maps and would not adopt the background information. Mrs. Wells: Okay, that you very much. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you, Mrs. Wells. Is that it? Mr. Virta: That concludes the people signed up to speak on that el ement, Mr. Chai rman. Chairman Trefelner: And that was coastal under conservation. Mr. Virta: That was coastal. Chairman Trefelner: I j ust have, I do not wish to speak on it, but, I was handed this letter by a person who could not attend . today that was here yesterday to speak, Mr. Nick Wilbur. I think I've made copies for the members and I'll give it to the secretary to enter into the record. Mr. Wilbur is a resident of South Hutchinson Island and is proposing that the County adopt an Ordinance that would limit the height of condominium construction to four stories. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, outside of the changes that were outlined previously to you in the ORC Report responses as well as the memorandum that was passed, distributed to the Board, the staff would recommend that the policy 7.2.1.3 found on page 35 of the ORC Response Report that the term existing be deleted from it to clarify. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you. Any additional comments from the Commission? If not, is there a motion? Com. Minix: Make the motion that we tentatively approve and go to the next. Chairman Trefelner: Commissioner Minix moved that we tentatively approve with the comments that Mr. Virta outlined, is 36 there a second? Com. Fenn: Second Chairman Trefelner: Discussion, all in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Com. Krieger: Aye. Com. Mi ni x: Aye. Com. Fenn: Aye. Com. Culpepper: Aye. Chairman Trefelner: Any opposed? Mr. Virta, how many other elements do we have? Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, we have four remaining elements and we have a total of five people signed up to speak. Not on every element, but three people are signed up to speak on more than one of the four issues. Chairman Trefelner: We want to take a break? Okay, we'll take a break for about, seven minutes. We' 11 cont~ nue the hearing. D2r. Virta. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, the next element to be considered is the conservation element, and the first name I have is Mark Walters. Ch«irman Trefelner: I don' t see him. Mr. Virta: Okay, Maria Titherington. Ms. Titherington: Good afternoon, again. I am Maria Titherington on behalf of the Uniola Chapter of the Florida Native Plant Society. 1, ~.3 . I would like to ma some recommendations on the conservation element. Policy 8123 regarding the wording in order to promote an increase and positive results the policy should be changed to read instead of "St. Lucie County will continue to cooperate with," St. Lucie County will improve cooperation with adjacent local governments by doing the following and listing some methods." ~ l,~t~~ A recommendation for policy 8110.2, we recommend that instead of reading "the land development regulations shall encourage waste water re-use plans, " that it be changed to state "that the land development regulations shall require waste water re-use plans 37 for new sewage treatment plants." The Utilities Authority could be another vehicle for review and assistance to the utilities in t~ ~ the County• l 5~- ~~5~ .UJ3 (~J~~` 2~ Policy 8186 to be consistent wi~_the__Treasure Coas~Regional Policy P~I~an~and to comply with 9J5, 013, 2C, 3 and St. Lucie County should establish a Plan `~pres~erve--~'S"Jpercent of remaining native upland habitat within the unincorporated areas of the County. We recommend the adoption of a County public lands acquisition manual. This would be the first and best action to pursue. Other actions would be formation of a County Land Acquisition Committee and a Finance Committee, pursuing Florida DNR Recreation Development Assistance Programs for land acquisition, lobbying for CARL Program funds, sale of surplus lands, issuance of general obligation bonds after a referendum. There are possible alternatives to rejection of preservation of native upland habitat. We strongly recommend that the acceptance and fulfillment of .these and/or other alternatives be made a policy to be submitted to DCA. Com. Culpepper: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Trefelner: Commissioner'~ Culpepper. Com. Culpepper: Di dn' t we di s cus s doi ng s omethi ng 1 i ke that yesterday? I don' t know that we discussed putting it directly in the Plan, but, we did discuss it. Mr. Krieger brought it up as well as did some of the other groups. It may be possible then to put something in there along those lines with regard to some goal with regard to the acquisition of those lands. Would that be inappropriate in the Plan? I know we talked about the LDR's yesterday. I' m s orry, Ns . Ti theri ngton, i r we 1 et i t go, we mi ght j us t s i t here and forget to do something later if we have a mind to do something this afternoon. - Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, if that is the Board' s desire, certainly it would be appropriate to include obj ective and policies to that end. Com. Fenn: But is that question here, is that the same thing that Commissioner Trefelner referenced that we had the CARL Program to take care of that? Chairman Trefelner: Yes, what she' s suggesting, it' s not incorporated into our Plan though, we discussed this yesterday, I don't know if you were here or not, but we discussed some of the things that you are bringing up right now as being possible, pos s i bl y, or bei ng addres s ed i n our LDR' s, but we di dn' t di s cus s incorporating it into the Comprehensive Plan. I f there' s a way that we could incorporate it at this point in the game, I get the feeling that there would be no objection from the Commission to do so. Mr. Virta: Do you have language that you can leave with us that we can. ' 38 Ms. Titherington: Yes, I' ve given you a copy. Chairman Trefelner: Yes. Com. Mi ni x: Mr. Chai rman. Be f ore we 1 eave thi s though, there' s one, the first thing you said about better cooperation with the local government. I take that as meaning that we don't have good cooperation with local government. Is that what that refers to? Me . Ti theri ngton: Yes . Com. Minix: Because I think that in the past five years, the cooperation among local governments on all issues has improved immensely, and I wouldn't want to say something in there that indicates it's not on a good level of cooperation right now. Chai rman Tref el ner: Okay. Di d you have any addi ti onal comments? Ms . Ti theri ngton: No I don' t. _ Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Ms. Titherington: Thank you very much. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Mr. Vi rta, okay, I pres ume we' re goi ng to have some additional speakers maybe Mr. Virta, you can look over those written comments she has before we leave this element and see if there's someway to incorporate it. Nr. Vi rta: Yes s i r, Mr. Chai rman. ChGirman T_efelner: Thank you. - Mr. Virta: Next speaker is Blaine Williams. Mr. Williams: Have a confession to make, the environmentalists are working together behind the scenes and I have a, sort of a duplicate series of statements to make. I won' t read them, but one of the things that came from our study groups on the Comp Plan, were these discussions. Last night, we were up to two o' clock in the morning trying to come up with some viable alternative to the rejection for preservation. We researched a bunch of files that we had. We found that the County Public Lands Acquisition Manual of which I do have a copy to give to you, would be an excellent tool for proceeding with this process of developing some acquisition techniques. The County Land Acquisition Selection Committee can be appointed by you at any point in time. DNR Recreation Development Assistance Programs do have quite a some of money to local government for acquisition of recreational lands with the stipulation I think that they have to have a conservation easement to fit into this conservation element, which in most cases, wouldn' t be a problem. We strongly recommend that you, if you can today, incorporate some of this language or part of it in order to prevent any, well 39 s ay, to o f f er s omethi ng to DCA. That' s the reas on we s tayed up so late last r,ight trying to come up with something that would be of assistance to you. I' m not s ure i f poli cy 810. 2 was addres s ed by Ms . Ti theri ngton. Did she get into that one by any chance? Chairman Trefelner: 812.10 Mr. Williams: Yes, 810. 2. Chairman Trefelner: Yes. Mr. Williams: Well, I think mine are duplicate, we do concur with the Native Plant Society. I've got a cover letter here stating that in accordance with the provisions of 163. 3184, the attached materials are our written objections to the revised St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and these are being presented for consideration during the adoption proceedings, and as also provided any oral objections we may make during the proceedin_gs are included as part of these projections. Thank you. Chai rman Tre f el ne r: Thank you, B1 ai ne. Mr. Virta: Betty Lou Wells. Mrs. Wells is the last person signed up to speak on this element. Mrs. Wells: And, you can ~ake me off your capital improvements list. Betty Lou Wells, I'm here in behalf of the Conservation ~lliance of St. Lucie County. In the conservation element, on page 19 of your responses we think that the agencies that would help identify environmentally sensitive lands would benefit that list by adding the Soils Conservation Service and the Department of Natural Resources. Would that not be, would those not be appropriate agencies that are here in the County also? Chai~man Trefelner: I missed your reference. Mrs. Wells: This is page 19 the list of agencies that would help identify environmentally sensitive lands. That's policy 8112.1 and staff added a list of people who were to do that including Fish and Wildlife, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish, South Florida Water Management District, U. S. Department of Agriculture and the State Universities. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Mrs. Wells: None of which I believe are right here, have offices in the County necessarily. Mr. Virta: I f I could, Mr. Chairman, what we' ve done is 40 identified, we just mentioned various governmental agencies and then say such as, and this is just an indication of where we were going to go to seek information so, that's not on an inclusive Mrs. Wells: You wouldn' t be restricted, of course, but it did seem to me as a matter of courtesy and not forgetting, I think we forget the soils service every once in a while and they do have a lot of valuable research and printed out information that can help iden`ify because of the soils that go with certain types of habitat and so forth. Chairman Trefelner: We weren' t intending to make an exclusive 1 i s t, as he i ndi cated, and I don' t s ee any harm though i n addi ng if it's the pleasure of the Board. Mre . Wel l s: You' re j us t not goi ng to 1 et me change anythi ng i n this Plan, are you? Chai rman Tre f el ner: No, I' m j us t tal ki ng about, I j us t s ai d that I don' t see any harm in changing this, so if it' s the pleasure of the Board. Com. Fenn: You mentioned two, you said the Soil Service Conservation Group and somebody else. Mrs. Wells: Department of Natural Resources, yeah. Com. Mir.ix: Let' s add them. Chai rman Tre f el ne=: Okay, i f there' s no obj e cti on f rom any member of the Board, it was suggested that we add. I f there is , no objection, then staff would you insert those ;wo agencies in tne example of the list. Mrs . We11 s: Thank you, you' ve made ~ two days . The cther recommendation that we have in the conservation element concerned your wording on pages 3 under protection of air quality and page 5 protection conservation of natural functions of soils. We would like to see added a policy or policies which would restrict the use of ORV's (Off Road Vehicles) and ATV's (All Terrain Vehicles~ to public and private lands which have been - designated for such use. We have seen, of course, in the Savannas very obvious evidence of bad results leading from vehicles being where they should not be. Not all of them are, fall into the category of ORV' s or ATV' s; however, just the other day I was driving down Edwards Road and close to Ft. Pierce Central there was a three wheeled vehicle speeding along the publ i c ri ght of way there and j us t throwi ng di rt up i nto the ai r tremendously which is the reason that we are concerned about air quality in connection with the vehicles. The soil erosion potential, of course, is great also with these vehicles. If you've been up in an airplane recently and looked down over much of Florida, you see these paths that are just criss-crossing Counties that have been caused by Off Road Vehicles that are just going any place they choose to and in some cases making deep ruts 41 and paths and chopping down anything in the way of natural res ources and nati ve growth i n thei r path. We don' t thi nk thi s is a right of people to go onto public or private property without permission and do this. And so, we would like to see pri vate property owners that do not mi nd havi ng s omeone do thi s on their private property or the County Government that might have some property where they would not mind vehicles going on it to designate these rather than do it the other way around and make the staff go out and identify all the sensitive places where they should not be. Because you' re going to miss some and it' s a big job and it would be, seems to us, much simpler to to let the County identify where it would be okay to go and they everybody would know including,the people that want to do this. Com. Fenn: May I say something to that? Chairman Trefelner: Commissioner. Com. Fenn: Mrs. Wells, do you remember, can you remember about seven to ten years ago before this Lawnwood Complex was developed to what it is now that we had what we thought was a bike trail in there? Do you remember the old bike trail that was behind the football stadium? Mrs . Wel l e: Yes . Ri ght, and there was s ome ques ti on about insurance and liabilities or something. Com. Fenn: Ri ght. Ri ght, and we got i nvol ved i n that. So, when you are tal ki ng about the County des i gnati ng thos e type of areas it goes much further. The County or the City, it really doesn' t matter, but it goes much further than just saying you' re going to desianate that particular area because if you designate that particular area for that activity then the courts of the land will then look toward you to be liable for whatever happens - there and that's why we have to eventually eliminate that old bike path. Which we thought it was a good thing, we even went out and put some mounds out for the guys to go up the mounds and see how far they can go through the air. It might have been stupid to do it, but we did it. Com. Minix: Was somebody there to catch them, like you. Com. Fenn: No, someone did, wasn' t able to do it and got hurt. Mrs. Wells: I think this is being taken up in connection with skateboarding and that kind of thing as to the liability of a government that might set one of these up. It seems to me that there should be a way of handling that so that it would come under what we already have. Com. Fenn: I just wanted to bring that across in your mind. Okay. ~ Mrs . Wel l s: Ri ght, ri ght. Chairman Trefelner: We have had it in a previous meeting some ~---~--c~~s~u~~ i~~~~~~srr~terai~ and Of f Road Vehi cl es and I thought it was addressed in the Plan. G'~ ~ ~ f1 ~ 42 Mrs . Wel l s: I t' s the other way around, i t' s i n there, we have to identify where they are not to go. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Oh, ri ght. Mrs. Wells: And this then doesn't really do anything for private property owners who may or may not present or may not know what's going on off the road. Com. Minix: Mr. Chairman, you know I think with private owners it really, they really, if they don't want those vehicles on there they have ways of blocking the entrances to get there, and, I don' t think, the County can only do so much. I don' t think we can take on the responsibility of keeping these vehicles off of everybodies private property unless they come to us or to the Sheriff's Department and say, these people are trespassing and I've put up a sign saying "no trespassing," then they can be arrested. Mrs. Wells: I'm not suggesting that the County try to patrol the whole place, I'm just saying that it seems to me a much more logical orderly dependable system to say here is where you should be and every pl ace el s e you s houl d be, and then i f s omebody has an objection and raises it, it would be Chairman Trefelner: But the problem that I find is that I don't know if I could think of a place that I would say here is where you should be, and if we have that in the Plan I think it would be incumbent upon us to find that place. M~6. Welis: Well we only need about one or two I would tnink. Com. Mi n? x: And then i ns ure i t. I was goi ng to s ay the s ame - thing that Havert did. Mrs . Wel l s: I don' t thi nk they' re here to s tay mys el f, I thi nk they're doing a great deal of damage and they`re dangerous to people who ride them and all that kind of thinq, but that I'm s aying is up to them, but when you' re doi ng damage to our 1 and, our private land, or public land, then I think we ought to be doing something about it, and this is our suggestion. Chairman Trefelner: Well we are going to do something about it by identifying places that they will be prohibited, but I don't think the Board is inclined to do the opposite and identify permitted areas. Are you? Mrs. Wells: Thank you. Chairman Trefelner: But you got one thought. Thank you. Mr. Vi rta. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, that concludes all the people who have signed up to speak on this element. 43 If I could, Mrs. Munshaw has roughed out a couple of policies based on the comments offered by Ms. Titherington, and they would follow in the conservation element policy $..~-8~"which is the basic upland policy. ~ ~ ~ ` First one would be a polic ~-~8-'~ which agreed by August 1, 1992, the County shall adopt a Public Lands Acquisition Manual to set forth procedures for identifying four acquisition, areas having intact native plant communities. ~ ( And, the second one would be polic~~~8~88, in order to preserve upland habitat the County shall establish a County Land Acquisition Selection Committee and Land Acquisition Finance Committee. In addition the County shall pursue funding DNR, Recreation Development Assistance Programs, law before Florida CARL Program funds to be spent in St. Lucie County and monitor sales of public lands to identify possible habitat sites for preservation. . Chairman Trefelner: Okay. Board have any objection to the inclusion of those policies and objectives? Com. Culpepper: Now did I hear anything about the referendum and exclude that? Chairman Trefelner: Commissioner Culpepper asked if there was any inclusion of public funds through a bond issue if approved by the Electorate, and I don't recall how it was supposed to be added in there. Com. Culpepper: I thought Ms . Ti theri ngton s ai d s ometni ng to that. We talked about that specificall~~ yesterday. Mr. Vir~a: The comments that were submitted by Ns. Titherington , had at the bottom of the list issuance of general obligation bonds after referendum, but we did not incorporate that into the two policies that we suggested. Chairman Trefelner: That would be an Acquisitiori~v(s Manual that probably would address those issues. Mr. Virta: Right, the manual would identify the areas that would be a . . . . . . Chairmar. Trefelner: Wait, hold it and then the Funding Committee. Nr. Virta: And, you' d have a Finance Committee and assumable part of the function of that Committee would be a recommendation as to how local financing could be arranged for it. Com. Culpepper: So then, it would be covered? Come be it through a(?) way through that, but it would be covered then? Chairman Trefelner: Through the Finance Committee I would believe. 44 Mr. Virta: Yes ma~. Com. Culpepper: Alright, thank you. Chairman Trefelner: Any objection to the inclusion of those objections and policies? Okay, we' 11 include those as part of the draft. There are no other people who are signed up to speak on this issue. Mr. Vi rta: No s i r. Chairman Trefelner: The pleasure of the Board to adopt as amended, tentatively. Com. Minix: So move. Com. Culpepper: Second Chairman Tre~elner: All in favor say aye. Aye. Com. Kri eger: Aye. Com. Mi ni x: Aye. Com. Fenn: Aye. Com. Cult~epper: Aye. Cha~ rmGn Trefelne=: Any opposed? Okay, ne}.t. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, the ne~t element is the Parks and Recreation element. We have two people signed up to speak. Maria Tithertington is the first person. Ms. Titherington: Good afternoon, I' m Maria Titherington on behalf of the Uniola Chapter of the Florida Native Plant Society. i~ 1~~- In reference to policy _3-~-~', we recommend Com. Fenn: Could you give us a page number on that if you have it? Ms , Ti theri ngton: I don' t have one. Com. Fenn: Thank you. Ms. Titherington: The last sentence in that paragraph. We recommend they be changed to read "the study shall be adopted by the County Commission as an amendment to this Comprehensive Plan. Com. Fenn: What are we 1 ooki ng f or, may I as k. 45 Ms. Titherington: Rather than as stated, "shall be presented to the County Commission for consideration as an amendment to this Comprehensive Plan." Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, Mr. McIntyre might like to give further comment, but the intent, on our part, in writing it that way is that we can't predetermine the future action of this Board, and so we can only simply offer stuff to the Board. The Board, I don't believe future Board's to specific actions. Com. Fenn: Fifth line from the bottom. Chairman Trefelner: I can't even find the section here. Com. Fenn: Open space in recreation. Mr. Virta: It' s on page 6 of the staff response to Parks and Recreation. Chairman Trefelner: Just for some clarifying. I understand what you are attempting to assure that the County does what we're saying that we're doing. The process of amending the Plan includes the public hearing and presumably the study could be, the study that was referenced here, could be amended at that public hearing and not adopted.in its entirely, so the intent, as I understand it from Mr. Virta, is to allow for and provide for the possibility of amendments to that Plan as a result of input from the public, people such as you, and not tying us to the adoption of the entire Plan. i~r. McI ntyre, woul d you cl ari f y tha Nr. McIr.tyre: ~1= future Plan amendments of this nature will , require a public hearing. we're limited to two a year except in emergency s i tuati ons , and you' re exactl y ri ght. I t woul d be inappropriate for the Board to pre-judge approval or disapproval of this in advance of the public hearing. That's the whole point of the public hearing to allow the Board the option of hearing public input and then determining on that basis and on the basis of the Board's opinions formed during the public hearing process, whether to approve or disapprove. Chairman Trefelner: Now, I interpret this sentence to read that the study will be presented to the County Commission and it will be scheduled for a Plan amendment. Is that correct? Mr. Virta: That is the intent there is to, it would be presented as an amendment to the Plan. Chairman Trefelner: But, you look at this sentence in another way you could read it as the study shall be presented to the County Commission for their consideration of even beginning the process. Mr. Virta: Another way to write, to read, if we wanted to re- word it is submitted to the County Commission as a proposed amendment. 46 Chairman Trefelner: As a proposed Plan amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Okay. For c=arifying, that is the intent of the policy, is it not to have a public hearing on that as a Plan? Mr. Virta: Yes sir. Chairman Trefelner: And if that is the intent of that policy then it would be made more clear, it would be made clearer if it read "the study shall be presented to the County Commission as a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Vi rta: Yes s i r. Ms. Titherington: In regards to Chairman Trefelner: If that's the intent of the motion, if that's the intent of the policy that would clarify it. Any objection? Okay, thank you for your comment on that. ~ (~S Ms. Titheri~ngton: Okay, we had a recommendation in regards to polic 91~ that the recommendation is that the date be specified when impact fees will be implemented. Fees should be utilized to fund the studies already committed to be undertaken. This should be stated in the policy. Chairman Trefelner: Do you have anymore? You want to just quite? Okay. I don' ~ have that P1 an that. Mr. Vi Mr. Chai rman, tnere i s a date i n the P1 an whi ch . calls Tor an impact, establishment of impact fees b~~ 1995. Chai~man Trefelner: Okay. Ns . Ti tneri ngton: we over 1 ooked i t, s orry. Chairma*.: Trefelner: Thank you for your comments. Mr. Virta: Betty Lou Wells Mrs. Wells: In the recreation and open space element, page 5, item 30, is notation that a softball quadraplex is to be built in 1991 and 1992 at an undetermined site, but at the same time, on the top of page 6, it's noted that no additional sites for recreation are being planned for, for the next five years, I take it? Chairman Trefelner: Well, I think the intent is to construct it on an existing site. 47 Mrs . Wel l s: I' m s orry, I di dn' t unders tand. Chairman Trefelner: The intent is to construct it on an existing site. Mrs. Wells: Well, it certainly didn' t say that. Com. Fenn: Excuse me, but did you read further? That quadraplex softball field has been talked about being built in the St. Lucie West area, and then on your next page it tells you that at this time, the County is not planning any additional sites other than what we had shown back on the previous page. Mrs. Wells: Well, it was not definite by any means that it was to be built at St. Lucie West. Com. Fenn: Well, it said it might be located in the St. Lucie West area and that has been talked about. Mrs . Wel 1 e: Al 1 ri ght. . Com. Fenn: Yeah, s o, s o Mrs. Wells: But does this mean they're going to donate it or are we going to have to secure it and pay for it. Cha~ rman Tref el ner: No, we don' t have, I dor.' t bel i eve we have funds programmed fo~ acquisition, so. Com. Fenn: And, I believe that's why you have the one from staff ~ response on top of page 6, is that right Mr. Virta? Is that why we have that response from staff on page 6, that you are not planning any additional ones? Mr. V~=ta: Yes sir, and I point out that this is, that three lines ~ight there is purely staff' s response that' s intended to go ultimately back to DCA as opposed to being incorporated into the element itself. Com. Fenn: Right. Chairman Trefelner: That's an explanation of our policy and objective and not an amendment to it. Is Lhat what you are s ayi ng? Mrs. Wells: The Conservation Alliance is concerned that there is no money planned for the next five years for the need of future population both for unincorporated area and regional facilities for total County population, which we think should be being planned for in accordance with 9J-5 0142C. And, just because they' re needed as well. What is the thinking that we' re 48 not seeking any sites at this time before prices go up and all that sort of thing when we know we are going to need more recreation facilities? Chairman Trefelner: This was discussed quite extensively, the part that has to do with the money, the element and the dollar tag that was attached to it was considerably higher, in fact, it was so high that we had no identified source of revenue to find to ear-mark specifically for that purpose. I don't think it means that we are not going to acquire additional lands or additional parks or public areas, it' s just that we' re not programming them in for dollars for paying for them for purchase purposes. Is that correct? Mr. Virta: Yes, Mr. Chairman. There are no identified needs within the time frame of the 1995 time frame, the short range perspective of this Plan that are level of service needs. As a result, and that really comes from the fact that the larger facilities, the Community reaching type facilities, this County right now is very blessed because the public at large, and the Board, has been aggressive in providing that level of facilities, so we have a significant amount of land in this capacity, or in this category right now. Ultimately, there will be need for additional, but within that time frame and with the monetary constraints faced by the Board they were not included at this poi nt. Mrs. Wells: Are there provisions as development takes place, where ever it's goinq to take place, that these will be looked at i n good ti me s o that they won' t get, s o that it won' t be an un- met need and so that there will be plans and money being put into it whether they are called for and identified now in the Plan or not. Is there a policy that will, I know we've got a level of service, a nalf an acre, 1, 000 people, but this doesn' t really say it all, it doesn' t say that we' re doing this with regional facilities as well as neighborhood parks? Mr. Viria: Mr. Chairman. The level of service does provide for three levels of parks. Their reference~C in the ORC Response Report was purely to the one, the neighborhood park facilities but that all facilities that have a level of service assigned to them will be monitored on an ongoing basis so that as development occurs, the impact of development on those facilities will be continuously monitored. It will be necessary to do that to make s ure that i ndeed we' re correct at thi s poi nt, and i f not, we` 11 have to make mid-course corrections as we go along. Mrs . Wel l s: Wel l, as the pers onal as i de, agai n, I woul d j us t like to point out that this is something that can easily get s hoved as i de when we need roads and we need, mus t have j ai 1 s by 1 aw and al ot of other thi ngs that we mus t have, and I thi nk i t would be real unfortunate if this County, which has had good recreational facilities for the most part, for us to drop behind. I'm particularly concerned with the need for a teen center, a large teen center. I note that a swimming pool is planned eventually, but that swimming pool has been talked about for about 25 years now, and we still don' t have it, and I think this may certainly, could be, one of our problems with bored teen- agers who don' t have enough good things to do. So, I hope there will be concern and attention paid to this particular item and that we don't just do the things we must do and forget about this 49 one. Com. Fenn: Well, Mrs. Wells, I will say for the next five to ten years, as I sit here, I will keep recreation utmost in the minc.s of my fellow Commissioners. Mrs . Wel l s: Thank you, that' s good to hear. Chairman Trefelner: Five to 10. Com. Mi ni x: How 1 ong di d you s ay? Com. Fenn: Oh, that what woke you up, didn' t it? Com. Fenn: Make up you mind Fenn, is it five or is it 10. ~ Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, there is no one else registered to speak on this element. Chairman Trefelner: Al1 right. What's the pleasure of the Board? We've directed some changes. Gom. Minix: Move tentative approval. Chairman Trefelner: With the changes that we have previously directed? Com. Mir._x: Right. Chairman Trefelner: Is there a second? Com. Culpepper: Second. Chairman Tre=elner: Motion and a second, all in favor say aye. Aye. Com. Krieger: Aye. Com. M~ r.~ x: Aye. Com. Fenn: Aye. Com. Culpepper: Aye. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Any oppos ed? Moti on c arri es . Mr. Vi rta. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman, the next element is intergovernmental coordination, and we have one person registered to speak, Betty Lou Wells. 50 • Chairman Trefelner: Is that the last element? Mr. Virta: We have capital improvements remaining, but we have no one registered to speak on capital improvements. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you. Mrs. Wells: Betty Lou Wells for the Conservation Alliance. Intergovernmental Coordination, Page 6, discusses hurricane evacuation. It does not address the different problems that would arise in case of nuclear power plant accident requiring evacuation. We feel this should be addressed including, a clearer explanation where ever appropriate in the Plan or how the Walton Road bridge is to be built despite environmental and physical difficulties in a timely manner. Also we feel DCA's should be given an answer to their question on how current use of Jensen Beach bridge can be reduced. They are, they seem to be concerned with the present level of St. Lucie County citizen use of Jensen Beach bridge, and they were asking for some recognition of that and some wording that this County is concerned in trying to reduce the overuse, if you will, of Jensen Causeway. Chairman Trefelner: I don't know how we're going to reduce overuse of the Jensen Causeway. I think it's been recognized for a long time that there is some traffic constraints that involve the Jensen Causeway. An alternative that we discussed way back when we were looking at the, what was that called? It's so long ago I don't even remember what the name of it was. Mr. V~ rta: Tne Hutchinson Island Resource Management Plan. Cha~ rman mrefelner: The Hutchinson Island Resource Plan. M~. Virta: Resource Management Plan. ~ Chairman Trefe'ner: Resource Management Plan and it identified improvements that should be the responsibility of St. Lucie County to the Jensen Beach Causeway, and I believe we approached that issue and didn't receive a positive response from that government to the south and in turn it was suggested that we discuss the walton Road crossing which would have an additional benefit to provide Island access for the mainland people, in my estimation, as well as provide exit from the Island people to the mai nl and. But, I don' t know where the f undi ngs comi ng f or that or we don't have that programmed into any specific year do we? I don' t know where we' d find the, if we have to do it on our own without state help, I j ust don' t know where we' d find the money to do it. Com. Mi ni x: Mr. Chai rman. Chai rman Tre f el ner: Yes . Com. Mi ni x: Thi s i s s omethi ng that we' ve al s o taken up on the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council level. Martin County 51 has written to the Governor, the previous Governor and the present Governor, so have we. We have, this Commission has gone on record with the state and federal government that we very much favor having the bridge put in place. As you probably know, the former Governor would not allow any state funds to be used for it. Federal government has said there will not be any state funds, or federal funds rather, so we' re in a position where we are talking about a 50 to 65 million dollar bridge and the state and federal governments are saying you're on your own, and there's just no way that in this Comprehensive Plan we can even mention it because this only goes to 1995 and there's no way that bridge is going to be accomplished in that short of time. Mre. Welle: What does this do to your ability to permit additional construction on South Hutchinson Island? Com. Minix: Staff will have to answer that. Mrs . Wel l s: I di dn' t unders tand the termi nol ogy about "commencement level". Mr, Virta: What is being allowed on the Island right now is what was agreed to in the Hutchinson Island Resource Management Plan. What is happening with this Plan will not have an effect one way or another on permitting, and the bottom line is, there's not a whole lot left to permit in that part of the County. Mre. Wells: But nothing new can be permitted down there, is that the case? Chairmar. Tre~elr.er: Only up to E5 is it 65 0? Mr. V~ r~a: Appro~imately 65%. , Chairman Trefelner: If you take the allowed maximum density and divide it by, or multiple it by 65o then that's what wouid be allowed on the remaining undeveloped property. Mrs . Wel l s: That di dn' t. Chairman Trefelner: There's not much remaining undeveloped property, what you see going up there right now are site plans that have been approved five, six, seven years ago and are just now being built, so I mean, there is no significant amount of acreage, there's some vacant parcels but there is very little significance, am I correct? Dir. Vi rta: Yes . Chairman Trefelner: Acreage in that vicinity that's left to be developed. Mr. Virta: That's correct, that portion of the Island is virtually developed at this point, recognizing all the various constraints that are put upon ~hem. 52 Mrs. Wells: As you drive down there it seEms as t~ough there is still a lot of undeveloped land between Ft. Pierce and Jensen. Does that, I mean I know some of it is park land but Chairman Trefelner: I was addressing south of the nuclear power plants. Mrs. Wells: Right, cause you assume that otherwise the traffic is going to go the other direction. Thank you. Mr, Virta: That concludes the people signed up to speak. Chairman Trefelner: Okay. What's the pleasure of the Board? Tentatively adopt the element? Com. Fenn: That we tentatively adopt this Intergovernmental Coordination element. ~ Com. Minix: Second Chairman Trefelner: Second by Commissioner Minix. Any discussion? Al1 in favor say aye. Aye. Com. Kri eger: Aye. Com. M~nix: Aye. Com. Fenn: Aye. Com. Culpep~er: Aye. Chairman Trefelner: Any opposed? Motion carries. Next. Mr. Vi rta: Mr. Chai rman, the remai ni ng el ement i s the Capi tal Improvements element and we have nobody signed up to speak on that item. Mr. Minix: Move we tentatively adopt that element. Chairman Trefelner: You don't have any additional comments other than those presented to us. Mr. Vi rta: No s i r, unl es s Mr. Kurek mi ght. Chairman Trefelner: Mr. Kurek. Commissioner Minix moves as a tentative adoption of that element, is there a second. 53 Com. Krieger: Second Chairman Trefelner: Discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Com. Krieger: ~ye. Com. Mi ni x: Aye. Com. Fenn: Aye. Com. Culpepper: Aye. Chairman Trefelner: Any opposed? Motion carries. That's all of them right? Mr. Vi rta: Yes s i r. Chairman Trefelner: Motion then would be in order to approve the Comprehensive Plan for St. Lucie County which incorporates all the elements that the Board had previously discussed and made tentative adoptions thereof, by Resolution No. 90-1 Mr. McI ntyre: Mr. Chai rman, i t' s Ordi nanc e 9 0-1 and j us t 1 et me indicate that would adopt as you indicate the Comprehensive Plan as previously amended by the Board, including changes made to the Future Land Use Map. It would also repeal the 1981 Growth Management Policy Plan affectionately known as GMP. Chairman Trefelner: What's the effective date of this. Mr. McIntyre: It will be effective, Mr. Chairman, on the date it is ~eceived by the Secretary of State. Cnairmar. '~re~elne~: Okay. Is there a motion? Pardon me. , Mr. Mclntvre: It will be transmitted in accordance with state law, five copies will be transmitted to the Department of Community Aifairs for their review and comment. Chairman Trefelner: Thank you. Is there a motion to adopt? Com. Minix: So move. Chairman Trefelner: Is there a second? Is there a second? Com. Culpepper: I' 11 second that. Chairman Trefelner: Motion and second to adopt and transmit. Under discussion just an approximate date, I have stacks and stacks of drafts and re-drafts and re-drafts of re-drafts and I want to throw them all away in favor of replacing it with what we've adopted. When do you think we can have a clean copy of this available? 54 Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman we will be, we have five days to trans mi t to the Department of Communi ty Af f ai rs . At that poi nt, we will have a limited amount of xerox produced copies; however, we will be sending the remainder out for printing so they can be done at a lower cost than we. can on our own copying machines. So, in direct answer to your question, I would hope that by the end of next week. Certainly in terms of having them available to the public at large it probably will be two to three weeks by the time you print them. Chairman Trefelner: Motion's on the floor then, to adopt and we' 11 do this by roll call. Deputy Clerk: Commissioner Krieger? Com. Kri eger: Yes mame. Deputy Clerk: Commissioner Fenn? Com. Fenn: Yes mame. Deputy Clerk: Commissioner Culpepper? Com. Culpepper: I'm gonna vote right after I get one quick question answered. My negative votes of yesterday, will they be reflected in the minutes of these meetings? Chai~m~n Trefelne~: I hope that ~hey are because I'd like mine reflected :~n them also. M~. NcIntyre: Yes, we will probably be getting a certified ~ transcript in an anticipation of future actions, in fact, I've already started ordering that. Com. Fenn: We have to have all that at the Administrative Heari ng. Mr. McI ntyre: Yes s i r. Com. Fenn: All right. Com. Culpepper: Yes mam1~. Deputy Clerk: Commissioner Minix? Com. Minix: Yes mam~. Deputy Clerk: Commissioner Trefelner? 55 Chairman Trefelner: Yes marr'~. The Plan is adopted, that' s the only item we had on the Agenda. Mr. Chi s hol m: Mr. Chai rman. Chairman Trefelner: I didn' t ask if staff had anything to say. Watch it Chisholm. How long does he have to go before he' s off probation? Yes sir, Mr. Chisholm. Mr. Chisholm: Mr. Chairman, ~ in a matter that' s related to the Plan, as you recall, we' ve made a number of copies available to the publ i c i n the pas t f or thei r us e and the s ame wi 11 be true of this document, I' m sure. There' s been some question about the charge the County has for those documents. We estimate the cost to be somewhere around $50.00 once we get the printed copy available to the public. In the last printing of the ORC Responses, we made some public copies available at no charge and we only attempted to charge some of them when they wanted more than one copy for their own use because we were just trying to be helpful at that point. But, I don't want to get into a situation where we have a burden on the County for the copies, but at the same time we want to provide the public service that we need to provide by making copies. I f it' s your consideration or if it' s you desire, and with your approval, we'd recommend that we establish a$25.00 fee for the document eventhough it' s going to cost us $50. 00, unless you want to charge the whole $50.00 fee for the document. Com. Culpepper: Mr. Chairman, didn't we adopt a policy for those that either couldn't afford it or were unwilling to pay the true cost that they leave a substan~ial deposit and that they return the document when they were rinished with their review? I don't , know i f P1 anni ng ever did that, but we voted to do that, do you remember back during the summer? Com. Mi ni x: Wha ~ I thi nk we di d, Mr. Chai rman, to answer that, we put them in all the libraries and we put them out here is wnat we, so that anyone who didn' t want to buy one wouldn' t have to. Com. Culpepper: Well I know we talked about letting them leave a deposit too so they could take them home with them and look at them and then bring them back. Com. Minix: I don' t remember that. Com. Culpepper: I do. Mr. Chisholm: I just wanted to cover this before we got the documents back and I know we're going to have some requests as we move forward we'll have several requests. Chairman Trefelner: The cost to print it will be $50.00? 56 Mr. Chi s hol m: Wel l, we' re j us t es ti mati ng that cos t that was basically what it cost us the last time, as I understand it, somewhere in that neighborhood. Mr. Virta: Mr. Chairman it came to $49.00 and some change so we for the draft Plan and rounding it off, we just charged simply $50. 00 to everybody. Com. Fenn: I would be for at least charging half the price. I wouldn't want to charge the entire amount, but I do think that rather than have people coming in and just pick them up that we do charge half of the amount. And, I also to what we did do once before, make them available at our facilities. Mr. Chisholm: At the libraries. Com. Fenn: Right, and if they can make use of them at that. Chairman Trefelner: Well, we' re prohibited by law from chargi`ng more than what it costs us. ~ Com. Fenn: Right. Chairman Trefelner: It' s hard from to imagine it costing $50. 00 but if it does and if you suggest that we charge $25.~0 for a limited number of copies, then I'll go along with it. Mr. Chi s hol m: Mr. Chai rman, i f I c an al s o j us t c 1 ari f y that because we do provide cobies to the libraries for the public's use ir. the reference area. I'd also indicate that we provide copies to the governmental entities that are in the area at no , charge. Com. Fe~:~: You want a motion on that Mr. Chairman? Chai rmGn Tre f el ner: I don' t know i f we need one. Why don' t you investigate it further and bring it back to our next meeting. Mr. Chi s hol m: Okay. Chairman Trefelner: Anything else? Mr. Chisholm: That' s all I have Mr. Chairman. Chairman Trefelner: They're not going to be ready by the time our next meeting comes around. Mr. Chi s hol m: No s i r. 57 . Com. Fenr_: I move we adjourn, if it' s okay with you Mr. Chai rman. Mr. Williams: Mr. Chairman you might admonish everyone to recycle those multiple draft Plans. It's alot of paper. Mr. McIntyre: Mr. Chairman related to the Comprehensive Plan changes there were two right-of-way agreements that I would like the Board to formally approve. That you have seen previously, one with Interstate Citrus and the other with St. Lucie Groves. Those do provide for conveyance of the property at no cost to the County. In one case there is no road impact fee credit that' s with Mr. Rhodes, he is receiving no road impact fee credits. He's agreed to waive those and the other case, the value is as of January 1, 19(?) I believe, Com. Culpepper, one of her concerns. Chai rman Tref el ner: Okay, we' ve di s cus s ed thes e bef ore. Mr. McIntyre: Staff recommends approval. Chairman Trefelner: Is there a motion? Com. Minix: Move we approve both. Com. Krieger: Second Cha~~man Trefeiner: NoLion and a second, all in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Com, Kri eger: Aye. Com. Mi ni x: Aye. Com. Fenn: Ave. Com. Culpepper: Aye. Chairman Trefelner: Any opposed, like sign. Motion carries. We' re adj ourned. 58 . ~ 59