Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 03.18.2021PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA ST. LUCIE COUNTY Regular Meeting Thursday, March 18, 2021 6:00 PM St. Lucie County Commission Chambers 2300 Virginia Avenue 3rd Floor of Roger Poitras Building Fort Pierce, FL  34982 BOARD MEMBERS CHAIRMAN JAMES TAYLOR VICE‐CHAIRMAN ROBERT LOWE BOARD MEMBER CRAIG MUNDT BOARD MEMBER  VALERIE SLACK BOARD MEMBER CRAIG BRIDGERS BOARD MEMBER ED LOUNDS AT‐LARGE BOARD MEMBER LAWRENCE “BEAU” SLAY BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM O’DELL AT‐LARGE BOARD MEMBER RYAN BINNER EX‐OFFICIO BOARD MEMBER MARTY SANDERS Mission Statement St. Lucie Works to deliver superior service that enhances our quality of life Page 1 of 420 Regular Meeting                                             Thursday, March 18, 2021                                                 6:00 PM 2 | Page WELCOME Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers prior to entering the Commission Chambers. Please note that the Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency serves in an advisory capacity to the St. Lucie County  Board of County Commissioners and has the power to review and make recommendations to the Board, for approval or  disapproval, on any applications within their area of responsibility. The Planning and Zoning Commission strongly encourages your input and comment at the public hearing. Please limit comments  to three minutes if possible and be respectful of others’ opinions. For public convenience, all meetings are televised and are provided with wireless internet access. NOTICE: All Proceedings before this Board are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to appeal any action taken by the  Board at these meetings will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of  the proceedings is made. Upon the request of any party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn  in. Any party to the proceedings will be granted the opportunity to cross‐examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon  request. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the Human Resources  Department at (772) 462‐1546, HumanResources@stlucieco.org or TDD (772) 462‐1428 at least forty‐eight (48) hours prior to the  meeting. Page 2 of 420 Regular Meeting                                             Thursday, March 18, 2021                                                 6:00 PM 3 | Page 1.CALL TO ORDER    2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE    3.INVOCATION    4.ROLL CALL    5.ANNOUNCEMENTS    6.DISCLOSURE(S)    7.MINUTES     A.St. Lucie County Planning & Zoning Commission minutes for the meeting of February 18, 2021.     8.PUBLIC COMMENT    9.PUBLIC HEARINGS      A.St. Lucie County Selvitz Road Rezone. ‐ Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas (Rezoning) from I  (Institutional) to U (Utilities) Zoning District.  The petition site is located on the Southwest corner  of Selvitz Road and Energy Land.       B.Proposed Text Amendment to Land Development Code, Section 7.10.22 ‐Scrap, Waste, Recycling  Operations.      C.Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment: Amending the Port Sub‐Element to incorporate the 2020  Port Master Plan       D.A County initiated Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to Policy 1.1.8.1.b.to revise the  minimum open space ratio to be consistent with percentages identified in the Land Development  Code for all Planned Developments.     Page 3 of 420 Regular Meeting                                             Thursday, March 18, 2021                                                 6:00 PM 4 | Page   E.A County initiated Text Amendment to the Land Development Code to broaden staff's ability to  provide Administrative approvals, waivers, and an opportunity to phase required improvements  to encourage new business, and help existing businesses streamline the regulatory process.     10.WORKSHOPS    11.OTHER BUSINESS    12.ADJOURN    Page 4 of 420 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Regular Meeting February 18, 2021 Convened: 6:00 PM Adjourned: 7:36 PM 1.CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair Taylor at 6:00pm. 3.INVOCATION The invocation was led by Mr. Bridgers. 5.ANNOUNCEMENTS Chair Taylor moved Item 9B (a Targeted Industry project) ahead of Item 9A. Chair Taylor expressed thanks for the Board electing him as 2021 P&Z Commission Chair. 6.DISCLOSURE(S) None. 7.MINUTES 8.PUBLIC COMMENT None. 9.PUBLIC HEARINGS A.Happy Foods Agricultural Labor Housing - Conditional Use Petition to allow four (4) dwelling units for Agricultural Labor Housing on a 706.63 acre parcel within the AG-5 (Agriculture - 1du/5ac) Zoning District, and located at 29800 Orange Avenue, Fort Pierce, FL 34945. Presented by Kris McCrain, Associate Planner, Planning & Development Services. The subject properties are located at 29800 Orange Avenue, on the north side of Orange Avenue, approximately 3-miles east of the Okeechobee County Boundary. The combined 1,015-acre subject parcels are located at 29800 Orange Avenue, on the north side of Orange Avenue, approximately 3-miles east of the Okeechobee County Border. The agricultural housing development site is approximately 4,300 ft. north of Orange Avenue, and Page 5 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, February 18, 2021 6:00 PM 2 | Page encompasses approximately 7.7-acres of the overall 706.63-acre parcel. In accordance with public notice requirements outlined in Section 11.00.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, public notice was advertised in the St. Lucie County News Tribune on February 5, 2021.Notice and response forms were mailed to all property owners located within a 500-foot radius of all Happy Foods collective property holdings. As a courtesy, the Planning and Development Services Department sent mail notices to the property owners located within 500 feet of all Happy Foods collective property holdings, and not only the property directly affected by the Conditional Use Petition and a sign was placed on the property notifying the public of tonight's Public Hearing. Of the 80 notices mailed out, the Planning Department has received 48 returned responses for the Conditional Use Petition. 10 – are in favor (responses received in favor were provided by one property owner). 38 – are not in favor (and the 38 responses received in opposition were provided by 2 property owners). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission forward the Petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval, subject to the following Conditions of Approval outlined: 1.The housing provided shall be temporary and solely for agricultural laborers only. The property owner must provide a biannual report from the Health Department demonstrating compliance with state statute for Migrant Labor Camps 2.If the dwelling units are vacant for 12 months or more, the use will be considered abandoned, and the owner must remove the dwellings within 90 days. If the dwellings are not removed by the owner, the County will remove them at the expense of the owner. 3.No children below the age of 16 years of age shall reside in the agricultural housing dwelling units. 4.Prior to issuance of a Vegetation Removal Permit a Tree Survey and Tree Mitigation Plan shall be submitted describing to the County. 5.Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all Category I listed invasive plant species shall be eradicated from the site 6.The developer, heirs, and/or assigns agree the private access easement to the labor housing may only be used for direct agricultural operations of the site. Any changes in the site from agricultural operations and/or revisions of the labor housing will be subject to review of conditions and requirements consistent with County codes at that time. 7.Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall provide a service agreement for solid waste collection from a solid waste provider. APPLICANT/ AGENT: Tim Sallin, Co-CEO IMG Enterprises, Inc, 4000 N A1A, Fort Pierce, FL; Scott Holmes, General Contractor Mr. Sallin responded to the Board Member's (Vice-chair Lowe, Mr. Mundt, Mr. Lounds, Ms. Slack. Mr. Bridgers ) regarding mail-out response, the H2A Harvester's living Page 6 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, February 18, 2021 6:00 PM 3 | Page arrangements/building occupation, payroll, audits (Internal staff through daily supervision, weekly housing checks, and regulatory bodies: Department of Labor, Department of Health and Homeland Security). Facility location, layout and size, gender of workers, pre- employment background check/ recruitment process, wage rate, Fire Systems, transportation and eating area, harvester termination process, COVID-19 precautions and sanitation protocol's, worker's comp./ medical care. PUBLIC COMMENT: Tod Mowry, President of Redtail Design Group, Inc. and Alec Wynne, with Wynne Ranch Discussed concerns for the harvester's living conditions and safety concerns, the zoning and conditional use aspects of the proposal. Vice-chair Lowe disclosed that Mrs. Theresa Heise spoke to him prior to the meeting. Theresa Heise, 3001 Orange Ave, Fort Pierce, FL 34947, stated that she did not received a notice. Voiced her concerned about the dangerous traffic on Orange Ave. fear of her safety and issues of alcohol and drug abuse among the worker's Frank Louis, 28800 Orange Ave., Fort Pierce 34947 expressed his concerns for safety. Mr. Sallin reiterated that the proposed agricultural location is ideal for agricultural workers. Chair Taylor, Vice-chair Lowe and Mr. Mundt inquired about how the number of 96 harvester's requested for the Conditional Use came about; who verifies that the conditions of the request are being followed; and the change of ownership process. Linda Pendarvis, Planning Manager, Planning & Development Services confirmed that the County can revoke the conditional use approval if the conditions are not followed. Mr. Lounds, and Mr. Bridgers commented on the County's Conditional Use process. Leslie Olson, Planning & Development Services Director, requested clarification on the Board's recommendation of approval. RESULT: Approve with conditions: 1.The housing provided shall be temporary and solely for agricultural laborers only. The property owner must provide a biannual report from the Health Department demonstrating compliance with state statute for Migrant Labor Camps 2.If the dwelling units are vacant for 12 months or more, the use will be considered abandoned, and the owner must remove the dwellings within 90 days. If the dwellings are not removed by the owner, the County will remove them at the expense of the owner. 3.No children below the age of 16 years of age shall reside in the agricultural housing dwelling units. 4.Prior to issuance of a Vegetation Removal Permit a Tree Survey and Tree Mitigation Plan shall be submitted describing to the County. Page 7 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, February 18, 2021 6:00 PM 4 | Page 5.Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all Category I listed invasive plant species shall be eradicated from the site 6.The developer, heirs, and/or assigns agree the private access easement to the labor housing may only be used for direct agricultural operations of the site. Any changes in the site from agricultural operations and/or revisions of the labor housing will be subject to review of conditions and requirements consistent with County codes at that time. 7.Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall provide a service agreement for solid waste collection from a solid waste provider. 8.If there is a change in ownership, a full review is required by the Board of County Commissioners RESULT:APPROVE, WITH CONDTIONS MOVER:Board Member Ed Lounds SECONDER:Craig Mundt AYES:Chair James A. Taylor, Vice-chair Bob Lowe, Craig Mundt, Ed Lounds, Lawrence "Beau" Slay, Ryan Binner, Valerie Slack, Craig Bridgers NAYS:None EXCUSED:None B.FPL Sundew Solar Energy Center - Conditional Use Permit to construct and operate a 74.5 Mega- Watt (MW) Photovoltaic Solar Center on a 470.12 acre parcel within the AG-5 (Agriculture - 1du/5ac) Zoning District, and located approximately one (1) mile west of Glades Cut-Off Road and Carlton Road intersection. Presented by Jodi Nentwick, Senior Planner, Planning & Development Services. In accordance with public notice requirements outlined in Section 11.00.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, public notice was advertised in the St. Lucie County News Tribune on February 5, 2021. Notices were mailed to 15 surrounding property owners within a 500-foot radius of the subject property, and a sign was posted on the property. The Planning Department received one response in favor of the project. The Conditional Use Petition proposes to construct and operate a 74.5 mega-watt photovoltaic solar center known as Florida Power & Light Sundew Solar Energy Center. This is a targeted industry project within St. Lucie County. The property is located approximately one mile west of the of the Glades Cut-off Road and Carlton Road intersection. The subject property lies outside the urban services boundary and is zoned AG-5, which is consistent the AG-5 future use designation. Notices were sent to 15 property owners within 500 ft. of the subject site. The Planning Department has received one response in favor of the project. This petition conforms to the Standards of Review as set forth in St. Lucie County Land Development Code Section 11.07.03 and is consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives, and policies. Page 8 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, February 18, 2021 6:00 PM 5 | Page STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. APPLICANT/ AGENT PRESENTATION: Scott Scovill, Senior Project Manager with FP&L 700 Universe Blvd, Juno Beach, FL 33408. Provided an overview of the FPL/ Gulf Power service area, the solar operations center, the design and layout of each solar project, the production goal by 2030, the economic impact of jobs created due to the construction and instillation of the solar panels, and so forth. Mr. Scovill answered questions posed by Vice chair Lowe, Mr. Mundt asked and Ms. Slack regarding the number of homes to be provided with the power, the level of efficiency and back-up for power outages, power storage, distance from the solar system to the nearest fi station, potential fire risk, access points and so forth. Josh Long, Planner with Gunster Law Firm, made a correction regarding previous statement pertaining to environmental impacts. DEP wanted to claim furlow's as wetlands. They will mitigate according to environmental standards. RESULT: Approved RESULT:APPROVE MOVER:Vice-Chair Bob Lowe SECONDER:Board Member Craig Bridgers AYES:Chair James A. Taylor, Vice-chair Bob Lowe, Craig Mundt, Ed Lounds, Lawrence "Beau" Slay, Ryan Binner, Valerie Slack, Craig Bridgers NAYS:None EXCUSED:None 10.WORKSHOPS None. 11.OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Lounds inquired about the status of the open space requirement agenda item. Benjamin Balcer, Planning & Development Services Assistant Director confirmed that the item will be brought before the Board during the March 2021 P&Z Meeting. 12.ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 7:36 PM. Page 9 of 420 ITEM NO.(ID # 2021-51103) DATE:3/18/2021 AGENDA REQUEST TO:Planning and Zoning Commission PRESENTED BY:Tahir Curry, Associate Planner SUBMITTED BY:Planning & Development Services SUBJECT:St. Lucie County Selvitz Road Rezone. - Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas (Rezoning) from I (Institutional) to U (Utilities) Zoning District. The petition site is located on the Southwest corner of Selvitz Road and Energy Land. BACKGROUND: The petitioner, St. Lucie County Transit Division, Community Services on behald of the Board of County Commissioners, is requesting an Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas for a change in zoning (Rezoning) from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the U (Utilities) Zoning District for a vacant 27.49-acre property located at Southwest corner of Selvitz Road & Energy Lane. PREVIOUS ACTION: FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners. COMMISSION ACTION: RESULT: MOVER:None SECONDER:None AYES:None NAYS:None Page 10 of 420 EXCUSED:None Coordination/Signatures Date: March 10, 2021 Linda Pendarvis, Planning Manager Date: March 10, 2021 Benjamin Balcer, Planning & Development Services Assistant Director Date: March 11, 2021 Leslie Olson, Planning & Development Services Director Date: March 11, 2021 Daniel McIntyre, County Attorney Date: March 12, 2021 Mark Satterlee, Deputy County Administrator Page 11 of 420 Planning Division Agenda Item Summary Applicant/Property Owner St. Lucie County BOCC (Transit Division, Community Services) 2300 Virginia Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34982 Agent Dennis Murphy Culpepper & Terpening, Inc. 10250 SW Village Parkway, Ste 201 Fort Pierce, Florida, FL 34987 Project Location Southwest corner of Selvitz Road & Energy Lane. Parcel ID# 2431-411-0002-000-6 Future Land Use PF (Public Facilities) Existing Zoning I (Institutional) Proposed Zoning U (Utilities) Staff Tahir Curry Tel 772-462-2515 Email CurryT@stlucieco.org Mail 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 SLC Selvitz Road Rezone Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas (Rezoning) Institutional (I) to Utilities (U) Project Description The St. Lucie County Transit Division, Community Services on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), is requesting an Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas for a change in zoning (Rezoning) from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the U (Utilities) Zoning District for a 27.49-acre undeveloped parcel located at Southwest corner of Selvitz Road & Energy Lane. The purpose of this request is to propose developing and operating a St. Lucie County Transit service hub, with opera- tional offices and maintenance facilities. U (Utilities) Purpose The purpose of this district is to provide and protect an environment suitable for utilities, transportation, and communica-tion facilities, together with such other uses as may be compatible with utility, transportation, and communication facili- ty surroundings. Notice Requirements Public hearing notice in accordance with Section 11.00.03 of the Land Develop- ment Code was placed in the St. Lucie News Tribune on March 5, 2021, letters were mailed to property owners within a 500 foot radius, and a sign posted on the property. Staff’s Recommendation Forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a rec-commendation for approval. Hearing Date Thursday March 18, 2021 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 12 of 420 Planning and Development Services Department Planning Division M E M O R A N D U M GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant/ Property Owner:St. Lucie County BOCC (Transit Division, Community Services Department) 2300 Virginia Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34982 Agent: Dennis Murphy Culpepper & Terpening, Inc. 2980 S. 25th Street Fort Pierce, FL 34987 Location:Southwest corner of Selvitz Road and Energy Lane Parcel ID Number:2431-411-0002-000-6 Parcel Size: 27.49-acres Future Land Use:PF (Public Facilities) Existing Zoning:I (Institutional) Proposed Zoning:U (Utilities) Requested Action:Change in zoning from I (Institutional) to U (Utilities) Existing Uses: Vacant Urban Service Boundary: Inside Fire/EMS:Fire Station # 6 (350 East Midway Road) is located approximately 3.5 miles Southwest from the subject parcel. Right-of-Way:Selvitz Road is a 110 ft. County owned and maintained right-of-way. TO:Planning and Zoning Commission THROUGH:Leslie Olson, AICP, Director Ben Balcer, AICP, Assistant Director FROM:Tahir Curry, Associate Planner DATE:March 2, 2021 SUBJECT:SLC Selvitz Road Rezone. Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas (Rezoning) RZ-12202025916 Page 13 of 420 Petition: SLC Selvitz Road Rezone File No.: RZ-12202025916 Page 2 Energy Drive is an 80 ft. private right-of-way. Utilties: Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA) service area. Central water and sewer are available to the site. Type of Concurrency Document Required: Concurrency Deferral Affidavit BACKGROUND ANALYSIS The St. Lucie County Transit Division, Community Services Department on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), is requesting an Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the U (Utilities) Zoning District for a 27.49-acre site located at the southwest corner of Selvitz Road and Energy Lane in Fort Pierce FL. The Future Land Use designation is PF (Public Facilities), and the parcel is situated inside of the Urban Service Boundary (USB). The purpose of this request is to allow developing and operating a St. Lucie County Transit service hub, with operational offices and maintenance facilities, consistent with Land Development Code (LDC) Section 3.01.03.W. for the Utilities Zoning District. Aerial Proposed Rezoning U (Utilities) Page 14 of 420 Petition: SLC Selvitz Road Rezone File No.: RZ-12202025916 Page 3 Future Land Use: The Future Land Use designation of the subject property is PF (Public Facilities). The PF (Public Facilities) land use category “is applied to properties used for such activities as education and places of worship. This designation may also be applied to other public uses such as jails and administrative buildings.” Current Zoning: The current zoning of the subject property is I (Institutional). “The purpose of this district is to provide and protect and environment suitable for institutional, public, and quasi-public uses, together with such other uses as may be compatible with institutional, public, and quasi-public surroundings.” Proposed Zoning: The proposed zoning of the subject property is U (Utilities). “The purpose of this district is to provide and protect an environment suitable for utilities, transportation, and communication facilities, together with such other uses as may be compatible with utility, transportation, and communication facility surroundings.” ********************************************** Page 15 of 420 Petition: SLC Selvitz Road Rezone File No.: RZ-12202025916 Page 4 STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 11.06.03 In reviewing this application for an amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas, the Board of County Commissioners and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider and make the following determinations: A.Whether the proposed rezoning is in conflict with any applicable portions of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code; The proposed rezoning to the U (Utilities) Zoning District is consistent with the St. Lucie County Land Development Code (LDC), and meets the Standards of Review set forth in LDC Section 11.06.03, as displayed in Sections A thru H of this report. The rezoning is consistent with LDC Section 11.09.02(A), Table 11-1 - Zoning District/ Land Use Category Compatibility Chart and the site meets the dimensional requirements set forth in Section 7.04.00 and Table 7-10 – Lot Size and Dimensional Requirements for the U (Utilities) Zoning District. The proposed Utilities Zoning District is consistent with surrounding uses, providing the use scope in LDC Section 3.01.03.W and District purpose. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan; The proposed rezoning to the U (Utilities) Zoning District is consistent with the Public Facilities Future Land Use designation as per Comprehensive Plan Table 1-3 - Land Use Designation / Zoning Compatibility Chart. Table 1-3 - Land Use Designation / Zoning Compatibility Chart Future Land Use CategoriesZoning Districts AG - 5 AG - 2 . 5 RE RS RU RM RH R/ C Cp u b CO M IN D P/ F MX D SD H T/ U TV C Utilities X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X The proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element’s Goals, Objectives and Policies: Objective 2.5.1: Address the provision of efficient public transit services based upon existing and proposed major trip generators and attractors, safe and convenient public transit terminals, land uses and accommodation of the special needs of the transportation disadvantaged in St. Lucie County. Policy 2.5.1.1 - St. Lucie County shall, in cooperation with the St. Lucie TPO and other appropriate agencies, continue to analyze the recommendations of the St. Lucie County Transit Development Plan (TDP), to determine the future system needs, transit right-of-way needs, Level of Service standards and the capital expenses necessary for the implementation of a fixed route transit system for the area based on the community's future land use designations and projected population characteristics. Policy 2.5.1.2 - Continue to assist the local coordinated community provider in seeking additional state and federal assistance funds in order to provide additional services. Page 16 of 420 Petition: SLC Selvitz Road Rezone File No.: RZ-12202025916 Page 5 Policy 2.5.1.3 - Continue to assist the Community Transportation Coordinator in seeking additional state and federal assistance funds in order to add vans or other vehicles to handle work trips for the transportation disadvantaged as demand increases. Policy 2.5.1.4 - Promote the availability of transportation to all transportation disadvantaged throughout St. Lucie County through sound marketing and public information efforts. Objective 2.6.1: Continue to Monitor and evaluate the demand for transit through the implementation of the TDP. Policy 2.6.1.2 - Encourage the local Community Transportation Coordinator to expand paratransit services to meet the service needs of the transportation disadvantaged residents of St. Lucie County. C. Whether and the extent to which the proposed zoning is inconsistent with the existing and proposed land uses; The proposed rezoning is consistent with the existing and proposed land uses. As stated above, the U (Utilities) Zoning District is compatible with the PF (Public Facilities) Future Land Use designation as per both the Land Development Code (LDC) and the Comprehensive Plan. This amendment will not create a conflict with the surrounding zoning districts and is similar in scope, scale, and intensity of the existing uses in the area. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Location Future Land Use Zoning Existing Land Use Subject Property PF (Public Facilities)I (Institutional) Vacant North I (Industrial)I-1 (Light Industrial)Vacant parcel in the City of Fort Pierce Jurisdiction South North St. Lucie River Water Control District right-of-way Canal No. 102 East RL (Low Density Residential) INST (Institutional) INST (Institutional) R-1(Single-Family Low Density Residential) OS-1(Recreational Open Space) PD (Planned Development) City of Fort Pierce Jurisdiction East PF (Public Facilities) I (Institutional)Children's Home Society of Florida Adjacent Parcels West I (Industrial)I-1 (Light Industrial) Vacant parcel in the City of Fort Pierce Jurisdiction D. Whether there have been changed conditions that require an amendment; St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners purchased the property in 2004 for the future development of County operations/facilities. The purpose of this rezone is to allow for the development and operation of a St. Lucie County Transit service hub, with operational offices and maintenance facilities consistent with LDC Section 3.01.03.W, proposed Utilities Zoning District. The current I (Institutional) Zoning Designation does not permit Transportation Services (47) as a permitted use. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether or to the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public Page 17 of 420 Petition: SLC Selvitz Road Rezone File No.: RZ-12202025916 Page 6 facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, solid waste, mass transit, and emergency medical facilities; The proposed change in zoning should not affect the acceptable level of service capacity of transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, solid waste, mass transit, or emergency medical facilities. Site-specific impacts will be addressed through a development application. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order, the developer must demonstrate that all public facilities are available to serve the parcel and obtain a Certificate of Capacity. The applicant has signed the required Concurrency Deferral Affidavit recognizing this provision. Water/Wastewater The subject property is located within the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA) service area. Water and wastewater services are available along Selvitz Road. FPUA services are available for future development to the petition site. Transportation Impacts The subject site has frontage on Selvitz Road and Energy Lane. Selvitz Road is a County owned and maintained right-of-way and Energy Lane is a private right-of-way. The County will not require right-of-way dedication with this rezone petition; however, a 30ft ROW dedication will be required along Selvitz Road at time of a site plan application. No additional transportation impacts are anticipated with this action. The future development of a St. Lucie County Transit service hub will be evaluated for traffic or transportation impacts at the time of site plan submittal. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment; Background The Environmental Resources Department (ERD) is in receipt of the December 17, 2020 date-stamped submittal from Planning and Development Services. This petition proposes to change the zoning designation on a parcel of land owned by St. Lucie County, located along the west side of Selvitz Road at the intersection with Energy Drive from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the U (Utility) Zoning District. The purpose of this change in zoning is to reclassify the petition property to a zoning district consistent with the intended use of the site as the administrative operations and maintenance center for the St. Lucie County Transit system provider, Treasure Coast Connector. Findings The rezone from I to U is not anticipated to result in any adverse environmental impacts. This submittal does not propose any new construction activities, and therefore, no environmental impacts are anticipated at this time. When site development activities are proposed, ERD will conduct further review through the site plan review process. Wetlands (i.e., Wetland A and Wetland B) were identified and depicted on the submitted boundary and topographic survey. When site development activities are proposed, a wetland jurisdictional determination and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) consistent with Land Development Code (LDC) 11.02.09.A.5 will be required. If these wetlands are claimed by a State and/or Federal entity, these wetlands will be required to be described within the EIR per Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.1.12.4. Additionally, if any impacts are proposed to claimed wetlands and their associated buffers, a Wetland Waiver Application will also be required. Recommendation Page 18 of 420 Petition: SLC Selvitz Road Rezone File No.: RZ-12202025916 Page 7 ERD has no objection to the proposed rezoning. G. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in an orderly and logical development pattern specifically identifying any negative affects of such patterns; The proposed change in zoning will result in an orderly and logical development pattern. The parcel is located inside the urban service boundary, surrounded by existing uses and zoning of similar scale. The requested rezone is not expected to harm other properties or improvements in the area. This rezone petition will revert the property to the Utilities Zoning District, which is similar in scope and scale of the surrounding properties of Light Industrial (City of Fort Pierce zoning to the north and west), Industrial Heavy, Utilities, and Institutional zoning designations. The petition will not negatively affect the development patterns in the surrounding area and will enhance compatibility with the surrounding zoning designations. H. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Code; The proposed rezoning is not in conflict with the public interest and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Land Development Code. CONCLUSION: Staff has reviewed this petition and determined that it conforms to the Standards of Review as set forth in Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and is consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Goals, Objectives, and Policies. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners. Page 19 of 420 Resolution No. 2021-XXX Page 1 RZ-12202025916 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XXX File No.: RZ-12202025916 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM THE I (INSTITUTIONAL) ZONING DISTRICT TO THE U (UTILITIES) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SELVITZ ROAD & ENERGY LANE IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, based on the testimony and evidence, including but not limited to the staff report, has made the following determinations: 1.St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners petitioned for an Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas to change the zoning from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the U (Utilities) Zoning District in St. Lucie County, Florida, for the property legally described in Paragraph “A” and depicted on the attached map as Exhibit “A.” 2.On March 18, 2021, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing notice at least 10 days prior to the hearing and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property, and recommended that the Board of County Commissioners approve/deny the change in zoning from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the U (Utilities) Zoning District. 3.On XX, 2021, this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing notice at least 10 days prior to the hearing and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. 4.The proposed change in zoning has/has not satisfied the requirements of Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and is/is not consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 5.The proposed change in zoning is/is not consistent with the existing and proposed use of property in the surrounding area. 6. A Concurrency Deferral Affidavit, a copy which is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit “B” was signed by the applicant on March 3, 2021. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: A.The property on which the Change in Zoning from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the U (Utilities) Zoning District is being granted/denied is described as follows: Page 20 of 420 Resolution No. 2021-XXX Page 2 RZ-12202025916 Legal Description: A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 35 SOUTH, RANGE 40 EAST, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 31; THENCE S 89°57'33" W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTION 31 A DISTANCE OF 49.50 FEET TO THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SELVITZ ROAD; THENCE N 00°04'15" E, ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 49.50 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH ST. LUCIE RIVER WATER CONTROL DISTRICT CANAL NO. 102, AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL; THENCE CONTINUE N 00°04'15" E, ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SELVITZ ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 1961.46 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF ENERGY DRIVE ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF TREASURE COAST BUSINESS PARK, P.B.64, P.36; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE BY THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES; THENCE N 44°57'33" W A DISTANCE OF 49.52 FEET; THENCE N 89°59'21" W A DISTANCE OF 564.96 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF LOT 5 ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF TREASURE COAST BUSINESS PARK, P.B.64, P.36; THENCE S 00°04'15" W, ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 5, DISTANCE OF 1997.04 FEET TO THE SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH ST. LUCIE RIVER WATER CONTROL DISTRICT CANAL NO. 102; THENCE N 89°57'33" E, ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE A DISTANCE OF 600.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 27.49 ACRES MORE OR LESS. Location: Southwest corner of Selvitz Road & Energy Lane. Parcel ID: 2431-411-0002-000-6 B.The St. Lucie County Planning and Development Services Director shall be authorized to amend the Official Zoning Map to change the zoning of the property herein described, from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the U (Utilities) Zoning District and to make notation of the reference to the date of adoption of this Resolution. C.A copy of this Resolution shall be mailed to the owner and agent of record as identified on the application. D.This Resolution shall be recorded in the Public Records. Page 21 of 420 Resolution No. 2021-XXX Page 3 RZ-12202025916 After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows: Chris Dzadovsky, Chair XXX Sean Mitchell, Vice-Chair XXX Commissioner Linda Bartz XXX Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson XXX Commissioner Cathy Townsend XXX PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED This X day of XX 2021. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY _________________________ Chair ATTEST:APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: ___________________________________________________ Deputy Clerk County Attorney Page 22 of 420 Resolution No. 2021-XXX Page 4 RZ-12202025916 Exhibit “A” (Boundary Survey) Page 23 of 420 Resolution No. 2021-XXX Page 5 RZ-12202025916 Exhibit “B” (Concurrency Deferral) Page 24 of 420 ITEM 9.A. SUGGESTED MOTIONS Suggested motion to recommend approval/denial of this requested change in zoning. MOTION TO APPROVE: AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, AND THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03, ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT APPROVAL FOR THE PETITION OF SLC SELVITZ ROAD REZONE. FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM THE I (INSTITUTIONAL) ZONING DISTRICT TO THE U (UTILITIES) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A 27.49-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SELVITZ ROAD & ENERGY LANE, BECAUSE..... [CITE REASON(S) WHY – PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] MOTION TO DENY: AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, AND THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03, ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DENY FOR THE PETITION SLC SELVITZ ROAD REZONE. FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM THE I (INSTITUTIONAL) ZONING DISTRICT TO THE U (UTILITIES) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A 27.49-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SELVITZ ROAD & ENERGY LANE, BECAUSE..... [CITE REASON(S) WHY – PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] Page 25 of 420 Page 26 of 420 Page 27 of 420 Page 28 of 420 Page 29 of 420 Page 30 of 420 Page 31 of 420 Page 32 of 420 Page 33 of 420 Page 34 of 420 Page 35 of 420 Page 36 of 420 Page 37 of 420 Page 38 of 420 Page 39 of 420 Page 40 of 420 Page 41 of 420 Page 42 of 420 Page 43 of 420 Page 44 of 420 Page 45 of 420 Page 46 of 420 Page 47 of 420 Page 48 of 420 Page 49 of 420 Page 50 of 420 Page 51 of 420 Page 52 of 420 Page 53 of 420 Page 54 of 420 Page 55 of 420 Page 56 of 420 Page 57 of 420 Page 58 of 420 Page 59 of 420 X. I INSTITUTIONAL. 1. Purpose. The purpose of this district is to provide and protect and environment suitable for institutional, public, and quasi-public uses, together with such other uses as may be compatible with institutional, public, and quasi-public surroundings. The number in "( )" following each identified use corresponds to the SIC Code reference described in Section 3.01.02(B). The number 999 applies to a use not defined under the SIC Code but may be further defined in Section 2.00.00 of this Code. 2. Permitted Uses. a. Community residential homes subject to the provisions of Section 7.10.07. (999) b. Family day care homes. (999) c. Family residential homes provided that such homes shall not be located within a radius of one thousand (1,000) feet of another existing such family residential home and provided that the sponsoring agency or the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) notifies the Board of County Commissioners at the time of home occupancy that the home is licensed by HRS. (999) d. Institutional residential homes. (999) e. Parks. (999) f. Police and fire protection. (9221,9224) g. Recreational activities. (999) h. Religious organizations. (866) 3. Lot Size Requirements. Lot size requirements shall be in accordance with Section 7.04.00. 4. Dimensional Regulations. Dimensional requirements shall be in accordance with Section 7.04.00. 5. Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements. Off-street parking and loading requirements are subject to Section 7.06.00. 6. Landscaping Requirements. Landscaping requirements are subject to Section 7.09.00. 7. Conditional Uses: a. Amphitheaters. (999) b. Cemeteries. (6553) c. Membership organizations. (86) d. Correctional institutions. (9223) e. Cultural activities and nature exhibitions. (999) f. Educational services and facilities. (82) g. Executive, legislative, and judicial functions. (91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97) h. Fairgrounds. (999) i. Funeral and crematory services. (726) j. Theaters. (999) k. Medical and other health services. (80) l. Postal service. (43) m. Residential care facilities for serious or habitual juvenile offenders. (999) n. Social services. (83) Page 60 of 420 o. Sporting and recreational camps. (7032) p. Stadiums, arenas, race tracks. (794) q. Telecommunication towers - subject to the standards of Section 7.10.23. (999) 8. Accessory Uses. Accessory uses are subject to the requirements of Section 8.00.00, and include the following: a. Drinking places (alcoholic beverages related to civic, social, and fraternal uses). (999) b. Restaurants. (Including the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption only.) (999) c. Funeral and crematory services. (726) d. Heliport landing/takeoff pads. (999) e. Detached single-family dwelling unit or mobile home, for on-site security purposes. (999) f. Residence halls or dormitories. (999) g. Solar energy systems, subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.28.                                   Page 61 of 420 3.01.03. - Zoning Districts. W. U UTILITIES. 1. Purpose. The purpose of this district is to provide and protect an environment suitable for utilities, transportation, and communication facilities, together with such other uses as may be compatible with utility, transportation, and communication facility surroundings. The number in "( )" following each identified use corresponds to the SIC Code reference described in Section 3.01.02(B). The number 999 applies to a use not defined under the SIC Code but may be further defined in Section 2.00.00 of this Code. 2. Permitted Uses: a. Air transportation services. (451,452) b. Agriculture, including farms, groves, and ranches. (01,02) c. Communication. (48) d. Electric services. (491) e. Electric transmission rights-of-way. (491) f. Gas pipeline rights-of-way. (492) g. Gas production and distribution. (492) h. Industrial wastewater disposal. (999) i. Railroad, rapid rail transit, and street railway transportation. (40,41) j. Sanitary services. (495) k. Transportation services. (47) l. Telecommunication towers - subject to the standards of Section 7.10.23. (999) m. Water supply and irrigation systems. (494, 497) n. Water transportation. (44) 3. Lot Size Requirements. Lot size requirements shall be in accordance with Section 7.04.00. 4. Dimensional Regulations. Dimensional requirements shall be in accordance with Section 7.04.00. 5. Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements. Off-street parking and loading requirements are subject to Section 7.06.00. 6. Landscaping Requirements. Landscaping requirements are subject to Section 7.09.00. 7. Conditional Uses: a. Airports. (458) b. Electric generation plants. (491) c. Gas production plants. (492) d. Land clearing and yard trash recycling operations - subject to the provisions of Section 7.10.12. (999) e. Natural or manufactured gas storage and distribution points. (492) f. Protective functions and their related activities - Correctional institutions. (9223) g. Solid waste disposal. (4953) h. Outdoor shooting ranges, providing site plan approval is obtained according to the provisions of Sections 11.02.07 through 11.02.09 and Section 7.10.19 of this Code. (999) Page 62 of 420 i. Solar generation station subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.28. (999) 8. Accessory Uses. Accessory uses are subject to the requirements of Section 8.00.00 and include the following: a. Automobile and truck rental services. b. Restaurants. (Including the sale of alcoholic beverages for on premises consumption only). (999) c. Solar energy system subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.28 (999) Page 63 of 420 Page 64 of 420 Page 65 of 420 Page 66 of 420 STATE OF FLORIDA CERTIFICATION No. LB 4286 151 SW FLAGLER AVENUE STUART, FLORIDA 34994 PHONE 772-464-3537 FAX 772-464-9497 www.ct-eng.com 2980 SOUTH 25th STREET FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34981● ● ● 2980 SOUTH 25th STREET FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34981 www.ct-eng.comFAX 772-464-9497PHONE 772-464-3537 STATE OF FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS AUTHORIZATION NO. 4286 Page 67 of 420 Environmental resources Final Report TO:Tahir Curry, Planning & Development Services Department THROUGH:Jennifer McGee, Environmental Regulations Manager Amy E. Griffin, Environmental Resources Director FROM:Aimee Cooper, Sr. Environmental Planner DATE:January 14, 2021 SUBJECT:St. Lucie County BOCC Selvitz Rezone RZ-12202025916 Background The Environmental Resources Department (ERD) is in receipt of the December 17, 2020 date-stamped submittal from Planning and Development Services. This petition proposes to change the zoning designation on a parcel of land owned by St. Lucie County, located along the west side of Selvitz Road at the intersection with Energy Drive from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the U (Utility) Zoning District. The purpose of this change in zoning is to reclassify the petition property to a zoning district consistent with the intended use of the site as the administrative operations and maintenance center for the St. Lucie County Transit system provider, Treasure Coast Connector. Findings The rezone from I to U is not anticipated to result in any adverse environmental impacts. This submittal does not propose any new construction activities, and therefore, no environmental impacts are anticipated at this time. When site development activities are proposed, ERD will conduct further review through the site plan review process. Wetlands (i.e., Wetland A and Wetland B) were identified and depicted on the submitted boundary and topographic survey. When site development activities are proposed, a wetland jurisdictional determination and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) consistent with Land Development Code (LDC) 11.02.09.A.5 will be required. If these wetlands are claimed by a State and/or Federal entity, these wetlands will be required to be described within the EIR per Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.1.12.4. Additionally, if any impacts are proposed to claimed wetlands and their associated buffers, a Wetland Waiver Application will also be required. Recommendation ERD has no objections to the rezoning of this parcel. Please contact Aimee Cooper at 772-462-6440 if you have any questions. Page 68 of 420 Date Mailed March 5, 2021 Planning and Development Services Department 772.462.2822 Property Owner/Applicant St. Lucie County BOCC (Transit Division, Community Services) 2300 Virginia Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34982 Agent Dennis Murphy Culpepper & Terpening, Inc. 10250 SW Village Parkway, Ste 201 Fort Pierce, Florida, FL 34987 Project Location Southwest corner of Selvitz Road & Energy Lane. Parcel ID# 2431-411-0002-000-6 Future Land Use PF (Public Facilities) Existing Zoning I (Institutional) Proposed Zoning U (Utilities) Staff’s Recommendation Forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a recom-mendation for approval. Staff Tahir Curry Tel 772-462-2515 Email CurryT@stlucieco.org Mail 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Public Hearing Notice Thursday, March 18, 2021 Notice of Proposed Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas Project Description The St. Lucie County Transit Division, Community Services on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), is requesting an Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas for a change in zoning (Rezoning) from the I (Institutional) Zoning District to the U (Utilities) Zoning District for a 27.49-acre undeveloped parcel located at Southwest corner of Selvitz Road & Energy Lane. The purpose of this request is to propose developing and operating a St. Lucie County Transit service hub, with opera- tional offices and maintenance facilities. U (Utilities) District Purpose The purpose of this district is to provide and protect an environment suitable for utilities, transportation, and communica-tion facilities, together with such other uses as may be compatible with utility, transportation, and communication facili- ty surroundings. The St. Lucie County Planning and Zon-ing Commission has the power to review and recommend to the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners, for approval or disapproval, any applica- tions within their area of responsibility. The Planning and Zoning Commission strongly encourages your input and comment at the public hearing. The pub- lic will be able to physically attend this meeting, but seating in the Chambers will be regulated to comply with social distancing protocols. Members of the public who attend are encouraged to wear masks or similar devices, which cover the nose and mouth. You may also mail or email written comments regarding this proceeding in advance of the public hearing for inclusion in the official record. Public comment for upcoming meetings can be submitted several ways: Email: Curryt@stlucieco.org; or Email: publiccomment@stlucieco.org Anyone with a disability requiring ac- commodations to attend this meeting may contact the SLC Community Risk Manager at least 48 hours in advance at 772-462-1546 or TDD 772-462-1428. Meeting Location: BOCC Chambers SLC Administration Annex, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, FL 34982 Meeting Time: 6:00 PM (or soon thereafter ) PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION This notice is provided because you are an owner of property within 500 feet of the proposed peti- Page 69 of 420 Page 70 of 420 1 ParcelID CuO1LastName CuO1FirstName CuO2LastName CuO2FirstName CuOStreet1 CuOStreet2 CuOCity CuOState CuOPostal 3406-501-0002-010-0 Arend Robert J Arend Lauren M PO Box 12176 Fort Pierce FL 349792432-333-0001-000-3 Dogs and Cats Forever Inc PO Box 880043 Port St Lucie FL 34988 3403-502-0135-000-2 Ebner Richard E Ebner Denise 4658 Selvitz Rd Fort Pierce FL 349813406-501-0003-000-4 Frias Vincent Frias Maria Guinto 4703 Selvitz Rd Fort Pierce FL 34981 3403-502-0134-000-5 Hopper Janice M Hopper Paul B 10300 W Midway Rd Fort Pierce FL 349452431-800-0006-000-8 Midway Properties Of St Lucie Five Siblings LLC 417 N Causeway New Smyrna Beach FL 32169 2432-211-0006-000-3 Midway St Lucie LLC 675 W Indiantown RD Ste 201 Jupiter FL 334583406-111-0001-000-3 NSLRWCD 14666 Orange AVE Fort Pierce FL 34945 3406-501-0002-000-7 Taylor Jason Taylor Buck 4605 Selvitz RD Fort Pierce FL 349812431-800-0001-000-3 TREASURE COAST BUSINESS PARK POA INC Florida Municipal Power Agency c/o Midway Properties of St Lucie 417 N Causeway New Smyrna FL 321693406-501-0011-000-3 White City Grove Inc PO Box 613 Fort Pierce FL 34954 Owners Mailout.xls Page 71 of 420 3/4/2021 Page 72 of 420 This document was created by an application that isn’t licensed to use novaPDF. Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice. 3/4/2021 Page 73 of 420 TR-GCI0602266-01 ST.LUCIE COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA THURSDAY,MARCH 18,2021 NOTICE OFAMENDMENT TOTHE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS TheSt.LucieCounty Planning andZoningCommissionisscheduledto review andmakerecommendationsregardingthefollowingitempetitionedbytheapplicantforadoptionbytheBoardofCountyCommissionersofSt.Lucie County,Florida,byresolution: RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY,FLORIDA,GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM THE I (INSTITUTIONAL)ZONING DISTRICT TO THE U (UTILITIES)ZONINGDISTRICT FOR APROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SELVITZROAD &ENERGY LANE INST.LUCIECOUNTY,FLORIDA. APPLICANT:St.Lucie CountyBoardof CountyCommissioners. PURPOSE:To rezone the property to the U (Utilities)Zoning District for the purpose of developing and operating a St.Lucie County Transit service hub,with office(s)and maintenance facilities. LOCATION:Southwest corner ofSelvitz Road &Energy Lane. ThePlanning andZoningCommissionPUBLIC HEARINGonthis item willbeheld in the CommissionChambers,Roger PoitrasAnnex,3rd Floor,St.Lucie County on Thursday, March18,2021,beginning at 6:00pm or assoonthereafteras possible. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard.Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be considered.If residents are concerned about COVID-19 or have health concerns,please refrain from coming to public meetings in person.You can live stream the meeting and contact the commissioners via phone or email as an alternative to making public comments in person. Publiccommentfor upcomingmeetings can be submittedseveral ways: •Email at publiccomment@stlucieco.org; •Residents without Internetaccess tothe Internetcancommentby phoneat772-462-1499 and TDD (telecommunications device for the deaf)number at772-462-1428. Comments must besubmitted bynoon the day prior to the meeting.Comments will be distributed to the Commission in advance of the meeting and included in the record provided the commentscomply withthe County’srules.Comments receivedby phone will be either played at the meeting or transcribed in written form provided that the comments complywith the County’s rules. General public comment is limited to three minutes or roughly 390 words;while comments for public hearing items are limited to fiveminutes or roughly 750words. The petition file is available for review at the Planning and Development Services Department offices located at 2300 Virginia Avenue,2nd Floor,Fort Pierce,Florida, during regular business hours.Please call (772)462-2822 orTDD (772)462-1428 if you have any questionsorrequireadditional information. The St.Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission has the power to review and recommend to the St.Lucie County Board of County Commissioners,for approval or disapproval,any applications within theirareaof responsibility. The proceedings of the Planning and Zoning Commission are electronically recorded.PURSUANT TOSection 286.0105,Florida Statutes,if aperson decidesto appeal anydecisionmadebythePlanningandZoningCommissionwithrespecttoanymatterconsideredatameetingorhearing,heor shewill need arecordof theproceedings.Forsuchpurpose,he or shemay needto ensurethat a verbatim record of theproceedingsismade,whichrecordincludes thetestimonyandevidence uponwhichthe appealistobebased.Upontherequestof any partyto theproceeding,individualstestifying duringahearingwillbeswornin.Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunitytocross-examineanyindividual testifying during a hearing uponrequest.If it becomesnecessary,a publichearing maybecontinuedto a date-certain. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St.Lucie County Community Risk Manager at least forty-eight (48)hours prior tothemeeting at (772)462-1546 orT.D.D.(772)462-1428.Any questionsabout this agenda maybe referred toSt.LucieCounty Planning Division at(772)462-2822. PLANNINGANDZONING COMMISSION/ LOCAL PLANNINGAGENCY ST.LUCIE COUNTY,FLORIDA /S/JAMES TAYLOR,CHAIR PUBLISH DATE:Friday,March 5,2021 Page 74 of 420 ITEM NO.(ID # 2021-51193) DATE:3/18/2021 AGENDA REQUEST TO:Planning and Zoning Commission PRESENTED BY:Bethany Grubbs, Planner SUBMITTED BY:Planning & Development Services SUBJECT:Proposed Text Amendment to Land Development Code, Section 7.10.22 -Scrap, Waste, Recycling Operations. BACKGROUND: A petition submitted by Engineering Design and Construction, Inc., on behalf of Richard Sampson and Lucky 13 Holdings, LLC, requesting a Text Amendment to Land Development Code Section 7.10.22 for Scrap, Waste, Recycling Operations. The Text Amendment proposes to amend the supplemental standards for land clearing and yard trash recycling operations to allow an alternative clean stabilized surface as the base area for stockpile staging, in addition to a concrete or asphalt surface, and to allow the access aisles between the stockpiles to be constructed of other paved surface that is acceptable to the County, in addition to a concrete or asphalt surface. On August 17, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the supplemental standards for yard trash and debris operation via Ordinance 99-003. The design standards require all base areas on which the stockpiles are located be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all weather stabilized surface that is acceptable to the County. PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners. COMMISSION ACTION: Page 75 of 420 RESULT: MOVER:None SECONDER:None AYES:None NAYS:None EXCUSED:None Coordination/Signatures Date: March 11, 2021 Benjamin Balcer, Planning & Development Services Assistant Director Date: March 11, 2021 Leslie Olson, Planning & Development Services Director Date: March 12, 2021 Patrick Dayan, Public Works Assistant Director Date: March 12, 2021 Daniel McIntyre, County Attorney Date: March 12, 2021 Mark Satterlee, Deputy County Administrator Page 76 of 420 Planning and Development Services Department Planning Division M E M O R A N D U M TO: Planning and Zoning Commission THROUGH: Leslie Olson, AICP, Director Benjamin Balcer, AICP, Assistant Director FROM: Bethany Grubbs, Planner DATE: March 10, 2021 SUBJECT: Sampson Tree Service (TLDC-2202125950) Text Amendment to the Land Development Code (Section 7.10.12. – Scrap, Waste, Recycling Operations) This is a petition by Engineering Design and Construction, Inc., on behalf of Richard Sampson and Lucky 13 Holdings, LLC to request a Text Amendment to Land Development Code Section 7.10.12 for Scrap, Waste, Recycling Operations. The Text Amendment proposes to amend the supplemental standards for land clearing and yard trash recycling operations to allow an alternative clean stabilized surface as the base area for stockpile staging, in addition to a concrete or asphalt surface, and to allow the access aisles between the stockpiles to be constructed of other paved surface that is acceptable to the County, in addition to a concrete or asphalt surface. GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Richard Sampson Lucky 13 Holdings, LLC 2170 SW Conant Avenue Port St. Lucie, FL 34953 Agent of Record: Bradley J. Currie, AICP Engineering Design and Construction, Inc. 10250 SW Village Parkway, Suite 201 Port St. Lucie, FL 34987 BACKGROUND: On August 17, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the supplemental standards for yard trash and debris operation via Ordinance 99-003. The design standards require all base areas on which the stockpiles are located be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all weather stabilized (paved) surface that is acceptable to the County and the access aisles between the stockpiles must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all weather stabilized surface that is acceptable to the County. REQUESTED TEXT: 7.10.00. – SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS 7.10.12.- Scrap, Waste, Recycling Operations Page 77 of 420 Project Name: Sampson Tree Service File No.: TLDC-2202125950 2 C.6.a. The base area on which the stockpiles are located must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all-weather stabilized surface that is acceptable to the County. b. The access aisles between the stockpiles must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all weather stabilized paved surface that is acceptable to the County. Alternative surfaces may be considered outside of the Urban Service Boundary if approved by the County Engineer or Designee. TEXT AMENDMENT STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03, ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE Pursuant to St. Lucie County Land Development Code (LDC) Section 11.06.03, the Development Review has reviewed the proposed Text Amendment to LDC Section 7.10.22 and found it to meet the technical requirements and standards of review. In reviewing this proposed amendment to the LDC, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider and make the following determinations: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code; The proposed Text Amendment is not in conflict with any applicable portions of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. There will be no change in the intensity of development. The use is currently listed as an allowable Conditional Use within the U (Utilities) and IH (Industrial, Heavy) Zoning Districts. All required buffering and setbacks will remain in place. The proposal solely requests to amend the paving requirements for the access aisles that are intended for operational support vehicles between the stockpiles. These drive-aisles are distinguished from the drive-aisles serving the public areas, i.e., the parking lot. B. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with all elements of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan; The proposed text amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. The following specific goals, objectives, and policies from the Comprehensive Plan were analyzed: Policy 4B.1.1.4 - Continue to implement the most cost-effective alternative solid waste management practices that would extend the useful life of the landfill. These alternatives include, but are not limited to: resource recovery, volume reductions by solid waste generators, separation of solid wastes at the source, public information programs, and operational changes which could improve efficiency. C. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is inconsistent with the existing and proposed land uses; The proposed Text Amendment to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code is not site specific but applies to the IH (Industrial, Heavy) and U (Utilities) Zoning District(s) Countywide. The use classification requires a Conditional Use Permit, which provides for analysis of consistency with the existing and proposed land uses. D. Whether there have been changed conditions that require an amendment; The development of innovative products has changed conditions since the adoption of the 1999 ordinance. The applicant’s request to allow for an alternate base material is founded on industry experience of the impracticability of maintaining an impervious all-weather surface due to the frequent traversing of heavy equipment and the damage that the weight causes. There have been advancements of new stabilization products have been proven to be as effective as concrete and asphalt (i.e, TrueGrid) while providing 100% permeable surfaces and absorb stormwater without the runoff. These products are engineered to accommodate heavy load applications in lieu of heavy-duty pavement that may crack. These pervious and stabilized surface alternatives can reduce or eliminate the need for expensive surface treatment. This Page 78 of 420 Project Name: Sampson Tree Service File No.: TLDC-2202125950 3 amendment also considered stabilized earth products such as mulch. Through site design (i.e., the slope of stockpiles and perimeter barriers) and proper management, pervious surfaces can be safe and not cause pollution into the stormwater systems. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether or to the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, solid waste, mass transit, and emergency medical facilities; The proposed Text Amendment will not result in additional demands on public facilities. All development is required to adhere to adopted Level of Service (LOS) and concurrency standards. Site-specific facility impacts are addressed at the time of development application. Site Development is required to provide stormwater conveyance areas and treatment, accounting for materials used in an impervious or semi- impervious fashion. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment; The proposed Text Amendment would not result in adverse impacts on the natural environment. The proposed text amendment is not expected to increase development pressures on natural areas and does not modify or exempt improvements from any of the County’s natural resource protection standards. The storage of yard materials will remain controlled and site-specific environmental impacts will be addressed at the time of Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit application. G. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would adversely affect the property values in the area; The proposed amendment is not anticipated to have an adverse impact on property values. H. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would not result in an orderly and logical development pattern specifically identifying any negative effects of such patterns; This amendment does not propose zoning district use changes; therefore, this amendment will maintain an orderly and logical development pattern. The required site plan must demonstrate compliance with the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this code; The proposed amendment is not in conflict with the public interest and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this code. Any potential conflict with public interests associated with a site-specific request can be addressed through the associated Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan process. The Conditional Use Permit process ensures that any proposed development be reviewed in context to the surrounding neighborhood through review of the location, design, intensity, configuration, and public facility impact in order to determine the appropriateness of the use and the compatibility with adjacent uses. J. Any other matters that may be deemed appropriate by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Board of County Commissioners, in review and consideration of the proposed amendment. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners may raise other matters regarding the proposed Land Development Code Text Amendment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds these amendments to meet the standards of review as set forth in Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, and is not in conflict with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Page 79 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Scrap, Waste Recycling Operations File No.: TLDC-2202125950 Page 1 ORDINANCE No.: 2021-XX File No.: TLDC-2202125950 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECTION 7.10.12 – SCRAP, WASTE, RECYCLING OPERATIONS, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION; AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida (Board), based on the testimony and evidence, including but not limited to the staff report, has made the following determinations: 1. On August 1, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, adopted the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. 2. On August 17, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, adopted Ordinance 99-003 for the purpose of creating supplemental standards for scrap, waste, recycling operations, applicable to the IH (Industrial, Heavy) and U (Utilities) Zoning District, within the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. 4. This Board is authorized by Section 125.01(1)(t), Florida Statutes, to adopt ordinances and resolutions necessary for the exercise of its powers and to prescribe fines and penalties for the violations of ordinances in accordance with law. 3. On March 18, 2021, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing on the proposed ordinance, after publishing due notice in the St. Lucie News Tribune on March 6, 2021. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the Board of County Commissioners approval/denial of the proposed text amendment to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. 4. This Board is authorized by Section 125.01(1)(t), Florida Statutes, to adopt ordinances and resolutions necessary for the exercise of its powers and to prescribe fines and penalties for the violations of ordinances in accordance with law. 5. On _________ ____, 2021, the Board of County Commissioners held its first Public Hearing on the proposed ordinance, after publishing due notice in the St. Lucie News Tribune on _________ ____, 2021. 6. On _________ ____, 2021, the Board of County Commissioners held its second Public Hearing on the proposed ordinance, after publishing due notice in the St. Lucie News Tribune on _________, 2021. Page 80 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Scrap, Waste Recycling Operations File No.: TLDC-2202125950 Page 2 7. The proposed amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code are/are not consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives, and standards of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and are in the best interest of the health, safety, and public welfare of the citizens of St. Lucie County, Florida. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA: PART A. THE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ARE TO READ AS FOLLOWS: The specific amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code to read as follows in strikethrough and underline format: 7.10.00. – SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS SECTION 7.10.12. – Scrap, Waste, Recycling Operations C.6.a. The base area on which the stockpiles are located must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all-weather stabilized surface that is acceptable to the County. b. The access aisles between the stockpiles must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all weather stabilized paved surface that is acceptable to the County. Alternative surfaces may be considered outside of the Urban Service Boundary if approved by the County Engineer or Designee. PART B. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS. Special acts of the Florida legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, County ordinances and County resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with this ordinance are hereby superseded by this ordinance to the extent of such conflict. PART C. SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative, or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance. If this ordinance, or any provision thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstance, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property, or circumstance. PART D. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE. This ordinance shall be applicable in the unincorporated area of St. Lucie County. PART E. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. Page 81 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Scrap, Waste Recycling Operations File No.: TLDC-2202125950 Page 3 The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this ordinance to the Bureau of Administrative Code and Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida 32304. PART F. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Department of State. PART G. ADOPTION. After motion and second, the vote on this ordinance was as follows: Chris Dzadovsky, Chair ______ Sean Mitchell, Vice Chair ______ Linda Bartz, Commissioner ______ Frannie Hutchinson, Commissioner ______ Cathy Townsend, Commissioner ______ PART H. CODIFICATION. Provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated in the St. Lucie County Code and Complied Laws, and the word “ordinance” may be changed to “section”, “article”, or other appropriate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intention; provided, however, that Parts B through H shall not be codified. PASSED AND DULY ENACTED this ___ day of __________, 2021. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Deputy Clerk Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: By: County Attorney Page 82 of 420 Page 83 of 420 Page 84 of 420 Page 85 of 420 Page 86 of 420 Page 87 of 420 Page 88 of 420 Page 89 of 420 Page 90 of 420 Page 91 of 420 Supplement 7 Page 1 of 2 Revised: February 10, 2011 LDC Text Amendment Application Supplement Refer to Land Development Code (LDC) Section 11.06.00 for details 1. If you are requesting an amendment to the text of the LDC, the precise wording of any proposed amendment to the text shall be provided: 7.10.00. – SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS 7.10.12.- Scrap Waste Recycling Operations C.6.A. The base area on which the stockpiles are located must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all-weather stabilized surface that is acceptable to the County. 2. Please give a statement describing any changed conditions that would justify an amendment: Through site design (i.e., the slope of stockpiles and perimeter barriers) and proper management, pervious surfaces can be safe and not cause pollution into the stormwater systems. Furthermore, the advancement of new stabilization products has been proven to be as effective as concrete and asphalt (i.e, TrueGrid) while providing 100% permeable surfaces and absorb stormwater without the runoff. These pervious and stabilized surface alternatives can reduce or eliminate the need for expensive surface treatment. 3. Please give a statement describing why there is a need for the proposed amendment: This amendment would provide greater flexibility to the industry by simplifying the development of recycling operations. Concrete and Asphalt is hard to maintain with constant traversing of the heavy equipment and vehicles needed for this operation. 4. Please give a statement describing whether and how the proposed amendment conforms to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan: There is great emphasis on the importance of recycling and the need to reduce the amount of waste sent to landfills and incinerators due to capacity constraints. Currently, yard waste and debris are transported to the local landfill for disposal. This amendment will assist with alleviating the development cost which burdens and encumber the construction of land clearing operations. Accordingly, this amendment will further Comprehensive Plan Policy 4B.1.1.4, which states, “Continue to implement the most cost-effective alternative solid waste management practices that would extend the useful life of the landfill. These alternatives include, but are not limited to: resource recovery, volume reductions by solid waste generators, separation of solid wastes at the source, public information programs, and operational changes which could improve efficiency.” 5. Please give a statement outlining the extent to which the proposed amendment: Page 92 of 420 Supplement 7 Page 1 of 2 Revised: February 10, 2011 A) Is compatible with existing land uses; The proposed amendment only seeks to remove the stockpile base material requirement. There will be no change to the intensity of development. The use is currently listed as an allowable Conditional Use within the U (Utilities) Zoning District. All required buffering and setbacks will remain in place. B) Affects the capacities of public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, solid waste, mass transit, and emergency medical facilities; (Would it exceed the capacity of the above public facilities?) This amendment will have no affect on the public facilities listed. Facility usage would not be any different by allowing a pervious base versus an impervious base for the stockpile areas. C) Affects the natural environment; (If no adverse impacts are anticipated, please explain why.) This amendment will have no adverse impacts on the natural environment. Through site design and operating using industry best practices, run-off prevention measures will be in place to prevent water pollution. Additionally, the stockpiles are currently and will remain, required to be enclosed by an opaque barrier to mitigate negative impacts. D) Will result in an orderly and logical development pattern; (Identify any negative effects.) There are no zoning district use changes proposed with this amendment; therefore, this amendment will maintain an orderly and logical development pattern. The required site plan must demonstrate compliance with the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan. 6. Please explain the applicant's interest in the subject amendment and how it affects their property; The applicant owns the subject property and currently has an operating business located on- site. This land clearing operation will supplement the current business by facilitating the recycling and reuse of the yard waste and debris that is removed off-site by the tree service business. 7. Please include such other information or documentation as the Planning & Development Services Director may deem necessary or appropriate to a full and proper consideration and disposition of this particular application. The applicant will provide additional information as requested by staff during the review. Page 93 of 420 Supplement 7 Page 1 of 2 Revised: February 10, 2011 Please Note: This LDC Text Amendment Application Supplement will not be considered complete without the Development Application, complete with notarized signatures of all persons applying for this amendment, or giving their consent to the filing of this application and supplement. __________________________ __________________________ Applicant or Agent Name (Printed) Signature Page 94 of 420 SUGGESTED MOTIONS: MOTION TO APPROVE AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, AND THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03, ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 7.10.12 – SCRAP, WASTE RECYCLING OPERATIONS, AND AMEND THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS FOR LAND CLEARING AND YARD TRASH RECYCLING OPERATIONS TO ALLOW AN ALTERNATIVE CLEAN STABILIZED SURFACE AS THE BASE AREA FOR STOCKPILE STAGING, IN ADDITION TO CONCRETE OR ASPHALT SURFACE, AND TO ALLOW THE ACCESS AISLES BETWEEN THE STOCKPILES TO BE CONSTRUCTED OF OTHER PAVED SURFACE MATERIAL THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE COUNTY, IN ADDITION TO A CONCRETE OR ASPHALT SURFACE, BECAUSE... [CITE REASONS WHY - PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] MOTION TO DENY AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, AND THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03, ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DENY OF THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 7.10.12 – SCRAP, WASTE RECYCLING OPERATIONS, AND AMEND THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS FOR LAND CLEARING AND YARD TRASH RECYCLING OPERATIONS TO ALLOW AN ALTERNATIVE CLEAN STABILIZED SURFACE AS THE BASE AREA FOR STOCKPILE STAGING, IN Page 95 of 420 ADDITION TO CONCRETE OR ASPHALT SURFACE, AND TO ALLOW THE ACCESS AISLES BETWEEN THE STOCKPILES TO BE CONSTRUCTED OF OTHER PAVED SURFACE MATERIAL THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE COUNTY, IN ADDITION TO A CONCRETE OR ASPHALT SURFACE, BECAUSE... [CITE REASONS WHY - PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] Page 96 of 420 Page 97 of 420 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE March 4, 2021 PROJECT:Sampson Tree Service REF:MNSP-6202025774 TO:Bethany Grubbs FROM:Grant Chambers Completeness Review: The information provided is sufficient to review for Deficiency. Deficiency Review: The following comments are offered based on narrative dated February 3, 2021. 1.Public Works recommends the text be revised to read: B. The access aisles between the stock piles must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all weather stabilized paved surface that is acceptable to the County. Alternative surfaces may be considered outside of the Urban Service Boundary if approved by the County Engineer or Designee. 2.For discussion regarding these comments, please contact myself at 772-462-2741 or chambersg@stlucieco.org. Page 98 of 420 7.10.12. - Scrap, Waste and Recycling Operations. A. In the IL (Industrial Light) zoning district, scrap and waste material collection operations may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the following criteria: 1. The collection operations shall be limited to the acceptance of glass, plastic, paper, cardboard, metal cans, and non-ferrous metals. 2. The property on which the collection activity is to take place shall be at least forty-three thousand five hundred sixty (43,560) square feet (1 acre) and no more than two hundred thousand (200,000) square feet (4.5 acres) in total area. 3. All activities, including storage of the collected materials shall be conducted within a completely enclosed structure. No outside storage of materials of any kind shall be permitted. 4. The property on which the collection activity is taking place shall be surrounded by a fence, wall, or vegetative screening eight (8) feet in height. Such fence or wall shall be of similar composition, construction, and color throughout and shall be constructed without openings except for one (1) entrance and one (1) exit; the entrance and exit shall be equipped with unpierced gates. Such gates shall be closed and securely locked at all times, except during business hours. If vegetative screening is to be substituted for a fence or wall, plans for such vegetative screening shall be submitted with the application for conditional use approval. Such vegetative screening shall consist of a greenbelt strip at least twenty (20) feet in width adjoining adjacent lot lines, and a greenbelt strip at least ten (10) feet in width adjoining street line. The greenbelt shall be composed of at least one (1) row of deciduous or evergreen trees and one (1) or two (2) rows of shrubs. 5. Regardless of building size, a complete site plan prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.02.00 (Major Site Plan) shall be required with the application for conditional use. The application for conditional use shall not be considered complete until all minimum site plan criteria have been determined to be met. 6. The reprocessing of the collected materials into any other product, by-product or other use or form is prohibited, unless the reprocessing is allowed in conjunction with manufacturing of a new product or material as would otherwise be permitted in the IL (Industrial Light) district. B. In the IH (Industrial Heavy) zoning district, scrap and waste material operations may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the following criteria: 1. The yard shall be at least forty-three thousand five hundred sixty (43,560) square feet and no more than two hundred thousand (200,000) square feet in area. 2. No junked vehicle, or any other junk or scrap shall be located for storage, dismantling, or any other purpose within seventy-five (75) feet of any residential district, within fifty (50) feet of the front street line, within thirty (30) feet of any side street line, or within thirty (30) feet of any other lot line. 3. The yard shall be surrounded by a fence, wall, or vegetative screening eight (8) feet in height. Such fence or wall shall be of similar composition, construction, and color throughout and shall be constructed without openings except for one (1) entrance and one (1) exit; the entrance and exit shall be equipped with unpierced gates. Such gates shall be closed and securely locked at all times, except during business hours. If vegetative screening is to be substituted for a fence or wall, plans for such vegetative screening shall be submitted with the application for conditional use approval. Such vegetative screening shall consist of a greenbelt strip at least twenty (20) feet in width adjoining adjacent lot lines, and a greenbelt strip at least ten (10) feet in width adjoining street line. The greenbelt shall be composed of at least one (1) row of deciduous or evergreen trees and one (1) or two (2) rows of shrubs. Page 99 of 420 4. Junked or wrecked vehicles shall be stacked to a height of no more than twenty-four (24) feet. 5. Regardless of building size, a complete site plan prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.02.00 (Major Site Plan) shall be required with the application for conditional use. The application for conditional use shall not be considered complete until all minimum site plan criteria have been determined to be met. C. In the IH (Industrial Heavy) or U (Utility) zoning district, land clearing and yard trash recycling operations, that are engaged in the recycling and processing of land clearing and yard trash only, may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the following criteria: 1. Business operations authorized under this Section shall be limited to the recycling, processing and short term storage of land clearing and yard trash only, and shall not be permitted to recycle, process or store for any period of time construction or demolition debris, except for that construction or demolition debris that may otherwise be defined as land clearing debris or yard trash. 2. The total site area devoted to the recycling, processing and storage of land clearing and yard trash debris shall be at least five (5) acres, but no more than fifteen (15) acres. 3. The recycling yard, including all product receiving areas, shall be surrounded by a fence, wall, or opaque vegetative screening eight (8) feet in height. Such fence or wall shall be of similar composition, construction, and color throughout and shall be constructed without openings except for one (1) entrance and one (1) exit; the entrance and exit shall be equipped with unpierced gates. Such gates shall be closed and securely locked at all times, except during business hours. If vegetative screening is to be substituted for a fence or wall, plans for such vegetative screening shall be submitted with the application for conditional use approval. Such vegetative screening shall consist of a greenbelt strip at least twenty (20) feet in width adjoining all adjacent lot lines, and a greenbelt strip at least fifteen (15) feet in width adjoining any street line. The greenbelt shall be composed of at least one (1) row of deciduous or evergreen trees and one (1) or two (2) rows of shrubs. Maintenance of the fence, wall, or opaque vegetative screening shall be the responsibility of the property owner consistent with the other provisions of this Code. 4. All sides of each Individual debris storage (stockpile) areas shall be accessible by means of fire lanes. Fire lanes shall be a minimum of one and one-half (1½) times the height of the pile, but in no case shall the fire lane be less than twenty (20) feet in width. A minimum one hundred (100) foot wide clear space shall be provided between every two (2) debris storage piles and there shall be a one hundred (100) foot wide fire lane at the end of each storage or stockpile, regardless of overall length. Figure 7-29 depicts the general layout of the debris storage stockpile areas: The maximum length of an individual debris storage stockpile shall not exceed five hundred (500) feet. The maximum width of an individual debris storage stockpile shall not exceed one hundred (100) feet. The maximum height of any one (1) storage pile shall not exceed thirty (30) feet. All stockpiles shall be surrounded with a network of fully operating fire hydrants spaced at intervals of no more than two hundred fifty (250) feet. No portion of the stockpile yard shall be less than two hundred (200) feet from any fire hydrant. Each fire hydrant shall provide for a minimum fire flow of seven hundred fifty (750) gallons per minute, unless otherwise provided for by the St. Lucie County Fire District. An area equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the total area occupied by the debris storage areas (stockpiles) shall be reserved for the emergency relocation of the stored materials should it be necessary for fire fighting purposes. This emergency storage area may not include any of the required minimum setbacks or separation corridors for the debris storage areas (stockpiles). This emergency storage area shall be adequately served with access to fire suppression resources, consistent with this code. Page 100 of 420 The total site area that may be covered with the debris storage areas (stockpiles), excluding the emergency stockpile area, shall not exceed sixty percent (60%) of the gross area of the project site. 5. Individual stockpiles shall be located at least one hundred (100) feet from any brush or tree line and shall be no closer than fifty (50) feet to any property line or street right-of-way line. 6. The base area on which the stockpiles are located must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all weather stabilized surface that is acceptable to the County The access aisles between the stock piles must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all weather stabilized surface that is acceptable to the County. 7. All materials received into the recycling yard shall be rotated through the recycling yard within twelve (12) months of its acceptance and deposition in the recycling yard. 8. All land clearing and yard trash recycling operations shall submit as part of the application for Conditional Use permit a copy of Fire Prevention Plan for the specific recycling operations that has been approved by the St. Lucie County Fire District, Fire Prevention Bureau. This fire prevention plan shall, at a minimum, address all requirements and recommendations of NFPA 46, Recommended Safe Practice for Storage of Forest Products, unless otherwise restricted further by this Code 9. All land clearing and yard trash recycling operations shall submit to an annual fire prevention inspection to be conducted, upon reasonable notice, by the St. Lucie County Fire District, Fire Prevention Bureau. 10. All stockpiles shall be constructed and located so as to afford the opportunity to measure the internal temperatures of the land clearing materials in the stockpile in order to monitor fire hazard. 11. All vehicles used on the stockpile shall be of a type that minimizes the compaction of the stockpile. 12. Regardless of building size, a complete site plan prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.02.00 (Major Site Plan) shall be required with the application for Conditional Use. The application for Conditional Use shall not be considered complete until all minimum site plan criteria have been determined to be met. 13. Every land clearing and yard trash recycling operation, authorized under this section, shall establish a cash security fund, bond or provide the County with an irrevocable letter of credit Page 101 of 420 based on the schedule below, to secure the cost of removing of all accumulated land clearing and yard trash debris from the site if it has been determined by the County Commission, following a duly noticed public hearing, that the land clearing and yard trash recycling operation has been abandoned or recycling operations have ceased for period in excess of six (6) months, or of the Conditional Use Permit is revoked for any reason. The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to any land clearing and yard trash recycling operation operated by any unit of local government within the County. Storage Yard Size Required Security 5 to 7.5 acres $ 50,000 7.5 to 12.5 acres $100,000 12.5 to 15 acres $150,000 14. Any lawfully, existing land clearing and yard trash recycling operation as of August 17, 1999, shall conform to the above described standards no later than January 1, 2001. In the event that any existing land clearing and yard trash recycling operation fails to meet the requirements of this section, the County shall pursue all available remedies to compel compliance with the provisions of this section and any other applicable provision of this code. 15. The Code Enforcement Board, shall be the responsible enforcement board assuring compliance with the provisions of this section and related sections within this Code. If the Public Works Director, in consultation with the County Administrator, or his/her designee, and County Attorney, determines that the Code Enforcement Board process would be an inadequate response to a given violation(s), the County Attorney may institute appropriate proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction for prosecution of the violation(s) as provided by law. 16. The violation of any of the regulations, restrictions and limitations promulgated under the provisions of this section may be restrained by injunction, including a mandatory injunction and otherwise abated in any manner provided by law. 17. Nothing contained in this provision shall prohibit the board of county commissioners from enforcing its codes by any other means. 18. In the event that St. Lucie County is declared a federal disaster area following or as a result of either hurricane or freeze damage, the County Commission may suspend any or all of the standards above for the duration of the declared emergency in order to facilitate the removal of vegetative debris. Page 102 of 420 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 ORDINANCE NO. 99-003 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BYAMENDING SECTION 2.00.00, DEFINITIONS, TO PROVIDE FORTHE ADDITION OF DEFINITIONS OF CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS, LAND CLEARING DEBRIS, LAND CLEARING OPERATION, LAND CLEARING AND YARD TRASH RECYCLING OPERATION AND YARD TRASH; BY AMENDING SECTION 3.01.03(U)(7), INDUSTRIAL HEAVY ZONING DISTRICT TO ADD YARD TRASH RECYCLING OPERATIONS AS A CONDITIONAL USE; BY AMENDING SECTION 3.01.03(W)(7), UTILITIES ZONING DISTRICT TO ADD YARD TRASH RECYCLING OPERATIONS AS A CONDITIONAL USE; BY ADDING SECTION 7.10.12(C) SCRAP AND TRASH MATERIALS, TO PROVIDE FOR THE ADDITION OF LAND CLEARING AND YARD TRASH RECYCLING OPERATIONS BY PROVIDING RESTRICTIONS, STANDARDS, DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, REPORT FILING REQUIREMENTS AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES; BY AMENDING SECTION 11.13.01(A) ENFORCEMENT OF CODE PROVISIONS, GENERALLY, TO ADD LAND CLEARING AND YARD TRASH RECYCLING OPERATIONS AS A ITEM TO BE ENFORCED BY ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL HEARING BOARD; BY PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, BY PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BY PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY, BY PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, BY PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, BY PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made the following determination: On August 1, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, adopted the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. The Board of County Commissioners has adopted certain amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, through the following Ordinances: 91-03 March 14, 1991 91-09 May 14, 1991 91-21 November 7, 1991 92-17 June 2, 1992 Ordinance #99-003fnl Final Underline is for addition St~-ikc T.~r~u~ is for deletion Page 1 PRINT DATE: 08/17/99 Page 103 of 420 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 o 93-01 February 16, 1993 93-03 - February 16, 1993 93-05 May 25, 1993 93-06 - May 25, 1993 93-07 May 25, 1993 94-07 - June 22, 1994 94-18 August 16, 1994 94-21 - August 16, 1994 95-01 January 10, 1995 96-10 - August 6, 1996 97-01 March 4, 1997 97-09 - October 7, 1997 97-23 September 2, 1997 99-01 - February 2, 1999 99-02 April 6, 1999 99-04 - August 17, 1999 99-05 July 20, 1999 99-15 - July 20, 1999 99-16 July 20, 1999 Recently the County has experienced a number of fires at land clearing and yard trash recycling operations in the unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, the cost of which to extinguish has been in excess of $150,000. The Board has determined that the uncontrolled storage of land clearing materials does create a potential hazard to the general health and safety of the public. On May 20, 1999, the Local Planning Agency/Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed ordinance after publishing notice in the Port St. Lucie News and the Tribune at least 10 days prior to the hearing and recommended that the proposed ordinance be approved. On July 6, 1999, this Board held its first public hearing on the proposed ordinance, after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Port St. Lucie News and the Tribune on June 24, 1999. On July 20, 1999 this Board held its second public hearing on the proposed ordinance, after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Port St. Lucie News and the Tribune on July 9, 1999, and continued this public hearing until August 17, 1999. On August 17, 1999, this Board reconvened the public hearing and accepted additional public comments and testimony. The proposed amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code are consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Underline is for addition is for deletion Ordinance #99-003fnl Page 2 Final PRINT DATE: 08/17/99 Page 104 of 420 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 and is in the best interest of the health safety and public welfare of the citizens of St. Lucie County, Florida. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: PART A. THE SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS TO THE ST. LUClE COUNTY CODE AND COMPILED LAWS TO READ AS FOLLOWS, INCLUDE: CHAPTER II DEFINITIONS 2.00.00 DEFINITIONS When used in this Code, the following terms shall have the meanings herein ascribed to them. Construction and demolition debris means discarded materials generally considered to be not water-soluble and nonhazardous in nature, including, but not limited to, steel, glass, brick, concrete, asphalt roofing material, pipe, gypsum wallboard, and lumber, from the construction or destruction of a structure as part of a construction or demolition proiect or from the renovation of a structure, and including rocks, soils, tree remains, trees, and other vegetative matter that normally results from land clearing or land development operations for a construction project, including such debris from construction of structures at a site remote from the construction or demolition project site. Mixing of construction and demolition debris with other types of solid waste will cause it to be classified as other than construction and demolition debris. The term Construction and demolition debris also includes: a)Clean cardboard, paper, plastic, wood, and metal scraps from a construction proiect; Effective January 1, 1997, except as provided in 2s. 403.707(13)(j). unpainted, q Underline is for addition 2 ............ is for deletion Ordinance #99-003fnl Page 3 Final PRINT DATE: 08/17/99 Page 105 of 420 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 nontreated wood scraps from facilities manufacturing materials used for construction of structures or their components and unpainted, nontreated wood pallets provided the wood scraps and pallets are separated from other solid waste where generated and the generator of such wood scraps or pallets implements reasonable practices of the generating industry to minimize the co-mingling of wood scraps or pallets with other solid waste; and C_) De minimis amounts of other nonhazardous wastes that are qenerated at construction or destruction projects, provided such amounts are consistent with best management practices of the industry. Land Clearing Debris means uprooted or cleared vegetation resultinq from a land clearinq operation. Land Clearinq Operation means the uprooting or clearing of vegetation in connection with construction for buildings and rights-of-way, residential or industrial development, mineral operations, or the clearing of vegetation to enhance property value and aesthetics. The removal and destruction of shade trees due to storm or insect damage is included as a land clearing operation. Land Clearinq and Yard Trash Recycling Operation means those businesses that are, engaged in the recycling and processing of land clearing and yard trash debris only and as may be authorized as a specific Conditional Use under Section 7.10.12(C) of this Code. Land Clearinq and Yard Trash Recycling Operations shall not include, or apply to, the on- site disposal of land clearing and yard trash debris generated from land clearinq activities on that property, provided that any such on-site disposal is not in conflict with any applicable federal, state or local regulations. Yard Trash means vegetative matter resultinq from landscapinq maintenance and land clearing operations. 3.01.00 CHAPTER III ZONING DISTRICTS ZONING DISTRICT USE REGULATIONS Underline is for addition Ctrika Throu~l~ is for deletion Ordinance #99-003fnl Page 4FinalPRINTDATE: 08/17/99 Page 106 of 420 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 3.01.03 ZONING DISTRICTS U. IH INDUSTRIAL, HEAVY 7. Conditional Uses Airport, landing and takeoff fields - general aviation. (458~) Manufacturing: 1) Paper & allied products (29) 2) Chemicals & allied products (28) 3) Petroleum refining & related products (29) 4) Stone, clay, glass & concrete products (32) 5) Primary metal industries (33) 6) Ammunition & ordinance (3~8) Natural or manufactured gas storage and distribution points. (492) Scrap~ and waste, and land clearing and yard trash recyclin.q operations meteriats - subject to the provisions of Section 7.1 0.12 (-13-). ~ Warehousing and storage services - stockyards. (999) Wholesale trade - nondurable goods: 1) Petroleum & petroleum products (999) UTILITIES Conditional Uses Airports. (458) Electric generation plants. (491) Gas production plants. Land clearing and yard trash recycling operations - subject to the provisions of Section 7.1 0.12. (999) Natural or manufactured gas storage and distribution points. (492) Protective functions and their related activities - Correctional institutions (9223) Solid waste disposal. (4953) Outdoor shooting ranges, providing site plan approval is obtained according to the provisions of Sections 1 1.02.07 through 11.02.09 and Section 7.10.19 of this Code. (999) CHAPTER VII DEVELOPMENT DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT LTl q I'll Underline is for addition is for deletion Ordinance #99-003fnl Pa~e 5FinalPRINTDATE: 08/17/99 Page 107 of 420 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 STANDARDS 7.10.00 7.10.12 SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS SCRAP~ AND WASTE-M~'T-ERIAE~ AND RECYCLING OPERATIONS Paragraphs A and B - no change In the IH (Industrial Heavy) or U (Utility) zoning district, land clearinq and yard trash recycling operations, that are engaged in the recycling and processing of land clearing and yard trash only. may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the followinq criteria: 1. Business operations authorized under this Section shall be limited to the recycling, processing and short term storage of land clearing and yard trash only, and shall not be permitted to recycle, process or store for any period of time construction or demolition debris, except for that construction or demolition debris that may otherwise be defined as land clearing debris or yard trash. The total site area devoted to the recycling, processing and storage of and clearinq and yardtrashdebrisshallbeatleastfive (5} acres, but no more than 15 acres. The recycling yard, including all product receivinq areas, shall be surrounded by a fence, wall, or opaque vegetative screening eight (8) feet in height. Such fence or wall shall be of similar composition, construction, and color throughout and shall be constructed without openings except for one entrance and one exit; the entrance and exit shall be equipped with unpierced gates. Such gates shall be closed and securely locked at all times, except duringbusinesshours. If vegetative screeninq is to be substituted for a fence or wall, plans for such vegetative screening shall be submitted with the application for conditional use approval. Such vegetative screeninq shall consist of a greenbelt strip at least twenty (20) feet in width adjoining all adjacent lot lines, and a Rreenbelt strip at least fifteen (15) feet in width adjoining any street line. The qreenbelt shall be composed of at least one (1) row of deciduous or evergreen trees and one (1) or two (2) rows of shrubs. Maintenance of the fence, wall, or opaque vegetat ve screeninq shall be the responsibility of the property owner consistent with the other provisions of this Code. All sides of each Individual debris storaqe (stockpile) areas shall be accessible by means of fire lanes. Fire lanes shall be a minimum of 1 ~ times the height of the pile, but in no case shall the fire lane be less than 20 feet in width. A minimum 100 foot wide clear space shall be provided between every two debris storaqe piles and there shall be a 100 foot wide fire lane at the end of each storage or stockpile, regard ess of overall length. Figure 7-29 depicts 1::::3 h3 Underline is for addition is for deletion Ordinance #99-003fnl Page 6FinalPRINTDATE: 08/17/99 Page 108 of 420 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 the general layout of the debris storage stockpile areas: The maximum length of an individual debris storage stockpile shall not exceed 500 feet. Tho, maximum width of an individual debris storage stockpile shall not exceed 100 feet. Tho, maximum height of any one storage pile shall not exceed thirty 30 feet. FIGURE 7-29 LAYOUT OF LAND CLEARING AND YARD WASTE STORAGE PILES ra~ Pile e Storage Pile Sto~ Pile Slomge Pile t 100'{ Storage Pile Storage Pile J 5~ ~t (max) SIorl~e Pile Sl~ra~e Pile 1~ Stor~e Pile I 8tomge Pile r i I b--forage Pile 8~r~ Pile All stockpiles shall be surrounded with a network of fully operating fire hydrants spaced at intervals of no more than 250 feet. No portion of the stockpile yard shall be less than 200 feet from any fire hydrant. Each fire hydrant shall provide for a minimum fire flow of 750 gallons per minute, unless otherwise provided for by the St. Lucie County Fire District. An area equal to 15% ofthe total area occupied by the debris storage areas (stockpiles) shall be reserved for the emergency relocation of the stored materials should it be necessary for fire fi~htina purposes. This emergency storage area may not include any of the requiredminimumsetbacksorseparationcorridorsforthedebrisstoraqeareas (stockpiles). This emergency storage area shall be adequately served with access to fire suppression resources, consistent with this code. The total site area that may be covered with the debris storaqe areas (stockpiles), excludingtheemergencystockpilearea, shall not exceed 60% of the qross area of the proiect site. q 1 Underline is for addition Strike Tkrougl. is for deletion Ordinance #99-003fnl Page 7FinalPRINTDATE: 08/17/99 Page 109 of 420 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 10. 11. 12. 13. Individual stockpiles shall be located at least one hundred (100) feet from any brush or trcc line and shall be no closer than fifty (50) feet to any property line or street right-of-way line The base area on which the stockpiles are located must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all weather stabilized surface that is acceptable to tho. County The access aisles between the stock piles must be constructed of either a concrete surface, asphalt surface, or other clean all weather stabilized surface that is acceptable to the County. All materials received into the recycling yard shall be rotated through the recycling yard within 12 months of its acceptance and deposition in the recycling yard All land clearing and yard trash recycling operations shall submit as part of the application for Conditional Use permit a copy of Fire Prevention Plan for the specific recycling operations that has been approved by the St. Lucie County Fire District, Fire Prevention Bureau. This fire prevention plan shall, at a minimum, address all requirements and recommendations of NFPA 46, Recommended Safe Practice for Storaqe ofForest Products, unless otherwise restricted further by this Code All land clearing and yard trash recycling operations shall submit to an annual fire prevention inspection to be conducted, upon reasonable notice, by the St. Lucie County Fire District, Fire Prevention Bureau. All stockpiles shall be constructed and located so as to afford the opportunity to measure the internal temperatures of the land clearinq materials in the stockpile in order to monitor fire hazard. All vehicles used on the stockpile shall be of a type that minimizes the compaction of the stockpile. Regard ess of building size, a complete site plan prepared in accordance with the provisions ofSection 11.02.00 (Major Site Plan) shall be required with the application for Conditional Use. The application for Conditional Use shall not be considered complete until all minimum site plan criteria have been determined to be met. Every land clearinq and yard trash recycling operation, authorized under this section, shall establish a cash security fund, bond or provide the County with an irrevocable letter of credit based on the schedule below, to secure the cost of removinq of all accumulated land clearinrlandyardtrashdebrisfromthesiteifithasbeendeterminedbytheCountyCommission, followinq a duly noticed public hearing, that the land clearing and yard trash recyclingoperationhasbeenabandonedorrecyclingoperationshaveceasedforperiodinexcessof six months, or of the Conditional Use Permit is revoked for any reason. The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to any land clearing and yard trash recycling operation operated by any unit of local government within the County. FT'I 3 h,3 Underline is for addition Strike Tkrougl. is for deletion Ordinance #99-003fnl Page 8FinalPRINTDATE: 08/17/99 Page 110 of 420 4 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Storage Yard Size Required Security 5 to 7.5 acres $ 50,000 7.5 to 12.5 acres $100,000 12.5 to 15 acres $150,000 16. Any lawfully, existing land clearing and yard trash recycling operation as of August 17, 1999,shall conform to the above described standards no later than January 1,2001. In the event that any existing land clearinq and yard trash recycling operation fails to meet the requirements of this section, the County shall pursue all available remedies to compel compliance with the provisions of this section and any other applicable provision of this code. The Environmental Control Hearing Board, shall be the responsible enforcement board assuring compliance with the provisions of this section and related sections within this Code. If the Environmental Control Officer, in consultation with the Community Development Director and the County Health Director, determines that the Environmental Control Hearing Board process would be an inadequate response to a given violation(s), the Environmental Control Officer may institute appropriate proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction for prosecution of the violation(s) as provided by law. In the event that St. Lucie County is declared a federal disaster area followinq or as a result of either hurricane or freeze damage, the County Commission may suspend any or all of the standards above for the duration of the declared emergency in order to facilitate the removal of vegetative debris. 11.13.00 11.13.01 A. AUTHORITY 1. ENFORCEMENT OF CODE PROVISIONS GENERALLY Enforcement by Environmental Control Hearing Board Enforcement proceedings with respect to the following provisions shall be in accordance with Section 11.13.02: Wellfleld Protection (Sections 6.03.00 and 11.05.10) Wastewater and Sewage Disposal Compliance (Sections 7.08.03 and 11.05.09) Wetlands Protection (Section 6.02.03) m Under--li--n~ ~ for --additiOn Stzikc T,h~u~l, is for deletion Ordinance #99-003fnl Page 9FinalPRINTDATE: 08/17/99 Page 111 of 420 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Native Upland Habitat Protection (Section 6.04.01) Land clearinR and yard trash recyclin.q operations (7.10.12(c)) Standard Housing Code (Section 13.08.00) All other codes, statutes, rules, regulations adopted by reference hereunder pursuant to Section 11.13.02(L). Enforcement proceedings with respect to all provisions of this Code, except those listed in paragraph 1 above shall be in accordance with Section 11.13.03. PART B.CONFLICTING PROVISIONS. Special acts of the Florida legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, CountyordinancesandCountyresolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with this ordinance are hereby superseded bythisordinancetotheextentofsuchconflict. PART C. SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative, or void,such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance. Ifthis ordinance or any provision thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstance, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property, or circumstance. PART D. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE. This ordinance shall be applicable throughout St. Lucie County's jurisdiction. PART E. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. The Clerk be and is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this ordinance to the Bureau of Administrative Code and Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida 32304. PART F. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Department of State. PART G. ADOPTION. After motion and second, the vote on this ordinance was as follows: q m Underline is for addition Ctrikc Throu~l. is for deletion Ordinance #99-003fnl Page 10FinalPRINTDATE: 08/17/99 Page 112 of 420 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 4O 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Chairman Paula A. Lewis Vice Chairman John Bruhn Commissioner Cliff Barnes Commissioner Doug Coward Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson AYE AYE AYE AYE AYE PART H. CODIFICATION. Provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated in the St. Lucie County Code and Compiled Laws, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other appropriate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intention; provided, however, that parts B through H shall not be codified. PASSED AND DULY ENACTED this 17th day of August, 1999 ATTEST: D EP"O'I"~ CLERK..,.r.~ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: DJM 99-003fnl(LDCamends - disc #12) q 0%, Underline is for addison trikc Tkro-~fik is for deletion Ordinance #99-003fnl Page 11 Final PRINT DATE: 08/17/99 Page 113 of 420 Planning Division Agenda Item Summary Applicant St Lucie County BOCC 2300 Virginia Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34982 Staff Kori Benton, AICP Assistant Planning Manager Planning and Development Services— Planning Division (772) 462-2518 bentonk@stlucieco.org File Number TCP-3202125974 Notice Requirements Public hearing notice in accordance with Section 163.3184(11), Florida Statute and Section 11.00.03 of the Land Development Code was placed in the St. Lucie News Tribune on March 7, 2021 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Planning & Zon- ing Commission, acting at the Local Planning Agency, recommend the Board of County Commissioners’ adopt a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to incorporate the 2020 Port Master Plan into the Comprehen- sive Plan. Project Website: The 2020 Port Master Plan, project overview and associated planning pro-cess content are available at: PlanPortFP.com. Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Amending the Port Sub-Element to incorporate the 2020 Port Master Plan Project Description In May 2020, at the guidance of the Board of County Commissioners, Staff launched the 2020 Port Master Planning efforts. St. Lucie County engaged the consulting team of Moffatt & Nichol and Atkins to prepare a new Port of Fort Pierce Master plan through a publicly engaged plan-making process. The 2020 Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan seeks to capitalize on current invest-ment momentum and public/private support, exploring ways in which our devel-oping Yacht Maintenance, Repair & Overhaul (MRO) facility can anchor Port investment desired for decades. The Plan details a multi-faceted vision for the Port that calls for:  Creation of the Treasure Coast’s premier center for yacht, shipbuilding, and related marine repair, overhaul, and maintenance facilities;  Investment in County owned Harbour Pointe Park to emerge as a public marina, boat ramp and upgraded park; and,  Advancement of a new wharf and surrounding uplands dedicated to support- ing small import/export marine dependent businesses. The Master Plan, accepted by the Board in November, is pending formal incor-poration into the County’s Comprehensive Plan with action requested by the Planning & Zoning Commission. This Plan identifies a road-map to achieve a diverse working waterfront that embraces new industries, centered on expanding economic and social benefits to the citizens and businesses of St. Lucie County and the Treasure Coast. In addition to incorporating the Plan, by reference, and Illustrative Master Plan, the Commission is encouraged to consider any updates to the Goals, Objectives and Policies within the Port Sub-element. Hearing Date: Thursday March 18, 2021 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 114 of 420 Planning and Development Services Department Planning Division M E M O R A N D U M TO:Planning & Zoning Commission THROUGH:Leslie Olson, AICP, Director Benjamin Balcer, Assistant Director FROM:Kori Benton, AICP, Assistant Planning Manager DATE:March 3, 2021 SUBJECT:Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment: Incorporating the 2020 Port Master Plan into the Port Sub-Element The St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan is the policy document used to provide guidelines for growth management within St. Lucie County. The Comprehensive Plan establishes the goals, policies, objectives and public improvements to maintain and enhance the quality of life for St. Lucie County residents, protect natural resources and promote sustainable economic development, while recognizing the expansive needs and values of the County's unique communities, diverse land area and vital infrastructure. The County Comprehensive Plan has 13 elements and a Port sub-element, with the Port Sub-element concentrating on the County’s most unique transportation asset which is situated along the most biodiverse estuary in North America. The County developed a new Port Master Plan in 2020, through an extensive public planning process, which is proposed for incorporation into the Comprehensive Plan Port Sub-Element. Background Planning for the Port of Fort Pierce, the region’s only deep-water port, has advanced through various Master Plans and support planning processes. The 1989 Port Master Plan was incorporated into the County’s Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Element, in accordance with St. Lucie County Code Section 30-23. - Port master plan, which affirms “the county port authority's port master plan is hereby incorporated into the transportation element of the comprehensive plan, pursuant to F.S. § 163.3178”. In 1996, a non-binding public referendum and charrette process resulted in new direction, culminating into a new Port Master Plan in 2002. In 2013, a second public charrette led to further Plan updates and Comprehensive Plan updates in 2015 as document by Ordinance 15-017 which has largely guided County goals, objectives, and policies for the Port. In 2018, the Port Sub-element was refined during the County’s Comprehensive Plan Evaluation Appraisal Report (EAR). 2020 Port Master Plan On March 3, 2020, the Board of County Commissioners accepted a Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Grant (50/50 Match) and authorized a corresponding consulting contract for the Port of Fort Pierce Master Vision Plan & Reinvestment Strategy. In May 2020, St. Lucie County launched the 2020 Port Master Plan update alongside the consulting team of Moffatt & Nichol and Atkins to prepare a new Port of Fort Pierce Master plan through a publicly engaged plan-making process. In the past, the Master Plan has served principally as a "policy type" of document rather than a specific layout plan for the Port Area; however, this initiative considered policy, implementation and preliminary design. This Master Plan, distinguished from prior plans, includes detailed site assessment, use layouts and integrated design for the Port Area. The Port of Fort Pierce, therefore the Master Plan Project Study Area, is primarily Page 115 of 420 Project Name: Port Master Plan Update 2 within the City of Fort Pierce’s jurisdiction with only one 1.85-acre parcel within the County’s jurisdiction. The Plan evaluated land use and zoning matters, while appropriately relegating such responsibility to the local governing authority in the Port Area. Collaboration The endeavor was led by the Port Master Plan Advisory Committee which included staff representatives from St. Lucie County, the City of Fort Pierce, the St. Lucie County Transportation Planning Organization (TPO), the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, and the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA). The Port Master Plan Advisory Committee compiled decades of research, planning documents, economic studies, and environmental publications, past grant awards and infrastructure records to ensure access to these assets in Plan preparation. The Port Advisory Committee (PAC), formerly known as the Harbor Advisory Committee, was an important contributor as well. Plan Highlights The Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan looks to capitalize on current investment momentum and public/private support, exploring ways in which our developing Yacht MRO facility can anchor Port investment desired for quite some time. The Plan details a multi-faceted vision for the Port that calls for: •Creation of the Treasure Coast’s premier center for yacht, shipbuilding, and related marine repair, overhaul, and maintenance facilities; •Investment in County owned Harbour Pointe Park to emerge as a public marina, boat ramp and upgraded park; and, •Advancement of a new wharf and surrounding uplands dedicated to supporting small import/export marine dependent businesses. The Planning Process emphasized community engagement, overcoming complications from the COVID-19 Pandemic, by advancing many community engagement activities online using our dedicated project website (www.planportfp.com), virtual meetings, electronic surveys, video conferencing, and other methods. The Master Plan, accepted by the Board in November, requires formal incorporation into the County’s Comprehensive Plan. The Plan identifies a roadmap to achieve a diverse working waterfront that embraces new industries, centered on expanding economic and social benefits to the citizens and businesses of St. Lucie County and the Treasure Coast. This Master Plan, developed by a public participation process, reflects extensive public input, coordination with property owners and stakeholders in the area, and is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan Port Sub-element. Comprehensive Plan Amendment The proposed Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment will incorporate the 2020 Port Master Plan, by reference, and Illustrative Master Plan, along with associated updates to the Port Sub-element Goals, Objectives and Policies. The 2020 Port Master Plan is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan, embracing these principles guide our Policy Makers and Port Authority in implementing the community’s vision for the Port, with key highlights below: St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Excerpts Goal 2.8: St. Lucie County shall continue to implement the Port Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce. Page 116 of 420 Project Name: Port Master Plan Update 3 Objective 2.8.1: Continue to implement the Port Master Plan consistent with Section 163.3178(2)(a-k), Florida Statutes. Policy 2.8.1.1 - The Port Master Plan shall address the environmental conditions of the Indian River Lagoon and its interaction with existing and proposed port activities. Policy 2.8.1.2 - The Port Master Plan shall address all aspects of port management and operation including safety and security of commercial, industrial, recreational, and environmental activities. Policy 2.8.1.3 - Coordinate with the City of Fort Pierce to ensure consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan including the Port Sub Element and Coastal Management Element. Policy 2.8.1.4 - Coordinate with the St. Lucie TPO and other appropriate local, state, and federal agencies to ensure adequate intermodal access and adequacy of public facilities and infrastructure. Policy 2.8.1.6 - Throughout the development of the Port Master Plan, ensure and encourage public participation of all affected parties through a formalized public participation process. Policy 2.8.1.7 - Upon the completion of the Port Master Plan, make any appropriate amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Incorporating the Port Master Plan into the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the requirements of Section 163.3178(2)(k), Florida Statutes, the Comprehensive Plan, and County Code & Compiled Laws. PUBLIC NOTICE An advertisement displayed in the local newspaper specifying the Planning & Zoning Commission’s Public Hearing, acting as the Local Planning Agency. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission, acting at the Local Planning Agency, recommend the Board of County Commissioners adopt a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to incorporate the 2020 Port Master Plan into the Comprehensive Plan. Page 117 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 1 . ORDINANCE No. 2021-XXX FILE NO.: TCP-XXXXXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE 2018 ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PORT SUB-ELEMENT 2A TO INCORPORATE THE 2020 PORT MASTER PLAN AND UPDATE THE GENERAL MASTER DEVELOPMENT MAP; UPDATING SUPPORT OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, based on the testimony and evidence, including but not limited to the staff report, has made the following determinations: 1.On January 9, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, adopted the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 2.The Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie as the governing body of St. Lucie County having jurisdiction over this application pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statues, is authorized and empowered to consider amendment to the adopted Comprehensive Plan of St. Lucie County. 3.On March 18, 2021, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the Local Planning Agency held a public hearing, of which due notice was published in the St. Lucie News Tribune, and recommended approval/denial of the proposed amendment to the Board of County Commissioners. 4.On , the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida held the first of two required public hearing, of which due notice was placed in the St. Lucie News Tribune and approved/denied transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity. 5.On _, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida held a public hearing, of which due notice was placed on the St. Page 118 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 2 . Lucie News Tribune, and deemed the adoption of the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: A.ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENTS The Board of County Commissioners does hereby adopt the amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, attached herein as Exhibit A. B.CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Board of County Commissioners does hereby state its intention to amend the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Port Sub-element 2a to incorporate the 2020 Port Master Plan and update the General Master Development Map; further updating support objectives and policies. C.CONFLICTING PROVISIONS Special acts of the Florida Legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, County Ordinances and County Resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with the Ordinance are hereby superseded by this Ordinance to the extent of such conflict. D.SEVERABILITY If any portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this Ordinance. If this Ordinance or any provisions thereof shall be held to be inapplicable for any person, property, or circumstances, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstances. E.APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE This Ordinance shall be applicable as stated in Paragraph A and B. Page 119 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 3 . F.FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of the Ordinance to the Bureau of Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida, 32304. G.FILING WITH THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY The Planning and Development Services Director shall send a certified copy of the Ordinance to the Department of Economic Opportunity, Community Planning and Development Programs, 107 East Madison Street, Caldwell Building, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-4120. H.EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect thirty-one (31) days after the adoption. If the Ordinance is challenged within thirty (30) days after adoption, the Ordinance shall not be effective until the State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission respectively issues a final order finding the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(10), Florida Statues. Page 120 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 4 . I.ADOPTION. After motion and second, the vote on this ordinance was as follows: Chris Dzadovsky, Chair XXX Sean Mitchell, Vice-Chair XXX Linda Bartz, Commissioner XXX Frannie Hutchinson, Commissioner XXX Cathy Townsend, Commissioner XXX PASSED AND DULY ENACTED this day of _, 2021. Attest:Board of County Commissioners St. Lucie County, Florida By: Deputy Clerk Chair Approved As To Form and Correctness: By: County Attorney Page 121 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 5 . Exhibit “A” PORT SUB-ELEMENT 2A GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Goal 2A.1: Responsibility for the Port - The overall responsibility for the management of the Port of Fort Pierce is vested by law with the St. Lucie County Commission and should be managed in the public interest of all the citizens of St. Lucie County. Objective 2A.1.1: St. Lucie County, working with the City of Fort Pierce, interested agencies and private property owners and consistent with the Port enabling laws and the constitutional and statutory protections for the rights of existing private property owners should ensure that the public interest and quality of life is protected when exercising public control of port property. Policy 2A.1.1.4: St. Lucie County, operating through its existing and future legal authorities, shall initiate discussions with the City of Fort Pierce, with other public agencies, and with the private business sector to create the legal agreements, memoranda of understanding, and joint planning agreements necessary to implement the goals, objectives, and policies of the 2020 Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce. Goal 2A.2: Land Use Map for the Port of Fort Pierce - The Port of Fort Pierce shall establish a General Master Development Map for the Port that establishes a general Port Operations Area Boundary to provide elected officials, prospective investors, port facility developers, and the public a clear understanding of the physical location of the activities that could be accommodated in the Port of Fort Pierce. The General Master Development Map for the Port of Fort Pierce is not to be used alone but rather in conjunction with the other development policies found in this plan and the applicable Local Comprehensive Plans for St. Lucie County and the City of Fort Pierce. Objective 2A.2.1: The General Master Development Map and Illustrative Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce shall be as depicted in Figures 2A-1 and 2A-2. The land use activities shown in this map these exhibits shall comply with applicable State, County and Municipal laws including the applicable Local Comprehensive Plans for St. Lucie County and the City of Fort Pierce, adopted pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Policy 2A.2.1.1: The general land use classification is to be used to determine consistency between the General Master Development Map for the Port of Fort Pierce and the applicable local government comprehensive plan. The Port of Fort Pierce will coordinate with the City of Fort Pierce and St. Lucie County to determine whether the Port General Master Development Map and Illustrative Master Plan are is consistent with the City and the County Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use designations for the Port Operations. Page 122 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 6 . Fi g u r e 2A - 2 Page 123 of 420 ITEM 9.C. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: MOTION TO APPROVE AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, ACTING AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVE TRANSMITTAL OF THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE PORT SUB-ELEMENT TO THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY BECAUSE…. [CITE REASON(S) WHY – PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] MOTION TO DENY AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, ACTING AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DISAPPROVE TRANSMITTAL OF THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE PORT SUB-ELEMENT TO THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY BECAUSE…. [CITE REASON(S) WHY – PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] Page 124 of 420 MASTER PLAN & REINVESTMENT STRATEGY FINAL / FEBRUARY, 2021 Page 125 of 420 2 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, FL 34982 PREPARED FOR PREPARED BY PERSPECTIVE RENDERING View of Fully Phased Master Plan Improvements. Page 126 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 3 CONTENTS The Port of Fort Pierce Outreach & Engagement Evolving Waterfronts Master Plan Implementation & Next Steps Appendix SECTION 1 SECTION 2 SECTION 3 SECTION 4 SECTION 5 SECTION 6 8 28 50 64 96 126 Page 127 of 420 4 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy This Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce establishes a roadmap to achieve a truly diverse working waterfront. The Plan embraces new industries and opportunities aligned with the goals of expanding economic and social benefit to the citizens and businesses found in St. Lucie County and along the Treasure Coast. The Port has been a fixture of the Fort Pierce community since the 1920s. Establishment of the Fort Pierce Inlet and a small but functional set of docks and transit sheds provided an important export point for Treasure Coast agricultural products. It also offered a source of employment for residents of the City of Fort Pierce. As the century marched forward, the work of the Port remained meaningful but modest when contrasted with the establishment and growth of other east coast seaports. In May 2020, St. Lucie County engaged the consulting team of Atkins and Moffatt & Nichol to explore how best the Port of Fort Pierce should author its next chapter as a unique economic and community asset in the region and the State of Florida. Every five years, Florida seaports are required to update their long-range plan to identify and guide investment to ensure alignment with local comprehensive planning and other regional initiatives. This update meets State requirements and builds on the previous planning work conducted in 2015. The Port heads into the next decade with the recent successful purchase of the 12-acre Indian River Terminal and selection of Derecktor Shipyards, Inc. to invest in and operate a megayacht maintenance, refit, and overhaul facility. This Plan update looks to capitalize on this momentum, exploring ways in which this new anchor can be catalytic for other Port investment. A common theme heard throughout the 2020 plan-making process was the Port and its lands, harbor, and channel are an untapped resource. Accompanying this sentiment, however, was often a cautionary note to ensure changes minimize impacts to Fort Pierce Inlet ecology and be aligned with community values and overall quality of life. This Plan update seeks to strike this balance. A variety of options were explored for public and private land to evolve into a diverse working waterfront. Options were prepared, refined, and established through active dialogue with the County, City, property owners, agencies, and the public. While this was made more challenging due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, conversations about the future of the Port were robust and substantive, utilizing an assortment of virtual meetings, online surveys, conference calls, and (limited) in-person meetings. The planning result is a multi-faceted vision for the Port of Fort Pierce that advances a number of long-term initiatives, including (see opposite page): • Creation of the Treasure Coast’s premier center for yacht, shipbuilding, and related marine repair, overhaul, and maintenance facilities; • Investment in County owned Harbour Pointe to emerge as a public marina, boat ramp, and upgraded park; and, • Advancement of a new wharf and surrounding uplands dedicated to the support small import/export marine dependent businesses. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 128 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 5 FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN 7 21 4 16 16 17 17 18 19 5 1 32 13 12 20 20 20 11 9 10 U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 O L D D I X I E H W Y O L D D I X I E H W Y AVENUE OAVENUE O AVENUE MAVENUE M AVENUE HAVENUE H FISHERMAN’S WHARFFISHERMAN’S WHARF I N D I A N R V R D R I N D I A N R V R D R N 7 T H S T N 7 T H S T SOUTH C A U S E W A Y SOUTH C A U S E W A Y BRIDG E BRIDG E NORTHNORTH CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T 14 15 6 8 KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Anticipated Storm Water Requirement Zones Fisherman’s Wharf Redevelopment Zone Fisherman’s Wharf Publicly Held Land Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway EXISTING Safe Harbor Harbortown Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Light Industrial Uses (Woods Properties and Inlet Fisheries) Derecktor Shipyard Fort Pierce Marine Terminal (Beyel Brothers) Lincoln Park Community Park PROPOSED Harbour Pointe and Tenant Access Road Dry Stack Boat Storage Taylor Creek Public Boat Ramp and Trailer Parking Harbour Pointe Waterfront Esplanade Harbour Pointe Public Marina Reef Restoration Center, Wharf and Dock East Wharf Berth and Marine Industries Yard(s) Marine Industries Vessel Slip (Optional) Yacht MRO and Shipbuilding Areas Wet Slip Yacht MRO Operational Areas Shiplift (Syncrolift) and Transfer System FEC Rail Spur and Related Operations (Optional) Urban Greenway System Linked to Proposed SUNTrail Urban Greenway Pedestrian Overpass Page 129 of 420 6 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Implementation of the Master Plan will take 10- to 20-years. Success relies on favorable market conditions, incremental investment by the public and private sector, and sustained community alignment and goodwill. Achievement of the aims and projects contained in the Master Plan are worthwhile, and will result in an active, working waterfront that serves as another important engine driving economic and social progress for the County and region. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THE PORT PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE Page 130 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 7 PERSPECTIVE RENDERING View of Fully Phased Master Plan Improvements. Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 131 of 420 8 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Page 132 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 9 THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE 1 Page 133 of 420 10 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Celebrating its centennial, the Port of Fort Pierce is one of Florida’s 15 deepwater seaports. Each varied, these assets play an important role in Florida’s economy. The Florida Ports Council estimates seaports generate nearly 900,000 direct and indirect jobs and contribute $117.6 billion in economic value to the state through their activities. WHY. Given the importance of these facilities, the State of Florida requires ports to maintain and update a master plan to identify, guide, and coordinate port development while ensuring alignment with local comprehensive planning and other community and regional initiatives. The Port of Fort Pierce’s previous plan was completed in 2015, and offered several key recommendations, including: • Seek funding for infrastructure; • Coordinate alignment of City of Fort Pierce and St. Lucie County planning and code to facilitate Port development; • Complete reconstruction of the Port Entrance Road and utility improvements; • Continue a dialogue with key players to build alliances; and, • Advance economic development. RECENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS. Several Port enhancements were undertaken over the last decade. Reconstruction of N 2nd Street and its related entry road greatly improved Port access. Purchase of the privately held Indian River Terminal was a long-standing goal of the County. Realized in 2018, this purchase set the stage for procurement and subsequent selection of Derecktor Shipyards to invest and develop a megayacht maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) facility on the Indian River Terminal site. Work is underway to upgrade site buildings and in-water infrastructure into a modern facility capable of servicing the world’s largest yachts. Yard refit includes purchase of a 1,500-ton mobile boat hoist capable of lifting vessels up to 250 feet in length. Derecktor anticipates delivery of this hoist by end of 2020. What County and City leaders, Derecktor, the Bell Family, and members of the community have and continue to see at the Port of Fort Pierce is opportunity. For Derecktor, “The Port of Fort Pierce is the ideal location for America’s next great shipyard…deep water access, no overhead obstructions and a generous turning basin provide ample clearance and maneuverability for the global fleet of megayachts and large sailing yachts.” ¹ NEXT CHAPTER. In May of 2020, St. Lucie County engaged the consulting team of Moffatt & Nichol and Atkins to explore how best the Port of Fort Pierce should seek new economic and other community benefit and author its next chapter. This 2020 update of the Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan looks to capitalize on current investment momentum and public/private support, exploring ways in which this new anchor can be catalytic for other Port investment. In this section, we outline the planning process and highlight key features of Port and project area. THE PORT AND MASTER OVERVIEW THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE 1.1 ¹ Derecktor Press Release, September 2020. Page 134 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 11 Ex-Indian River Terminal THE PORT AND MASTER OVERVIEW THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE Ex-Indian River Terminal Harbour Pointe ParkHarbour Pointe Park Existing Silos, Ex-Indian River Terminal, Port EntrancExisting Silos, Ex-Indian River Terminal, and Port Entrance Marinas Along Taylor CreekMarinas Along Taylor Creek Page 135 of 420 12 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy How should the Port evolve to embrace community economic and social opportunities? How do we balance these aims while also maintaining the need for environmental stewardship for the Port surrounding waters? These are the central questions posed by St. Lucie County to Atkins and Moffatt & Nichol in master plan creation. GOALS. The goals of the Master Plan included: • Explore innovative ideas, uses, and community priorities for the Port through thoughtful, focused engagement; • Develop multiple concepts depicting upland and in-water uses informed by community input, consultant expertise, and case study research; • Consider methods for incorporating Port properties and in-water facilities into the surrounding Downtown waterfront and broader Fort Pierce community context; and, • Organize a general playbook outlining approaches for an informed evolution of Port marine terminal operations and site investments that consider the idea of “future-proofing” Port lands and facilities to be adaptable to ever-changing markets. The planning team was not tasked with market assessment preparation or measurement of potential economic value gained (or lost) from Plan implementation. Both types of market and economic analysis are envisioned as likely candidates for follow-on study. The Master Plan presented herein is a starting point for continued discussion of what’s possible—and actionable. PLANNING PROCESS. The planning process commenced in May of 2020 and included four key steps (refer to accompanying graphic). • STEP 1. Understand the site and potential development opportunities through data collection, site assessment, and case study; • STEP 2. Explore with the community and stakeholders a plan framework and follow-on initial site concepts; • STEP 3. Determine with the community and stakeholders which concepts should be revised and detailed; and, • STEP 4. Finalize the Master Plan and related implementation approaches. THE PLANNING PROCESS THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE 1.2 Harbour Pointe ParkHarbour Pointe Park Fort Pierce InletFort Pierce Inlet Page 136 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 13 THE PLANNING PROCESS THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE STEP 3: DECIDE Draft plan formulation and implementation strategies STEP 4: FINALIZE Prepare final Master Plan and move to implementation STEP 2: EXPLORE Plan framework and concepts exploration STEP 1: UNDERSTAND Data collection, site assessment, and case study WORKING TOGETHER STEP-BY-STEP. Each step included extensive client and community consultation. Outreach efforts included: • Active consultation with a client assembled Master Plan Advisory Committee; • Focused one-on-one outreach with landowners, surrounding businesses, community interest groups, and County and City elected officials, FDOT, the TPO, and Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council; and, • Engagement with the public via two outreach periods and a comprehensive digital campaign. Efforts and results associated with each grouping are offered in Section 2 - Outreach & Engagement (starting on page 29). MAY - JUNE JULY - OCTOBER Page 137 of 420 14 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy 1.2 STUDY AREA The Port of Fort Pierce is a unique resource in Florida, one of only a handful of deepwater ports and working waterfronts. THREE AREAS. The Project Study Area consists of approximately 255 acres of land and water area (see accompanying graphic, red box). The Study Area is bounded by the Intracoastal Waterway (east), Fisherman’s Wharf (south), N 2nd Street and Old Dixie Highway (west), and North Causeway/AIA (north). The Project Study Area includes the new Derecktor Shipyard (ex-Indian River Terminal), a large vacant property in the center of the site owned by the Bell Family, County owned Harbour Pointe, and private marina facilities straddling the mouth of Taylor Creek. The Port Operations Area includes parcels immediately surrounding the Project Study Area (Orange Line). Properties in this zone are considered in the planning effort and reviewed to ensure alignment with concepts contemplated for the Project Study Area. The Port Planning Area comprises submerged and upland areas extending from the Fort Pierce Inlet to the Port (Blue Dashed Line). This zone includes the federally maintained channel and turning basin utilized by Port activities. The entrance channel is 400 feet wide and 30’ deep and links to the 28’ deep interior channel and turning basin. This zone includes portions of Jim and Causeway Islands as well as the southern portion of Fort Pierce Inlet State Park. Similar to the Port Operations Area, properties and features in this zone are reviewed to ensure alignment with elements considered for the Project Study Area. THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE 1.3 Harbour Pointe ParkHarbour Pointe Park Page 138 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 15 Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Port Operations Area (+/- 360 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway Fort Pierce City Marina Riverwalk & Veteran’s Memorial Park Causeway Marina Museum Pointe Park US Coast Guard Station Fisherman’s Wharf Derecktor Shipyard Harbour Pointe Park Taylor Creek Safe Harbor Harbortown Riverside Marina KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 FORT PIERCE INLET 11 10 9 8 7 4 5 3 6 1 2 REGIONAL CONTEXT MAP STUDY AREA THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE CAUSEWAY ISLAND FORT PIERCE INLET STATE PARK JIM ISLAND INDIAN RIVER FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE JENNINGS COVE NORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN Page 139 of 420 16 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy STUDY AREA THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE REGIONAL INITIATIVES. Several initiatives are underway near the Port (see accompanying graphic). Projects include major transportation improvements such as North Causeway Reconstruction and implementation of the SUNTrail Greenway. Others involve public facing waterfront renewal efforts, such as the Fisherman’s Wharf redevelopment and Kings Landing development. The Port Master Plan will incorporate and add value to as many of these initiatives as logical. Key considerations include: • Integration of SUNTrail Greenway components linking to and through public facing Port areas; • Operational upgrade and beautification of Fisherman’s Wharf Road between the Derecktor Shipyard and Fisherman’s Wharf redevelopment; • Alignment of public facing uses and access points at Fisherman’s Wharf via long term relocation of activities at the Beyel Brothers site (end of Fisherman’s Wharf); • Use of Port areas for potential staging and construction of North Causeway and other regional projects; • Encouragement of a water taxi system linking Downtown waterfront activity zones to Fisherman’s Wharf and a renewed Harbour Pointe Park; and, • Encouragement of Port mobility linkages and beautification efforts sensitive to ongoing enhancements at the Lincoln Park neighborhood and other surrounding parcels. Page 140 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 17 Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Port Operations Area (+/- 360 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway SUNTrail Greenway Kings Landing Fisherman’s Wharf Redevelopment Zone Causeway Marina Museum Pointe Park Local Water Taxi Operation Lincoln Park Neighborhood Renewal North Causeway Reconstruction KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 FORT PIERCE INLET ONGOING PROJECT INITIATIVES 1 4 3 6 2 7 5 STUDY AREA THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE CAUSEWAY ISLAND FORT PIERCE INLET STATE PARK INDIAN RIVER FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE JENNINGS COVE NORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN JIM ISLAND Page 141 of 420 18 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy The landside portion of the Project Study Area comprises an estimated +/- 165 acres. Of this total, 79% is privately owned with the balance County and City land. Major private land owners include the Bell Family (Destin Beach and other affiliates), Beyel Brothers, Woods Family, Inlet Girls LLC (Inlet Fisheries), King Marine Group (Taylor Creek Marina), Jamco Inc (Cracker Boy Boat Works), Safe Harbor Harbortown, and others. The Florida East Coast Railway (FEC) owns rail spurs within the Project Study Area that were separated from the north-south mainline as part of N 2nd Street redevelopment. Main public parcels included the 12-acre Indian River Terminal now the subject of a long term lease to Derecktor Shipyard as well as the 20-acre Harbour Pointe Park. CURRENT ACTIVITIES. Current uses and activities within the Port Area include: • BEYEL BROTHERS. One of several locations of Beyel Brothers, parcels at the end of Fisherman’s Wharf support loading and off- loading of barges and other work boats as well as other marine dependents activities. These activities are increasingly seen as suboptimal in this location due to conflict with the Derecktor MRO and Fisherman’s Wharf redevelopment; • DERECKTOR SHIPYARD (EX-INDIAN RIVER TERMINAL). Anticipated to be fully operational in 2021, Derecktor Shipyard provides a full service mega-yacht MRO and new construction facility designed specifically for 200ft, 900-ton plus megayachts. Site features include, +/- 8-acres of storage and repair space, 1,000 feet of protected dockage, and a maintenance building with integrated office space; • WOODS FAMILY TRACTS AND INLET GIRLS LLC (INLET FISHERIES). Woods Family Tracts & Inlet Fisheries properties house a series of varied warehouse, storage, office and administrative buildings, as well as indoor and outdoor parking and storage; • SILOS AND RELATED BUILDINGS (BELL FAMILY). Currently vacant; • TAYLOR CREEK MARINA. Taylor Creek Marina is comprised of a dry stack boat storage facility (475 positions in use), outdoor storage yard, a fueling dock, a ships store, and other features and amenities; • CRACKER BOY BOAT WORKS. Cracker Boy Boat Works provides owner directed and executed boat maintenance and vessel repair yard, with 75-ton capacity travel lift, 15-ton mobile crane and fully stocked marine store; and, • SAFE HARBOR HARBORTOWN. Safe Harbor Harbortown is a marina offering amenities such as transient slips, dry storage, a waterside restaurant, fuel dock and marine services (inc. Shearwater FL,etc.). 1.4 THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE Page 142 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 19 FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP 7 8 9 1110 4 6 5 1 2 13 1415 16 18 17 12 U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 O L D D I X I E H W Y O L D D I X I E H W Y AVENUE OAVENUE O AVENUE MAVENUE M AVENUE HAVENUE H FISHERMAN’S WHARFFISHERMAN’S WHARF I N D I A N R V R D R I N D I A N R V R D R N 7 T H S T N 7 T H S T SOUTH C A U S E W A Y SOUTH C A U S E W A Y BRIDG E BRIDG E NORTHNORTH CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T 3 Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Port Operations Area (+/- 360 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway Parcel Boundary Taylor Creek Commons Taylor Creek Lincoln Park Community Park Riverview Memorial Park Museum Pointe Park Causeway Cove Marina DNE World Fruit Sales Shearwater Boat Yard (Formerly Whiticar Marine North) Safe Harbor Harbortown Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Harbour Pointe Park Egan Packing Inlet Fisheries Palmdale Oil Company Fort Pierce Marine Terminal (Beyel Bros. Properties) 12A Buoy Salty’s Water Sports & Boat Rental KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE Page 143 of 420 20 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE LAND USE AND ZONING. The Project Study Area falls within the current limits of the City of Fort Pierce, and thus is subject to its current Future Land Use and Zoning classifications. The City’s Adopted Future Land Use Plan lists the majority of the Project Study Area as Industrial (I), with Taylor Creek Marina, Cracker Boy Boat Works, and Harbortown as Marine Commercial (MC). In terms of zoning, the Derecktor site along with Woods Family, Beyel Brothers, and other smaller tracts in the immediate vicinity are zoned Marine Industrial (I2). Marina facilities along Taylor Creek are zoned Marine Commercial (C6) and Marine Industrial (I2). The balance of the Project Study Area, inclusive of the Bell Family tracts and Harbour Pointe fall under the Planned Unit Redevelopment (PUR). The PUR zoning for this area was extended in 1999 by Ordinance No. J-504 following Port planning and charrette work at the time. A change of zoning will be required to advance major outcomes of this master planning effort that are not in alignment with the 1999 PUR Ordinance. The Port is located within the Fort Pierce Community Redevelopment Area (FPRA). Vacant properties at the Port represent some of the largest available within the FPRA. The FPRA Plan was updated in 2020. In its Plan, the FPRA redoubles its efforts to target industry growth, employment, education, job training to the area. Expansion of economic activity is aligned with FPRA overarching industry targets. Page 144 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 21 U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 N 1 3 T H S T N 1 3 T H S T O L D D I X I E H W Y O L D D I X I E H W Y AVENUE OAVENUE O AVENUE MAVENUE M AVENUE HAVENUE H FISHERMAN’S WHARFFISHERMAN’S WHARF I N D I A N R V R D R I N D I A N R V R D R N 7 T H S T N 7 T H S T SOUTH C A U S E W A Y SOUTH C A U S E W A Y BRIDG E BRIDG E NORTHNORTH CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK CITY OF FORT PIERCE ZONING MAP THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Port Operations Area (+/- 360 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Parcel Boundary RL, Low Density Residential RM, Medium Density Residential RH, High Density Residential BC, Boundary Commercial NC, Neighborhood Commercial GC, General Commercial MC, Marine Commercial HIMU, Hutchinson Island Mixed Use INST, Institutional I, Industrial COS, Conservation & Open Space KEY FEATURES Page 145 of 420 22 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Port Operations Area (+/- 360 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Parcel Boundary PUBLIC LAND County and City of Fort Pierce PRIVATE LAND Beyel Brothers Woods Family Inlet Fisheries Bell Family Safe Harbor Harbortown Others KEY FEATURES THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE PARCEL OWNERSHIP FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK Page 146 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 23 THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE Page 147 of 420 24 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy In review of the spatial arrangement of the Port moving forward, a number of observations were made by the community and planning team. Each considered the opportunities and challenges presented by the existing conditions and relationships between the Port and City. The following graphics indicate the parcel boundaries and how they piece together on the site. Current uses and ownership within the Port Area include: Publicly Owned A. Fisherman’s Wharf B. Derecktor Shipyard C. Harbour Pointe Park Privately Owned D. Taylor Creek Marina E. Safe Harbor Harbortown F. Underutilized & Vacant Land A B D E FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY NORTH US HWY 1 OLD DIXIE HWY F C 1.5 SITE SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE Page 148 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 25 FISHERMAN’S WHARF Located at the southern end of the Port, Fisherman’s Wharf is planned as a vibrant boating, food & beverage, and recreational space linking the working port area and historic Fort Pierce Riverwalk. DERECKTOR SHIPYARD An ongoing investment area that will host a state of the art repair and refit yard designed to welcome the industry’s largest megayachts. HARBOUR POINTE A +/- 20 acre parcel of County owned land located at the southeastern end of Taylor Creek. The site is home to Harbour Pointe Park and other activities. TAYLOR CREEK MARINA Taylor Creek Marina features high-dry (rack) boat storage. Cracker Boy Marina provides upland boat services and working areas. SAFE HARBOR HARBORTOWN Extensive marina complex hosting in-water and upland boat storage along with servicing facilities. UNDERUTILIZED & VACANT LAND The key to the Port’s long-term success is finding the right use mix and approach to engage the center of the project study area. FBCDEA SITE SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE Page 149 of 420 26 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy ZONES OF OPPORTUNITY. The Port’s orientation and existing use patterns establish three clear zones of opportunity within the Project Study Area. The southern zone is dominated by Derecktor Shipyard and other marine shipping and related uses taking advantage of existing piers and wharfs. The central zone sets itself up for development by single or multiple commercial anchors benefiting from future marine infrastructure and/or proximity to uses north and south. The northern zone is dominated by marina interests (Safe Harbor, Taylor Creek, Cracker Boy) and parkland. Each of these areas is reliant on access from N 2nd Street and a potential future series of improved corridors running into each zone. A COMPELLING FUTURE FOR THE CENTER. Over the next few years, Derecktor Shipyard, Fisherman’s Wharf, and other finer grain development in the southern portion of the Project Study Area will make important economic and social contributions to the Port and area overall. The key to the Port’s long term success is finding the right use mix and approach to engage the center of the area. This larger area— approximately 5 times the size of the current Derecktor operation— could be a significant incubator of marine-related jobs, commerce, and other benefits. +/- 76 AC PUBLIC SPACE. Fisherman’s Wharf has great potential to be the northern anchor of the City of Fort Pierce’s growing waterfront, linking the City Marina, cultural, and other Downtown uses. This zone also provides an important new waterfront access point for the Lincoln Park Community. Harbour Pointe is more challenging. Surrounded by light industrial uses, and generally accessible only by car, this zone requires strengthened linkages and greater visibility to be a safe, inviting contributor to the overall network of public spaces. Activation and/or integration with surrounding uses needs to be explored if this area is to contribute to the site’s overall success. LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY DOWNTOWN HARBOUR POINTE FISHERMAN’S WHARF OPPORTUNITYOPPORTUNITYOPPORTUNITY SITE SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE SOUTH CENTRAL NORTH Page 150 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 27 MINIMAL ACTIVE MARINE EDGES. Limited stretches of the Project Study Area have active marine edges. In the south, primary edges totaling +/- 3,100 linear feet are already in use by Derecktor, Beyel Brothers, the planned Fisherman’s Wharf, and the existing boat ramp. An additional +/- 2,300 feet may be possible alongside the existing channel and turning basin, but significant capital investment and permitting would be needed. Marina facilities along Taylor Creek may also be considered available for expansion along the Harbour Pointe waterfront. FEC RAILWAY IMPACT ON DEVELOPMENT. The Florida East Coast (FEC) right-of-way (ROW) limits the number of crossings to/from Port lands. It also focuses development to face internally to the Port vs. offering access and activity along US1 and Old Dixie Highway. Permeability is greatest in the southern portion of the Port Operations and Project Study Area, allowing for the greatest opportunity to create spaces for linkage and interaction with Fort Pierce proper, especially at Fisherman’s Wharf. 2 3 1 CHALLENGE CHALLENGE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE. With a majority of the Port Study Area land privately owned, the plan needs to showcase use opportunities for these parcels and find approaches that will help guide a positive development outcome. One way the Master Plan can help is through identification of site serving infrastructure that would increase the development readiness of privately held parcels. CHALLENGE PRIVATE PRIVATE PUBLIC PUBLIC SITE SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE Page 151 of 420 28 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Page 152 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 29 2 OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 153 of 420 30 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Planmaking is about building public trust and working collaboratively to translate community desire into compelling, actionable proposals. Community collaboration typically involves combinations of in person, one-on-one and one-on-group work sessions supported by online engagement tools. THE ENGAGEMENT PROCESS. The COVID-19 Pandemic and related community health and safety concerns required the Planning Team to migrate from this traditional outreach framework to one where a majority of community engagement activities occurred online using our dedicated project website (www.planportfp.com), virtual meetings, electronic surveys, video conferencing, and other methods. While at times challenging, this near virtual-only engagement approach proved fruitful; meetings and online input yielded favorable results, both in terms of participation levels and clear community direction. In the following pages, we highlight the primary components of our community outreach campaign and results derived from its implementation. All detailed survey results, recordings of virtual meetings, and other materials produced in the planning effort continue to reside on the project website and remain available for public review. The community engagement campaign included activities in four main categories: • Weekly meetings with the County assembled Master Plan Advisory Committee; • Focused one-on-one outreach with landowners, surrounding businesses, community interest groups; • One-on-one meetings with County and City elected officials; and, • Engagement of the general public via two outreach periods and an always available project website. 2.1 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Farmers Market Information Table (Engagement Session 2) Poster Gallery (Engagement Session 2) Farmers Market Information Table (Engagement Session 2) Poster Gallery (Engagement Session 2) Page 154 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 31 BY THE NUMBERS 1. 6 VIRTUAL MEETING PRESENTATIONS. 2. TWO FORMAL SURVEYS OVER 5 WEEKS WITH 624 SURVEY PARTICIPANTS. 3. OVER 50 MEETINGS WITH PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS. 4. CONTINUAL ONLINE PRESENCE THROUGH THE PROJECT WEBSITE - WWW.PLANPORTFP.COM. 394 MEETING ATTENDEES 7,514 RESPONSES 624 SURVEY PARTICIPANTS 349 SUBSCRIBERS 6,438 WEBSITE VIEWS 667 COMMENTS 95,360 SOCIAL IMPRESSIONS 6 VIRTUAL MEETINGS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 155 of 420 32 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Established at the project onset, the Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan Advisory Committee (MPAC) was comprised of individuals from St. Lucie County’s Planning, Airport/Seaport, and Communications Departments. The MPAC also included representatives from the City of Fort Pierce Planning Department and the Transportation Planning Organization, with limited participation from Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA) & the Economic Development Council. The MPAC met on a weekly basis and was a highly effective sounding board in the exploration of project issues and guidance of the Planning Team to needed data and stakeholders. The group was also instrumental in advancing public awareness campaigns and staffing project poster galleries at the Fort Pierce Airport, County Administration Complex, and Downtown Farmer’s Market. While everyone in the community can be thought of as a project stakeholder, we use this term to specifically call out those individuals, agencies, property owners, and businesses that are critical conduits for project information and/or have a unique stake in the outcome of the planning effort. The Planning Team held more than 50 meetings with project stakeholders, with most of these occurring via conference call or online collaborative platform (e.g., Microsoft Teams). Stakeholders contacted throughout the planning process included: • Port Advisory Committee (formerly Harbour Advisory Committee). Meetings were held on July 15 and October 14; • County and City Elected Officials; • Florida Representative Delores Hogan Johnson; • St. Lucie County Staff (various departments); • City of Fort Pierce Planning Department; • The Fort Pierce Community Redevelopment Agency (FPRA); • The St. Lucie County Fire District; • The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council; • Property owners and interests found within and around the Project Study Area; • Marina operators and other maritime dependent businesses; • The St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce; • St. Lucie County Economic Development Council; • Florida Department of Transportation; • The Fort Pierce Waterfront Council; • South Beach Association; • Fort Pierce Utilities Authority; • The Treasure Coast Builders Association; and, • Others. Information and perspective provided in each meeting was invaluable to the planning process, and data and concepts provided by stakeholders was integrated throughout the plan development. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT 2.1.1 MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2.1.2 STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS Page 156 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 33 A project website—www.planportFP.com—was launched in early July to serve as an information portal, host surveys and virtual public meetings that accompanied the two outreach sessions, and function as a storing house for all community feedback. Content was tailored to reflect project materials from each community work session, and importantly, ask a series of questions about community priorities and preference. The community was also asked to weigh in on three preliminary master plan concepts. The website offered open ended questions to gather community ideas and points-of-view. Digital copies of all community presentations, poster-sized graphics, and survey results were also made available via the project website, as well as the recorded virtual public meetings. Overall, the website was well received by all involved, garnering over 6,438 views and 349 subscribers. Over 624 individuals answered one or more survey questions, generating 7,514 survey responses. PROJECT WEBSITE. Throughout the project’s duration, the planning team hosted a project website to make available project information, surveys, virtual meetings, and allow visitors to subscribe to a project information email service. The website was refreshed with new information prior to each public engagement period. Hosted by PublicInput.com, the project website was compatible across mobile devices (phones, tablets, kiosks, laptops, etc) and ADA 508 (U.S.) and WCAG 2.1 AA compliant. VIRTUAL MEETINGS. As noted previously, due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, public engagement meetings were conducted virtually using the project website and streamed through Facebook Live. During the first engagement period, three virtual public meetings were held between July 1 and July 2. The first series of virtual meetings addressed the question, “How should the Port of Fort Pierce evolve to embrace community economic and social opportunities?” Issues and opportunities identified by the Planning Team were shared with the public meeting participants. The virtual meeting format enabled participants to call, text, and message their questions and comments for the team to address. Approximately 250 citizens participated virtually in the first set of virtual meetings. The second set of three virtual public meetings occurred between July 29 and 30, 2020. This second session presented a draft mission statement and three initial planning concepts for the Port, to elicit community feedback on a preferred direction forward. Planning concepts were developed using the draft core tenets and framework established for the project area. The concepts also considered the Team’s general sense of financial feasibility, ease of implementation, permissibility by regulatory agencies, and community acceptance of project elements. Approximately 144 citizens participated virtually during the second set of meetings. All meetings were archived on the project website for viewing at any time. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT 2.1.3 GENERAL PUBLIC Page 157 of 420 34 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy COMMUNITY SURVEYS. A community survey was developed and disseminated during each public engagement session. Surveys were available digitally on the project website and at poster gallery displays. Survey questions were tailored to reflect the major themes of each virtual engagement session and ask a series of questions about community priorities and preferences and weigh in on three preliminary master plan concepts (from offered options). The survey offered both close- and open-ended questions to gather community ideas and points-of-view. Over 624 individuals answered one or more survey questions, generating 7,514 survey responses. POSTER GALLERIES. Key materials generated as part of the public engagement effort and made available on the project website were also summarized into posters. Posters were placed at two fixed locations in the County: The Fort Pierce Airport and County Commission building. Posters and project information were also made available during the Saturday Downtown Farmer’s Market between July 24 to August 16. Physical surveys were on hand at each location for completion by the public. Surveys completed in this fashion were input into the overall survey database with responses aggregated with online responses. Additionally, over 750 post cards were distributed via St. Lucie County Library locations, seeking to garner further project participation and community feedback. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 158 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 35 Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Unsure Community investment and revitalization is a priority.10%4%5%23%56%2% Fort Pierce and its waterfront are good the way they are. 26%38%21 %10%4%1% Downtown development will bring lasting social benefit.4%5%10%25%52%4% Investment in our economy can happen without negative consequences to the natural environment. 5%10%11 %36%36%2% Development generates needed capital to fund preservation initiatives.4%8%19%41%25%3% A strong economy is the best way to strengthen our community 1%3%8%35%52%1% We should steer public investment into community upgrades, parks, and preservation initiatives.3%9%13%38%36%1% Attracting investment to our community and economy will lead to a better quality of life.2%4%8%38%47%1% We need more public and private sector investment in commerce enabling jobs and infrastructure.4%2%4%37%52%1% Community revitalization and investment is the best path to bring forward economic gains.3%2%10%42%41%2% We can balance economic and preservation needs.4%3%12 %43%37%1% Preservation initiatives should take priority over new development.7%18 %22%28%22%3% SURVEY 1. Q1. YOUR VIEWS ON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PREFERENCES COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 159 of 420 36 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy 2.2 THEMES FROM PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SESSION 1 Public Engagement Session 1 focused on several areas, including assessment of the suitability of various land uses at the Port and measurement of the community’s outlook on its future. Gauging preference in both areas was considered essential for formulating planning concepts for the Project Study Area. A total of 397 individuals participated in survey one, generating 5,165 question responses and over 300 unique comments. From these results and other captured community and stakeholder input, several broad themes emerged. • The Port is a unique asset for the region. While underdeveloped, survey respondents overwhelmingly validated the idea that the Port can become an improved strategic economic community asset (Question 4). Furthermore, activation of the Port can lead to betterment of Downtown Fort Pierce, the waterfront, and surrounding neighborhoods and communities (Question 5). There was little measurable community sentiment that the Port’s best days are behind it. • The community embraced the notion that the Port could welcome a diverse number of land use types (Question 2). Several groupings of land uses garnered favorable attention by survey respondents, including: Marine technology, manufacturing, maintenance, repair, and related uses; megayacht, marina, and boating facilities comprising land and or in water areas; education, research, and training/apprenticeship facilities; food and beverage, dining, and entertainment; active and passive recreational facilities linked to the waterfront. These categories were supported consistently by respondents living within and outside the City of Fort Pierce (cross tabulated with Question 9). • Not all land uses were beloved equally. About a third of survey respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed that four land use groupings should be considered in the Port Master Plan. These included: Light industrial uses, such as warehousing, fabrication, assembly and similar activities; marine shipping, freight facilities, and related infrastructure; logistics and distribution, such as trucking and rail facilities linked to or separate from any port marine shipping features; and, residential uses. Some of the strong sentiment resulted from community concern that many of these maritime dependent uses would trigger negative environmental in quality of life impacts. By example, the community group The Waterfront Council has long voiced concerns that extensive development of cargo shipping and related industries at the Port would result in damage to the ecology of the Indian River Lagoon, Fort Pierce Inlet, and its namesake State Park. Examining open ended survey comments also identified community concerns that light industrial uses might best be situated outside of the urban core where traffic impacts would be lessened and land cheaper. • While not specifically captured as part of survey questions, there was strong recorded community interest in a continuation of the artificial reef program at the Port. The County and City also expressed this interest. The County’s Erosion District also conveyed a need to maintain deep water access on or near Taylor Creek for Erosion District operations. • Active and passive recreational facilities linked to the waterfront remained one of the most popular used types. Survey respondents suggested these facilities could be provided/upgraded, including recreational boating and similar uses at Harbour Pointe. OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 160 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 37 SURVEY 1. Q6. WHICH STATEMENT BEST DESCRIBES YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH THE PORT? SURVEY 1. Q4. CAN THE PORT BECOMEAN IMPROVED STRATEGIC ECONOMICCOMMUNITY ASSET SUPPORTINGCOMMERCE AND JOBS? SURVEY 1. Q5. CAN THE PORT FUNCTIONIN AN IMPROVED ROLE, HELPING BETTERDOWNTOWN, THE WATERFRONT, ANDSURROUNDING COMMUNITIES?I use business, restaurants, marinas, and other spaces at or near the Port I live near the Port I work at or have a business reliant on the Port I do not experience the Port in any aspects of my day-to-day activities I sometimes see the Port from the bridge or bayfronts I sometimes read about the Port’s activities in the media KEY FEATURES 50% 29% 13% 4% 3% 2% YES. AGREE 95% YES. AGREE 96% NO. DISAGREE 5% NO. DISAGREE 4% THEMES FROM PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SESSION 1 OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 161 of 420 38 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy SURVEY 1. Q2. WHAT TYPES OF BUSINESSES AND USES SHOULD THE PORT SEEK TO ATTRACT? RESPONSES OVERALL Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Unsure Marine technology, manufacturing, maintenance, repair, and related uses.5%4%12%47%33%0% Light industrial uses, such as warehousing, fabrication, assembly and similar activities.8%20%18%43%11 %0% Marine shipping, freight facilities, and related infrastructure.9%22%12 %39%19 %0% Mega yacht, marina, and boating facilities comprising upland and/or in-water areas.6%8%8%40%39%0% Education, research, and training/apprenticeship facilities.3%5%11 %44%37%0% Logistics and distribution, such as trucking and rail facilities linked to or separate from any Port marine shipping features.11 %25%21 %30%13 %0% Aquaculture, hydroponic gardens, and similar agribusiness uses.7%11 %22%39%20%1% Sustainable energy, green power, and similar renewable uses.6%11 %22%35%25%1% Food and beverage, dining, and entertainment.5%7%12 %38%39%0% Commercial office and retail uses (of a scale and density contextually suitable).7%16%31 %35%11 %0% Residential uses (of a scale and density contextually suitable).15 %17%23%33%10%2% Active and passive recreational facilities linked to the waterfront.3%4%9%42%39%3% THEMES FROM PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SESSION 1 OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 162 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 39 RESPONSES BY ZIP CODE Strongly Disagree + Disagree Neutral Strongly Agree + Agree Strongly Disagree + Disagree Neutral Strongly Agree + Agree Marine technology, manufacturing, maintenance, repair, and related uses.8%16%76%10%2%88% Light industrial uses, such as warehousing, fabrication, assembly and similar activities.37%20%44%21%11 %68% Marine shipping, freight facilities, and related infrastructure.35%13 %52%27%11 %63% Mega yacht, marina, and boating facilities comprising upland and/or in-water areas.9%6%85%20%4%76% Education, research, and training/apprenticeship facilities.4%11 %86%17%13 %70% Logistics and distribution, such as trucking and rail facilities linked to or separate from any Port marine shipping features.45%23%32%29%18 %53% Aquaculture, hydroponic gardens, and similar agribusiness uses.14 %22%64%28%19 %53% Sustainable energy, green power, and similar renewable uses.19 %23%58%17%19 %65% Food and beverage, dining, and entertainment.12%7%81 %10%22%69% Commercial office and retail uses (of a scale and density contextually suitable).22%24%54%26%36%38% Residential uses (of a scale and density contextually suitable).34%24%42%31 %29%41% Active and passive recreational facilities linked to the waterfront.4%6%90%13 %10%77% CITY OF FORT PIERCE ZIP CODES Cross Tabulated with Q#12 ALL OTHER ZIP CODES Cross Tabulated with Q#12 THEMES FROM PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SESSION 1 OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 163 of 420 40 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy With community validation that the Port can evolve to be an improved economic and social asset and a shortened list of suitable land uses achieved, a Master Plan Mission Statement accompanied by five organizing elements was prepared. Why are these valuable? Both the mission statement and supportive tenets guide plan formulation; they are the foundational elements of the Master Plan, enshrining key areas of investment as well as community sentiment. ² MISSION STATEMENT. The mission statement and organizing elements were presented to the public as part of Public Engagement Session Two’s survey effort and virtual meetings. When asked if the Master Plan Mission Statement “accurately captures the future direction the Port should take moving forward,” 71% of survey respondents agreed with this statement. 2.3 ESTABLISHING THE MISSION & FRAMEWORK The mission statement is where you want to go and what you do to get there. It is intended to be aspirational. These are the guiding rules that drive the development of site concepts, and ultimately, the statements that hold the Vision Plan together. They directly align with the Mission Statement. The Master Plan and Reinvestment Strategy is the ultimate outcome of the project effort. It summarizes all work prepared, and importantly, assembles these items into a playbook outlining approaches for site uses, reinvestment and long range possibilities for the Port. MISSION STATEMENT KEY TENETS MASTER PLAN OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT 2 This Master Plan Mission Statement is different than the Port’s mission statement, which is to “Broaden and strengthen the economic base of the regional community by providing adequate infrastructure and development processes for mixed-use port development.” The Master Plan Mission Statement speaks specifically to what ideas underpin the structure & vision of the Plan. Page 164 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 41 SURVEY 2. Q1. DOES THIS MISSIONSTATEMENT ACCURATELY CAPTURE THEFUTURE DIRECTION THE PORT SHOULDTAKE MOVING FORWARD? The Master Plan Mission Statement places the primary focus of the Plan as aligning public and private interests to “foster the creation of the Treasure Coast’s premier center for yacht and related marine industry maintenance, repair, and overhaul activity.” It considers the seeds of this endeavor have been planted with the ongoing investment by Derecktor Shipyards—that they are part of this initiative. Community and stakeholder outreach suggest there is extensive room to grow in this marine industry category. The natural features of Fort Pierce’s deep water harbor, available land, and labor force are aligned to meet this end. The Mission Statement keeps open the door for related marine industries to play a part in this effort—from small import/export businesses to light-industrial uses often found proximate to this type of specialized marine cluster. MISSION STATEMENT ALIGN AND ENABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LAND HOLDINGS TO FOSTER CREATION OF THE TREASURE COAST’S PREMIER CENTER FOR YACHT AND RELATED MARINE INDUSTRY MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, AND OVERHAUL ACTIVITY. LEVERAGE SUCCESS TO PROPEL SUSTAINABLE GROWTH OF FORT PIERCE’S ECONOMY AND QUALITY OF LIFE. ESTABLISHING THE MISSION & FRAMEWORK OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT DISAGREE 9% NEUTRAL 9% STRONGLY DISAGREE 10% AGREE 47% STRONGLY AGREE 25% Page 165 of 420 42 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy PLAN TENETS. Five guiding tenets provide greater insight as to what the Port should consider under its Mission Statement over the long term. Preliminary and refined planning concepts presented in this plan all follow the framework established by these tenets. AN ENGINE FOR OUR BLUE ECONOMY Foster investment in the Port of Fort Pierce as Treasure Coast’s center for yacht and related maritime maintenance, repair, and overhaul activity and other Blue Economy industries. 01 GROW THE AMOUNT OF FUNCTIONAL WATERFRONT EDGES Expand coastal edges for working and recreational waterfront activities. 02 ESTABLISHING THE MISSION & FRAMEWORK OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 166 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 43 PROVIDE A FLEXIBLE TEMPLATE FOR PORT LAND DEVELOPMENT Organize upland areas for flexibility and adaptability for marine commerce and light-industry uses. Encourage infrastructure investment in measured increments to grow sustainably and responsibly. 03 INVEST AND GROW ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AND RESTORATION Become a center of excellence for reef and coastal research, restoration, and resilience. 04 THE PORT AS A GOOD NEIGHBOR Ensure Port edges stabilize and bolster the viability of varied community development endeavors. 05 ESTABLISHING THE MISSION & FRAMEWORK OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 167 of 420 44 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy The Planning Team prepared a series of initial site options assembled from the ideas generated from the first public engagement session and survey effort as well as site situational analysis, case study, and other project research effort. Each of these options were presented to the community as part of Public Engagement Session 2. CONCEPT VARIATION. Each initial Port planning concept offered a series of intervention approaches for the study area, from creation of an extensive mega yacht MRO facility in the center of the Port (Concept 1) to more nuanced yachting and flexible berths and tenant yards (Concept 3). Each initial concept shared similar features, such as the renewal of Harbour Pointe Park as an active park and public marina facility. Initial concepts and their respective programs are not mutually exclusive to one another. The expectation by the Planning Team— confirmed as part of Public Engagement Session 2—was a desire to mix and match concept elements to ultimately build a preferred concept and approach for Master Plan development. 2.4 INITIAL PORT PLANNING CONCEPTS OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 168 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 45 Concept One contemplates Port transformation into one of the largest centers for motor and sailing yacht MRO and marine industrial services along the Eastern Seaboard. Ship lift facilities with related open air and high bay (covered) service areas are centrally positioned with specialized buildings for sailing yacht mast maintenance and other functions arrayed around the perimeter. New in-water berths supporting wet slip MRO activities and vessel berthing are provided. Marine industrial warehouses with commercial storefronts line N 2nd Street and parcels surrounding the central yacht MRO. These large and small unit clusters host electronics businesses, hydraulics companies, engine repair, shaft and propeller works, sail makers, technology, research, storage, and a variety of other marine related businesses. A new marine industries education center is introduced adjacent to the existing silos. Harbour Pointe is renewed to host park and recreational boating features. An anchor tenant of this zone is the expanded Reef Restoration and Marine Ecology Education Center. This facility will include extension programs from Indian River State College, Florida Atlantic University, and other institutions of higher learning. 2.4.1 CONCEPT ONE FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK PERSPECTIVE CONCEPT MASTER PLAN Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway Mixed-Use Commercial Marine Industrial Park / Light Industrial Uses Yacht Repair and Refit, Shipyard, Boat Works, and Marina Uses Environmental / Cultural Resource Uses Park, Greenway, and Storm Water Recharge Existing Buildings and Development Safe Harbor Harbortown Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Improved Harbour Pointe Community Park Reef Restoration and Environmental Education Center High and Dry Boat Storage Public Marina Restaurant, Sundries and Commercial Marina Village Urban Greenway (inc. Low Impact Development, Storm Water Recharge) Marine Industrial Park with Commercial Storefronts Fort Pierce Yacht Repair and Refit, Shipyard, and Boat Works Mast Works Facility Ship Lift and Boat Works Yard Marine Industries Training Center and Crew Facilities Derecktor Shipyard Beyel Brothers Inc - Fort Pierce Marine Terminal Fisherman’s Wharf KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 INITIAL PORT PLANNING CONCEPTS OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT1 3 610 11 1315 16 17 14 612 8 4 7 5 29 9 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY NORTH US HWY 1 OLD DIXIE HWY LINCOLN PARK Page 169 of 420 46 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Concept Two envisions new operational slips and working waterfront edges in the center of the study area, promoting one or more motor and sailing yacht MRO businesses. Travel lift and covered in-water wet slips line the water’s edge and are supported by open and high bay (covered) areas. Marine industrial warehouses with commercial storefronts line N 2nd Street and parcels surrounding the central yacht MRO. These large and small unit clusters host electronics businesses, hydraulics companies, engine repair, shaft and propeller works, sail makers, technology, research, storage, and a variety of other marine related businesses. Harbour Pointe is renewed to host park and recreational boating features. An anchor tenant of this zone is the expanded Reef Restoration and Marine Ecology Education Center. This facility will include extension programs from Indian River State College and other institutions of higher learning. 2.4.2 CONCEPT TWO FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK PERSPECTIVE CONCEPT MASTER PLAN FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY NORTH US HWY 1 OLD DIXIE HWY LINCOLN PARK Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway Mixed-Use Commercial Marine Industrial Park / Light Industrial Uses Yacht Repair and Refit, Shipyard, Boat Works, and Marina Uses Environmental / Cultural Resource Uses Park, Greenway, and Storm Water Recharge Existing Buildings and Development Safe Harbor Harbortown Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Improved Harbour Pointe Community Park Reef Restoration and Environmental Education Center High and Dry Boat Storage Public Marina Restaurant, Sundries and Commercial Marina Village Urban Greenway (inc. Low Impact Development, Storm Water Recharge) Marine Industrial Park with Commercial Storefronts Fort Pierce Yacht Repair and Refit, Shipyard, and Boat Works Ship Lift and Boat Works Yard Derecktor Shipyard Beyel Brothers Inc - Fort Pierce Marine Terminal Fisherman’s Wharf KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 INITIAL PORT PLANNING CONCEPTS OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT 1 3 10 11 11 13 14 15 5 12 8 4 7 6 29 9 Page 170 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 47 Concept Three blends two ideas together along an expanded working waterfront. First, provide an expansion area for greater motor and sailing yacht MRO operations. Second, provide a zone for large vessel (Handymax-class) MRO operations and a flexible berth and yard for small ship cargo industries. Marine industrial warehouses with commercial storefronts line N 2nd Street and surrounding parcels. These large and small unit clusters, positioned by the removal of the silos, host electronics businesses, hydraulics companies, engine repair, shaft and propeller works, sail makers, technology, research, storage, and a variety of other marine related businesses. Needed storm water detention and recharge areas line the rear portion of the main arrangement of warehouse buildings. Harbour Pointe is renewed to host park and recreational boating features. An anchor tenant of this zone is the expanded Reef Restoration and Marine Ecology Education Center. This facility will include extension programs from Indian River State College and other institutions of higher learning. 2.4.3 CONCEPT THREE FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK PERSPECTIVE CONCEPT MASTER PLAN FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY NORTH US HWY 1 OLD DIXIE HWY LINCOLN PARK Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway Mixed-Use Commercial Marine Industrial Park / Light Industrial Uses Yacht Repair and Refit, Shipyard, Boat Works, and Marina Uses Environmental / Cultural Resource Uses Park, Greenway, and Storm Water Recharge Existing Buildings and Development Safe Harbor Harbortown Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Improved Harbour Pointe Community Park Reef Restoration and Environmental Education Center High and Dry Boat Storage Public Marina Restaurant, Sundries and Commercial Marina Village Urban Greenway (inc. Low Impact Development, Storm Water Recharge) Marine Industrial Park with Commercial Storefronts Operations Yard (+/- 15 AC) Large Vessel Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO) and Handymax Cargo Vessel Berths Yacht Repair and Refit, Shipyard, and Boat Works Derecktor Shipyard Beyel Brothers Inc - Fort Pierce Marine Terminal Fisherman’s Wharf KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 INITIAL PORT PLANNING CONCEPTS OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT1 3 14 12 1113 10 10 12 15 16 8 4 7 29 9 6 5 Page 171 of 420 48 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy NONE OF THE CONCEPTS 11% EACH HAVE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES 27% As part of the second survey and virtual meetings, the community was asked to review each concept against the five tenets underpinning the Master Plan Mission Statement. The purpose was to see if the community felt there was strong alignment between the desired outcome expressed in the planning framework and each initial planning concept. The five guiding tenets were listed for each initial concept and the community was asked to score alignment of these statements from “not very well” to “very well.” The results are presented in the accompanying table. As shown, a majority of survey respondents generally rated each concept as “well,” with Concept 2 garnering the highest concentration of responses in this category. When asked “which initial concept do you feel will provide the most economic and social benefit to your community”, responses were fairly spread across each concept, with the response “each have strengths and weaknesses” receiving the highest number of responses (27%). In review of these results along with community open ended survey comments and other stakeholder feedback, the following was concluded: • Survey respondents and stakeholders found something to like about one or all of the initial Port planning concepts, with 84% percent of respondents indicating preference for one concept or indicating each had strengths and weaknesses. • The idea of creating a hybrid of each of concept’s best attributes was viewed as the preferred direction forward, especially within the context of follow-on discussions with property owners. SURVEY 2. Q7. WHILE THE PLANNINGTEAM WILL MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TOALL CONCEPTS, WHICH INITIAL CONCEPTDO YOU FEEL WILL PROVIDE THE MOSTECONOMIC AND SOCIAL BENEFIT? CONCEPT 2 16% NOT SURE 5% CONCEPT 3 20% CONCEPT 1 21% INITIAL PORT PLANNING CONCEPTS OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT 2.4.4 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SESSION 2 Page 172 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 49 CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2 CONCEPT 3 NOT VERY WELL 1 NOT WELL 2 UNSURE 3 WELL 4 VERY WELL 5 NOT VERY WELL 1 NOT WELL 2 UNSURE 3 WELL 4 VERY WELL 5 NOT VERY WELL 1 NOT WELL 2 UNSURE 3 WELL 4 VERY WELL 5 Foster investment in the Port of Fort Pierce as Treasure Coast’s center for yacht and related maritime maintenance, repair, and overhaul activity and other Blue Economy industries. 7%5%11 %40%37%7%7%12%61%13%9%11 %15%49%16% Expand coastal edges for working and recreational waterfront activities.9%5%27%41%18%7%7%17%61%9%12%12%15%49%12% Organize upland areas for flexibility and adaptability for marine commerce and light-industry uses. Encourage infrastructure investment in measured increments to grow sustainably and responsibly. 8%4%21%54%13%10%4%17%65%4%14%1%20%48%16% Become a center of excellence for reef and coastal research, restoration, and resilience.14%7%17%42%19%8%3%21%55%14%8%8%23%48%12% Ensure Port edges stabilize and bolster the viability of varied community development endeavors.10%7%26%43%15%8%4%27%52%8%9%12%26%41%13% SURVEY 2. Q4-6. ON A SCALE OF 1 TO 5, HOW WELL DOES EACH CONCEPT ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING? INITIAL PORT PLANNING CONCEPTS OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT Page 173 of 420 50 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Page 174 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 51 3 EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 175 of 420 52 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy In the section that follows, we present a summary review of several selected projects and plans that help shape our understanding of how traditional port areas can afford a diverse array of land uses and features. CASE STUDY. One planning effort objective was the review of other port and waterfront precedent projects that have like-minded facets and community alignment of uses and elements. While no project aligns itself perfectly with the conditions found in Fort Pierce, other precedents’ implementation strategies provide insightful knowledge into key successes. We specifically sought out examples of active working waterfronts. As defined by the National Working Waterfront Network, these areas are “waterfront lands, infrastructure and waterways that are used for water-dependent activities. These include ports, small recreational boat harbors, fishing docks, and hundreds of other places where people use and access the water.” Successful working waterfronts share a number of traits, including: • KEEP MARINE ACTIVITIES ACCESSIBLE. Preserve landside and waterside access points that facilitate blue economy functioning. • ENSURE FLEXIBILITY AND ADAPTABILITY. Capital and operational investments consider a number of different uses and users over time. • SUSTAIN THE WATERFRONT AS AN ASSET FOR ALL. Plan environmental protection and economic development together. • VIEW THE WORK OF THE WATERFRONT. Allow the community connect and learn about the daily workings of the water’s edge. • FOSTER CONTINUAL COMMUNITY DIALOGUE. Successful working waterfronts are always looking for ways to balance competing issues and opportunities. They never stop community and user conversation and long range planning. 3.1 FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 176 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 53 FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS RYBOVICH SUPERYACHT MARINA WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA Page 177 of 420 54 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS WHERE. Savannah Yacht Center (SYC) is a deep water yacht MRO on the Savannah River. Less than two miles upriver from downtown Savannah and 20 minutes from Savannah/Hilton Head International airport, SYC offers a wide range of services in close cooperation with qualified sub-contractors. Rail facilities are immediately adjacent to SYC. WHAT. SYC facilities are capable of providing its large yacht customers with infrastructure to handle a variety of maintenance, repair and refit projects. This includes a 460-foot graving dock capable of handling yachts of up to 330 feet; a Syncrolift with 3,240 long ton gross rating; a rail transfer system with capacity for 6(+), 260-foot yachts simultaneously; and, 1,200 feet of floating docks for in-water service for yachts. Additionally, SYC offers its customers several amenities while their vessel is being serviced including a Bistro style restaurant, fitness center, crew lounge and concierge services to assist crew members. TAKEAWAYS. Core takeaways include: • The 3,240 shiplift platform and rail transfer system/ configuration is considered essential for the long term economic success of the SYC; • SYC offers a mix of floating docks and upland MRO areas. Upland MRO areas are proximate to active rail facilities; • Upland development includes amenities for customers and crew, including a restaurant, fitness center, lounge, and concierge services area; and, • An economic impact study conducted by Armstrong State University economist Michael Toma found that, when fully operational, the SYC will support nearly 800 direct and indirect jobs across Georgia. SYC will also support, as well as annual wages of $50 million, tax revenue of $5.5 million, and $171 million in economic activity. 3.1.1 SAVANNAH YACHTING CENTER Page 178 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 55 WHERE. Lauderdale Marine Center (LMC) is located in Fort Lauderdale, 30 miles north of Miami and six miles from Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport. WHAT. LMC coves 65-acres and is considered the largest dedicated yacht repair and refit facility of its kind in the U.S. LMC offers year-round availability, 24-hour security, and hurricane safe dockage. Infrastructure includes 19 out-of-water covered sheds; 8 in-water covered slips; and, dry docking for over 100 vessels up to 485 tons. LMC can handle vessels up to 170 feet and 330 tons. On-site guest amenities include a fitness center, restaurant, and leasable office space. Additionally, the facility offers a Marine Foreign Trade Zone, which provides the ability for brokers to show and sell foreign-flagged vessels to U.S. buyers right from LMC docks. This arrangement eliminates standard import duties on new builds. TAKEAWAYS. Core takeaways include: • LMC shares a similar development footprint to the vacant land available at the Port of Fort Pierce; • Similar to SYC, LMC offers amenities to boat owners and crew; and, • The Marine Foreign Trade Zone provides the ability for brokers to show foreign-flagged vessels without standard import duty on new builds. A similar zone could be developed in Fort Pierce. 3.1.2 LAUDERDALE MARINE CENTER FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 179 of 420 56 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy WHERE. The MB92 Barcelona Superyacht Refit is situated in the Western Mediterranean and caters to yacht fleets and owners throughout the region. This location serves as a strategic stop-off point for travel between the Mediterranean and Caribbean. WHAT. The shipyard is one of the largest refit facilities in the world, covering over 30-acres of land area. It provides service-refit, repair and maintenance work for superyachts with lengths from 115 to 600- feet. MB92 Barcelona is part of the MB92 Group which manages two major refit shipyards in the Mediterranean, the other being MB92 La Ciotat in the South of France. The shipyard currently has 120 employees and 900 subcontractors that provide world-class superyacht services. The facilities include a 2,000 ton Syncrolift, a 720-foot dry dock, and a new 4,800 ton Shiplift that increases the capacity to serve the largest yachts. On-site workshops are available for suppliers and contractors to support project management, purchasing, and crew. The shipyard is fully compliant with the International Ship & Port Facility Security Code (ISPS) and is only accessible via staffed and monitored security entrances. TAKEAWAYS. Core takeaways include: • MB92 is located and coexists with surrounding land uses found along the main recreation and urban waterfront of Barcelona; • MB92 offers a mix of upland and in-water facilities. Upland facilities include a Syncrolift able to lift vessels up to 2,000 tons and transfer these to a rail transfer system/ configuration. The facility also uses a mobile 150 ton travellift. A similar configuration of shiplift and travellift capable facilities could be contemplated for Fort Pierce; and, • On-site workshops are available for suppliers and contractors. Fort Pierce could consider on-site, or possibly, a shared tenant accommodate similar workplace solution for marine industry needs. 3.1.3 MB92 BARCELONA SUPERYACHT FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 180 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 57 FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 181 of 420 58 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy WHERE. The Port and City of Hueneme are located 60 miles north of the Los Angeles metro area. This prime location offers a highly efficient and uncongested alternative to other U.S. west coast ports and is the only commercial deep-water port between Los Angeles and San Francisco. Port Hueneme is positioned close to major distribution, automotive, and agricultural centers. WHAT. The Port of Hueneme is owned and operated by The Oxnard Harbor District, created in 1937, as an independent special District (business enterprise) and political subdivision of the State of California. The Oxnard Harbor District’s policies are set by a five-member Board of Harbor Commissioners elected at large from the District. The Port is vital in the intermodal logistics supply chain and significantly contributes to the economic health of Ventura County and Southern California, including: • Over $9 billion in cargo annually; • $1.5 billion in overall economic impact; • $119 million paid in annual taxes; and, • The support of more than 15,800 direct, indirect, induced,and influenced jobs regionally. The Port’s facilities include: A 120-acre port terminal; 30-acre Navy terminal; 3 commercial cargo wharves; 3 Navy wharves; a rail yard; and, cold storage area. The Port of Hueneme can accommodate ships of up to 800 feet long. TAKEAWAYS. Core takeaways include: • The Port of Hueneme is a good example of a small- to medium-sized port welcoming a diverse number of cargoes and other working waterfront elements; and, • While the Port is a driving force of economic activity, its proximity the surrounding community can create friction. To help ameliorate Port/ City issues, the Port takes an active role in continual community outreach and communications. The Port has developed a comprehensive, multichannel approach to ensure outstanding engagement from Stakeholders representing community, local neighborhoods, special interest groups, civic organizations, schools, and government entities. 3.1.4 PORT HUENEME FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 182 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 59 FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 183 of 420 60 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy WHERE. The Thea Foss Waterway, formerly the City Waterway, is a north–south inlet of Commencement Bay separating downtown Tacoma, Washington, from the Port of Tacoma. WHAT. The Thea Foss Waterway was formerly a thriving industrial center named after Thea Foss who founded the Foss Maritime Company on the inlet in 1889. Industry began to dwindle in the area, and by 1981, the Thea Foss Waterway was almost entirely abandoned. In 1983, the United States Environmental Protection Agency listed the Thea Foss waterway as part of the Commencement Bay Superfund site. A new planned development is underway along the waterway which features parks, residential areas, and office space. A public esplanade runs along the length of the waterway and will eventually span 1.5 miles and connect the waterway with downtown Tacoma. Guests can watch boats enter and leave the marinas with the stunning backdrop of Mount Ranier while strolling the waterfront. Lined with restaurants, the wide, promenade supports multi-modal pedestrians activities and provide a vibrant atmosphere. Closely situated to downtown, a brief walk from the esplanade across the Museum of Glass plaza and the Bridge of Glass gets one to bustling Pacific Avenue. Bruce Dees & Associates was charged with creating a Master Plan for this linear park and urban revitalization project. In addition, a schematic design was developed for the first one-half mile portion of the esplanade between 15th and 21st streets, and construction documents were completed for the first phase between 15th and 18th streets. The design team went beyond the initial scope of work for the project by studying how private development that will ultimately front the esplanade will look. The project is overseen by the Foss Waterway Development Authority Board (FWDA) whose jurisdiction will sunset at the end of 2020 and be transitioning over to a variety of City of Tacoma departments. TAKEAWAYS. Core takeaways include: • One essential aspect of the success of Thea Foss Waterway is its ability to balance working waterfront aspects with other mixed use; and, • This urban renewal project includes a 1.5 mile long waterfront esplanade, parks, residential areas, restaurants and office space. This revitalization has transformed The Thea Foss Waterway into an economic center and a popular place to live, work and visit. 3.1.5 THEA FOSS WATERWAY FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 184 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 61 FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 185 of 420 62 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy WHERE. The under-performing former Channelside Bay Plaza is home to the new Sparkman Wharf. A Water Street Tampa project, the Wharf is located along the Garrison Channel in downtown Tampa. WHAT. Sparkman Wharf is named after Stephen Sparkman, the region’s first congressman. Sparkman introduced innovation and transformation to Tampa, pushing the City’s boundaries and helping shape its future. Changing the economic and physical landscape of downtown Tampa, he secured federal funding to dig deep-water channels into downtown, allowing larger ships to come closer and creating Port Tampa Bay. Strategic, a partnership developed between Tampa Bay Lighting owner Jeff Vinik and Bill Gates’ Cascade Investment, demolished the failed Channelside Bay Plaza and developed Sparkman Wharf, linking Tampa and its waterfront with activating site uses. Key site amenities activate the public realm and revitalize Tampa’s waterfront: a re-imagined waterfront loft-style office space, ground- level retail, a one-acre event lawn, biergarten, and dining garden. The open space and event lawn are programmed year-round with live music and shows, and has various seating options to accommodate up to 500 people. The Wharf is in the Channel District and will benefit from nearby revitalization efforts. Within three blocks of the wharf, the following projects are in development: The University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine is building a new 13-story facility; JW Marriott Hotel is building a 26-story hotel; a 20-story office building; two apartment towers; and, a Marriot Edition boutique hotel with 46 high- end condominiums above. TAKEAWAYS. Core takeaways include: • The Wharf pays homage to Tampa’s industrial and maritime history and is a bold revitalization effort of waterfront redevelopment; • Revitalization of a failed, closed-off and inward-looking shopping center, focused on what the site could offer by tearing down a barrier and opening the views, connecting people to the waterfront and providing a range of site uses to activate the public realm; • Various indoor/outdoor programming amplifies uses on site while connecting to nearby amenities, like the sporting arenas; and, • Cruise ships only dock at the Port of Tampa for 35 days in a calendar year. Opening the site to the public will allow people to get closer to the waterfront, optimizing the other 330 days. 3.1.6 SPARKMAN WHARF FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 186 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 63 FACETS OF WORKING WATERFRONTS EVOLVING WATERFRONTS Page 187 of 420 PERSPECTIVE RENDERING View of Fully Phased Master Plan Improvements. 64 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Page 188 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 65 4 MASTER PLAN Page 189 of 420 66 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy The 2020 Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce establishes a long range vision for achievement of a truly diverse working waterfront, one embracing new industries and opportunities to help expand economic and social benefit to the citizens and businesses found in St. Lucie County and along the Treasure Coast. The Plan builds from the Port’s unique qualities—presence of a deepwater channel without bridge height limitations, available land and water’s edge, improved vehicular access, the potential for reestablishment of rail service, and other strengths. It seeks to support existing businesses and expand the marine commercial and recreational workings of the entire area. This includes newly minted megayacht MRO industries to expansion of boating activities along Taylor Creek. The Plan embraces market opportunities deemed attainable by property owners, stakeholders, and the Planning Team. Importantly, the Master Plan is aligned with community sentiment. The Plan builds from a position of community optimism that—with careful stewardship and public and private sector investment—the Port can make marked gains in economic and social development for the City, County, and Treasure Coast. Uses depicted in the Plan are those supported by a majority of community engagement participants and project stakeholders (refer to Section 2 - Outreach & Engagement). Proposed uses and investments strive to find balance in many ways. For example, the revenues generated from the proposed public marina at Harbour Pointe help to offset the cost of recreational pathways and park investments. PLAN DISTRICTS. The fully phased planning concept is presented in the accompanying Illustrative Master Plan. For ease of understanding recommendations, we have grouped improvements into five Districts. Districts are summarized below and presented in greater detail in the pages that follow. Toward the end of this Section, we describe ways in which the Plan is aligned with the Mission Statement and Five Guiding Tenets established during the planning process. • HARBOUR POINTE. A publicly facing, mixed-use recreational District. The renewed Harbour Pointe includes a public boat ramp, marina, sundries shop, restaurant, Reef Restoration Center (artificial reef program), walking paths, and other features. County ownership of this area places it in a position to realize upgrades over the short term. • FORT PIERCE MEGAYACHT MRO AND SHIPYARD. This area embodies the investment and activities underscored by the Port Master Plan Mission Statement—foster creation of the Treasure Coast’s Premier Center for yacht and related marine industry MRO activity. This is the largest District in the Plan and requires public and private sector investment to help bring it to life. • EAST WHARF. This new District creates a space for local and regional marine dependent businesses to grow and thrive. Positioning of this facility takes advantage of existing deepwater access extending north from the Port’s turning basin. • INDIAN RIVER TERMINAL AND FISHERMAN’S WHARF. This District is the historic heart of the Port and is the focus of ongoing investment by Derecktor and the public sector. Existing small businesses at Fisherman’s Wharf (Beyel Brothers) and surrounding inland tracts (Woods Family, Inlet Fisheries) are also found in this area. • TAYLOR CREEK RECREATIONAL BOATING AREA. This District is comprised of existing private businesses and operators found in the north of the Port. The Master Plan supports a continuation of these uses and provides small initiatives to ensure their long term viability. 4.1 MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 190 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 67 FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN 7 21 4 16 16 17 17 18 19 5 1 32 13 12 20 20 20 11 9 10 U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 O L D D I X I E H W Y O L D D I X I E H W Y AVENUE OAVENUE O AVENUE MAVENUE M AVENUE HAVENUE H FISHERMAN’S WHARFFISHERMAN’S WHARF I N D I A N R V R D R I N D I A N R V R D R N 7 T H S T N 7 T H S T SOUTH C A U S E W A Y SOUTH C A U S E W A Y BRIDG E BRIDG E NORTHNORTH CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T 14 15 6 8 Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Anticipated Storm Water Requirement Zones Fisherman’s Wharf Redevelopment Zone Fisherman’s Wharf Publicly Held Land Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway EXISTING Safe Harbor Harbortown Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Light Industrial Uses (Woods Properties and Inlet Fisheries) Derecktor Shipyard Fort Pierce Marine Terminal (Beyel Brothers) Lincoln Park Community Park PROPOSED Harbour Pointe and Tenant Access Road Dry Stack Boat Storage Taylor Creek Public Boat Ramp and Trailer Parking Harbour Pointe Waterfront Esplanade Harbour Pointe Public Marina Reef Restoration Center, Wharf and Dock East Wharf Berth and Marine Industries Yard(s) Marine Industries Vessel Slip (Optional) Yacht MRO and Shipbuilding Areas Wet Slip Yacht MRO Operational Areas Shiplift (Syncrolift) and Transfer System FEC Rail Spur and Related Operations (Optional) Urban Greenway System Linked to Proposed SUNTrail Urban Greenway Pedestrian Overpass KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 191 of 420 68 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 192 of 420 PERSPECTIVE RENDERING View of Fully Phased Master Plan Improvements. Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 69 MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 193 of 420 70 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy The Master Plan calls for the comprehensive upgrade of County owned Harbour Pointe. Renewal starts with the creation of a new, east-west roadway extending from the terminus of N 2nd Street to the Park. This roadway will support existing and new ventures along Taylor Creek as well as link to a planned tenant service road extending southeast to East Wharf. Three primary recreational boating facilities are depicted in the Plan. For the private parcel located between Cracker Boy Boat Works and Harbour Pointe, the Plan envisions the parcel’s highest and best use as a dry stack boat storage facility similar to those already positioned along Taylor Creek. Immediately to the east of this facility is planned a +/- 2-acre public boat ramp and parking area. This facility addresses community desire for additional recreational boat ramps (Black Pearl Ramp) and works to help reduce congestion at Fisherman’s Wharf. A floating dock for loading/unloading functions and other temporary activities is depicted east of the boat ramp. Occupying the eastern edge of the District is a new public marina. As depicted, Harbour Pointe Marina would host 120 to155 slips arranged along four dock sections extending to the Intracoastal Waterway. Docks are positioned to avoid nearby mapped beds of eelgrass. Docks would be designed to support recreational boats of 35 feet to 60 feet LOA. Along Taylor Creek at the end of the marina, provision is made for a hand-powered recreational craft (e.g. kayak, stand-up paddle board) launch. Additional study and assessment of the marina site is needed to determine if a floating or fixed breakwater is needed within the program to protect vessel slips. A central waterfront esplanade would connect each recreational boating area as well as upland development building pads, a waterfront facing lawn, and bike/ped facilities. Depicted in the Plan is approximately 20,000 square feet of development on four sites. Envisioned buildings include a sundries shop, boat charter offices, dock master, restaurant, and other similar elements. The water’s edge culminates in the 7,500 square foot Reef Restoration Center located in the southeast corner of the site (a detailed description of this facility is offered in Section 4.2.4). A central formal waterfront lawn marks the civic hub of Harbour Pointe. Lawn uses could include sunrise yoga, live music, evening movies, food truck rallies, and other programmed activities. The lawn links to recreational paths and greenways planned for Harbour Pointe as well as those contemplated as part of the overall Port Master Plan and the Florida SUNTrail. District waterfront edges would be engineered to minimize environmental impact to nearby marine resources while also making the shoreline more resilient to damage from boat wakes, storm driven waves and flooding, and the effects of sea level rise. Edge treatments allowing and encouraging the public to approach and enjoy the waterfront are encouraged. The Plan currently depicts a combination of rock rubble stabilized shoreline along Taylor Creek, transitioning to sheet pile wall at the central portion of the waterfront esplanade. Along the stretch of water’s edge between the lawn and Reef Restoration Center, a preserved beach area giving way to engineered seating walls is proposed. While swimming would be forbidden, the beach would offer views of the bay, picnicking, and similar recreational activities. The current stormwater retention basin is retained and modified to meet additional runoff needs resulting from increased impervious area at the site (refer to Section 5 for more information). Areas around the basin would be landscaped and activated, with the goal of creating a walking path around the pond and linked to other District bike/ped facilities. Establishment of landscaped berms along the southern edge of the District is recommended for transitioning to the East Wharf. MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN 4.1.1 HARBOUR POINTE DISTRICT Page 194 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 71 Harbour Pointe and Tenant Access Road East Wharf Access Road Dry Stack Boat Storage Taylor Creek Public Boat Ramp and Trailer Parking Taylor Creek Public Boat Ramp Transient Docks Hand-Powered Recreational Launch Harbour Pointe Waterfront Esplanade Harbour Pointe Public Marina Harbour Pointe Parking – North Harbour Pointe Parking – South Reef Restoration Center Reef Restoration Center Wharf Reef Restoration Center Dock Harbour Pointe Pond and Greens KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN - HARBOUR POINTE DISTRICT 3 4 4 8 9 10 11 14 N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T B - B B - B 5 6 7 1 2 6 12 13 A - A A - A MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 195 of 420 72 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 196 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 73 MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 197 of 420 74 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN 4.1.2 HARBOUR POINTE ACCESS ROAD VARIES EXISTING DEVELOPMENT (CRACKER BOY BOAT WORKS) +/- 33’ THREE-WAY ROAD +/- 10’ NATURE STRIP +/- 4’ NATURE STRIP +/- 6’ BUFFER +/- 15’ SHARED SIDEWALK VARIES YACHT/ MRO SHIPYARD +/- 6’ SHARED SIDEWALK +/- 30’ BUFFER, INC. LAY DOWN AND OPERATIONAL ZONE Linking visitors and residents to Harbour Pointe and other regional attractions is an important Master Plan objective. One advocated approach to accomplish this is through the expansion of the SUNTrail Greenway to and through the site. The SUNTrail Greenway is a bicycle and pedestrian facility that will expand District connectivity between key public attractions and open spaces destinations within the Fort Pierce Community. As advocated by this Master Plan, Harbour Pointe Access Road will act as an east-west connector linking key destinations, such as Harbour Pointe Park, the Lincoln Park Community Park, and surrounding neighborhoods. This corridor should include streetscape improvements with designated lanes for vehicle and pedestrians, separated by vegetated buffers (see Sections A-A, B-B). SECTION A-A Page 198 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 75 MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN VARIES SURFACE PARKING +/- 15’ SHARED SIDEWALK +/- 11’ ONE-WAY ROAD +/- 9’ ON-STREET PARKING +/- 10’ PLANTED MEDIAN +/- 9’ ON-STREET PARKING +/- 11’ ONE-WAY ROAD +/- 50’ HARBOUR POINTE POND AND GREENS +/- 6’ SIDEWALK +/- 15’ SHARED SIDEWALK VARIES SURFACE PARKING New wayfinding and signage will guide visitors to key points of interest throughout Harbour Pointe, linking visitors from the Proposed SUNTrail and N 2nd Street, towards the Harbor Pointe Waterfront, Public Marina, Reef Restoration Center, and other surrounding attractions. SECTION B-B Page 199 of 420 76 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN The Master Plan calls for incremental development of the region’s largest, purpose-built marine cluster of megayacht MRO activities and supporting industries. Anchored by centrally positioned shiplift and vessel transfer system, between 40 and 50 acres are employed as open air and covered service areas, Jones Act compliant ship new building zones, workshops, and storage yards. A portion of this area could also be designated a Marine Foreign Trade Zone, providing an ability for brokers to show and sell foreign-flagged vessels without standard import duty on new builds. Shiplift and vessel transfer system arrangement allows either a single or several tenants to invest in yard spaces and then share (rent) lift and transfer infrastructure. In-water berths supporting wet slip MRO activities and vessel berthing are provided to the west and east of the planned shiplift. Depicted in the accompanying image is +/- 4,000 linear feet of berthing space, supporting vessels up to 300 feet LOA. The shoreline would be engineered using rock rubble stabilized shoreline. As determined optimal, the engineered shoreline can be adapted to welcome development of the yacht and marine industries vessel slip as depicted in the Plan (refer to project phasing in Section 5). Ultimate design would ensure a resilient edge and elevation height to reduce potential impacts from storm driven waves, extreme tides, and sea level rise. Aside from upland service yards and boat storage areas, the Plan envisions: Supporting specialized climate-controlled spaces for mast, paint, and refit activities; workshops and warehouse bays; office and administration buildings; covered outdoor work areas; and, other features. The ultimate amount and configuration of these elements would be built to suit a specific operator(s). While the Plan encourages use of pavers and other concrete systems to reduce overall impervious area of aprons and yard, follow-on design will need to balance this objective against implementation of effective stormwater control strategies that include the use of pollution prevention activities for service yards and hull maintenance areas. 4.1.3 FORT PIERCE YACHT MRO FACILITY AND SHIPYARD Page 200 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 77 Shiplift (Syncrolift) and Transfer System Wet Slip Operations Area – South Wet Slip Operations Area – East Yacht MRO Yard – Area 1 Marine Industries Vessel Slip (Optional) FEC Rail Spur and Related Operations (Optional) Yacht MRO Yard – Area 2 Yacht MRO Yard/ Jones Act Compliant Ship New Building Zone– Area 3 Yacht MRO Yard/ Jones Act Compliant Ship New Building Zone– Area 4 KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 9 N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN - FORT PIERCE YACHT MRO FACILITY AND SHIPYARD MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 201 of 420 78 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 202 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 79 MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 203 of 420 80 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN While Harbour Pointe and megayacht MRO zones take main billing in the Port Master Plan, there is marine facility demand for use by small businesses in their respective construction, import/export, and other marine dependent operations. The transition of the 12-acre Indian River Terminal away from these types of operations left only 2.45 acres of deepwater accessible working waterfront available for industry (Woods Family and Beyel Brothers Tracts). Operation of these remaining working waterfront parcels is increasingly challenging given the age and cost of upkeep for existing marine structures. In the case of Beyel Brothers site, there is increasing pressure for more public facing uses desired/planned at Fisherman’s Wharf. To help remedy this situation, creation of a new marine industry import/export dock and trade enabling yards along the North Access Channel is proposed. Development of this zone—referred to in the Plan as East Wharf—would create +/- 800 linear feet of wharf and an adjacent operable berth pocket supported by +/- 9.5 acres (depicted) of trade enabling yard area(s). This area could flex to be +/-14 acres or greater (refer to Section 4.2.3 for examples). Vessels working from East Wharf would be similar to those already observed at the Port: large and small barges, Ro-Ro (Roll On-Roll Off) ships, regional feeder vessels, and work boats. This location would be accessed on the mainland by a service road extending along Harbour Pointe. Other access options are available and dependent on overall site development. There exists some potential for conflict between the positioning of yacht MRO and marine cargo areas. Follow-on design and engineering should establish reasonable setbacks between both use types as well as stipulate restricted/ prohibited site activities. As an option, rail service could be reestablished from the FEC Railroad mainline into the site. Rail service would could support yacht MRO areas and/or East Wharf operations. Investment would be required to re-establish a rail crossing along N 2nd Street. As operational space comes online, this zone could be made available to incentivize relocation of Beyel Brothers from Fisherman’s Wharf to a new, modern deepwater facility with improved access to their upland yard located along N 2nd Street. The site could also be marketed to other existing Treasure Coast operators. Over the very long term and as market conditions warrant, vessel and landside operational areas could be expanded through creation of a yacht and marine industries vessel slip. The vessel slip as depicted would add 1,650 linear feet of berth area. The depth of the slip inland could be extended/ reduced based on market need. Due to East Wharf’s proposed location on private property, this initiative is best advanced through a public-private partnership where the County could leverage its minority interest in the Bell Property (derived through sale of the Indian River Terminal) and ability to access grants and other public funds. This approach puts value on a policy of preserving working waterfront areas for marine dependent business as well as improving land assembly and uses opportunities along Fisherman’s Wharf. 4.1.4 EAST WHARF DISTRICT Page 204 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 81 East Wharf Tenant Road and Gate(s) East Wharf and Related Berth Pocket Trade Enabling Yard Area(s) Marine Industries Vessel Slip (Optional) KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 1 1 3 4 2 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN - EAST WHARF DISTRICT MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 205 of 420 82 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Improvements are ongoing to transform the Indian River Terminal into Derecktor Shipyard’s Fort Pierce facility and eventual corporate headquarters. Once complete, the 12-acre site will host a state-of- the-art repair and refit yard customized to support megayacht MRO activities for vessels up to 200 feet LOA and 900 tons. Through recent demolition of the 100+ year-old Indian River Terminal Citrus Packing House, eight acres of concrete apron are now available to provide outdoor yard and service areas. The world’s largest mobile hoist (1,500 tons) will move vessels from existing berths to service yard spaces, and over time, link to other work areas planned for the Fort Pierce Yacht MRO Facility and Shipyard (refer to Section 4.1.3). The remaining shed is undergoing repurpose to support office, storage, and repair spaces along with machine, wood, electrical, and pipe shops. Under the Plan, the privately held Beyel Brothers parcels at Fisherman’s Wharf have the flexibility to remain in place or, as presented in Section 4.1.4, relocate to new facilities at East Wharf. In either case, wharfs and aprons associated with these parcels likely need to undergo repair and update to remain in operational use. If Beyel Brothers do select to vacate some or all of the Fisherman’s Wharf parcels, public acquisition of these parcels is recommended to allow some or all of the area to be used in support of expanded megayacht MRO activities and/or increased public waterfront access through restaurant, park, commercial fishing, or other public facing venue. Other private properties found to the north of the Derecktor Shipyard remain to allow current small businesses in these locations to operate and grow. Successful growth of Port megayacht MRO activities will likely increase the viability for reuse of several of these spaces and yard areas for offices and workshops for trades and businesses needing close proximity to ship repair and refit activities (e.g., electricians, fabricators, millwork experts). Similar to case study facilities reviewed, this area could welcome new amenities for customers and crew, including a restaurant/ food truck area, fitness center, and concierge services. As the potential presents itself, the remaining FEC Railroad spur running north south between Woods Family and Inlet Fisheries parcels should be acquired and combined into adjoining parcels or held for future reuse in another capacity. One longer term initiative for this zone is creation of a flexible workplace for small businesses and contractors that could also support workforce development programs. Workforce development programs could partner with shipyards and businesses at the Port, Indian River State College, and other career and technical centers. This type of facility would consist of 2,500 to 5,000 square feet of space and could occupy existing buildings within this District. Derecktor Shipyard ConceptDerecktor Shipyard Concept 4.1.5 INDIAN RIVER TERMINAL & FISHERMAN’S WHARF Page 206 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 83 Travel Lift Access and Operational Corridor Derecktor Shipyard Improvements (Various) Beyel Brothers Marine Improvements (Various) and/ or Relocation Silo Activation with Trade Enabling Activity Woods Family Marine Yard Improvements (Various) Woods Family Site/Building Improvements (Various) Inlet Fisheries Site/Building Improvements (Various) Avenue H/Fisherman’s Wharf Corridor Enhancement KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN - INDIAN RIVER TERMINAL & FISHERMAN’S WHARF 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 AVENUE HAVENUE H FISHERMAN’S WHARFFISHERMAN’S WHARF I N D I A N R V R D R I N D I A N R V R D R N 7 T H S T N 7 T H S T SOUTH C A U S E W A Y SOUTH C A U S E W A Y BRIDG E BRIDG E N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T 8 MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 207 of 420 84 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Activities and privately held parcels in this zone remain in operation, continuing to support a focus of water recreation activities along with smaller technical yards and marine industries, including Harbortown Marina & Complimentary Marine Services (canvas, sail repair, marine electronic, and others businesses). Development of a greenway linking the proposed Florida SUNTrail along N 2nd Street and Old Dixie Highway to Fisherman’s Wharf, Harbour Pointe Park, and park areas in the Lincoln Park community is recommended for this zone (refer to Section 4.2.5 for more detail). Either in combination with the greenway or part of a separate initiative, an emergency access route from N 2nd Street to the north end of the Port is recommended. This would likely best be accomplished at the current north end of N 2nd Street (cul de sac) with an operable control gate/bollards linking to Old Dixie Highway. This effort would need to seek an easement across the FEC Railway for this limited purpose. 4.1.6 TAYLOR CREEK RECREATIONAL BOATING AREA Page 208 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 85 DNE World Fruit Sales Improvements (Various) Shearwater Boat Yard (Formerly Whiticar Marine North) Improvements (Various) Safe Harbor Harbortown Improvements (Various) Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Urban Greenway System Linked to Proposed SUNTrail Emergency Access Route (Linking N 2nd Street to North end of the Port) KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 6 6 5 7 U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 O L D D I X I E H W Y O L D D I X I E H W Y ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN - TAYLOR CREEK RECREATIONAL BOATING AREA MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW MASTER PLAN Page 209 of 420 86 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy 4.2 ALIGNMENT WITH PLAN TENETS MASTER PLAN The Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan follows the Mission Statement and Five Guiding Tenets (refer to Section 2.3). In the following section, we highlight ways in which the Plan address each. Page 210 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 87 Foster investment in the Port of Fort Pierce as Treasure Coast’s center for yacht and related maritime maintenance, repair, and overhaul activity and other Blue Economy industries. The blue economy broadly defined refers to any economic activity in the maritime sector. Taking it a step further, many organizations focus on blue economy activities as being sustainable, balancing the health of ocean, sea and coastal ecosystems with the opportunity to expand economic output and livelihoods. The Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan promotes growth in the number and diversity of marine related industries. It also encourages greater recreational boating, environmental education, public access, and other facets of blue economy activities. On its own, the Fort Pierce Megayacht MRO Facility and Shipyard is expected to sustain several hundred direct and indirect full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs within the Project Study Area and businesses in the region. This facility would also make substantive contributions to State and local government taxes. ALIGNMENT WITH PLAN TENETS MASTER PLAN The megayacht industry and MRO activities have a major economic impact at multiple levels. As reported in the 2018 Report “Mega Yachts in South Florida: Trends, Impacts, and Issues,” South Florida grew from 800 megayachts in local waters (1997) to 1,800 (2017). A median sized megayacht (140 feet LOA) spends over $2.0 million annually, generating economic impacts across hundreds of business types and directly supporting 11 FTE jobs and 41 FTE via the regional multiplier effect. Florida’s recent policies to adjust sales tax imposition on sales and repair of yachts have provided a boost to the industry. During 2017, yards reported major refit projects ranging in value from $1.2 million to $2.7 million. A $1.5 million refit project generates $60,000 in sales tax proceeds. In addition to direct sales taxes there are $97,500 of additional taxes generated to state and local government. Derecktor Shipyard’s anticipates directly supporting +/- 80 FTE positions at the Fort Pierce facility once at full operation. This equates to 6.6 jobs per acre. Other yards in South Florida yield similar numbers. By example, Dun & Bradstreet reports 160 employees at Rybovich Boat Company LLC (West Palm) and 90 employees Merrill- Stevens Dry Dock Co. (Miami). Beyond those directly employed, there are many other subcontractors supported by yacht MRO activities. Megayacht MRO, import/export marine dependent businesses, and other working waterfront blue economy industries will all help to expand economic opportunities for the County and region. 4.2.1 AN ENGINE FOR OUR BLUE ECONOMY Page 211 of 420 88 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Expand coastal edges for working and recreational waterfront activities. The current configuration of Port infrastructure affords a limited number of active marine edges. Working marine edges total +/- 3,100 linear feet along the Derecktor, Woods Family parcel, Beyel Brothers, and Fisherman’s Wharf. Many of these facilities are in need of repair and upkeep. The proposed Master Plan seeks to more than double the working waterfront edge of the Port. Contemplated investments include creation of wet-slips (for yachts awaiting or undergoing repair), East Wharf, and the proposed yacht and marine industries vessel slip. These three projects combined will add between 6,000 and 7,000 linear feet of working marine edge. Marina and other in-water recreational facilities contemplated at Harbour Pointe will add to this total. ALIGNMENT WITH PLAN TENETS MASTER PLAN 4.2.2 GROW THE AMOUNT OF FUNCTIONAL WATERFRONT EDGES Page 212 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 89 4.2.2 GROW THE AMOUNT OF FUNCTIONAL WATERFRONT EDGES ALIGNMENT WITH PLAN TENETS MASTER PLAN Page 213 of 420 90 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Organize upland areas for flexibility and adaptability for marine commerce and light-industry uses. Encourage infrastructure investment in measured increments to grow sustainably and responsibly. It’s difficult to pinpoint what the future will hold for the Port and in- water and upland assets. Detailed market studies—while a useful follow-on step—were not part of this planning effort. What resonated with property owners, stakeholders, and the community was seeking to ensure the Port could flex to embrace new business prospects and changing priorities. To this end, the Plan incorporates a number of flexible features that can be pursued as market opportunities or other needs emerge. Several of these adaptable zones are depicted in the following exhibits. • IMPORT/EXPORT AND TRADE ENABLING AREAS AT EAST WHARF. As presented in Section 4.1.4, this zone offers a range of scalable uplands and berth area dependent on market need. Upland area can range from +/- 4 acres (Variant A1) to +/- 14 acres (Variant A2). Additional expansion west is possible. IMPORT/EXPORT AND TRADE ENABLING AREAS AT EAST WHARF • CORNER OF N 2ND STREET AND THE ACCESS ROAD TO HARBOUR POINTE PARK. This +/- 6.35 acre parcel is flexible to be set aside to help meet stormwater detention requirements (Variant B1), light-industrial space (Variant B2), or additional megayacht MRO / Jones Act compliant ship development. • WOODS FAMILY MARINE YARD AND INLET FISHERIES. The Plan contemplates this zone could remain in its current configuration, offering existing light industrial and warehousing spaces (Variant C1). With acquisition of the FEC Railroad spur, new buildings could be introduced and designed to host electronics businesses, hydraulics companies, engine repair, shaft and propeller works, sail makers, and other marine related enterprises (Variant C2). • FISHERMAN’S WHARF. Beyel Brothers can remain in its present parcel holdings (Variant D1) or relocate to allow expansion of more megayacht MRO and public accessible mixed-use development (Variant D2). VARIANT A1 VARIANT A2 VARIANT A1 VARIANT A3 ALIGNMENT WITH PLAN TENETS MASTER PLAN 4.2.3 PROVIDE A FLEXIBLE TEMPLATE FOR PORT LAND DEVELOPMENT Page 214 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 91 WOODS FAMILY MARINE YARD AND INLET FISHERIES FISHERMAN’S WHARF CORNER OF N 2ND STREET AND ACCESS ROAD TO HARBOUR POINTE PARK VARIANT B1 VARIANT B2 VARIANT C1 VARIANT C2 VARIANT D1 VARIANT D2VARIANT B3 ALIGNMENT WITH PLAN TENETS MASTER PLAN Page 215 of 420 92 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Become a center of excellence for reef and coastal research, restoration, and resilience. The community expressed desire to keep and possibly grow the artificial reef program currently operating from Harbour Point. Over the short term—during design, permitting and implementation of Harbour Point Park redevelopment—this program will remain in place. Once transformation of the Park is underway, this program is recommended to shift to the southeast corner of the District and utilize newly created landside and in-water facilities. An operational yard on County property would provide area for storage of materials destined for use in artificial reef creation, modular “reef balls,” and other equipment and components. Additional interim zones could be negotiated with adjacent private property owners. Over the long term, the Plan envisions creation of a 7,500 square foot center funded through grants, partnerships, and public sector contributions. While the ultimate development program for the center has yet to be determined, the Plan contemplates an environmental education atrium space, classroom, lab room, offices, and outdoor learning patio. Outdoor elevated grow tanks could be incorporated to support coral micro fragmentation work. A single floating dock would extend from the waterfront and provide dedicated berth space for marine research vessels, educational tours, and provide a home for a contemplated Fire Boat or similar marine first responder vessel. ALIGNMENT WITH PLAN TENETS MASTER PLAN 4.2.4 INVEST AND GROW ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AND RESTORATION Page 216 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 93 Proposed SUNTrail Greenway and Bike/ Ped Circulation Park and Open Space Waterfront Marina, Docks and Public Boat Ramps Mixed-Use/ Food & Beverage Research and Development Reef Restoration Center KEY FEATURES REEF RESTORATION CENTER U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 O L D D I X I E H W Y O L D D I X I E H W Y AVENUE OAVENUE O AVENUE MAVENUE M AVENUE HAVENUE H FISHERMAN’S WHARFFISHERMAN’S WHARF I N D I A N R V R D R I N D I A N R V R D R N 7 T H S T N 7 T H S T SOUTH C A U S E W A Y SOUTH C A U S E W A Y BRIDG E BRIDG E NORTHNORTH CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T MULTI-USE CONNECTIONS TO EDUCATION & RECREATION HUB FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK ALIGNMENT WITH PLAN TENETS MASTER PLAN Page 217 of 420 94 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Ensure Port edges stabilize and bolster the viability of varied community development endeavors. The work of the waterfront can create stress on surrounding land uses and neighborhoods. Noise, truck traffic, lighting at night, and long stretches of fencing are all examples of this in practice. Yet, as evidenced in Section 3, working waterfronts and surrounding neighborhoods can thrive together, especially when planned holistically and when open dialogue between interests is maintained. For the Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan, several opportunities were considered to foster a greater level of cohesion between the Project Study Area and surrounding neighborhoods and businesses. These include: • Greenway creation linking the proposed SUNTrail from Fort Pierce along N 2nd Street and Old Dixie Highway to Fisherman’s Wharf, Harbour Pointe, and park areas in the Lincoln Park community. The east-west portion of the greenway connecting Lincoln Park to Harbour Point could include a bike/ped overpass spanning the FEC Railroad and US Highway 1. • Renewal and enhancement of Avenue H and Fisherman’s Wharf roadway. • Illumination and beautification of the Port silos as attractive features of the skyline during the day and night. • Creation of landscaped berms and other elements to serve as buffers between working waterfront zones and Harbour Pointe Park. • Support of Fisherman’s Wharf to be developed as a fishing village working waterfront, including, tourism uses, as envisioned in the Fisherman’s Wharf Redevelopment Plan (2017). ALIGNMENT WITH PLAN TENETS MASTER PLAN 4.2.5 THE PORT AS A GOOD NEIGHBOR Page 218 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 95 ALIGNMENT WITH PLAN TENETS MASTER PLAN Page 219 of 420 96 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Page 220 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 97 5 IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Page 221 of 420 98 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Implementation of the Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan is a 20-year endeavor. Initial investments and market success will create a foundation for subsequent steps and projects. The Master Plan is a roadmap to help bring forward a future desired. Recognizing market forces and community priorities change, the Plan is flexible in its implementation to accommodate change. IMPLEMENTATION STAGES. Projects and initiatives are grouped into two stages of implementation: Early (Stage 1) and Follow-On (Stage 2). While names used for both groups are indicative of the general timing or project, there is flexibility within each stage to advance, slow-down, reduce, and/or expand initiatives and implementors (e.g., the public and private sectors) see fit. In the pages that follow, we present a recommended progression of project through Stage 1 and 2 along with other notable studies and related initiatives. 5.1 IMPLEMENTATION OVERVIEW IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS 2C Page 222 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 99 PERSPECTIVE RENDERING View of Fully Phased Master Plan Improvements. Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 99 2A 2F 2B 2E 2D 1A 1B 1C IMPLEMENTATION OVERVIEW IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Page 223 of 420 100 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy 5.2 PROJECTS UNDER STAGE 1 Stage 1 improvements are those expected to substantively advance over the next five years. Within Stage 1, three primary initiatives commence: • AREA 1A. Redevelopment of Harbour Pointe, inclusive of linking roadway/ greenway and other recreational boating and upland areas. • AREA 1B. Advancement of initial phases of East Wharf, including development of 800 linear feet of wharf and a commensurate import/export yard area for tenants of 4- to 6-acres. • AREA 1C. Development of the southern portion of the Fort Pierce Megayacht MRO and Shipyard Area. This project includes approximately +/- 24 acres of uplands along with +/- 4,000 linear feet of wet berths and a shiplift supporting vessels up to 300 feet LOA. For each of the projects above, some amount of market, economic, financial, and design analysis is needed to advance the sizing and detailed programmatic needs of each Stage 1 improvement group. This work, along with specific preferences by private property owners, may result in scaling up or down of primary project components of each group. For example, the public marina at Harbour Pointe requires additional design analysis to determine the need for a breakwater between the Intracoastal Waterway and proposed facilities. Additional environmental study is also envisioned to ensure the project does not impact mapped seagrasses in the area. The combined results of these analyses will dictate a refined project program for the marina that then can translated into a financial model and a determination of the ultimate level of investment in this project. IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Page 224 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 101 FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK 1A 1C 1B 7 4 16 16 17 17 18 19 5 1 32 13 12 20 20 20 11 9 10 U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 O L D D I X I E H W Y O L D D I X I E H W Y AVENUE OAVENUE O AVENUE MAVENUE M AVENUE HAVENUE H FISHERMAN’S WHARFFISHERMAN’S WHARF I N D I A N R V R D R I N D I A N R V R D R N 7 T H S T N 7 T H S T SOUTH C A U S E W A Y SOUTH C A U S E W A Y BRIDG E BRIDG E NORTHNORTH CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T 14 15 6 8 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN - STAGE 1 PROJECTS UNDER STAGE 1 IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Anticipated Storm Water Requirement Zones Fisherman’s Wharf Redevelopment Zone Fisherman’s Wharf Publicly Held Land Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway EXISTING Safe Harbor Harbortown Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Light Industrial Uses (Woods Properties and Inlet Fisheries) Derecktor Shipyard Fort Pierce Marine Terminal (Beyel Brothers) Lincoln Park Community Park PROPOSED Harbour Pointe and Tenant Access Road Dry Stack Boat Storage Taylor Creek Public Boat Ramp and Trailer Parking Harbour Pointe Waterfront Esplanade Harbour Pointe Public Marina Reef Restoration Center, Wharf and Dock East Wharf Berth and Marine Industries Yard(s) Marine Industries Vessel Slip (Optional) Yacht MRO and Shipbuilding Areas Wet Slip Yacht MRO Operational Areas Shiplift (Syncrolift) and Transfer System FEC Rail Spur and Related Operations (Optional) Urban Greenway System Linked to Proposed SUNTrail Page 225 of 420 102 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy 5.3 PROJECTS UNDER STAGE 2 IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Stage 2 includes follow-on efforts within each of the primary initiative zones—Yacht MRO, East Wharf, Harbour Pointe — as well as embarks on other infrastructure and commerce investments. These efforts are envisioned to advance after 2025 but could happen sooner based on market conditions and resource availability. • AREA 2A. As market conditions warrant, expand the Fort Pierce Megayacht MRO and Shipyard Area to add an additional 20 acres of upland area and include Jones Act Compliant Ship New Building Zone. This area could also flex to support other import/ export trade enabling activities, light industrial uses, and/ or other marine activity center functions. • AREA 2B. Grow the import/export area to 9- to 14-acres depending upon investment in the depicted marine industries vessel slip (see Area 2D). • AREA 2C. Consider potential relocation of Beyel Brothers from Fisherman’s Wharf to East Wharf. • AREA 2D. As desired, advance the creation of the marine industries vessel slip and an additional +/- 1,650 linear feet of berth and apron area. • AREAS 2E AND 2F. As available and desired, activate additional areas in support of Fort Pierce Megayacht MRO and Shipyard Area, Jones Act Compliant Ship New building Zone, Marine Foreign Trade Zone, light industrial uses, and/ or other marine activity center functions. Similar to Stage 1 improvements, some amount of market, economic, financial, and design analysis is needed to advance the sizing and detailed programmatic needs of each Stage 2 improvement group. Page 226 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 103 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN - STAGE 2 VARIANT 1 Areas 2B and 2D do not apply under this Stage 2 Variant. 2B 2D FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK 2A 2F 2E 2C 7 21 4 16 16 17 17 18 19 5 1 32 13 12 20 20 20 11 9 10 U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 O L D D I X I E H W Y O L D D I X I E H W Y AVENUE OAVENUE O AVENUE MAVENUE M AVENUE HAVENUE H FISHERMAN’S WHARFFISHERMAN’S WHARF I N D I A N R V R D R I N D I A N R V R D R N 7 T H S T N 7 T H S T SOUTH C A U S E W A Y SOUTH C A U S E W A Y BRIDG E BRIDG E NORTHNORTH CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T 14 15 6 8 PROJECTS UNDER STAGE 2 IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Anticipated Storm Water Requirement Zones Fisherman’s Wharf Redevelopment Zone Fisherman’s Wharf Publicly Held Land Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway EXISTING Safe Harbor Harbortown Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Light Industrial Uses (Woods Properties and Inlet Fisheries) Derecktor Shipyard Fort Pierce Marine Terminal (Beyel Brothers) Lincoln Park Community Park PROPOSED Harbour Pointe and Tenant Access Road Dry Stack Boat Storage Taylor Creek Public Boat Ramp and Trailer Parking Harbour Pointe Waterfront Esplanade Harbour Pointe Public Marina Reef Restoration Center, Wharf and Dock East Wharf Berth and Marine Industries Yard(s) Marine Industries Vessel Slip (Optional) Yacht MRO and Shipbuilding Areas Wet Slip Yacht MRO Operational Areas Shiplift (Syncrolift) and Transfer System FEC Rail Spur and Related Operations (Optional) Urban Greenway System Linked to Proposed SUNTrail Urban Greenway Pedestrian Overpass Page 227 of 420 104 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK 2A 2F 2E 2C 2B 7 21 4 16 16 17 17 18 19 5 1 32 13 12 20 20 20 11 9 10 U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 O L D D I X I E H W Y O L D D I X I E H W Y AVENUE OAVENUE O AVENUE MAVENUE M AVENUE HAVENUE H FISHERMAN’S WHARFFISHERMAN’S WHARF I N D I A N R V R D R I N D I A N R V R D R N 7 T H S T N 7 T H S T SOUTH C A U S E W A Y SOUTH C A U S E W A Y BRIDG E BRIDG E NORTHNORTH CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T 14 15 6 8 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN - STAGE 2 VARIANT 2 Area 2D does not apply under this Stage 2 Variant. 2D PROJECTS UNDER STAGE 2 IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Anticipated Storm Water Requirement Zones Fisherman’s Wharf Redevelopment Zone Fisherman’s Wharf Publicly Held Land Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway EXISTING Safe Harbor Harbortown Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Light Industrial Uses (Woods Properties and Inlet Fisheries) Derecktor Shipyard Fort Pierce Marine Terminal (Beyel Brothers) Lincoln Park Community Park PROPOSED Harbour Pointe and Tenant Access Road Dry Stack Boat Storage Taylor Creek Public Boat Ramp and Trailer Parking Harbour Pointe Waterfront Esplanade Harbour Pointe Public Marina Reef Restoration Center, Wharf and Dock East Wharf Berth and Marine Industries Yard(s) Marine Industries Vessel Slip (Optional) Yacht MRO and Shipbuilding Areas Wet Slip Yacht MRO Operational Areas Shiplift (Syncrolift) and Transfer System FEC Rail Spur and Related Operations (Optional) Urban Greenway System Linked to Proposed SUNTrail Urban Greenway Pedestrian Overpass KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Page 228 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 105 FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE TAYLOR CREEK 2A 2F 2E 2C 2D 2B 7 21 4 16 16 17 17 18 19 5 1 32 13 12 20 20 20 11 9 10 U S H W Y 1 U S H W Y 1 O L D D I X I E H W Y O L D D I X I E H W Y AVENUE OAVENUE O AVENUE MAVENUE M AVENUE HAVENUE H FISHERMAN’S WHARFFISHERMAN’S WHARF I N D I A N R V R D R I N D I A N R V R D R N 7 T H S T N 7 T H S T SOUTH C A U S E W A Y SOUTH C A U S E W A Y BRIDG E BRIDG E NORTHNORTH CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E CAUSEW A Y B R I D G E N 2 N D S T N 2 N D S T 14 15 6 8 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN - STAGE 2 VARIANT 3 PROJECTS UNDER STAGE 2 IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 KEY FEATURES Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Anticipated Storm Water Requirement Zones Fisherman’s Wharf Redevelopment Zone Fisherman’s Wharf Publicly Held Land Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway EXISTING Safe Harbor Harbortown Taylor Creek Marina Cracker Boy Boat Works Light Industrial Uses (Woods Properties and Inlet Fisheries) Derecktor Shipyard Fort Pierce Marine Terminal (Beyel Brothers) Lincoln Park Community Park PROPOSED Harbour Pointe and Tenant Access Road Dry Stack Boat Storage Taylor Creek Public Boat Ramp and Trailer Parking Harbour Pointe Waterfront Esplanade Harbour Pointe Public Marina Reef Restoration Center, Wharf and Dock East Wharf Berth and Marine Industries Yard(s) Marine Industries Vessel Slip (Optional) Yacht MRO and Shipbuilding Areas Wet Slip Yacht MRO Operational Areas Shiplift (Syncrolift) and Transfer System FEC Rail Spur and Related Operations (Optional) Urban Greenway System Linked to Proposed SUNTrail Urban Greenway Pedestrian Overpass Page 229 of 420 106 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS 5.4 DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS The Master Plan supports projects across five development Districts (refer to Section 4.1). These projects—both large and small—work together to transform each District into the fully realized ideas and initiatives offered in Section 4. PROJECT BY PROJECT LISTING. A list of projects contemplated for each development District is presented in this section. Each entry includes a project code, name, brief description, and proposed implementation stage (e.g., Stage 1 or Stage 2). Entries also identify linking projects—those efforts needing implementation prior to or concurrent with the listed initiative. For example, development of the Harbour Pointe Access Road (Project H1) should occur prior to or concurrent with creation of the Taylor Creek Boat Ramp and Trailer Parking (Project H4). Each project requires several steps necessary for advancement—feasibility, preliminary design, cost estimating, permitting, detailed design, tendering, construction, and others. These inherent steps are not detailed in the table. Preliminary orders of magnitude cost estimate ranges by project are presented in each table. Cost ranges were developed using unit prices for the largest components within each project type. Cost ranges do not include land acquisition (as needed), finance, and soft development costs such as professional services and regulatory fees. Figures provided should be used as initial guidance and perfected through follow-on site investigation and design. Each table presents an initial list of anticipated sources of funding for projects. This includes an initial indication of anticipated project implementation responsibility—the public sector, the private sector, or a combination of both through a public-private partnership. Also offered in each table are potential state and federal grants that may be applicable to the project. Offered grants vary greatly in award amount, local match requirements, use of funds constraints (e.g., design stage versus construction), and other specifics. The provided listing is a starting point for grant research; additional state and federal sources may be available and programs and available funds do change. Listed grants should be fully explored by St. Lucie County as they can make a measurable difference in the ability of a project to come to light. Similar to cost figures offered, listed sources of funding should be treated as initial guidance and perfection through policy discussions, prioritization, site investigation, and design. INTEGRATION OF PROJECTS WITH REGIONAL PLANNING. Integration of proposed Port Master Plan projects with regional plans is important to ensure concurrence with local and regional initiatives and as a required threshold for public sector and funding. Alignment with the St. Lucie Comprehensive Plan is essential and discussed in Section 5.5.1. The 2020 Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan and projects of relevance should be included by reference in update to Go2040, the St. Lucie County Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Long Range Transportation Plan. Projects of relevance should also be added into the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) process. The Port Master Plan should also be included in the next round of update to the Comprehensive Economic Development Plan as prepared annually by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. Ways in which the Reef Restoration Center can be linked to Florida’s State Wildlife Action Plan should also be considered. Page 230 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 107 DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS CODE FUNDING SOURCE DESCRIPTION PUB Public Sector Initiative PVT Private Sector Initiative PPP Public-Private Partnership FEMA HMA FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grant Projects implementing mitigation measures to reduce disaster losses. FEMA BRIC FEMA Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grant Hazard mitigation projects that reduce risks from disasters and natural hazards. CDBG HUD Community Development Block Grant Annual grants to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment, and by expanding economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate-income persons. EPA UWSG EPA Urban Waters Small Grant Bi-Annual grants promoting healthy and accessible urban waters that work to grow local businesses and enhance educational, recreational, social and employment opportunities in nearby communities. 5Star NFWF Five Star and Urban Waters Restoration Grant Program seeks to develop nation-wide community stewardship of local natural resources. Grants seek to address water quality issues in priority watersheds. FWS BA FWS Wildlife and Sport Fish Boating Access Grant Grant funds for projects that provide access to America’s waterways by developing new access facilities or renovation and/or improvement of existing facilities. FWS BIG FWS Wildlife and Sport Fish Boating Infrastructure Grant Grant funds for projects to construct, renovate, and maintain tie-up facilities with features for transient boaters. FWS SWG FWS State Wildlife Grant Grant funds to state fish and wildlife agencies for developing and implementing programs that benefit wildlife and their habitats, including species that are not hunted or fished. This includes research, fish and wildlife surveys, species restoration, habitat management, and monitoring. FTA PFG FTA Passenger Ferry Grant Provides competitive funding to public ferry systems in urbanized areas. 5.4.1 FUNDING SOURCE LEGEND Page 231 of 420 108 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy CODE FUNDING SOURCE DESCRIPTION BUILD USDOT Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) Grants Grant program for investment in road, rail, transit, and port projects that promise to achieve national objectives. Previously known as TIGER Discretionary Grants PIDG MARAD Port Infrastructure Development Grants Grants to improve facilities within, connecting to, out of, or around coastal seaports, inland river ports and Great Lakes ports. Project should improve the safety, efficiency, or reliability of the movement of goods into, out of, around or within a port. EDA EDA Public Works and Economic Adjustment Assistance Programs Grants provide economically distressed communities and regions with comprehensive and flexible resources to address a wide variety of economic needs. Funded projects lead to the creation and retention of jobs and increased private investment, advancing innovation, enhancing the manufacturing capacities of regions, providing workforce development, and growing ecosystems to attract foreign direct investment. FLA JOB FLA Job Growth Grant Fund and Economic Development Project Grants Various Florida Department of Economic Opportunity development programs designed to promote public infrastructure and workforce training across the state as well as specific economic development projects and technical assistance. FIND WAP FLA Inland Navigation District Waterways Assistance Program Grant program established to alleviate problems associated with the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway and associated waterways within the District. Eligible projects include navigation channel dredging, channel markers, navigation signs or buoys, boat ramps, docking facilities, fishing & viewing piers, waterfront boardwalks, inlet management, environmental education, law enforcement equipment, boating safety programs, beach re-nourishment, dredge material management, environmental mitigation, and shoreline stabilization. FSTED FLA Seaport Transportation and Economic Development Grant Florida program to finance port transportation projects on a 50-50 matching basis. FCT WW FLA Communities Trust Working Waterfronts Program (Stan Mayfield Grant) Grant program for use to acquire land directly used for the purposes of the commercial harvest of marine organisms or saltwater products. Funds can also be used to acquire land used for exhibitions, demonstrations, educational venues, civic events, and other purposes that promote and educate the public about economic, cultural, and historic heritage of Florida’s traditional working waterfronts. DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS FUNDING SOURCE LEGEND (CONT.) Page 232 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 109 CODE FUNDING SOURCE DESCRIPTION FBIP FLA Boating Improvement Program Program providing grants for boating access projects and other boating-related activities on coastal and/or inland waters of Florida. FCT Parks FLA Communities Trust Parks and Open Space Grant program assists communities meet the challenges of growth, supporting viable community development and protecting natural resources and open space. FRDAP FLA Recreation Development Assistance Program Grant program that provides financial assistance to local governments to develop and/or acquire land for public outdoor recreational purposes. FLWCF FLA Land and Water Conservation Fund Grants for acquisition or development of land for public outdoor recreation use. FRTP FLA Recreational Trails Program Federally funded competitive grant program that provides financial assistance for the development of recreational trails, trailheads, and trailside facilities. FTAP FLA Transportation Alternatives Plan Program focuses on improvements which create alternatives to transportation for the non-motorized user and enhancements to the transportation system for all users. Nine activities are eligible for funding including construction, planning and design of on- and off-road facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians. SUN Trail FDOT Shared Use Non-motorized (SUN) Trail Program Grant Program funds non-motorized paved shared-use trails that are part of the Florida Greenways and Trails System Priority Trail Map coordinated by OGT. FCPI FLA Coastal Partnership Initiative Grants support four program areas: resilient communities, public access, working waterfronts, and coastal stewardship. DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Page 233 of 420 110 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy CODE PROJECT NAME DESCRIPTION PROPOSED STAGE LINKING PROJECT(S) INITIAL COST ESTIMATE LOW HIGH H1 Harbour Pointe and Tenant Access Road 3-lane access road linking N 2nd Street to Harbour Pointe and East Wharf. Bike/ Ped elements.Stage 1 None $1.75 Mil $2.25 Mil H2 East Wharf Access Road 2-lane access road linking Harbour Point Access Road to East Wharf.Stage 1 H1 $1.3 Mil $1.7 Mil H3 Dry Stack Boat Storage 400-vessel dry stack boat storage complex with parking, operations apron, and administrative office.Variable H1 $6 Mil $9.15 Mil H4 Taylor Creek Public Boat Ramp and Trailer Parking 2-acre public boat ramp and associated parking.Stage 1 H1 $260,000 $520,000 H5 Taylor Creek Public Boat Ramp Transient Docks Floating dock for waiting boats and loading/ unloading functions.Stage 1 H1 $185,000 $280,000 H6 Hand-Powered Recreational Launch Launching point for SUP, kayak, and other hand-powered recreational watercraft.Variable H1, H8 $20,000 $50,000 H7 Harbour Pointe Waterfront Esplanade Publicly accessible, +/- 1,150-foot public esplanade with +/- 20,000-square feet of development.Stage 1 H1, H9 $1.7 Mil $4.3 Mil H8 Harbour Pointe Public Marina 125- to 155-vessel public marina with pump-out, utilities, and other amenity. Stage 1 H1, H9 $7.35 Mil $11 Mil H9 Harbour Pointe Parking - North +/- 100 Parking spaces with related curb, gutter, landscape, and linking walkways.Stage 1 H1 $900,000 $1.8 Mil H10 Harbour Pointe Parking - South +/- 185 Parking spaces with related curb, gutter, landscape, and linking walkways.Stage 2 H1, H9 $1.6 Mil $3.2 Mil H 11 Reef Restoration Center +/- 7,500 square foot, single level Reef Restoration Center with outdoor habitat tanks.Stage 1 H1, H10 $1.2 Mil $1.8 Mil H12 Reef Restoration Center Wharf Vessel loading area and storage yard for Artificial Reef project and other activities.Stage 1 H1 $1.95 Mil $2.55 Mil H13 Reef Restoration Center Dock Single 300-foot dock to accommodate research vessel(s), excursion vessels, fire boat, and others.Variable H12 $990,000 $1.25 Mil H14 Harbour Pointe Pond and Greens Walkways, pond overlook, vita-course, and other amenity.Variable H1 $900,000 $1.4 Mil 5.4.2 HARBOUR POINTE DISTRICT DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Page 234 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 111 POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE CODE PUB, PPP (SUN Trail, FTAP, FRTP) PUB, PPP (PIDG, FSTD) PVT PUB (FWS BA, FIND WAP, FBIP) PUB (FWS BIG, FIND WAP, FBIP) PUB (FIND WAP, FBIP) PUB, PPP (FEMA BRIC, EPA UWSG, 5Star, FIND WAP, FCT Parks, FRDAP, FCPI) PUB, PPP (FWS BA, FIND WAP, FBIP) PUB PUB PUB (EPA UWSG, EDA, FWS SWG, FIND WAP, FCT Parks, FCT WW, FCPI) PUB (FEMA HMA assoc. with soil conservation, FWS SWG, FIND WAP, FCT WW, FCPI) PUB (FTA PFG assoc. with water taxi, FWS SWG, FIND WAP, FCT WW) PUB (5Star, FCT Parks, FRDAP, FLWCF) H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 H7 H8 H9 H10 H12 H11 H13 H14 DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Page 235 of 420 112 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS CODE PROJECT NAME DESCRIPTION PROPOSED STAGE LINKING PROJECT(S) INITIAL COST ESTIMATE LOW HIGH Y1 Shiplift (Syncrolift) and Vessel Transfer System +/- 4,000-ton rated shiplift linked to adjacent transfer rail systems and yard areas.Stage 1 None $500,000 $2 Mil Y2 Wet Slip Operations Area - South +/- 1,000 linear feet of wet slip operational area and apron. Rock-rubble engineered shoreline.Stage 1 None $2.5 Mil $4.3 Mil Y3 Wet Slip Operations Area - East +/- 2,350 linear feet of wet slip operational area and apron. Rock-rubble engineered shoreline.Stage 1 None $3.5Mil $6.3 Mil Y4 Yacht MRO Yard - Area 1 +/- 24-acre megayacht MRO area with transfer rails, including covered service bays and workshops Stage 1 Y1, Y2, Y3 $5.3 Mil $8.4 Mil Y5 Marine Industries Vessel Slip (Optional)+/- 4.25-acre vessel basin with up +/- 28-feet of draft and +/- 1,650-linear feet of wharf and apron. May include Ro-Ro Platform. Stage 2 (Optional)H1, E1, E2, E3 $19.8 Mil $29.7 Mil Y6 FEC Rail Spur and Related Operations (Optional)+/- 1,600-linear foot rail spur and operational area/apron linked to the FEC Railway mainline.Stage 2 (Optional)H1, E1, E2, E3 $160,000 $320,000 Y7 Yacht MRO Yard – Area 2 +/- 7.5-acre megayacht MRO area with transfer rails. Can include Jones Act compliant shipbuilding. Can include free zone. Can include covered service bays and enclosed workshops. Stage 2 Y1, Y2, Y3, Y4 $1.6 Mil $2.6 Mil Y8 Yacht MRO Yard/ Jones Act Compliant Ship New Building Zone– Area 3 +/- 8.5-acre megayacht MRO area with transfer rails. Can include Jones Act compliant shipbuilding. Can include free zone. Can include covered service bays and enclosed workshops. Stage 2 Y1, Y2, Y3, Y4 $1.8 Mil $2.95 Mil Y9 Yacht MRO Yard/ Jones Act Compliant Ship New Building Zone– Area 4 +/- 6.5-acre megayacht MRO area with transfer rails. Can include Jones Act compliant shipbuilding. Can include free zone. Can include covered service bays and enclosed workshops. Stage 1/Stage 2 H1 $1.4 Mil $2.2 Mil 5.4.3 FORT PIERCE YACHT MRO FACILITY AND SHIPYARD Page 236 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 113 Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y7 Y6 Y8 Y9 DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE CODE PVT, PPP (EDA, FLA JOB, CDBG, BUILD) PVT, PPP (FEMA BRIC, EDA, FLA JOB, CDBG, BUILD) PVT, PPP (FEMA BRIC, EDA, FLA JOB, CDBG, BUILD) PVT, PPP (EDA, FLA JOB, CDBG, BUILD) PVT, PPP (EDA, FLA JOB, CDBG, BUILD) PVT PVT, PPP (EDA, FLA JOB, CDBG, BUILD) PVT, PPP (EDA, FLA JOB, CDBG, BUILD) PVT Page 237 of 420 114 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy 5.4.4 EAST WHARF DISTRICT DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS CODE PROJECT NAME DESCRIPTION PROPOSED STAGE LINKING PROJECT(S) INITIAL COST ESTIMATE LOW HIGH E1 East Wharf Tenant Road and Gate(s)Completion of the 2-lane access road linking Harbour Point Access Road to East Wharf. Needed tenant access points, security fence and gates.Stage 1 H1 $228,000 $290,000 E2 East Wharf and Related Berth Pocket Marginal Wharf of +/- 800 linear feet with +/-28-feet of draft (berth pocket). May be linked to Reef Center Wharf. May include Ro-Ro Platform.Stage 1 None $6.4 Mil $9.6 Mil E3 Trade Enabling Yard Area(s)+/- 9.5-acre operational yard (depicted) for import/ export activities. Size may vary based on slip and other factors (refer to Section 4.2.3).Stage 1 / Stage 2 H1, E1, E2 $445,000 $715,000 E4 Marine Industries Vessel Slip (Optional)+/- 4.25-acre vessel basin with up +/- 28-feet of draft and +/- 1,650-linear feet of wharf and apron. May include Ro-Ro Platform. Stage 2 (Optional)H1, E1, E2, E3 $19.8 Mil $29.7 Mil Page 238 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 115 E1 E1 E3 E4 E2 DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE CODE PUB, PVT, PPP (PIDG, FSTD, BUILD, EDA, FLA JOB) PUB, PVT, PPP (PIDG, FSTD, BUILD, EDA, FLA JOB) PUB, PVT, PPP (PIDG, FSTD, BUILD, EDA, FLA JOB) PVT Page 239 of 420 116 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS CODE PROJECT NAME DESCRIPTION PROPOSED STAGE LINKING PROJECT(S) INITIAL COST ESTIMATE LOW HIGH I1 Travel Lift Access and Operational Corridor Area improvements and linking corridor to megayacht MRO yards and vessel storage.Stage 1 Y1, Y2, Y4 $150,000 $300,000 I2 Derecktor Shipyard Improvements (Various)Ongoing improvements to Derecktor Shipbuilding Yard. May include building modifications. Stage 1 None $12 Mil $12 Mil I3 Beyel Brothers Marine Improvements (Various) and/ or Relocation Needed site and wharf improvements. Possible relocation to East Wharf. Various None $2.3 Mil $3.5 Mil I4 Silo Activation with Trade Enabling Activity Reuse of existing silos for import/export industries. Silo beautification.Various None $100,000 $250,000 I5 Woods Family Marine Yard Improvements (Various)Needed site and wharf improvements. Various None $250,000 $500,000 I6 Woods Family Site/Building Improvements (Various)Needed upgrades to existing structures. May serve as business incubator and light industrial uses.Various None $1.2 Mil $2.4 Mil I7 Inlet Fisheries Site/Building Improvements (Various)Needed upgrades to existing structures. May serve as business incubator and light industrial uses.Various None $230,000 $460,000 I8 Avenue H/Fisherman’s Wharf Corridor Enhancement Upgrade and beautification of Avenue H/Fisherman’s Wharf corridor. Improved public and tenant access.Stage 1 None TBD TBD 5.4.5 INDIAN RIVER TERMINAL & FISHERMAN’S WHARF Page 240 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 117 I1 I1 I2 I3 I5I4 I6I6 I7 I8 DISTRICT BY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS CODE PVT PVT, PPP (FSTD) PVT, PPP (FSTD) PVT, PPP (Arts grants assoc. with beautification) PVT, PPP (FSTD) PVT, PPP (EDA, FLA JOBS with job training programs) PVT, PPP (EDA, FLA JOBS with job training programs) PUB (FCT WW, FTAP, FCPI) Page 241 of 420 118 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS 5.5 CHARTING A NEW FUTURE Master Plan advancement will occur over time, with critical studies and initial investments leading to subsequent steps and projects. Plan implementation will occur in stages, while market conditions, design, on-going analysis and availability of financial resources may prolong or accelerate implementation of specific projects. In the following section, we identify critical components that will support the advancement of the Master Plan. As stated in Goal 2.8 of the adopted St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, “St. Lucie County shall continue to implement the Port Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce.” The contents and exhibits comprising the 2020 Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan update the existing 2015 Port Master Plan. Recommended adoption of the 2020 Port Master Plan by the St. Lucie County Board of Commissioners is encouraged to allow this work to replace/ inform: • The responsibility for the Port (Goal 2A.1); • The land use map for the Port of Fort Pierce (Goal 2A.2); • Port activities (Goal 2A.3); • Environmental protection (Goal 2A.4); • Emergency management (Goal 2A.5); • Landside infrastructure (Goal 2A.6); and, • Navigation channels (Goal 2A.7). A full synopsis of these goals and related objectives/ policies is offered in Section 6 (Appendix). Implementation of the Plan will generate increased traffic from new businesses and users found throughout the Project Study Area. These impacts will likely be greatest along N 2nd Street, Avenue H, and U.S. Highway 1 as well as related intersections. A traffic impact study is recommended to better quantify trip generation and needed improvements throughout the roadway network as a result of Plan implementation. The Plan supports integration of safe bicycle and pedestrian pathways around and through selected components (Harbour Pointe Park Access Road) of the Project Study Area linked to recreational facilities the proposed SUNTrail and places of business. 5.5.1 ALIGNMENT WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5.5.2 IMPACTS OF TRAFFIC FROM OPERATIONS Page 242 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 119 5.6 As discussed in Section 1.4, the Project Study Area falls within the limits of the City of Fort Pierce and is subject to its land use and zoning regulations. The City’s Adopted Future Land Use Plan lists the majority of the Project Study Area as Industrial (I), with Taylor Creek Marina, Cracker Boy Boat Works, and Harbortown as Marine Commercial (MC). In terms of zoning, the Derecktor site along with Woods Family, Beyel Brothers, and other smaller tracts in the immediate vicinity are zoned Marine Industrial (I2). Marina facilities along Taylor Creek are zoned Marine Commercial (C6) and Marine Industrial (I2). The balance of the Project Study Area, inclusive of the Bell Family tracts and Harbour Pointe Park, fall under the Planned Unit Redevelopment (PUR) zoning classification. The Port’s PUR zoning was established in 1999 by Ordinance No. J-504 following planning work at the time. The concepts and uses underpinning the current PUR zoning are not in alignment with the recommendations of the 2020 Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan. To address the issue, the Plan recommends a collaborative undertaking by the City and County to update zoning following one of two avenues: • APPROACH 1. Repeal Ordinance No. J-504 and rezone the area as Mixed Use District (MXD) / Planned Development (PD) under the City’s Zoning Code. Inform the new MXD District with an overlay exhibit depicting key areas and uses. The exhibit would provide clarity of permitted and conditional uses through use of an overall site plan exhibit. The site plan exhibit would be aligned with the recommendations of the 2020 Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan, with flexibility built into the exhibit to allow the area to adapt to changing market conditions and opportunities. • APPROACH 2. Adjust the current PUR under Ordinance No. J-504 to reflect the 2020 Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan. The norms for PUR modification would be followed, including Planning Review Board review, public hearing(s), and City Commission Adoption by Ordinance. Under both approaches, new zoning should ensure cohesion between current zoning for parcels south of Taylor Creek and within the Project Study Area. Ideally, the entire zone should allow the same land use and intensity without down zoning the current rights extended to those owners under Marine Industrial (I2). As a third approach, private property owners can seek a full rezoning to another category that meets their needs, such as Marine Industrial (I2). CHARTING A NEW FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS 5.5.3 UPDATE OF PROJECT STUDY AREA ZONING Page 243 of 420 120 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy 5.7 The adopted St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan states “The Indian River Lagoon is recognized as the most biodiverse estuary in North America and as an important component of the local economic base and the overall quality of life in the community. As such, the integrity of the Indian River Lagoon shall be protected by correcting any detrimental effects caused by current operations and ensuring long-term development and improvement activities are consistent with all local, state and federal environmental laws and regulations”. As presented previously, a common theme heard throughout the 2020 Plan-making process was the Port and its lands, harbor, and channel are an untapped resource. Accompanying this sentiment, however, was often a similar caution that harnessing this resource should be done carefully and ensure protection of community quality of life and the ecology and recreational attributes of Fort Pierce Inlet and the Indian River Lagoon. The 2020 Port Master Plan and its implementors should continue to work with federal, state, and local governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, to ensure the protection and restoration of the Indian River Lagoon and avoid future degradation of the Lagoon’s ecological health. Approaches to this end include: • Regulate discharges coming from port activities into the Indian River Lagoon to prevent air and water pollution in violation of any adopted federal, state, or local laws or regulations. Berthing, seawall, and drainage infrastructure will actively be pursued to eliminate or reduce and treat existing runoff. • Work with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties to preserve and restore seagrass beds and mitigate any permitted losses to existing seagrass beds caused by port activities to the maximum extent possible. • Work with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties, to protect endangered and threatened species from port activities in the Indian River Lagoon; including excessive freshwater, suspended materials, nutrient inflows, toxic substances and exotic invasive species. The Port of Fort Pierce will need to continue to coordinate with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the Florida Inland Navigation District to provide for the maintenance of the navigation channels, including location of spoil disposal sites and adequate channel depths. The Plan does not envision pursuit of channel and turning basin deepening. Development of berth pockets (East Wharf), wet berths, and the marine industries vessel slip will need follow USACE permitting norms as well as other federal, state, and local governmental requirements. The Plan also recommends consideration and advancement of sustainable site solutions, green building initiatives, and best development practices in the construction and operation of in-water and upland development initiatives. Major initiatives, such as renewal of Harbour Pointe Park, should consider integration of principals and possible certification within Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (Envision), the Blue Flag Program (for marinas and beaches), and/ or others. 5.5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CHARTING A NEW FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Page 244 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 121 Implementation of Plan projects should also take into account the growing body of guidance and best practices for seaport resiliency. Implementation of specific Master Plan projects should take into account ongoing work and results from St. Lucie County Community Resilience initiatives. The 2019 “Florida Seaports Resiliency Report” prepared by the Florida Seaport Transportation and Economic Development Council (FSTED) provides a number of best practices for consideration by the Port of Fort Pierce associated with Plan implementation. These include: • Assess future needs and identify potential impacts to the Port’s seaport businesses, marine industry, cargo activity, and infrastructure needs to meet 20 year plus sea level rise projections while maintaining operations. • Review and identify mitigation techniques and strategies available to the Port to mitigate those impacts such as raising existing structures, and/or natural and man-made buffers or structures. • Ensure the Port is added to county and state Critical Facilities Lists recognizing it as critical infrastructure to assure inclusion in vital communication and coordination efforts in prompt support during emergency response and recovery phases of disaster management. • Ensure stability of communications systems and flexibility of Port procedures and trained personnel to improve coordination in response and recovery lessening impacts from natural or man- made incidents or disasters. • Ensure the Port of Fort Pierce is prepared and protected by development of an All Hazards Emergency Plan including mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery coordination and actions to protect Port asset personnel and property to promote resiliency. CHARTING A NEW FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Page 245 of 420 122 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy CHARTING A NEW FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Development following the Master Plan will trigger additional demands on various departments, agencies, and entities responsible for fire and spills prevention, emergency management, and disaster response. A shortlist of groups important for consultation is offered below: • St. Lucie County and the City of Fort Pierce • St. Lucie County Fire District • St. Lucie County Sheriff’s Office • City of Fort Pierce Police Department • Florida Harbor Pilots • Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM) • Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) • Florida Department of Health – St. Lucie • U.S. Coast Guard • U.S. Customs and Border Protection • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Following Plan adoption, the County should formulate a new or engage an existing emergency management working group to review the Master Plan. This group should include individuals from the list above and other intergovernmental coordinating entities. Review outputs should include identification of related plans, policies, and procedures in need of update based on current Port conditions and featured Plan projects. This group should be encouraged to think through needed additional studies and design assessments necessary due to the specialized nature of Port, yacht MRO, and other operations. The working group should also envision areas of future investment in capital and operational infrastructure and approaches to funding these needs. Anticipated areas of focus for the Port and/ or this working group include: • PORT OPERATIONS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT/UPDATE. Develop/update the Port Operations and Emergency Management Plan to ensure public safety and maximize the Port’s ability to recover quickly from disruption and other impacts resultant from emergencies and disasters. This document should provide organizational direction, command and control, and Port operations for management of resources, protection of Port assets (personnel, property equipment, supplies etc.), and operating standards for security and other components of Port operations. Review and update sections of the Plan impacted by the Port Master Plan such as: • Command and control responsibilities; • Communications (internal and external): • Port and tenant responsibilities; • Specific duties and responsibilities upon setting of Port conditions; • General preparedness; • Security and Incident response; • Alert and notification (accidental and Intentional); • Port maintenance and damage assessment; • Vessel mooring during heavy weather; and, • Other sections. 5.5.5 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Page 246 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 123 CHARTING A NEW FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS • UPDATE APPLICABLE COUNTY RESPONSE PLANS. The County should review and seek update of the following: • County Comprehensive Emergency Response Plan (CEMP) Hazard Specific Annexes Emergency Operations Center (EOC) – Organizational Structure • Emergency Support Functions (ESF) – Liaison Position and Functions • Hurricane Response Plan • Hazardous Materials and CBRNE Response (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosives) • Hazardous Materials release/spill Response Plan • SECURITY STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES (SOPS). Address Port Security Department procedures to ensure safety for employees, visitors, and incoming/outgoing marine vessels. Address potential incidents, notification procedures, documentation, credentialing, and training. Consider including: • Incident Notification & Reporting process (internal & external): Public space to report activity or incidents (webpage, by phone, or other platform so chosen by Port). Include documents for reporting, investigation, coordination with applicable department/person, and outcome/follow-up reporting. • Incident response (accidental): Procedures for accident notification and response to on-site and water moorings accidents (OSHA, fire, HAZMAT, injuries). • Incident response (intentional): Coordinate with Fort Pierce Police and St. Lucie County Sheriff to develop SOP/ SOG response strategies/tactics to identify and respond to suspected intentional sabotage, criminal, or terrorism related damage to Port equipment, supplies, and/or cargo. Investigation, inspection of shipments boat and parts imports, bad actor/disgruntled persons, civil unrest, suspect apprehension, and others. • Surveillance (overt/covert): Prepare surveillance procedures for electronic (cameras) or physical (watch duty officer), include allowance for electronic backup (IT solutions). • Employee Credentialing: Site access credentials, crew badges, contractor badges, and support badges for entry and/or continued authorized presence on Port property or Port marine vehicles, boats, or ships. • Training: Develop core training for security personnel and incorporate into SOP/SOGs. Include DHS for Incident Command System (ICS) for coordination with government response with on-scene/Unified Command response. Ensure OSHA for certification requirements are met; CBRNE training is undertaken as appropriate. Page 247 of 420 124 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Implementation of projects under the Port Master Plan will require development of new stormwater management facilities to reduce rainwater runoff and improve overall water quality. The Port Study Area currently includes a large storm water retention pond at Harbour Pointe as well as several smaller facilities located at the northern end of N 2nd Street and at the entry to the Port. Estimates prepared by Inwood Consulting suggest implementation of the fully phased Master Plan would trigger a need for between 14 and 17 acres of new stormwater management facilities. This range could vary depending upon the consideration of projects implemented during Stage 2 and the overall impervious area of megayacht MRO and other facilities. Given the large area required and the intrinsic value of Port Study Area land, approaches to reduce impervious area and to locate new facilities off-site are encouraged. For Harbour Pointe, the recommended approach is to retain and expand the existing pond, better incorporating it into the overall park like setting of the area. For East Wharf and the Fort Pierce Megayacht MRO and Shipbuilding Area, the Plan has reserved +/- 6.35 acres of area south of the Harbour Point Access Road for possible use. Work by Inwood Consulting suggests the potential exists to pump storm water out of the Port Project Study Area to a proposed off-site pond for treatment. This would reduce the need to utilize highly valuable land within the Port to meet stormwater management estimates. The most logical location for off-site treatment are properties west of US Highway 1 along Avenue O. The Bell Family currently owns +/- 7.25 acres of property in this location and could utilize this area for their specific site stormwater management needs as well as that of others. As offered in Section 4.2.5, the hope is on-site and off-site stormwater management features can be connected to create a greenway linked to the proposed SUNTrail system and the Lincoln Park community. Megayacht MRO, shipbuilding, import/export trade enabling infrastructure, and other marine activity areas need to follow Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce potential stormwater pollution from operations. Source control and stormwater treatment BMP’s should focus on keeping stormwater from coming into contact with pollutants as well as involve installing of special devices to treat and manage runoff. Additional study will be required once more detailed planning and design is advanced to properly identify and size source control and stormwater control BMPs for indoor and outdoor maintenance areas and other operational zones. 5.5.6 STORMWATER FACILITIES CHARTING A NEW FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Page 248 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 125 Project champions are individuals and groups that advocate for and ultimately implement the Master Plan. They help maintain momentum and focus on moving initiatives through design, finance, permitting, construction, and operational stages. The overall responsibility for the management of the Port of Fort Pierce is vested by law with the St. Lucie County Commission, and as such, the Port should be managed in the public interest of all the citizens of St. Lucie County. In this role, the County’s Airport/ Seaport Department remains the key champion for continued study and ultimate delivery of the Port Master Plan. Following the County’s Comprehensive Plan, the Airport/ Seaport Department should continue to work collaboratively with the City of Fort Pierce, interested agencies, and private property owners in a way “consistent with the Port enabling laws and the constitutional and statutory protections for the rights of existing private property owners” (Objective 2A.1.1). The Port should ensure that the public interest and quality of life is protected when exercising public control of Port property. Continued collaboration throughout Plan implementation should occur with: • City of Fort Pierce; • Other affected local governments; • St. Lucie Transportation Planning Organization; • Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council; • Florida Seaport Transportation and Economic Development Council (FSTED); • The St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce; and • St. Lucie County Economic Development Council. The Port is an important engine for job creation and training. The Plan recommends continued FPRA and Indian River College coordination to find venues for training, skills development, and apprenticeship positions for industries currently and anticipated to be at the Port. Aside from the above, we recommend the established Port Advisory Committee take an active role alongside the County in Plan implementation. Tapping into the individual and communal expertise of this group could be useful to steward projects forward. The community is vested in the overall success of the Port and was involved in every step of Master Plan creation. We recommend continued collaboration with the public through Plan implementation. Approaches for consideration by the County for continued public collaboration include: • Regularly scheduled “State of the Airport/Seaport” updates; • Development of a website, social media, and other information platforms to continually keep the community up-to-date on planned events and overall advancement of the Master Plan; and, • Presentation of Port Master Plan and implementation effort at State and local conferences and civic meetings. 5.5.7 PROJECT CHAMPIONS CHARTING A NEW FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION & NEXT STEPS Page 249 of 420 126 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy Page 250 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 127 6 APPENDIX Page 251 of 420 128 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy APPENDIX GOAL 2.8. St. Lucie County shall continue to implement the Port Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce. • OBJECTIVE 2.8.1: Continue to implement the Port Master Plan consistent with Section 163.3178(2)(a-k), Florida Statutes. • Policy 2.8.1.1 - The Port Master Plan shall address the environmental conditions of the Indian River Lagoon and its interaction with existing and proposed port activities. • Policy 2.8.1.2 - The Port Master Plan shall address all aspects of port management and operation including safety and security of commercial, industrial, recreational, and environmental activities. • Policy 2.8.1.3 - Coordinate with the City of Fort Pierce to ensure consistency with the City’s Comprehensive Plan including the Port Sub Element and Coastal Management Element. • Policy 2.8.1.4 - Coordinate with the St. Lucie TPO and other appropriate local, state, and federal agencies to ensure adequate intermodal access and adequacy of public facilities and infrastructure. • Policy 2.8.1.5 - Develop funding mechanisms to implement the Port Master Plan such as a Tax Increment Financing District, Community Development Area, as well as exploring other funding mechanisms such as grants. • Policy 2.8.1.6 - Throughout the development of the Port Master Plan, ensure and encourage public participation of all affected parties through a formalized public participation process. • Policy 2.8.1.7 - Upon the completion of the Port Master Plan, make any appropriate amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. GOAL 2A.1. Responsibility for the Port - The overall responsibility for the management of the Port of Fort Pierce is vested by law with the St. Lucie County Commission and should be managed in the public interest of all the citizens of St. Lucie County. • OBJECTIVE 2A.1.1: St. Lucie County, working with the City of Fort Pierce, interested agencies and private property owners and consistent with the Port enabling laws and the constitutional and statutory protections for the rights of existing private property owners should ensure that the public interest and quality of life is protected when exercising public control of port property. • Policy 2A.1.1.1: St. Lucie County shall maintain the necessary oversight of the Port of Fort Pierce to ensure compliance with applicable state law governing deepwater ports and to guarantee the financial feasibility of any publicly funded infrastructure within the port. • Policy 2A.1.1.3: St. Lucie County shall cooperate with the City of Fort Pierce, other affected local governments, the St. Lucie Transportation Planning Organization (TPO), the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and the Florida Seaport Transportation and Economic Development Council (FSTED). ADOPTED ST. LUCIE COUNTYCOMPREHENSIVE PLAN HIGHLIGHTSAND REFERENCES TO THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE Page 252 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 129 APPENDIX GOAL 2A.2. Land Use Map for the Port of Fort Pierce - The Port of Fort Pierce shall establish a General Master Development Map for the Port that establishes a general Port Operations Area Boundary to provide elected officials, prospective investors, port facility developers, and the public a clear understanding of the physical location of the activities that could be accommodated in the Port of Fort Pierce. The General Master Development Map for the Port of Fort Pierce is not to be used alone but rather in conjunction with the other development policies found in this plan and the applicable Local Comprehensive Plans for St. Lucie County and the City of Fort Pierce. • OBJECTIVE 2A.2.1: The General Master Development Map for the Port of Fort Pierce shall be as depicted in Figure 2A-1. • Policy 2A.2.1.2: The Port of Fort Pierce shall support/ seek development activities such as yacht construction and maintenance, maritime industrial and commercial uses, marine research facilities, maritime academic and vocational uses, depending on market conditions. GOAL 2A.3: Port Activities - The quality of life for St. Lucie County residents will be strengthened and maintained by enhancing the economic viability, attractiveness, environmental quality, and social benefits associated with activities at the Port of Fort Pierce. • Policy 2A.3.1.2: Future public infrastructure improvements in the Port Planning Area will be made consistent with the Port Master Plan, to include the following projects: Harbor Pointe shoreline protection, refurbish and/or improve City marina bulkheads, Fisherman’s Wharf, improve Terminal Drive, improve Harbor Street, improve Port Avenue, construct a connecting road between 2nd Street to the Harbor Pointe property, construct additional bulkheads at the City Marina, construct pedestrian linkage along 2nd Street to downtown, construct pedestrian linkage to Old Dixie Highway/US 1, develop park infrastructure, develop engineering master stormwater management system for port property including off-site alternatives, and coordinate and install improvements along with corresponding infrastructure element. • OBJECTIVE 2A.3.3: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with federal, state and local governments, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall maintain, increase, and promote marine industry and related scientific and commercial activities at the Port of Fort Pierce so there is no net loss of marine industry. • Policy 2A.3.3.1: The Port of Fort Pierce, in cooperation with other governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall accommodate water-related marine activities and related service activities within the Port Planning Area. • Policy 2A.3.3.2: The Port of Fort Pierce, in cooperation with other governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall protect, maintain, and promote marine industry activity from encroachment or displacement by incompatible land uses. • OBJECTIVE 2A.3.5: The Port of Fort Pierce, in compliance with federal, state, and local laws, shall work with appropriate public safety entities to improve and maintain the port security management plan for the Port Operations Area. Page 253 of 420 130 / Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan & Reinvestment Strategy GOAL 2A.4. Environmental Protection - The Indian River Lagoon is recognized as the most biodiverse estuary in North America and as an important component of the local economic base and the overall quality of life in the community. As such, the integrity of the Indian River Lagoon shall be protected by correcting any detrimental effects caused by current operations and ensuring long-term development and improvement activities are consistent with all local, state and federal environmental laws and regulations. • OBJECTIVE 2A.4.1: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with federal, state, and local governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall ensure the protection and restoration of the Indian River Lagoon and avoid future degradation of the Lagoon’s ecological health due to port activities. • Policy 2A.4.1.1: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with federal, state and local governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, will regulate discharges coming from port activities into the Indian River Lagoon to prevent air and water pollution in violation of any adopted federal, state, or local laws or regulations. Berthing, seawall and drainage infrastructure will actively be pursued to eliminate or reduce and treat existing runoff. • Policy 2A.4.1.2: The Port of Fort Pierce shall work with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties to preserve and restore seagrass beds and mitigate any permitted losses to existing seagrass beds caused by port activities to the maximum extent possible. • Policy 2A.4.1.3: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties, shall protect endangered and threatened species from port activities in the Indian River Lagoon; including excessive freshwater, suspended materials, nutrient inflows, toxic substances and exotic invasive species. GOAL 2A.6. Landside Infrastructure - Landside and waterside infrastructure serving the Port of Fort Pierce should meet the Port’s future requirements in a manner consistent with the abilities of the appropriate agencies to provide the services needed to support approved port activities. • OBJECTIVE 2A.6.1: The Port of Fort Pierce shall work with other governmental agencies to improve linkages between the Port Facilities and intermodal transportation routes. • Policy 2A.6.1.1: The Port of Fort Pierce should enhance and expand activities that tie the Port to the Treasure Coast International Airport and coordinate with the St. Lucie TPO, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and the Florida East Coast (FEC) Railroad, Tri-rail and other possible rail services, in order to encourage multi-modal development, maximize intermodal transportation connections, and facilitate the continued economic growth, development, and vitality of St. Lucie County. APPENDIX Page 254 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins / 131 GOAL 2A.78. Navigation Channels - Navigation channels serving the port’s maritime and recreational activities shall meet existing and limited future needs as outlined in this plan. • OBJECTIVE 2A.7.1: The Port of Fort Pierce shall coordinate with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Inland Navigation District to provide for the maintenance of the navigation channels, including location of spoil disposal sites and adequate channel depths. • Policy 2A.7.1.1: The Port of Fort Pierce shall coordinate with the U.S. Coast Guard in the placement and maintenance of the navigational aids within the port area. GOAL 5.1. Balancing growth and coastal resources. All development proposed in the future land use element in the coastal area shall occur in a manner which protects, conserves, and enhances the natural resources of the coastal area and the environmental, social and economic benefits attributed to them and shall comply with the Florida Building Code, floodplain management standards set forth by FEMA, set forth in 44 C.F.R. part 60, and applicable regulations regarding construction seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line. • OBJECTIVE 5.1.1: Future Development in the Coastal Area. St. Lucie County shall continue to protect the natural resources of the coastal area from adverse impacts caused by future development through the implementation and strengthening of existing environmentally related laws and the assignment of appropriate Future Land Use designations. • Policy 5.1.1.7 - St. Lucie County land use and coastal planning area development decisions shall support the preservation of working waterfronts as defined in Section 342.07, F.S., to promote the enhancement of the waterfront/ coastal area with boat hauling and repairing businesses, commercial fishing facilities, coastal research organizations, marine industries, ports harbors, and other similar water- dependent uses, while taking into consideration potential strategies for adaptation and mitigation. APPENDIX Page 255 of 420 Page 256 of 420 RESOLUTION 2020-255 A RESOLUTION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA ACCEPTING THE UPDATED PORT OF FORT PIERCE MASTER PLAN WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, FL, based on the testimony and evidence, including but not limited to the staff analysis and presentation, has made the following determinations: 1. Florida Statutes, Section 163.3178 (2)(k), requires all recognized deepwater ports, as listed in s. 311.09(1), in the State of Florida prepare a master plan to be submitted to the appropriate local government for inclusion within that government's locally adopted comprehensive plan. Since the Port Planning Area covered by this Master Plan includes property within the incorporated and unincorporated area of the County, St. Lucie County is an appropriate local government. 2. On March 12, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the 2002 Port Master Plan, having published a notice of such hearing in the Port St. Lucie News and the Tribune. 3. In 2012, the Florida Department of Transportation District Four (District) encouraged the City of Fort Pierce and St. Lucie County to update the Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan in conformance with Florida Statutes Sections: 163.3177(6)(b), 163.3177(6)(g)8, 163.3178(2)(k), and 163.3178(3). 4. In September 2013, the Compilation of Data and Recommendations for the Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan was published for the Department of Transportation, District Four and formally accepted. 5. On December 15, 2015, the Board of County Commissioners, after a public hearing of which due notice was placed in the St. Lucie News Tribune, adopted Ordinance 15-017 containing amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Port Sub -element and Conservation Element relating to the Port of Fort Pierce. The Ordinance stated the Port of Ft. Pierce vision is to maximize economic benefit to the region while minimizing impact on the Indian River Lagoon and Atlantic Ocean. 6. In 2017, a consolidated master plan integrated 2015 and 2016 studies which analyzed the Port's Fisherman's Wharf area development. The 2017 plan did not' formally update Port Master Plan or the vision, goals, objectives or policies of the Port, however it was intended as a first step to provide a consolidated planning document for the County (Port) to use as a basis for a master plan update or an entirely new master plan. 7. On April 2, 2019, the Board of County Commissioners, after a public hearing of which due notice was placed in the St. Lucie News Tribune, adopted Ordinance 19- 005 containing Evaluation and Appraisal Review (EAR) Comprehensive Plan Amendments which included updates to the Port Sub -element 2a. 8. It is in the public interest to update the Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan. 9. On March 3, 2020, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution No. 20-036A accepting a Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Grant (50/50 Match) and authorized a corresponding consulting contract for the Port of Fort Pierce Master Vision Plan & Reinvestment Strategy. JOSEPH E. SMITH, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT SAINT LUCIE COUNTY FILE # 4783988 11/2412020 10:05:49 AMORBOOK4512PAGE'841 - 843 Doc Type: RESO RECORDING: $27.00 Resolution 2020-255 Page 1 Page 257 of 420 10. The County held several public input sessions, virtually due to the COVID-19, hosted public input surveys, engaged stakeholders including the public and the port area property owners, and convened the Port Advisory Committee (formerly known as the Harbor Advisory Committee) for the purpose of garnering public participation, prepare and review the Master Plan updates. 11.On August 11, 2020, the Board of County Commissioners received a project update presentation, highlighting public input capture, stakeholder coordination, conceptual plans and the project outlook. 12. On October 14, 2020, the Port Advisory Committee held a virtual meeting to review the Port Master Plan Update, Executive Summary. 13. The proposed Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan Update is consistent with the comprehensive plan of St. Lucie County. 14. On November 12, 2020, the Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing, duly noticed the St. Lucie News Tribune, to accept the 2020 Port Master Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida that: 2. 3. The Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan Draft is accepted as prepared by Moffatt & Nichol and Atkins, dated November 4, 2020 The Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan Draft will be transmitted to the City of Fort Pierce Commission for evaluation, recommendation and adoption, where applicable. The County should initiate the process to have this Master Plan incorporated into the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, consistent with the requirements of Section 163.3178(2)(k), Florida Statutes. This resolution shall be recorded in the Public Records of St. Lucie County. After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows: Cathy Townsend, Chair AYE Chris Dzadovsky, Vice -Chair AYE Sean Mitchell, Commissioner AYE Linda Bartz, Commissioner AYE Frannie Hutchinson, Commissioner AYE PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 12th day of November 2020. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY CHAIR Resolution 2020-255 Page 2 Page 258 of 420 ATTEST: DEPOTY CLE 00 C: S c" Z&vrr,, FLOR APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: Resolution 2020-255 Page 3 Page 259 of 420 St. Lucie County 2A-0 Adopted 4.2.2019 Comprehensive Plan Port Sub-element GOPs Port Sub-element 2A GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Originally adopted via Ordinance 15-017 The Port of Fort Pierce vision is to maximize economic benefit to the region while minimizing impact on the Indian River Lagoon and Atlantic Ocean. The vision for the Port of Fort Pierce encourages economic redevelopment of the port under well-defined land use and planning guidelines and streamlined port governance, with sufficient flexibility to merge market demand with marine industrial, marine commercial, marine research, and maritime academic/vocational uses. The vision includes environmentally sound best management practices, as well as transitional buffers between various uses. References to the “Port of Fort Pierce” in the Goals, Objectives, and Policies shall be interpreted to mean the County Port Authority working in coordination with the City of Fort Pierce to implement the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Port Sub-element. An Interlocal Agreement between the County and the City of Fort Pierce further defines the responsibilities of each entity. Goal 2A.1: Responsibility for the Port - The overall responsibility for the management of the Port of Fort Pierce is vested by law with the St. Lucie County Commission and should be managed in the public interest of all the citizens of St. Lucie County. Objective 2A.1.1: St. Lucie County, working with the City of Fort Pierce, interested agencies and private property owners and consistent with the Port enabling laws and the constitutional and statutory protections for the rights of existing private property owners should ensure that the public interest and quality of life is protected when exercising public control of port property. Policy 2A.1.1.1: St. Lucie County shall maintain the necessary oversight of the Port of Fort Pierce to ensure compliance with applicable state law governing deepwater ports and to guarantee the financial feasibility of any publicly funded infrastructure within the port. Policy 2A.1.1.2: St. Lucie County shall determine whether to initiate actions necessary to acquire public ownership of those areas in the port determined to be in the public interest. Policy 2A.1.1.3: St. Lucie County shall cooperate with the City of Fort Pierce, other affected local governments, the St. Lucie Transportation Planning Organization (TPO), the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Ccouncil and the Florida Seaport Transportation and Economic Development Council (FSTED). Policy 2A.1.1.4: St. Lucie County, operating through its existing and future legal authorities, shall initiate discussions with the City of Fort Pierce, with other public agencies, and with the private business sector to create the legal agreements, memoranda of understanding, and joint planning agreements necessary to implement the goals, objectives, and policies of the Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce. Page 260 of 420 St. Lucie County 2A-1 Adopted 4.2.2019 Comprehensive Plan Port Sub-element GOPs Goal 2A.2: Land Use Map for the Port of Fort Pierce - The Port of Fort Pierce shall establish a General Master Development Map for the Port that establishes a general Port Operations Area Bboundary to provide elected officials, prospective investors, port facility developers, and the public a clear understanding of the physical location of the activities that could be accommodated in the Port of Fort Pierce. The General Master Development Map for the Port of Fort Pierce is not to be used alone but rather in conjunction with the other development policies found in this plan and the applicable Local Comprehensive Plans for St. Lucie County and the City of Fort Pierce. Objective 2A.2.1: The General Master Development Map for the Port of Fort Pierce shall be as depicted in Figure 2A-1. The land use activities shown in this map shall comply with applicable State, County and Municipal laws including the applicable Local Comprehensive Plans for St. Lucie County and the City of Fort Pierce, adopted pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Policy 2A.2.1.1: The general land use classification is to be used to determine consistency between the General Master Development Map for the Port of Fort Pierce and the applicable local government comprehensive plan. The Port of Fort Pierce will coordinate with the City of Fort Pierce and St. Lucie County to determine whether the Port General Master Development Map is consistent with the City and the County Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use designations for the Port Operations. Policy 2A.2.1.2: The Port of Fort Pierce shall support/seek development activities such as yacht construction and maintenance, maritime industrial and commercial uses, marine research facilities, maritime academic and vocational uses, depending on market conditions. Policy 2A.2.1.3: By March 1st of each year, the Port of Fort Pierce Director shall submit to the County Administrator or their designee an updated five (5) year capital budget/improvement plan for the Port. To the extent that local funds are required to address a capital improvement need, the Board of County Commissioners shall be requested to provide the necessary funding to meet that need. Nothing in this policy shall be construed as to prohibit the Board of County Commissioners from requesting that the City of Fort Pierce, the Fort Pierce Community Redevelopment Agency, or any other appropriate agency or entity assist in funding one or more capital improvement project(s) within the Port Operations Area. Goal 2A.3: Port Activities - The quality of life for St. Lucie County residents will be strengthened and maintained by enhancing the economic viability, attractiveness, environmental quality, and social benefits associated with activities at the Port of Fort Pierce. Objective 2A.3.1: The Port of Fort Pierce should strengthen the economic development activities in the Port Operations Area by working with federal, state and local government, the private sector, and other interested parties to formulate an economic development plan that will foster new jobs that exceed the County’s average annual wage and enhance the community’s prosperity. Policy 2A.3.1.1: The Port of Fort Pierce shall support County and City efforts to purchase and lease property within the Port Operations Area that will support economic development of the Port through added revenue streams while allowing for increased opportunities for Federal and State grants. Page 261 of 420 St. Lucie County 2A-2 Adopted 4.2.2019 Comprehensive Plan Port Sub-element GOPs Policy 2A.3.1.2: Future public infrastructure improvements in the Port Planning Area will be made consistent with the Port Master Plan, to include the following projects: Harbor Pointe shoreline protection, refurbish and/or improve City marina bulkheads, Fisherman’s Wharf, improve Terminal Drive, improve Harbor Street, improve Port Avenue, construct a connecting road between 2nd Street to the Harbor Pointe property, construct additional bulkheads at the City Marina, construct pedestrian linkage along 2nd Street to downtown, construct pedestrian linkage to Old Dixie Highway/US 1, develop park infrastructure, develop engineering master stormwater management system for port property including offsite alternatives, and coordinate and install improvements along with corresponding infrastructure element. Policy 2A.3.1.3: St. Lucie County, working with federal, state and local governments, the private sector, and other interested parties, may provide incentives for jobs that exceed the County's average annual wage. St. Lucie County, the City of Fort Pierce, private property owners, and local economic development groups should establish a proactive campaign to market the Port of Fort Pierce. Policy 2A.3.1.4: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with federal, state and local governments, the private sector, and other interested parties, will encourage port industries to develop job training programs and use the local workforce to the fullest extent possible. Objective 2A.3.3: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with federal, state and local governments, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall maintain, increase, and promote marine industry and related scientific and commercial activities at the Port of Fort Pierce so there is no net loss of marine industry. Policy 2A.3.3.1: The Port of Fort Pierce, in cooperation with other governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall accommodate water-related marine activities and related service activities within the Port Planning Area. Policy 2A.3.3.2: The Port of Fort Pierce, in cooperation with other governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall protect, maintain, and promote marine industry activity from encroachment or displacement by incompatible land uses. Objective 2A.3.5: The Port of Fort Pierce, in compliance with federal, state, and local laws, shall work with appropriate public safety entities to improve and maintain the port security management plan for the Port Operations Area. Policy 2A.3.5.1: The Port of Ft. Pierce shall use its best efforts to ensure that port security will protect port users and citizens from crime or terrorism concerns and prevent any increase in criminal activity or enterprises. Policy 2A.3.5.2: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with federal, state and local governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall develop a public education program for the port security management plan to ensure that the owners, users, other responsible parties, and members of the public understand port security. Goal 2A.4: Environmental Protection - The Indian River Lagoon is recognized as the most biodiverse estuary in North America and as an important component of the local economic base Page 262 of 420 St. Lucie County 2A-3 Adopted 4.2.2019 Comprehensive Plan Port Sub-element GOPs and the overall quality of life in the community. As such, the integrity of the Indian River Lagoon shall be protected by correcting any detrimental effects caused by current operations and ensuring long-term development and improvement activities are consistent with all local, state and federal environmental laws and regulations. Objective 2A.4.1: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with federal, state, and local governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall ensure the protection and restoration of the Indian River Lagoon and avoid future degradation of the Lagoon's ecological health due to port activities. Policy 2A.4.1.1: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with federal, state and local governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, will regulate discharges coming from port activities into the Indian River Lagoon to prevent air and water pollution in violation of any adopted federal, state, or local laws or regulations. Berthing, seawall and drainage infrastructure will actively be pursued to eliminate or reduce and treat existing runoff. Policy 2A.4.1.2: The Port of Fort Pierce shall work with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties to preserve and restore seagrass beds and mitigate any permitted losses to existing seagrass beds caused by port activities to the maximum extent possible. Policy 2A.4.1.3: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties, shall protect endangered and threatened species from port activities in the Indian River Lagoon.; including excessive freshwater, suspended materials, nutrient inflows, toxic substances and exotic invasive species. Objective 2A.4.2: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties, shall protect and maintain the existing natural coastal areas and resources within the Port Planning Area. Policy 2A.4.23.13: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties, will develop a list of best management practices for environmental protection, including water quality and air quality, which have been used successfully by other Ports to ensure efficient and effective management of port operation activities while providing environmental protection. Policy 2A.4.23.24: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties, shall encourage the development of stormwater run-off control systems where possible to protect the natural coastline in the port and surrounding areas. Policy 2A.4.2.3: The Port of Fort Pierce will work with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties, to prevent detrimental effects on the Indian River Lagoon caused by port activities by supporting estuarine diversity and the protection, maintenance, and enhancement of the population of endangered and threatened species. Objective 2A.4.3: In keeping with the St. Lucie County Manatee Protection Plan (MPP), the Port of Fort Pierce will work with other governmental agencies and private interests to improve protection of the manatees and enforcement of existing related laws within the Port Operations Area. Page 263 of 420 St. Lucie County 2A-4 Adopted 4.2.2019 Comprehensive Plan Port Sub-element GOPs Policy 2A.4.3.1: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties, will adjust future and proposed dock design and construction to be consistent with manatee protection measures. Policy 2A.4.3.2: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties, will protect and/or mitigate seagrass beds and submerged aquatic vegetation that serve as manatee habitat in the Port Planning Area. Policy 2A.4.3.3: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, private interests, and other interested parties, will help to develop guidelines and establish an education program for crew procedures regarding observing and avoiding manatees when arriving and departing from docks in the Port Planning Area. Goal 2A.5: Emergency Management - The public will be protected in various emergency situations through cooperation between the Port of Fort Pierce and other governmental bodies to achieve maximum levels of safety and to restrict commerce of hazardous materials in the Port of Fort Pierce. Objective 2A.5.1: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with regional and state emergency management agencies, private interests, and other interested parties, shall identify new and existing procedures to ensure public safety in the event of a hurricane or other natural disaster. Policy 2A.5.1.1: The Port of Fort Pierce shall comply with the comprehensive emergency management plans of appropriate local general purpose government to ensure safe evacuation of the Port during times of a hurricane or other disasters. Policy 2A.5.1.2: The Port of Fort Pierce shall work with the City of Fort Pierce and St. Lucie County to ensure that all development activities within the Port Planning Area, including the Port Operations Area, are consistent with State of Florida’s policies on development within areas identified as Coastal High Hazard Areas. New residential uses within areas designated as Coastal High Hazard as defined in the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, shall be discouraged. Objective 2A.5.2: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, shall comply and cooperate to ensure that adequate procedures are in place to respond to a hazardous material spill. Policy 2A.5.2.1: The Port of Fort Pierce shall comply with the processes of federal, state, and local governments for safe and expedient cleanup of hazardous spills. Policy 2A.5.2.2: The Port of Fort Pierce shall cooperate with governmental bodies to provide complete and timely information to the public in the event of a hazardous materials accident. Goal 2A.6: Landside Infrastructure - Landside and waterside infrastructure serving the Port of Fort Pierce should meet the Port's future requirements in a manner consistent with the abilities of the appropriate agencies to provide the services needed to support approved port activities. Objective 2A.6.1: The Port of Fort Pierce shall work with other governmental agencies to improve linkages between the Port Facilities and intermodal transportation routes. Page 264 of 420 St. Lucie County 2A-5 Adopted 4.2.2019 Comprehensive Plan Port Sub-element GOPs Policy 2A.6.1.1: The Port of Fort Pierce should enhance and expand activities that tie the Port to the Treasure Coast International Airport and coordinate with the St. Lucie TPO, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and the Florida East Coast (FEC) Railroad, Tri-rail and other possible rail services, in order to encourage multimodal development, maximize intermodal transportation connections, and facilitate the continued economic growth, development, and vitality of St. Lucie County. Policy 2A.67.1.23: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, should facilitate expansion of public transit to and from the Port Planning Area. Goal 2A.78: Navigation Channels – Navigation channels serving the port’s maritime and recreational activities shall meet existing and limited future needs as outlined in this plan. Objective 2A.7.1: The Port of Fort Pierce shall coordinate with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Inland Navigation District to provide for the maintenance of the navigation channels, including location of spoil disposal sites and adequate channel depths. Policy 2A.7.1.1: The Port of Fort Pierce shall coordinate with the U.S. Coast Guard in the placement and maintenance of the navigational aids within the port area. Policy 2A.7.1.2: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall continue to operate, maintain and improve a permanent spoil disposal site for materials dredged from the Port Planning Area. Policy 2A.7.1.3: The Port of Fort Pierce, working with other governmental bodies, the private sector, and other interested parties, shall seek to improve the condition of Taylor Creek from the S-50 Spillway to the Intracoastal Waterway through maintenance dredging and water quality improvement projects. Page 265 of 420 St. Lucie County 2A-6 Adopted 4.2.2019 Comprehensive Plan Port Sub-element GOPs Page 266 of 420 Moffatt & Nichol / Atkins Global / 15 Port Planning Area (+/- 1,545 AC) Port Operations Area (+/- 360 AC) Project Study Area (+/- 255 AC) Fort Pierce Inlet Navigation Channel Intracoastal Waterway Fort Pierce City Marina Riverwalk & Veteran’s Memorial Park Causeway Marina Museum Pointe Park US Coast Guard Station Fisherman’s Wharf Derecktor Shipyard Harbour Pointe Park Taylor Creek Safe Harbor Harbortown Riverside Marina KEY FEATURES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 FORT PIERCE INLET 11 10 9 8 7 4 5 3 6 1 2 STUDY AREA THE PORT OF FORT PIERCE FORT PIERCE CAUSEWAY ISLAND FORT PIERCE INLET STATE PARK JIM ISLAND INDIAN RIVER FORT PIERCE INLET INNER RANGE JENNINGS COVE NORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN REGIONAL CONTEXT MAP FI N A L D R A F T Page 267 of 420 Page 268 of 420 Page 269 of 420 Page 270 of 420 Page 271 of 420 Page 272 of 420 Page 273 of 420 Page 274 of 420 Page 275 of 420 Page 276 of 420 Page 277 of 420 Page 278 of 420 Page 279 of 420 Page 280 of 420 Page 281 of 420 Page 282 of 420 Page 283 of 420 Page 284 of 420 Page 285 of 420    Public Outreach Session 2 – Port of Fort Pierce Master Plan Project Engagement VIEWS 2,918 PARTICIPANTS 200 RESPONSES 1,750 COMMENTS 288 SUBSCRIBERS 92 No data to display... 1. The following draft mission statement was prepared for the planning effort. "Align and enable public and private land holdings to foster creation of theTreasure Coast's premier center for yacht and related marine industrymaintenance, repair, and overhaul activity. Leverage success to propel sustainable growth of Fort Pierce's economy and quality of life." Does this mission statement accurately capture the future direction the Portshould take moving forward? (select one) 125 respondents 47% 25% 10% 10% 9% Agree Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Page 286 of 420 2. How can we improve on this draft mission statement? 5 Agree13 days ago “Premier” we don’t want a polluted waterway. Where is the concern for the environment, especially the Indian River lagoon? Where is the Concern for marine life? Where are the marine biologists findings? I appreciate the “economic opportunity” but what about concern for the community and the environment? Why are we selling out development in the port to multi million dollar yacht owners who don’t understand our community values? We’re not giving up our precious, and one of a kind port to foreign interests. I don’t want to see us regular folk squeezed out. There are some beautiful photos at our local history museum of the waterway 100 years ago. I want to keep it beautiful and invest in economic development for the next generation. 3 Agree13 days ago Make it clear that Derecktor and any other lessees must strictly adhere to the terms of the contract so that the citizens of St. Lucie County are not liable for debt service in the event of a delay in payment by Derecktor. 2 Agree10 days ago Include the fact that the port will have recreational areas for the public to use, i.e. bike paths, waterfront benches, sidewalks, fishing pier, free dinghy dock, emergency 911 phone kiosks, Etc.. 1 Agree13 days ago Include Cargo shipping 1 Agree13 days ago Add the word ‘manufacturing’ to the ones shown to include local manufacturers, who can launch at the port. 1 Agree13 days ago "Align and enable" are non-descript words interpreted by the reader. They hold no particular value and meaning. It's whatever anyone wants to say it means thereby it holds no accountability. The statement would be stronger to replace these words so readers can focus on words of value and strength. 1 Agree13 days ago Need to recognize ancillary businesses that would enhance the economy. 15 hours ago Add consideration for recreational uses... 16 hours ago A bit less focus on having it be solely for yatch and related marine industry maintenance. 21 hours ago A welcome center in the form of a yacht club or mariners' center with member and guest activities available to local and visiting yachtsmen should be included. A welcoming center with a yacht club atmosphere could make Fort Pierce a destination point for traveling yachts and, affordable memberships could attract area boating community members. My husband and I have traveled the ICW, both north and south, several times before relocating here. I remember wishing there was somewhere to meet like minded traveling and local boaters to learn about local boating information. yesterday delete "foster creation of" and substitute "create" 2 days ago Create relationships with local businesses to enhance our customer experience. 2 days ago Create relationships with local businesses to enhance our services. 3 days ago Include something alluring to the public like restaurant or art Page 287 of 420 4 days ago What do you mean by leverage? Foster by public beyond existing entities usually involves more government spending. Why not split the lease sections up and not have one company tie up proper progress but allow others to contribute allowing investment and free market, creating jobs and varied approach instead of government created cookie cutter institutional modeling. 4 days ago Emphasize and demonstrate that there will be adequate environmental protections to keep Fort Pierce's waterways as healthy and clean as possible. 5 days ago Add into this statement while maintaining and advancing the the well being of the water ways and ecosystem and taking into consideration community growth. 5 days ago Include cargo. It would help improve the economy and standard of living for the people of Fort Pierce and Saint Lucie county as a whole. 6 days ago Scrub it 6 days ago Development and infrastructure will make thinks move any port that does cargo never stop working.so cargo would really be a big deal for that port. Look right now never mind how small a port is today all that’s going on it’s working now just do some research. 6 days ago Include cargo. It would help improve the economy and standard of living for the people of Fort Pierce and Saint Lucie county as a whole.  6 days ago include recognition and conservation of the valuable natural and recreational resources in the Port area and the Indian River Lagoon as whole as part of sustainability. 6 days ago I was wondering if there had been any thought given to beyel bros and there equipment. That is not a very appealing sight as you are going over the bridge. Any thoughts on relocation. 7 days ago Do not lean toward partiality with the development of the port, and having it reflected in the mission statement. 7 days ago Hopefully there is a lot more to Ft. Pierce than just this marine industry development. How about spotlighting some other development activities especially in and around downtown? 7 days ago I would like to offer an observation, aside from the improvement of the draft mission statement. I am the commodore of the Fort Pierce Yacht Club. Our charter is to encourage safe boating in the FP/St Lucie community and to offer community-wide boating events. Thus we have been engaged for many years in reaching out to non-member boating residents and boating visitors alike. Our experience is that there is currently no effective way to gather together these entities; and we believe that this will be further complicated with the arrival of crews for MRO work. I see the suggestion for an affordable yacht club -- at least for now, there is an affordable yacht club south of Fisherman's Wharf but our time in this location may be limited to our lease renewal date of 2024. What the port, the community and our visitors would benefit from is a more public "welcome center"/meet and greet/gathering location -- which may or may not be co-located with the FPYC as an anchor tenant. An example of the value of this concept is that FPYC and FPCM co-host a yachties Thanksgiving -it is a sell out! FPYC attempts to open our doors on New Year's Eve as well and the event is well attended by visiting yachtsmen. The community/the port /area marine businesses would benefit, in our opinion, by the formalization of a "welcome center" concept by incorporating such a gathering space along side the MROs and between the major marinas. 7 days ago It needs to include language that emphasizes support for social equality for the residents of Fort Pierce. Page 288 of 420 8 days ago I agree with this caveate. I wouldn't want the marine activity to be mostly repair, maintenance overhaul. I would like to see a mix of recreational activities, in there as well. ie: tours, boat rental, fishing charters, yacht club, a boardwalk atmosphere, with restaurants and bike paths.. 8 days ago As mentioned, "St. Lucie County's" economy and quality of life. 8 days ago Set aside part of harbor point park for hotels, restaurants and related retail. 8 days ago The port spent many years as a failed shipping port, which is what any shipping port this far north of the Bahamas will be. Shipping produce and oranges is a dead issue, as dead as the orange growing industry in Florida. The crews and owners of the megayachts spend hundreds of thousands of dollars at the bars and restaurants between the port and downtown. It is very convenient for the crews, as they can walk to many of the restaurants. The owners fly their private planes into the airport, bringing more money to the county . MOre tradesmen from all over the county will be making more money servicing the yachts than they ever would if Ft. Pierce tried to convert back to a shipping port 9 days ago Anything constructed with local taxpayers money out be for the use of the local taxpayer, not for what it might “bring into” the area! We love our little town and are tired of people trying to turn it into something else. 9 days ago Mention something along the lines of, “while protecting the fragile and diverse environment which it is on and surrounded by.” 9 days ago Add recreational boating activities to mission, along with a meeting center for visiting yachtsmen, Olympuc saying develioment center, and public access areas. Remove marine industry repair and overhaul activity. Toxic industries will not improve our quality of life. 9 days ago I believe it needs to mention the entire county. Even though it is Fort Pierce located the jobs and economy will affect all of the county. 9 days ago The words “Industry” And “sustainable growth” usually does NOT equal “Quality of life” For the citizens, Our environment and our beloved community. The people using the mega yacht facilities don’t live here or care about us or the places And spaces we call home. Just tell it like it is and include the words “Toxic”, “Pollution” and “Out of Town Money” so everyone can calibrate their expectations. 10 days ago Add recreational boating activities to mission, along with a meeting center for visiting yachtsmen and public access areas 10 days ago by including public access recreational boating activities to the mix 10 days ago Add marine technical training center to provide an abundant resource of trained professionals. 10 days ago Remove the word "related". There are marine industries other than the yacht industry in our harbor, that long precede the arrival of the megayacht industry. Work boats other than yacht support have fed families for a couple generations or more here. They deserve a home, too. A strong stance on continuing to support our local ecosystem would be great too. Perhaps mention a desire of our community to build in balance with the lagoon we all depend upon. 10 days ago Add a meeting place for boaters Page 289 of 420 10 days ago Environmental concerns with marine industry maintenance, repair, and overhaul activity to close to the Indian River Lagoon. Economic concerns are important, but quality of life includes enironmental concerns also. 12 days ago Leave/allot space for a Yacht Club type facility 13 days ago Re visit the development of the site and adjoining sites. get it off the tax roll. There still are many issues to even get to the agreement now in place for development We have major dredging issues to yet get over.I believe if the currant person that has the lease with the county shows that he cannot perform we should not renew his contract and re bid it and sell the property and get this project moving I will be glad to assist if I can in any way Let's revisit the site and contract. 3. Five core tenets underpin the draft Mission Statement. How well do each of these tenets align with the draft Mission Statement and your perspective on what is important for the Port moving forward? Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 3a. Foster investment in the Port of Fort Pierce as Treasure Coast's center for yacht and related maritime maintenance, repair, and overhaul activity and other Blue Economy industries. 7% Strongly Disagree 6% Disagree 13% Neutral 46% Agree 27% Strongly Agree 3b. Expand coastal edges for working and recreational waterfront activities. 9% Strongly Disagree 5% Disagree 10% Neutral 37% Agree 38% Strongly Agree 3c. Organize upland areas for flexibility and adaptability for marine commerce and light-industry uses. Encourage infrastructure investment in measured increments to grow sustainably and responsibly. 7% Strongly Disagree 7% Disagree 5% Neutral 50% Agree 32% Strongly Agree 3d. Become a center of excellence for reef and coastal research, restoration, and resilience. 6% Strongly Disagree 4% Disagree 12% Neutral 23% Agree 54% Strongly Agree 3e. Ensure Port edges stabilize and bolster the viability of varied community development endeavors. 7% Strongly Disagree 7% Disagree 11% Neutral 47% Agree 28% Strongly Agree 92 respondents Show all 17 comments Page 290 of 420 4. On a scale of 1 to 5, how well does CONCEPT 1 address the following? 1. Not Very Well 2. Not Well 3. Unsure 4. Well 5. Very Well 4a. Foster investment in the Port of Fort Pierce as Treasure Coast's center for yacht and related maritime maintenance, repair, and overhaul activity and other Blue Economy industries. 7% 1. Not Very Well 2% 2. Not Well 7% 3. Unsure 46% 4. Well 39% 5. Very Well 4b. Expand coastal edges for working and recreational waterfront activities. 5% 1. Not Very Well 6% 2. Not Well 23% 3. Unsure 45% 4. Well 20% 5. Very Well 4c. Organize upland areas for flexibility and adaptability for marine commerce and light-industry uses. Encourage infrastructure investment in measured increments to grow sustainably and responsibly. 5% 1. Not Very Well 3% 2. Not Well 18% 3. Unsure 60% 4. Well 15% 5. Very Well 4d. Become a center of excellence for reef and coastal research, restoration, and resilience. 13% 1. Not Very Well 7% 2. Not Well 17% 3. Unsure 42% 4. Well 22% 5. Very Well 4e. Ensure Port edges stabilize and bolster the viability of varied community development endeavors. 5% 1. Not Very Well 7% 2. Not Well 27% 3. Unsure 43% 4. Well 18% 5. Very Well 64 respondents Page 291 of 420 5. On a scale of 1 to 5, how well does CONCEPT 2 address the following? 1. Not Very Well 2. Not Well 3. Unsure 4. Well 5. Very Well 5a. Foster investment in the Port of Fort Pierce as Treasure Coast's center for yacht and related maritime maintenance, repair, and overhaul activity and other Blue Economy industries. 4% 1. Not Very Well 6% 2. Not Well 13% 3. Unsure 65% 4. Well 13% 5. Very Well 5b. Expand coastal edges for working and recreational waterfront activities. 4% 1. Not Very Well 4% 2. Not Well 18% 3. Unsure 64% 4. Well 11% 5. Very Well 5c. Organize upland areas for flexibility and adaptability for marine commerce and light-industry uses. Encourage infrastructure investment in measured increments to grow sustainably and responsibly. 6% 1. Not Very Well 6% 2. Not Well 13% 3. Unsure 72% 4. Well 4% 5. Very Well 5d. Become a center of excellence for reef and coastal research, restoration, and resilience. 6% 1. Not Very Well 2% 2. Not Well 17% 3. Unsure 61% 4. Well 15% 5. Very Well 5e. Ensure Port edges stabilize and bolster the viability of varied community development endeavors. 6% 1. Not Very Well 4% 2. Not Well 24% 3. Unsure 59% 4. Well 7% 5. Very Well 56 respondents Page 292 of 420 6. On a scale of 1 to 5, how well does CONCEPT 3 address the following? 1. Not Very Well 2. Not Well 3. Unsure 4. Well 5. Very Well 6a. Foster investment in the Port of Fort Pierce as Treasure Coast's center for yacht and related maritime maintenance, repair, and overhaul activity and other Blue Economy industries. 9% 1. Not Very Well 9% 2. Not Well 13% 3. Unsure 53% 4. Well 16% 5. Very Well 6b. Expand coastal edges for working and recreational waterfront activities. 9% 1. Not Very Well 13% 2. Not Well 13% 3. Unsure 50% 4. Well 15% 5. Very Well 6c. Organize upland areas for flexibility and adaptability for marine commerce and light-industry uses. Encourage infrastructure investment in measured increments to grow sustainably and responsibly. 14% 1. Not Very Well 2% 2. Not Well 18% 3. Unsure 51% 4. Well 16% 5. Very Well 6d. Become a center of excellence for reef and coastal research, restoration, and resilience. 8% 1. Not Very Well 8% 2. Not Well 19% 3. Unsure 53% 4. Well 13% 5. Very Well 6e. Ensure Port edges stabilize and bolster the viability of varied community development endeavors. 8% 1. Not Very Well 10% 2. Not Well 24% 3. Unsure 42% 4. Well 16% 5. Very Well 55 respondents 7. While the Planning Team will make improvements and refinements to all concepts, which initial concept do you feel WILL PROVIDE THE MOST ECONOMICAND SOCIAL BENEFIT TO YOUR COMMUNITY? (select one) 69 respondents 29% 23% 20% 16% 6% 6% 4. Each have strengths and weaknesses 1. Concept 1 3. Concept 3 2. Concept 2 5. None of the concepts 6. Not sure Page 293 of 420 8. What big idea(s) would you like to see incorporated into the next iteration ofplanning concept development? 1 Agree10 days ago Make room for an affordable yacht club facility for all boaters with the club house available to St. Lucie County. 1 Agree13 days ago Domed or Round Buildings instead of square, higher flood proof seawalls, anything that accommodates for hurricanes. I favor the educational center being on the corner or edge of Taylor Creek area with the docks in front of the building free for use of mariners. Fort Pierce has a great sailing program for young adults. The port could provide additional areas for launch small vessels. 14 hours ago Utilize the towers as structural cores and service shafts for a high rise providing mixed space for boat/yacht owners (and/or) live aboards, crew, offices, with radiating views and suites plus a destination restaurant on top. Also, golf cart parking and rental might be something to consider... 16 hours ago n/a 16 hours ago More thought for commercial commerce within the Marine Terminal 2 days ago Protection of marine ecology and environment and the natural shoreline at Harborpointe Park. Creating public access to the working components would be beneficial--Let people see and learn about this industry and to see the vessels. That would be more interesting than another waterfront restaurant and touristy gift shop.. 3 days ago Why can't we have a water park on Harbor Pointe??? It will draw young families and it would be great to enjoy the Indian River from that vantage point. It would bring other entertainment industries to the area which would be good for tourism. 4 days ago Will there be a facility for the local yacht club???? 5 days ago Making this port one of the first to truly protect the clean waterways that the treasure coast is famous for. Also taking into consideration the infrastructure and community growth. 6 days ago incorporate ideas that are supportive of fishing, seafood and aquaculture industries, such as seafood processing and aquaculture demonstration areas. 7 days ago diverse use for the port and job opportunities for the residents here-now and future... 7 days ago Maritime Academy, educational buildings and crew housing for visiting yacht crews 7 days ago The lagoon’s natural health needs to be addressed and steps need to be taken to ensure the industrial marine business will not harm the lagoon. The people of Fort Pierce love the lagoon and don’t want to see it damaged by this Port and the activities. 8 days ago We have Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute and the Smithsonian which are both already, centers of excellence for reef and coastal restoration. Perhaps an exhibition hall/museum but I see no need for further expansion in these plans for that. I would prefer more emphasis on public access for enjoyment of the river's edge. bike paths, open air restaurants a gathering spot for boatmen and women like a yacht club. 8 days ago Hotels, condos, restaurants and associated retail. All these uses will create good ,well paying, clean jobs Page 294 of 420 8 days ago Beyel Brothers exists today and I have no desire to interfere with their work. Other than that, concept 3 suggest increased cargo and should be immediately scrapped as increased cargo WILL nullify any hope of attracting the large mega-yachts. Cargo failed before and would fail again. 9 days ago None! Keep it small and local! 9 days ago More recreational space and provisions for the community and LESS private interest concerns. Fort Pierce can grow and flourish if it is done with keeping what makes us great in mind....plenty of green spaces, a healthy Indian River Lagoon for the future and access to the ocean through the inlet. All the things that make it prime for development Are the things that need to be sustained and expanded upon or we will end up like many other commercialized ports in the state. 9 days ago I would like to see more clearly how any of these concepts support conservation and reef research. 9 days ago Waste to Energy and use the waste to supply power to the project. Keep that trash out of landfills from the project. NOT incineration but a closed system that beats EPA emissions standards and provides power source 24/7...clean and green! Lets talk trash solutions and power solutions. Overall the ideas look great. 9 days ago Include property between Dixie & US1 9 days ago I would like to see a yacht club location for all visiting crews to utilize and enhance their visit to the marina and port 10 days ago a recreational hub, including a meet and greet location for visiting yacht crews; love the water taxi idea 10 days ago Yacht or boat club 10 days ago Water taxi dock. Dinghy dock, railroad spur for industrial uses on the largo cargo ships, a central food/drink strip in the port between Derecktor and The Bell property, could ne where Ft. Pierce Yacht and ship is located or just north east of it. There needs to be a wider greenway through the port including wide sidewalks to accomodate bicycles, bicycle lanes aren't enough when large trucks are going to industrial areas in the port. There should also be a customs office in walking distance between the City Marina and Harbortown Marina. There should be a public floating dock similar to the city dock in West Palm Beach, FL, for transients on any size vessel, it could border the ICW at a parallel for about the length of the Harbour Point property, from the northeast corner going south. There should also be a helipad on top of the silos or one built somewhere in the vicinity of the superyachts. There should also be a lighted range beacon so yachts can spot Fort Pierce froms miles out at sea, it helps with navigation, every serious port in the world has range beacons, a perfect place for one would be on the top of the silos. Thanks! 13 days ago Some of the questions are vague making a response difficult. Many times I know exactly what you are asking of me to answer, other times it’s questionable or difficult to answer.What is the desired goal here, for the desired number of ships to be docked or repaired and such ? I like that local retailers can expand small businesses into this area, I live very close to this area and traffic is very much a concern. The train passes often, the bridge opens every 30 mins, the roads aren’t wide enough to accommodate additional traffic proposed in all three plans. Currently bumper to bumper back ups occur on the two lane roads. I don’t want an additional commute home. 13 days ago More is not always better with the limited amount of waterfront space keep business that have been providing jobs in Ft ,Pierce for decades show some loyalty help keep cargo shipping Page 295 of 420 13 days ago Define/Explain/Give an example of one such warehouse currently or in the future: "Marine industrial warehouses with commercial storefronts line North 2nd Street and surrounding parcels. " 13 days ago I would not overdue any expansion of "recreational waterfront activities" which would interfere with waterway passage by yachts; too much recreational activity clog up the works, increase tremendous out- of-towners to use our area activity when they don't pay taxes; too much activity can't be accommodated by parking access and locals would be competing for space with out-of-towners; Still to the plan but don't add lots of 'recreational waterfron activities". We have plenty of areas for that right now and boaters land on the inlet waters northern land areas for their own outings. Don't ruin the activity they now do with a "commercialized" on-slaught of junk. Keep it natural in this regard. 9. Did you participate in our previous Community Priorities Survey and/or PublicEngagement Session One? (select one) 67 respondents 55% 40% 4% 1. Yes 2. No 3. Not sure 10. What is your age? (select one) 69 respondents 39% 28% 19% 14% 0% 4. 56 to 69 5. 70 or older 2. 18 to 39 3. 40 to 55 1. 17 and under Show all 10 comments Page 296 of 420 11. How many people reside in your household? (select one) 68 respondents 63% 26% 10% 0% 1. 0 to 2 2. 3 to 4 3. 5 to 6 4. 7 or more 12. Where do you live? 69 respondents 29% 16% 14% 9% 7% 7% 6% 6% 6% 2. East Ft. Pierce and the Beaches (Zip Codes 34949, 34957) 4. South Ft. Pierce (Zip Code 34982) 5. St. Lucie Village and Northern St. Lucie County (Zip Codes 34946, 34951) 1. Downtown Ft. Pierce (Zip Code 34950) 3. West Ft. Pierce (Zip Codes 34947, 34981, and 34945) 6. Port St. Lucie (Zip Codes 34952, 34983, 34984, 34986, 34953, 34990, 34987, and 34972) 7. Indian River County 8. Martin County 9. Other not listed Page 297 of 420 Page 298 of 420 Page 299 of 420 Page 300 of 420 ITEM NO.(ID # 2021-51210) DATE:3/18/2021 AGENDA REQUEST TO:Planning and Zoning Commission PRESENTED BY:Benjamin Balcer, Planning & Development Services Assistant Director SUBMITTED BY:Planning & Development Services SUBJECT:A County initiated Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to Policy 1.1.8.1.b.to revise the minimum open space ratio to be consistent with percentages identified in the Land Development Code for all Planned Developments. BACKGROUND: The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element and the Land Development Code have inconsistent percentages for open space requirements. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.8.1.b. provides for a standard minimum open space ratio of 35 percent (35%) for all planned developments. Land Development Code Section 7.02.03.H.1. - Open Space Standards for Planned Non-residential Developments, states that projects containing less ten (10) acres must commit a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the gross land area as common open space. The proposed amendment will clarify the discrepancy between the County's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code, and allow for the regulations of open space standards for Planned Development Projects through the text of the Land Development Code. PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, recommend the Board of County Commissioners adopt a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to allow for specific open space requirements for Planned Developments to be regulated thought the Land Development Code. Page 301 of 420 COMMISSION ACTION: RESULT: MOVER:None SECONDER:None AYES:None NAYS:None EXCUSED:None Coordination/Signatures Date: March 11, 2021 Leslie Olson, Planning & Development Services Director Date: March 11, 2021 Daniel McIntyre, County Attorney Date: March 12, 2021 Mark Satterlee, Deputy County Administrator Page 302 of 420 Planning and Development Services Department Planning Division M E M O R A N D U M TO: Planning and Zoning Commission THROUGH: Leslie Olson, AICP, Director Benjamin Balcer AICP, Assistant Director FROM: Jodi Nentwick, Senior Planner DATE: March 8, 2021 SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment: Revise Open Space Requirements for Planned Developments within the Future Land Use Element A County initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment seeks to remove the minimum thirty-five percent (35%) open space ratio, in order, to delegate the minimum open space standards for Planned Developments to those within the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. BACKGROUND: The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element and the Land Development Code have inconsistent percentages for open space requirements. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.8.1.b. provides for a standard minimum open space ratio of thirty-five percent (35%) for all planned developments. Land Development Code Section 7.02.03.H.1. – Open Space Standards for Planned Non-Residential Developments, states that projects containing less then (10) acres must commit a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the gross land area as common open space. The proposed amendment will clarify the discrepancy between the County’s Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code, and allow for the regulation of open space standards for Planned Development Projects through the text of the Land Development Code. St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Excerpts Goal 1.1: Ensure the highest quality living environment possible, through a mixture of land uses reflecting the needs and desires of the local residents and how they want their community to develop. The goal shall be implemented by strictly enforced building, zoning and development codes based on objectives and policies that will enhance St. Lucie County's natural and man-made resources while minimizing any damage or threat of degradation to the health, safety and welfare of the county's citizens, native wildlife and environment, through incompatible land uses. Objective 1.1.8: Planned Developments. The County shall continue to support and encourage innovative land use development patterns including planned developments through the adequate provision in the County's Land Development Code including Planned Unit Developments (PUD), Planned Non-Residential Development (PNRD) and the Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD) zoning designations. Page 303 of 420 Project Name: Open Space Requirements 2 Policy 1.1.8.1 – The County shall continue to encourage the use of planned development techniques to conserve open space and environmentally sensitive areas, through the County's Land Development Code which shall include: a. Minimum acreage requirements necessary to support a viable mixed use community providing sufficient design flexibility to allow innovation and creativity in all forms of planned unit developments; b. Minimum open space ratios of 35 percent standards, consistent with the percentages identified in the Land Development Code for in all planned developments and including assurances that such areas will remain as open space to protect existing native habitat, to provide for minimum setback needs from adjacent uses, and to provide active and passive recreational as well as visual amenities; c. Provisions ensuring the long term preservation of remaining open spaces; d. A mixed use district combining residential, commercial, recreational, educational, and other income producing uses providing significant functional and physical integration among uses; e. Minimum standards for the provision of on-site shopping, job opportunities and internal trip capture; and, f. Specific requirements to provide efficient, centralized infrastructure (potable water and sanitary sewer). Include specific restrictions on the use of septic tanks, individual wells, and package plants in planned unit developments. g. Development consistent with the Towns, Villages and Countryside Element and the Transfer of Development Rights Program outlined under Objective 11.1.7. PUBLIC NOITCE An advertisement displayed in the local newspaper specifying the Planning & Zoning Commission’s Public Hearing, acting as the Local Planned Agency. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission, acting as the Local Planning Agency, recommend the Board of County Commissioners adopt a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to allow for specific open space requirements for Planned Developments to be regulated through the Land Development Code. Page 304 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 1 . ORDINANCE No. 2021-XXX FILE NO.: TCP-XXXXXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT POLICY 1.1.8.1.B. - OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; PROVIDNG FOR ADOPTION. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, based on the testimony and evidence, including but not limited to the staff report, has made the following determinations: 1. On January 9, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, adopted the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie as the governing body of St. Lucie County having jurisdiction over this application pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statues, is authorized and empowered to consider amendment to the adopted Comprehensive Plan of St. Lucie County. 3. On March 18, 2021, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the Local Planning Agency held a public hearing, of which due notice was published in the St. Lucie News Tribune, and recommended approval/denial of the proposed amendment to the Board of County Commissioners. 4. On _____________, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida held the first of two required public hearing, of which due notice was placed in the St. Lucie News Tribune and approved/denied transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity D ivision of Community Planning. 5. On _, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida held a public hearing, of which due notice was placed on the St. Page 305 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 2 . Lucie News Tribune, and approved the adoption of the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: A. ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENTS The Board of County Commissioners does hereby adopt the amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, attached herein as Exhibit A. B. CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Board of County Commissioners does hereby state its intention to amend the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.8.1.B. addressing open space requirements to be consistent with the open space requirements in the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. C. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS Special acts of the Florida Legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, County Ordinances and County Resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with the Ordinance are hereby superseded by this Ordinance to the extent of such conflict. D. SEVERABILITY If any portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this Ordinance. If this Ordinance or any provisions thereof shall be held to be inapplicable for any person, property, or circumstances, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstances. E. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE This Ordinance shall be applicable as stated in Paragraphs A and B. Page 306 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 3 . F. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of the Ordinance to the Bureau of Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida, 32304. G. FILING WITH THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY The Planning and Development Services Director shall send a certified copy of the Ordinance to the Department of Economic Opportunity, Community Planning and Development Programs, 107 East Madison Street, Caldwell Building, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-4120. H. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect thirty-one (31) days after the adoption. If the Ordinance is challenged within thirty (30) days after adoption, the Ordinance shall not be effective until the State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission respectively issues a final order finding the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(10), Florida Statues. Page 307 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 4 . I. ADOPTION. After motion and second, the vote on this Ordinance was as follows: Chris Dzadovsky, Chair XXX Sean Mitchell, Vice Chair XXX Linda Bartz, Commissioner XXX Frannie Hutchinson, Commissioner XXX Cathy Townsend, Commissioner XXX PASSED AND DULY ENACTED this day of _, 2021. Attest: Board of County Commissioners St. Lucie County, Florida By: Deputy Clerk Chair Approved As To Form and Correctness: By: County Attorney Page 308 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XXX Page 5 . Exhibit “A” FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Goal 1.1: Ensure the highest quality living environment possible, through a mixture of land uses reflecting the needs and desires of the local residents and how they want their community to develop. The goal shall be implemented by strictly enforced building, zoning and development codes based on objectives and policies that will enhance St. Lucie County's natural and man-made resources while minimizing any damage or threat of degradation to the health, safety and welfare of the county's citizens, native wildlife and environment, through incompatible land uses. Objective 1.1.8: Planned Developments. The County shall continue to support and encourage innovative land use development patterns including planned developments through the adequate provision in the County's Land Development Code including Planned Unit Developments (PUD), Planned Non-Residential Development (PNRD) and the Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD) zoning designations. Policy 1.1.8.1 – The County shall continue to encourage the use of planned development techniques to conserve open space and environmentally sensitive areas, through the County's Land Development Code which shall include: a. Minimum acreage requirements necessary to support a viable mixed use community providing sufficient design flexibility to allow innovation and creativity in all forms of planned unit developments; b. Minimum open space ratios of 35 percent standards, consistent with the percentages identified in the Land Development Code for in all planned developments and including assurances that such areas will remain as open space to protect existing native habitat, to provide for minimum setback needs from adjacent uses, and to provide active and passive recreational as well as visual amenities; c. Provisions ensuring the long term preservation of remaining open spaces; d. A mixed use district combining residential, commercial, recreational, educational, and other income producing uses providing significant functional and physical integration among uses; e. Minimum standards for the provision of on-site shopping, job opportunities and internal trip capture; and, f. Specific requirements to provide efficient, centralized infrastructure (potable water and sanitary sewer). Include specific restrictions on the use of septic tanks, individual wells, and package plants in planned unit developments. g. Development consistent with the Towns, Villages and Countryside Element and the Transfer of Development Rights Program outlined under Objective 11.1.7. Page 309 of 420 Page 310 of 420 Page 311 of 420 Page 312 of 420 Planning and Development Services Department Planning Division M E M O R A N D U M ITEM 9.D. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: MOTION TO APPROVE AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, ACTING AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVE TRANSMITTAL OF THE PROPOSED COMREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO STATE LAND AGENCY BECAUSE…. [CITE REASONS WHY - PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] MOTION TO DENY AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, ACTING AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DISAPPROVE TRANSMITTAL OF THE PROPOSED COMREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO STATE LAND AGENCY BECAUSE…. .[CITE REASONS WHY - PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] Page 313 of 420 ITEM NO.(ID # 2021-51211) DATE:3/18/2021 AGENDA REQUEST TO:Planning and Zoning Commission PRESENTED BY:Benjamin Balcer, Planning & Development Services Assistant Director SUBMITTED BY:Planning & Development Services SUBJECT:A County initiated Text Amendment to the Land Development Code to broaden staff's ability to provide Administrative approvals, waivers, and an opportunity to phase required improvements to encourage new business, and help existing businesses streamline the regulatory process. BACKGROUND: Staff has coordinated with the St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce and the Development Review Taskforce to identify and amend certain regulations that to act as a local economic stimulus to combat the effects of the COVID-19 appropriate emergency. Staff has taken this opportunity to identify areas within the Land Development Code to expand flexibility through Administrative approvals, waivers, and phase in improvements. These are anticipated to be permanent changes to the Land Development Code and will require Board approval by Ordinance. PREVIOUS ACTION: At the January 21, 2021 Planning and Zoning meeting, the Board held a public workshop and discussion on these LDC Text Amendments. The Board asked questions and provided input on the amendments and asked that it be brought back before them at a regularly scheduled meeting. The December 17, 2020 Planning and Zoning meeting was canceled due to lack of quorum. At the November 19, 2020 Planning and Zoning meeting, the Board held a public hearing and discussion on the various amendments. The Board voted unanimously to move forward as follows: 1. Postpone the item, with the exception of the Text Amendment to LDC Section 11.02.10. A-B (Preliminary and Final submittal requirements). 2. Continue the Text Amendment to LDC Section 11.02.10 A-B item to the December 17th Planning and Zoning meeting. Page 314 of 420 3. Schedule a public workshop to discuss Text Amendments to LDC Section 7.02.03, 7.03.03, 7.06.03, 7.09.04 E-F, 7.10.18, 7.10.23; and 11.02.02 B-C to be held on January 21, 2021 Planning and Zoning meeting. 4. Schedule Text Amendments to LDC Section Section 7.02.03, 7.03.03, 7.06.03, 7.09.04 E-F, 7.10.18, 7.10.23, and 11.02.02 B-C in 2021. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed Text Amendment to the Land Development Code be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval. COMMISSION ACTION: RESULT: MOVER:None SECONDER:None AYES:None NAYS:None EXCUSED:None Coordination/Signatures Date: March 11, 2021 Leslie Olson, Planning & Development Services Director Date: March 12, 2021 Daniel McIntyre, County Attorney Date: March 12, 2021 Mark Satterlee, Deputy County Administrator Page 315 of 420 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Regular Meeting November 19, 2020 Convened: 6:00 PM Adjourned: 7:49 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM by Chair Billy O'Dell. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. INVOCATION Invocation was led by Chairman O'Dell. 4. ROLL CALL Present Chair Billy O'Dell, Board Member Craig Mundt, Board Member Ed Lounds, Vice‐Chair James A. Taylor, Board Member Ryan Binner, Board Member Valerie Slack, Board Member Craig Bridgers Excused Board Member Lawrence "Beau" Slay, Board Member Bob Lowe 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS None. 6. DISCLOSURE(S) Mr. Mundt disclosed that he discussed with the County attorney that his wife is a member of the Conservation Alliance, an organization that submitted a virtual comment in reference to Item B. Page 316 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, November 19, 2020 6:00 PM 2 | P a g e 7. MINUTES A. St. Lucie County Planning & Zoning Commission minutes for the meeting of October 15, 2020 8. PUBLIC COMMENT No general comments. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Prima Vista Rezone ‐ Change in zoning from the CO (Commercial, Office) Zoning District to the CN (Commercial, Neighborhood) Zoning District. Presented by Kris McCrain, Associate Planner. In accordance with public notice requirements outlined in Section 11.00.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, public notice was advertised in the St. Lucie County News Tribune on November 6, 2020. Notices were mailed to 52 surrounding property owners within a 500‐foot radius of the subject property, and a sign was posted on the property. The Planning Department has not received any returned responses for the proposed rezone at this time. The proposed rezoning to the CN (Commercial, Neighborhood) Zoning District is consistent with the Commercial Future Land Use designation, as per the Comprehensive Plan Table 1‐3 ‐ Land Use Designation / Zoning Compatibility Chart. On March 27, 1990, the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 90‐ 79, granting a change in zoning from the RS‐4 (Residential, Single‐Family) Zoning District to the CO (Commercial, Office) Zoning District for the subject property. The proposed Rezone Petition will conform to the minimum lot standards in accordance to the Land Development Code Section 7.04.01 for the Commercial, Neighborhood Zoning District. The Commercial, Office and Commercial, Neighborhood are similar Zoning District differentiated by minimum density with similar uses. The Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District allows for limited trade and service activities to serve the surrounding neighborhoods. RESULT: APPROVE MOVER: Board Member Ed Lounds SECONDER: Board Member James A. Taylor AYES: Billy O'Dell, Craig Mundt, Ed Lounds, James A. Taylor, Ryan Binner, Valerie Slack, Craig Bridgers NAYS: None EXCUSED: None Page 317 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, November 19, 2020 6:00 PM 3 | P a g e These Uses include: • Beauty & Barber Services • Real Estate • Hobby & Toy Shops • Eating Places • Food Stores • And Medical Marijuana Dispensaries All future uses will be reviewed by the St. Lucie County Development Review Committee for compatibility with the surrounding uses. The above table provides examples of the Conditional Uses permissible within the Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District. These Uses include: • Small Postal & Shipping Stores • Child & Adult Day Cares • Car Washes • And Gas Stations All future uses will be reviewed by the St. Lucie County Development Review Committee for compatibility with the surrounding uses. STAFF RECCOMMENDATION: This petition conforms to the Standards of Review as set forth in St. Lucie County Land Development Code Section 11.06.03 and is consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives, and policies. Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. AGENT PRESENTATION: Presented by David Milledge with Colteur & Hearing. The property is a 1/2 acre. Proposing to rezone to commercial neighborhood, Future development remains in the conceptual state and will require a site plan approval. The trend is away from office use. Mr. Taylor asked about the zoning of the Port St. Lucie section on the other side of the canal. Kris stated it is an animal clinic located there. COMMENTS: No in‐person or virtual comments. Mr. Mundt asked that the applicant designates North on maps once plans are submitted. Mrs. Slack informed Ms. Pierre, Board Secretary that she would like to vote to count on this item. Ms. Pierre misunderstood the update to Executive Order 20‐69 and how it applies to rules for quorum, and virtual board attendees votes vs in‐person votes. Leslie Olson, Planning & Development Services Director, clarified that although virtual attendance does not count towards the establishment of a quorum, their votes count. Page 318 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, November 19, 2020 6:00 PM 4 | P a g e RESULT: Approved B. Text Amendment to the Land Development Code for Planning and Development Applications and Approval Process. Presented by Benjamin Balcer, Planning & Development Services Assistant Director. This DRAFT Ordinance designed to expand the ability for County Staff to provide Administrative level approvals, alternatives, and phased improvements. The overarching goal of the Ordinance is to encourage new and expanding businesses, as well as increase the palatability of Non‐residential and Mixed Use Planned Development, which leads to superior quality projects through the encouragement of flexibility and creative design options. The Ordinance before you, are a compilation of multiple text amendments, drafted to implement the recommendations of the Development Review Task Force and the St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce. The goal of the Task Force is to review the County’s regulatory environment and develop recommendations on how the Land Development Code may be amended to better assist the public, navigate the development approval process by reducing or eliminating certain requirements, creating more flexibility in some regulatory language and improve the efficiency of the County’s internal plan review process. While this is a County initiated Text Amendment, coordination to draft the proposed Ordinance began between the County staff and the Task Force in July of this year. During that time, the County and its residents were in the middle of the COVID‐19 pandemic, which placed emphasis on the need for the County to stimulate the local economic development through reducing impediments by creating additional flexibility through Administrative approvals, waivers, and phase in required improvements. Draft Ordinance Changes: • Better “Define Vehicular Use Area”; • Reduction in open space standards for Planned Non‐Residential and Planned Mixed Use Developments over 10 acres from 35% to 25%, • Provide relief of paved parking requirements for religious facilities and membership organizations, RESULT: APPROVE MOVER: Board Member Ed Lounds SECONDER: Board Member James A. Taylor AYES: Billy O'Dell, Craig Mundt, Ed Lounds, James A. Taylor, Ryan Binner, Valerie Slack, Craig Bridgers NAYS: None EXCUSED: None Page 319 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, November 19, 2020 6:00 PM 5 | P a g e • Identify locations and develop standards where Administrative relief from paved parking requirements can be requested, • Allow administrative relief from the wall height requirement between adjoining commercial and residential uses, • Require screening of waste receptacle(s) from all adjacent parcels, • Remove additional outdoor screening standards within the Airport Industrial Park, • Allow for administrative relief for perimeter landscaping on telecommunications towers, • Increase the minor site plan square footage and multi‐family unit threshold; and • Shift submittal requirements for Preliminary Planned Development from the preliminary stage to the Final Site Plan submittal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF: Ms. Olson, Mr. Balcer, and Mr. Kori Benton (Planning Assistant Manager) responded to various comments and questions posed by Mr. Binner, Mr. Sanders, Mr. O'Dell, Mr. Taylor, Ms. Slack and Mr. Lounds regarding: timeframe for the approval process, substantial changes to projects that have been brought to the BOOC between 50,000 to 100,000 square feet, input from outside shareholder, stormwater requirements, green space, fire lanes, parking, fences and screening around garbage facilities, Environmental Resources Departments comments, open space requirements, community engagement, economic impact, Development Review Taskforce, public notice requirements and providing informational resources available to the public, and so forth. Other discussion/ Board suggestions: • Let the community know what helpful tools are available and how they can access them (e.g. Land Use map) • Reach out to the public on social media • Broadcast P&Z on FB live PUBLIC COMMENTS: In‐person: None Virtual: Pat La Balbo 8390 Delphinium Court Port St. Lucie, FL 34952 “I do NOT want staff to be able to approve the requirements for open land use when building, lowered to 25%. Perhaps permitting requirements and exceptions for use should be increased, not degreased.” Adella Blacka 1034 SW Bellevue Ave Port St Lucie, FL 34953 Page 320 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, November 19, 2020 6:00 PM 6 | P a g e “I do NOT want open land requirements reduced to 25% and I do NOT want the process for approving exceptions to be weakened by delegating to staff.” Shari Anker, President Conservation Alliance of St. Lucie County “To St. Lucie County and its Planning Department: This email is to register the Conservation Alliance of St. Lucie County’s strong opposition to the proposed changes in policy in both how permitting decisions are made and the percentage of open land to be retained when building commences on open land. First, we wish to emphasize that in order for the County to truly be a representative democracy its citizens must be allowed their say when weighty decision such as approving exceptions to permitting are considered. If these decisions are delegated to staff, there would be either, no input from its citizens before the decisions are made as well as institutional barriers to holding anyone accountable for bad decisions once they are made. We insist that these decisions continue the heretofore normal process of public hearings and input prior to decisions, which also allow for elected representatives to be held accountable by their constituents for the decisions they make. Second, as the county’s population grows and with that the health of our environment becomes more at risk than it has ever been before the Alliance cannot overstate how critical it is to retain as much open land as possible. Open lands soak in water that would otherwise need to be directed into stormwater drains and on to our Lagoon, the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and other waters. The net effect will be to increase pollutants into our waterways. We are expecting more extreme weather events due to climate changes so this benefit is no small matter. Lessening the amount of open land could also lead to increased flooding as stormwater systems become overwhelmed due to the expected rise in precipitation. Open lands are available for soils and flora, hopefully native flora, to perform their ecological function of absorbing carbon. Open land gives more mental health benefits for human psyches. Along with St. Lucie County’s legacy of creating a fabulous park system the feel of “open space” provides a welcoming and homelike identity for residents as well as visitors. We ask that you take advantage of protecting this rare quality while you still can. Once gone, the changes are permanent.” Chair O’Dell asked: how many members are a part of this organization; and are all of the members in a general consensus to these comments? Irene‐Eva Ries 5209 Palmetto Avenue Fort Pierce, FL 34982 “As a long‐time resident of St. Lucie County, I hereby OPPOSE proposed changes for open land requirements reduced to 25% and oppose the process for approving exceptions to be weakened by delegating to staff. Reasons for opposing this change: Page 321 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, November 19, 2020 6:00 PM 7 | P a g e 1) Reducing open land requirements and reducing permit fees is a signal to speculators and certain industries to force high‐density construction on county residents, something we do not want. The majority of St. Lucie County residents chose the county because population density is considerably lower than counties to our south. BOCCs and residents have been misinformed, repeatedly, by "developers" that prolific construction is "good" for their communities, promising "increases in property values" as an incentive to allow fast‐tracked land destruction. They also dangle the prospects of "job creation" in an attempt to push cash residents to allow redundant construction. The promises are usually hollow, with residents and their government stuck with infrastructure costs, upgrades, maintenance, overuse, all caused by overcrowding. Construction jobs are a bait‐and‐switch, considering these are temporary, at best. 2) Lowering fees, delegating to a department which is already hard‐working and under‐staffed exacerbates problems and pressure on county governments and staff to approve higher volume at lower revenue and at lower standards for consideration. This is an opportunity for local and regional construction businesses to instead meet actual needs by transitioning into construction types and patterns which better meet the needs and standards residents have for open space and business. There should always be a premium place on businesses which renovate and repurpose structures OVER constant demands for wholesale land destruction for new construction. We have choices to make, standards to uphold, and expectations to meet as community. Let us use natural resources wisely, and challenges businesses to meet our needs instead of us meeting theirs.” “Good Afternoon Ms. Nentwick, Many thanks for your note this morning, it is truly appreciated. I do hope I have not misinterpreted the described intended changes, based on the announcement materials I read in deciding to respond. My chief concerns, to recap, are/is too much land disturbance fueled by industry‐driven construction and not need‐driven construction; lowered fees translating to lowered revenue for the county to utilize, and increased workloads on agile but often under‐staffed departments. If I have misunderstood or misinterpreted the proposed change, I apologize and would, instead, communicate the summary of concerns I recapped here. In looking out this morning over the St. Lucie River across from White City Park, I should also stress that my property is extremely flood‐prone, (it's a FEMA Severe Repetitive Loss of SRL property) and more construction very often exacerbates existing drainage conditions. It may be selfish on my part to include that, but many of us here have experienced flooding threats from drainage rather than river inundation (the deluge of early October coming to mind). Again, thank you for the reply and clarification.” Page 322 of 420 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, November 19, 2020 6:00 PM 8 | P a g e Robert Mathias 6450 SE South Marina Way Stuart, FL 34996 “Opposed to lowering of open space requirements. Water quality too important.” Further discussion between the Board and staff to determine the best way to move forward. RESULT: Table 1. Postponed the item, with the exception, of the Text Amendment to LDC 11.02.10 A‐B (preliminary and final submittal requirements) 2. Continue the Text Amendment to LDC 11.02.10 A‐B item to the December 17th P&Z meeting 3. Schedule a public workshop to discuss Text Amendment to LDC (7.02.03, 7.03.03, 7.06.03, 7.09.04 E‐F, 7.10.18, 7.10.23, 11.02.02 B‐C) on Jan 21st 4. Schedule Text Amendment to LDC (7.02.03, 7.03.03, 7.06.03, 7.09.04 E‐F, 7.10.18, 7.10.23, 11.02.02 B‐C) item in 2021 10. WORKSHOPS None. 11. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Mundt asked Ms. Olson to give an overview of how staff would notify the public of the upcoming workshop. Ms. Olson's response: • Reach out to stakeholder groups of date and time of event • social medical through County Communications Division • Newspaper ads • Flyers 12. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 7:49 PM. RESULT: TABLE MOVER: Vice‐chair James A. Taylor SECONDER: Board Member Craig Mundt AYES: Chair Billy O'Dell, Craig Mundt, Ed Lounds, James A. Taylor, Ryan Binner, Valerie Slack, Craig Bridgers NAYS: None EXCUSED: None Commented [JN1]: media Page 323 of 420 Page 324 of 420 Page 325 of 420 7.02.03. - Standards and Requirements. Standards and requirements for a Planned Non-Residential Development shall be as follows: A. Minimum Size. The minimum lot size requirements for a Planned Non-Residential Development shall be as follows: 1. Any Planned Non-Residential Development in a Residential Land Use classification shall comply with the minimum lot requirements in the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Zoning District. 2. Any Planned Non-Residential Development in a Commercial, Industrial or Mixed Use Land Use classification shall comply with the minimum lot requirements in the Commercial General (CG) Zoning District. 3. All Planned Non-Residential Development shall be under common ownership or control. B. Area, yard, Height and Other Dimensional Requirements. Area, yard, and height requirements shall be determined at the time of Preliminary and Final Development Plan approval, except that any structure on North or South Hutchinson Island that has not been occupied, constructed, or has not received a building permit, site plan or other County development approval as a permitted use prior to January 10, 1995, the requirements of Section 4.01.00, Hutchinson Island — Building Height Overlay Zone shall apply. C. Public Facilities. 1. The Planned Non-Residential Development shall be designed and located so there will be no net public cost for the provision of water lines, sewage lines, storm and surface drainage systems, and other utility systems in order to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to mitigate impact on the environment and natural resources, to ensure public safety and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 2. The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities is six (6) inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. 3. The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities, that are located on a dead-end water main is eight (8) inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. The maximum number of fire hydrants that may be located on any dead end water main is one (1). 4. Fire hydrants shall be provided at a minimum spacing of one (1) every six hundred (600) feet unless otherwise approved by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. D. Traffic and Pedestrian Circulation. 1. Every use permitted in a Planned Non-Residential Development shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, vehicular accessway, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. 2. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the Planned Non-Residential Development shall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic. 3. The proposed Planned Non-Residential Development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the project, or such surrounding collector or arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. Page 326 of 420 4. Streets in a Planned Non-Residential Development may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent County regulations and ordinances, however, variations to the standard minimum right-of-way widths may be considered as part of the Planned Non-Residential Development if it is shown to the satisfaction of the County Commission, that the requested variation is consistent with the intent of the County's roadway construction standards and necessary for the design of the Planned Unit Development. 5. Any pedestrian circulation system and its related walkways shall be insulated from the vehicular street system. 6. All roads and streets shall intersect at an approximate 5° angle of ninety (90) degrees unless circumstances acceptable to St. Lucie County indicate a need for a lesser angle of intersection. 7. Street jogs or centerline offsets between any local street or road with another local street or road, shall be no less than one hundred fifty (150) feet. 8. The intersection of any two (2) local roads or streets with a Major Collector or Arterial Roadway shall be separated by a minimum distance of six hundred sixty (660) feet, as measured from centerline to centerline. 9. Permanent dead-end streets shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) feet in length. Cul-de- sacs shall be provided at the end of all dead end roads or streets greater than five hundred one (501) feet in length. The length of a dead-end street shall be measured along the centerline of the street from its point of perpendicular intersection with the centerline of intersecting street to the end of the dead-end street or roadway. All cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum right-of-way diameter of one hundred (100) feet. If the dead end roadway is five hundred (500) feet or less in length, a "Y" or "T" type of turn around may be approved. If a dead end street is temporary in nature then a temporary cul-de-sac shall be required until the roadway is connected to another street or road. In the center of the cul-de-sac an unpaved island, surrounded by a curb, improved with grass and landscaping that will not interfere with sight distance, may be provided. Center islands shall have a diameter of not less than seventeen (17) feet, unless otherwise approved through the review of the Planned Unit Development. 10. All roadways, exclusive of interior parking and access aisles areas, regardless of ownership, shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any exterior building walls, except for security gate houses or similar security structures located in a private street or road right-of-way. 11. Access points on all collector or arterial streets serving a Planned Non-Residential Development shall be located and spaced so that traffic moving into and out of the arterial streets does not cause traffic congestion. E. Parking and Loading. 1. General Provisions. a. The number, type, and location of parking spaces shall be determined at the time of final Planned Nonresidential Development plan approval. The determination of the number of spaces required shall be based on Section 7.06.02 of this Code. The number of parking spaces required by this section may be reduced based on substantial competent evidence that the reduced number of spaces is adequate for the proposed use or that parking may be shared by proximate uses that operate at different times or on different days. Page 327 of 420 b. Reserved parking spaces may be provided, in lieu of paved spaces, subject to Section 7.06.02(B)(4) of this Code. 2. Off Street Parking and Loading. Off-street parking and loading requirements are governed by Sections 7.06.02 and 7.06.03 of this Code, and the following standards: a. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be designed to provide travelways between adjacent uses while discouraging through traffic. b. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be screened from adjacent roads and pedestrian walkways with hedges, dense planting, or changes in grades or walls. 3. On Street Parking. In Planned Non-Residential Developments, on street parking may be used so long as the road on which the on-street parking is proposed lies entirely within the limits of the defined Planned Nonresidential Development and such parking would not contravene any other provision of this Code or the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances. Where such on street parking and loading is used, it shall be consistent with the following design standards: a. The minimum size of a parking stall shall be as follows: parallel 8 feet × 23 feet angled 10 feet × 18 feet handicapped (parallel) 12 feet × 23 feet handicapped (angled) 12 feet × 18 feet b. Handicapped parking spaces shall be appropriately marked. c. Access for emergency fire vehicles shall be in accordance with NFPA standards. d. No more than fifteen (15) parking spaces shall be permitted in a continuous row without being interrupted by a minimum landscape area of three hundred sixty (360) square feet. F. Lighting. All lighting facilities shall be arranged in such a manner so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or properties. G. Landscaping and Natural Features. 1. Native trees and vegetation and other natural features shall be preserved to the extent practicable. 2. All sensitive environmental vegetation, trees and areas shall be preserved to the extent practicable. 3. Landscaping for off-street parking and loading areas shall meet the minimum requirements of Section 7.09.00. H. Open Space Standards. 1. For development projects of less than ten (10) acres, a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the gross area of land to be committed to a Planned Non-Residential Development must be for use as common open space, which may include parks, recreation areas, bicycle and pedestrian paths and facilities, marinas, swimming beaches, common open space, common landscaping or planting areas, or other areas of public purpose other than street or road rights-of-way, utility easements, excluding exclusive stormwater treatment facilities, and parking areas. For development projects of ten (10) acres or more, a minimum of thirty-five percent (35%) of the gross area of land to be committed to a Planned Non-Residential Development must be for use as common open space, which may include parks, recreation areas, bicycle and Page 328 of 420 pedestrian paths and facilities, marinas, swimming beaches, common open space, common landscaping or planting areas, or other areas of public purpose other than street or road rights-of-way, utility easements, excluding exclusive stormwater treatment facilities, and parking areas. At the request of the developer, and subject to the approval of the Board of County Commissioners, use of recreational facilities may be offered to the general public. A minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of any existing native upland habitat on the property, must be preserved in its natural condition as part of the required thirty-five percent (35%) common open space, For each acre of preserved native habitat above the required minimum fifteen percent (15%) that is preserved in its original state, credit shall be given at a rate of one hundred fifty percent (150%) per acre towards the remaining common open space requirement. All areas to be dedicated for common open space shall be identified as part of the Preliminary Development Plan for the Planned Nonresidential Development. Areas that are floodways, lakes, wetlands, and stormwater retention areas may be applied to satisfy the total common open space requirement subject to the requirement that fifteen percent (15%) of any existing native habitat on the property must be included as part of the required thirty-five percent (35%) common open space. As part of the Final Planned Nonresidential Development submission process, the developer or petitioner for the Planned Nonresidential Development shall provide for one (1) of the following: a. The advance dedication of all common open space to a public, or acceptable private, agency that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and any buildings, structures or improvements that have been placed on it. All such dedications or conveyances shall be completed prior to the issuance of any building permits, including land clearing, for any portion of the Planned Nonresidential Development; or, b. A phased conveyance of the land to be used for common open space to a public or acceptable private agency that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and any buildings, structures or improvements that have been placed on it. The schedule for the phased conveyance of any such lands to be used for common open space shall be a specific condition of approval for the Planned Nonresidential Development. 2. Areas provided or reserved to meet any other environmental preservation or protection requirement of this code or other lawful regulatory authority may be counted towards the overall common open space requirement, provided that the common open space meets the requirements of this Code. 3. All land dedicated for common open space shall be physically part of the Planned Non- Residential Development. I. Phasing. 1. A Planned Non-Residential Development may be developed in more than one (1) stage or phase. 2. If a Final Development Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners is to be developed in stages or phases, each successive phase shall be constructed and developed in a reasonably continuous fashion. The final stage or phase shall be completed within ten (10) years of the date of final development plan approval. Any extension of the above requirement is subject to approval by the Board of County Commissioners unless otherwise amended by the Board of County Commissioners. J. Signs. Page 329 of 420 1. Signs within any Planned Non-Residential Development located in a Residential or Agriculturally classified land use area shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 9 applicable to the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Zoning District; provided, however, that the Board of County Commissioners may condition approval of a Planned Non-Residential Development upon compliance with more stringent sign regulations in order to ensure design consistency throughout the proposed development, to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to ensure public safety and prevent public harm, and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 2. Signs within any Planned Non-Residential Development located in a commercially or industrially classified Land Use Area shall comply with the provisions of Chapter IX applicable in the Commercial General (CG), Zoning District; provided, however, that the Board of County Commissioners may condition approval of a Planned Non-Residential Development upon compliance with more stringent sign regulations in order to ensure design consistency throughout the proposed development, to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to ensure public safety and prevent public harm, and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. ( Ord. No. 2016-23 , Pt. A, 11-1-2016) Page 330 of 420 7.03.03. - Standards and Requirements. Standards and requirements for a Planned Mixed Use Development shall be as follows: A. Minimum Area. Minimum areas for land uses within Planned Mixed Use Developments shall be as specified in Table 7.2 below. Where more that one (1) land use is developed within a Planned Mixed Use Development, the minimum size of the development shall be the sum of the minimum areas for each land use as specified in Table 7-2 below. All land included as a part of the minimum requirement shall be contiguous and under common ownership or control. Residential land uses may not exceed forty percent (40%) of the Planned Mixed Use Development, except for the Mixed Use Development (MXD-Grande Beach, Medium Intensity) Mixed Use Activity Area as adopted in Figure 1-7K of Policy 1.1.7.3 of the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan that may include up to seventy (70) residential dwelling units. TABLE 7-2 MINIMUM AREA FOR PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS LAND USE MINIMUM AREA (GROSS ACRES) Residential 1 Institutional 1 Professional Service/Office 1 Commercial 1 Public Service/Utilities 1 Industrial 1 B. Residential Density and Non-Residential Floor Area Ratios. 1. The maximum permitted residential density of a Planned Mixed Use Development shall not exceed the residential density reflected in the Mixed Use Intensity Plans of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and referenced in Table 7-3 below. On North and South Hutchinson Island, the provisions of Section 3.01.03(AA), HIRD (Hutchinson Island Residential District) shall govern. 2. For non-residential uses, intensity shall be limited by Floor Area Ratios as specified in Table 7-3 below. Floor Area Ratio is defined as the total floor area of the building divided by the total area of the lot. The total floor area of the building shall include all floors of the building. TABLE 7-3 Page 331 of 420 DENSITY AND FLOOR AREA RATIOS FOR PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS Land Use Minimum DU/Acre Maximum DU/Acre Floor Area Ratio High Intensity Residential 5 15 Institutional 1.50 Professional Service/Office 1.50 Commercial 1.00 Public Services/ Utilities 0.50 Industrial 0.50 Medium Intensity Residential 5 9 Institutional 1.00 Professional Service/Office 1.00 Commercial 0.75 Public Services/ Utilities 0.25 Industrial 0.25 Low Intensity Page 332 of 420 Residential 0 5 Institutional 0.50 Professional Service/Office 0.50 Commercial 0.50 Public Service/ Utilities 0.25 Where mixed land uses are horizontally or vertically integrated on the same parcel, the developer shall demonstrate that the parcel contains sufficient land area for the proposed uses to have been approved individually, except for the Mixed Use Development (MXD-Grande Beach, Medium Intensity) Mixed Use Activity Area as adopted in Figure 1-7K of Policy 1.1.7.3 of the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. C. Dimensional Requirements. For Planned Mixed Use Developments, area, yard, height and other dimensional requirements of Chapters VII, VIII, IX, and XIII shall be determined at the time of final PMUD Plan approval except that for any structure on North or South Hutchinson Island that has not been occupied, constructed, or has not received a building permit, site plan or other County development approval as a permitted use prior to January 10, 1995 the requirements of Section 4.01.00, Hutchinson Island - Building Height Overlay Zone shall apply. Where area, yard, height and other dimensional requirements, as defined by the Planned Mixed Use Development are less restrictive than similar requirements of this Code, approval may be granted by the Board of County Commissioners upon demonstration that such less restrictive dimensional requirements are determined to be consistent with the intent and purpose of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, and the other standards and requirements of this Code. D. Public Facilities. 1. In order to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to mitigate impact on the environment and natural resources, to ensure public safety and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the Planned Mixed Use Development shall be designed and located so there will be no net public cost for the provision of water lines, sewage lines, storm and surface drainage systems, and other utility systems. 2. The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities is six (6) inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. 3. The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities, that are located on a dead-end water main is eight (8) inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. The maximum number of fire hydrants that may be located on any dead end water main is one (1). Page 333 of 420 4. Fire hydrants shall be provided at a minimum spacing of one (1) every six hundred (600) feet unless otherwise approved by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. E. Traffic and Pedestrian Circulation. 1. Roadway Classification - Roadways in Planned Mixed Use Developments shall be classified as arterial, collector, or local roads or streets. These classifications are presented in order of the intensity of their associated uses. Local streets are further subdivided into residential and general streets. While the uses permitted along these streets differ, neither of these classifications is intended to be used more intensively than the other. Further definitions of and standards for these classifications as used for Planned Mixed Use Developments are found below and in Table 7-4. Page 334 of 420 a. Arterial road - A route providing service which is relatively continuous and of relatively high traffic volume, long average trip length, high operating speed, and high mobility importance. b. Collector road - A route providing service which is of relatively moderate average traffic volume, moderately average trip length, and moderately average operating speed. Page 335 of 420 Such a route also collects and distributes traffic between local roads or arterial roads and serves as a linkage between land access and mobility needs. c. Local streets - Routes which primarily permit direct access to abutting property and connections to a higher order roadway. A local street provides service that is relatively low in volume and short average trip length or minimal through traffic movements. (1) Residential local street - a local street on which only residential, institutional, and neighborhood commercial uses are permitted (see Table 7-1). (2) General local street - a local street on which some residential uses are prohibited (see Table 7-1). 2. Roadway Design Criteria - The following criteria shall be used in planning for traffic circulation. a. Minimum dimensional requirements for roadways in Planned Mixed Use Developments shall be as specified in Table 7-4 below, unless otherwise approved. b. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed for smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Local streets within the Planned Mixed Use Development shall not be connected to streets outside the development where their use would encourage through traffic. c. The proposed Planned Mixed Use Development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the project, or such surrounding collector or arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. d. The proposed Planned Mixed Use Development shall be designed so that arterial and collector roads which enter or leave the project, shall connect to roads of the same or higher classification. e. As specified in Table 7-1 above, all non-residential land uses, other than neighborhood commercial, within the Planned Mixed Use Development shall have direct access to a general local or collector street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on any street. f. As specified in Table 7-1 above, all residential land uses within the Planned Mixed Use Development shall have direct access to a residential local, a general local or a collector street without creating traffic hazards on any street. g. Access points on all collector or arterial streets serving a Planned Mixed Use Development shall be located and spaced so that traffic moving into and out of the arterial streets does not cause traffic congestion. h. Access to arterial streets shall be permitted only for uses with projected average daily trips (ADTs) of four thousand five hundred (4,500) or greater (see Table 7-1). i. Streets in a Planned Mixed Use Development may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with Chapter XIII, Building Regulations and Public Works Construction, of the St. Lucie County Land Development Regulations. Variations to the standard minimum right-of- way widths may be considered as part of the Planned Mixed Use Development if it is shown to the satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners, that the requested variation is consistent with the intent of the County's roadway construction standards and necessary for the design of the Planned Mixed Use Development. j. All roads and streets shall intersect at an approximate 5° angle of ninety (90) degrees unless circumstances acceptable to St. Lucie County indicate a need for a lesser angle of intersection. Page 336 of 420 k. Street jogs or centerline offsets between any local street or road with another local street or road, shall be no less than one hundred fifty (150) feet. l. The intersection of any two (2) local roads or streets with a Major Collector or Arterial Roadway shall be separated by a minimum distance of six hundred sixty (660) feet, as measured from centerline to centerline. m. Permanent dead-end streets shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) feet in length. Cul- de-sacs shall be provided at the end of all dead end roads or streets greater than five hundred one (501) feet in length. The length of a dead-end street shall be measured along the centerline of the street from its point of perpendicular intersection with the centerline of intersecting street to the end of the dead-end street or roadway. All cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum right-of-way diameter of one hundred (100) feet. If the dead end roadway is five hundred (500) feet or less in length, a "Y" or "T" type of turn around may be approved. If a dead end street is temporary in nature then a temporary cul-de-sac shall be required until the roadway is connected to another street or road. In the center of the cul-de-sac an unpaved island, surrounded by a curb, improved with grass and landscaping that will not interfere with sight distance, may be provided. Center islands shall have a diameter of not less than seventeen (17) feet, unless otherwise approved through the review of the Planned Unit Development. n. All roadways, exclusive of interior parking and access aisles areas, regardless of ownership, shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any exterior building walls, except for security gate houses or similar security structures located in a private street or road right-of-way. o. Any pedestrian circulation system and its related walkways shall be separated from the vehicular street system. This may include, when deemed to be necessary by the Board of County Commissioners, pedestrian underpasses or overpasses in the vicinity of playgrounds and other recreation areas, local shopping areas, and other neighborhood uses which generate a considerable amount of pedestrian traffic. TABLE 7-4 MIXED USE AREA ROADWAY STANDARDS Roadway Classification/ Avg. Daily Trips Min. Row Width Max Number of Lanes Min Lane Width Sidewalks Bicycle Lanes Rural/Urban ARTERIAL ROADS 0—13,400 100' 2 12' 6' both sides 6' both sides 13,401—29,500 160' 4 12' 6' both sides 6' both sides 29,501 and up 200' 6 12' 6' both sides 6' both sides Page 337 of 420 COLLECTOR ROADS 0—10,300 80' 2 12' 6' both sides 5' both sides 10,301—22,800 100' 4 12' 6' both sides 5' both sides LOCAL GENERAL STREETS 0—7,500 60' 2 12' 6' both sides Optional LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREETS 0—4,500 40'* 2 10'/12' 6' both sides Optional 4,500—7,500 50'* 2 10'/12' 6' both sides Optional * Requires curb and gutter for stormwater design unless otherwise approved by County Engineer. Sources: United States Department of Transportation, ABCD's of Bikeways Florida Department of Transportation, Florida's Level of Service Standards and Guidelines, Manual for Planning, April 1992 St. Lucie County, Community Development Department F. Parking and Loading. 1. General Provisions. a. The number, type, and location of parking spaces shall be determined at the time of final Planned Mixed Use Development plan approval. The determination of the number of spaces required shall be based on Section 7.06.01(F) of this Code. The number of parking spaces required by this section may be reduced based on substantial competent evidence that the reduced number of spaces is adequate for the proposed use or that parking may be shared by proximate uses that operate at different times or on different days. b. Reserved parking spaces may be provided, in lieu of paved spaces, subject to Section 7.06.02(C) of this Code. 2. Off Street Parking and Loading. Off-street parking and loading requirements are governed by Sections 7.06.02 and 7.06.03 of this Code, and the following standards: a. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be designed to provide travelways between adjacent uses while discouraging through traffic. b. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be screened from adjacent roads and pedestrian walkways with hedges, dense planting, or changes in grades or walls. 3. On Street Parking. In Planned Mixed Use Developments, on street parking may be used so long as the road on which the on-street parking is proposed lies entirely within the limits of the defined Planned Mixed Use Development and such parking would not contravene any other provision of this Code or the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances. Where such on street parking and loading is used, it shall be consistent with the following design standards: Page 338 of 420 a. The minimum size of a parking stall shall be as follows: parallel 8 feet × 23 feet angled 10 feet × 18 feet handicapped (parallel) 12 feet × 23 feet handicapped (angled) 12 feet × 18 feet b. Handicapped parking spaces shall be appropriately marked. c. Access for emergency fire vehicles shall be in accordance with NFPA standards. d. No more than fifteen (15) parking spaces shall be permitted in a continuous row without being interrupted by a minimum landscape area of three hundred sixty (360) square feet. G. Lighting. All lighting facilities shall be arranged in such a manner so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or properties. A detailed lighting plan shall be required for arterial and collector streets and any Planned Mixed Use Development located on North or South Hutchinson Island. H. Buffers and Landscaping Between Uses Within The Planned Mixed Use Development. Mixed Use Developments shall provide buffers and landscaping as required by Section 7.09.00, unless otherwise approved. I. Planned Mixed Use Development Perimeter Buffers. Buffers at the perimeter of the PMUD shall be as specified in Table 7-5 below. TABLE 7-5 REQUIRED PERIMETER BUFFERS Planned Mixed Use Development Buffer Required of PMUD Property Buffer Required of Adjacent Property RESIDENTIAL 30 Feet To be determined by the zoning of the adjacent property COMMMERCIAL/ INSTITUTIONAL 30 Feet INDUSTRIAL/UTILILITY 40 Feet J. Setbacks from Agricultural Land. Planned Mixed Use Developments adjacent to land used for agricultural purposes, or designated for agricultural use on the Future Land Use Map of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan shall provide setbacks from the agricultural land sufficient to protect the function and operation of those uses from the encroachment of Urban activities or uses. K. Open Space and Landscaping Standards. Page 339 of 420 1. A minimum of thirty-five percent (35%) of the gross area of the land to be committed to a Planned Mixed Use Development must be for use as common open space, which may include, parks, recreation areas, bicycle and pedestrian paths and facilities, marinas, swimming beaches, common open space, common landscaping or planting areas, or other areas of public purpose other than street, road or drainage rights-of-way, above ground utilities, excluding exclusive stormwater treatment facilities, and parking areas. A minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of any existing native upland habitat on the property, must be preserved in its natural condition as part of the required thirty-five percent (35%) common open space, For each acre of preserved native habitat above the required minimum fifteen percent (15%) that is preserved in its original state, credit shall be given at a rate of one hundred fifty percent (150%) per acre towards the remaining common open space requirement. 2. All areas to be dedicated for common open space shall be identified as part of the Preliminary Development Plan for the Planned Mixed Use Development. Areas that are floodways, lakes, wetlands, and stormwater retention areas may be applied to satisfy the total common open space, subject to the requirement that fifteen percent (15%) of any existing native habitat on the property must be included as part of the required thirty-five percent (35%) common open space. As part of the Final Planned Mixed Use Development submission process, the developer or petitioner for the Planned Mixed Use Development shall provide for one (1) of the following: a. The advance dedication of all common open space to a public, or acceptable private, agency that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and any buildings, structures or improvements that have been placed on it. All such dedications or conveyances shall be completed prior to the issuance of any building permits, including land clearing, for any portion of the Planned Mixed Use Development; or, b. A phased conveyance of the land to be used for common open space to a public or acceptable private agency that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and any buildings, structures or improvements that have been placed on it. The schedule for the phased conveyance of any such lands to be used for common open space shall be a specific condition of approval for the Planned Unit Development. No such parcel of land dedicated or conveyed for common open space shall be less than one (1) contiguous acre, and all such areas shall be physically part of the Planned Mixed Use Development. 3. Areas provided or reserved to meet any other environmental preservation or protection requirement of this code or other lawful regulatory authority may be counted towards the overall common open space requirement, provided that the common open space meets the requirements of this Code. 4. Landscaping for off-street parking and loading areas shall, as a minimum, meet the requirements of 7.09.00. 5. For Planned Mixed Use Developments to be constructed in stages or phases, the net open space provided in an individual stage or phase may vary from the required thirty-five percent (35%) if the approved plan for the Planned Mixed Use Development provides for the required open space, and the County is assured that the open space will be provided. L. Phasing. 1. A Planned Mixed Use Development may be developed in more than one (1) stage or phase. 2. If a Final Development Site Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners is to be developed in stages or phases, each successive phase shall be constructed and developed in a reasonably continuous fashion. No more than two (2) years shall elapse between the completion of any stage or phase, and the final stage or phase shall be completed within ten Page 340 of 420 (10) years of the date of Final Development Site Plan approval. Extensions of the above requirements are subject to approval by the Board of County Commissioners. Unless otherwise amended by the Board of County Commissioners through the Final Development Site Plan review process, the following sequence of development must be adhered to: a. One (1) or more major recreation facilities and other major amenities, planned to serve the entire development, shall be completed or adequate security posted prior to the issuance of building or mobile home permits of more than forty percent (40%), or other percentage as determined by the Board to be appropriately based on circumstances that include the size of the project and the proposed phasing schedule of the total number of authorized dwelling units. Recreation facilities or facilities and other amenities planned to serve one (1) phase of a multi-phased development shall be completed or appropriate security posted prior to issuance of building or mobile home permits or the recording of any final plat within that phase. b. For Planned Mixed Use Developments to be constructed in stages or phases, the net density of an individual stage or phase may vary from the approved Final Site Plan subject to the requirements in Section 11.02.05. 3. Notwithstanding the above, if the land is within a Development of Regional Impact and governed by a development order, the development order shall govern the timing of the phases or stages of development activity. M. Signs. 1. Signs within any Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD), less than or equal to one hundred (100) acres in overall area, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter IX of this Code, provided however, that the Board of County Commissioners may condition approval of a Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD), upon compliance with more stringent sign regulations in order to ensure design consistency throughout the proposed development, to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to ensure public safety and prevent public harm, and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 2. Signs within any Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD), greater than one hundred (100) acres in overall area may submit a general signage plan for the Planned Mixed Use Development, as part of the Final Planned Unit Development Plan submissions. The general signage plan shall be based on the general dimension and size standards applicable to other similarly designated property; provided, however, that the Board of County Commissioners may condition approval of a Planned Mixed Use Development upon compliance with more stringent sign regulations in order to ensure design consistency throughout the proposed development, to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to ensure public safety and prevent public harm, and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 3. All other requirements and standards relating to signs within the Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD) zoning designation shall be consistent with Chapter IX of this Code. Page 341 of 420 7.06.00. - OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING[1] Footnotes: --- (1) --- Editor's note— Ord. No. 2013-44, § A , adopted December 17, 2013, repealed the former 7.06.00, §§ 7.06.01—7.06.04, and enacted a new 7.06.00 as set out herein. The former 7.06.000 pertained to similar subject matter and derived from Ord. No. 12-003, adopted May 15, 2012. 7.06.01. - Purpose and Applicability. A. Purpose. The requirements of this Section are intended to insure that every building, structure, or use erected or instituted, except for bona-fide agricultural uses and buildings, shall be provided with adequate off-street parking facilities for the use of occupants, employees, visitors, and patrons, and that certain uses be provided with adequate off-street loading facilities, thereby reducing congestion to the public streets and promoting the safety and welfare of the public. B. Applicability. 1. Existing Uses/Changes in Use. Buildings or structures existing as of the effective date of this Code may be modernized, altered, or repaired without providing additional off-street parking or loading facilities, provided there is no change of use. Effective March 1, 1999, any change in use to an existing building or structure, will require that all on-site parking and loading facilities be brought into full compliance with the provisions of this Code, except as otherwise provided here in Section 7.06.00, as it may be amended from time to time. For the purposes of this Section, "change in use" shall mean any change in use or activity that requires the issuance of a new certificate of zoning compliance. Parking surface, landscaping, changes in use and zoning compliance are subject to the provisions of this Code as amended by Ordinance No. 12-003. 2. Expansion of Structure. Expansion in floor area, volume, capacity, or space occupied of any structure existing on or before July 1, 1984, shall require compliance with all off-street parking and loading requirements contained in this Code to be met for both new construction and existing structures, except as otherwise provided below and in Section 7.06.03. a. Exceptions: 1. If the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Services Director that the site has provided adequate off-street parking for its use prior to expansion, only the new construction shall be required to comply with the requirements of this Section. 2. New construction not required to comply with off-street parking requirements include: Entry areas or vestibules, unoccupied storage areas provided these do not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the gross floor area, and areas which do not add to the carrying capacity of a structure. 3. Nonconforming Uses. When repairs and alterations are to be made in a building occupied by a nonconforming use, all off-street parking requirements contained in this Code shall be met if the cost of repairs and alterations exceed fifty percent (50%) of the assessed value of the building and structures. a. Exceptions: 1. If the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Services Director that the site has provided adequate off-street parking for its use prior Page 342 of 420 to expansion, only the new construction shall be required to comply with the requirements of this Section. 2. New construction not required to comply with off-street parking requirements include: Entry areas or vestibules, unoccupied storage areas provided these do not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the gross floor area, and areas which do not add to the carrying capacity of a structure. ( Ord. No. 2013-44, § A, 12-17-13 ) 7.06.02. - Performance Standards. A. Number of Off-Street Parking and Loading Spaces Required. 1. Off-Street Parking per Use. The most recently published edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation is adopted by reference as the use-specific requirements for off- street parking. The most recently published standards will be available for the public on the County website and at the Planning and Development Services Department. a. For any uses not listed in the latest edition of Parking Generation, the Planning and Development Services Director will make a determination for required parking based on the most similar use, professionally recognized standards, a survey of similar counties' regulations, and/or analysis by a traffic engineer based on use-specific parking requirements. The determination will be made in writing referencing the standards or analysis used to make the determination. 2. Handicapped Parking. Handicapped parking shall be provided as required the Standard Building Code and F.S. §§ 316.1955 and 316.1956. The number of designated handicapped parking spaces shall be determined as follows: HANDICAPPED PARKING REQUIREMENTS Total Number of Required Parking Spaces Number of Required Handicapped Parking Spaces* 0—15 1 16—50 2 51—75 3 76—100 4 101—150 5 151—200 6 201—300 7 Page 343 of 420 301—400 8 401—500 9 501—1,000 2% of total required parking 1,000+ minimum of 20, plus 1 additional space for each 100 parking spaces over 1,000 *The number of required handicapped parking spaces may be included within the gross number of required parking spaces. 3. Off-Street Loading. Off-street loading space shall be provided and maintained as follows: a. For all commercial and industrial development: Size of Building Number of Spaces 0 to 24,999 square feet 1 25,000 to 59,999 square feet 2 60,000 to 119,999 square feet 3 120,000 to 199,999 square feet 4 200,000 to 299,999 square feet 5 For each additional ninety thousand (90,000) square feet over three hundred thousand (300,000) square feet or major fraction thereof, one (1) space. b. For each auditorium, convention hall, exhibition hall, museum, motel, hotel, office building, sports arena, stadium, hospital, sanitarium, welfare institution, or similar use having an aggregate floor area of: Size of Building Number of Spaces Over 10,000 square feet, but less than 40,000 square feet 1 Page 344 of 420 For each added 60,000 square feet or major fraction thereof 1 c. For any use not specifically mentioned, the requirements for off-street loading facilities to which the unmentioned use is most similar shall apply. Such determination shall be made by the Planning and Development Services Director. B. Design Standards. Page 345 of 420 1. Stall Size. a. The minimum size of a parking stall shall be as follows: Standard: Ten (10) feet × eighteen (18) feet Page 346 of 420 Angled: Ten (10) feet × eighteen (18) feet Parallel: Eight (8) feet × twenty-three (23) feet Handicapped: Twelve (12) feet × eighteen (18) feet (F.S. § 316.1955(3)) Two (2) feet of the required eighteen (18) feet provides for the overhang of the front of the vehicle beyond the front wheels, and therefore may be in grass instead of pavement if that two (2) feet is not included in any other required landscape or separation area, and if wheel stops or curbs are used to prevent vehicular encroachment into the two-foot area. 2. Aisle Width, Ingress and Egress. a. Dimensional requirements of access aisles: MINIMUM PARKING ACCESS AISLE DIMENSIONS Angle of Parking (degrees) Aisle Width (feet) Two-Way One-Way 90 26 26 75 22 22 60 20 20 45 20 16 30 20 16 0 (parallel) 20 16 b. No paving or vehicular use area, other than shared entrance or exit drives located in accordance with Section 7.05.06, shall be installed within ten (10) feet of adjoining property or within fifteen (15) feet of any road right-of-way frontage, and said unpaved area shall be landscaped in accordance with Section 7.09.00. c. All off-street parking areas shall be designed so that motor vehicles can exit without backing into a street, except for single-family, two-family and three-family dwellings. 3. Material. a. Requirement for All Weather Surface for All Required Off-Street Parking and Vehicular Use Areas. Subject to the Administrative Relief provisions below, all required off-street parking Page 347 of 420 spaces, access aisles, vehicular use and off-street loading areas constructed, expanded or altered after March 1, 1999, shall be constructed with an all weather surface meeting the requirements of the St. Lucie County Public Works Department. The permitted impervious surface materials shall be concrete, asphalt, brick pavers, stamped concrete, or paving block. Pervious paving systems and grass paving systems shall be permitted when the paving systems and materials are approved by the County Engineer. Stabilized unpaved parking areas may be permitted at locations outside the urban service area upon approval of the County Engineer, so long as parking spaces, accessways, and driveways are clearly marked and the vehicular/pedestrian circulation system is safe. The County Engineer shall publish a list of commercially available paving systems of pervious and impervious paving materials that are approved for use. The County Engineer shall approve design material and specifications on each site. 4. ADA Accessibility. Page 348 of 420 a. All handicapped parking spaces shall be appropriately outlined with blue painted lines, minimum four (4) inches wide, and shall be posted with the international symbol of accessibility. Handicapped accessible spaces shall meet the minimum design, signing and marking standards of the Florida Department of Transportation, and shall generally be located as depicted in Figure 7-24. b. All handicapped spaces shall have an adjacent access aisle sixty (60) inches wide. Two (2) handicapped parking spaces may share a common access aisle. c. All spaces shall have accessible thereto a curb-ramp or curb-cut, to allow access to the building served and shall be located so that users would not be compelled to wheel behind parked vehicles. Page 349 of 420 d. Parallel spaces that are being used for handicapped purposes, shall be located at the beginning or end of a block. Curbs adjacent to such spaces shall be of a height which will not interfere with the opening and closing of motor vehicle doors. 5. Landscaping. a. No more than ten (10) parking spaces shall be permitted in a continuous row without being interrupted by a minimum landscape area of one hundred eighty (180) square feet for single row parking or three hundred sixty (360) square feet for double row parking (see Figure 7-23). b. Parking or display of any motor vehicle, recreational vehicle, boat, trailer or other vehicle in any required landscape area is prohibited. 6. Wayfinding. a. All directional and regulatory signage and all pavement markings shall be in accordance with the "USDOT Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices." b. Off-street parking facilities, including access drives and aisles for all multi-family, including two-family and three-family dwellings, and non-residential uses and shall be marked either by painted lines, precast curbs, or in a similar fashion to indicate parking spaces. 7. Vehicle Queuing. a. Vehicle Queuing Area spaces required, per use: DRIVE UP/THRU VEHICLE STORAGE REQUIREMENTS Facility/Use Minimum Vehicle Queuing Area Drive-in Bank 6 spaces per service window Restaurant Drive-Thru 8 spaces per service window Car Wash (Automatic) 3 spaces on approach to wash line Car Wash (Self Service) 1 space on approach to wash line Gatehouse/Entry Control Structure (manned or unmanned) 4 spaces (see Section 7.10.15) All other commercial drive-thru uses 3 spaces per service position b. Adequate vehicle storage areas shall be provided at all drive-through and access regulating facilities. A vehicle queuing area is to be a minimum of ten (10) feet by twenty-five (25) feet. Minimum vertical clearance of fourteen (14) feet shall be required unless provisions for an unrestricted pass area are made. c. No vehicle queuing area may block any other parking stall, access aisle, driveway or off-street parking facility. Page 350 of 420 d. All vehicle queuing measurements shall commence from the drive-through service window. In the case where two (2) service windows are provided, the measurement shall commence at the second window from which services are provided. 8. Vehicle Storage. Off-street parking facilities supplied by the owner or operator shall not be used by commercial vehicles owned, operated, or used in the business of such owner or operator during his/her regular hours of business, or by vehicles offered for sale unless additional parking spaces are made for these vehicles. 9. Off-Street Loading Space Design. FIGURE 7-25 Page 351 of 420 a. Location. Loading spaces shall be located on the same lot as the building or structure to which they are accessory. No loading shall be located in a required front yard. b. Designation and Use. Each required loading space shall be designated as such and shall be used only for loading purposes. Page 352 of 420 c. Design and Maintenance. 1. Off-street loading spaces shall be an area at grade level at least twelve (12) × fifty-five (55) feet long with a fourteen-foot vertical clearance. 2. For buildings less than fourteen thousand nine hundred ninety-nine (14,999) square feet, the required delivery space may have a minimum dimension of twelve (12) feet × thirty (30) feet with a fourteen-foot vertical clearance. 3. Each loading space shall be accessible from the interior of the building it serves without crossing or entering any other required off-street loading space, off-street parking space, or circulation area. Such loading spaces shall be arranged for convenient and safe ingress and egress by motor truck and trailer. 4. All loading spaces shall be paved. ( Ord. No. 2013-44, § A, 12-17-13 ) 7.06.03. - Relief. A. Administrative Relief. The Planning and Development Services Director may grant administrative relief from the parking standards or the required amount of all weather surface for off-street parking and vehicle use areas including vehicular use areas (Small Business < six thousand (6,000) square feet) based upon a written request for such administrative relief and an analysis submitted by the applicant. The analysis must demonstrate that the numeric amount of required parking or the required amount of all weather surface for off-street parking and vehicle use areas is unnecessary or not practical to construct because of conditions that are unique and peculiar to the site or conditions that would result in unnecessary hardship for the owner, lessee or occupant as opposed to mere inconvenience and that the conditions are created by the regulations of this Code and not by the actions of the property owner or applicant, environmental considerations, such as micrositing for large trees, for mass transit considerations, such as providing transit stops in an area to be served with mass transit services, and superior design considerations determined by exceeding the minimum requirements of the Land Development Code. The County Engineer shall review the request for administrative relief from the all-weather parking surface requirements and provide the Planning and Development Services Director with a written recommendation based on the standards set out in this section. The County Engineer may require the applicant to provide an engineered solution to any adverse impacts that the request for a waiver may create. If it is determined by the Planning and Development Services Director that it is not possible to meet the numeric or parking stall width parking requirements of this Code due to the size or configuration of the existing parcel, the Planning and Development Services Director may grant administrative relief, subject to determining consistency with the Standards of Review set out in Section 10.01.02, to the parking stall width or the number of parking spaces to be required. Any such administrative relief shall be specific to the parcel or property in question and shall be the minimum necessary to address the particular problem. Any such administrative relief shall include specific findings of fact and shall be issued in a manner and form that is acceptable to the County Attorney. Any determination for relief that is made by the Planning and Development Services Director shall be recorded in the public records of St. Lucie County. B. Context Sensitive Parking. Within downtowns and walkable scale communities having mixed uses, on-street parking, and which may also include parking structures or common parking lots, on-site parking for each building may not be required when all of the required parking for the land use proposed in the building is provided within six hundred (600) feet of the building, and is not dedicated to another land use, except that shared parking agreements permitted by Section 7.06.02(B)(3) shall be allowed. Parking requirements for mixed use downtown and walkable scale mixed use areas shall be computed for general retail land uses using the shopping center parking standard. All other land uses and retail land uses that have parking rates that exceed the shopping center rate shall have their parking requirements computed at their parking generation rates and added to the basic retail shopping center requirement. Reductions may be made for land uses that enter into shared parking Page 353 of 420 agreements. The total parking requirement must be met by a combination of on-street parking, off-site common parking facilities, shared parking (if used), and on-site parking. All on-street parking proposed within a public right-of-way shall require the issuance of a right-of-way use permit by the County Engineer prior to any land clearing or construction of pavement marking, whichever comes first. This section does not authorize on-street parking on public right-of-way but only gives credits for the reduction of on-site parking when properly approved on-street parking is available, as provided herein. The total parking requirement derived as required herein may be reduced by up to twenty percent (20%) by the Planning and Development Services Director for equivalent facilities that provide for transit access and sheltered transit stops, park-and-ride facilities, remote parking with motorized access between parking and destination, and/or bicycle parking and movements, or other modes of ground transportation not included herein (e.g., golf cart paths). C. Combined Properties Used for Off-Street Parking. Two (2) or more owners or operators of buildings, structures, or uses requiring off-street parking facilities may make collective provisions for such facilities, provided that the total of such parking spaces when combined or used together shall not be less than the sum of the requirements computed separately, and provided further that no off-site parking space shall be greater than six hundred (600) feet from any building it is designated to serve. D. Shared Off-Street Parking Areas. Where, in the determination of the Planning and Development Services Director, the required number of spaces is excessive for a specific building or facility requiring site plan approval, and the owner of the property has submitted to the Planning and Development Services Director an enforceable restriction of use, the Planning and Development Services Director may authorize the use of shared parking facilities effectively reducing the number of required parking spaces. In no case however, shall less than seventy-five percent (75%) of the required off-street parking spaces be provided. The purpose of this provision is to allow land uses located within a unified development or on adjacent lots to enter into agreements to use parking spaces at different times of day which correspond to their different hours of operation. When shared parking agreements are applied in approving site plans, no land uses can be permitted that exceed the maximum allowable parking demand at the prescribed times of day, even though the initial land uses may eventually be proposed to be changed. Additional parking may have to be constructed in order to accommodate new land uses proposed to be operating simultaneously during the day or evening. Restrictions on the parking generation rates and times of use of the affected buildings shall be required to be recorded in the public records of St. Lucie County, Florida, and may be in the form of restrictions contained within a development order or development agreement, or in such other form as the Planning and Development Services Director may prescribe with the approval of the County Attorney required for all standard and special forms used for this purpose. E. Provision of Reserved Parking Areas. Where, in the determination of the Planning and Development Services Director, the required number of required parking and loading spaces is excessive for a specific use, the owner or agent may substitute landscaping in lieu of paving provided said areas are reserved for future parking and loading should the County find those spaces are needed, and further provided: a. The owner of the land upon which such parking is being reserved shall enter into a written agreement with St. Lucie County which shall include a schematic portrayal as to how the required parking and loading areas can be provided with the County, to be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court, with enforcement running to the County ensuring that the reserved parking and loading area shall never be encroached upon, used, sold, leased, or conveyed, for any purpose except in conjunction with the building or use which the reserved parking area serves so long as the off-street parking facilities are required. b. The owner of the land upon which such reserved parking and loading area is located agrees to bear the expense of recording the agreement which shall bind his/her heirs, successors, or assigns. c. The written agreement shall be voided by the County if the reserved parking and loading area is converted to usable parking area or if the reserved parking area is no longer required. d. No handicapped parking areas may be included within a reserved parking area. Page 354 of 420 ( Ord. No. 2013-44, § A, 12-17-13 ) Page 355 of 420 7.09.04. - General Landscaping Requirements. The following landscaping requirements shall apply to all non-residential and residential uses including but not limited to mobile home parks/subdivisions, single-family subdivisions, recreational vehicle parks, and multi-family residential uses, including all requested changes in use, except for those use interior to a common shopping center or similar multi-user building or structure provided that no additional parking is required, regardless of whether a site plan is required or not. All development activity shall comply with the provisions of the Vegetation Protection and Preservation of the Land Development Code (6.00.00), which shall supersede the provisions of this Section to the extent of conflict. Existing vegetation may be used towards landscape requirements, in accordance with the guidelines set up in Section 7.09.03(E)(8), with approval from the Environmental Resources Director. For the purposes of native tree protection, dimensional criteria in this section shall be reasonably flexible, with approval from the Environmental Resources Director. A. Required Landscaping Adjacent to Public or Private Street or Road Rights-of-Way. The area between any building, off-street parking area or other vehicular use area abutting a street or road right-of-way, shall be designed and landscaped as follows: 1. A strip of land at least fifteen (15) feet in depth shall be located abutting street or road right-of-way and shall be landscaped to include one (1) tree for each thirty (30) linear feet of abutting right-of-way or major fraction thereof to be planted as far away from the right-of-way line as to allow for the installation, maintenance, repair or replacement of water/wastewater infrastructure. In addition, a hedge, wall or other durable landscaping barrier shall be placed along the interior perimeter of this required landscaped strip. 2. All property lying between the right-of-way and off-street parking or other vehicular use area outside the required landscaped strip shall be landscaped with at least grass or other ground cover. 3. Landscaping shall be designed so that it will not interfere with the function of utility easements. 4. Necessary accessways from the public right-of-way through all such landscaping shall be permitted to service the principal use, parking or other vehicular use areas. 5. Noncontinuous landscaped earthen berms may be used in conjunction with the planting of a continuous hedge provided that the intent of the visual barrier created by the hedge is maintained. Maximum slope ratios for all earthen berms shall be no greater than 3:1. 6. Fences, walls or other similar barriers, whether they are constructed of opaque materials or not, may be located in any required yard, consistent with the provision for Section 8.00.00 of this Code. All required perimeter landscaping shall be located on the outside (street side) of the wall or fence. Any brick, masonry, stockade or similarly constructed wall adjacent to a public or private street right-of-way shall be designed and constructed so that the wall face facing the street or road is articulated in such manner as not to result in a continuous flat wall surface facing the street or road right-of-way. Figure 7-31 generally depicts the placement of a fence or wall along a public or private street right-of-way. Pedestrian and vehicular access through any wall or fence are permitted, however the wall or fence shall be places so that adequate sight distance at any vehicular or pedestrian access is maintained. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to maintain all landscaping along the outside edge of any fence or wall consistent with the requirements of this Code. Page 356 of 420 B. Perimeter Landscaping Relating to Abutting Properties. 1. When an off-street parking area or other vehicular use area will not be entirely screened by an intervening building or structure from abutting property, that portion of such area not screened shall be provided with a landscaped buffer of not less than ten (10) feet in width. Such landscaped buffer shall be designed and planted with a hedge or other durable landscape barrier not less than four (4) feet in height at planting, and to be maintained so as, to form a six (6) foot or higher continuous unbroken, solid visual screen after eighteen (18)months, between the off-street parking area or other vehicular use area and such Page 357 of 420 abutting property. Such landscaped barrier shall be located between the common lot line and the off-street parking area and other vehicular use areas. 2. In addition, one (1) tree shall be provided for each thirty (30) linear feet or major fraction thereof of such landscape barrier. 3. Noncontinuous landscaped earthen berms may be used in conjunction with the planting of a continuous hedge provided that the intent of the visual barrier created by the hedge is maintained. Maximum slope ratios for all earthen berms shall be no greater than 3:1. Fences, walls or other similar barriers, whether they are constructed of opaque materials or not, may be located within any required yard, consistent with the provisions of Section 8.00.00 of this Code. All required perimeter landscaping shall be located along the outside of the wall or fence. Pedestrian access through any wall or fence may be permitted, however the wall or fence shall be placed so that adequate sight distance at the pedestrian access is maintained. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to maintain all landscaping along the outside edge of any fence or wall consistent with the requirements of this Code. C. Parking and Other Vehiclular Use Area Interior Landscaping. 1. Generally. Surface parking and other vehicular use areas shall have at least one (1) square foot of interior landscaping for every eighteen (18) square feet or major fraction thereof of off-street parking and vehicular use area. Each separately landscaped area shall contain a minimum of one hundred eighty (180) square feet and shall have a minimum width of at least ten (10) feet and shall include at least one (1) shade tree of an appropriate species with the remaining area adequately landscaped with shrubs, ground cover, or other authorized landscaping material not to exceed three (3) feet in height. Properties that are designated Industrial Extraction (IX), and Utilities (U) will be exempt from any parking area interior landscaping requirements and only need to provide interior landscaping for any required parking/access aisle areas. All other vehicular use areas are exempt from the interior landscaping requirements. 2. Vehicle Encroachments into Landscaped Areas. The front of a vehicle may not encroach upon any landscaped area. Two (2) feet of the required depth of each parking space abutting on a landscaped area may be planted in extra grass or ground cover provided that a suitable motor vehicle stop is provided. 3. Terminal Landscape Islands. Each row of parking stalls shall be required to end in a landscaped island which shall measure no less than ten (10) feet in width, or less than fifteen (15) feet in length. At least one (1) shade tree of an appropriate species shall be provided for each terminal island. 4. Interior Landscape Areas. No more than ten (10) parking spaces shall be permitted in a continuous row without being interrupted by a minimum landscape area of one hundred eighty (180) square feet for a single row of parking or four hundred (400) square feet for a double row of parking. The number of continuous parking places and the minimum required distance may be altered to accommodate existing trees. Each interior landscaped area shall have a minimum width of ten (10) feet. One (1) shade tree of an appropriate species shall be provided for each interior island. 5. Curbing. All terminal landscaped islands and interior landscaped areas shall be surrounded with a continuous raised, nonmountable curb in accordance with the specifications for public works of St. Lucie County as identified in Chapter XIII of this Code. 6. Median Landscaping. a. A linear landscape median between two (2) abutting rows of parking may be used to satisfy, in part, the requirements of this Section relative to interior landscaping. Terminal islands are required as described in Section 7.09.04(C)(3). Page 358 of 420 b. A landscaped parking lot median must be a minimum of eight (8) feet in width and provide for the planting of at least one (1) shade tree of an appropriate species for every thirty (30) linear feet of median length or fraction thereof. All parking lot median landscaped areas shall be protected with a continuous, raised, nonmountable curb in accordance with the specifications for public works of St. Lucie County as identified in Chapter XIII of this Code. 7. Reserved Parking Area Landscape Requirements (7.06.02 (B) (4)). Where, in the determination of the Growth Management Director, in consultation with the Environmental Resources Director, the required number of parking and loading spaces is excessive for a specific use, the owner or agent may substitute landscaping in lieu of paving provided said areas are reserved for future parking and loading should the County find those are needed, and further provided: a. The owner of the land upon which such parking is being reserved shall enter into a written agreement with the County. The agreement shall be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court, with enforcement running to the County ensuring that the reserved parking and loading area shall never be encroached upon, used, sold, leased, or conveyed, for any purpose except in conjunction with the building or use which the reserved parking area serves so long as the off-street parking facilities are required. The agreement shall include a schematic portrayal as to how the required parking and loading areas will be provided. b. The owner of the land upon which such reserved parking and loading area is located agrees to bear the expense of recording the agreement which shall bind his/her heirs, successors, or assigns. c. The written agreement shall be voided by the County if the reserved parking and loading area is converted to usable parking area or if the reserved parking area is no longer required. d. No handicapped parking areas may be included within a reserved parking area. D. Visibility for Landscaping Adjacent to the Public Rights-of-Way and Points of Access. When an accessway intersects a public right-of-way or when the subject property abuts the intersection of two (2) or more public rights-of-way, all landscaping within the triangular areas described below shall provide unobstructed cross-visibility at a level between three (3) feet and six (6) feet, provided, however, trees or palms having limbs and foliage trimmed in such a manner that no limbs or foliage extend into the cross-visibility area shall be allowed provided they are so located so as not to create a traffic hazard. Landscaping, except required grass or ground cover, shall not be located closer than three (3) feet from the edge of any accessway pavement. The triangular areas referred to above are: 1. The areas of property on both sides of an accessway formed by the intersection of each side of the accessway and the public right-of-way line with two (2) sides of each triangle being fifteen (15) feet in length from the point of intersection and the third side being a line connecting the ends of the two (2) other sides. 2. The area of property located at the corner formed by the intersection of two (2) or more public rights-of-way with two (2) sides of the triangular area being thirty (30) feet in length along the abutting public right-of-way lines, measured from their point of intersection, and the third side being a line connecting the ends of the other two (2) lines. E. Landscaped Buffer Areas Between Non-Residential or Residential Structure(s) Housing Three (3) or More Dwelling Units and Single-Family or Two-Family Residential Uses. All side and rear yard perimeter buffer areas between non-residential or residential structure(s) housing three (3) or more dwelling units and single family or two family residential uses shall be landscaped with a masonry wall or opaque wood fence of at least eight (8) feet in height that forms a continuous screen between the uses. All masonry walls or opaque wood fences shall be landscaped with a continuous hedge along both the inside and outside base of the wall or fence. One (1) tree shall Page 359 of 420 be planted along the wall or fence for each thirty (30) linear feet or major fraction thereof of the length of the wall or fence. Tree plantings shall be alternated so that at least sixty percent (60%) of the required number of trees is located on the outside of the wall or fence. The remaining forty (40) percent of the required perimeter tree plantings shall be located on the inside face of the wall or fence. Existing native vegetation may be used to satisfy all or part of the landscape planting requirements of this paragraph upon the approval of the Environmental Resources Director. All fences or walls shall be treated with an anti-graffiti surface treatment. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to removal any graffiti that may be applied to the wall or fence. In addition, the owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping along both the inside and outside edge of any wall or fence. This landscaping shall be maintained in a good condition so as to present a healthy, neat, and orderly appearance free from refuse and debris. Maintenance shall include the replacement of all unhealthy and dead material within sixty (60) days in conformance with the approved site plan/or landscape plan. Violations of this section, or failure to maintain all required landscaping shall be grounds for referral to the Code Enforcement Board for appropriate enforcement actions. The sixty-day rule for compliance may be extended, when necessary, by the Environmental Resources Director or his/her designee to permit recovery from acts of nature such as a hurricane or a freeze. Masonry walls or opaque wood fences may be located within any required yard, consistent with the provisions of Section 8.00.00 of this Code. The requirement for this perimeter masonry wall or opaque wood fence may be waived by the Environmental Resources Director if it is shown to the satisfaction of the Environmental Resources Director either that the adjoining properties owners have signed a consent that indicates their desire not to have the required masonry wall or opaque wood fence constructed along their property line, or that the Environmental Resources Director determines that a waiver is necessary to preserve any significant, protected or historic native vegetation. In the event that any such consent is issued, the owner of the property on which the nonresidential development is taking place shall need to comply with the standards of Section 7.09.04(B) of this Code as those standards relate to perimeter screening. All other landscaping provisions of this Code shall apply as applicable. Pedestrian access through any wall or fence may be permitted, however, the wall or fence shall be placed so that adequate sight distance at the pedestrian access is maintained. Any wall or fence constructed adjacent to a public or private street right-of-way shall be designed and constructed so that the wall face facing the street or road is articulated in such manner as not to result in a continuous flat wall surface facing the street or road right-of-way. Figure 7-31 generally depicts the placement of a fence or wall along a public or private street right-of-way. For the purpose of this section, non-residential uses shall not include any permitted or accessory use located in the institutional (I) or Religious Facilities (RF) Zoning District, except that a perimeter buffer area between any residential zoning district and a permitted or accessory use in the Institutional (I) or Religious Facilities (RF) Zoning District, shall consist of a landscaped masonry wall, opaque wood fence, hedge or other durable landscaped barrier of at least six (6) feet in height that forms a continuous screen between the uses. If a masonry wall or other non-living material screen is used to provide this required buffer, the masonry wall or other non-living material screen shall be landscaped with a continuous hedge along the base of the wall and with one (1) tree for each thirty (30) linear feet or major fraction thereof of wall length. All required perimeter landscaping shall be located along the outside of the wall. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to maintain all landscaping along the outside edge of any wall consistent with the requirements of this Code. If vegetative landscape screens are installed, they shall be required to form a solid visual screen at time of planting. When existing vegetation is inadequate to function as a visual screen, it shall be augmented by two (2) staggered rows of shrub material at least six (6) feet in height. To the extent permitted under Section 7.09.03(E)(7) of this Code, the Environmental Resources Director shall encourage the use of preserved native vegetation as meeting the intent and requirements of this Section. When making such a determination, the Environmental Resources Director shall attach a report to the building plans or development permits, with Page 360 of 420 supporting photographs or other acceptable documentation, that indicates how the existing native vegetation meets the intent of this Section. The Environmental Resources Director may require a conservation easement or similar restrictive covenant, if the easement or covenant is necessary to ensure compliance with the terms of this section. Any developer seeking to utilize the provisions of Section 7.09.03(E)(7) to meet the requirements of this Section shall be required to maintain this native preserve area in perpetuity. If this preserve area is ever substantially altered or removed so that it no longer meets the intent of this Section, the developer shall be required to meet in the screening requirements of this Section. The provisions of this Section, excluding the maintenance requirements may be varied by the Environmental Resources Director for any minor or major site plan, Planned Development Project (PUD, PNRD, or PMUD) if it shown through the Preliminary and Final Development Plan review process that the intent of this Section is being complied with and that all other applicable provisions of this Code are being met. A waiver of the provisions of this section shall require the approval of the Board of County Commissioners. F. Off-Street Loading Spaces and Waste Receptacles. All off-street loading spaces and waste receptacles shall be fully screened from any residential use by a uniformly colored, solid visual and auditory barrier of not less than six (6) feet in height, or a densely planted landscape screen consisting of evergreen shrubs or trees that shall be at least four (4) feet in height when planted and that can be expected to reach at least six (6) feet in height within eighteen (18) months. The screening shall extend the full length of any loading facility with openings as required for ingress and egress; however, there shall not be greater than twenty percent (20%) open space within the screen. G. Existing Off-Street Parking and Loading Lots. When an off-street parking or loading lot existed as of the effective date of this Code and such off-street parking lot is enlarged in area or capacity, the entire parking lot, both old and new, shall comply with this Code. H. Landscaping and Screening Requirements for Back-Siphonage and Backflow Preventers. 1. It shall be the responsibility of the developer to landscape and screen backflow preventers. 2. Backflow preventers shall be placed on private property. 3. A continuous landscaped buffer shall be placed around the backflow prevention device, to provide a visual screen from adjacent properties. All shrubs or hedges shall be a minimum of eighteen (18) inches above grade immediately after planting, and shall be planted and maintained so as to form a four (4) foot or higher continuous, unbroken, solid visual screen within one (1) year after the time of planting. I. Landscaping Requirements for Residential Structures of Three (3) or Fewer Units. 1. Any new residential structure containing one (1), two (2), or three (3) units must preserve or plant one (1) tree for every 2,500 square feet of the subject lot or parcel of land, up to a maximum planting of seventeen (17) trees per lot or parcel. On any lot or parcel greater than one (1) acre in area, the provisions of Section 6.00.00, Vegetation Protection and Preservation, shall be complied with. 2. All trees preserved or planted in order to meet this landscaping requirement shall meet the standards of Section 7.09.03(E)(2) of this Code. 3. One hundred percent (100%) of the planted trees shall consist of native species such as Live Oaks (Quercus virginiana), Laurel Oaks (Quercus laurifola), slash pine (Pinus elliotti), or other species listed in Section 7.09.04(L)(2) Native and Drought-Tolerant Vegetation. 4. Automatic irrigation systems shall be equipped with an automatic rain shut-off device. J. Landscaping Requirements for Enclosed Buildings or Groups of Buildings Used for the Production of Food, Produce, Animals (Land or Water Species), or Ornamental Plants or Trees in a Agricultural Zoning District. Page 361 of 420 1. Any new enclosed building, or group of buildings, used for the production of food, animals (land or water species) or ornamental products, excluding pole barns, sheds or barns used for the housing or sheltering of animals or livestock as an accessory use to the agricultural production operations, shall provide a minimum ten (10) foot wide landscape strip adjacent to, and around the perimeter of the building or group of buildings used for this purpose. This landscape strip shall include at least one (1) tree, meeting the requirements of this Code, for every thirty (30) liner feet of the building or group of buildings perimeter. 2. One hundred percent (100%) of the planted trees shall consist of native species such as Live Oaks (quercus virginiana), Laurel Oaks (quercus laurifola), slash pine (pinus elliotti), or other species listed in Section 7.09.04(L)(2) Native and Drought-Tolerant Vegetation. 3. Exceptions/Administrative Relief: The Public Works Director may grant relief from the requirements of this paragraph if it is shown to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director that the building or group of buildings being used for the production of food, animals (land or water species) or ornamental plants or trees is: a.) More that five hundred (500) feet from any adjacent property that is not under the ownership or control of the developing party. Road right-of-way and drainage canal right-of-way are not excluded from this property determination; or, b.) Is adequately screened by an existing native vegetation buffer meeting the intent of this paragraph. This existing native vegetative buffer must be located on the property that the building or group of buildings is located on. If relief is granted under this paragraph, and if the native vegetation buffer is ever removed fro any reason, the property owner shall be responsible to provide new plantings consistent with the requirements of this code. K. Off-Street Site Lighting Requirements and General Design Standards. General Requirements. Where artificial outdoor lighting is provided, it shall be designed and arranged so that no source of the lighting will be a visible nuisance to adjoining property used or zoned for a residential purpose. In addition, the lighting shall be so designed and arranged so as to shield public streets and highways and all adjacent properties from direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind. For non-residential properties that abut property used or zoned for a residential purpose to the rear, or side, the following shall apply: 1. For properties with a depth in excess of two hundred (200) feet: The maximum allowable mounting height of all outdoor light fixtures within fifty (50) feet from the front property line is twenty-five (25) feet, provided that such fixtures shall be shielded from public streets and highways to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind. The maximum allowable mounting height of all outdoor light fixtures between fifty (50) feet from the front property line and seventy-five (75) feet from the rear property line is twenty (20) feet provided that such fixtures shall be shielded from all adjacent properties to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind. The maximum allowable mounting height of all outdoor light fixtures within seventy-five (75) feet from any property line abutting a residential zoning district, including the AR-1 zoning district is six (6) feet, or not to extend above the height of the buffer wall. 2. For properties with a depth less than two hundred (200) feet: The maximum allowable mounting height of all outdoor light fixtures within twenty-five (25) feet from the front property line is twenty-five (25) feet. provided that such fixtures shall be shielded from public streets and highways to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind. The maximum allowable mounting height of all outdoor light fixtures between twenty-five (25) feet from the front property line and twenty-five (25) feet from the rear property line is twenty (20) feet provided that such fixtures shall be shielded from all adjacent properties to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind. Page 362 of 420 The maximum allowable mounting height of all outdoor light fixtures within twenty-five (25) feet from any property line abutting a residential zoning district including the AR-1 zoning district is six (6) feet or not to extend above the height of the buffer wall. 3. All outdoor lighting installations shall use concealed source fixtures. These shall be cut-off type fixtures in which the lenses do not project below the opaque section of the fixture. All lighting fixtures shall be mounted with a zero degree tilt. Ground mounted flood and spotlight fixtures that are used to illuminate the building facade are exempt from this requirement. Fixture styles shall be consistent throughout the site. 4. Ground mounted flood and spotlights, if used. shall be placed on standards pointing toward the building or wall and positioned so as to prevent light from glaring onto residential areas, rather than the buildings or walls and directed outward which creates dark shadows adjacent to the buildings. 5. Building mounted outdoor lighting fixtures, other than those required by ordinances and regulations of the County, are prohibited on the rear or sides of buildings adjacent to residential zoning districts, including the AR-1 zoning district. All other building mounted outdoor lighting fixtures required by ordinances and regulations of the County shall be shielded to prevent light from glaring on residential areas. 6. All outdoor lighting fixtures in place prior to March 1, 1999, shall be permitted to continue operation. However, any outdoor lighting fixture that replaces an existing fixture. or any existing fixture that is moved, must meet the standards of this Code. Existing fixtures that direct light toward streets, and are determined to be a traffic hazard, or existing fixtures that direct light toward adjoining property used or zoned for a residential purpose shall be either shielded or redirected within 90 days of notification. 7. Parks and recreational uses are exempt from the above requirements. 8. Nothing in this Section is intended to contravene the requirements of Section 6.04.02 (Sea Turtle Protection). In the event of a conflict between these regulations, the stricter to the two (2) standard shall apply. The Public Works Director is empowered to determine the stricter of the two (2) standards to be applied. L. Standards for Native and Drought-Tolerant Vegetation. 1. When a development is designated as a major, minor, or planned site plan under the provisions of Section 11.02.02 of this Code, water-wise design incorporating the following standards shall be required, in addition to the general landscape standards in Section 7.09.00. a. At least fifty percent (50%) of the minimum landscaping required by Section 7.09.00 shall consist of water-wise plant materials as defined in Sections 7.09.04(L), 7.09.04(M) or 7.09.04(N) except that one hundred percent (100%) of required lawn areas shall consist of water-wise grasses listed in Section 7.09.04(L)(2)(a). Each type of required landscaping, such as trees, shrubs, vines, and lawn areas shall be calculated separately, and each type shall meet the required percentage minimum of defined water-wise plant materials. b. Plant materials shall be grouped according to watering requirements in order to prevent over-watering of water-wise plant materials. Proposed irrigation zones shall be shown on the landscaping plan. Such zones shall take into consideration both plant material and microclimate factors, such as northern or southern exposure, shade or full sun, slope, and berming. c. Ground covers approved under Section 7.09.04(L)(2)(g) may be used instead of grass when planting strips are eight (8) feet wide or less. 2. Plant Materials. All plants utilized to meet the water-wise requirement shall be site appropriate, and shall be selected from the following lists or be water-wise and non-invasive Page 363 of 420 species approved by the Public Works Director. In approving other plant materials, the Director shall consider criteria including, but not limited to, soil type, hydrology, and climate. a. Grasses: (1) Bahia grass (may be mixed with ryegrass); (2) St. Augustine grass; (3) Other grass serving a site specific need approved by the Public Works Director. b. Ground Cover/Accent Plants: COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME AFRICAN BUSH DAISY gamolepis chrysanthemoides DWARF LILY TURF, MONDO GRASS ophiopogon japonicus AFRICAN IRIS dietes vegeta ENGLISH IVY hedera helix AGAPANTHUS agapanthus orientalis, a. africanus FAKAHATCHEE GRASS tripsacum dactyloides AMARYLLIS hippeastrum x hybridum FALSE HEATHER cuphea hyssopifolia BAY CEDAR suriana maritima BEACH MORNING GLORY ipomea imperati BEACH DUNE SUNFLOWER helianthus debilis MARSH ELDER iva frutescens BEAUTY BERRY callicarpa americana LIRIOPE, LILYTURF liriope muscari BIRD OF PARADISE strelixia reginae NECKLACE POD sophora tomentosa BLANKET FLOWER gaillardia pulchella PARSONS JUNIPER juniperus squamata expansa 'parsoni' BLUE RUG JUNIPER juniperus horizontalis 'wiltonii' PENTAS pentas Ianceolata BLUE DAZE evolvulus glomerata PERIWINKLE (VINCA) catharanthus roseus BOSTON FERN, SWORD FERN nephrolepsis exaltata PURSLANE portulaca grandiflora CAPE HONEYSUCKLE tecomaria capensis RAILROAD VINE ipomea pes-capri CAROLINA YELLOW JASMINE gelsemium sempervirens RAIN LILY zephyranthes spp. Page 364 of 420 CAST IRON PLANT aspidistra elatior RAMORA COMPACT SHORE JUNIPER juniperus conferta 'compacta' RED FOUNTAIN GRASS pennisetum Setaceum Var. Rubrum COONTIE zamia floridana z. pumila, z. furfuracea SCHELLING'S DWARF HOLLY ilex vomitoria 'Schelling's dwarf' CREEPING FIG ficus pumila SEA OATS uniola paniculata CRINUM LILY crinum spp. SEA OX-EYE DAISY borrichia arbororescens DAYLILY hemerocallis spp. SHINY BLUEBERRY vaccinium myrsintes BLUE DAZE JUNIPER juniperus chinensis 'procumbens nana' SOCIETY GARLIC tulbagia violacea DOWNY JASMINE jasminum multiflorum SPIDER LILY hymenocallis latifolia DWARF JASMINE trachelospermum asiaticum SPLIT LEAF PHILODENDRON philodendron selloum DWARF FAKAHATCHEE GRASS tripsicum dactyloides T. jasminodies "minima" STRING LILY crinum americanum DWARF LANTANA lantana depressa (ovatifolia 'reclinata') l involucrata LANTANA lantana montevidensis involucrata DWARF GARDENIA gardenia jasminoides 'prostrata' YELLOW CANNA canna flaccida c. Shrubs: COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME BLUE VASE JUNIPER juniperus chinensis 'blue vase' LIMEBERRY triphasia trifolia BOXTHORN severinia buxifolia MARSH ELDER iva fructescens BOXWOOD buxus microphylla NANDINA nandina domestica Page 365 of 420 BURFORD HOLLY ilex cornuta 'Burfordii' NIGHT JESSAMINE cestrum nocturnum BUTTONWOOD conocarpus erectus OLEANDER nerium oleander CARDBOARD PLANT zamia furfuracea ORANGE JASMINE murraya paniculata 'Lakeview' CHRISTMAS BERRY lycium carolinianum PINE CONE LILY, WILD GINGER zingiber zerumbet COCO PLUM chrysobalanus Icaco PITTISPORUM pittisporum tobira COONTIE zamia floridana PLUMBAGO plumbago auriculata CORAL BEAN erythrina herbacea RED FOUNTAIN GRASS pennisetum setaceum var. rubrum CRAPE MYRTLE lagerstroemia indica ROUND-LEAF HAWTHORN raphioleis umbellata CREPE-JASMINE,PINWHEEL FLOWER tabernaemontana divaricata RUSTY LYONIA lyonia ferruginia CRINUM LILY orinum spp. SCARLET HIBISCUS hibiscus coccineus DOWNY JASMINE jasminum multiflorum SANDANKWA VIBURNUM Viburnum suspensum DWARF YAUPON HOLLY ilex vomitoria 'nana' SCHELLING'S HOLLY ilex vomitoria 'Schelling's dwarf' DWARF CHINESE HOLLY ilex cornuta 'Rotunda' SEA GRAPE cocoloba uvifera DWARF OLEANDER nerium oleander SELLOUM philodendron selloum FAKAHATCHEE GRASS tripsacum dactyloides SHELL FLOWER alpinia spp. FIRE THORN pyracantha coccinea SHINING JASMINE jasminum nitidum FLORIDA ANISE illicium floridanum SHINING SUMAC, WINGED SUMAC rhus copallina FRAGRANT OSMANTHUS osmanthus fragrans SHRIMP PLANT justicia brandegeana GALLBERRY ilex glabra SILVERTHORN elaeagnus pngens GARBERIA garberia fruticosa SNOWBERRY chiococca alba GARDENIA gardenia jasminiodes SOUTHERN WAX MYRTLE myrica cerifera Page 366 of 420 GLOSSY ABELIA abellia x grandiflora SWAMP HIBISCUS hibiscus grandiflours GOLDEN SHRIMP PLANT pachystachys lutea TARFLOWER befaria racemosa GOLDEN DEWDROP duranta repens TEXAS SAGE leucophyllum fructescens HETZII JUNIPER juniperus chinensis 'hetzii' THRYALLIS, RAIN OF GOLD galphimia glauca HIBISCUS hibiscus x rosa-sinensis TORULOSA JUNIPER juniperus chinesis 'torulosa' INDIAN HAWTHORN raphiolepis indica VITEX Vitex trifloia JAPANESE PRIVET ligustrum japonicum WILD OLIVE, FLORIDA PRIVET forestiera segregata LANTANA lantana spp. YELLOW ELDER tecoma stans YELLOW ANISE illicium parviflorum d. Trees: COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME AMERICAN HOPHORNBEAM ostrya virginiana RED MAPLE acer rubrum BALD CYPRESS taxodium distichum REDBAY persea borbonia CAMPHOR TREE cinnamomum camphora RIVER BIRCH betula nigra CHERRY LAUREL prunus caroliniana SAVANNAH HOLLY ilex x attenuata CHINESE ELM ulmus parvifolia 'Drake' SHUMARD OAK quercus shumardii CRAPE MYRTLE lagerstroemia indica SLASH PINE pinus elliotii DAHOON HOLLY ilex cassine SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA magnolia grandiflora EAST PALATKA HOLLY ilex x attenuata SOUTHERN REDCEDAR juniperus silicicola FLORIDA MAPLE acer barbatum SWEETGUM liquidambar styraciflua Page 367 of 420 GOLDENRAIN TREE koelreuteria elegans SYCAMORE platanus occidentalis INDIAN HAWTHORN raphiolepis indica 'Majestic Beauty' TREE LIGUSTRUM ligustrum lucidum LAUREL OAK quercus laurifolia WATER OAK quercus nigra LEYLAND CYPRESS cupressocyparis leylandii WAX MYRTLE myrica cerifera LIVE OAK quercus virginiana WEEPING YAUPON HOLLY ilex vomitoria 'pendula' NAGI PODOCARPUS podocarpus nagi WINGED ELM ulmus alata PIGNUT HICKORY carya glabra YELLOW POINSIANA peltophorum inerme PODOCARPUS podocarpus macrophyllus 3. Mulching Standards: a. All plant materials meeting the water-wise requirement of this code shall be mulched with at least a three-inch layer of mulch. Cypress mulch shall not be used for any non-residential landscaping areas or projects. The use of cypress mulch is to be discouraged on all residential projects or landscape areas. b. Mulch shall cover the entire area of the planting bed. 4. Alternative Method of Meeting the Water-Wise Requirement When Native Upland Plant Communities Are Maintained. a. Preservation of existing native upland plant communities on the site may substitute for all or part of the water-wise requirement in the following ratios: Preservation of twenty-five percent (25%) or more of site No water-wise requirement Preservation of fifteen (15)—twenty-five percent (25%) of site Water-wise requirements limited to thirty percent (30%) of each type of required plant material Preservation of one (1)—fifteen percent (15%) of site Water-wise requirements limited to forty percent (40%) of each type of required plant material Page 368 of 420 b. Reduction of water-wise requirements by preserving existing native upland plant communities shall be allowed only when the Public Works Director determines that all of the following criteria are met: 1. The existing native plant communities shall be viable and in good condition and include canopy, understory, and ground cover. 2. The existing native plant communities must be protected by a conservation easement or other legally enforceable preservation mechanism. 3. The execution of the site plan will not threaten the viability of the existing native plant community. 4. The plant community to be preserved shall be at least one-half (½) acre in size, except that microcommunities totaling at least one-half (½) acre may be preserved providing that each microcommunity is at least ten (10) feet in width and contains at least one hundred (100) square feet. 5. A management plan is submitted to show how the viability of the preserved communities will be maintained without the use of heavy equipment. 5. Irrigation Systems: a. Irrigation System Design Standards. 1. Permanent irrigation of preserved plant communities shall be prohibited. 2. Irrigation required for the re-establishment or restoration of existing plant communities shall be limited to temporary irrigation systems. Newly installed plant communities or supplemental plants to existing plant communities may initially require additional water to become established. Temporary irrigation systems shall remain in place for at least six (6) months and shall include: (a) Temporary low-volume irrigation, or (b) Alternative method approved by Public Works Director. 3. Automatic irrigation systems shall incorporate the following criteria: (a) Zoning of irrigation systems: Sprinkler heads irrigating designated high water demand areas shall be circuited or zoned so that they can be irrigated at a different frequency or application rate than low water demand areas. At a minimum separate zones shall be created for turf and planting beds, with a separate zone also required for trees not incorporated into planting beds. (b) Automatic rain shut-off devices: Automatic irrigation systems shall be equipped with an automatic rain shut-off device for each proposed zone. (c) Elimination of over-throw onto impervious surfaces: 1. Sprinkler heads shall be directed away from impervious surfaces. 2. The effects of wind on the spray stream shall be reduced by requiring low trajectory spray nozzles. b. Maintenance of Irrigation Systems: Irrigation systems shall be maintained in working condition at all times, to prevent waste of irrigation water. Broken sprinkler heads, pipes and nozzles shall be repaired or replaced within fourteen (14) days of notice. c. Irrigation During Water Shortage: Irrigation systems shall be operated in accordance with the requirements of water shortages declared for St. Lucie County by the South Florida Water Management District or St. Lucie County. M. Special Landscaping Requirements For North and South Hutchinson Island. If any development is to occur on a site located on North or South Hutchinson Island, seventy-five percent (75%) of Page 369 of 420 the new landscaping material to be planted shall consist of the following species. The Public Works Director may reduce the minimum size requirements to the largest plant sizes available if the listed plant material is unavailable in the sizes set forth in 7.09.03 (E) (2) and (3). Each type of required landscaping, such as trees, shrubs, vines, and lawn areas shall be calculated separately, and each type shall meet the required percentage minimum of plant materials. COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME GRASSES: Broomsedge Bluestem andropogon virginicus Beach Panic Grass panicum amarum Seashore Saltgrass distichlis spicata Sea Oats unicola paniculata Purple lovegrass eragrotis spectabilis _____ GROUND COVER: Aster aster spp. Beach Verbena glandularia maritima Silver Sea Oxeye borrichia arborescens Beach Sunflower helianthus debilis Blanket Flower gaillardia pulchella Gopher apple liciania michauxii Portulaca portulaca pilosa Beach Peanut okenia hypogaea Sea Purslane sesuvium portulacastrum Spiderwort tradescantia spp. Goldenrod solidago spp. Ironweed veronia spp. Railroad Vine ipomoea imperati Beach Morning Glory ipomoea pes-caprae _____ SHRUBS: Marlberry Ardisia escallonioides Wild Olive osmanthus americana Page 370 of 420 Salt Bush baccharis halimfolia Wild Coffee psychotria nervosa Beautyberry callicarpa americana Myrtle Oak quercus myrtifolia Jamaica Caper capparis spp. White Indigoberry randia aculeata Snowberry symphoricarpos albus Rouge-Plant rivina humilis Coco-plum chrysobalanus icaco Scrub Palmetto sabal etonia Pigeon Plum coccoloba diversifolia Inkberry scaevola plumieri Sea Grape coccoloba uvifera Saw palmetto serenoa repens Florida Privet forestiera segregata False Mastic sideroxylon foetidissimum Yaupon Holly ilex vomitoria Spanish Bayonet yucca aloifolia Marsh Elder iva frutescens Bear Grass yucca filamentosa Beach Elder iva imbricata Coontie zamia spp Christmas Berry lycium carolinianum Hercules' Club zanthoxylum clava-herculis Poisonwood metopium toxiferum Wax Myrtle myrica cerifera Lancewood ocotea coriacea _____ TREES: Gumbo Limbo Bursera simaruba Live Oak Quercus virginiana Stangler Fig Ficus aurea Cabbage Palm Sabal palmetto Southern Red Cedar Juniperus silicicola Paradise Tree Simarouba glauca Wild Tamarind Lysiloma latisiliquum Page 371 of 420 N. Special Landscaping Standards For Development in Areas Determined to Contain Scrub Habitat. If any development is to occur on a site that is determined, through an Environmental Impact Report submitted pursuant to Section 11.02.09 or Section 11.02.10 of this Code, or by the Public Works Director following a specific site inspection by the Director, or his/her designee, to be scrub habitat as defined in Chapter 2 of this Code, then the development shall be required to provide for the preservation of the existing scrub habitat where the location of said habitat is not in conflict with the proposed building or parking areas. The Public Works Director, or his/her designee, may require that reasonable changes be made to any site plan or application for building permit for the purpose of preserving or protecting any special or unique existing tree(s) or native habitat. If the existing scrub habitat must be removed to provide for the reasonable use of the property, seventy-five percent (75%) of any new landscaping material to be planted shall consist of the following listed species. The Public Works Director may reduce the minimum size requirements to the largest plant sizes available if the listed plant material is unavailable in the sizes set forth in Section 7.09.03(E)(2) and (3). Each type of required landscaping, such as trees, shrubs, vines, and lawn areas shall be calculated separately, and each type shall meet the required percentage minimum of plant materials. COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME GRASSES Broomsedge Bluestem Andropogaon virginicus Lopsided indiangrass Sorghatrum secundum Arrowfeather threeawn Aristida purpurascens Pinewoods Dropseed Sporobolus junceus Wiregrass Aristida stricta Panicum Needleleaf Dichanthelium aciculare Purple Lovegrass Eragrotis spectabilis _____ GROUND COVER Blanket Flower Gaillardia pulchella Runner Oak Quercus pumila Yellow Jessamine Gelsemium sempervirens Goldenrod Solidago spp. Blue-eyed Grass Sisyrinchium spp. Spiderwort Tradescantia spp. Page 372 of 420 Beach Sunflower Helianthus debilis Ironweed Veronia spp. St. John's Wort Hypericum spp. Bear Grass Yucca filamentosa Gopher apple Liciania michauxii Portulaca Portulaca pilosa _____ SHRUBS Hawthorne Crataegus spp. Myrtle Oak Quercus myrtifolia Carolina Holly Ilex ambigua Scrub Palmetto Sabal etonia Yaupon Holly Ilex vomitoria Saw palmetto Serenoa repens Fetterbush Lyonia lucida Sparkleberry Vaccinium arboreum Chapman Oak Quercus chapmanii _____ TREES Scrub Hickory Carya floridana Wild Olive Osmanthus americana Pignut Hickory Carya glabra Sand Pine inus clausa Juniperus silicicola Southern Red Cedar Live Oak Quercus virginiana O. Administrative Relief from the Provisions of this Section. The Environmental Resources Director may allow alternative landscaping where it is determined based upon a showing by the applicant for any Final Development Order, that a literal application of these regulations will not meet the general spirit and intent of this Code as a result of use, traffic patterns, drainage or other issues Page 373 of 420 of configuration. The alternate landscape proposal may include changes to species, plant sizes, landscape area dimensions, quantities, planting schedules, and surety requirements; as long as the overall project meets the environmental enhancement and aesthetic intent of the Land Development Code and the alternatives provide comparable visual and/or noise screening. Any area landscape plan submitted as an alternative shall be designed in such a manner that the alternate landscape area and the amount of material provided equal the amount that was originally required, unless it is determined by the Environmental Resources Director that additional landscaping is required for that alternative to meet the minimum visual and noise screening requirements and environmental and aesthetic intent of the Land Development Code. The Environmental Resources Director may solicit comments from adjoining property owners for alternative screening proposals. (Ord. No. 07-054, Pt. B, 12-11-2007; Ord. No. 09-007, Pt. A, 9-1-2009; Ord. No. 12-003, Pt. G, 5-15-2012) Page 374 of 420 7.10.23. - Telecommunications Tower Siting. A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish regulations and requirements for the siting of wireless telecommunications facilities. All new towers or antennas in the County shall be subject to these regulations, except where specifically excluded. The section is intended to accomplish the following: 1. Protect and promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the unincorporated areas of the County; 2. Accommodate the growing need and demand for reliable wireless communications services by permitting the siting of wireless telecommunications towers and antennas within the County's boundaries and provide reasonable accommodation to promote and to encourage fair and reasonable competition among telecommunications service providers or providers of functionally equivalent services on a neutral and nondiscriminatory basis; 3. Minimize potential impacts of towers upon residential areas and land uses; 4. Encourage and promote the location of towers in nonresidential areas, where the adverse impact on the community is minimal; 5. Minimize the total number of towers throughout the community by strongly encouraging the collocation of antennas on new and pre-existing tower sites as a primary option rather than construction of additional single-use towers; 6. Encourage and promote users of telecommunications towers and antennas to configure them in a way that minimizes the adverse visual impact of the telecommunications towers and antennas through careful design, siting, landscape screening, and innovative camouflaging techniques; 7. Minimize potential damage to property from wireless telecommunications towers and telecommunications facilities by requiring such structures be soundly designed, constructed, modified and maintained and in compliance with all requirements of the Florida Building Code applicable to similar structures; 8. Enhance the ability of the providers of wireless telecommunications services to provide such services to the community through an efficient and timely application process; 9. Encourage the location and collocation of antennas on existing structures thereby minimizing new visual impacts and reducing the need for additional antenna support structures; 10. Further the balance between predictability for the communications industry in the placement of wireless telecommunications facilities and appropriate land use regulations to protect the aesthetic integrity and public safety of the County's residents, visitors and businesses; 11. Establish appropriate zoning requirements, including but not limited to setback and distance separation requirements, aesthetics, landscaping, land use based location priorities, and structural design for wireless telecommunications towers and antennas within the County's boundaries, with due consideration to the County's comprehensive plan, zoning map, existing land uses and environmentally sensitive areas, including hurricane preparedness areas; 12. Establish setback and distance separation requirements for towers that do not exceed the minimum distance necessary to satisfy structural safety or aesthetic concerns; 13. Adopt regulations that are consistent with applicable federal and state laws, including but not limited to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which as set forth in 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iv), expressly preempts, state and local government regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the FCC's regulations concerning such emissions, and F.S. § 365.172(13); 14. Establish procedural requirements and substantive criteria applicable for the review and approval or denial of applications for eligible facilities modification; Page 375 of 420 15. Ensure that application submittal requirements for eligible facilities modifications are related to information reasonably necessary to the determination of whether or not the proposed modification will result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of the eligible structure; 16. Exempt facilities modifications approved under this section as eligible facilities requests from zoning and development regulations that are inconsistent with Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act, Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act ("Spectrum Act") (PL-122-96; codified at 47 U.S.C. § 1455(a)) and FCC orders promulgated thereto, codified at 47 C.F.R. § 1.40001; 17. Establish specific regulations, which are limited to Section 7.10.23(U) in this section, for Federal Communications Commission (FCC) licensed amateur radio; and 18. Preserve the County's right to continue to enforce and condition approvals pursuant to this Section on compliance with generally applicable building, structural, electrical, and safety codes and with other laws codifying objective standards reasonably related to health, safety and welfare. In furtherance of these goals, the County will at all times give due consideration to the County's Comprehensive Plan, zoning maps, existing land uses, and environmentally sensitive areas, including hurricane preparedness areas, in approving sites for the location of towers and antennas. B. Definitions. The terms used in this Section will have the meanings set forth in the Land Development Code, Chapter II, Definitions, Section 2.00.00, Definitions. C. General. 1. Telecommunications towers may be located as a permitted use in the "AG-5" Agricultural-5, "IL" Industrial Light, "IH" Industrial Heavy, and "U" Utility Zoning Districts subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.23. Telecommunications towers may be located as a conditional use, subject to the requirements of Section 7.10.23 and Section 11.07.00, in all remaining zoning districts. A proposed telecommunications tower in a residential zoned district must be stealth and may be approved as a conditional use. A proposed telecommunications tower must include the attachment of a wireless communications facility such as antennas to be used for the provision of wireless telecommunications services. A proposed telecommunications tower that does not include wireless communications facilities to be used for the provision of wireless telecommunications service shall not be approved in any zoning district. 2. Priority Siting Locations. a. Any new wireless telecommunications facility including but not limited to a tower shall be subject to a determination of the appropriate siting location priorities range from 1 to 7, with the preferred siting location found in Priority 1 and the least desirable siting location found in Priority 7. In the event that a proposed wireless communications facility or tower cannot be sited to comply with a location in Priority 1, the development application shall demonstrate why a lower priority site is necessary. The information to demonstrate why a higher siting priority is not possible shall include the information set forth in subsection 7.23.10(C)(6)(a). In addition, the collocation preference set forth in subsection 7.23.10(C)(5) shall take precedence over the siting of a new Tower in any siting priority. b. Priority 1. Collocation of a wireless communications facility on existing towers or antenna support structures is preferred. Notwithstanding this provision, a tower or wireless communications facility on County-owned property, not including property within the public rights-of-way, with an appropriate agreement with the County, shall be considered a Priority 1 siting location. Nothing herein shall require that the County provide access to County-owned or controlled property. Only when it can be demonstrated that there are no feasible existing towers, structures or site on County-owned property for the proposed tower, can an applicant propose a lower priority site for a proposed tower. c. Priority 2. If a proposed wireless tower or communications facility cannot comply with a site specified in Priority 1, the applicant may propose a new monopole or stealth tower on property designated "AG-5" Agricultural-5, "IL" Industrial Light, "IH" Industrial Heavy, and "U" Utility on the zoning map. Page 376 of 420 d. Priority 3. If a proposed wireless communications facility cannot comply with Priorities 1 or 2, the applicant may propose a new monopole or stealth tower on property designated "CG" Commercial General, "CO" Commercial Office, or "CN" Commercial Neighborhood on the zoning map. e. Priority 4. If a proposed new telecommunications tower cannot comply with Priority 1, 2, or 3, the applicant may propose a new monopole or stealth tower on property within any other zoning district, other than residential zoning district on the zoning map, unless specifically excluded. f. Priority 5. If a proposed new telecommunications tower cannot comply with Priority 1, 2, 3, or 4 the applicant may propose a new tower (that does not have to be a monopole or stealth tower) on property owned by the County or on property designated "AG-5" Agricultural-5, "IL" Industrial Light, "IH" Industrial Heavy, and "U" Utility, "CG" Commercial General, "CO," Commercial Office, or "CN" Commercial Neighborhood on the zoning map. g. Priority 6. If a proposed new telecommunications tower cannot comply with Priority 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5, the applicant may propose a new tower (that does not have to be a monopole or stealth tower) on property within any other zoning district, other than residential zoning on the zoning map. h. Priority 7. If a proposed new telecommunications tower cannot comply with Priority 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6, the applicant may propose a new stealth tower on property within a residential zoning district on the zoning map in a location that would minimize adverse impacts on adjacent residential properties. 3. Telecommunications towers may be located as a permitted use on the same property as another use. A different existing use on the same lot or parcel that is proposed to have a telecommunications tower located on it shall not preclude the installation of that telecommunication tower if the other requirements of this section can be met. 4. Broadcasting Facilities/Receive Only Antennas. This ordinance will not govern any telecommunications tower, or the installation of any antenna, that is for the use of a broadcasting facility or is used exclusively for receiving only antennas. Telecommunications facilities owned by the County shall not be subject to this Section 7.10.23, except as specifically referred to herein to the extent not inconsistent with applicable law. 5. Except to the extent not consistent with applicable law, the County hereby establishes a preference for the use of approved pre-existing towers, structures and technologies when feasible for the applicant's proposed wireless telecommunications service, as opposed to the construction of new towers, with respect to all siting priorities. Collocation of antennas by more than one (1) provider on pre-existing telecommunications towers, structures, or technologies shall take precedence over the construction of new telecommunications towers. Accordingly, each application shall include a written report certified by a professional licensed engineer licensed to practice in the State of Florida, stating that the applicant has reviewed the County's inventory of existing towers, antennas and approved sites within the search area for collocation opportunities on an existing site, and that no existing tower or structure within the search area of the proposed site can accommodate, or be modified to accommodate the applicant's proposed facility. 6. Inventory of Existing Sites. a. Each applicant shall review the County's inventory of pre-existing towers, antennas, and approved sites. All requests for sites other than the inventory shall include specific information concerning the location, height, and design of the proposed telecommunications tower. No new telecommunications tower shall be approved unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the County that no pre-existing tower, structure or economically or technically feasible alternative technology that does not require the use of new telecommunications tower or new structures can accommodate, or be modified to accommodate, the applicant's proposed antenna. Evidence submitted to Page 377 of 420 demonstrate that no pre-existing telecommunications tower, structure or alternative technology is suitable shall consist of any of the following: i. An affidavit demonstrating that the applicant made diligent efforts but was unable to obtain permission to install or collocate the applicant's telecommunications facilities on County owned telecommunications towers or usable antenna support located within as applicable, the search area or a one mile radius of the proposed telecommunications tower site. ii. An affidavit demonstrating that the applicant made diligent efforts to install or collocate the applicant's telecommunications facilities on pre-existing towers or useable antenna support structures owned by other persons located within as applicable, the search area or a one-mile radius of the proposed telecommunications tower site, but was unable to obtain permission. iii. Pre-existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural strength and cannot reasonably be modified to support applicant's proposed antenna and related equipment as demonstrated by supporting plans and calculations by a licensed engineer experienced in the design of wireless telecommunications facilities. iv. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause interference with the antenna on the pre-existing towers or structures, or the antenna on the pre-existing towers or structures would cause interference with the applicant's proposed antenna and such interference cannot reasonably be eliminated as demonstrated by a licensed engineer. v. The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the owner in order to share an existing tower or structure or to adapt an existing tower or structure for sharing are unreasonable. Costs exceeding new tower development are presumed to be unreasonable. vi. The applicant demonstrates with support from a licensed engineer that no pre-existing tower or structure located within the search area has the capacity to provide reasonable technical service, is of sufficient height to meet applicable requirements, or there are other limiting factors that render pre-existing towers or structures unsuitable. vii. The applicant demonstrates that alternative technology used in the wireless telecommunications business and within the scope of applicant's FCC license, is economically or technically not feasible. 7. No signals, artificial lights, or illuminations shall be permitted on any tower or antenna unless required by the FAA or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the lighting alternatives and design chosen must cause the least disturbance to the surrounding views. 8. Other than warning signs, no signs, including commercial advertising, logos, political signs, flyers, or banners shall be allowed on any part of a telecommunications tower. Any signs placed in violation of this section shall be removed at the expense of the owner. All warning signage shall conform with the requirements of Chapter 9.00.00 of this Code. Notwithstanding those requirements, the following provisions shall apply: a. The warning signs may be attached to free standing poles if the content of the signs may be obstructed by landscaping. b. The County reserves the right to modify or waive the above requirements to avoid visual clutter and to better apply the goals of this section. c. Warning signs shall include the name of the owner(s) and operators and a twenty-four-hour emergency telephone number posted adjacent to the gate. d. If high voltage is necessary for the operation of the telecommunications tower or any accessory structures, "HIGH VOLTAGE—DANGER" warning signs shall be permanently Page 378 of 420 attached to the fence or wall surrounding the structure and spaced no more than forty (40) feet apart. e. "NO TRESPASSING" warning signs shall be permanently attached to the fence or wall and spaced no more than forty (40) feet apart. f. The height of the lettering of the warning signs shall be at least twelve (12) inches in height. The warning signs shall be installed at least five (5) feet above the finished grade. 9. Parking shall be in compliance with Section 7.05.00 and 7.06.00 of this Code. 10. All telecommunications towers, and the accessory building(s) and/or equipment associated with the towers, shall be enclosed by opaque security fencing eight (8) feet in height and the tower shall be equipped with an appropriate anti climbing device, regardless of the zoning district in which the tower is located, provided, however, the County may waive such requirements. 11. Telecommunication tower setbacks and separation standards, as provided in Sections 7.10.23(N) and 7.10.23(O)(1) of this Code shall be calculated and applied to telecommunications tower facilities located in the County irrespective of municipal and county jurisdictional boundaries. 12. Telecommunications towers shall be regulated and permitted pursuant to this Section and shall not be regulated as essential services, public utilities, or private utilities. 13. Owners and/or operators of towers shall certify that all licenses required by law for the construction and/or operation of a wireless communications system in the County have been obtained and shall file a copy of all required licenses with the County. D. Applications for New Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas. 1. Prior to submitting an application for a new tower or antenna, the applicant shall engage in a pre- submission meeting with the County Administrator. At the discretion of the County Administrator, such meeting may be waived, or may be conducted via telephone or electronic communications. The County shall grant or deny each properly completed application for any wireless communications facility, not otherwise subject to subsection K, based on the applicant's compliance with the County's applicable regulations, including but not limited to land development regulations, consistent with this subsection and within the normal time frame for a similar type of review but in no case later than ninety (90) business days after the date the application is determined to be properly completed in accordance with this paragraph. 2. a. Completeness of Applications. An application is deemed submitted or resubmitted on the date the application is received by the County. If the County does not notify the applicant in writing that the application is not completed in compliance with the County's regulations within twenty (20) business days after the date the application is initially submitted or additional information resubmitted, the application is deemed, for administrative purposes only, to be properly completed and properly submitted. However, the determination shall not be deemed as an approval of the application. If the application is not completed in compliance with the County's regulations, the County shall so notify the applicant in writing and the notification must indicate with specificity any deficiencies in the required documents or deficiencies in the content of the required documents or deficiencies in the content of the required documents which, if cured, make the application properly completed. Upon resubmission of information to cure the stated deficiencies, the County shall notify the applicant, in writing, within the normal time frame of review, but in no case longer than twenty (20) business days after the additional information is submitted, of any remaining deficiencies that must be cured. Deficiencies in document type or content not specified by the County do not make the application incomplete. Notwithstanding this subparagraph, if a specified deficiency is not properly cured when the applicant resubmits its application to comply with the notice of deficiencies, the County may continue to request the information until such time as the specified deficiency is cured. The County may establish reasonable time frames within which the required information to cure the application deficiency is to be provided or the application will be considered withdrawn or closed. Page 379 of 420 b. Supplements to Applications. If an application is subject to a state or federal timeframe for review and determination (i.e. "shot clock"), to allow sufficient time for review, an applicant may not submit corrected, new or supplemental materials without the consent of the County Administrator, unless an applicant was notified that the application was incomplete. The County Administrator may determine not to review or to provide comment on corrected, new or supplemental materials after the application is scheduled for a public hearing without good cause. 3. The time frames specified in this subsection D may be extended only to the extent that the application has not been granted or denied because the County's procedure generally applicable to all other similar types of applications permits, require action by the Board of County Commissioners and such action has not taken place within the time frames specified. Under such circumstances, the County will act to either grant or deny the application at its next regularly scheduled meeting automatically. The County may request, but not require, a waiver of the timeframes by the applicant, except that, with respect to a specific application, a one-time waiver may be required in the case of a declared local, state, or federal emergency that directly affects the administration of all permitting activities of the County. Applicants may request a subsequent or additional pre-application conference with the County. Such request shall be submitted with a non-refundable fee of five hundred dollars ($500.00) to reimburse the County for the cost and fees incurred by the such conference. 4. It is the County's intention that the requirements of this Section 7.10.23 shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the ability of a service provider to provide wireless services in violation of federal law. If an applicant maintains that compliance with one (1) or more of the provisions of this section will prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless services in violation of federal law, the applicant may apply for a variance to be exempted from the requirements of one (1) or more provisions of this section for its proposed wireless telecommunications facility or tower. In such circumstances, the applicant shall include an affidavit from a licensed engineer specifying in detail why such provisions would prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless service and what modifications or exemptions, if any, to the provisions of this section may be necessary. The County shall review such application for a variance pursuant to the County's procedures for processing variances. The timeframes for review and approval of an application contained herein, shall not apply to an application for a variance. E. Building Codes/Safety Standards. The construction, maintenance, operation and repair of telecommunications facilities are subject to the supervision of the County to the extent not otherwise prohibited by F.S. § 365.172, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 or the Spectrum Act, and shall be performed in compliance with all applicable laws, ordinances, departmental rules and regulations and practices affecting such structures including, but not limited to, zoning codes, building codes, and safety codes, and as provided below. 1. All telecommunication towers must meet or exceed current standards and regulations of the FAA, the FCC, including radio frequency emission standards and regulations of the state or federal government with the authority to regulate towers prior to issuance of a building permit by the County. If such applicable standards and regulations are changed, then the owners of the telecommunications towers governed by this ordinance shall bring such towers and antennas into compliance with such revised standards within six (6) months of the effective date of such standards and regulations, unless a different compliance schedule is mandated by the controlling state or federal agency. Unless otherwise prohibited by applicable federal or state law, failure to bring towers and antennas into compliance with such revised standards and regulations shall constitute a violation of this ordinance and grounds for the removal of the tower at the expense of the owner. 2. To ensure the structural integrity of telecommunications towers, the owner shall construct and maintain the telecommunications tower in compliance with all applicable building codes, other applicable codes and standards as amended from time to time. A statement shall be submitted to the County by a professional licensed engineer certifying compliance with this subsection. Page 380 of 420 Where a preexisting structure, including light and power poles, is requested as a camouflage facility by the owner, the facility, and all modifications thereof, shall comply with all requirements as provided in this section. 3. Although the County will not require wireless providers to provide evidence of a wireless communications facility's compliance with federal regulations except evidence of compliance with applicable Federal Aviation Administration requirements, and evidence of proper FCC license or other evidence of FCC authorized spectrum use, the County may request the FCC to provide information as to a wireless provider's compliance with federal regulations, as authorized by federal law. F. Requirement of Site Plan and Engineering Report. All applicants for new towers and towers which are modified or reconstructed to accommodate additional antennas shall submit a written report certified by a professional licensed engineer. The report shall include: all information required by Section 11.02.09(A)(1), (2), (3) and (5) of the Land Development Code of St. Lucie County except to the extent such information is determined to be not applicable by the Building Department or otherwise prohibited by applicable state or federal law. In addition, the report shall include the following: 1. A site plan of the property within three hundred percent (300%) of the tower height of the tower drawn to scale prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 11.02.00 of this Code, including, but not limited to: a. Site plan development consistent with Section 11.02.00 including: i. A tax parcel number, legal description of the parent tract and leased parcel, total acres, and Section/Township/Range of the subject property; ii. The lease parcel fully dimensioned, including property lines, setbacks, roads on or adjacent to the subject property, easements; iii. Outline of all existing buildings, including a purpose (i.e., residential buildings, garages, accessory structures, etc.) on subject property located within three hundred percent (300%) of the tower height from the tower; iv. All existing vegetation, by mass or individually by diameter, measured four (4) feet from the ground of each stand-alone tree on the subject property located within three hundred percent (300%) of the tower height of the tower v. Proposed/existing security barrier, indicating type and extent as well as point of controlled entry; vi. Proposed/existing access easements, utility easements, and parking for the telecommunications tower; vii. All proposed changes to the subject property, including grading, vegetation removal, temporary or permanent roads and driveways, storm water management facilities and any other construction or development attendant to the telecommunications tower; viii. If applicable, on-site and adjacent land uses, and Comprehensive Plan classification of the site. 2. Type of Tower and Specifics of Design. a. Scaled renderings of elevations depicting the design of the tower and associated equipment including but not limited to the antennas, mounts, equipment shelters, cable as well as cable runs, fencing, landscaping and security barrier, if any. b. A statement that the proposed tower, within a reasonable period following the completion of construction, will be used for the provision of wireless communications services. If the applicant or tower owner is not a carrier or provider of wireless communications services, the application shall include appropriate documentation confirming that the tower will be used for the attachment of wireless communications facilities for the provision of wireless communications services. Such documentation may include a lease or license, with Page 381 of 420 confidential information redacted, between the tower owner and a provider of wireless communications services. c. Materials of the proposed tower specified by generic type and specific treatment (i.e., anodized aluminum, stained wood, painted fiberglass, etc. These shall be provided for the antennas, mounts, equipment shelters, cable as well as cable runs, and security barrier, if any; d. Colors of the proposed tower represented by a color board or equivalent showing actual colors proposed. Colors shall be provided for the antennas, mounts, equipment buildings, cable as well as cable runs, and security barrier, if any; e. Dimensions of the tower specified for all three (3) directions: height, width and breadth. These shall be provided for the antennas, mounts, equipment shelters and security barrier, if any; and f. A visual impact analysis, with a minimum of two (2) photo digitalization or photographic superimpositions of the tower within the subject property. The photo digitalization or photographic superimpositions shall be provided for all attachments, including: the antennas, mounts, equipment shelters, cables as well as cable runs, and security barrier, if any for the total height, width and breadth, as well as at a distance of two hundred fifty (250) feet and five hundred (500) feet from the subject property line from all properties within that range, or at other points agreed upon in a pre-application conference. 3. Prior to issuance of a permit, current wind-loading capacity and a projection of wind-loading capacity using different types of antennas as contemplated by the applicant. No telecommunications tower shall be permitted or be permitted to be modified so as to exceed its wind-loading capacity. 4. A statement that the proposed tower, including reception and transmission functions, will not interfere with the customary transmission or reception of radio, television or similar services as well as other wireless services enjoyed by adjacent residential and nonresidential properties. 5. Non-interference with Public Safety Telecommunications Facilities. A wireless communications facility shall not create interference with any public safety telecommunication facility. Any application for a wireless communications facility or tower pursuant to this article shall include a certification from a licensed engineer that the proposed facility is not expected to interfere with or obstruct transmissions to and from existing public safety telecommunications facilities. In the event that an authorized County official determines that a proposed wireless communications facility or tower interferes with a public safety telecommunications facility or public safety communications, the official may recommend denial of the application and set forth in writing the reasons for the recommendation of denial. In the event that a constructed wireless communications facility or tower does interfere with public safety telecommunication facilities, it shall be the responsibility of the owner and/or permittee of the wireless communications facility or tower which creates the interference or obstruction to make all necessary repairs, and/or accommodations to alleviate the problem at the owner/permittee's expense. The County shall be held harmless in this occurrence. To the extent not inconsistent with applicable law, if the service provider refuses to rectify interference within twenty-four (24) hours of receiving notice, said violation shall be considered a zoning violation and all applicable remedies thereto may be imposed for such violation. In addition, the County may, in addition to the foregoing, file a complaint with the FCC for resolution and/or seek an injunction and pursue other actions including criminal sanctions against the service provider pursuant to Florida law, including but not limited to F.S. §§ 843.025 and 843.165. Any person who is found to have violated this article shall be subject to sanctions as provided by applicable law. 6. A statement of compliance with Section 7.10.23(E), all applicable Building Codes, associated regulations and safety standards. For all towers attached to existing structures, the statement shall include certification that the structure can support the load superimposed from the telecommunications tower. Except where provided herein, all towers shall have the capacity to permit multiple users; at a minimum, monopole towers shall be able to accommodate two (2) Page 382 of 420 users and, at a minimum, self-support/lattice or guyed towers shall be able to accommodate three (3) users. 7. Any additional information reasonably deemed necessary by the County to assess compliance with this Code and applicable law. 8. Special fee. The County shall have the right to retain independent technical consultants and experts that it deems necessary to properly evaluate applications for individual towers. The special fee shall be based upon the hourly rate of the independent technical consultant or expert the County deems necessary to properly evaluate applications for a tower or towers. The special fee shall be applied to those applications requiring special review or evaluation. The special fee shall be paid by the applicant to the County. G. Aesthetics. All telecommunications towers and antennas shall meet the following requirements: 1. At a telecommunications tower site, the design of the buildings and related structures shall use materials, textures, screening, and landscaping that will blend them into the natural setting and surrounding buildings to minimize the visual impact. Towers and any accessory buildings shall retain their silver/grey factory finish, or subject to any applicable standards of the FAA, be finished or painted in stealth or neutral tone colors, so as to reduce visual obtrusiveness. 2. Except as noted in paragraphs 3 and 4 below; all telecommunications tower sites must comply with the landscaping and screening requirements of the Land Development Code. The Environmental Resources Director shall require landscaping in excess of any written requirements as is deemed reasonably necessary in order to enhance compatibility with adjacent residential and nonresidential land uses. All landscaping shall be properly maintained to ensure good health and viability at the expense of the owner. Telecommunications tower facilities shall be landscaped with a buffer of plant materials that effectively screens the view of the telecommunications tower compound from property used for residences. The standard buffer shall consist of a landscaped strip at least ten (10) feet wide outside of the perimeter of the compound, except that, if the tower compound perimeter abuts a public or private street or public right-of-way, the minimum buffer width shall be fifteen (15) feet. Existing mature growth, not including exotics, and natural land forms on the site shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. In some cases, such as towers sited on large, wooded lots, natural growth around the property perimeter may be a sufficient buffer. The Environmental Resources Director shall be responsible for determining if the existing native perimeter vegetation meets the intent of this Code. All areas disturbed during project construction shall be replanted with vegetation according to Section 7.09.00, of this Code. 3. If an antenna is installed on a structure other than a telecommunications tower, the antenna and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment must be of a neutral color that is identical to, or closely compatible with, the color of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and related equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible. 4. The Board of County Commissioners may consider total or partial relief from the required perimeter landscaping requirements of paragraph 2 above, if the proposed telecommunications tower meets all of the following standards and criteria: a. The telecommunications tower is located in an AG-5, AG-2.5, AG-1, IL, IH or U Zoning district. b. The proposed telecommunications tower is located a minimum of one thousand (1,000) feet, or the tower height, whichever is greater, from the nearest public street or road right-of-way, public park or playground, public or private school (primary or secondary educational facility), habitable residential structure or any area zoned for residential or commercial uses. For the purpose of this paragraph this restriction shall apply to all properties regardless of political boundary. c. The proposed telecommunications tower base must be screened from view by either existing vegetation, intervening buildings, structures or other physical or made features meeting the intent of this code. Page 383 of 420 d. It is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners that the planting of any vegetation would result in the high probability of general plant mortality due to unacceptable soil conditions that cannot otherwise be resolved through replacement of the soil or other form of soil treatment. In considering any request for relief under the provisions of this section, the Board of County Commissioners may impose reasonable limiting conditions associated with that relief. 5. The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to wireless facilities erected or attached to any existing telecommunications tower or existing building or structure except that any support buildings or structures for the additional antenna or antenna arrays must be screened compliant with the intent of this code. 6. The County reserves the right to require that any new towers be designed as stealth or camouflaged tower. All new telecommunications towers, equipment buildings, and antennas in a residential zoning district must be stealth or camouflaged. 7. Cell on Wheels ("COW"). Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Section 7.10.23, the County Administrator may allow the installation of a cell-on-wheels in accordance with the following: a. During documented states of emergency as declared by the County Administrator; b. To continue the provision of personal wireless service during construction or maintenance of a wireless communications facility; c. For testing purposes; d. For special events; or e. As otherwise authorized by the FCC. The County Administrator is limited to allowing the installation of each cell-on-wheels for up to ninety (90) total days. Approval by the County Administrator of a COW on County property shall not convey any title, equitable or legal, in County property. The Board of County Commissioners may extend the period of time in which a cell-on-wheels is allowed for good cause by resolution. The owner of the cell-on-wheels shall agree to indemnify the County and shall provide appropriate evidence of insurance and the fund in compliance with subsection H of this section. H. Security Fund. Every telecommunications service provider shall establish a cash security fund, or provide the County with an irrevocable letter of credit in the same amount, to secure the cost of removing an antenna, antenna array, or tower that has been determined to be abandoned under Section 7.10.23(R), in the event the owner fails to comply with the provisions of Section 7.10.23(R). The amount of the cash security fund or letter of credit to be provided as follows: 1. For each commercial telecommunication tower, cell-on-wheels, and the initial set of antenna or antenna array .....$25,000.00 2. For each co-located telecommunication provider's antenna or antenna array .....5,000.00 I. General Requirements for the Location of New Wireless Telecommunications Towers on County Property. In addition to the other standards of this section, every new telecommunications tower proposed for location on any property owned, leased, and/or controlled by St. Lucie County shall be subject to the following minimum standards: 1. Lease Required. Any new construction, installation or placement of a telecommunications facility on any property owned, leased, and/or controlled by the County shall require a lease agreement executed by the County and the owner of the facility. Notwithstanding any provision in the County Code to the contrary, subject to applicable state and federal law, telecommunications towers shall not be allowed in the public rights-of-way controlled by the County. The County may require, as a condition of entering into a lease agreement with a telecommunications services provider, the dedication of space on the facility for public health and safety purposes, as well as property improvements on the leased space. Any dedications and improvements shall be negotiated prior to execution of the lease. Page 384 of 420 2. Incentive to collocate facilities on County property. Pursuant to the intent of this ordinance, the County shall provide the following incentives to tenants in order to encourage the collocation of telecommunications facilities on County-owned property: a. The County shall not require that proposed tenants seeking to co-locate on wireless towers on County-owned property pay rent to the facility owner in excess of the fair market value for the space, as determined at the time of execution of the lease. b. The County may receive a percentage of the rental fees received by the telecommunications facility operators from each subsequent tenant at a single telecommunications facility located on County property consistent with such lease or sublease of County-owned property. Fees for placement, installation and use of telecommunications towers and antennas shall be determined by resolution of the Board. c. No lease or sublease granted under this section shall convey any exclusive right, privilege, permit or franchise to occupy or use the public lands of the County for delivery of telecommunications services or any other purpose. The County cannot and hereby expressly does not waive or relinquish any of its land use, regulatory, permitting and police power authority, approval or enforcement rights and obligations, as they may relate to government regulations of general applicability which may govern property subject to a lease or sublease with the County, any improvements thereon, or any operations on the property. Nothing in any lease or sublease with the County shall be deemed to create an affirmative duty of the County to abrogate its right to exercise its police power and governmental powers by approving or disapproving or taking any other action in accordance with its zoning and land use codes, administrative codes, ordinances, rules and regulations, federal laws and regulations, state laws and regulations and grant agreements, as they may be amended. d. No lease granted under this section shall convey any right, title, or interest in the public lands other than a leasehold interest, but shall be deemed only to allow the use of the public lands for the limited purpose and term stated in the lease agreement. No lease granted under this section shall be construed as a conveyance of a fee title interest in the property. e. The Board of County Commissioners may adopt by resolution a standard fee schedule to be used in the calculation of lease rates for the use of County property for establishing a telecommunications tower site. 3. Indemnification and insurance requirements. Indemnification a. The County shall not enter into any lease agreement or otherwise allowing tower siting by a telecommunications service provider until and unless the County obtains an adequate indemnification from such provider. This indemnification must at least: i. Release the County from and against any and all liability and responsibility in or arising out of the construction, operation, or repair of the telecommunications facility. Each telecommunications facility operator must further agree not to use or seek any money or damages from the County in connection with the above mentioned matter; ii. Indemnify and hold harmless the County, its elected and appointed officers, agents, servants and employees, from and against any and all claims, demands, or causes of action whatsoever kind or nature, and the resulting losses, costs, expenses, reasonable attorney's fees, liabilities, damages, orders, judgments or decrees, sustained by the County or any third party arising out of, or by reason of, or resulting from, or out of each telecommunications facility operator's, or its agent's, employee's, or servant's negligent acts, errors, or omissions; and iii. Provide that the covenants and representations relating to the indemnification provision shall survive the term of any agreement and continue in full force and effect as to the responsibility of the party to indemnify. Page 385 of 420 Insurance a. The County may not enter into any lease agreement, or otherwise authorize a tower site by any telecommunications service provider until and unless the County obtains assurance that such operator (and those acting on its behalf) have adequate insurance as determined by the County Personnel/Risk Manager. At a minimum, the following insurance requirements shall be satisfied: i. A telecommunications facility operator shall not commence construction or operation of the facility without obtaining all insurance required under this section and approval of such insurance by the County Personnel/Risk Manager, nor shall a telecommunications facility operator allow any contractor or subcontractor to commence work on its contract or subcontract until all similar such insurance required of the same has been obtained and approved by the County Personnel/Risk Manager. The required insurance must be obtained and maintained for the entire period the telecommunications facility is in existence. If the operator, its contractors or subcontractors do not have the required insurance, the County may order such entities to cease operation of the facility until such insurance is obtained and approved. ii. Certificate(s) of such insurance, reflecting evidence of the required insurance shall be filed with the County personnel/Risk Manager. For entities that are entering the market, the certificates shall be filed prior to the commencement of construction and once a year thereafter, and as provided below in the event of a lapse in coverage. iii. The certificate(s) of insurance shall contain a provision that coverages afforded under such policies shall not be cancelled until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the County. All insurance policies shall be issued by companies authorized to do business under the laws of the State of Florida. iv. Where applicable, in the event that the insurance certificate provided indicates that the insurance shall terminate or lapse during the term of the lease agreement with the County, then in that event the telecommunications facility operator shall furnish, at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the date of such insurance, a renewed certificate of insurance as proof that equal and like coverage remains in effect for the balance of the lease term. b. A telecommunications facility operator and its contractors or subcontracts engaged in work on the operator's behalf, shall maintain minimum insurance, in the amounts determined by the County Personnel/Risk Manager, to cover liability, bodily injury and property damage. The insurance shall cover the following exposures: premises, operations, and certain contracts. Such coverage shall be written on an occurrence basis and shall also be required under any lease agreement between the County and the telecommunications facility operator. J. Initial Wireless Telecommunications Antennas on Existing Structures. Any telecommunications antenna which is not attached to a tower may be approved by the building official following a building permit review as an accessory use to any commercial, industrial, institutional, or multi-family structure of three (3) or more stories provided: 1. The antenna does not extend more than twenty (20) feet above the highest point of the structure; and 2. The antenna complies with all applicable FCC and FAA regulations and all applicable building codes; and 3. Wall-mounted antennas shall be located as close as possible but no more than four (4) feet from the face of the wall of the building to which it is attached; and 4. To minimize adverse visual impacts, antenna types shall be selected based upon the following priority: (1) camouflage; (2) whip; (3) panel; and, (4) dish. An applicant for the construction of a Page 386 of 420 telecommunications tower shall state in writing why each choice cannot be used for a particular application if that choice is not the top priority; and 5. Microwave dish antennas located less than sixty-five (65) feet above the ground may not exceed six (6) feet in diameter. Microwave dish antennas located sixty-five (65) feet and higher above the ground may not exceed eight (8) feet in diameter. Ground-mounted dish antennas must be located or screened so as not to be visible from abutting public streets; and 6. No signals, lights, or illumination shall be permitted on an antenna or equipment building unless required by the Federal Communications Commission or the Federal Aviation Administration. Security lighting around the base of the antenna and equipment building may be provided if such light conforms to the overspill requirement in the County Code. K. Colocation of Wireless Antennas on Existing Towers and Structures. An antenna which is attached to an existing tower and that is not subject to subsection M, Proposed Facilities Modifications, shall be approved provided such collocation is accomplished in a manner consistent with the following: 1. a. The County shall grant or deny each properly completed application that is not subject to subsection M, Proposed Facilities Modifications, as provided in this Section, for the collocation of a wireless communications facility within the County's jurisdiction within the normal time frame for a similar building permit review but in no case later than forty-five (45) business days after the date the application is determined to be properly completed in accordance with the County's application procedures provided the following. b. Collocations on towers, including non-conforming towers that meet the requirements in subparagraphs (b)(i) through (b)(iii) below, are subject to only building permit review, which may include a review for compliance with this subparagraph, such collocations are not subject to any design or placement requirements of the County's land development regulations in effect at the time of the collocation that are more restrictive than those in effect at the time of the initial antennas placement approval, to any other portion of the land development regulations, or to public hearing review. This subparagraph shall not preclude a public hearing for any appeal of the decision on the collocation application, provided the following: i. The collocation does not increase the height of the tower to which the antennas are to be attached, measured to the highest point of any part of the tower or any existing antenna attached to the tower; and ii. The collocation does not increase the ground space area, commonly known as the compound, approved in the site plan for equipment enclosures and ancillary facilities; and iii. The collocation consists of antennas, equipment enclosures, and ancillary facilities that are of a design and configuration consistent with all applicable regulations, restrictions, or conditions, if any, applied to the initial antennas placed on the tower and to its accompanying equipment enclosures and ancillary facilities and, if applicable, applied to the tower supporting the antenna. Such regulations may include the design and aesthetic requirements, but not procedural requirements, other than those authorized by this section, of the County's land development regulations in effect at the time the initial antennas placement was approved. c. Except for a historic building, structure, site, object, or district, a collocation on all other existing structures that meet the requirements in subparagraphs (c)(i) through (c)(iv) below shall be subject to no more than building permit review, and an administrative review for compliance with this subparagraph. Such collocations are not subject to any portion of the County's land development regulations not addressed herein, or to public hearing review. Nothing herein shall preclude a public hearing for any appeal of the decision on the collocation application: Page 387 of 420 i. The collocation does not increase the height of the existing structure to which the antennas are to be attached, measured to the highest point of any part of the structure or any existing antenna attached to the structure; ii. The collocation does not increase the ground space area, otherwise known as the compound, if any, approved in the site plan for equipment enclosures and ancillary facilities; iii. The collocation consists of antenna, equipment enclosures, and ancillary facilities that are of a design and configuration consistent with any applicable structural or aesthetic design requirements and any requirements for location on the structure, but not prohibitions or restrictions on the placement of additional collocations on the existing structure or procedural requirements, other than those authorized by this section, of the County's land development regulations in effect at the time of the collocation application; and iv. The collocation consists of antenna, equipment enclosures, and ancillary facilities that are of a design and configuration consistent with all applicable restrictions or conditions, if any, that do not conflict with subparagraph (c) and were applied to the initial antenna placed on the structure and its accompanying equipment enclosures and ancillary facilities and, if applicable, applied to the structure supporting the antennas. d. Regulations, restrictions, conditions, or permits of the County, acting in its regulatory capacity, that limit the number of collocations or require review processes inconsistent with this subsection, shall not apply to collocations addressed in this paragraph. e. If only a portion of the collocation does not meet the requirements of this subparagraph, such as an increase in the height of the proposed antenna over the existing structure height or a proposal to expand the ground space approved in the site plan for the equipment enclosure, where all other portions of the collocation meet the requirements of this subparagraph, the portion of the collocation only may be reviewed under the County's regulations applicable to an initial placement of that portion of the facility, including, but not limited to, its land development regulations, and within the review time frame specified in subsection D for the placement of new towers. The rest of the collocation shall be reviewed in accordance with this subparagraph. A collocation proposed under this subparagraph that increases the ground space area, otherwise known as the compound, approved in the original site plan for equipment enclosures and ancillary facilities by no more than a cumulative amount of four hundred (400) square feet or fifty percent (50%) of the original compound size, whichever is greater, shall, however, require no more than administrative review for compliance with the County's regulations, including, but not limited to, land development regulations review, and building permit review, with no public hearing. This subparagraph shall not preclude a public hearing for any appeal of the decision on the collocation application. f. If a collocation does not meet the requirements of subparagraph (K)(1)(b) and (c), the County may review the application under the County's regulations, including, but not limited to, land development regulations, applicable to the placement of an initial antennas and its accompanying equipment enclosure and ancillary facilities. g. If a collocation meets the requirements of subparagraph (K)(1)(b) and (c), the collocation shall not be considered a modification to an existing structure or an impermissible modification of a nonconforming structure. h. The owner of the existing tower on which the proposed antennas are to be collocated shall remain responsible for compliance with any applicable condition or requirement of a permit or agreement, or any applicable condition or requirement of the land development regulations to which the existing tower had to comply at the time the tower was permitted, including any aesthetic requirements, provided the condition or requirement is not inconsistent with this paragraph. Page 388 of 420 i. An existing tower, including a nonconforming tower, may be structurally modified in order to permit collocation or may be replaced through no more than site plan and building permit review process for approval, and is not subject to public hearing review, if the overall height of the tower is not increased and, if a replacement, the replacement tower is a monopole tower or, if the existing tower is a camouflaged tower, the replacement tower is a like-camouflaged tower. The subparagraph shall not preclude a public hearing for any appeal of the decision on the application. 2. An existing tower may be structurally modified or rebuilt up to the same height or to a taller height, to accommodate the collocation of an additional antenna(s), only if the modification or reconstruction is in full compliance with Building Code and requirements consistent with the original site approval process including but not limited to submission of a site plan and compliance with any stealth requirements. The County shall require a modified setback based on the modification or increased height of the tower to accommodate structural safety or aesthetic concerns. The County shall review an application to increase the height of an existing tower or substantially modify an existing tower under the County's regulations, including, but not limited to, land development regulations applicable to the placement of a new tower, to the extent not inconsistent with applicable law. 3. A tower which is being rebuilt to accommodate the collocation of an additional antenna may be moved on site within fifty (50) feet of its existing location, subject to applicable setback and separation requirements. A tower which previously received a conditional use approval may be rebuilt according to the conditions under which the conditional use was approved. 4. After the tower is rebuilt to accommodate collocation, only one (1) tower may remain on the site. The initial tower shall be removed within thirty (30) days of the final inspection for the new tower. 5. Microwave dish antennas located less than sixty-five (65) feet above the ground may not exceed six (6) feet in diameter. Microwave dish antennas located sixty-five (65) feet and higher above the ground may not exceed eight (8) feet in diameter. Ground-mounted dish antennas must be located or screened so as not to be visible from abutting public streets to the extent not inconsistent with applicable law. L. Rooftop Mounted Telecommunications Towers and Antennas. All rooftop towers and antennas shall comply with the following requirements: 1. The height of any tower or antenna, including support structures, shall not extend more than fifteen (15) feet above the average height of the roof line; and 2. Rooftop communication facilities shall not adversely affect adjacent properties; and 3. Screening shall be required to minimize the visual impact upon adjacent properties; and 4. Rooftop mounted towers and antennas shall only be allowed on buildings that are at least three stories in height. M. Proposed Facilities Modification Applications. 1. The County shall approve Proposed Facilities Modification Applications that do not result in a substantial change of a tower or base station and comply with the requirements as set forth in this subsection (M). 2. This subsection (M) shall not apply to proposed facility modifications to an eligible support structure that is not a legal conforming, or legal non-conforming structure at the time a completed eligible facilities modification application is filed with the County. 3. This subsection (M) shall not apply to a proposed facility modification to a structure, other than a tower, that does not, at the time of submittal of the application, already house or support transmission equipment lawfully installed within, or upon, or attached to, the structure. 4. Eligible Facilities Modification Application Requirements. Applications for eligible facilities modification must meet the following standards: Page 389 of 420 a. All applications for eligible facilities modification shall be in writing and accompanied by the applicable application and fee established by resolution of the county commission and attested to by the authorized person submitting the application on behalf of the applicant, certifying the truth and accuracy of the information provided in the application. b. No application for eligible facilities modification shall be approved unless it includes the following information: i. The legal and dba names, mailing address, tax identification number, and contact phone number(s) of applicant. ii. If a corporation, the name and address of the registered agent of applicant in the State of Florida and the state of incorporation of the applicant. iii. If applicant is an entity, other than a corporation, such a partnership or limited liability company, the names and business addresses of the principles. iv. An assertion that the proposed facilities modification is subject to review under Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act and that the modification does not constitute a substantial change to the tower or base station. v. If the applicant is not the owner or person in control of the eligible support structure and/or site, the following shall be required: (1) An attestation that the owner or person in control of the eligible support structure and/or site has consented to the proposed facilities modification. (2) If the eligible support structure is located in a public right-of-way, the applicant must also attest that applicant has authorization to install, maintain and operate transmission equipment in, under and above the public right-of-way. vi. If the applicant proposes a modification that will result in an increase in height of the eligible support structure, the application shall include record drawings, as built plans, or the equivalent, showing the height of the eligible support structure: (1) as originally constructed and granted approval by the County or other applicable local zoning or similar regulatory authority, or (2) as of the most recent modification that received County, or other local zoning or regulatory approval, prior to the passage of the Spectrum Act, whichever height is greater. vii. If the applicant proposes a modification to an eligible support structure, which structure, or proposed modification of the same, is subject to pre-existing restrictions or requirements imposed by a reviewing official or decision-making body pursuant to authority granted under the County Code, or an ordinance or a municipal code of another local government authority, the application shall include a copy of the document (e.g., permit or conditional approval) setting forth such pre-existing restrictions or requirements together with a certification that the proposed facilities modification conforms to such restrictions or requirements; provided that, such certification shall have no application to the extent the proposed facilities modification relates solely to an increase in height, increase in width, addition of cabinets, or new excavation, that does not result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of the eligible support structure. viii. If the applicant proposes a modification to an eligible support structure, which structure, or proposed modification of the same, is subject to pre-existing concealment restrictions or requirements, or was constructed with concealment elements, the following shall be required: (1) Applicant shall set forth the facts and circumstances demonstrating that the proposed modification would not defeat the existing concealment elements of the eligible support structure. Page 390 of 420 (2) If the proposed modification will alter the exterior dimensions or appearance of the eligible support structure, applicant shall include a detailed visual simulation depicting how the eligible support structure will appear after the proposed modification is complete. The visual simulation shall depict to scale the eligible support structure in relation to the trees, landscaping and other structures adjacent to, or in the immediate vicinity of, the eligible support structure. ix. If the applicant proposes a modification that will protrude from the edge of a non-tower eligible support structure, the application shall include record drawings, as-built plans, or the equivalent, showing at a minimum the edge of the eligible support structure at the location of the proposed modification. x. If the applicant proposes a modification to an eligible support structure that will include any excavation or would result in a protrusion from the edge of a tower that exceeds an existing protrusion of any transmission equipment attached to a tower, or would protrude from the edge of a non-tower eligible support structure, the following shall be required: (1) A description of the boundaries of the site together with a scale drawing based on an accurate traverse, with angular and lineal dimensions, depicting the boundaries of the site in relation to the tower or base station proposed to be modified and depicting the proposed location, elevation and dimensions of the new or replacement transmission equipment. (2) The County may require a survey by a land surveyor licensed in the State of Florida when, in the judgment of the approval authority, a survey is reasonably necessary to verify the boundaries of the site to determine if the proposed facilities modification would result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of the eligible support structure. xi. If the applicant proposes a modification to the eligible support structure that includes hardening through structural enhancement, the following shall be required: (1) A technical report by a qualified licensed engineer, demonstrating that the structural enhancement is performed in connection with and is necessary to support the proposed collocation, removal, or replacement of transmission equipment and conforms to applicable code requirements. (2) The County may retain the services of an independent technical expert to review, evaluate, and provide an opinion regarding the applicant's demonstration of necessity. xii. If the applicant proposes a modification to a tower, the following shall be required: (1) A stamped report by a licensed engineer demonstrating that the tower with the proposed modifications will comply with applicable structural, electrical and safety codes, including by way of example, and not limitation, EIA/TIA-222-Revision G, published by the American National Standards Institute (as amended), allowable wind speed for the applicable zone in which the tower is located, and describing the general structural capacity of the tower with the proposed modifications, including: (a) The number and type of antennas that can be accommodated; (b) The basis of calculation of capacity; and (c) A written statement that the proposed complies with all federal guidelines regarding interference and ANSI standards as adopted by the FCC, including but not limited to nonionizing electromagnetic radiation (NIER) standard. Page 391 of 420 (2) The County may retain, at the expense of the applicant, the services of an independent technical expert to review, evaluate and provide an opinion regarding the applicant's demonstration of compliance. xiii. If the applicant proposes a modification to a base station, the application shall include a stamped report by a Florida licensed engineer demonstrating that the base station, with the proposed modifications, will comply with applicable structural, electrical and safety codes. xiv. If the applicant proposes a modification requiring, alteration to the eligible support structure, excavation, installation of new equipment cabinets, or any other activities impacting or altering the land, existing structures, fencing, or landscaping on the site, the following shall be required: (1) A detailed site plan and drawings, showing the true north point, a graphic scale and, drawn to an appropriate decimal scale, indicating and depicting: (a) The location, elevation and dimensions of the existing eligible support structure; (b) The location, elevation and dimensions of the existing transmission equipment; (c) The location, elevation and dimensions of the transmission equipment, if any, proposed to be collocated or that will replace existing transmission equipment; (d) The location, elevation and dimensions of any proposed new equipment cabinets and the intended use of each; (e) Any proposed modification to the eligible support structure; (f) The location of existing structures on the site, including fencing, screening, trees, and other significant site features; and (g) The location of any areas where excavation is proposed showing the elevations, depths, and width of the proposed excavation and materials and dimensions of the equipment to be placed in the area excavated. xv. Copies of any environmental documents required by any federal agency. These shall include the environmental assessment required by 47 C.F.R. Part 1 (Part 1—Practice and Procedure), Section 1.1307, as amended, or, in the event that an FCC environmental assessment is not required, a statement that described the specific factors that obviate the requirement for an environmental assessment. 5. Review of Application. a. The County shall review applications for Eligible Facilities Modification pursuant to this section, to determine whether the application qualifies. b. The County shall notify the applicant within thirty (30) days after the date the application is initially submitted or additional information resubmitted, whether the application is properly completed in compliance with the County's requirements. If the application is not completed in compliance with the County's requirements, the County shall so notify the applicant in writing delineating all missing documents and information required in the application that if are cured would deem the application properly completed. c. Upon resubmission of information to cure the stated deficiencies, the County shall notify the applicant, in writing, no later than ten (10) days after the additional information is submitted, of any remaining deficiencies that must be cured, delineating missing information. If a specified deficiency is not properly cured when the applicant resubmits its application to comply with the notice of deficiencies, the County may continue to request the information until such time as the specified deficiency is cured, or may establish a reasonable time frame Page 392 of 420 within which the required information to cure the application deficiency is to be provided. The timeframe is tolled in the case of second or subsequent notices pursuant to the procedures identified herein. If the curative information is not provided within such time frame, the application will be considered withdrawn or closed and the application will be denied. d. Completeness Review; Time Limitation. The County shall grant or deny a properly completed application for Eligible Facilities Modification within sixty (60) days of the date of the applicant's submission of an application seeking approval under this subsection (M), after it is determined to be properly completed. An application is deemed submitted or resubmitted on the date the application is received by the County. The sixty (60) day review period begins to run when the application is filed and may be tolled by mutual agreement of the County and the applicant or in cases where the County's reviewing body determines that the applications is incomplete. The timeframe is not tolled by a moratorium on review of applications. 6. Eligible Facilities Modification Permit. An eligible facilities modification permit issued pursuant to this subsection (M), and any deemed approved application, shall be valid for a term of one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of issuance, or the date the application is valid for a term of one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of issuance, or the date the application is deemed approved. N. Setbacks. The following setback requirements shall apply to all telecommunications towers: 1. All telecommunications towers shall be setback from all property lines of the parcel on which it is to be constructed a minimum distance of one hundred ten percent (110%) of the fall radius of the tower or the minimum setback for the zoning district whichever is greater. 2. The setback for the base of any guys for guyed towers and any equipment buildings must satisfy the minimum zoning district setback requirements. 3. In establishing these setback requirements, the Board of County Commissioners finds that such setbacks are the minimum distance necessary to satisfy structural safety and aesthetic concerns for owners of adjacent properties, residents, and users of nearby public rights-of-way. O. Separation/Height. 1. In addition to the setback from the property line, the following separation requirements shall apply to all telecommunications towers: a. Separation from off-site/designated areas: 1. Telecommunication tower separation shall be measured from the base of the proposed telecommunication tower to the lot line of the off-site and/or designated areas as specified in Table 7-40. 2. Separation requirements for towers shall comply with the minimum standards established in Table 7-40. The Board of County Commissioners hereby finds that the separation requirements for towers in Table 7-40 are the minimum distance necessary to satisfy structural safety and aesthetic concerns of nearby existing or potential residents. Table 7-40 Separation measured from the base of the proposed tower from the property line of a lot with any habitable residential structure, except for accessory security residences in IL, IH and U zoning districts 750 feet Page 393 of 420 Separation from the property line of vacant land in residential zoning districts 750 feet 3. The Board of County Commissioners may approve variances from the separation requirements to habitable residential structures, and to vacant residentially zoned land, provided that no variance shall permit a separation distance that is less than the setback requirement. 4. The Board of County Commissioners shall not approve a variance except upon specific written findings of fact based directly upon the particular facts submitted to them showing that: a. A literal interpretation of the provisions of Table 7-40 would render the applicant in violation of State or Federal law or would preclude provision of service in the desired area. b. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental or injurious to surrounding properties, and will not endanger public safety. c. The variance is the minimum variance that will make possible reasonable use of the land, building, and structures; and d. The variance requested arises from a condition that is unique and peculiar to the land involved and that it is created by the conditions of this Code and not by the actions of the property owner or applicant. The above standards of review are in addition to those general standards set out in Section 10.01.02 of this Code. b. Separation distances between telecommunications towers. 1. The separation distance from pre-existing towers including other towers described in the inventory of existing sites shall be shown on an updated site plan or map. The applicant shall also identify the type of construction of the pre-existing tower(s) and the owner/operator of the pre-existing tower(s), if known. 2. Separation distances between towers shall be applicable for and measured between the proposed tower and pre-existing towers. The separation distances shall be measured by drawing or following a straight line between the center of the base of the pre-existing tower and the center of the base of the proposed tower, pursuant to a site plan. 3. Each applicant shall review the County's inventory of pre-existing towers, antennas, and approved sites within the search area. All requests for sites other than the inventory shall include specific information concerning the location, height, and design of the proposed tower. To support the County's preference for collocation over new towers, no new tower including but not limited to a stealth tower, shall be permitted within one (1) mile of a pre-existing tower unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the County that no pre-existing tower, structure or alternative technology that does not require the use of new towers or new structures can accommodate, or be modified to accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna. The applicant shall also identify the type of construction of the existing telecommunications tower(s) and the owner/operator of the existing telecommunications tower(s), if known. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing tower, structure or alternative technology is suitable may consist of any of the criteria set forth in subsection 7.10.23(C)(6)(a). Page 394 of 420 4. The Board of Adjustment may approve variances from the separation requirement provided that the applicant meets all other provisions of Section 7.10.23(O). 5. The separation distance of one (1) mile between towers shall not apply to properties that are proposed to be developed as a "telecommunications tower farm", in order to encourage clustering of telecommunications towers on a single property, provided that all other setback and separation standards as specified in this section are met. 6. Unless otherwise granted a variance, telecommunications towers shall be constructed no greater than the heights as provided below: a. For a single user, up to one hundred (100) feet in height; b. For two (2) users, up to one hundred fifty (150) feet in height; c. For three (3) or more users, up to two hundred fifty (250) feet. d. For the purpose of determining compliance with all requirements of this Section, measurement of telecommunications tower height shall include the telecommunications tower structure itself, the base pad, and any other telecommunications facilities attached thereto. Telecommunications tower height shall be measured from grade. P. Buildings and Equipment Storage Areas. It is recognized that each telecommunications antenna will have some type of associated electronic support and equipment buildings at or near the telecommunications facility. Depending on the type of facility being erected, the following general standards shall apply, in addition to the other general provisions of the code. 1. Rooftop mounted wireless equipment facilities shall comply with the following requirements: a. Rooftop equipment/storage cabinets shall be set back a minimum of fifteen (15) feet from the edge of the roof or one-quarter of the distance along the perpendicular axis of the roof, whichever is less. The height of the roof must be at least three (3) stories. b. All rooftop equipment buildings shall be stealth, and finished, screened or designed so that they blend into the architecture of the building on which they are located. c. All equipment buildings shall meet all County design standards and comply with the building codes. d. No commercial advertising, including company name, shall be allowed on an antenna, screen or equipment building. e. No signals, lights, or illumination shall be permitted on an antenna or equipment building unless required by the Federal Communications Commission or the Federal Aviation Administration. Security lighting ground the base of the antenna and equipment building may be provided if such light conforms to the overspill requirement in the County Code. f. The only signage that may be permanently attached to the building shall be for the purpose of identifying the party responsible for operation and maintenance of the facility, its address, and telephone number for safety and security and shall comply with this Code. g. Mobile or stationary equipment not located within the building upon which the antenna is mounted, or in an equipment building or cabinet, shall not be stored or parked on the site of a building mounted antenna, unless repairs to the antenna are being made. 2. Proposed antennas located on power poles, street lights or other utility poles and equipment cabinets in the public rights-of-way shall comply with the requirements set forth in the St. Lucie County Communications Rights-of-Way Ordinance, Chapter 44, Article I, Sections 44-1—44-18, of the County Code, as it may be amended. 3. Antennas located on towers shall comply with the following requirements: Page 395 of 420 a. Equipment/storage facilities shall comply with the minimum building setback standards of the zoning district in which they are located. This requirement may be modified by the Board of Adjustment to encourage collocation. b. All equipment/storage facilities shall be screened in accordance with the general requirements of Section 7.09.00. 4. Generators may be used only when other power sources are not available, and as an emergency back-up power source and shall comply with County Code. Q. Supplemental Review Information for Wireless Telecommunications Tower Conditional Use Applications. In addition to the minimum standards of review set forth in this section, any application for a conditional use permit for the construction of a telecommunications tower shall address the following standards and requirements: 1. Compliance with the procedures and requirements of Section 11.07.00. 2. Availability of suitable existing towers, other structures, or economically and technically feasible alternative technologies not requiring the use of towers or structures. 3. Height of the proposed tower. 4. Setback and separation distance between the proposed tower and the nearest residential units, residential district boundaries, and platted residentially zoned property, where applicable. 5. Typography of the area where the tower is proposed to be located. 6. Type, extent and density of existing native vegetation at the proposed site and the surrounding tree coverage and foliage. 7. Design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that have the effect of reducing or eliminating visual obtrusiveness. Camouflage tower designs shall be encouraged as meeting this criterion. 8. Proposed ingress and egress. 9. A nonrefundable fee of five hundred dollars ($500.00) to reimburse the County for the costs of reviewing the application. R. Removal of Abandoned Wireless Telecommunications Towers, Facilities and Antennas. Any telecommunications tower, wireless communications facility or antenna that is not used or operated for a continuous period of six (6) consecutive months shall be considered abandoned, and the owner of such telecommunications tower, facility or antenna shall remove the same at its cost within ninety (90) days of receipt of notice from the County notifying the owner of such abandonment and in accordance with applicable permits. Failure to remove an abandoned telecommunications tower, facility or antenna within the ninety (90) days shall be grounds for the County to remove the tower, facility, or antenna at the expense of the owner or for the County to allow another person to remove the facility at the owner's expense. The owner of the communications facility shall be responsible for all damage to property, facilities or utilities damaged as a result of such removal and shall restore or pay for restoration as required in the County code. If there are two (2) or more users of a single telecommunications tower or facility, the telecommunications tower or facility shall not be considered abandoned until all users cease using the telecommunications tower or facility for a continuous period of six (6) consecutive months. Upon determination by a tower, facility or antenna owner that its tower, facility or antenna is to be abandoned, the owner shall notify the County no later than ninety (90) days from such determination, or no later than thirty (30) days following such abandonment, whichever is sooner. The County may independently establish that a wireless communications facility has been abandoned. In reaching such determination, the County may request documentation and/or affidavits from the owner of the wireless communications facility regarding the active use of the facility. If the owner fails to provide the requested documentation within thirty (30) days, a rebuttable presumption shall exist that the owner has abandoned the wireless communications facility. S. Pre-Existing Telecommunications Towers. Any telecommunications tower lawfully erected before the effective date of this ordinance shall be allowed to continue usages which existed on this date. Routine Page 396 of 420 maintenance of the tower and its support facilities is allowed to continue. Any existing tower that does not meet the standards of this section shall not be required to meet these standards unless and until the tower is proposed for modification or replacement, to the extent not inconsistent with applicable law. T. Inspections, Reports, Fees, and Monitoring. 1. Telecommunications tower owners shall submit a report to the Building Department certifying structural and electrical integrity of the tower every five (5) years. The report shall be accompanied by a nonrefundable fee of two hundred dollars ($200.00) to reimburse the County for the cost of review. Notwithstanding this provision, an owner of a telecommunications tower shall provide such report following recovery from a declaration of a state of emergency by the County or by an appropriate state official that included the area of the tower. 2. The County may conduct periodic inspections of telecommunications towers, at the owner's expense, to ensure structural and electrical integrity and compliance with the provision of this ordinance. The owner of the telecommunications tower may be required by the County to have more frequent inspections should there be extraordinary conditions or other reason to believe that the structural and electrical integrity of the tower is jeopardized. There shall be a maximum of one (1) inspection per year unless extraordinary conditions warrant. If, upon inspection, the County concludes that a tower fails to comply with applicable laws, codes, regulations or permits or constitutes a danger to persons or property, then upon notice being provided to the owner of the tower, the owner shall have thirty (30) days to bring such tower into compliance with such standards. Failure to bring such communications towers into compliance within thirty (30) days shall constitute grounds for the removal of the telecommunications tower or antenna at the owner's expense. U. Amateur Radio Antennas And Support Apparatus Utilized By FCC Licensed Amateur Radio Operator. 1. Applicability and Findings. Amateur radio antennas and their support apparatus are subject solely to the regulations contained in this subsection 7.10.23(U) to the extent not inconsistent with applicable federal or state law, and are not subject to other provisions of Section 7.10.23, including but not limited to priority siting, setback, stealth and separation requirements. The Board of County Commissioners recognizes that the amateur radio service is a voluntary, noncommercial communication service that plays an important role in providing emergency communications. Moreover, the amateur radio service provides a reservoir of trained operators, technicians and electronic experts who can be called on in times of national or local emergencies. Accordingly, the regulations adopted herein are designed to protect the ability to operate amateur radio antennas while protecting important public safety and aesthetic interests. 2. Amateur radio antennas and their support apparatus shall be limited to maximum height of eighty (80) feet except where a higher antenna is allowed pursuant to the FCC's preemptive ruling PRB- 1 (Federal Preemption of State and Local Regulations Pertaining to Amateur Radio Facilities, Memorandum Opinion and Order, PRB-1, 101 FCC 2d 952 (1985) (PRB-1)) and provided that an administrative determination is made by the County Administrator or designee, based on evidence submitted by the applicant, that the proposed height is technically necessary to engage in amateur radio communications. 3. A building permit from the County shall be required for the installation or substantial modification to the installation of an amateur radio antenna and its support apparatus. A building permit shall not be required for: a. Adjustment, replacement or repair of the elements of an amateur radio antenna array affixed to the antenna support apparatus; b. Amateur radio antenna facilities erected temporarily for less than twenty-four (24) hours for test purposes or for emergency communications; or c. Collocation of additional amateur radio antenna on an existing amateur radio antenna support apparatus installed pursuant to a permit or pre-existing amateur radio antenna support apparatus installed prior to the effective date of this ordinance. Page 397 of 420 4. The following requirements shall apply provided they do not prohibit the operation of the amateur radio antennas: a. Building Site Location. Amateur radio antennas and their support apparatus shall be located behind the required primary/principal building within the rear and interior side yard of the property. They are prohibited within the front and side street yard areas. Amateur radio antennas and their support apparatus shall not be installed in County public rights-of-way. b. Setbacks. Amateur radio antennas and their support apparatus shall maintain the same rear and side setbacks as required for the principal building of the building site and shall be installed a minimum of eight (8) feet from any overhead utility line(s) and power line(s). Where such amateur radio antennas and their support apparatus are located on a building site which is fronting upon two (2) or more streets and/or alleys, the amateur radio antennas and support apparatus shall maintain the same primary/principal building setback as required from each such street or alley. c. As with the height limit, the County Administrator or designee may allow an exception to the building site location and setback requirements if technically necessary to engage in amateur radio communications. 5. Installation. The installation or substantial modification of an amateur radio antennas and their support apparatus and foundation shall be in accordance with the manufacturer's prescribed installation and safety procedures and shall meet all applicable county, state and federal requirements, as amended including but not limited to the Florida Building Code, County Code, National Electric Code and FCC regulations. 6. Notwithstanding the provisions of this subsection, existing amateur radio antennas and their support apparatus installed prior to the effective date of this Ordinance shall be allowed to continue operations and to undergo routine maintenance without having to comply with the provisions of this Ordinance. Existing amateur radio antennas and their support structures installed prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall not require a permit unless they are being replaced or substantially modified. 7. The Board of County Commissioners recognizes that the amateur radio service is a voluntary, noncommercial communication service that plays an important role in providing emergency communications and hereby sets the fee for a building permit at two hundred forty dollars ($240.00). V. Penalties. Any person, firm or corporation who knowingly breaches any provision of this Section 7.10.23, as it may be amended shall upon receipt of written notice from the County be given a time schedule to cure the violation. Failure to commence to cure within thirty (30) days and to complete a cure, to the County's satisfaction, within sixty (60) days, or such longer time as the County may specify, shall result in revocation of any permit or license and the County shall seek any remedy or damages to the full extent of the law. This shall not preclude other penalties allowed by law. (Ord. No. 09-003, Pt. A, 1-20-2009; Ord. No. 2018-006 , Pt. A, 5-15-2018) Page 398 of 420 11.02.02. - Designation of Minor Site Plan, Major Site Plan, or Planned Development Site Plan. A. Generally. For purposes of these review procedures, all site plans shall be designated as either a Minor Site Plan, a Major Site Plan, or a Planned Development Site Plan according to the criteria below. B. Minor Site Plan. A proposed development shall be designated as a Minor Site Plan if it is: 1. Any division of land into less than ten (10) parcels but more than two (2) parcels in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.03.00. 2. Any multi-family residential development of less than fifty (50) units, that does not involve platting. 3. Any nonresidential use, including additions to existing structures of 6,000 to 50,000 square feet. 4. Any nonresidential use, less than 50,000 square feet, that provides drive-through or walk-up services. 5. Any nonresidential use, less than 50,000 square feet, that provides for the retail sales of motor or heating fuels. 6. Any commercial lodging establishment having less than six (6) units. C. Major Site Plan. A proposed development shall be designated as a Major Development Site Plan if it is: 1. Any division of land into ten (10) or more parcels, in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.03.00. 2. Any multi-family residential development of fifty (50) or more dwelling units. 3. Fifty thousand and one (50,001) or more square feet of non-residential floor space. 4. All commercial lodging establishments have six (6) or more units available for rent or lease. 5. Any development of land. a. Where the proposed development should be more thoroughly considered and reviewed because of its location or potential for impact on public facilities, natural resources and public safety. D. Planned Development Site Plan. A proposed development shall be designated as a Planned Development Site Plan if it is: 1. A Planned Unit Development (Per Section 7.01.00); 2. A Planned Non-Residential Development (Per Section 7.02.00); 3. A Planned Mixed-Use Development (Per Section 7.03.00). 4. A Planned Town or Village (Per Section 3.01.03.FF); 5. A Planned Country Subdivision (Per Section 3.01.03.GG); 6. A Planned Retail/Workplace (Per Section 3.01.03.HH); 7. A Development of Regional Impact, as defined in F.S. § 380.06, and in accordance with Section 11.02.02(E). E. Developments of Regional Impact. 1. Application for a binding letter of determination from Department of Community Affairs required. A developer shall be required to submit an application to and receive a determination from the Department of Community Affairs as to whether or not such development is a development of regional impact as defined in F.S. § 380.06, under the following circumstances: a. If the development is at a presumptive numerical threshold or up to twenty percent (20%) above a numerical threshold in the guidelines and standards in F.S. Ch. 380, or administrative rules promulgated thereunder; or Page 399 of 420 b. The development is between a presumptive numerical threshold and twenty percent (20%) below the numerical threshold, and St. Lucie County is in doubt as to whether the character or magnitude of the development at the proposed location creates a likelihood that the development will have a substantial effect on the health, safety or welfare of the citizens of more than one (1) county. 1. In the event that a development is between a presumptive numerical threshold and twenty percent (20%) below the numerical threshold, the developer shall submit a request in writing to the Growth Management Director for a determination as to whether or not St. Lucie County will require that an application for a binding letter of interpretation will be required to be submitted in regard to such development. The procedure for processing such requests in St. Lucie County shall be as follows: 2. Within thirty (30) days after receipt of the developer's written request, the Growth Management Director shall make a determination in writing as to whether the County will require that the developer submit an application for a binding letter of interpretation. The Director shall provide by mail (certified, return receipt) or hand delivery, copies of the written determination to the developer and to the Board of County Commissioners. Any person may appeal the determination of the Director to the Board of County Commissioners by filing a written notice of intent to appeal with the County Director within fifteen (15) days of the date of receipt of the Director's written determination. 2. Application Requirements. a. As to any development which is required by the provisions of Section 11.02.02(E) to submit for a binding letter of interpretation or for which the developer for any reason has submitted for a binding letter of interpretation, the application to St. Lucie County for any of the following: 1. Comprehensive plan amendment; 2. Rezoning; 3. Planned Unit Development approval; 4. Site Plan approval; 5. Conditional Use approval; 6. Special Exception; or 7. for any other development permit, as defined in F.S. § 380.031, shall be accompanied by a certified copy of the final determination by the Department of Community Affairs or any court judgment which constitutes a final judgment entered as a result of an appeal from a final order of the Department of Community Affairs making a determination on the Development of Regional Impact status of the project. St. Lucie County shall not receive or process any applications for Development Permits for any project or portion thereof, for which a binding letter of interpretation is required or is actually sought by the developer, until a final binding determination has been made as to the Development of Regional Impact status of the project. b. In any application for a Development Permit to St. Lucie County for a proposed development as to which a final binding determination has been made that the proposed development is not a Development of Regional Impact and that determination has been made in part or in whole based upon various commitments or limitations as to development made in the applicant's request for a binding letter, agreed to by the applicant, or otherwise imposed by the Department of Community Affairs to restrict the development in a way that it shall not constitute a Development of Regional Impact, such commitments, limitations or conditions shall be incorporated as conditions into all Development Permits issued by St. Lucie County, as if such conditions were fully set out in each Development Permit. Page 400 of 420 3. Filing Requirements. If a proposed development has been determined to be a Development of Regional Impact or if the developer has waived the right to request a binding letter of interpretation or otherwise agreed to the Development of Regional Impact status of a proposed development, then, as to such proposed development, any application to St. Lucie County as to the first Development Permit sought from St. Lucie County for such development shall be accompanied by, and there shall be filed simultaneously with it, an application for development approval seeking Development of Regional Impact review and approval as required in F.S. § 380.06. No final action will be taken by St. Lucie County on any St. Lucie County Development Permit application as to a project for which Development of Regional Impact approval is being sought, until St. Lucie County is in a position to concurrently act upon the application for development approval. 4. Proposed Modification to a Development. In the event of a proposed modification to a development for which a binding letter of interpretation has been received by St. Lucie County indicating that the development was not a Development of Regional Impact, the following shall apply: a. In the event that the modification increases the size or scope of the development so that when the proposed modification is aggregated with the prior approved development that was determined not to be a Development of Regional Impact, that the aggregated development is at a presumptive numerical threshold or up to twenty percent (20%) above a numerical threshold in the guidelines and standards of F.S. Ch. 380.06, or administrative rules promulgated thereunder, then the developer shall be required to submit an application for a binding letter of interpretation. b. In the event that the modification increases the size or scope of the development so that when the proposed modification is aggregated with the prior approved development that was previously determined not to be a Development of Regional Impact, that the aggregated development is at a presumptive numerical threshold or twenty percent (20%) below the numerical threshold, then the provisions of Section 11.02.02(E)(1)(b) shall apply. c. The provisions of Sections 11.02.02(E)(2) and (3) shall also apply in the event of a modification to a development which falls within the parameters of subparagraphs a and b above. (Ord. No. 12-003, Pt. I, 5-15-2012) Page 401 of 420 Planning and Development Services Department Planning Division M E M O R A N D U M ITEM 9.E. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: MOTION TO APPROVE AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, AND THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03, ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT APPROVAL TO THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AS COMPREHENSIVELY OUTLINED IN TABLE 1 WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT FOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND APPROVAL PROCESS, BECAUSE ... [CITE REASONS WHY - PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] MOTION TO DENY AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, AND THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03, ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DENY THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AS COMPREHENSIVELY OUTLINED IN TABLE 1 WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT FOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND APPROVAL PROCESS , BECAUSE... . .[CITE REASONS WHY - PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] Page 402 of 420 Planning and Development Services Department Planning Division M E M O R A N D U M TO:Planning and Zoning Commission THROUGH:Leslie Olson, AICP, Director Benjamin Balcer AICP, Assistant Director FROM:Jodi Nentwick, Senior Planner DATE:March 5, 2021 SUBJECT:Text Amendment to the Land Development Code (TLDC-102020252870) A County initiated Text Amendment to the Land Development Code (LDC) to broaden staff’s ability to provide Administrative approvals, waivers, and an opportunity to phase required improvements to encourage new business, and help existing businesses streamline the regulatory process. BACKGROUND: Staff has coordinated with the St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce and the Development Review Taskforce to identify and amend certain regulations to assist in stimulating the local economy and combat the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Staff has taken this opportunity to identify areas within the Land Development Code to expand flexibility through Administrative approvals, waivers, and phase in improvements. These are anticipated to be permanent changes to the LDC and will require Board approval by Ordinance. The table below highlights the following various LDC Amendments: Table 1, below, provides a comprehensive overview of the various LDC Amendments proposed: LDC Code Section Intent of Change 2.00.00 – Definitions – Vehicular Use Area Clarify type of material required for impervious vehicle use area. 7.02.03 – PNRD (Planned Non-Residential Development) Open Space Standards Reduce the amount of open space required for the projects of ten (10) or more acres from 35% to 25%. 7.03.03 – PMUD (Planned Mixed-Use Development Open Space Standards Reduce the amount of open space required from 35% to 25%. This would align with surrounding jurisdictions. 7.06.03 – Relief – Off-Street Parking and Loading Identify locations and standards where an applicant can request off-street relief from the all-weather surface standards and changing all-weather surface to paved surface. Adding off-street parking requirements for religious and membership organizations. 7.09.04.E. – Landscape Buffer Areas Allows the ERD Director to reduce the 8 ft. tall wall/fence requirement down to 6 ft., if the adjacent property owners consent to reduce the adjacent buffer height. 7.10.18 – Airport Industrial Park – Storage Area Regulations Removes additional screening standards for the Industrial Park, to align with current screening requirements of the Code. 7.10.23 – Telecommunications Tower Aesthetics Allow ERD Director to waive the perimeter landscaping requirements if the proposed tower will not be visible from Page 403 of 420 Project Name: LDC Text Amendment (Development Standards Amendment) File No.: TLDC-102020252870) 2 adjacent property or Right-of-Way’s. 11.02.02.B – Designation of Minor Site Plan Increase the numerical standards of projects that would qualify for Minor Site Plan Review. 11.02.02.C – Designation of Major Site Plan Corresponding change as a result of changing the standards of development applications that would qualify for minor site plan review. TEXT AMENDMENT STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03, ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE Pursuant to St. Lucie County Land Development Code (LDC) Section 11.06.03, the Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed the proposed Text Amendment to LDC as outlined in Table 1 and found it to meet the technical requirements and standards of review. In reviewing this application for a Text Amendment to the LDC, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider and make the following determinations: A.Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code; The amendments build on existing authority, provided to the PDS Director to act on development orders consistent with the LDC and Comprehensive Plan. The amendments retain internal consistency. B.Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with all elements of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan; The proposed Text Amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. The following Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives, and policies support the proposed amendment: Goal 10.2: Diversify the year round economy and established an economic and cultural climate that will allow St. Lucie County to effectively compete in the global economy. Objective 10.2.2: Establish procedures and tools to encourage business development and assist economic development in St. Lucie County. Policy 10.2.2.1 – Continue to utilize a point person for inter-agency and inter-department communication whose purpose is to facilitate the movement of targeted economic development projects through the regulatory process. Policy 10.2.2.2 – Continue to investigate and implement tools to assist developers and businesses in locating appropriate facilities for their needs and to provide all necessary statistical information to encourage outside investors to locate in St. Lucie County. Objective 10.2.5: The County shall, through economic development projects encourage diversification of the tax base to further support long-term investment in County quality of life. Policy 10.2.5.2: The County shall support economic development activities that encourage growth in non-residential development resulting in the creation of long term commercial and industrial targeted industry jobs together with comprehensive increases in assessed valuations and ad valorem tax receipts for non-residential development. C.Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is inconsistent with the existing and proposed land uses; The proposed Text Amendment is not inconsistent with existing or proposed land uses. Page 404 of 420 Project Name: LDC Text Amendment (Development Standards Amendment) File No.: TLDC-102020252870) 3 D.Whether there have been changed conditions that require an amendment; The proposed ordinance is drafted to provide relief for businesses that have been affected by COVID-19 and to expand Staff’s ability to provide Administrative approval and waivers. These changes will be permanent to diversify the “tool box” to assist businesses year round. The proposed amendments will improve the speed to market for new and expanding businesses, by streamlining the development review process and allow for increased administrative approvals. E.Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether or to the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, solid waste, mass transit, and emergency medical facilities; The proposed Text Amendment will not result in additional demands on public facilities. Site specific facility impacts are addressed at the time of development application. All development is required to adhere to adopted Level of Service (LOS) and concurrency standards. F.Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment; The proposed Text Amendment would not result in adverse impacts on the natural environment. The proposed text amendment is not expected to increase development pressures on natural areas and does not modify or exempt improvements from any of the County’s natural resource protection standards. G.Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would adversely affect the property values in the area; The proposed amendment is not anticipated to have an adverse impact on property values in the area. Property values may be positively affected by the proposed amendment. H.Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would not result in an orderly and logical development pattern specifically identifying any negative effects of such patterns; We want an orderly and logical development pattern. The proposed amendments will provide opportunities for creative design features that will enhance the logical development pattern within the County. In some instances, these amendments will allow for less stringent design regulations, resulting in a transitional pattern of development. I.Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this code; The proposed amendment is not in conflict with the public interest and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this code. J.Any other matters that may be deemed appropriate by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Board of County Commissioners, in review and consideration of the proposed amendment. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners may raise other matters regarding the proposed Land Development Code Text Amendment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Page 405 of 420 Project Name: LDC Text Amendment (Development Standards Amendment) File No.: TLDC-102020252870) 4 Staff finds these amendments to meet the standards of review as set forth in Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, and is not in conflict with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Page 406 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 1 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. ORDINANCE NO. 2021-XX FILE NO.: TLDC 102020252870 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER II - DEFINITIONS, SECTION 2.00.00 - DEFINITIONS; CHAPTER VII, DEVELOPMENT DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS, PLANNED NON-RESDIENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, SECTION 7.02.03 – STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS, TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT TO TWENTY- FIVE PERCENT; SECTION 7.03.03. – PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT TO TWENTY-FIVE PERCENT; SECTION 7.06.00 – OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING, TO ADD REQUIREMENTS FOR OFF-STREET GRASS PARKING FOR RELIGIOUS AND MEMBERSHIP ORGANIZATIONS AND CLARIFYING PROVISIONS OF THE PARKING STANDARDS; SECTION 7.06.03. – RELIEF, TO ADD PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDS WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY; SECTION 7.09.04. – GENERAL LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, TO ALLOW THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DIRECTOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL TO REDUCE THE EIGHT FOOT WALL HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO SIX FEET; SECTION 7.10.18 – AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK – STORAGE AREA REGULATIONS, REMOVAL OF ADDITIONAL SCREENING STANDARDS FOR THE INDUSTRIAL PARK, SECTION 7.10.23. TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER SITING, TO ALLOW FOR A WAIVER OF THE PERIMETER LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR; AND CHAPTER XI - ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT, SECTION 11.02.02. – DESIGNATION OF MINOR SITE PLAN, MAJOR SITE, PLAN, OR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN, TO AMEND THRESHOLDS FOR MINOR SITE PLANS AND MAJOR SITE PLANS; AND PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION; AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, (Board) based on the testimony and evidence, including but not limited to the staff report, has made the following determinations: 1.On August 1, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, adopted the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. 2.This Board is authorized by Section 125.01(1)(h), Florida Statutes, to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and, Page 407 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 2 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. 3.This Board is authorized by Section 125.01(1)(t), Florida Statutes, to adopt ordinances and resolutions necessary for the exercise of its powers and to prescribe fines and penalties for the violations of ordinances in accordance with law. 4.On March 18, 2021, the Local Planning Agency/Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed ordinance after publishing due notice in the St. Lucie News Tribune and recommended that the proposed ordinance be forwarded with a recommendation for approval/denial. 5.On , 2021, this Board held the first public hearing on the proposed ordinance, after publishing due notice in the St. Lucie News Tribune. 6.On , 2021, this Board held its second public hearing on the proposed ordinance, after publishing due notice in the St. Lucie News Tribune and approved/denied the adoption of the ordinance. 7.The proposed amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code are consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, are internally consistent with the remainder of the Land Development Code and are in the best interest of the health, safety and public welfare of the citizens of St. Lucie County, Florida. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: PART A. The specific amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code to read as follows in strikethrough and underline format: CHAPTER II – DEFINITIONS 2.00.00.-DEFINTIONS Vehicular Use Area: Any area intended to support tracked or tired vehicles capable of self- propulsion. Vehicular use areas are engineered and constructed to support repeated loadings of these vehicles. The incidental use of any area by a tracked or tired vehicle to park non- self- propelled vehicles, for example, trailers, does not make the area used for the parking of such vehicles a vehicle use area. The vehicle use area construction of all-weather paved impervious surface is not required but shall include measure in conformance to St. Lucie County Engineering design standards to direct and store all stormwater run-off so it is treated prior to any off-site discharge. This requirement is not intended to supersede or otherwise contradict any regulatory requirements by any other agency. CHAPTER VII – DEVELOPMENT DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS 7.02.00. – PLANNED NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 7.02.03. – Standards and Requirements. Page 408 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 3 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. Standards and requirements for a Planned Non-Residential Development shall be as follows: A.Minimum Size. The minimum lot size requirements for a Planned Non-Residential Development shall be as follows: 1.Any Planned Non-Residential Development in a Residential Land Use classification shall comply with the minimum lot requirements in the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Zoning District. 2.Any Planned Non-Residential Development in a Commercial, Industrial or Mixed Use Land Use classification shall comply with the minimum lot requirements in the Commercial General (GC) Zoning District. 3.All Planned Non-Residential Development shall be under common ownership of control. B.Area, yard, Height and Other Dimensional Requirements. Area, yard, and height requirements shall be determined at the time of Preliminary and Final Development Plan approval, except that any structure on North or South Hutchinson Island that has not been occupied, constructed, or has not received a building permit, site plan or other County development approval as a permitted use prior to January 10, 1995, the requirements of Section 4.01.00, Hutchinson Island – Building Height Overlay Zoning shall apply. C.Public Facilities. 2.The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection is six (6) inches. Actual wWater main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. 3.The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities, that are located on a dead-end water main is eight (8) inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. The maximum number of fire hydrants that may be located on any dead end water is one (1). 4.3.Fire hydrants spacing shall be provided at a minimum spacing of one (1) every six hundred (600) feet unless otherwise approved by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. D.Traffic and Pedestrian Circulation. 6.All roads and streets shall intersect at an approximate 5” angle of ninety (90) degrees unless circumstances acceptable to St. Lucie County indicate a need for a lesser angle of intersection. 7.Street jogs or centerline offsets between any local street or road with another local street or road, shall be no less than one hundred fifty (150) feet. 8.The intersection of any two (2) local roads or streets with a Major Collector or Arterial Roadway shall be separated by a minimum distance of six hundred sixty (660) feet, as measured from centerline to centerline. Page 409 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 4 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. 9.6.Permanent dead-end streets shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) feet in length. Cul- de-sacs shall be provided at the end of all dead-end roads or streets greater than five hundred one (501) feet in length. The length of a dead-end street shall be measured along the centerline of the street from its point of perpendicular intersection with the centerline of intersecting street to the end of the dead-end street or roadway. All cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum right-of-way diameter of one hundred (100) feet. If the dead-end roadway is five hundred (500) feet or less in length, a “Y” or “T” type of turn around may be approved. If a dead-end street is temporary in nature then a temporary cul-de-sac shall be required until the roadway is connected to another street or road. In the center of the cul-de-sac an unpaved island, surrounded by a curb, improved with grass and landscaping that will not interfere with sight distance, may be provided. Center islands shall have a diameter of not less than seventeen (17) feet, unless otherwise approved through the review of the Planned Unit Development. 10. All roadways, exclusive of interior parking and access aisles areas, regardless of ownership, shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any exterior building walls, excepts for security gate houses or similar security structures located in a private street or road right-of-way. 11. 7. Access points on all collector or arterial streets serving a Planned Non-Residential Development shall be located and spaced so that traffic moving into and out of the arterial streets does not cause traffic congestion. E.Parking and Loading. 3. On Street Parking. In Planned Non-Residential Developments, on street parking may be used so long as the road on which the on-street parking is proposed lies entirely within the limits of the defined Planned Nonresidential Development and such parking would not contravene any other provision of this Code or the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances. Where such on street parking and loading is used, it shall be consistent with the following design standards: a.The minimum size of a parking stall shall be as follows: parallel 8 feet x 23 feet angled 10 feet x 18 feet handicapped (parallel)12 feet x 23 feet b.Handicapped parking spaces shall be appropriately marked. c.Access for emergency five vehicles shall be in accordance with NFPA standards. d.No more than fifteen (15) parking spaces shall be permitted in a continuous row without being interrupted by a minimum landscape area of three hundred sixty (360) square feet. G.Landscaping and Natural Features. Page 410 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 5 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. 3. Landscaping for off-street parking and loading areas shall meet the minimum requirements of Section 7.09.00. H.Open Space Standards. 1.For development projects of less than ten (10) acres, a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the gross area of land to committed to a Planned Non Residential Development must be for use as common open space, which may include parks, recreation areas, bicycle and pedestrian paths and facilities, marinas, swimming beaches, common open space, common landscaping or planting areas, floodways, lakes, wetlands, stormwater retention areas or other areas of public purpose other than but not including street or road rights- of-way, utility easements, above-ground utilities (although open space may be provided under transmission lines) require written approval from utility entity excluding exclusive stormwater treatment facilities, and parking areas. For development projects of ten (10) acres or more, a minimum of thirty twenty- five percent (325%) of the gross area of land to be committed to a Planned Non Residential Development must be for use as common open space, which may include parks, recreation areas, bicycle and pedestrian paths and facilities, marinas, swimming beaches, common space, common landscaping or planting areas, floodways, lakes, wetlands, stormwater retention areas or other areas of public purpose other than but not including street or road rights-of-way, utility easements, above-ground utilities (although open space may be provided under transmission lines), excluding exclusive stormwater treatment facilities, and parking areas. At the request of the developer, and subject to the approval of the Board of County Commissioners, use of recreational facilities may be offered to the general public. A minimum of fifteen twenty percent (1520%) of any existing native upland habitat on the property, must be preserved in its natural condition as part of the required thirty twenty- five percent (325%) common open space. For each acre of preserve native habitat above the required minimum fifteentwenty percent (1520%) that is preserved in its original state, credit shall be given at a rate of one hundred fifty percent (150%) per acre towards the remaining common open space requirement. All areas to be dedicated for common open space shall be identified as part of the Preliminary Development Plan for the Planned Nonresidential Development. Areas that are floodways, lakes, wetlands, and stormwater retention areas may be applied to satisfy the total common open space requirement subject to the requirement that fifteen twenty percent (1520%) of any existing native habitat on the property must be included as part of the required thirtytwenty-five percent (325%) common open space. As part of the Final Planned Nonresidential Development submission process, the developer or petitioner for the Planned Nonresidential Development shall provide for one (1) of the following: a.The advance dedication of all common open space to a public, or acceptable private, agency that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common space and any buildings, structures or improvements that been placed on it. All such dedications or conveyances shall be completed prior to the issuance of any building permits, including land clearing, for any portion of the Planned Nonresidential Non-Residential Development; or Page 411 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 6 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. b.A phased conveyance of the land to be used for common space to a public or acceptable private agency that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and any buildings, structures or improvements that have been placed on it. The schedule for the phased conveyance of any such lands to be used for common open space shall be a specific condition of approval for the Planned Nonresidential Non-Residential Development. 2.Areas provided or reserved to meet any other environmental preservation or protection requirement of this code or other lawful regulatory authority may be counted towards the overall common space requirement, provided that the common space meets the requirements of this Code. 3.All land dedicated for common open space shall be physically part of the Planned Non- Residential Development. I.Phasing. 2. If a Preliminary Final Development Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners is to be developed in stages or phases, each successive phase shall be constructed and developed in a reasonably continuous fashion. The final stage or phase shall be completed within ten (10) years of the date of preliminary final development plan approval. Any extension of the above requirement is subject to approval by the Board of County Commissioners unless otherwise amended by the Board of County Commissioners. J.Signs. 1.Signs within any Planned Non-Residential Development located in a Residential or Agriculturally classified land use area shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 9 applicable to the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Zoning District; provided, however, that the Board of County Commissioners may condition approval of a Planned Non- Residential Development upon compliance with more stringent sign regulations in order to ensure design consistency throughout the proposed development, to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to ensure public safety and prevent public harm, and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 2.Signs within any Planned Non-Residential Development located in a commercially or industrially classified Land Use Area shall comply with the provisions of Chapter IX applicable in the Commercial General (CG), Zoning District; provided, however, that the Board of County Commissioners may condition approval of a Planned Non-Residential Development upon compliance with more stringent sign regulations in order to ensure design consistency throughout the proposed development, to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to ensure public safety and prevent public harm, and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 7.03.00. – PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT 7.03.03. – Standards and Requirements K.Open Space and Landscaping Standards. 1.A minimum of thirty twenty-five percent (325%) of the gross area of the land to be committed to a Planned Mixed Use Development must be for use as common open space, which may include, parks, recreation areas, bicycle and pedestrian paths and facilities, Page 412 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 7 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. marinas, swimming beaches, common open space, common landscaping or planting areas, floodways, lakes, wetlands, stormwater retention areas, or other areas of public purpose other than but not including street, road or drainage rights-of-way, above ground utilities (although common open space may be provided under transmission lines), excluding exclusive stormwater treatment facilities, and parking areas. A minimum of fifteen twenty percent (1520%) of any existing native upland habitat on the property, must be preserved in its natural condition as part of the required thirty twenty-five percent (325%) common open space, For each acre of preserved native habitat above the required minimum fifteen twenty percent (1520%) that is preserved in its original state, credit shall be given at a rate of one hundred fifty percent (150%) per acre towards the remaining common open space requirement. 2.All areas to be dedicated for common open space shall be identified as part of the Preliminary Development Plan for the Planned Mixed-Use Development. Areas that are floodways, lakes, wetlands, and stormwater retention areas may be applied to satisfy the total common open space, subject to the requirement that fifteen percent (15%) of any existing native habitat on the property must be included as part of the required thirty twenty-five (325%) percent common open space. As part of the Final Planned Mixed-Use Development submission process, the developer or petitioner for the Planned Mixed-Use Development shall provide for one (1) of the following: 7.06.00.– OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING 7.06.01.– Purpose and Applicability. A.Purpose. The requirements of this Section are intended to insure ensure that every building, structure, or use erected or instituted, except for bona-fide agricultural uses and buildings, shall be provided with adequate off-street parking facilities for the use of occupants, employees, visitors and patrons, and that certain uses be provided with adequate off-street loading facilities, thereby reducing congestion to the public street and promoting the safety and welfare of the public. B.Applicability 1.Existing Uses./Changes in Use. Buildings or structures existing as of the effective date of this Code may be modernized, altered, or repaired without providing additional off-street parking or loading facilities, provided there is no change of use. 2.Change in Use. Effective March 1, 1999, any change in use to an existing building or structure, will require that all on0site parking and loading facilities be brought into full compliance with the provisions of this Code., except as otherwise provided here in Section 7.06.00, as it may be amended from time to time. For the purposes of this Section. “change in use” shall mean any change in use or activity that requires the issuance of a new certificate of zoning compliance. Parking surface, landscaping, changes in use and zoning compliance are subject to the provisions of this Code as amended by Ordinance No. 12- 003. 2.3.Expansion of Structure. Expansion in the floor area, volume, capacity, or space occupied of any structure existing on or before July 1, 1984, shall require compliance with all off- street parking and loading requirements contained in this Code to be met for both new Page 413 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 8 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. construction and existing structures, except as otherwise provided below and in Section 7.06.03. a. Exceptions: 1.If the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Services Director that the site has provided adequate off-street parking for its use prior to expansion, only the new construction shall be required to comply with the requirements of this Section. 2.New construction not required to comply with off-street parking requirements include: Entry areas or vestibules, unoccupied storage areas provided these do not exceed twenty- five percent (25%) of the gross floor area, and areas which do not add to the carrying occupancy capacity of a structure. 3.4.Nonconforming Uses: When repairs and alternations are to be made in a building occupied by a nonconforming use, all off-street parking requirements contained in this Code shall be met of the cost of repairs and alterations exceed fifty percent (50%) of the assessed value of the building and structures. a. Exceptions. 1.If the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Services Director that the site has provided adequate off-street parking for its use prior to expansion, only new construction shall be required to comply with requirements in this Section. 2.New Cconstruction not required to comply with off-street parking requirements include: Entry areas or vestibules, unoccupied storage areas provided these do not exceed twenty- five percent (25%) of the gross floor area, and areas which do not add to the carrying occupancy capacity of a structure. 5. Religious Facility and Membership Organization. When a building in which persons regularly assemble for religious worship or social organization is built, repaired, or expanded, the off-street requirements are as follows: a. Exceptions: 1.Up to seventy-five percent (75%) of the total parking requirement may be stabilized grass parking for new construction and expansion of structure. All-weathered impervious surface Is not required as provided herein. 2.Grass parking shall be provided in a manner acceptable to the County Engineer. 3.In the event grassed parking areas become deteriorated as indicated by dead or dying grass, bare dirt or overgrown grass and weeds, the Planning and Development Services Director may require the owner of the property to pave all or part of such area. 4.The stabilized grass parking vehicular use area shall meet the design standards pursuant to Section 7.06.02(B), except for material as provided herein. 7.06.02- Performance Standards. B. Design Standards. 3. Material. Page 414 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 9 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. a. Requirement for All Weather Paved Surface for All Required Off-Street Parking and Vehicular Use Areas. Subject to the Administrative Relief provisions below, all required off-street parking spaces, access aisles, vehicular use and off-street loading areas constructed, expanded or altered after March 1, 1999, shall be constructed with an all weather paved surface meeting the requirements of the St. Lucie County Public Works Department. The permitted impervious surface materials be concrete, asphalt, brick pavers, stamped concrete, or paving block. Only asphalt or concrete will be permitted within the County’s Right-of-Way. Pervious paving systems and grass paving systems shall be permitted for non-required parking spaces when the paving systems and materials are approved by the County Engineer. Stabilized unpaved parking areas may be permitted at locations outside the urban service area upon approval of the County Engineer, so long as parking spaces, accessways, and driveways are clearly marked and the vehicular/pedestrian circulation system is safe. The County Engineer shall publish a list of commercially available paving systems of pervious and imperious paving materials that are approved for use. The County Engineer shall approve design material and specifications on each site. For religious facilities or fraternal organizations, grass parking is exempt from the Administrative Relief provisions below, as provided in Section 7.06.01.B.5. 7.06.03. – Relief. A. Administrative Relief for Developments under 6,000 SF. The Planning and Development Services Director may grant administrative relief from the parking standards or the required amount of all weather paved surface for off-street parking and vehicle use areas including vehicular use areas (Small Business Development < six thousand (6,000) square feet) based upon a written request for such administrative relief and an analysis submitted by the applicant. The analysis must demonstrate that the numeric amount of required parking or the required amount of all weather paved surface for off-street parking and vehicle use areas is unnecessary or not practical to construct because of conditions that are unique and peculiar to the site or conditions that would result in unnecessary hardship for the owner, lessee or occupant as opposed to mere inconvenience and that the conditions are created by the regulations of this Code and not by the actions of the property owner or applicant, environmental considerations, such as micrositing for large trees, for mass transit considerations, such as providing transit stops in an area to be served with mass transit services, and superior design considerations determined by exceeding the minimum requirements of the Land Development Code. Requests for administrative relief from the paved surface requirements shall meet the following standards: 1.Lands within the Urban Service Boundary: a.The alterative off-street parking or vehicular use area shall not be visible from any the adjacent right-of-way; b.The alternative off-street parking or vehicular use area shall not be utilized for a public use; 2.Lands outside of the Urban Service Boundary: a.Alternative off-street parking or vehicular use areas shall not be permitted for any operation involving retail lands. Page 415 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 10 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. The County Engineer Public Works Department shall review the request for administrative relief from the all-weather paved parking surface requirements and provide the Planning and Development Services Director with a written recommendation based on the standards set out in this section. The County Engineer Public Works Department may require the applicant to provide an engineered solution to any adverse impacts that the request for a waiver may create. If it is determined by the Planning and Development Services Director that it is not possible to meet the numeric or parking stall width parking requirements of this Code due to the size or configuration of the existing parcel, the Planning and Development Services Director may grant administrative relief, subject to determining consistency with the Standards of Review set out in Section 10.01.02, to the parking stall width or the number of parking spaces to be required. Any such administrative relief shall be specific to the parcel or property in question and shall be the minimum necessary to address the particular problem. Any such administrative relief shall include specific findings of fact and shall be issued in a manner and form that is acceptable to the County Attorney. Any determination for relief that is made by the Planning and Development Services Director shall be recorded in the public records of St. Lucie County. 7.09.00. – LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 7.09.04. – General Landscaping Requirements. E.Landscaped Buffer Areas Between Non-Residential or Residential Structure(s) Housing Three (3) or More Dwelling Units and Single-Family or Two-Family Residential Uses. All side and rear yard perimeter buffer areas between non-residential or residential structure(s) housing three (3) or more dwelling units and single family or two-family residential uses shall be landscaped with a masonry wall or opaque wood fence of at least eight (8) feet in height that forms a continuous screen between the uses. All masonry walls or opaque wood fences shall be landscaped with a continuous hedge along both the inside and outside base of the wall or fence. One (1) tree shall be planted along the wall or fence for each thirty (30) linear feet or major fraction thereof of the length of the wall or fence. Tree plantings shall be alternated so that at least sixty percent (60%) of the required number of trees is located on the outside of the wall or fence. The remaining forty (40) percent of the required perimeter tree plantings shall be located on the inside face of the wall or fence. Existing native vegetation may be used to satisfy all or part of the landscape planting requirements of this paragraph upon the approval of the Environmental Resources Director. All fences or walls shall be treated with an anti-graffiti surface treatment. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to removal any graffiti that may be applied to the wall or fence. In addition, the owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping along both the inside and outside edge of any wall or fence. This landscaping shall be maintained in a good condition so as to present a healthy, neat, and orderly appearance free from refuse and debris. Maintenance shall include the replacement of all unhealthy and dead material within sixty (60) days in conformance with the approved site plan/or landscape plan. Violations of this section, or failure to maintain all required landscaping shall be grounds for referral to the Code Enforcement Board for appropriate enforcement actions. The sixty-day rule for compliance may be extended, when necessary, by the Environmental Resources Director or his/her designee to permit recovery from acts of nature such as a hurricane or a freeze. Masonry walls or opaque wood fences may be located within any required yard, consistent with the provisions of Section 8.00.00 of this Code. The requirement for this perimeter masonry wall or opaque wood fence may be waived by the Environmental Resources Page 416 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 11 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. Director if it is shown to the satisfaction of the Environmental Resources Director either that the adjoining properties owners have signed a consent that indicates their desire not to have the required masonry wall or opaque wood fence constructed along their property line, or that the Environmental Resources Director determines that a waiver is necessary to preserve any significant, protected or historic native vegetation. The Environmental Resources Director may reduce the eight (8) foot height requirement down to six (6) feet, if it shown that adjoining property owners have signed a consent form that indicates their desire to reduce the height of the required masonry wall or opaque wood fence constructed along their property line. In the event that any such consent is issued, the owner of the property on which the nonresidential development is taking place shall need to comply with the standards of Section 7.09.04(B) of this Code as those standards relate to perimeter screening. All other landscaping provisions of this Code shall apply as applicable. 7.10.00. – SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS 7.10.18 – Airport Industrial Park – Special Regulations. J. Storage Area Regulations. No materials, waste, supplies or equipment shall be stored outside of the buildings constructed or erected onsite, unless the storage yard or area is entirely screened by an opaque barrier, eight (8) foot in height, consisting of either a wall, fence, hedge or other durable landscape barrier screened in accordance with Section 7.09.00 of this Code. All landscape screens shall be approved by the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority prior to their installation. 7.10.23. – Telecommunications Tower Siting. G. Aesthetics. All telecommunications towers and antennas shall meet the following requirements: 4. The Board of County Commissioners The Environmental Resources Department Director may consider total or partial relief from the required perimeter landscaping requirements of paragraph 2 above, if the proposed telecommunications tower meets all of the following standards and criteria: a. The telecommunications tower is located in an AG-5, AG-2.5, AG-1, IL, IH or U Zoning district. b. The proposed telecommunications tower is located a minimum of one thousand (1,000) feet, or the tower height, whichever is greater, from the nearest public street or road right- of-way, public park or playground, public or private school (primary or secondary educational facility), habitable residential structure or any area zoned for residential or commercial uses. For the purpose of this paragraph this restriction shall apply to all properties regardless of political boundary. c. The proposed telecommunications tower base must be screened from view by either existing vegetation, intervening buildings, structures or other physical or made features meeting the intent of this code. d. It is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners Environmental Resources Director that the planting of any vegetation would result in the high probability of general plant mortality due to unacceptable soil conditions that cannot otherwise be resolved through replacement of the soil or other form of soil treatment. In Page 417 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 12 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. considering any request for relief under the provisions of this section, the Board of County Commissioners Environmental Resources Director may impose reasonable limiting conditions associated with that relief. CHAPTER XI – ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 11.02.02. – Designation of Minor Site Plan, Major Site Plan, or Preliminary Planned Development Site Plan. A.Generally. For purposes of these review procedures, all site plans shall be designated as either a Minor Site Plan, a Major Site Plan, or a Preliminary Planned Development Site Plan according to the criteria below. B.Minor Site Plan. A proposed development shall be designated as a Minor Site Plan if it is: 1.Any division of land located outside of the Urban Service Boundaries into less than ten (10) parcels but more than two (2) parcels in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.03.00. 2.Any division of land located within the Urban Service Boundary into less than fifty (50) parcels but more than two (2) parcels in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.03.00. 2.3.Any multi-family residential development of less than fifty (50) one hundred (100) units, that does not involve platting. 3.4.An nonresidential use, including additions to existing structures of 6,000 to 50,000 100,000 square feet. 4.5.Any nonresidential non-residential use, less than 50,000 square feet, that provides drive through or walk up services. 5.6.Any nonresidential non-residential use, less than 50,000 square feet, that provides drive through or walk-up services. 7. Any non-residential use, including additions to existing structures up to 500,000 square feet for development included within the St. Lucie County Targeted Industry List. 6.8.Any commercial lodging establishments having less than six (6) units. C.Major Site Plan. A proposed development shall be designated as a Major Development Site Plan if it is: 1.Any division of land located outside the Urban Service Boundary into ten (10) or more parcels, in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.03.00. 2.Any division of land located within the Urban Service Boundary into fifty (50) or more parcels, in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.03.00. 2 3. Any multi-family residential development of fifty (50) one hundred (100) or more dwelling units. 3.4. Fifty thousand and one (50,001) One hundred thousand and one (100,001) or more square feet of non-residential floor space. 5.Five hundred thousand and one (500,001) or more square feet of non-residential floor space for any development included within the St. Lucie County Targeted Industry List. 4. 6. All commercial lodging establishments have including six (6) or more units available for rent or lease. 5. 7. Any development of land. Page 418 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 13 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. a.Where the proposed development should be more thoroughly considered and reviewed because of its location or potential for impact on public facilities, natural resources, and public safety. D. Preliminary Planned Development Site Plan. A proposed development shall be designated as a Planned Development Site Plan if it is: If any portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative, or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance. If this ordinance or any provision thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstance, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property, or circumstance. PART D.APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE. This ordinance shall be applicable in the unincorporated area of St. Lucie County. PART E.FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this ordinance to the Bureau of Administrative Code and Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida 32304. PART F.EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Department of State. PART G.ADOPTION. After motion and second, the vote on this ordinance was as follows: Chris Dzadowsky, Chair XXX Sean Mitchell, Vice-Chair XXX Linda Bartz, Commissioner XXX Frannie Hutchinson, Commissioner XXX Cathy Townsend, Commissioner XXX PART H. CODIFICATION. Provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated in the St. Lucie County Code and Compiled Laws, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other appropriate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered to accomplish such intention; provided, however, that Parts B through H shall not be codified. PASSED AND DULY ENACTED this day of , 2021. Page 419 of 420 Ordinance No. 2021-XX Development Standards Amendment Page 14 Underline is for additions. Strikethrough is for deletion. Attest: Board of County Commissioners St. Lucie County, Florida By: Deputy Clerk Chair Approved As To Form and Correctness: By: County Attorney Page 420 of 420