The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet 10-18-04 · ,. \..t ~A~:?!,:'~i~ii:!~¡>:¿,~=::':~;:~}~~J·~;~;<:~ ~ . ' ..., October 18,2004 'J',;,".< ~~\~~.... !.:-.~¡;.:f.'" \."~ ~ :' , REVISED October 1 8, 2004 6:00 PM BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING AGENDA WELCOME ALL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED. PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES AND PAGERS PRIOR TO ENTERING THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS. GENERAL RULES AND PROCEDURES - Attached is the agenda which will determine the order of business conducted at today's Board meeting: CONSENT AGENDA - These items are considered routine and are enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests. REGULAR AGENDA - Proclamations, Presentations, Public Hearings, and Department requests are items, which the Commission will discuss individually usually in the order listed on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS - These items are usually heard on the first and third Tuesday at 6:00 P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible. However, if a public hearing is scheduled for a meeting on a second or fourth Tuesday, which begins at 9:00 A.M., then public hearings will be heard at 9:00 A.M. or as soon thereafter as possible. These time designations are intended to indicate that an item will not be addressed prior to the listed time. The Chairman will open each public hearing and asks anyone wishing to speak to come forward, one at a time. Comments will be limited to five minutes. As a ge'~eral rule, when issues are scheduled before the Commission under department request or public hearing, the order of presentation is: (1) County staff presents the details of the Board item (2) Commissioners comment (3) if a public hearing, the Chairman will ask for public comment, (4) further discussion and action by the board. ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION - Please state your name and address, speaking clearly into the microphone. If you have backup material, please have eight copies for distribution. NON-AGENDA ITEMS - These items are presented by an individual Commissioner or staff as necessary at the conclusion of the printed agenda. PUBLIC COMMENT - Time is allotted at the beginning of each meeting of general public comment. Please limit comments to five minutes. DECORUM - Please be respectful of others opinions. MEETINGS - All Board meetings -are open to the public and are held on the first and third Tuesdays of each month at 6:00 P.M. and on the second and fourth Tuesdays at 9:00 A.M., unless otherwise advertised. Meetings are held in the County Commission Chambers in the Roger Poitras Administration Annex at 2300 Virginia Ave., Ft. Pierce, FL 34982. The Board schedules additional workshops throughout the year necessary to accomplish their goals and commitments. Notice is provided of these workshops. Assistive Listening Device is available to anyone with a hearing disability. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Director at (772) 462-1777 or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. '-" . BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS www.co.st-lucie.fI.us ·:~·'·N...>":(· 'i.~.1'>" .:t":'." ,;,.;~yt'("¡,"; '" :- Paula A. Lewis, Chairman John D. Bruhn, Vice Chairman Doug Coward Frannie Hutchinson Cliff Barnes District No. 3 District No. 1 District No.2 District No. 4 District No. 5 October 1 8, 2004 6:00 P.M. j PUBLIC HEARINGS ~ 0 ~T fo W' ~ ,; 'Þ }f) ¡f}l} r Á I sgrv (Íypv ~' ~r ) , ¡rl f INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS Reading of the announcements by the County Administrator 2. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT -----~----- GROWTH MANAGEMENT ¡ Consider whether or not to adopt the Becker Holding Corporation's amendment to the Future Land Use Map. Adoption of the amendment would change the future land use designation on 72 acres located along Ten Mile Creek. Approximately 41 acres inside the tOO-year floodplain would change from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2 du/ac) to R/C (Residential, Conservation - 1 du/5ac) and 31 acres outside the tOO-year floodplain would be changed from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) - Consider whether to adopt, not to adopt, or continl!.e the Becker Holding Corporation's amendment to the Future Land Use Map. Ae/-,,/~i;. . ~~ //..5 ¿::- r "$ £/Þ" r.s ¿',t.-c.- ~& ;1'A--fh-.-..¡/~ ~1-'~'--' ,GROWTH MANAGEMENT /~ ~¿? ~ ~C-(.,~L / ~~,¿7~ , "consider adoption of Ordinance 04-030 approving the B]K, Inc. application requesting a change in the Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac). The 48.72 amendment site is located on the south side of Okeechobee Road (SR 70), approximately Y2 mile west of the Florida Turnpike. - Consider staff recommendation to adopt Ordinance 04-030 approving the B]K, Inc. request for a change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential, Urban). ~ GROWTH MANAGEMENT Consider adoption of Ordinance 04-032 approving the Home Dynamics Inc. request for a change in Future Land Use designation from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RM (Res ntial Medium - 9 du/ac) and RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac) for 34.5 acres located on the southwe corner of Edwards Road and South 25th Street. - Consider staff recommendation to adopt Ordinance -032 approving the Home Dynamics Corporation petition for a Change in Future Land Use designation fro COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RM (Residential, Medium 9 du/ac) and RH esidential, High - 15 du/ac). /l/leJ~ ~ '" ... ~ .." Regular Agenda October 18, 2004 Page Two / GROWTH MANAGEMENT Consider Ordinance 04-031 adopting the Lucie Rock, LLC request for a change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/l-95 Activity Area - Medium and High Intensity Levels). - Consider staff recommendation to adopt Ordinance 04-031 approving the Lucie Rock, LLC request for a change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area). END OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ------ ------- 4. ADMINISTRATION Staff request for the Board to approve Hurricane-related legislative issues - Consider staff recommendation to approve the attached After-Action Reports and forward a letter to the Local Legislative Delegation and the Florida Association of Counties asking that the attached outlined requests be considered in future State . Legislation. 5. ADMINISTRATION Civic Center Status - Staff is seeking direction on whether the County should replace the roof, air- conditioning and stage at the Civic Center or begin planning towards a replacement facility at a location to be determined. \ - ~ ..,/ ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS þ -------------------- ANNOUNCEMENTS OCTOBER 18, 2004 1. County Commissioners meeting changes: · The November 2, 2004 Board of County Commissioners meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. · The November 9, 2004 Board of County Commissioners meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m. · The Board of County Commissioners will hold a Special Board Meeting on November 15, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. · The November 16, 2004 Board of County Commissioners Reorganization meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. The public is invited to join the newly elected Commission for cake and coffee following the reorganization meeting. · The December 28, 2004 Board of County Commissioners meeting has been canceled due to the Holidays. 2. There will be a public meeting on Friday, October 22, 2004 at 2:00 in the County Commission Chambers to inform the residents of Indian River Drive of the plans for rehabilitation of the roadway. 3. The South Beach Charrette (Chuck's Seafood) will be on Saturday, October 23, 2004 at 1 :00 p.m. at Fire Station #2, 880 Seaway Drive in Fort Pierce. \ 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 re<¡uiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Manager at (772) 462-1777 or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. '-' !;;¡¡¡iì1!~'.fmj\'~~~r."I:t'·:V· t,~'·· \.' , ". ~~~4f~~-<"~~b'.'\: ~q~~1 '-~..~~ .... ...,,, . Ke1 October 18,2004 1~~\?r~ø~~~~'7 .~?'; ~. - . REVISED October 18, 2004 6:00 PM BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING AGENDA WELCOME ALL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED. PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES AND PAGERS PRIOR TO ENTERING THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS. GENERAL RULES AND PROCEDURES - Attached is the agenda which will determine the order of business conducted at today's Board meeting: CONSENT AGENDA - These items are considered routine and are enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests. REGULAR AGENDA - Proclamations, Presentations, Public Hearings, and Department requests are items, which the Commission will discuss individually usually in the order listed on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS - These items are usually heard on the first and third Tuesday at 6:00 P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible. However, if a public hearing is scheduled for a meeting on a second or fourth Tuesday, which begins at 9:00 A.M., then public hearings will be heard at 9:00 A.M. or as soon thereafter as possible. These time designations are intended to indicate that an item will not be addressed prior to the listed time. The Chairman will open each public hearing and asks anyone wishing to speak to come forward, one at a time. Comments will be limited to five minutes. As a ge'~eral rule, when issues are scheduled before the Commission under department request or public hearing, the order of presentation is: (1) County staff presents the details of the Board item (2) Commissioners comment (3) if a public hearing, the Chairman will ask for public comment, (4) further discussion and action by the board. ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION - Please state your name and address, speaking clearly into the microphone. If you have backup material, please have eight copies for distribution. NON-AGENDA ITEMS - These items are presented by an individual Commissioner or staff as necessary at the conclusion of the printed agenda. PUBLIC COMMENT - Time is allotted at the beginning of each meeting of general public comment. Please limit comments to five minutes. DECORUM - Please be respectful of others opinions. MEETINGS - All Board meetings are open to the public and are held on the first and third Tuesdays of each month at 6:00 P.M. and on the second and fourth Tuesdays at 9:00 A.M., unless otherwise advertised. Meetings are held in the County Commission Chambers in the Roger Poitras Administration Annex at 2300 Virginia Ave., Ft. Pierce, FL 34982. The Board schedules additional workshops throughout the year necessary to accomplish their goals and commitments. Notice is provided of these workshops. Assistive Listening Device is available to anyone with a hearing disability. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Director at (772) 462-1777 or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. .; '~~,.r ç ~ '<; oê~ ,.t: >;; ~ ., .' ,,~¢ ". . " . '~ '-' ' BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS www.co.st-lucie.fI.us Paula A. Lewis, Chairman John D. Bruhn, Vice Chairman Doug Coward Frannie Hutchinson Cliff Barnes District No. 3 District No. 1 District No. 2 District No. 4 District No.5 October 18, 2004 6:00 P.M. INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS 2. 3A. 'ê{eJ M'~O 3B'J' IQ , ,'':\. .' '\\ \¡ 1\.~ \)J) 3C. , -reO , (,1\{ f\ VV' /0' }-{ Reading of the announcements by the County Administrator GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT ~~~-;:; ÓX~Cìr,C'¡-, '1,' et, - i3rtAh,,-'-(("') LQ.cGì "::, - (t' ') GROWTH MANAGEMENT --k.Àkhì¡'\~CVl- '-feS Consider whether or not to adopt the Becker Holding corpo~i'i~)f,~)f~;~~~t to the Future Land Use Map. Adoption of the amendment would change the future land use designation on 72 acres located along Ten Mile Creek. Approximately 41 acres inside the 100-year floodplain would change from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2 du/ac) to R/C (Residential, Conservation - 1 du/5ac) and 31 acres outside the tOO-year floodplain would be changed from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) - Consider whether to adopt, ·not to adopt, or continue the Becker Holding ~ Corporation's amendment to the Future Land Use Mat 'M.öh en, -\ G i (\~\ "",ie.. (,del; t', ä-¡\v. I \(0'2. ""&1,'¿. i fì Lt (\-€ í t;::,ÙCA ) -\C(~P''l:>\e.. 16..1'(.\ u~(. u,'C\--h'':'''í\,'":>ìt2.î ù....\\t~ C'I\.o-1- c+ ~L/ , GROWTH MANAGEMENT{' \C,GL~ ~\U."\+\ìfCvcr -I\\<?. -;:>...\.) þ\C'cë"O>';· / ------ 'Consider adoption of Ordinance 04-030 approving the B]K, Inc. application requesting a change in the Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac). The 48.72 amendment site is located on the south side of Okeechobee Road (SR 70), approximately 1/2 mile west of the Florida Turnpike. - Consider staff recommendation to adopt Ordinance 04-030 approving the BJK, Inc. request for a change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential, Urban). GROWTH MANAGEMENT Consider adoption of Ordinance 04-032 approving the Home Dynamics Inc. request for a change in Future Land Use designation from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RM (Residential Medium - 9 du/ac) and RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac) for 34.5 acres located on the southwest corner of Edwards Road and South 25th Street. - Consider staff recommendation to adopt Ordinance 04-032 approving the Home Dynamics Corporation petition for a Change in Future Land Use designation from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RM (Residential, Medium 9 du/ac) and RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac). ~lDtì ûY1 +ò denî '-' ..,,¡ Regular Agenda October 18, 2004 Page Two 3D. \ fOP (\/~ f\yf" \' ,/ jj {j GROWTH MANAGEMENT Consider Ordinance 04-031 adopting the Lucie Rock, LLC request for a change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area - Medium and High Intensity Levels). - Consider staff recommendation to adopt Ordinance 04-031 approving the Lucie Rock, LLC request for a change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/l-95 Activity Area). END OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ---µüLUI\ fò 4pró~ídl ~¡er-,A..-htlYJ ièep~d-s wIth f{-<.-- e-xceph'(J)1 (.J'~¡~, ADMINISTRATION Iú.s,h h?01 (t~rJllk OefYlOl"huì') Cúsbot Cle.5tn^1ed h("lo/1e~Cind. iOfVJo..rð Revolt-6 rJ5 (~f'µ.estteJ. Þ~b~ Staff request for the Boarl:! to-approveLHurricane-rel3ted legislative issues - Consider staff recommendation to approve the attached After-Action Reports and forward a letter to the Local Legislative Delegation and the Florida Association of Counties asking that the attached outlined requests be considered in future State . Legislation. 4. ~ I () tJI ~'{û'~ t\ ~X~~ 0 5. , MADMINISTRA TION , k 0'1\. \Ó,{¡ ~"f-é ~iVic Center Status' - Staff is seeking direction on whether the County should replace the roof, air- "Y Iv c,,'V~~lcUnditioning and stage at the Civic Center or begin planning towards a replacement facility at a location to ~~I -' c\l" ~'\, be determined. tJ} ~(\\ \,1" \ \¡...- ..., ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ------------------ ANNOUNCEMENTS OCTOBER 18, 2004 1. County Commissioners meeting changes: · The November 2, 2004 Board of County Commissioners meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. · The November 9, 2004 Board of County Commissioners meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m. · The Board of County Commissioners will hold a Special Board Meeting on November 15, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. · The November 16, 2004 Board of County Commissioners Reorganization meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. The public is invited to join the newly elected Commission for cake and coffee following the reorganization meeting. · The December 28, 2004 Board of County Commissioners meeting has been canceled due to the Holidays. 2. There will be a public meeting on Friday, October 22, 2004 at 2:00 in the County Commission Chambers to inform the residents of Indian River Drive of the plans for rehabilitation of the roadway. 3. The South Beach Charrette (Chuck's Seafood) will be on Saturday, October 23, 2004 at 1 :00 p.m. at Fire Station #2, 880 Seaway Drive in Fort Pierce. \ 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 St. Lucie County Community Services Manager at (772) 462-1777 or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. 10/17/2004 00:0? 7724513512 ~ CANDLELIGHT ACRES PAGE 01 ..., ... .', ;.fIo North Fork Property Owners 2630 Rainbow DriWt Ft. Pierce, Fie. 34981 North Fork property OWners To: ~~~~~ II: r;1,l1dý Department of Comm n ra From: Patricia A. Ferrick Governmental Repre..ntative 4802 South 25'" Sbeet Fort Pierce, FIa.. 34881-5001 Subject: File Number pA-03-003 (8eckeI' Holding eorporaton) Ordinance 04..029 Location: Northwest comer of Se1v1tZ Road and RaUa Rd. along Ten Mile CreeL Size of property~ 72 acre., request Land use change. 31 from RS- 2 to RU.. 5 dwelling units to acre. 41 Acres Residential conservation 1 unit per 5 Ac.... \ iii, 10/17/2004 00:02 7724513512 ~ :~ANDLELlGHT ACRES PAGE 02 ...I ... TM Norttl Fork Property Owners, questions the need for auch high density on property that borders Ten Mile Creek. that ftows directly Into the North Fork of the at. lucie RIYfH'. We understand work is cumH1tty being done to ....toN Oxbows in the North Fork, and that this property has an Oxbow OR site. We .Iso question the traffic impact statement, dOM it include the þrojected daUy trips for Wal-Marta Distribution Centar? Doeia it include the trips generated with the opening of Selvitz Road providing a mNCt connection into Pott St. Lucie, and the aecompanied additional traffic from recent zoning ch.....'" PaL in that corridor? We question the additional trip generations on the roadwaya in the .u~unding area. There are no grocery sto.... or dn.....toras or doctor offices in this conidor. w. question the noise from the adjacent industrial uses In this area. How will Uùs impact a nadti family setting? On the ftood zone maps it appears that over half of ibis property is In the 100 year floodplain. How will this impact the downstream ........? WiD this change encourage other property owners along the T... " MiIe·CNek.... and the North Fort to NqUeSt this same \ change? WiH it set a precedent for more mutti..family development along the pristine water way. to the south thenÞby degrading the water quality that flows into the .quatic pf'eérve a.... eouth of the Midway Road bridge? The NorthFOf1( Property Ownera feels that these questions need to be answered prior to the Land Use change being granted. The . North Fort Property CMners has additional queetioAs regarding this land U.e ebanga. lÐ/17!2004 00;0~ 7724613512 CANDLELIGHT ACRES PAGE 03 "-- "'" "" Wh.t Is the CUlTent eMvation of th. property along setvitz and Ral" Road? What is the cunvnt elevation along the river? What is ~. ftood el&vation in this area? What first floor elevation is needed for construction? wtt.t amount of impervious surface ftln...off will be generated by ttds; project? , ~t will the road way elevation be in ....tion to house eIe-'tion In this area? We a", vety famHl.r with hou8ee in and aloriD the riverfront properties at a bigher elevation than 1he road and the road tben becomes a canal during high water di8¿harge and hurricanes. Examples, BeD Avenue, Sweetwater, etc.: What volume of water will tbe .Uenuation facHitie8 being designed bold? It bas been estimated in the North FOIt River basin that 46,,000 .~ feet is needed. The North Fork Is . Tiel., Sasin. We ,... that the land use change and the PUD that goø before the ¡ Planning and Zoning Board on October 21, should be co~panion petitions. Before the Board of County ConJm1saionenh Pttot to any land use chaßge, we am vwy familiar with properties that come in under the density allowed only to find " that: the property cnanges hands and that new plana .... \ 8U"itIød up to the uttimate denaitr allowed. In~ of the applied for density under the current appfication utttrnate density is then requested up to the maximum. ,Thill proposed project is not conaistønt with Goa" 8.1,8.1...2.11 t 8.1.3.1. In the CGnHt"Yation element. We request that you rHCbedute thle land use chaRge and companion it with 1he PUn, 80 that questions raised cantHI fully ...Wered. ~~~~ ~t?~. - <µ¡,_Jç/~ · ,.' C....i -:B 0 C c. ~. ~dm.. Û:>. A~ ~ ~ l:¿@.. ~' 3A TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY FL FROM; JAMES & DIANE PULLIAM 3311 SELVITZ RD. FT. PIERCE FL 34981-4720 SUBJECT: BECKER HOLDING P A -03-003 OCT 20, 2004 WE ARE LOOKING FOR PROTECTION AND STABILITY!!!!!! WHEN A F AMIL Y MAKES A SIZABLE INVESTMENT IN A HOME AND GOES TO THE TROUBLE TO RESEARCH THE ZONING, CODES, AND FUTURE LAND USE OF AREA PARCELS, IT SHOULD BE SOMETHING YOU CAN TAKE TO THE "BANK" . OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THIS PETITION IS THAT: BECKER WILL BE ABLE TO BUILD 167 HOMES UNDER THE PROPOSED CHANGE R/U, RlC, VERSES 150 HOMES UNDER THE CURRENT RlS DESINATION. ALL HOMES ARE TO BE BUILT OUTSIDE OF THE 100 YR FLOOD PLAIN, ON THE UPLAND 34 ACRES. IS THIS SUMMARY ACCURATE? THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN INDICATES APPROX. 35 HOMES WILL BE BUILT WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN. WE AVE EXPERIENCED THAT 100- YEAR EVENT 4 TIMES IN THE PAST 10 YEARS. WILL THE TRANSFER OF THE 8 UNITS FROM THE RlC 41 ACRE FLOODPLAIN AREA TO THE UPLAND PROPOSED PUD SITE PLAN PREVENT ANYONE FROM FOREVER DEVELOPING THE FLOOD PLAIN? WILL THE DEVELOPER BE ALLOWED TO PLACE FILL IN THE FLOOD PLAIN AT THE DETRIMENT OF CURRENT RESIDENTS ALONG THE CREEK THAT ARE CURRENTL Y ABOVE THE FLOOD LEVEL, BUT MAY NOT BE, IF FILL IS ADDED? AREA FOR FEASIBLE OFF SET FLOOD WATER RETENTION IS NOT SHOWN. DETAILED TOPO WORK IS NOT INCLUDED ON SITE PLAN. WHY ISN'T THE COMISSION CONSIDERING DETAILED TOPO AND FLOOD PLAIN INFORMATION FOR THIS PETITION? PAGE 1 OF2 · .,. ~ -.II WHAT PROTECTION DO THE AREA RESIDENTS HAVE FROM A CHANGE IN THE PROPOSED PUD OF SINGLE F AMIL Y HOMES TO MDL TI F AMIL Y APARTMENTS, AS IS CURRENTL Y HAPPENING IN THE WHITE CITY SUNRISE AREA, IF THE COMISSION APPROVES THE PETITIONWITHOUT LINKING IT TO A SPECIFIC SITE PLAN? THIS PROPERTY HAS AN ACTIVE FLOOD PLAIN AS SHOWN BY THE ENCLOSED PICTURES. WILL THE COUNTY COMMISSION CONTINUE TO ALLOW THE CHANGING OF LAND USE ALONG ENVIROMENT ALLY SENSITIVE AREAS OF TEN MILE CREEK, WHERE THE IS NO ACTIVE FLOOD PLAIN TO PREVENT ENCROACHING OF HIGH DENSITY HOUSING? THE FLOOD PLAIN ISSUE MUST BE RESOLVED IN A DELffiERA TE PRESIDENCE SETTING MANNER THAT WILL PROTECT BOTH CURRENT AND FUTURE RESIDENTS. WHEN WILL THIS ISSUE BE UPDATED IN CONJUNCTION WITH UPDATED FLOOD PLAIN INFORMATION? AT THIS POINT TEN MILE CREEK IS A RARITY AND THE COUNTY COMMISSION HAS THE PUBLIC RESPONSffiILITY TO PROTECT IT FOR THE FUTURE ENJOYENT OF OUR RESIDENTS. REQUEST THIS LETTER AND RESPONSES TO IT BECOME PART OF THE PETITION RECORD DURING THE COMMISSION MEETING ON OCT 21,2004 SINCERELY, JAMES AND DIANE PULLIAM. .. 1 _ ) J, Y:Ø~w>_/~¡ç~-> ./ ' :~ÙLb~J~t,~ PAGE 2 OF 2 ~ To: Submitted By: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: RECOMMENDATION: COMMISSION ACTION: ~ APPROVED CJ OTHER Approved 5-0 Motion to include additional language in letter to DCA to approve land use and transfer units out of the flood plan through the PUD process. County Attorney Originating Dept.: Finance: ..." Agenda Request ~~A Item Number Date: 1 0/18/04 Consent Regular Public Hearing Leg. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] Quasi-JD [ X ] ~ Board of County Commissioners Growth Management Department Consider the adoption of the Becker Holding Corporation's amendment to the Future Land Use Map. Adoption of the amendment would change the future land use designation on 72 acres located along Ten Mile Creek. Approximately 41 acres inside the 100-year floodplain would change from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RIC (Residential, Conservation - 1 du/5ac) and 31 acres outside the 100-year floodplain would be changed from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac). On June 15, 2004, the public hearing to consider adoption of the amendment was continued until September 7, 2004 to allow the applicant time to present a Planned Unit Development (PUD) concurrent with the amendment to the Future Land Use Map (Meeting canceled - Hurricane Frances). The associated PUD was scheduled for the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on September 30, 2004 (Meeting canceled - Hurricane Jeanne). The PUD has been rescheduled to October 21st. Due to scheduling difficulties we ask that you consider this item prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. NIA On June 15, 2004, the Commission continued the public hearing to consider adoption of the amendment until September 7,2004 (meeting canceled). On December 16, 2003, the Commission continued the public hearing to consider adoption of the amendment until June 15, 2004. On September 2, 2003 the Commission transmitted an amended application to DCA for review; the transmittal proposed a change from RS to R/C for lands inside the floodplain and from RS to RU for lands outside the floodplain. On June 19, 2003, the Local Planning Agency, by a vote of 8 to 0 recommended denial of the applicant's request to change the future land use designation on the entire 72 acres from RS to RU. Adopt Ordinance 04-029 approving the Becker Holding Corporation's change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (residential, Urban) and RIC (Residential, Conservation). CONCURRENCE: D DENIED --- Douglas M. Anderson County Administrator ,,fL./' .L/~ Coordination/ Signatures Mgt. & Budget: Other: Purchasing: Other: ~ ..J GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Administration MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: County Commissioners N ¡J Randy Stevenson, Interim Growth Management Director ~ October 13, 2004 DATE: SUBJECT: Becker Holding Corporation Amendment to the Future Land Use Map - Ordinance On June 15, 2004, the Board of County Commissioners continued the public hearing to consider adoption of the subject amendment until September 7,2004. The September 7,2004 meeting was not held due to the arrival of Hurricane Frances. The continuation of the June 15, 2004 meeting was requested by the application to allow additional time to prepare and present a Planned Unit Development concurrent with the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) proposal for the property was scheduled for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission on September 30, 2004 which has been rescheduled to October 21 , 2004 because of the arrival of Hurricane Jeanne. Because of scheduling difficulties, we ask that you consider whether to adopt, not adopt or to continue the proposed future land use amendment at this time. If adopted, the future land use amendment would reduce the maximum densities within the 100- year floodplain (83 dwelling units to 8 dwelling units) and increase densities outside the floodplain resulting in an overall net density increase of 23 dwelling units; from 144 units under the current RS (Residential, Suburban - 2du/c) designation to 167 units under the proposed RlC (Residential, Conservation - 1 du/5ac) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) designations. The original staff report and the Florida Department of Community Affairs Objections, Comments and Recommendation Report is attached for you review. Staff would note that adoption of the Becker Holding Corporation's and the three other amendments are outside the 60-day adoption period prescribed by Section 163.3184(7)(a), Florida Statutes. The Department has indicated that adoptions by the local governing body after the 60-day period have previously been approved. However, we have not received a formal extension of time and cannot ensure that Department of Community Affairs will recognize the amendments. While this hearing is not intended to review the Ten Mile Creek Estates Planned Unit Development, staff has the following comments on the plan that is currently under review. The proposed project maintains the required shoreline setbacks from Ten Mile Creek and the remnant oxbow located on the parcel. ~ "WI October 8, 2004 Subject: Becker Holding Corporation Page 2 The site survey indicates 41.5 acres of the parcel (the area proposed for the RlC designation) lie within the 1 OO-year floodplain. The remaining 31.82 acres (the ar~a proposed as RU) lie outside the floodplain. County policy has been to allow the calculation of allowable dwelling units based on Comprehensive Plan and zoning issues and then allow the distribution of those dwelling units over the entire site. Staff is concerned that the plan currently under review places dwellings within the floodplain (in fact, in areas which were flooded last month). The Comprehensive Plan identifies the RlC (Residential, Conservation) future land use designation as applied to areas that exhibit unique or special environmental characteristics and that should be more closely examined prior to any final development approvals. We are recommending an RlC Future Land Use Designation for this area because of its special characteristics and believe that placing dwelling units in this area conflicts with the intent of the recommendation. Staff has made representatives of the developer aware of this concern. Staff recommends the Commission adopt the RlC (Residential, Conservation) Future Land Use designation within the 100 year floodplain and RU (Residential, Urban) designation on lands outside the floodplain with an understanding that the amendment is outside the time lines of Florida Statute 163.3184(7) (a). If you have any questions regarding this petition please let us know. cc: County Administrator County Attorney AI Broder File \wi ....., 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 ORDINANCE 04-029 FILE NO.: PA-03-003 AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY; AUTHORIZING AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING 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 and the Florida Department of Communities Affairs Objections, Comments and Recommendations Report, has made the following determinations: 1. Becker HoldinQ Corporation, presented a petition for a change in future land use designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential, Urban) for the property depicted on the attached maps as Exhibit "A" and described below. 2. On June 19, 2003, the Local Planning Agency 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 deny a change in future land use designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential, Urban). 3. On September 2, 2003, 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, and found the petition partially consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. File No.: PA-03-003 October 13, 2004 Ordinance 04-029 Page 1 '-' '-' 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 3. On September 2,2003 this Board authorized the transmittal of a future land use change of RS (Residential, Suburban) to RlC (Residential, Conservation) for lands inside the 100-year floodplain and from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential, Urban) for lands outside the 100-year floodplain, for the petition property to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further agency review in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; and 4. On December 16, 2003, at the request of the applicant, this Board continued the public hearing to consider adoption of the amendment until June 15, 2004. 5. On June 15, 2004, at the request of the applicant, this Board continued the public hearing to consider adoption of the amendment until September 7, 2004, which was cancel because of Hurricane Frances. 6. On October 18, 2004, this Board held a public hearing on the change in future land use designation, after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Fort Pierce Tribune and the Port St. Lucie News on October 8, 2004 and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. 4. The proposed change in future land use designation is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensivé Plan. 5. The proposed change in future land use is consistent with the existing and proposed use of property in the surrounding area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: A. CHANGE IN FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION The future land use designation set forth in the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan for the property described as follows: SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 35, RANGE 40, THAT PART OF THE SOUTHER 1/2 OF THE NE 1/4, LYING SOUTHERLY OF CANAL 71 (TEN MILE CREEK) AND WESTERLY OF SELVITZ ROAD AND THE NORTHERN 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4, LYING WESTERLY OF SELVITS AND RALLS ROADS AND SOUTHERLY OF CANAL 71 (TEN MILE CREEK) AND THE NORTHERN 50 FEET OF THE NORTHERN 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 (72.62 AC), (OR BOOK AND PAGE NUMBER 495-2541). File No.: PA-03-003 October 13, 2004 Ordinance 04-029 Page 2 '-' "'wIll 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 owned by Becker Holding Corporation, is hereby changed from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential, Urban) and RlC (Resource, Conservation), as depicted on Exhibit "A", Future Land Use Map. (Location: Selvitz Road and Ralls Road) B. FINDING OF CONSISTENCY This Board specifically determines that the approval of this change in the Future Land Use Element is internally consistent with the policies and objectives contained in the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, specifically Policies 11.1.3.6 and 11.1.3.7 of the Capital Improvements Element, which identify this approval as a Preliminary Development Order and provide for the recognition that impacts of this approval on the public facilities of St. Lucie County will not occur until such time as a Final Development Order is issued. C. CHANGES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS The St. Lucie County Growth Management Director is hereby authorized and directed to cause these changes to be made in the Future Land Use Maps of the Future Land Use Element of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and to make notation of reference to the date of adoption of this Ordinance. D. 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. E. 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 circumstances, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstances. F. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE This ordinance shall be applicable as stated in Paragraph A. File No.: PA-03-003 October 13, 2004 Ordinance 04-029 Page 3 ~ """'" 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 G. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Bureau of Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida, 32304. H. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS The Growth Management Director shall send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Department of Community Affairs, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida, 32399-2100. h EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect upon the issuance by the State Land Planning Agency of a Notice of Intent to find the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(9), Florida Statutes, or until the Administration Commission issues a final order finding the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(10). J. ADOPTION After motion and second, the vote on this ordinance was as follows: Chairman Paula A. Lewis xxx Vice-Chairman John D. Bruhn xxx Commissioner Cliff Barnes xxx Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson xxx Commissioner Doug Coward xxx PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED This 18th Day of October 2004. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA File No.: PA-03-003 October 13, 2004 Ordinance 04-029 Page 4 ~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ATTEST: 8 9 10 11 12 Deputy Clerk 13 14 15 16 17 dw File No.: PA-03-003 October 13, 2004 BY ..." Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: County Attorney Ordinance 04-029 Page 5 EXHIBIT "A" '-' ...." Seeker Holding Corporation - SOCC Approved Change in Future Land Use Classification from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban) and OC (ResidentiaVConservation) C I I l' 1-LIIII111' RU r- l r , PIf ,T ï' ·1· I .1," .," ",' ",..& II ~ "I' I II I I , I I I I I Edward. Rood . -- ,-- . . . . . . ..:... I-- -- · · I· · f~ S . · PIf PIf ~ - PIF , I'. "-ð'a r-;- "'7" ... ~I-- RU f-;- - . .~. ...J · >1-- 1..- . ~. _._ ·ii!·1 "~ > - I-- ... .1. .:J.. . ."' ~ " , ..<. ~~ ~~.~ -;- - ~- " .. -; 7. .-- t . · " ~ - V . Of' · , . . · · '(;;Ì:.'''¡ · -.... 't- I I · - " . . ~ · " ... ~, ~ ~~ '- + · . , " " . ~ VL -- RU J:' - ïõ f-¡- ...-¡ Ir-¡; "/' fJ0 ~~ ./' ~ L . /' ~ " i --~; ..........:- :----... 1 ~d ¿ ~! r r- H~ ~ .....l.___ 1 \ ~ RU 1\ , '-.. ~ .- ... / "! N ::I! '5 IND RS RU ~ Ji ... / C1Î Z fl.1-' ~~F ,/ I~ JD I: 0" IND / ~ 0> . ~.. c.'~" ~/ ,~. Á P A 03-003 ~ This pattern indicates subject parcel 5è~~ ~~~k GIS ~,;:;,.;:;.... Map prepared September 18. 2003 , ThiI IIIIp .. ... complied tor.....pIMning Md ...... purp¡c-. cri(. N VHI WIt)' dart ~ ..... ,... Ð pnMàe .. moll CUNfC lflii ~ ~ pœIIbIe,. II nar.....a.d b... . . '-ØIIY Þn*IG døC:WrIØ. \w ..I . . . STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS "Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call home" III BUSt! Governor COLLEEN CASTILLE Secret~ry November 23, 2003 The Honorable Paula A. Lewis Chairman, S1. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Dear Chairman Lewis: The Department of Community Affairs has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for S1. Lucie County (DCA No. 03-2), which was received on September 24, 2003. Copies of the proposed amendment have been distributed to appropriate state, region and local agencies for their review, and their comments are enclosed. The Department has reviewed the comprehensive plan amendment for consistency with Rule 9.1-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes (F.S.) and has identified no objections. We do offer a comment on the parcel owned by the Becker Holding Corporation, which is being considered as part of an environmental restoration effort to return the North Fork of the S1. Lucie River, including Ten Mile Creek, to its pre-l 940s condition. The parcel has been identified as containing 2 of the 21 reconnect ion sites. identified in the Feasibility Study for the Reconnection of Wetlands and Oxbows along the North Fork of the S1. Lucie River, June 2ùû3. While WI':, recognize the County's intent to reduce density in the floodplain, as being very positive we suggest the County further facilitate restoration by encouraging the clustering of development, including stormwater facilities to the uplands. In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendment, and pursuant to Rule 91-11.011(5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to the Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD · TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399·2100 Phone: 850.488.8466/Suncom 278.8466 FAX: 850.921.0781/Suncom 291.0781 Internet address: httD:/lwww.dca.statl..(I.us CRITICAL STATE CONCERN FIELD OffiCE 2796 Ovc,o'sr~s HiGhw~y, Suite 212 Ma.alhon, FL 330S().2227 COMMUNITY PLANNING 2SSS Shumard Oak Doulev,ud hllahm.." FL 32399-2100 ['''[RG[~CY ~'"~'AGEMENT 2SSS Shumard Oak Doulrvard hllahassr.. FL 32)99-2100 HOUSING II< COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT 2SSS Shum;IId Oak Doul..ard T~lIahaSl"'. FL 32399-2100 · . '-" ..., The Honorable Paula A. Lewis November 21,2003 Page 2 For your assistance, we have attached procedures for final adoption and transmittal of the comprehensive plan amendment. If you have any questions, please call Ken Metcalf, Regional Planning Administrator, at (850) 922-1807, or Dan Evans, Planner at (850) 922-1805. Sincerely yours, ~1u--~ Charles Gauthier, AICP Chief of Comprehensive Planning CG/de Enclosures: Review Agency Comments Transmittal Procedures cc: Mr. Dennis Murphy, Director, St. Lucie County Community Development Department Mr. Michael Busha, Executive Director, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. '-' ....¡ SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 3301 Gun Club Ro;¡d, \Vest P;¡1111 Be;¡ch, Florida 33406 . (561) 686-8800 . FL W ATS 1-800-432-20-15 . TDD (561) 69ì-25ï-l Mailing Address: >,o. Box 24680, West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680 . ww\\'.sfwmd,go\' GOV 08-32 October 22, 2003 ----. .... .... Ray Eubanks, Administrator Plan Review and DRI Processing Team Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 ¡ U~.ì [~ œ ~ ~ \'t.L : .I I ¡ ~r!.l \ OCï 2 ì ¿UL~ 1 ~--¡fpM' SSP ~...,. . PLAN P~OCESSING TEAM ; ~...I , í J ~ Dear Mr. Eubanks: Subject: Proposed Amendment Comments St. Lucie County, DCA# 03-2 - \1 "(\ \ c - \ . n /7"lt,\ South Florida Water Management District staff has reviewed the above subject document and we have no adverse comments on JIT Investments, File Number PA-03-001. However, we are forwarding comments on Becker Holding Corporation, File Number PA-03-003 (see attached). If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Jim Golden at (561) 682-6862 or me at (561) 682-6779. Sincerely, .iJh/( / _ '" 7~~~ ,- ~---------- P.K_ Sharma, AICP Lead Planner Water Supply Planning & Development Division PKS/nk c: Ken Metcalf, DCA Michael Busha, TCRPC Dennis Murphy, St. Lucie County GOVERNING Bo.~RD EXEClITIVE OFFICE Nicol..is J. Gutilirrez, Jr., Esq., 0"", Pamela Brooks-Thomas. V'~"'-ClII1i, l\Iich.lel Collins Hugh M. English Ke\'Ín ~kC"rty Harkley R. Thornton .. " " ."ott"__._ 01:" Hl'nry Dean E.rrcIIIÙ~· pi-,.'!," '-" ..",; Name of Agency: Lead Reviewer: Local Government: DCA Response Date: South Florida Water Management District Jim Golden, AICP, (561) 682-6862 S1. Lucie County, DCA #03-2 October 24, 2003 ============================================================= BACKGROUND: SFWMD staff has completed its review of two proposed amendments to S1. Lucie County's Future Land Use Map. SFWMD staff is providing comments on one of the proposed amendments, Becker Holding Corporation (File Number PA-03- 003), pursuant to Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. Please note that the SFWMD's comments are not intended to unlawfully restrict in any manner the legal rights of the property owner. The proposed amendment seeks to change the current Residential Suburban (RS) designation (2 dwellings units per acre) on a :t73-acre parcel to a Residential Urban (RU) designation (5 dwelling units per acre) on 38 acres and a Residential Conservation (RC) designation (0.20 dwelling units per acre) on 35 acres. COMMENTS: The subject :t73 acre parcel is located adjacent to Ten Mile Creek which is a tributary of the North Fork of the S1. Lucie River. According to the County's staff report, approximately 35 acres of the ±73 acre parcel are located within the creek's floodplain. The floodplain area includes a remnant oxbow that was cut- off from the main river channel when the river was dredged and straightened for drainage control purposes in the early 1900's. The subject ±73 acre parcel is located in an area that is part of the North Fork Floodplain Restoration Plan, a component of the Central and Southern Florida Project Indian River Lagoon - South Feasibility Study. The purpose of this project is to reconnect and restore wetlands and historic oxbows partially or completely isolated from the river's main branch, to derive water storage and natural filtration of river water through wetlands; and to improve natural habitats. The proposed land use change from RS to RC for the 35 acres identified as being located within the floodplain will help provide some environmental and water resource protection for this land. Any development proposed on the subject ±73 acre parcel should be designed and constructed in such a lawful manner so as to be consistent with the primary goals and objectives of the North Fork Floodplain Restoration Plan and the SFWMD's Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) criteria. -~···T·~ "~ ." t.. h~,:I., :...,' hi rt ~ , ,.i)" ,,' ," ~~";~.>~~ ' 'r' ':',.....",,~l.' . ."'(W=--r-\ .OIUV~ .\ ~.;:~~~.;;; ~--........~~ÙM '-"' '..J Department of Environmental Protection Jeb Bush Governor Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Tallahassee. Florida 32399-3000 October 30, 2003 David B. Struhs Secretary " . -.. -._-~.. , . ...! '. ......- - } Mr. D. Ray Eubanks Bureau of Local Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 . . ;.;) r-~:-" ---- ~ r: ì i : .. ¡ ~:; ',' ",.,'; j, '--'..--. ·--"¡."F:~"---· :.~.~; .:'.,:. £' .:.«: : -. - "_. Re: Proposed Amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, DCA 03-2 Dear Mr. Eubanks: The Office of Intergovemmental Programs of the Department of Environmental Protection has reviewed the above-referenced amendment under the required provisions of Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 9J-5 and 9J-11, Florida Administrative Code. Our comments and recommendations are provided to assist your agency in developing the state's response. Comments on File Number PA-03-003 (Becker Holding Corporation): 1. The reviewer could not find an analysis of need that warrants such an ambitious increase in residential density in this environmentally sensitive area, adjacent to the Ten Mile Creek. The Ten Mi Ie Creek is scheduled for restoration as part of the Indian Ri ver Lagoon South Feasibi lity Study. The Large areas of impervious surfaces depicted in the proposed plan drawing could have deletetious impacts on the creek area, and may not be conducive to restoration of the oxbow lakes and surrounding habitat. It is recommended that the development be scaled down to that which is currently allowed by the land use designation, barring some compelling need for the more dense multi-family dwelling units. 2. Although the applicant indicates that adequate water and sanitary sewer capacities exist for the proposed increased densities, the analysis required by 9J-5 has not been performed. It is recommended that an analysis of the demand for water and wastewater capacities be conducted prior to taking action on this proposed amendment. A demonstration of conCUlTent water and sanitary sewer service capacity should be made prior to re-designating this land use. 3. If this project is ultimately approved, it is recommended that the applicant work with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and the southeast district office of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to develop a storm water management plan that will minimize storm water impacts to the Ten Mile Creek. A I'" ':-""'" P,.~~r.,..t:"''' , ~C', Pr"....øl;(!' Printed on recycle/! paþer. '-' '..,J storm water management plan should involve the use of innovative pervious surfaces for the large parking areas that are depicted in the plan drawing, as well as arranging the parking areas in such manner as to minimize the volume and velocity of storm water nmoff. Stonn water will need to be treated to remove contaminants from the enlarged parking areas. Several methods of achieving this objective are currently available and the applicant should explore them with the SFWMD during the permit review process. 4. Since the federally funded restoration of the 10 Mile Creek is associated with the Indian River Lagoon South Feasibility Study and the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, assurances will be needed that the development is consistent with these restoration efforts. 5. Although the County staff indicates in its comments that the area in the vicinity of the oxbow lakes is environmentally sensitive and needs to be protected, being part of the 10 Mile Creek floodplain, there does not appear to be any analysis of the sensitive habitat, and the incidence of protected animal species in the area. It is recommended that an analysis be performed of the habitat and the protected species that may be present, with the development of conservation objectives directed at avoiding impacts to both the habitat and the protected species. If the development cannot be accomplished without avoiding impacts to the habitat, then actions to minimize those impacts will need to be implemented. After avoiding and minimizing impacts, then mitigation of impacts may be considered. Comments on File Number PA-03-001 (JIT Investments LLC): No Comment. Please call me at (850) 245-2163 if you have any questions regarding this response. Sincerely, /t'1--<--~~ d:-r--------- Robert W. Hall Office of Intergovernmental Programs '-' -;:~l~Yi~~~~.~¡~tŒ~~ít)tS~:~~~fJ!t~~'§~ :' -~.... ~-=irt'-o:¡¡:~: ~~:J~~;·:tffjã1~Ir;:~P¡"~>~mi=~~"E···t ::~,. ,,-:=!.." ~~~n-;f~=-;.;~- :-,~~?-;--~ :--'''--i ~ '~'," ::., ~ ,. ~ ~, '~~::r,' ¡¡¡ e if,,1;'.;l-'=-":: i 1·:;:~7L ~ '"'""';:-_..:~;.:,:...' "j -: "'::r}J > Q-:....,-_.~. 'j7è:~~.,._... ;' __.:._ ~~:=J:·----·iX¡: :--··ï·Þ-=-jr_·=-~":'~· ::J': 1··..;~···Öif~-·<:iL::::~'~.)~.~..~·~:ì --=~:2: .~.~------, .' ·--li{·D.I A-;r~tj:::;R-~J;'~ E iF-:~~.:~M$~R~ ~,~:~~0~ ;r~M..~:B ~f;:-..À C H"'K.:" ~S..T~)::-·¡;~trC-'I ~~?~ ,~~;_., " _:.~r";': d~f ~:'.~~~::1,J)=~=r-f=~"=f~~\~~r~B~:~i~~;~::~E;~'.'i ,;'; -,::~~'::'~:sr~~~~:~;)--~~- ø-~ ~r October 17, 2003 ¡':) A-Œ @ rn 0 WŒ"'f"\;~ ¡ 0 J .. In ' i ~! OCT r) 2003 I Ú ¡ . il., .... 0 ~..J Mr. Charles Gauthier Chief Bureau of Local Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shummard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 I ~ BPM BSP PLAN MOŒSSING TtA'" ' . ........ Subject: St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Draft Amendments - DCA Reference No. 03-2 Dear Mr. Gauthier: Council has reviewed the above-referenced amendments in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statlttes and Council's adopted plans, policies, and review procedures. Enclosed is a copy of our report as approved by Council at its regular meeting on October 17,2003 pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, ~~::: Planning Director TLWwh Attachment "Bringing Comm"nities Together" · Est. 1976 .sIt E..I Oce.D BODlev.wet - Suile .sll - SI..WI, Flowiet. .s4"4 :':.~:.; :77:!~ ,!,!'.4ftU . !òr. 2"·.1'1 - Fu (772) 221·41" - E-..il - adlllillli\rupc.o., \w {:J t'- """ TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL MEMORANDUM To: Council Members AGENDA ITEM 51 From: Staff Date: October 17, 2003 Council Meeting Subject: Local Government Comprehensive Plan Review Draft Amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan DCA Reference No. 03-2 Introduction The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, requires that Council review local government comprehensive plan amendments prior to their adoption. Under the provisions of this law, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) prepares an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report on a proposed amendment only if requested to do so by the local government, the regional planning council, or an affected person or if an ORC Report is otherwise deemed necessary by the DCA. If the local government requests the DCA to prepare an ORC Report, then Council must provide the DCA with its own objections, recommendations for modification, and comments on the proposed amendments within 30 days of its receipt. Background St. Lucie County is proposing two Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments to its comprehensive plan. The County has requested that the DCA prepare an ORC Report. Evaluation The FLUM amendments are shown on the attached maps and summarized in Table 1. '- ...I Table 1 St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendments - DCA Reference 03-2 Amendment, Acreage <"<Narni".:::' ;..:., <';',',. PA 03-003 73.0 CurreI}t FL µM ,Designation, ." -...',. -. '. '. -:. ",,",' ,- - .:~.' .'.. . '. " ,...:; ,',i'. Residential Suburban (2 dwelling units/acre) .Prop?~ed F~~ P.esi~ation ." " :',:":." ,.".. " 38 acres Residential Urban (5 dwelling units/acre) . .Location. ,,' . - .'.:.':,':'.. - '.~:~~:::~f]i ':.::j:~"»:~: Commercial 3 5 acres Res i den ti a l/Conserva ti on (1 dwelling unit/5 acres) Industrial northwest corner of Selvitz Road and Ralls Road along the south side ofTen Mile Creek P A 03-001 46.6 southeast corner of North Kings Highway and Angle Road Total 119.6 1. P A 03-003 (Becker Holding Corporation) - This amendment is for a 73-acre parcel located at the northwest comer of Selvitz Road and Ralls Road along the south side of Ten Mile Creek. The proposal is to redesignate the parcel from Residential Suburban (2 dwelling units/acre) to Residential Urban (approximately 38 acres) and ResidentiaVConservation (approximately 35 acres). The site is presently vacant. The surrounding existing lands include Ten Mile Creek to the immediate north and single-family residential to the north of the creek, industrial and vacant land to the south, St. Lucie Scout Camp and residential to the east, and single family residential to the west. The surrounding FLUM designations include Residential Suburban to the west and southeast and Residential Urban to the south, north, and northeast. The property is within the County's urban service boundaries. .AIl estimated 35 acres of the 73-acre site lie within the 100-year floodplain. Although much of the floodplain on the site was previously filled for agricultural activities, lower elevations retain water after heavy rains. There is a remnant oxbow of the natural course of the Ten Mile Creek within the parcel that was cutoff from the main channel when the river was dredged and straightened for drainage control in the 1940s. 2. PA 03-001 (HT Investment Company) - This amendment is for 46.6 acres located at the southeast comer of Kings Highway and Angle Road. The proposal is to redesignate the property from Commercial to Industrial. The site is presently vacant. The surrounding existing land uses include a citrus processing plant to the north, the Kings Highway Industrial Park to the northwest, one residence to the east, and a citrus grove to the south. The surrounding FLUM designations include Light Industrial and Agriculture to the north, Agricultural Residential to the east and southeast, and Agricultural to the west and south. The property is within the urban service area of the County. The property was originally classified for commercial use because the area was expected to be developed in a more intense residential .L '-' '...I - fashion. However, over the past thirteen years, there has been little residential development in the area. The area is in transition to non-residential/industrial uses. Extrajurisdictional Impacts Analysis of the amendments indicates that they would not have any significant adverse impacts on neighboring jurisdictions. Effects on Significant Regional Resources or Facilities Analysis of the proposed amendments indicates that they would not have adverse effects on significant regional resources or facilities. Objections, Recommendations for Modification, and Comments Obiections None Comments 1. P A 03-003 (Becker Holding Corporation) - The subj ect site is targeted for restoration as part ofthe North Fork St. Lucie River Oxbow Reconnection Project proposed in the Indian River Lagoon Feasibility Plan and the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Plan. The proposed land use amendment to the approximate 35 acres within the floodplain reduces the development density. Any development that occurs on this property should be done in a manner that is sensitive to efforts to restore, enhance, and maintain the functions and values of natural waters and adjacent upland habitat. Recommendation Council should adopt the above objections and comments and approve their transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. Attachments ., .J -, to.......... ~,Õ'" , \,1 _. '/ 1'1.. . ;¡ I ~I: '___. _ ,_ _: , :- . ® .,~~: ¡.'~.~.~~.;~. : . . 11 ......,.,-:., .~ : ~ · .~":<I. ._n ·....-..·10 ~-,;¡¡;- h .i! . ~.. . ¡.., .. . ¡;¡ . "!lo, ~ '( I -I . _ ~ _ _ ~...., ..._ _ ~ 1\ ~~ ;: 0"'1= i! - 'OJ'' - ~.." ~..... - c , ~~~{t , ---. -J'-- -,..'.. .- . ~.. . ---=-""""" /" "~' .;,Ì"":' . ''':' . 'I ,: ":;:)" -- · - .~; .: . .~} \ 1, "" - -. - ...- ;..~.:../ r "\. - " "'.:J: ~, ..- : , ," \.p' i:(\.' ~ I ;F \ O~._L..._ ~ .' . {7 --. --.., - 7 -/"'~'? .,.:>, ~'/':..O . .... .."..... . " .d:1_'" ~ ..... ,r---. . \;TY '. - . -' - I . ;..7-, ' , , '\,' I' ~ I "\.' 0.,\. -! L.\ U . . ",í\~_._____ -~~:t'J:IIOo;.i.r4 I '-' ~' ~ """ General Location J\1ap St. Lucie County ... 0' _ ::.;;, :¡.:¡:.:. o ..... .... :r<'I ".0, o I r<'I : .. !; = I I I I eo, .c:,... I :::: ;: f ¡: .. z III; ~ ~ ~¡ : ~' ~ 1 0: ... ~I :. 1~ .. ~-,.s- ;' .. , I ! , I ., I. i ~. ~ ,t. :: ç, : "_0 _.... .. .. " wI'" ~I ., I .:i I I I I I --·:1..· -, ;1 i I ,- I ." I i I ! I ¡ . I I ',' r '- ..\ '- .. I, .. i ..'J, l' ! .,1 i , : I.: ~ ilc.")O . I i'l' - l7, ..)r-~- i -----r¡;;-nTI"--ì ¡-- -. , , .-. ,.,. I -- :;,'':.. 4 õ~ Q.z 01 ~:J< ~ >-00 B .. ()- ~ L.:c:. 2 '-;:,¡¡,¡- f S'...O II! :rU... Ji ã:Ju.. E õ~ ¡ c.. ~cn .. ,. \ ",\:, " ',p Q ::; '- ..., St. Lucie County Future Land Use Map Amendment Becker Holding Corporation PIF RU PIF " o ,. RS RU CI . .. ::I _ ~ i III: III ..i iii Z INO 5 .c._' )4 .~ ~)f '-' 'WIll .", ......... St. Lucie County Future Land Use Map Amendment JIT Investment Company ~ '11 ¡ ..U ' w· o oJ . '" .. v t· v .. .. It 'O~ ,_, '0'"'''''''5'14 -------~..- " ~.... ,l_J .. :iZt ,'0,/ .~;, .c·,,\i;.'i',s·..' b, 'lrS , 'n',,", 'S'N ~ ~ } ... ~ j! 6 '-' TO: 'wi COMMISSION REVIEW: September 2, 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division MEMORANDUM County Commission FROM: Community Development Director DATE: August27,2003 SUBJECT: Application of Becker Holding Corporation, for a Change in Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ae) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 dulae) LOCATION: CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: EXISTING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: PARCEL SIZE: PROPOSED USE: SURROUNDING ZONING DESIGNATIONS: SURROUNDING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS: SURROUNDING EXISTING LAND USES: Northwest corner of Selvitz Road and Ralls Road along the south side of Ten Mile Creek RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ae) RU (Residential Urban - 5 dulae) ".... AR-1 (Agricultural Residential - 1 dulae) RM-5 (Residential Multi-Family 5 du/ae) 72 acres Multi-Family Residential AR-1 (Agricultural Residential- 1 dulaere) and RS- 3 (Residential 3 dulae) to the east, west and north. IX (Industrial, Extraction) and AR-1 (Agricultural Residential 1 dulae) is located to the south. RS (Residential Suburban) to west and southeast. RU (Residential Urban) is located to the south, north and northeast. Residential to the north, industrial and vacant to the south, and residential and institutional to the east. '-' ..., August 27, 2003 Page 2 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 UTILITY SERVICE: The subject property is within the service area identified within the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA) District Master Plan. FPUA proposes to provide water and sewage service along Selvitz Road within a five year period. TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS RIGHT-Of-WAY ADEQUACY: The existing road right-of-way for Selvitz Road is 66 feet in width. The existing right-of-way width for Ralls Road is 66 feet in width then narrows to 50 feet in width. SCHEDULED IMPROVEMENTS: Turn lanes and signalization at the intersection of Selvitz Road and Edwards Road. Construction will begin within the next 12- 16 months. TYPE Of CONCURRENCY DOCUMENT REQUIRED: Concurrency Deferral Affidavit. ****************************** COMMENTS ' The applicant is requesting a change in the future land use designation for a 72-acre parcel from RS (Residential Suburban) to AU (Residential Urban). The subject property is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Selvitz Road and Ralls Road, southwest of Ft. Pierce. The current future land use designation allows for residential uses at a density of 2 dwelling units per acre, or in the case of this specific parcel a total of 144 dwelling units. Approval of the proposed change to the RU Future Land Use designation would allow a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre or in the case of this specific parcel, 360 dwelling units. The stated purpose of the requested change in future land use designation is to develop the property as a multi-family project. The applicant has submitted a conceptual site plan that provides for the construction of 360 residential units in a combination of two and three story structures. It should be noted that the site plan submitted with this application is for conceptual design purposes only. A change in the Future Land Use designation is required to allow the applicant to seek a change in zoning from the subject property's existing AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 dulac) zoning classification to RM-5 (Residential Multi-Family 5 dulac) or PUD (Planned Unit Development). The Future Land Use application package includes a Traffic Impact Statement encompassing a '-' ...,I August27,2003 Page 3 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 three-mile radius that was utilized to evaluate the proposed Future land Use amendment. A Future Land Use amendment is a considered to be a Preliminary Development Order under Policy 11.1 .3.7 of the County's Comprehensive Plan, the issuance of which does not imply, grant or otherwise conceded that any specific development scenario will receive Final Development Order approval. If the requested change in land use is approved, the only entitlement granted to the applicant is the right to proceed with an application for Final Development Order approval that could permit a residential development with a density up to five (5) units to the acre. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order the developer must demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and a Certificate of Capacity must be obtained. On July 19, 2003, the proposed amendment was presented before the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency (LPA). Following a public hearing on this proposed Plan Amendment, that included the receipt of public testimony, the LPA voted unanimously (8 to 0) to recommend the Board of County Commissioners deny the proposed amendment to the County's Future Land Use Map. During the July 19th public hearing on this petition, eleven residents in the area appeared to oppose the petition based on the potential environmental impacts, loss of floodplain storage and potential traffic impacts to Selvitz and Edward Roads. During the LPA discussions, it was recommended by a member of the Local Planning Agency that the County should consider the purchase the property because of it's environmental sensitivity. After further discussion on the matter, the Chairman of the St. Lucie County LPA requested that staff notify the Commissioners of there was general consensus among the Local Planning Agencÿ members that the property should be purchased by the public. As a proposed ,Future Land Use amendment, site-specific details such as the specific type of use, design configurations, location of driveway connections and requirements to improve roadways are not included, or required, in the application package. Our review is limited to the proposals consistency with the State, Regional and Local Plans, which requires a determination of the amendment's potential impact to the natural resources and public infrastructure, and it's compatibility with the surrounding land uses. If approved, the applicant will have the ability to seek a change in zoning and ultimate development approvals. However, approval of a change in the Future Land Use designation does not authorize or imply that the highest density or intensity, or that all uses or zoning districts possible under that Future Land Use designation are appropriate or would be approved. Prior to the issuance of a Final Development Order the ultimate development plan will be reviewed and must comply with the County's Nature Resource Protection Standards and the Comprehensive Plan requirements. Many properties, such as the Becker Grove site, have environmental constraints that reduce the developable area of the property; however, densities may be transferred to developable areas of the same parcel or contiguous parcels under the same ownership. '-' .., August27,2003 Page 4 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 CONSISTENCY WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Any proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan may be reviewed by several state and regional agencies. The Department of Community Affairs is charged with determining whether amendments are consistent with and further the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the State Comprehensive Plan, the Strategic Regional Policy Plan and Rule J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The following sections address the proposed amendment's consistency with each of these plans respectively: In reviewing this application for a proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Future Land Use Map, staff finds that the following Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the County Comprehensive Plan are the primary components applicable to this petition. The following is an element-by-element evaluation of the proposed amendment: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT The petitioner's application for this amendment to the County's Future Land Use Map states, "Any future development of this site would have to restore natural vegetation and restrict any development from within the floodplain pursuant to the St. Lucie County Land Development Regulations". Increasing the gross land use density on this site will likely have some degree of impact upon the floodplain of Ten Mile Creek. An estimated 35 acres of the 72-acre amendment site lie within the 100-year floodplain. The initial concept plan for the development site indicated that a portion of the floodplain include stormwater management facilities. Although much of the floodplain on this site was previously filled for agricultural activities, lower elevations continue tò store water during heavy rains. There is also a remnant oxbow from the natural course of Ten Mile Creek in the western 1/3 of the petitioned parcel that was cutoff from the main channel when the river was dredged and straightened for drainage control purposes in the 1940's. Surrounding future land use classifications are RU (Residential Urban) to the north, south and northeast, RS (Residential Suburban) to the southeast and west. Farther to the south/southwest of the petitioned property is a large area of industrially classified lands that house a number of industrial activities from material processing to distribution of goods. The requested future land use classification of RU allows residential densities of up to 5 units per gross acre and some limited commercial uses. Approval of the proposed amendment would result in residential development densities slightly higher than the residential areas to the north, across Ten Mile Creek. Higher density residential units can be considered a good transition from the adjacent industrial uses and the residential uses to the north. The primary concern that the County currently has in regard to this petition is the increase the probability of negative impacts from the site into the floodplain area of Ten Mile Creek. Objective 1.1.5: In coordination with the other elements of this plan, future development within the Planned Urban Service Area shall be directed to areas where urban and community serviceslfacllities can be provided in the most efficient and compact manner so as to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. '-" ., August 27, 2003 Page 5 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 The proposed amendment discourages sprawl, pursuant to this Objective, and Section 9J-5.006(b)(7), FAC. Urban sprawl is discouraged by the proposed amendment's location within the existing urban service boundary and its close proximity to urban facilities and employment centers. The proposed RU Future Land Use classification would allow for the development of medium density residential dwelling units, institutional and neighborhood commercial uses. The site's close proximity to employment sectors may reduce future home to work trips on the County's roadways. This objective encourages the clustering of units in order to promote the efficient provision of services and discourage urban sprawl. Clustering on the subject site is also necessary to eliminate development within the site's protected shoreline preservation zone, floodplain and floodway. Representatives of the petitioner have indicated that sufficient water and wastewater capacity is currently available from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order, a Certificate of Capacity indicating that all adequate infrastructure services are available is required. Central water and sanitary sewer facilities required for any future development proposal along with Stormwater management, roadway, and other public facilities are the responsibility of the developers and not the local government. The amendment site is bordered on the east by a collector roadway that allows easy access to the major arterial and emergency evacuation route (Midway Road) that connects to 1-95. Policy 1.1.7.1: Continue to support and encourag~ innovative land use development patterns through adequate provision In the County's Land Development Regulations Including Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) and Mixed Use Developments (MXDs). The application indicated that a change in zoning to RM-5 would be sought if the proposed Future Land Use Amendment were approved. Staff recommends development of the subject site be proposed through the County's PUD (Planned Unit Development) process, which will result in a change in zoning to PUD. Policy 1.1.9.7: Enforce Section 6.02.02 of the land development regulations to protect the watercourses Identified below: North Fork of the St. Lucie River - from the Martin County line to the confluence with Five & Ten Mile Creeks -- Five Mile Creek - from the confluence of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River to the Florida East Coast Railroad, Glades Cut-Off Branch Line. Ten Mile Creek - from the confluence of North Fork of the St. Lucie River to McCarty Road. (Beyond these points, channelization effects are so great that natural course and habitat are lost) '-' ..., August 27, 2003 Page 6 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 The amendment site is located along Ten Mile Creek and contains a remnant of the historic Creek that is hydrologically connected to the main channel of the Creek. Increasing densities within the project site can be expected to further impact this oxbow and the Ten Mile Creek floodplain. Goal 1.2: Recognize that land use and transportation must be considered concurrently in all planning, and to the extent feasible, modify current land use patterns to decrease dependence on the automobile in order to minimize the need for future roadway expansion and promote the use of alternate modes of transportation. The increased density and close proximity of the subject site to employment sectors provides an opportunity to decrease automobile trips and provide alternate modes of transportation, including bicycling, walking and mass-transit. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Statement based upon a ''worst-case" traffic generation rate for the amendment site utilizing the maximum density as allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. The analysis indicates that an additional 210 single-family dwelling units would not reduce the level of service on Selvitz Road. If developed for multifamily purposes, the trip generation would be reduced from that of the single-family demand. Policy 2.1.1 : The St. Lucie County transportation system shall be reviewed in coordination with any requested changes to the Future Land Use Element or other related component of this plan. A report on the impacts to the system brought about by any proposed land use changes shall be prepared and presented to the Board of County Commissioners as part of the review of that land Use change. The applicant has provided a Traffic Impact Summary as part of the Future Land Use amendment application. The analysis year is 2008; the estimated build out of the proposed development. A comprehensive and updated report will be required before any Final Development Order is obtained. The analysis utilizes the road network in place based upon adopted work programs of FOOT and the Capital Improvement Program of S1. Lucie County. The summary indicates that no significant impact -occurs and the - additional vehicle trips will not reduce the level of service standards of County roadways. Policy 1.2.2.1: Explore development patterns, which allow for employment and shopping opportunities in close proximity to residential uses. The proposed amendment will increase residential densities that are in close proximity to existing and proposed employment centers. '-' 'WIll August 27, 2003 Page 7 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 HOUSING ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Objective 5.1.2: In order to facilitate the development of industries (industrial and commercial) providing numerous positions, the County shall encourage the development of housing conducive to the attraction of these new industries and which have been identified as a need within St. Lucie County. The proposed Future Land Use change will provide for higher density residential units in close proximity to the proposed 1.2 million square foot Wal-Mart Distribution Center. This will provide housing in close proximity to the new employee center and reduce the overall vehicle trips on County roadways. INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. A Certificate of Capacity showing all necessary infrastructure improvements will be available is required prior to obtaining any Final Development Order. · Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element The amendment site is within the utility service area of the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. According to the applicant, wastewater service is not available directly adjacent to the project site, however, FPUA can treat and dispose of wastewater generated from the project. A wastewater pumping station and off-site force main extension would be required to connect to existing FPUA facilities. The FPUA has the capacity to provide wastewater treatment and disposal for the allowable density of 360' units. Prior to any Final Development Order approvals, the applicant would need to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available and wastewater treatment service will be provided to the project. · Solid Waste Sub-Element The County's Solid Waste facility currently has a 37-year capacity based upon current usage and would have sufficient capacity to service the maximum density of the proposed Future Land Use amendment and not reduœ the Level of Service (LOS) standards for the County's solid waste facility as set forth by Policy 68.1 .1 .1 . · Drainage and Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element Objective 6C.1.3. The County shall enforce existing Land Development Regulations, which support the protection and maintenance of the natural functions (flow and storage) of the 100-year floodplain and other natural drainage features. '-' ..J August 27,2003 Page 8 Petition: Becker Holding Corpofation File Number: PA-03-003 Any future development of the site will require natural drainage features to be maintained and a stormwater management area to be provided that is consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the development standards set forth in the County's land development code and the South Florida Water Management District. Any future development proposals will require the demonstration of compliance with the County's Flood Damage Prevention standards, which are intended to control the alteration of natural floodplains and natural protective barriers. · Potable Water Sub-Element The applicant has reported that Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA) can provide potable water service for the subject site. FPUA owns and maintains a 12" diameter water main along the project's frontage on Selvitz Road and has adequate capacity to provide potable water service to the site. Prior to any Final Development Order approvals, the applicant would need to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available and FPUA will service the project. COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The amendment site is within the area of collaboration between federal, state and local agencies targeting the restoration of the North fork of the St. Lucie River and its natural tributaries to improve water quality in the North Fork of the St. Lucie River Outstanding Florida Waters and downstream estuaries, the St. Lucie Estuary and Indian River Lagoon. A significant portion of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and its main tributaries, Ten. Mile and Five Mile Creeks, contain floodplains that are completely or partially isolated from the river's main branch because of dredging in the 1920-1940's. As part of the Indian River Lagoon Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan project, approximately 55 miles of riverfront along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and its natural tributaries have been identified for reconnection to the main river channel. The oxbow reconnections will greatly improve the North Fork of the St. Lucie River's water quality and water storage functions and enhance the river's ability to support a diverse and healthy biological community. This will greatly benefit the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. Positive effects will extend to downstream receiving water bodies, the St. Lucie Estuary, the Indian River Lagoon and the Atlantic Ocean. Goal 7.1.1: 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. The County waterways, including Ten Mile Creek, are impaired as a result of past agricultural and expanding urban activities. Although the floodplain on the subject site was previously cleared and partially filled to allow for agricultural activities, a remnant of the historic creek and low elevations along the floodplain still remain. Increasing the '- ....,¡ August27,2003 Page 9 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 densities On the subject site can be expected to increase development pressures On these natural resources and potential result in a loss of floodplain storage functions and negative impacts to the oxbow. The low elevations along Ten Mile Creek provide water storage during time of heavy rains. The oxbow is hydrologically connected to the Creek. Policy 7.1.2.9: The County shall support and implement programs, in line with the administrative and fiscal constraints of the County, to restore, enhance, and maintain the functions and values of natural waterways and adjacent upland habitats within the coastal area. Through state and local programs, St. Lucie County will continue to encourage the preservation and enhancement of floodplain wetland functions through public purchase and restoration of the floodplain wetlands and adjacent upland buffers along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and the Indian River Lagoon, including their natural tributaries. The subject site is targeted for restoration as part of the North Fork St. Lucie River Oxbow Reconnection Project that is proposed within the Indian River Lagoon Feasibility Plan and the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Plan. Development of the amendment site should occur in a manner that furthers efforts to restore, enhance and maintain the functions and values of natural waters and adjacent upland habitats. Increasing the density on the amendment site would reduce the probability of restoring the Ten Mile Creek floodplain and physical reconnection of the oxbow to the main river channel. Policy 7.1.3.3: The County shall cooperate with- the appropriate regulatory and management agencies to implement comprehensive and coordinated management plans of the Indian River Lagoon in order to improve the biological health of the Lagoon. The amendment site is included within the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Plan and the Indian River Lagoon Resistibility Plan as a natural area restoration site. Joint state, regional and federal agencies have funded a feasibility study that will include designs for the future restoration of the subject tract. Funding for the acquisition of this site for this purpose is currently not available. Any future development plans should be designed in conjunction with State staff to ensure the restoration of this site is not inhibited. Objective 7.1.4: St. Lucie County shall strive to obtain or - maintain water quality and trophic state index classifications-of "good" for the Indian River Lagoon, Five Mile Creek, Ten Mile Creek, and the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The County shall enact appropriate regulations that provide for the maintenance or improvement of water quality. A significant portion of the floodplain of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River, including the amendment parcel, is isolated from the river's main branch because of dredging that occurred in the 1920-40's. This resulted in a significant loss of floodplains and oxbow's being cut off from the main water channel, which reduced the Creeks ability to naturally filter nutrients. The riverine dredging and subsequent land use intensification resulted in '-" "'" August 27. 2003 Page 10 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 degradation of the quality of water in Ten Mile Creek and downstream waterbodies, including the St. Lucie Estuary. The North Fork St. Lucie River Marsh Reconnection project is part of the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) Feasibility Study, our area's portion of the Everglades Comprehensive Plan. Shoreline restoration and reconnection of partially isolated floodplain wetlands is a separate component of the IRL Feasibility Study. Funds for conducting pilot studies and feasibility planning of marsh and oxbow reconnections have previously been supplied by the 51. Lucie River Issues Team and other matching grant sources (e.g., USFWS, SFWMD). The feasibility plan has recently been completed and any development of the floodplain should be reviewed in conjunction with the proposed restoration improvements. As proposed, this amendment would increase densities and development pressures along Ten Mile Creek, which may negatively efforts to improve the quality of water in Ten Mile Creek and downstream estuaries. CONSERVATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment is not consistent with Goal 8.1, 8.1 .2.11, 8.1.3.1, goals, objectives and policies found within the conservation element. Goal 8.1: The natural resources of St. Lucie County shall be protected, appropriately used, or conserved in a manner which maximizes their function, and values. The proposed amendment would increase densities within the floodplain along Ten Mile Creek, a degraded waterbody, and headwaters to the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The proposed ir:1crease in density can be expected to increase development pressure within the amendment site's floodplain and to a remnant of the pre-dredged Creek. The placement of improvements within the floodplain is not an appropriate use and can be expected to result in a loss of existing and potential floodplain values. The amendment site consists of a fallow citrus grove and floodplain along Ten Mile Creek. Although, the previous citrus operations severely impacted the site's natural environment, the site still contains 1,500 feet of frontage along Ten Mile Creek, remnants of the historic Creek and approximately 35 acres within the Ten Mile Creek floodplain. The site contains a large section of the historic Ten Mile Creek that was probably- cut off from the main channel when the creek was channalized in the early 1900's. Policy 8.1.1.2: St. Lucie County shall facilitate development that maximizes energy efficiency and sustainability. This should Include techniques that will reduce the total fossil fuel energy required to build and maintain urban land uses. This shall Include standards that promote mixed land use patterns, urban infill, public transit and provide non-motorized Interconnections between land use types to reduce auto dependence and vehicle miles traveled. '-" ...., August 27,2003 Page 11 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 The site's close proximity to major employment sections can be expected to reduce the vehicle miles traveled to work. Non-motorized and public transit facilities within the ultimate site development plan, and retrofitting existing and future roadways with facilities to accommodate non-motorized users would fully address this policy. Policy 8.1.2.11: 51. Lucie County shall support and assist with projects that further the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Imitative goals to restore and maintain ecosystem elements most resembling natural, healthy functions of a complex balanced aquatic system. Increasing densities along Ten Mile Creek will increase development pressures within the floodplain resulting in further impacts to Ten Mile Creek and eliminating the ability to reconnect the historic oxbow on this site to the existing river channel. The project site is included with the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Plan and Indian River Lagoon Feasibility Plan as a natural area restoration site. Joint efforts between, state, regional and federal agencies has funded a feasibility study that will include designs for the future restoration of the tract. Funding for the acquisition of this site for this purpose is currently not available. Any construction in the floodplain should assist to enhance the natural floodplain functions and reconnect the isolated oxbow to the main river channel. Policy 8.1.3.1: The County's land development regulations shall include the use of programs to protect or maintain floodplain, such as reduced parking, conservation easements, cluster site plan and micrositing of buildings. The County shall continue to strictly enforce regulations that direct development away from the floodplains and provide upland buffers along the floodplain. Residential development on the site can occur with little or no impact to the remaining natural resources and adjacent waters if the development and accessory facilities are located outside the floodplain and the shoreline preservation zone (which includes the oxbow). The preliminary Multi-Family Conceptual Site Plan places all structures outside the floodplain except for two stormwater management lakes. One of the lakes is located where the remnant oxbow is located. The remnant oxbow is protected through local standards, however there is a potential that increased densities and development pressure on the floodplain could result in impacting the oxbow if the future developer proposes sufficient mitigation and received the approval of the water management district aRd St. Lucie County. Policy 8.1.8.16: The County shall require clustering of dwelling units and/or open space for land development projects which contain environmentally sensitive lands and critical habitats within Its project boundaries, in order to preserve these resources. Ten Mile Creek shoreline, floodplain and historic oxbow is considered environmentally sensitive. Increased densities will increase the probability that impacts to this area will occur. '-' """""" August 27,2003 Page 12 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 Policy 8.1.12.7: No fill or regrading of property shall be allowed except to establish required road elevations for driveways, unless the environmental assessment shows that fill or regrading will not adversely affect the environment and fill is available on site. The proposed amendment may increase development pressures along the Ten Mile Creek shoreline and prohibit the future connection of the historic oxbow to the existing channel as proposed by the local, state and regional agencies. Residential development should occur outside the floodplain and any alterations in the floodplain area can assist efforts to restore Ten Mile Creek's natural functions. Increasing the density, and thereby the development pressure on this tract, reduces the likelihood of this happening. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE Policy 9.1.1.1 : Level of Service for Recreation and Open Space s'hall be as follows: · Community Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents in the unincorporated area. · Regional Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents countywide Recreation and Open Space Level of Service demands are based on the 2000 Census reported persons per household of 2.47 and the 360 maximum dwelling units allowed under the proposed Future Land Use designation of RU, the resultant population estimate for the amendment site is 889 persons. The amendment site would require 4.45 acres to provide the required commun1ty level of service for recreation and open space for the maximum development of the site. The 72 acre project site contains sufficient land area to accommodate the recreation needs of it's future residents and has been determined not to conflict with this element. The floodplain and shoreline protection areas on the subject site can provide passive recreational activities for its residents to meet the community LOS standards. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Policy 11.1.4: No right to obtain final development order, nor any other rights to develop (B)(3)(b) the subject property have been granted or implied '-' """" August 27,2003 Page 13 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 by the County's approval of the preliminary development order without determining the capacity of public facilities. A Certificate of Capacity must be obtained before a Final Development Order is issued. Policy 11.1.28: The County shall continue to require new development to meet level of service standards for both on and off site improvements, including local streets, water and sewer connection lines, stormwater management facilities, and open space. Sufficient capacity is expected to be available to service the proposed amendment site. Prior to the approval of any Final Development Order a Certificate of Capacity must be obtained. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The following goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan apply to this amendment: WATER RESOURCE~ 187.201 (7)(a) Goal: Florida shall assure the availability of an adequate supply of water for all competing uses deemed reasonable and beneficial and shall maintain the functions of natural systems and the overall present level of surface and ground water quality. Florida shall Improve and restore the quality of waters not presently meeting water quality standards. The intensity of development proposed for the project site may pose a threat to the adjacent Ten Mile Creek and downstream Outstanding Florida Waters. The applicant has provided a preliminary development plan that clusters dwelling units to avoid impacts. to on-site and off-site water resources. However, proposed stormwater treatment facilities are provided within the floodplain and these facilities would eliminate an oxbow that represents a portion of historic Ten Mile Creek. The oxbow would have been created and cut off from the river when the river was channelized. The proposed increase in density on this tract is expected to increase the pressure for developmenr to occur within the floodplain and thereby reduce the restoration goals of local, state and federal agencies. NATURAL SYSTEMS AND RECREATIONAL LAND~ 187.201 (9)(a) Goal: Florida shall protect and acquire unique natural habitats and ecological systems, such as wetlands, tropical hardwood hammocks, palm hammocks, and virgin longleaf pine forests, and restore degraded natural systems to a functional condition. '- .." August27,2003 Page 14 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 The amendment site consists of a fallow citrus grove and floodplain along Ten Mile Creek. Although, the previous citrus operations severely impacted the site's natural environment, the site still contains 1,500 feet of frontage on Ten Mile Creek, and remnants of the pre-dredged Ten Mile Creek. About 50% of the amendment site is within the Ten Mile Creek floodplain. The site also contains a large section of the historic Ten Mile Creek that was primarily cut off from the main channel when the creek was canalized in the early 1900's. The proposed amendment may increase development pressures along the Ten Mile Creek shoreline and prohibit the future connection of the historic oxbow to the existing channel as proposed by the local, state and regional agencies. Residential development could occur outside the floodplain and any construction in the floodplain area assist in restoration of the Ten Mile Creek floodplain natural functions. Increasing the density and thereby the development pressure on this tract reduces the likelihood of this happening. LAND US~ 187.201(16)(a) Goal: In recognition of the importance of preserving the natural resources and enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner. Representatives have indicated that sufficient capacity is currently available from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority to provide water and wastewater servree to 360 dwelling units that would be allowed under the proposed amendment's maximum density. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order, a Certificate of Capacity indicating that all adequate infrastructure services are available is required. Central water and sanitary sewer facilities required for any future development proposal along with stormwater management, roadway, and other public facilities are the responsibility of the developers and not the local government. The amendment site is bordered on the east by a collector roadway that allows easy access to the major arterial and emergency evacuation route (Midway Road) that connects to 1-95. The proposed amendment to the future land use classification is not expected to adversely affect the quality of life in the immediately surrounding area. The site is located in an area that contains public improvements sufficient to support residential development. PUBLIC F ACILITIE~ 187.201 (18)(a)FS: Florida shall protect the substantial investments in public facilities that already exist and shall plan for and finance new facilities to serve residents in a timely, orderly, and efficient manner. The amendment would maximize the efficient use of the existing and proposed public facilities in furtherance of this state goal. '-' 'wII August27,2003 Page 15 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 TRANSPORTATION. 187.201 (20)FS: Directs future transportation improvements to aid in the management of growth and promotes an intermodal transportation system. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers this goal. An analysis of the impact of the proposed amendment on effected roadways has been provided. The applicant's Traffic Impact Statement is based upon a "worst-case" traffic generation for the site utilizing the maximum allowed density as allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. The analysis indicates that an additional 210 single-family dwelling units would not reduce the level of service on Selvitz Road. If the site were developed for multifamily purposes, the trip generation would be reduced from the single-family demand. CONSISTENCY WITH THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN The following are the primary regional goals and polices that apply to this petition: Strategy 1.1.2: Promote compatibility of urban areas, regional facilities, natural preserves and other open spaces. The amendment is in conflict with this goal. The proposed increase in density will allow high density along Ten Mile Creek. The existing RS land use category is appropriate for areas of special environmental concern such as along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and Indian River Lagoon. Ten Mile Creek is the major tributary to the North Fork. Increased densities and intensities along the river shoreline would increase the likelihood of further degradation of these waterways. Policy 8.1.1.1: All development should take place concurrent with or after the provision of necessary infrastructure and services. The proposed amendment site is located in an area with the necessary water, wastewater and roadway capacity currently available. Development of residential units on the site encourages the location of housing units within close proximity to major employment sectors to facilitate any future transit system and to provide convenient access to emergency evacuation routes. CONCLUSION Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change not wholly consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is not wholly consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed Future Land Use Classification change would increase residential densities and development '-' 'WII August 27, 2003 Page 16 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 pressures along Ten Mile Creek, the headwaters of the North Fork of the St. Lucie Aquatic Preserve. County staff believes that most, if not all of the inconsistencies cited above, can be addressed through the removal of the 35 acres of this site that lie within the floodplain from the proposed future land use change. This area would retain the RS (Residential Suburban) future land use designation, thereby reducing densities on the parcel and reduce increased development pressures along Ten Mile Creek. Specifically, this adjustment would result in a maximum parcel density of 260 dwelling units as opposed to the requested 360 dwelling units. Staff recommends that this petition be forwe ': ,;;d to the Florida Department of Commllnit" MZ-' .....hapter 163, Florida ~... ... .d outside of the1 00 year T!("'':':~ p'-"" ~hp~' (' .;~'.J~ ,~. " I' .:¡ G';,;> ¡. ',,¡Od. \,;\,;; \JUI.I",y r"\uiluiH......:,tor County Attorney File '-" ..J CåUNTY "": FLORIDA' PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Environmental Resources Division MEMORANDUM ...~." .s....~t.~,;r.-.-T~':I~1t_I.......'"'>O:..........~.,:.\__'2P~,,_·ft___~_....~"'·;!...._~.'""'-"'11'___, ..do,~___"'.."" "'...~..~I!'''''''''___'"''_'''''''''_:.o<l._..-..:....~_.........__..t.''....,"'.....,. TO: BOCC Don West, Public Works Directo~t'~ - Environmental Resources Division THRU: FROM: DATE: August 14, 2003 RE: File No. PA-03-003 Application of Becker Holding Corporation for a Change in Future Land Use Designation from RS to RU ********************.******************************************.******************************************** In response to the June 4, 2003 Planning report for the Future Land Use Amendment application by Becker Holding Corporation, ERD submits the following: The proposed recommendation by Planning for the subject property adjacent to 10-Mile Creek is to maintain the existing RS land use designation over the 1 CO-year floodplain areas onsite, while granting the land use change to RU for onsite areas outside of the floodplain. Under either of these land use designations, per Sec. 6.02.02(B) LDC, two buffer zones with development restrictions would be required for the 10-Mile Creek waterway, including any natural fingers and oxbows. The first zone, Zone A, shall consist of an area 0-75 feet from the MHWL of the waterway and restricts most development activity, while the second zone, Zone B, consists of Zone A and 300-ft from the MHWL of the waterway and allows less restricted development activity. Per the same section of the LDC, a variance can be obtained from these requirements. Currently onsite, only one of the two original oxbows remain, a portion of the historical flow way of 10-Mile Creek prior to channelization to the current waterway. Attached 1944 and 1952 aerial photos of the site show the progressive land alteration activities of the 1 OO-year floodplain and the oxbows of the 10-Mile Creek riparian corridor. Based on the Language in tbe LDC section _ mentioned above, the buffer zones and their restrictions would also apply to theoxþow, unless a variance is granted. The last sentence in Policy 8.1.3.1 states "...The County shall continue to strictly enforce regulations that direct development away from floodplains and provide upland buffers along the floodplain." Other policies identify the need for preservation, restoration and maintenance of surface waters in order to eliminate pollutant flows to the IRL National Estuary and the S1. Lucie River, to improve surface water quality, and to ensure ecosystems elements most resembling natural, healthy functions of a complex balanced aquatic system. (Policies 8.1.2.8, 8.1.2.10, and \...; ..",,; File No.: PA-03-003 August 14, 2003 Page 2 8.1.2.11) The LDC further recognizes that the waterways are a valuable natural resource to be protected from silting and pollution, as well as from erosion of the waterway banks, and that such banks should be preserved. As a result, ERD considers the oxbow, the 1 OO-year floodplain, and the Ten Mile Creek shoreline environmentally sensitive areas warranting preservation and restoration, despite the extensive alterations of the site and the historical use as a citrus grove. Prepared for FDEP, the recently completed Feasibilitv StudY for the Reconnection of Wetlands and Oxbows alona the North Fork St. Lucie River. June 2003, evaluates the restoration potential of reconnecting isolated oxbows and wetlands along the NFSlR, and includes results of field investigations, hydrologic analyses, and mapping, along with a cost benefit analysis of various restoration alternatives. A total of 21 oxbow reconnection/creation sites were identified in this study, two of which were identified on the subject site. The first was the reconnection of the existing oxbow to Ten Mile Creek for an estimated design/construction cost of $180,000, while the second was the complete re-creation of the historical oxbow no longer in existence for the same cost. These cost estimates do not include the cost of land acquisition, which the study assumed at an average cost of $10,000 per acre. The report further indicates that projects identified in the feasibility study would also qualify for a Noticed General permit, which allows for a simplified application with a 30-day review and issuance period. Recommendation To ensure compliance with the Comp Plan and the LDC, as well as to ass~st in the implementation of the June 2003 feasibility study, ERD would recommend the Board consider placing specific development restrictions on the land as a part of this future land use amendment to allow for the preservation of the entire 1 OO-year floodplain and oxbow, along with a 75-ft upland buffer. This can be accomplishèd through the concurrent submittal of a PUD design along with this future land use amendment package. Since current LDC provisions could allow the applicant to seek a variance from established setback distances to allow development improvements immediately adjacent to Ten Mile Creek, submittal of a PUD design would allow these areas to be identified at this time ,as preservation areas and would ensure their continued protection at the time of site plan designs. As an incentive to the applicant's participation in preserving and restoring these areas, ERD also recommends the Board entertain granting the RU designation over the entire site and allow the applicant to transfer any unused density units from..the site to an appropriate off-site property that is less environmentally sensitive, per Policy 8.1.8.4. Based on financial returns received through the development of the project, the applicant could designate funds to assist in the identified restoration efforts. Also, at the time of receipt of financial returns from the transferred development units, additional funds could be redirected back on site to further the restoration activities in the preserve areas. And, to maximize these dollars on such restoration efforts, possible partnerships could also be pursued with the Army Corps of Engineers, South Florida Water Management District, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and the Soil and Water Conservation District. '-' ...I File No.: PA-03-003 August 14, 2003 Page 3 Based on the above recommendations, the quantifiable benefits would be: · Preservation and restoration of 3,000+/- linear feet of shoreline and 35+ acres of floodplain/oxbow(s). · A native buffer extending up to 825+/- feet in width between the onsite use and the residential homes north of Ten Mile Creek. · Elimination of any development encroachment that would undermine the continued viability of the restored ecosystem. · No loss of development units afforded to the property/applicant. · Development elsewhere in the County due to the transferred units off-site. In addition, qualitative benefits would be: · Increased natural resources functions due to the restoration of the oxbow(s), floodplain, and shoreline. · Possible reduction of suspended solids, nutrients, heavy metals, sediments, and other pollutant loads flowing into the St. Lucie River Estuary and Indian River Lagoon National Estuary . · Enhanced habitat value and productivity. · Increased wildlife utilization. · Enhanced natural scenic values. · Enhanced quality of life for adjacent residents. · Enhanced protection of properties and property values. · Enhanced tax-base from transferred development units. · Possible flooding relief on other properties with the re-connection ofthe oxbow to the Ten Mile Creek flow way, due to the increased storage capacity. As a result, ERD would support approval of this Future Land Use Amendment with the above recommendations. Attachments: 1944 Aerial Photo 1952 Aerial Photo Current Aerial Photo with 100-year Floodplain cc: Dennis Murphy, Community Development Director Becker Holding Corporation ~ "'" 1944 Aerial Photo '-' '-' ....,¡ ( C \ 0 ......... ....... z Cd 10- A 0 0.. ~f 10- 0 (Y) 0 0 ~.. 0 -" ,0 ¡.v 0) I ~ c (Y) -- a " .~ ã -0 0 « (. I ~ IL CL \ (. J 10- Q) .:Y. Ü Q) OJ a: ä;¡iI .....0; I! f.. '\ .. ... .... .., '" c .., a: ç -+-'0 z 0-- ::::> -+---- 0 Q) (\j- ç () '00 z ~o ::::> 0 CL.--.J ctfÔoI' :IN; 7JNÿM U a: w ;1 0.... > .. ~ ......) IfJO'" Œ I ! ~ ... .. !' w z ~ 011 _..... "]0 '" .. .. ~ .., .. i .. a: I .., <: '" 5 ø.ooo a:JM ClYOII NO.....,.) :2 Z '" <: Õ tot-) ......) £; 'NY !' '" '" ... ¡ .., tÞ'" ... 5 .., '" '" Å1.NnO~ S .( 1 S S( l 3380H~33>10 '-' ....." PIF RU PIF · ; . .. · ~ . · . .. . RU " o RS RU o 2 ~ ~. 1 . .. II: II> ..; vi Z INO .s<:- -'-'-.;. ~~"- t Map prepared May 28. 2003 f P A 03-003 ~ This pattern indicates subject parcel ... .. ,. .... ...... .............. .. ....... --- -- N ..... -,........................---...- ..-..-. ........ II _....... .._ _ . ...., ..... ....... '- ...,¡ j · . · . . " ~, . g .. o -' · . 8 . %' ' s · ð ' Ii ~ ! · " . . · ëi . " · .!: . · ð . c: · ~ . · .. . " " J: . . . P A 03-003 ~ This pattern indicates subject parcel " o o ci II: :J' !! ~ :E , " II: III ..; vi Z Map prepared May 28. 2003 f 5ì:- ~-:. ~...~~~ GIS ..,.<>_~ ... ... - -. ..... III........... - ....... ...,.... ... N ........................,....... ....--....--- __ _.f. ......... _.. _ . ...... ........ ....... '-' ~ e. e. ~i[j ~~~~tëJ ~ A <tI :<;.I"'~~,,,.. .... / ¡ / / / J ~""""._.';".;. ._;.L ~ v '. ( ( .." ~ Dl!!pJ,ay, p- County p- Major Waler p- loning p- S bd· . . b.. u IV/SlOns II" p- Improved Sales p- land Sales p- Parcels - At ". ?, ' ¿lIU.3 '-' ( "-'tI Corporation .. . . .. .. . AR-1 " . ~ . .. . c: . ;¡ . " .. ~ . .. .. .. . AR-1 " o IH c 2 ::! Ii :E Ii ~ .; iii Z IX IX P A 03-003 ~ This pattern indicates subject parcel 5Ç;- ~-u. ~~~ GIS ~_~ Map prepared May 28, 2003 , "'" .., ... ...... -..... .............. ... ...... ......... .., N ................. -.n.... III....... ........____ .-......- ......... ......... ..... _ . 1IIIJIIIr.... ......... '-' ..., Becker Holding Corporation P A 03-003 ~~ This pattern indicates subject parcel 5è ~~ a,~~_, GIS ___,-- Map prepared May 28, 2003 f ......._"-'~u.,.....~........_~... .... --, --............-.. .....-......-- ~ ...-...I'iGI~ __. . ~.....____ N '-' '."wJI1 AGENDA ITEM 4: BECKER HOLDING CORPORATION - File No. PA-03-003: Ms. Diana Waite. presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 4 was the application of Becker Holding Corporation, for a change in future land use designation for a 72-acre parcel from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban). She continued that the subject property is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Selvitz and Ralls Road in a transitioning area of the county. She also stated that the current future land use designation allows residential uses at 2 dwelling units per acre, or a total of 144 dwelling units. She advised that approval of the proposed change to RU would allow a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre or 360 dwelling units.· She continued that the stated purpose of the requested change in future land use is to develop the property as a multi-family project. She stated that the applicant has submitted a conceptual site plan that provides for 360 units. She also stated that a change in the future land use designation is required to allow the applicant to seek a change in zoning from the subject property's existing AG-l (Agricultural - 1 du/acre) zoning classification to the RM-5 (Residential, Multiple-Family - 5 du/acre) or PUD (Planning Unit Development) zoning. She advised that the future land use application package included a Traffic Impact Statement encompassing a three-mile radius that was utilized to evaluate the proposed Future Land Use amendment. She also stated that the surrounding zoning is AR-l (Agricultural. Residential - 1 du/acre) and RS-3 (Residential - 3 du/acre) to the east, west. and north. with IX (Industrial, Extraction) and AR-l (Agricultural, Residential-l du/acre) to the south. Ms. Waite stated that the petitioner's application for this amendment to the County's Future Land Use Map states, "Any future development of this site would have to restore natural vegetation and restrict any development from within the floodplain pursuant to the St. Lucie County Land Development Regulations". She also stated that it is acknowledged that increasing the gross land use density on this site will likely have some degree of impact upon the floodplain of Ten Mile Creek. She continued that an estimated 35 acres of the 72-a,Çre amendment site is within the l00-year floodplain. She advised that the conceptual site plan for the development site indicates that a portion of the floodplain would not be impacted by direct site development; however, this area would include storm water management facilities within the floodplain area. She also stated that that although much of the floodplain on this site was previously filled for agricultural activities, lower elevations continue to store water during heavy rains. She continued that there is also a remnant oxbow from the natural course of Ten Mile Creek in the western 1/3 of the petitioned parcel that was cutoff from the main channel when the river was dredged 'and straightened for drainage control purposes in the 1940' s. Ms. Waite stated that surrounding land uses are RS (Residential Suburban) to the west and southeast, with RU (Residential Urban) located to the south, north. and northeast. She advised that farther to the south/southwest of the petitioned property is a large area of industrially classifieG- lands that house a number of industrial activities from material processing to distribution of goods. .She also stated that the requested future land use classification of RU allows residential densities of up to 5 units per gross acre and some limited commercial uses. She continued that approval of the proposed amendment could result in residential development densities slightly higher than the residential areas to the north. across Ten Mile Creek. She stated that higher density residential units could be considered a good transition from the adjacent industrial uses and the residential uses to the north. She also stated that the primary concern the County currently has is in regard to this petition is the increase of potential impacts that may be generated from this site into the floodplain area of Ten Mile Creek. P & Z I LPA Meeting June 19, 2003 Page 12 '-' '...,J Ms. Waite stated that the applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Statement based upon a "worst- case" traffic generation rate for the amendment site utilizing the maximum density as allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. She advised that the analysis indicated that an additional 210 single- family dwelling units would not reduce the level of service on Selvitz Road. She also stated that if developed for multi-family purposes, the trip generation would be reduced from that of the single-family demand. Mr. Jones questioned where the flood plain was. The petitioner passed out a map showing the flood plain area. Mr. Jones questioned if Staffs recommendation was for approval if they only used those areas outside of the flood plain and if they met all setbacks for shorelines. Ms. Waite stated they were concerned about environmental issues but if the development was outside of the flood plain and preservation areas it should be okay. Mr. Grande questioned if the applicant was made aware of the environmental issues prior to the meeting. Chainnan Merritt asked the applicant or their representative to come forward. Mr. Mark Matthes from Lucido and Associates stated that he was the representative for the applicant Becker Holdings and that they only had some brief conversations with Ms. Waite regarding environmental issues. He also stated that their original meetings with Staff were focused on different information that what is within the staff report. He continued that they revised their plans based on the infonnation contained in the staff report. He stated that they are committed to removing all stonn water facilities from the oxbow area of the creek and do whatever is necessary to return the oxbow to its natural condition. He advised that they feel they can provide a multi-family development on the site within the upland portion that would meet their needs for 360 units and will provide the value and benefit to the regional waterways. He also stat('.d that aside from the environmental issue the staff report is very encouraging because of the high- density transition, isn't considered to be urban sprawl, and no real conflicts with many of the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. He continued that they are also willing to work with Staff regarding their comments about roadways. He stated that there is a three hundred foot setback to Ten Mile Creek, which is easily accommodated, however with the reintroduction of the oxbow, the t~ee hundred foot setback from the relocated oxbow creates a severe limitation to the use of the property. He also stated that the general portion of the site is quite elevated compared to Ten Mile Creek. He continued that they feel they can utilize the higher elevations of the site, restore the oxbow, and re-vegetate the shoreline. He advised that they are concerned about Staffs recommendation of limiting the land use amendment to only the upland portions because that would limit the portion of development potential to only 260 lots. He stated that there is no federal or state funding for reconnection of this oxbow and they feel they could be partners with the County but they need the extra units to bring forth those resources. Mr. Jones questioned how many acres of the subject property they were going to be developing. Mr. Matthes stated it would be about 36 to 38 acres. Mr. McCurdy questioned if the homes would be for sale or rental. Mr. Matthes stated they were not sure yet because they did not have a developer assigned yet. He advised that they are looking at the typical size one, two, and three bedroom units. Mr. Lounds questioned if their conceptual plan was for two or three story buildings that would have 16-20 units each. Mr. Matthes stated that is what is conceptually being planned right now. He advised that the actual plan that will be submitted may have less or more based upon the P & Z I LPA Meeting June 19,2003 Page 13 '-' ''WI application of development conditions, but they are asking for the land use change to allow that many just in case. Mr. Grande questioned why they did not apply for their PUD at the same time, especially since they are requesting an increase of five times the allowed density. Mr. Matthes stated that it is a 2 1/2 increase, not a five. He continued that it is too costly to submit the PUD unless they know that the future land use change would be granted, especially without a developer on board yet. Chairman Merritt opened the public hearing. Ms. Maryann Angelis, 4064 Oak Hammock Lane, stated that she was speaking on behalf of a hundred of the residents within the area of the subject property. She also stated that the property is one of the county's best properties because it is located on the Ten Mile Creek. She advised that the neighbors have seen manatees and other wildlife in the Creek. She continued that when she bought her home in Oak Hammock, she planned to live there for life with her family. She stated that they own businesses and work in the County and feel having this project will increase the crime in their area. She also stated that the driving on Selvitz Road would be greatly impacted by adding 360 units worth of traffic in the area. Mr. George Brown, 4910 Ralls Road, stated he owns four acres on the north side of Ten Mile Creek and nine acres on the south side. He stated that he has known the Becker family for a long time but is very concerned about the flooding in this area. He advised that when they develop the site, all of the pavement and other areas would collect water that has to go somewhere. He continued that if you obstruct the water from dissipating over the flat area the people on the other side of Ten Mile Creek would end up getting flooded. He stated that this would cause an increase in the volume of water and cause erosion. He also stated that he has seen manatee in that area too. He continued that he is very concerned about what they are,going to do about all the water run off from the asphalt and roof drainage. He advised that pulling out on Selvitz Road is okay if you are turning right, but turning left is very difficult, and would be impossible with this much more t~affic being generated. Mr. Danny Weiss, 3965 Oak Hammock Lane, stated that traffic backs up from the comer of Selvitz and Edwards Road across the canal, across the bridge, and sometimes up to Ralls Road. He advised that by adding about 600 cars, three per household, would not be safe. He questioned how multi-family unit developments reduce the trip generation in comparison to single-family. Mr. Murphy explained that in traffic modeling, forecasting, and traffic trip generation rates, a single-family on a national average generates more trips than multi-family. Mr. Weiss stated that he doesn't agree especially since we don't have any real public transportation in the area. He advised that the bridge would need to be rebuilt with this amount of increase in traffic and the road CaRnot handle it either. He stated that he is very concerned about all of these new homes ending up under water with the way the area floods each year. Mr. John Ferrick read a letter submitted by Patricia A. Fenick on behalf of the North Fork Property Owners. "The North Fork Property Owners question the need for such high density on property that borders Ten Mile Creek, that flows directly into the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The impact would be well over 1,000 people on this property. How will it impact our schools? We understand work is currently being done to restore Oxbows in the North Fork; this property has an Oxbow on site. We also question the traffic impact statement; does it include projected daily trips for the Wal-Mart Distribution Center? Does it include trips generated with P & Z ILPA Meeting June 19,2003 Page 14 '-' 'will the opening of Selvitz Road, providing a direct connection into Port St. Lucie, and the accompanied additional traffic from recent zoning changes in the PSL corridor? We question the additional trip generations on the roadways in the surrounding area. There are no grocery stores, drugstores, or doctor offices in this corridor. We question the noise from the adjacent industrial uses in this area. How will this impact a multi-family setting? Will this change encourage other property owners along the Ten Mile Creek area and the North Fork to request this same change? Will it set a precedent for more multi-family development along the pristine waterways to the south and thereby degrade the water quality that flows into the aquatic preserve south of the Midway Road Bridge? The North Fork Property Owners feel that these questions need to be answered prior to the Land Use change being granted." Mr. Marty Limberis, 3252 River Drive, stated that this would be the view from his backyard. He advised that the property is very low on the backside. He questioned if they would have a septic system on this property because there is no city water or sewer in the area. Mr. Doug McAdie, 4301 Edwards Road, stated that he has lived on his property for twenty-two years and his parents and grandparents lived there prior to him. He stated that the south side of the river floods as far as the eye could see. He advised that he is concerned about them getting the change in land use and then selling the property to someone else, which could end up with a totally different plan for the property than what they are suggesting. He stated that he agrees that they really should have submitted a POD (Planned Unit Development) with this to assure them that they are going to actually do what they are proposing to do. He also stated that he saw a panther walk through his property, and there are only seventy in the state. Mr. Bill Braun, 3920 Oak Hammock Lane, stated that his property is to the east of the upper portion of the subject property. He continued that flooding is very bad in that area and the river is extremely sensitive and should not be overloaded. Mr. Ron Burton, 3224 River Drive, stated that there is supposed to be a bridge to walk on in the area, which is c~rrently crime free. He advised that adding this to the area would increase the crime and destroy property values. He stated that the entire area is under water during the rainy season. Mr. Bob Forsman, 4010 Oak Hammock Lane, stated that his problem is that he is concerned that all of thèse changes from what the public originally wanted is changing the way the county is developèd. He advised that he doesn't think it is important to have multi-family housing in that area. He stated that he trained environmental engineers and the mathematics behind water run off is very sophisticated. He advised that the ability to slow down the run off through Ten Mile Creek is handled through the oxbows. He continued that when you have upland, that is a major restriction of the water run off into the drainage ways. He stated that if the land can absorb it, it helps slow it down the actual run off even more. Mr. Jim Pulliam, 3311 Selvitz Road, stated that he feels developers should restore and ensure establishment of natural vegetation prior to actual project construction. He advised that the grove has not been used in several years and that wildlife is already reestablishing itself due to access of surrounding natural areas. He stated that the higher density would effectively increase one mile population from approximately 850 residents of single family owned homes and 40 duplexes to 1,770 for 350 multi-family units, or 1,500 if there are 260 units. He also stated that he feels urban sprawl is encouraged by this plan because there is no family support in the area, P & Z I LPA Meeting June 19,2003 Page 15 '-' ...,¡ like gas stations, grocery stores, or doctors. He continued that by increasing family density adjacent to an industrial park would encourage all retail activities to proliferate in an area that is primarily single-family homes. He stated that this project is within the urban service boundary but not close to urban facilities. He also stated that that site's protected shoreline and preservation zone, flood plain, and flood way could become a playground for approximately 200- 300 children in the proposed project area. He advised that this project would increase road use and that being so close to a work area could increase the amount of trips because it would encourage someone being dropped off and the other household member using the car all day. He stated that he feels by approving development in this area the county would be endangering residents because of the two chemical fertilizer plants blast area and the deadly ammonia gas. He also stated that they were concerned about everyone being charged a sewer fee by FPUA since this development would need sewer lines brought in. He advised that they feel this site does not protect, conserve, or enhance the natural resources of the area. He stated that the County should assume liability for allowing development of a high-density development that would put 700 - 1,000 people at risk because of the adjacent industrial park. He also stated that placing the project on a single entry and exit road would create an extremely dangerous intersection, especially in extreme emergency evaluations. He continued that the adverse effects will impact the natural protected shoreline, flood plain, and upland habitat of Ten Mile Creek and would probably jeopardize future funding of environmental restoration money to St. Lucie County. Ms. Diane Pulliam, 3311 Selvitz Road, stated that there have been many accidents on the road, which is directly in front of their house, where people have gotten killed. She questioned what would happen when this development is put in and the existing residents don't want to hook into the FPUA sewer lines. Chairman Merritt stated that if water and sewer lines are put in and they run next to their property they would be asked to hook into them within one year. Ms. Pulliam stated that she believed that would be quite costly. She also stated that there is already going to be an increase in traffic in the area because of the new Wal-Mart. She advised that there is an S- type turn on Ralls Road and that makes it difficult for driving. She continued that there aren't any services nearþy either to handle the increased population. Mr. AI Rosenberg stated that he and his wife reside at 3201 Live Oak Lane, in the Live Oak Estates Subdivision. He advised that last year they tried to go home on Edwards Road and were stopped and asked to leave because the wind was blowing poisons fumes over the area of their home. He also stated that there are many problems with cars approaching the intersections at a high rate of speed. He continued that many driveways corne out onto Edwards Road and that makes it difficult for the homeowners and also very dangerous for drivers. He stated that DOT should lower the speed limit on Edwards Road because the 45-mile an hour speed limit has caused many deaths in that area. He advised that by creating a more intensive use on this subject parcel would be dangerous because of the heavy industry in the area. He continued that he feels - the Comprehensive Plan is a wonderful thing and the public input is very important. He advised that more intensive, dissimilar uses should not be side by side. He stated that having heavy industry surrounding a residential area, with only a ten-foot vegetative barrier, dooms it to failure. Mr. Lounds questioned when he moved to his current residence. Mr. Rosenberg stated that he moved in December 1995. Ms. Stella Geraghty, 4001 Oak Hammock Lane, stated that their area is a more high-end development and feels putting a lower income, denser; housing development close by would not be appropriate. She stated that they are all used to the industrial area because most of the noise is P & Z I LPA Meeting June 19, 2003 Page 16 '-' ...J during the day, but this development would cause too much traffic. She continued that the traffic already backs up quite a bit when the railroad is closed and this would only make it worse. She stated that this would totally change the area that she lives in and she isn't sure that she would want to stay in that area if this development is approved. She also stated that right now there is no crime, it is quiet, and no one knows they're there, but this development would change that. Chairman Merritt closed the public hearing. Mr. Mark Matthes stated that he would like to address some of the publics' comments and questions. He stated that drainage, traffic, crime, utilities, and multi-family seem to be the biggest issues raised. He advised that crime he cannot address, but they are not planning on having criminals move into their homes. He continued that most of the comments regarding drainage were about the flood way and damaging it. He stated that he and his client do not planning on blocking the flood way and Staff has even stated that they cannot block the flood way. He also stated that putting a lake in the flood way would not block it any way and that they feel putting a storm water system in a flood way would increase the storage capacity because of the soil being removed. He advised that they are not going to drain into the flood way because they are required to drain into an on-site system to treat water quality before it discharges into the positive legal outfall. He continued that they have a right to drain into Ten Mile Creek, but that drainage must be controlled and will be controlled by all the rules and regulations of the SFWMD. He stated that they already have a twelve-inch water main next to their site and they will pay the full cost of bringing sewer to the site. He also stated that no one has the money to restore this oxbow, re-vegetate the shoreline, reforest the three hundred foot setback, but the developer is willing to partner up and restore that. He advised that they could help restore and maintain the wildlife, they are only asking for something that will allow them to pay for that restoration and use the land in a reasonable and compatible fashion. He continued that the smallest buffer, conceptually, is a fifty-foot buffer along one side, the buffer and reforestation along Ten Mile Creek would be over three hundred feet in some places. He stated that traffic is an issue, but it sounds like the problem already exists and isn't being caused by them. He also stated that one wtiy to solve that problem is to allow developers to pay for the impact they cause. He advised that they believe this development will pay far beyond its fair share in impact fees because they would need to provide intersection improvements at Edwards Road, Selvitz & Ralls Road, and possibly other improvements. Mr. Lounds stated that he feels this development is misplaced due to so much industrial in that area. Mr. Grande stated that he would not be able to support this without a POO (Planned Unit Development). Ms. Hilson stated that there are too many environmental issues with this property. Mr. Jones stated that he did not feel this project was right for this location. Mr. Lounds stated that he isn't anti-development, but that he doesn't feel this particular property is right for this project. P & Z I LPA Meeting June 19, 2003 Page 17 '" ....,.¡ Mr. Merritt stated that he feels this is the County's fault because they should have purchased this property a long time ago. He also stated that he feels this is the wrong project in the wrong place. Mr. Hearn stated that after considering the testimony presented during the public hearing, including staff comments, I hereby move that the Local Planning Agency of St. Lucie County recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners deny the application of Becker Holdings Corporation, for a Change in Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban) because of all of the stated concerns that we heard here tonight and I applaud the public for coming out and expressing their concerns. I too feel this is a very, very, sensitive piece of property. I can see some very upscale homes being built on certain portions of large tracts of this particular piece of land if it is not purchased by the County for preservation purposes. Motion seconded by Mr. Grande, with discussion. Mr. Jones stated that it was brought up earlier that they might want to suggest that the County purchase this property and that he feels the comment regarding upscale homes conflicts with that. Mr. Grande stated that he believed that Mr. Lounds suggestion would appear in the minutes for the Commissioners to read and act upon if they wish. He also stated that an alternative would be that once this voted on, you may choose to make a separate motion with that recommendation and have that separate motion voted on. Mr. Hearn stated that as the maker of the motion, his intention was not to develop this land in any way or remove it from the suggestion that it be purchased for preservation purposes. He continued that he fully supports that but in view of the fact that may not happen his recommendation is that it be used in a much more sensitive way for development purposes, if necessary. Mr. Lounds stated that he agrees with Mr. Grande that the Commissioners can review the minutes and make their own recommendations based on the Local Planning Agency's suggestions without it being part of the motion itself. He also stated that the motion doesn't lioùt the Becker family from coming back with a different plan that might be presentable and, compatible with the residents, as well as the LP A and Board of County Commissioners. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously (with a vote of 8-0) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of denial. P & Z I LPA Meeting June 19,2003 Page 18 ~ ..." J. MICHAEL BRENNAN, P. A. ATTORNEY AT LAW 715 DELAWARE AVENUE FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 34950-8554 (772) 461-2884 FAX (772) 461-2944 .jUt. I 4 July 11, 2003 Mr. Cliff Barnes Chairman, St. Lucie County Commission 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Fl 34950 Re: Becker Holding Corporation Change of future land use designation from RS(Residential Suburban) -2 du/ac) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) Dear Mr. Barnes: I am a resident of 3221 Live Oak Lane which is immediately across the Ten Mile Creek from the Becker Holding Corporation property, which is up tor a change of land use on July 17, 2003. Having had an opportunity to review the recommendations and attend the local planning agency review on June 19, 2003, I object to the change in the land use of the Becker property. This objection is based on the following reasons: 1) The property is immediately adjacen~ to Ten Mile Creek, which is an environmentally sensitive area. The land also contains the old river bed for Ten Mile Creek. The increase in the allowance of residential units will only greater endanger the sensitivity of this creek. The most-particular problem i~ that a great deal of the proposed area is unbuildable and the increased zoning number would only increase the density of the buildable portion of the land. 2) The traffic pattern at Selvitz Road and Edwards Road is already hazardous because of the large volume of traffic due to the existing residential development, but more importantly, because of the business acti vi ties located along Sel vi tz Road and Glades Cutoff Road. This intersection activity is only going to increase with the construction of the Wal-Mart Distribution Center. i ....... ...." Mr. Cliff Barnes Chairman, St. Lucie County Commission July 11, 2003 Page 2 For these two reasons alone, the project should be denied. I would request that the County consider acquiring this acreage as an environmental sensitive area. . Sincerely, J. Michael Brennan JMB/rh cc: Mr. John Bruhn Mr. Doug Coward Ms. Pamela Lewis Ms. Frannie Hutchinson Department of Community Development '-' ...., WEB I to' .Ij North Fork Property Owners To: Local Planning Agency Board of County CommIsaio..... Department of Community Affalra From: Patricia A. Ferrick Governmental R.p......tative 4802 South 25- StrHt Fort Pierce, Fla. ~181-5008 Subject: File Number PA-G3-0Q3 (Becker Holding Corporation) Locdon:' Northweet comer of Selvitz Road and Ralls Rd. along Ten Mil. C,..k. Size of property: 72 ac,., I'8qUtNlt Land use change from RS- 2 to RU. 5 dwlling units to acre. '- """ '. - ~- JlJN , 8 2003 The North Fork Property Own... questions the need for such high density on property that borde,. Ten Mile Creek, that flows directly into the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The impact could be well ovar 1000 people on ...Ia property. How will it knpact our achoo.? We understand work is cUmlnay being done to ....to18 Oxbow. In the North Fork, this property has an Oxbow on site. w. .lao question the traffic impact statement; d088 it øn~Ø~~~ projectad daily tripe for the Wal-Mart Distribution Centar? Doee It Include tripe generated with the opening of Selvltz Road. providing a diNCt connection into Port It. Lucie, and the accompanied additio,.al traffic from nlCent zoning changes in the PSL corridor? We question the additional trip generation. on the roac:twaY8 ~» the surrounding .rea. There are no grocery 8tores, ,drugstores, or doctof- ofllc.. in this corridor. We queetlon the noise from the adjacent Industrial..... In this ...... How will this impact. multi-family setting? , Will thia change encourage other property owners along ~t{; Ten-Mile Creek area and the North FOftc: to request tit. same change? Will It ..t a precedent for more multi-family development along the prietine waterways to the south and thereby degrade the water quality that flows into the aquatic Pl'Merve south of the Midway RCNld bridge? The Nor1h Fork Property Own.... fee.. that the.. question. need to be anawered pñor to the Land U.. change being grantH. ~Iy, £1;t&"1a A. Fenick . /. ~ Submitted by James B. Pulliam "wi r~ !/~J,,-UJLJ1 Œ '. .... -, , , ~ . JIll '. ,;: Rebuttal to local planning Agency Review 6/1 9/03 File #P A-03-003 Application of Becker Holding Corporation, for a change in Future Land Use Designation trom RS (Residential Suburban - 2 duJac) to RU (Residential Urban _ 5 du/ac) Comments Page 3 Future Land Use Element Developers should restore and ensure establishment of natural vegetation prior to actual project construction. Grove has not been in use for several year~. Wildlife is already reestablishing itself, due to access of surrounding natural areas. High density would effectively increase one mile population &om approximately 850 residents of single family owned homes and (40 duplexes) to 1,770 for 350 units or 1,500 at 260 units. Objective 1.1. 1 5 Urban sprawl is encouraged by this plan! Currently there is no family support areas i.e., gas stations 1.5 miles, grocery stores 3 miles, Doctors 5 miles. By increasing family density adjacent to an industrial park will encourage all retail activities to proliferate in an area that is primarily single family homes. Although this pròject is within urban service boundary and dangerously close to a work area, it is not close to urban facilities. Also no areas close to the project are desirable, nor zoned for urban facilities. The site's "protected" shoreline and preservation zone, flood plain, and flood way will be an unauthorized playground for approximately 200-300 children in the projeCt area. If the children are supervised this will add to the unauthorized playground density. (See-Attached Pictutes) Pg. 5 Goal 1.2 Traffic Circulation Locating in this area is close to work area, but further away &om all other family support activities. This increases road use for everything else but work transportation. "Also "close to work area" encourages single automobile families I · ~ Submitted by James B. Pulliam ....,j to drop off workers at beginning of shift, use car during shift, and pick up workers at end of shift, actually increasing traffic density. Housing Element By approving development is this area the county is endorsing and ensuring residents are placed in harms way of two chemical fertilizer Plant's Explosion Blast Area, and deadly ammonia gas from two Fertilizer plants and two large citrus processing plants. Evacuation times on a single entrance Road leading closer to hazard area is a county liability issue. This is a precedent setting project allowing multifamily units (apartments) to be interspersed among older e~tablished single f~ily owned homes. Single family homes built in north Port S1. Lucie off Midway Rd. are closer to the Wal-Mart Distribution Center than proposed project area. Page 6 Sanitary Sewer sub-element Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority will bring in sewer lines. Does this mean every residence that Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority pass enroute to site will be charged a sewer fee whether they are connected or not? . 7.1.1.1 Site does not protect, conserve, or enhance the natural resources of the area. S1. Lucie County has not assured that the developer will restore natural vegetation and physically protect the Ten Mile Creek shoreline and flood plain. Long time resident George B. Brown says flood plain is larger than depicted on site plan. 7.1.2.9. Any development of the amendment site should occur in a manner that further the efforts to restore, enhance and maintain the functions and values of natural waters and adjacent upland habitats. It should be obvious to everyone that allowing 700-1,000 people, 300-400 automobiles, 260-350 apartments, will not accomplish 2 Submitted~James B. Pulliam ~ anything towards restoring, enhancing, and maintaining the upland habitats. (See Attached Pictures) 7.1.4. Water quality cannot be enhanced by locating stonn water treatment areas (holding ponds) in a flood plain. Ten Mile Creek will be polluted by these holding areas during flood stages. Policy 8.1.1.2 To provide residents non automotive transportation to work, developer should provide and_ construct approximately eight miles of sidewalks and bik~ paths along Ralls Rd., Selvitz Rd., and Glades Cut-off Rd. Policy 8.1.3.1 Placing of stonn water management sites Le., Holding ponds, in flood plain will ensure contamination ofTen Mile Creek during floods. Policy 9.1.1. Passive flood plain use by residents means allowing approximately 200 -300 children to play in flood plain area. Supervisors of children adds to that density. " Water Resources. 187.201 (7) (a) goal Placing of.storm water management sites Le., Holding ponds, in flood plain will ensure contamination ofTen Mile Creek during floods. Land Use. 187.201. (16) (a) Goal - Thê proposed amendmcnÜuture land use classification is expected to adversely _ affect the quality of life in the immediately surrounding Area. Approximately 30 residents win suddenly have 700-1,000 new neighbors within the neighborhood. Traffic density win not effect the roadways as much as waiting times at intersections. Residents turning into and out of project area will create a hazard, as well as delaying Selvitz Rd. Traffic, especially north bound entry and exits of project area. (See attached photographs) 3 SUbmitted~ James B. Pulliam ..., The site is not located in an area that contains public improvements sufficient to support residential development. Water, and sewer does not exist and must be brought to the area. The closest public park, library, and school is miles (3+) away. Currently there is no family support areas i.e., gas stations 1.5 miles, grocery stores 3 miles, Doctors 5 miles. By increasing family density adjacent to an industrial park will encourage all retail activities to proliferate in an area that is primarily established single family homes. Transportation. 187.201 (20)FS: S~lvitz Road is primarily a feeder road for the Ft. Pierce Industrial Park. The Park contains two countywide garbage collection companies, one waste water treatment company, four ready mix companies, two highway building companies, including the asphalt plants, four beverage distribution companies, one mulch processing and vegetation grinding company, two large citrus processing companies, a propane distribution company, and the county landfill, along with other various heavy industry companies. Selvtiz Road traffic count should indicate 70-80 % heavy & commercial vehicles. All family automobile and school bus traffic on this road "is at risk". Ralls Road intersects Selvitz Road in a downhill slopping apex of a curve 300 feet south of bridge approach & exit area. Road viewing distance is 300 feet both directions. Posted speed is 35 MPH but reality 40-45 MPH. (See Attached Photographs) Conclusion: County should assume liability for allowing development of high density development that puts 700-1,000 people at risk (Adjacent) to Industrial Park Environment, containing massive explosive, force created by ingredients in fertilizer plants, deadly, colorless, suffocating, ammonia gas, used in huge qJ,lantities by C!t.rus processing plants, and dust hazards created by mulch grinding . -., and-concrete-plant activities. Project is located less than 200 yd.'s trom 2 fertilizer plants, 2 asphalt plants, a ready mix concrete plant and a citrus processing plant. Noxious smells, blowing dust and loud heavy machinery noise are eVf:r present irritations in project area. Combined this with placing the project on a single entry and exit road creating an extremely dangerous intersection that can be "fixed" by complete relocation of the 4 en . < -. CJ) CO"",,- ~~ ;o~ IDO =W cnoo -. . :JO ~'" co .. ëiJ'" COW ~» õ· s: :J » ,...... ;oQ2 Q)~ =0) CJ)''- ;08 P-cx> . . (J)O OW c:~ s:~ <» æ- s: ~ , -\:: s:: - - So:' ~ "'U IQ) CD::J ~~ffi _.'< 0.. ....... :::r-f3" <..,....... <cro Q)0'" ....... ^ en CD (j) ro .., 0 -....... IQ) -. Q)og N3- Q) ::J' "'0 9:oŠ: .- c cL "'0.. 00- roro o -+, o £»0) 3-- "O~ en-- CD~ <,"co ~ö o en .. .0 »0 "0» ~3: o £» n ::r j ;00) W-"" -~ ëi)0) -.... ;00 a,W ."""'-J z· . o~ ;:¡.. ::TO N ~» ~~ » r-+ ;Om w-"" -~ ëi)m -.... ;.00 c..W ."""'-J Z· . o~ ;:¡oo ::T~ <CX> -. » ~s: '-' » r-+ » . r-+ ;0 W = m (J) -.... -J.. ;Om a,-"" . ° _W ;a."""'-J CD .. ...,01 (J)W CD .. oN r-+CX> -. o :::J ,..." <": , r , , ~ ( '" í ~ '-' ...,., z o ;:¡ :::J <0) -. --... CD~ ~~ ;08 ~(X) ëñö -0) :J . . r-+- I'\.) CD.þ. ., C/)> ~~ r-+- -. o ::J en CD - :5. 0) N:::ï: w~ ::JO c.w m~ c..þ. ~01 m . . .,0 o..~ CJJ» :::o~ 0.. . " .' '-' Fertilizer and Plant Explosions Evacuations .."., . {,ht:f\it·;d~.IH\'oht.'tl ii! ihc;.¡:,,·, Im!:'I,-!!;,o,O,:' .". , Iksl rCl1ll'l1lhl.'n:d I'romlhl.' Oklahollla (11.\ h()l1Ibil1~ \\ herl' it comprisl.'<..! pari of thl' dcadly l1)i'lllrl', :\l11l1lonium nil rail' is a whitl.' crystal/illl' solid that. \\hl'n mi\ed with organÌl' 111:tleri,d. crcaks d hl,¡sting agent. One L'\<IInpk is ANFO (ammoniul1l nilratc &. ruel oil). When healL'd to dL'ClIl1l1ositi()). ammonium nitralt' cmits highly hr\ic '·lIl1Il·.... II is uscd as a hlasting agcnl as \\cll as /Loni li/l'I'. Thl'rc wcrc 420 tons orammonium nilratc sh)ùl ,1\ Cargill. MN/:y; J:''''I'Úd, : ThL' most toxic orlhe li\'c ehcmil'als slon:d ilnhl' \\;lrL'l1OUSl". This pcs!icidc C¿HlSL'S major d\:'pleli()n ufthe ozone layer and is a pOlential d;mger to IhL' neurological ílnd reproducli\'l.' SYStL'IllS or humans and anim<.lls that come in contacl \\ jlh it. II is classijjcd as a Category acute h)\in, tvklhyl bromide is used as a soil fumigant ;lI1d <IS a pesticide for lonta(ocs. pOI<lIOes and other l'/"OpS, PC/J'{Ì(/u.':i: /\ Il),ic herhicide likcn\:'ù 10 Agent Orange lIsed in Vietnam. This chemical C;111 product' Illultis\'sll'm or~a) !;¡ilure und death ifsmall amounts UI\.' ingcsll'd. TherL' is IW antidt)\t.'. Endo\-uíf!!:! -' !\~) i I1SCl't ic ide used on tooacco élml fruit crops. LxposlIrl' al high kvels can damuge I he ccntraIIìCf'\Olls",\sll'l1l. (/::,1-., ,:';;"-\ f~ò!il'ide mosl ct)l1ll1lonly used 011 corn. soyhean ,Jlld PP\;IIO crops hut is also kI1O\-\'n It) h<l\ l' !(),iL' ,-oIL'L'h ,,/) allimals. '. ~,~'" ...:.'#". . "-." . i:: SlIIflkc lï.1l·,IJrtllll Il1e (·argill/¡·/'Iih.:..,. "-(11',',1,/11/\<, ¡/il,'" WI (-,1'111/1,1/011 '/¡"''/(I/'('<'c! ¡hl' t"",¡I.'Hllifli/ ul .\.i){):¡ rl.-,_"ti.., '';¡I.\ M on ¡toring the E ffcefs The dang\:'rs ¡'ro))) tht:' massi\,e fin: and L'.\plosions \\el'l~ nol the ()nly c()1\.:crns. Officials \\cn..'~lbo tì..>n:l.:d to deal \\ilb CkHlds or smoke coming from the lire September 29 Florida Fertilizer Plant Fire Forces 1100 to Evacuate Smoke containing ammonium nitrate, an explosive material. from the Ben Hill Griffin Inc, fertilizer plant in Frostproof, Florida could be seen for miles and prompted the evacuation of 1 1 00 homes and businesses. The evacuation, in this sparsely settled area 50 miles south of Orlando, was done out of concern for the chemicals that were potentially involved. but no injuries were reported. The cause of the fire was unknown '-' ....1 AGENDA - BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS September 2, 2003 7:00 P.M. BECKER HOLDING CORPORATION, has petitioned St. Lucie County for Change in Future Land Use Classification from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban) for the following described property: Location: Northwest corner of the intersection of Selvitz Road and Ralls Road. Please note that all proceedings before the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or. hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings, and that, for such purposes, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings i~ made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross- examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be considered. Plior to this public hearing, notice of-the SQme was sent to all adjacent property owners August 22, 2003. 'Legal notice was published in the Port St. Lucie News and The Tribune, newspapers of general circulation in St. Lucie County, on August 22, 2003. File No. PA-03-003 '-" st. WCIE COUNTY ION&OOI COftjMISSKJNtHS PUIUC HLWNG AGENDA _1.2003 : tOWHDMITMAY~ NOIIŒ II ........ .... In ........ ...1It See J. .. ....toc:¡ _.:-...It. ~........~ &..I:: Dn.I ~ :c"" oj .. So. Loâ """'" c-."...:::'" : ::.:-sc~~~,-:::-; ~~~f " --.........-, .' ,....., INVESTMENT COMP'ANY. ltC., lor .. ÇMReI In f........ l"'" U. Cl.....c.tion I, . COM ~I 10 INO ftnckI."YI, 'ot ItM fo ,. ......døcI...III'operfJ: lOTS ... I. I. '. NID .. l£SS THE WEST 70 FEE Of lOT . MARTIN'S SUIOMSfOH Of THE N 1 Of 1ME "" 114 Of SECT10N t. tOWNSHIP SOUJlt. RANGE . (AST. ACCOftDING TO THE PLAT It*'IIIOf AS MCORDEO IN PlAT lOOK 4 'N!Æ .. Of nt( PUIlIC II(COADS Of ST, lUCo( COUN1Y. flORtOA. LESS AND (XC£PT THAT PAIIT Of LOYS 5. J. AND ., CONVEYED IN DEE MECOROt:D IN 0.... 800II. no, 'AGE 1251, 'HE PUlue MCOftOS Of Sf. LUCIE COUNTY 'LI*IA. LESS ANO (KCEP" THE fOllOWING DESCRIBE PAllal: A POfIITION a lAND lVWG IN LO'S 8 AND 7 SAID "."flN'S SU8OMSKJN. BEING MOR PMTICUlARl V DESCRIBED AS FOllOWS to CCMlMENŒ AT THE NW CORNf.R Of SAID SEe TIOII " TOWNSIII' :IS SOUTH. .....GE 30 fAST THfQ 5 "D·4ft 213.. FEET AlONG 1H£ WIEST UN( Of SAIl) SECTION I; THENCE N ...,"11'£ IO.OD fEET TO tHE POINT Of IEGIN, _ nt(NŒ S 0'21·'>£ :IS"'2 .(n ALONG A UN( _ 'EET fASTfRU Of, ANO 'ARA WElt WITH. TII( WEST lINE Of SAIl) SECTION , _ N """1'£ 350.00 fEET; THlNC( N ...._ QU5 fUT TO tHE SOUTH lJN( Of _ I.AMJS DESCIUIED .. 0,., lOOK 270 ,_ 1251. I'U8UC IlECOIIDS Of ST, lUCI( COUNTY. flOIIDA; THENŒ S "'38"_ :RUI fiEf AlONG SAIl) SOUTH lIN(; TH£NC£ 5 "'7'"4OW 43.41 FEET TO THE POINT Of BE· -, LocIIiIR: SE CiDfMf of Kings Highwly INS Angle - 2.GLAS$MAH JiOLDINGS. u.c.. lor . Changl . fuIIn ...... O. CInIificIØon from RE. (Res" ...... ElÞleJ 10 MI ........ UrtMn) for the 101 -.--- .. TH( SOUTH DNE~ Of THE NOATH EAST DNE_ Of SECTION .S, TOWN _ I< SOUTH. IIANŒ » fAST. ST. lUCI( ~ ~EAST~~ fI~THET:Òf. AlSOIfSSIIGHT~·WAvs. lot.... ~Ih-A _ II .. InteJMCtion 0 --...--, UECIIII IIDtØNG COIIPOAA T1ON. fa, a.- .. _ 'Uno! Uoo a-ificM... AS ......... -..... .. III) _., II< _.....-.-- IICTIDN .. _ 35. IIANGE .... THA PMr Of THE 'IOUTHlR 112 Of TIt( HE ..... l Y INII _"'Y Of CANAl. 71 ITtN MI I3IEUI _ _Y Of SElVITZ IIOAD All TH( __ 112 Of TH( &OUTHfAST ..... LY INII _V Of aWlS NID IIAU.S R _ IOUIMEII.V Of CANAl TI ITtN MIL.( CIIEIII _ _ _11M 50 fiEf Of THE __ 112 Of TH( SOIITHW£ST .... Of THE IDI1IIIEAST .... 112.12 AQ, tOO 8001: ---,~ \ \4.bIII. rla............... II 1hI ....JMCIiott 0 --...-- PU8UC _ .. .. _ .. "" CammI ~~_""f_.sc. ~..... __-::O'~2 ~. J;OG '.M. OJ '" ioOOn the,..". ~ TO SecIion _.0105, 1100d. $tltUl.. . . ..... ..... 10 .",..1 cnr deci$ion midi' .... . ....... .....,cy. OJ commktlQn wiItI fa '. :: -:I.': ~::. ~ng":~~ .... .... .... ........ he NV f"~ to eftIUfW ... . ........ N08ttI 01 rht ptocødt"91 . ....... ..... ...... ..... _.. tesUmony Ind ....... __...... thelPPt., if 10 be, ",S«!. 8OAIIO Of COMMISSION(RS ST,lUCIE COUNTY. flORIDA IS/Q;II_. OW.MAN ......00... ..~......,,_"I 'y ~¡ , . - '-' ...,J It would have been a disaster if the fire spread to the fertilizer plant, delaHoussaye said. "If Helena Chel11lcal WOUll1 have CnUgl1t on tile, ther'e would have l)et~11 son'H'~ se,-iolJs explosion~; .-=.nrl rnob.=thly InjtJl·il~s." ".hl"! sñic1. AI;> /1./11, M()(J.IY, lill'I/()/II,,,., wC'/(' ',1111 InrltnJ/lilll "01 '.;pot..;, fire- Clffic :,11', s¿Jic.l, A rlJiJrld<.1l0"y CV¿lC"lI,ltion of pcople livinr¡ within a half rnile of the site wùs lifted.:lt 3:30 p,rn,. Hllddock Si1id. The evacuation beçran arOund 11 p.nl, Sunclay with Crowley PolIce knocking door to door ~t 110rnes of! Arneric.an Legion Road, which runs adjacent to the plant. LJIII" 11 ;~O fl· III" .-J ,.il~.-('r' '.11 ¡-',"" " CJI VI~tllr:lf-'" nil 1-', IIJI' «-'rJ 1o l-!xit AIIII'III.-III LI~giuJ1 ROdd Vid U,S, RC,lt.- 90 d~, d fl.l II 1 II." Lluuc.l uf"-"lIoke ui/luwL-r..J oVerl1(~':'HJ. Burrrinq «'/II/JI'r:, (Jid«'f('" ill the risillf srnokc, <In(1 the hl.lilcJinqs' nletdl rU'11blf;'d lil({:' tlH,/rlder in response to the hiqh.pressure st'-eams of water striking its SLW(<Jce, One truck was loaded down with famIly members. At least a dozen adults and chIldren In theIr pajamas sat III the bed of the large-Size truck. jefol'e pulling out of the st'"eet, one family member asked, "Wl1el'e ale we supposed to go?" AIH>lJt ,"30 P.ViiClJPPS fOlJl1d ~;hl-!ltpr dt rl '_;t':'iC]ing areèt set up by the A/nerjean Red Cross c_1f ACdllidlld .It '-he RicL' FL'~tiVi.ll Building to keep the residents postecl <,!Jout wh':'ï> they' could I'etunl Ilon1e. said Tony Cn2ctcu,-. Red C,-oss directo,- Just after n,idnlgl-,t, POlice begéH¡ t)(-iIT,r.ad,ng Capitol Road, where the Acadia Pansh DetentIon Cente:" IS iocated. Deputies stoOd by l'ea(Jy to evacuate about SJü men ""0f':1 t!1e .Jail, IJut it was not necessary, sakI Acadia PanSll Shel,ff's LI'. r-'"10Ini't~·. I:r'f~è't~;f:'! Plant Blaze Forces Evacuations WASHINGTON January 5. ¡9gB.. A firp, in;.¡ M?Y$ville Ky , fer1ihzer plan! yp.~terrfAy for('.f)r! np;:¡rfy ?:"):lO ppnplt" In /¡~;:¡vp. their hnrTlp.!,; nile 10 Ih!>,th!,p;:¡r of p:<plosions ;'lnri foxic smoke The fire, which was discovered ,,! Ii!,. Pë!r\' hn',/rs of Sund?y morning, consumed ne?rly 400 tons of ?/!lInon/un! nitr?te. a white crystalline dry fertilizer 1~IIIIW,nllll1ì 1lll131e IS also one of the primary chemicals IJsed In the Gklahoma City bombing, EvaClI?':lons Occurred witl1in a onH-mile rél(!IIIS of H)e plant. which inCluded several communllles :11 Þ,eJa;11s éìlle! 8ro\'.lI) Counties, OhiO, across the 01110 RIver f he ,\rnencan ',ed Cross reports as many as 437 people In sl1ellers III the immediate area The shellers were 111 ivlaysvllle. I<.y,. a high school in Brown County, OH, and an elementary school In Adams County Ohio. Residents were allowed to return to their homes and businesses just after 6 p rn las! night As of this morning, officials at the scene report the tire is under control and is being allowed to burn Itself out More than 150 firefIghters from seven fire departments balt/ed the blaze, All raIl and liver traltic w¡;¡.s hailed In fhe area of the planl for several hours, The facility is located JlISt 300 yards from the Ohio River As it was a Sunday mo)mg. 'rrlðTly churches_wete forced to cancel Iheir services, Officials in Adams and Brown counties, Ohio, declared 3 local state of emergency due to smoke from the p¡;.¡nt drifting across the river, The Ohio State Emergency Opera lions Center (EOC) was not activated. The National Response Center dispatched an EnVllonmentat Protection Agency Air Monitoring team to Maysvllle yesterday That team will be monitoring the air primarily for ammonia, an expected byproduct of the fire Other than that group. there has been no requesl for Federal assistance, Fire officIals indicate it may be several days before the fire is completely out. A similar fire occurred 111 1950. and Smoldered for a number of days The fire was declared lInder control before 5:30 p.rn EST Sunday, One firelighter WéI:> reported injured I.".o;r U "t"rprl,' WPr1np.O;rl" . '2.Fph.2003 ":.1B:32 EST E.spañoll prrvacy Policy I AccesSibIlity '-' '''-' BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR August 22, 2003 In accordance with the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, you are hereby advised that BECKER HOLDING CORPORATION, has petitioned St. Lucie County for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban) for the following described property: Location: Northwest corner of the intersection of Selvitz and Ralls Road. THE PROPERTY'S LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS A V AILABLE UPON REQUEST The second public hearing on the petition will be held at 7:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on September 2, 2003, County Commissioner's Chambers, St. Lucie County Administration Building Annex, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fon Pierce, Florida. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at that time. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be considered. The County Planning Division should receive written comments to the Board of County Commissioners at least 3 days prior to a scheduled hearing. County policy discourages communication with individual County Commissioners on any case outside of the scheduled public hearing(s). You may speak at a public hearing, or provide written comments for the record. The proceedings of the County Commission are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the County Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings. For such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the reqùest of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. If it becomes necessary, a public hearing may be continued to a date-<:ertain. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Director at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting at (772) 462- 1777 or T.D.D. (772) 462-1428. If you no longer own property adjacent to the above-described parcel, please forward this notice to the new owner. Please call (772) 462-1577 if you have any questions, and refer to: File Number P A-03-003. Sincerely, ST~ L~CI~ C, OU~Y BOARD ?~ COM, MISSIONERS L~;¿;¡~,¿n~~:/?I µ~-' Cliff '~es, Chainnan JOHN O. BRUHN. Districr No 1 . DOUG COWAf\D, District No, 2 . PAULA A, LEWIS, District No, J . FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, DistJlcr No 4 . CLIFF OAf\NES, District No, 5 Counry Administrator - Douglas M, Anderson 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce. FL 34982-5652 Administration: (772) 462-1590 · Planning: (772) 462-2822 · GISfTechnicol SeNices: (772) 462-1553 Economic Development: (772) 462-1550 · Fox: (772) 462-1581 Tourist/Convention: (772) 462-1529 · Fax: (772) 462-2132 ~ ....., ( Local Planning Agency Review: 06/19/03 File Number PA-03-003 MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: Local Planning Agency FROM: Planning Manager DATE: June 4, 2003 SUBJECT: Application of Becker Holding Corporation, for a Change in Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) LOCATION: Northwest corner of Selvitz Road and Ralls Road along the south side of Ten Mile Creek CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: RU (Residential Urban - 5 dufac) AR-1 (Agricultural Residential- 1 du/ac) RM-5 (Residential Multi-Family 5 dufac) EXISTING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: PARCEL SIZE: 72 acres PROPOSED USE: Multi-Family Residential SURROUNDING ZONING DESIGNATIONS: AR-1 (Agricultural Residential- 1 du/acre) and RS- 3 (Residential 3 dufac) to the east, west and north. IX (Industrial, Extraction) and AR-1 (Agricultural Residential 1 du/ac) is located to the south. SURROUNDING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS: RS {Residential Suburban} to west and southeast. RU {Residential Urban} is located to the south, north and northeast. SURROUNDING EXISTING LAND USES: Residential to the north, industrial and vacant to the south, and residential and institutional to the east. '-' ..., June 10.2003 Page 2 ( Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-o03 UTILITY SERVICE: The subject property is within the service area identified within the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA) District Master Plan. FPUA proposes to provide water and sewage service along Selvitz Road within a five year period. TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS RIGHT-Of-WAY ADEQUACY: The existing road right-of-way for Selvitz Road is-66 feet in width. The existing right-of-way width for Ralls Road is 66 feet in width then narrows to 50 feet in width. SCHEDULED IMPROVEMENTS: Turn lanes and signalization at the intersection of Selvitz Road and Edwards Road. Construction will begin within the next 12- 16 months. TYPE Of CONCURRENCY DOCUMENT REQUIRED: Concurrency Deferral Affidavit. COMMENTS The applicant is requesting a change in the future land use designation for a 72-acre parcel from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban). The subject property is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Selvitz Road and Ralls Road in a transitioning area of the County. The current future land use designation allows residential uses at 2 dwelling units per acre or a total of 144 dwelling units. Approval of the proposed change to RU would allow a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre or 360 dwelling units. The stated purpose of the requested change in future land use is to develop the property as a multi-family project. The applicant has submitted a conceptual site plan that provides for 360 units. A change in the future land Use designation is required to allow the applicant to seek a change in zoning from the subject property's existing AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/ac) zoning classification to RM-5 (Residential Multi-Family 5 du/ac) or PUD (Planned Unit Development). The future land Use application package includes a Traffic Impact Statement encompassing a three-mile radius that was utilized to evaluate the proposed future land Use amendment. - - The proposed future land use amendment is a preliminary development order and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property but allows the developer to seek development of the property for multi-family uses. No right to obtain a final development order, or any other rights to develop the subject property have been granted or implied by the County if the requested comprehensive plan amendment is approved. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and a Certificate of Capacity must be obtained. '-' ('-' Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 June 10, 2003 Page 3 CONSISTENCY WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Any proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan may be reviewed by several state and regional agencies. The Department of Community Affairs is charged with determining whether amendments are consistent with and further the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the State Comprehensive Plan, the Strategic Regional Policy Plan and Rule J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The following sections address the proposed amendment's consistency with each of these plans respectively: In reviewing thiš application for a proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Future Land Use Map, staff finds that the following Goals, Objectives. and Policies of the County Comprehensive Plan are the primary components applicable to this petition. The following is an element-by-element evaluation of the proposed amendment: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT The petitioner's application for this amendment to the County's Future Land Use Map states, "Any 'future development of this site would have to restore natural vegetation and restrict any development from within the floodplain pursuant to the St. Lucie County Land Development Regulations". It is acknowledged that increasing the gross land use density on this site will likely have some degree of impact upon the floodplain of Ten Mile Creek. An estimated 35 acres of the 72-acre amendment site is within the 100-year floodplain. The conceptual site plan for the development site indicates that a portion of the floodplain would not be impacted by direct site development; however, this area would include stormwater management facilities within the floodplain area. Although much of the floodplain on this site was previously filled for agricultural activities, lower elevations continue to store water during heavy rains. There is also a remnant oxbow from the natural course of Ten Mile Creek in the westem 1/3 of the petitioned parcel that was cutoff from the main channel when the river was dredged and straightened for drainage control purposes in the 1940's. Surrounding future land use classifications are RU (Residential Urban) to the north, south and northeast, RS (Residential Suburban) to the southeast and west. Farther to the south/southwest of the petitioned property is a large area of industrially classified lands th:at house a number of industrial activities from material processing to distribution of goods. The requested future land use classification of RU allows residential densities of up to 5 units per gross acre and some limited commercial uses. Approval of the proposed amendment would result in residential development densities slightly higher than the residential areas to the north, across Ten Mile Creek. Higher density residential units can be considered a good transition from thë adjacent industrial uses and -the residential uses to the north. The primary concern that the County currently has· in . regard to this petition is the increase of potential impacts that may be generated from this site into the floodplain area of Ten Mile Creek. Objective 1.1.5: In coordination with the other elements of this plan, future development within the Planned Urban Service Area shall be directed to areas where urban and community services/facilities can be provided in the most efficient and compact manner so as to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. '-' "...", ( Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-Q3-003 June 10, 2003 Page 4 The proposed amendment discourages sprawl, pursuant to this Objective, and Section 9J-5.006(b)(7), FAC. Urban sprawl is discouraged by the proposed amendment's location within the existing urban service boundary and its close proximity to urban facilities and employment centers. The proposed RU Future Land Use classification would allow for the development of medium density residential dwelling units, institutional and neighborhood commercial uses. The developers are encouraged to cluster units in order to promote the efficient provision of services and to eliminate development within the site's protected shoreline preservation zone, floodplain and floodway. The site's ·close proximity to employment sectors may reduce future home to work trips on the County's roadways. . Representatives of the petitioner have indicated that sufficient water and wastewater capacity is currently available from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order, a Certificate of Capacity indicating that all adequate infrastructure services are available is required. Central water and sanitary sewer facilities required for any future development proposal along with Stormwater management, roadway, and other public facilities are the responsibility of the developers and not the local government. The amendment site is bordered on the east by a collector roadway that allows easy access to the major arterial and emergency evacuation route (Midway Road) that connects to 1-95. Policy 1.1.7.1: Continue to support and encourage innovative land use development patterns through adequate provision in the County's land Development Regulations including Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) and Mixed Use Developments (MXDs). - The application indicated that a change in zoning to RM-5 would be' sought if the Future Land Use Amendment was approved. Staff recommends development of the subject site be proposed through the County's PUD (Planned Unit Development) process, which will result in a change in zoning to PUD. Policy 1.1.9.7: Enforce Section 6.02.02 of the land development regulations to protect the watercourses identified below: North Fork of the St. Lucie River - from the Martin County line to the confluence with Five & Ten Mile Creeks Five Mile Creek - from the confluence of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River to the Florida East Coast Railroad, Glades Cut-Off Branch Line. . . Ten Mile Creek - from the confluence of North Fork 01 the St. "Lucie River to McCarty Road. (Beyond these points, channelization effects are so great that natural course and habitat are lost) The amendment site is located along Ten Mile Creek and contains a remnant of the historic Creek that is at least hydrologically connected to the main channel of the Creek. Increasing densities within the project site \w "-..",/ June 1 O. 2003 Page 5 ( Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-Q03 can be expected to further impact this oxbow and the Ten Mile Creek floodplain. Goal 1.2: Recognize that land use and transportation must be considered concurrently in all planning, and to the extent feasible, modify current land use patterns to decrease dependence on the automobile in order to minimize the need for future roadway expansion and promote the use of alternate modes of transportation. The increased density and· close proximity of the subject site to employment sectors provides an opportunity to decrease automobile trips .and provide alternate modes of transportation, including bicycling, walking and mass-transit. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Statement based upon a "worst-case" traffic generation rate for the amendment site utilizing the maximum density as allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. The analysis indicates that an additional 210 single-family dwelling units would not reduce the level of service on Selvitz Road. If developed for multifamily purposes, the trip generation would be reduced from that of the single-family demand. Policy 2.1.1: The 51. Lucie County transportation system shall be reviewed in coordination with any requested changes to the Future Land Use Element or other related component of this plan. A report on the impacts to the system brought about by any proposed land use changes shall be prepared and presented to the Board of County Commissioners as part of the review of that Land Use change. The applicant has provided a Traffic Impact Summary as part of the Future Land Use amendment application. The analysis year is 2008; the estimated build out of the proposed development. A comprehensive and updated report will be required before any Final Development Order is obtained. The analysis utilizes the road network in place based upon adopted work programs of FDOT and the Capital Improvement Program of St. Lucie County. The summary indicates that no significant impact occurs and the additional vehicle trips will not reduce the level of service standards of County roadways. Policy:1.2.2.1: Explore development patterns, which allow for employment and shopping opportunities in close proximity to residential uses. . The proposed amendment will increase residential densities that are in close proximity to existing and proposed employment centers. HOUSING ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Objective 5.1.2: In order to facilitate the development of Industries (industrial and commercial) providing numerous positions, the County shall encourage the development of housing conducive to the attraction of these new Industries and which have been Identified as a need within 51. Lucie County. ~ (,.." Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 June 10,2003 Page 6 The proposed Future Land Use change will provide for higher density residential units in close proximity to the proposed 1.2 million square foot Wal-Mart Distribution Center. This will provide housing in close proximity to the new employee center and reduce the overall vehicle trips on County roadways. INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. A Certificate of Capacity showing all necessary infrastructure improvements will be available is required prior to obtaining any Final Development Order. .' Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. The amendment area is within the utility service area of the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. According to the applicant, wastewater service is not available directly adjacent to the project site, however, FPUA can treat and dispose of wastewater generated from the project. Development of the project's improvements would require installation of a wastewater pumping station and off-site force main extension to connect to existing FPUA facilities. The FPUA has the capacity to provide wastewater treatment and disposal for the allowable density of 360 units. Prior to any Final Development Order approvals, the applicant would need to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service the project. Solid Waste Sub-Element The proposed amendment is not in conflict with this element. The County's Solid Waste facility currently has a 37 -year capacity based upon current usage and would have sufficient capacity to service the maximum density of the proposed Future Land Use amendment and not reduce the Level of Service (LOS) standards for the County's solid waste facility as set forth by Policy 68.1.1.1. Draina~e and Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element The proposed amendment does not conflict with this sub-element. Objective 6C.1.3. The County shall enforce existing land Development Regulations, which support the protection and maintenance of the natural functions (flow and storage) of the 100-year floodplain anëi oth-er natural drainage features. Any future development of the site will require natural drainage features to be maintained and a stormwater management area to be provided that is consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the development standards set forth in the County's land development code and the South Florida Water Management District. Any future development proposals will require the demonstration of compliance with the County's Flood Damage Prevention standards, which are intended to control the alteration of natural floodplains and natural protective barriers. "., ....J June 10, 2003 Page 7 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 Potable Water Sub-Element The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. The applicant has reported that Fort Pierce Utilities Authority staff stated that the FPUA can provide potable water service for the subject site. FPUA owns and maintains a 12" diameter water main along the project's frontage on Selvitz Road and has adequate capacity to provide potable water service to the site. Prior to any Final Development Order approvals, the applicant would need to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service the project. COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined to conflict with this element. The amendment site is within the area of collaboration between federal, state and local agencies targeting the restoration of the North fork of the St. Lucie River and its natural tributaries to improve water quality in the North Fork of the St. Lucie River Outstanding Florida Waters and downstream estuaries, the St. Lucie Estuary and Indian River Lagoon. A significant portion of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and its main tributaries, Ten Mile and Five Mile Creeks, contain floodplains that are completely or partially isolated from the river's main branch because of dredging in the 1920-1940's. As part of the Indian River Lagoon Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan project, approximately 55 miles of riverfront along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and its natural tributaries have been identified for reconnection to the main river channel. This will greatly improve the North Fork of the St. Lucie River's water quality and water storage functions and enhance the river's ability to support a diverse and healthy biological community. This will greatly benefit the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. Positive effects will extend to downstream receiving water bodies, the St. Lucie Estuary, Indian River Lagoon and Atlantic Ocean. , Goal 7.1.1: BALANCING GROWTH AND COASTAL RESOURCES. ALL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED IN THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT ¡¡\3 THE COASTAL AREA SHALL OCCUR IN A MANNER WHICH PROTECTS, CONSERVES, AND ENHANCES THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE COASTAL AREA AND THE ENVIRC)NMENTAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS ATTRIBUTED TO THEM. The County waterways, including Ten Mile Creek, are impaired as a result of past agricultural and expanding urban activities. Although the floodplain on the subject site was previously cleared and partially filled to allow for agricultural activities, a remnant of the historic creek and low· elevations along the flõodplain still remain. Increasing the densities OR the subject site can be expected to increase development pressures that may result in filling low areas within the floodplain and impacting the oxbow. The low elevations along Ten Mile Creek provide water storage during time of heavy rains. The oxbow appears to be connected to the Creek, at least hydrologically. Policy 7.1.2.9: The County shall support and implement programs, in line with the administrative and fiscal constraints of the County, to restore, enhance, and maintain the functions and values of natural waterways and adjacent upland habitats within the coastal area. Through state and local programs, St. Lucie County will continue to encourage the preservation and enhancement of \w ( 'wI1 June 10, 2003 Page 8 Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 floodplain wetland functions through public purchase and restoration of the floodplain wetlands and adjacent upland buffers along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and the Indian River Lagoon, including their natural tributaries. The subject site is targeted for restoration as part of the North Fork St. Lucie River Oxbow Reconnection Project that is proposed within the Indian River Lagoon Feasibility Plan and the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Plan. Funding for the acquisition of site for this purpose is currently not available. Development of the amendment site should occur in a manner that furthers efforts to restore, enhance and maintain the functions and values of natural waters and adjacent upland habitats. Increasing the density on the amendment site would reduce the probability of protecting the Ten Mile Creek floodplain and physical reconnection of the oxbow to the main river channel. Policy 7.1.3.3: The County shall cooperate with the appropriate regulatory and management agencies to implement comprehensive and coordinated management plans of the Indian River Lagoon in order to improve the biological health of the Lagoon. The amendment site is included within the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Plan and the Indian River Lagoon Resistibility Plan as a natural area restoration site. Joint state, regional and federal agencies have funded a feasibility study that will include designs for the future restoration of the subject tract. Funding for the acquisition of this site for this purpose is currently not available. Any future development plans should be designed in conjunction with the proposed restoration of the floodplain to enhance the natural floodplain and reconnect the isolated oxbow to the main river channel. Objective 7.1.4: St. Lucie County shall strive to obtain or maintain water quality and trophic state index classifications of "good" for the Indian:River Lagoon, Five Mile Creek, Ten Mile Creek, and the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The County shall enact appropriate regulations that provide for the maintenance or improvement of water quality. A significant portion of the floodplain of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River, including the amendment parcel, is isolated from the river's main branch because of dredging that occurred in the 1920-40's. This resulted in a significant loss of natural filtration of nutrients that has resulted in degradation of the quality of water in Ten Mile Creek and downstream waterbodies, including the St. Lucie Estuary. ' The North Fork St. Lucie River Marsh Reconnection project is part of the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) Feasibility plan; our area's portion of the Everglades Comprehensive Plan, Shoreline restoration and reconñection of partially isolated floodplain wetlands is a separate component of the IRL Feasibility Study of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. Funds for conducting pilot studies and feasibility planning of marsh and oxbow reconnections have previously been supplied by the Sf. Lucie River Issues Team and other matching grant sources (e.g., USFWS, SFWMD). The proposed amendment would increase development pressures along Ten Mile Creek, which will hamper efforts to improve the quality of water in Ten Mile Creek and downstream estuaries. \wi .~ ~~,.,. June 10, 2003 Page 9 ( Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 CONSERVATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment is not consistent with Goal 8.1, 8.1.2.11, 8.1.3.1, goals, objectives and policies found within the conservation element. Goal 8.1: The natural resources of St. Lucie County shall be protected, appropriately used, or conserved in a manner which maximizes their function, and values. The proposed amendment would increase density within the floodplain along Ten Mile Creek, a degraded waterbody, and headwaters to the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The proposed increase in density can be expected to increase development pressure within the amendment site's floodplain that also includes a remnant of the pre-dredged Creek. The placement of improvements within the floodplain is not an appropriate use and will result in a loss of existing (although minimal) and potential floodplain values. The amendment site consists of a fallow citrus grove and floodplain along Ten Mile Creek. Although, the previous citrus operations severely impacted the site's natural environment, the site still contains 1,500 feet of frontage along Ten Mile Creek, remnants of the pre-dredged Ten Mile Creek, an oxbow, and lands within the Ten Mile Creek floodplain. The site contains a large section of the historic Ten Mile Creek that was primarily cut off from the main channel when the creek was channalized in the early 1900's. Policy 8.1.1.2: St. Lucie County shall facilitate development that maximizes energy efficiency and sustainability. This should include techniques that will reduce the total fossil fuel energy required to build and maintain urban land uses. This shall include standards that promote mixed land use patterns, urban Înfill, public transit and provide non-motorized interconnections between land use types to reduce auto dependence and vehicle miles traveled. The site's close proximity to major employment sections can be expected to reduce the vehicle miles traveled to work. Non-motorized and public transit facilities within the proposed development site, proposed employment centers and retrofitting of adjacent and future roadways to accommodate non-motorized users would fully address this policy. ' Policy 8.1.2.11: St. Lucie County shall support and assist with projects that further the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Imitative goals to restore and maintain ecosystem elements most resembling natural, healthy functions of a complex balanced aquatic system. Increasing densities along Ten Mile Creek will increase development pressures within the floodplain resulting in further impacts to Ten Mile Creek and eliminating the ability to reconnect the oxbow on this site to the main river channel. The project site is included with the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Plan and Indian River Lagoon Feasibility Plan as a natural area restoration site. Joint efforts between, state, regional and federal agencies has funded a feasibility study that will include designs for the future restoration of the tract. Funding for the acquisition of this site for this purpose is currently not available. Any construction in the floodplain should \wt .."J June 1 0, 2003 Page 10 ( Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 assist to enhance the natural floodplain and reconnect the isolated oxbow to the main river channel. Policy 8.1.3.1: The County's land development regulations shall include the use of programs to protect or maintain floodplain, such as reduced parking, conservation easements, cluster site plan and micrositing of buildings. The County shall continue to strictly enforce regulations that direct development away from the floodplains and provide upland buffers along the floodplain. Residential development on the site can occur with little or no impact to the remaining natural resources and adjacent waters if the development and accessory facilities are located outside the floodplain and shoreline preservation zone. The preliminary Multi- Family Conceptual Site Plan places all structures outside the floodplain except for two lakes that would provide stormwater management. One of the lakes is proposed within the remnant oxbow that is located on the property. The remnant oxbow is protected through local standards, however there is a potential that increased densities and development pressure on the floodplain could result in impacting the oxbow if the future developer proposes sufficient mitigation. Policy 8.1.8.16: The County shall require clustering of dwelling units and/or open space for land development projects which contain environmentally sensitive lands and critical habitats within its project boundaries, in order to preserve these resources. Ten Mile Creek shoreline is considered ,environmentally sensitive. Increased densities will increase the probability that impacts to this area will occur. - Policy 8.1.12.7: No fill or regrading of property shall be allowedéxcept to establish required road elevations for driveways, unless the environmental assessment shows that fill or regrading will not adversely affect the environment and fill is available on site. The proposed amendment may increase development pressures along the Ten Mile Creek shoreline and prohibit the future connection of the historic oxbow to the existing channel, as proposed by the local, state and regional agencies. Residential development could occur outside the floodplain and any construction in the floodplain area should assist in restoration of the Ten Mile Creek floodplain natural functions. Incrèasing the density, and thereby the development pressure on this tract, reduces the likelihood of this happening. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE Policy 9.1.1.1: Level of Service for Recreation and Open Space shall be as follows: Community Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents in the unincorporated area. Regional Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents countywide Recreation and Open Space level of Service demands are based on the 2000 Census reported persons per household of 2.47 and the 360 maximum dwelling units allowed under the proposed Future land Use designation of RU, the resultant population estimate for the amendment site is 889 persons. '-' ....., June 10, 2003 Page 11 ( Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 The amendment site would require 4.45 acres to provide the required community level of service for recreation and open space for the maximum development of the site. The 72 acre project site contains sufficient land area to accommodate the recreation needs of it's future residents and has been determined not to conflict with this element. The floodplain and shoreline protection areas on the subject site can provide passive recreational activities for its residents to meet the community LOS standards. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Policy 11.1.4: No right to obtain final development order, nor any other rights to develop (B)(3)(b) the subject property have been granted or implied by the County's approval of the preliminary development order without determining the capacity of public facilities. A Certificate of Capacity must be obtained before a Final Development Order is issued. Policy 11.1.28: The County shall continue to require new development to meet level of service standards for both on and off site improvements, including local streets, water and sewer connection lines, stormwater management facilities, and open space. Sufficient capacity is expected to be available to service the proposéd amendment site. Prior to the approval of any Final Development Order a Certificate of Capacity must be obtained. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The following goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan apply to this amendment: WATER RESOURCES. 187.201 (7)(a) Goal: Florida shall assure the availability of an adequate supply of water for all competing uses deemed reasonable and beneficial and shall maintain the functions of natural systems and the overall present level of surface and ground water quality. Florida shall improve and restore the quality of waters not presently meeting watér quality standards. There is a concern that the intensity of development proposed for the project site will pose a threat to the adjacent Ten Mile Creek and downstream Outstanding Florida Waters. The applicant has provided a preliminary development plan that clusters dwelling units to avoid impacts to on-site and off-site water resources. However, proposed stormwater treatment facilities are provided within the floodplain that contains an oxbow that represents a portion of historic Ten Mile Creek. The oxbow would have been created and cut off from the river when the river was channelized. '-' '..,./ June 10. 2003 Page 12 ( Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 The proposed increase in density on this tract is expected to increase the pressure for development to occur within the floodplain and thereby reduce the restoration goals of local, state and federal agencies. NATURAL SYSTEMS AND RECREATIONAL LANDS.187.201 (9)(a) Goal: Florida shall protect and acquire unique natural habitats and ecological systems, such as wetlands, tropical hardwood hammocks, palm hammocks, and virgin long leaf pine forests, and restore degraded natural systems to a functional condition. The amendment site consists of a fallow citrus grove and floodplain along Ten Mile Creek. Although, the previous citrus operations severely impacted the site's natural environment, the site still contains 1,500 feet of frontage on Ten Mile Creek, and remnants of the pre-dredged Ten Mile Creek. About 50% of the amendment site is within the Ten Mile Creek floodplain. The site contains a large section of the historic Ten Mile Creek that was primarily cut off from the main channel when the creek was canalized in the early 1900's. The proposed amendment may increase development pressures along the Ten Mile Creek shoreline and prohibit the future connection of the historic oxbow to the existing channel as proposed by the local, state and regional agencies. Residential development could occur outside the floodplain and any construction in the floodplain area assist in restoration of the Ten Mile Creek floodplain natural functions. Increasing the density and thereby the development pressure on this tract reduces the likelihood of this happening. LAND USE. 187.201(16)(a) Goal: In recognition of the importance of preserving the natural resources and enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in place, or have agreeme.nts to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner. Representatives have indicated that sufficient capacity is currently available from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority to provide water and wastewater service to 360 dwelling units that would be allowed under the proposed amendment's maximum density. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order, a Certificate of Capacity indicating that all adequat.e infrastructure services are available is required. Central water and sanitary sewer facilities required for any future development proposal along with stormwater management, roadway, and other public facilities are the responsibility of the developers and not the local government. The amendment site is bordered on the east by a collector roadway that allows easy access to the major arterial and emergency evacuation route (Midway Road) that connects to 1-95. The proposed amendment - to the future land use classification is not expected to adversely affect the quality of life in the immediately surrounding area. The site is located in an area that contains public improvements sufficient to support residential development. PUBLIC FACILITIES. 187.201(18)(a)FS: Florida shall protect the substantial investments in public facilities that already exist and shall plan for and finance new facilities to serve residents in a timely, orderly, and efficient manner. ~ '..J ( Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 June 10. 2003 Page 13 The amendment would maximize the efficient use of the existing and proposed public facilities in furtherance of this state goal. TRANSPORTATION. 187.201(20)FS: directs future transportation improvements to aid in the management of growth and promotes an intermodal transportation system. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers this goal. An analysis of the impact of the proposed amendment on effected roadways has been provided. The applicant's Traffic Impact Statement is based upon a "worst-case" traffic generation for the site utilizing the maximum allowed density as allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. The analysis indicates that an additional 210 single-family dwelling units would not reduce the level of service on Selvitz Road. If the site is developed for multifamily purposes, the trip generation would be reduced from the single-family demand. CONSISTENCY WITH THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN The following are the primary regional goals and polices that apply to this petition: Strategy 1.1.2: Promote compatibility of urban areas, regional facilities, natural preserves and other open spaces. The amendment is in conflict with this goal. The proposed increase in density will allow high density along Ten Mile Creek. The existing RS land use category is appropriate for areas of special environmental concern such as along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and Indian River Lagoon. Ten Mile Creek is the major tributary to the North Fork. Increased densities and intensities along the river shoreline would increase the likelihood of further degradation of these waterways.: Policy 8.1.1.1: All development should take place concurrent with or after the provision of necessary infrastructure and services. The proposed amendment site is located in an area with the necessary water, wastewater and roadway capacity currently available. Development of residential units on the ,site encourages the location of housing units within close proximity to major employment sectors to facilitate any future transit system and to provide convenient access to emergency evacuation routes. ' CONCLUSION Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use changë not· wholly consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is not wholly consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed Future Land Use Classification change would increase residential densities and development pressures along Ten Mile Creek, the headwaters of the North Fork of the St. Lucie Aquatic Preserve. County staff believes that most, if not all of the inconsistencies cited above, can be addressed through the removal of the 35 acres of this site that lie within the floodplain '-' (, ( Petition: Becker Holding Corporation File Number: PA-03-003 ....I June 10. 2003 Page 14 from the proposed future land use change. This area would retain the RS (Residential Suburban) future land use designation, thereby reducing densities on the parcel and potential development pressures along Ten Mile Creek. In more general terms, this adjustment would result in a maximum parcel density of 260 units as opposed to the requested 360 units. Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval for the future land use change on the approximately 38 acres that are located outside the floodplain only and decline the requested future land use designation change on the approximately 35 acres with the Ten Mile Creek floodplain. Attachment cc: County Administrator County Attorney File '. '-' '...,I ( The RE designation is intended for large lot, single-family detached residential dwellings, at a density of one unit per gross acre. These areas are not required to be served with central utilities, however when at all practical, service connections should be provided. The RE designation is acknowledged as potentially suitable tor limited residential development under the following criteria: o All residential development must be in accordance with applicable standards and restrictions as set forth in the Land Development Regulations; o All residential development proposals in excess of 10 .units must be approved through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process as provided for in the Land Development Regulations; o Any residential development in excess of 200 acres should be in conjunction with the establishment of a Community Development District, pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, for the purpose of providing the necessary infrastructure facilities to support that development; and, o Resid nsities are set at a maximum of one (1) unit per one (1) gross acre. RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN (RS) The Residential Suburban (RS) land use category is intended to act as a transitional area between the agricultural areas and the more intense residential areas in the eastern portion of the County. This category is found predominantly along the western edge.of the urban form, but is also appropriate for areas of special environmental concern such as aÌong the North Fork of the St. Lucie Aiverand the Indian River Lagoon. The RS designation. is intended for large lot, single-family detached residential dwellings, at a density of one to two units per gross acre. These areas are not required to be served with central utilities, however when at all practical, service connections should be required. RESIDENTI.~L URBAN (RU) The Residential Urban (RU) classification is the predominant residential land use category in the County. This residential land use category provides for a maximum density of 5 dwelling units per gross acre. The RU designation is genera"y found between the identified urbarr service areas and the-transitional AS areas. These properties ne~d to be serviced with central water and wastewater services. These services may be ·provided by èither a public utility or through private on-site facilities, as would be permitted in accordance with all applicable regulations. New development in the AU areas car. occur using traditional single-family or multi-family zoning designations or through the Planned Unit Development process. 51. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Underline is for add~ion slril<e tkl'ðtl!Jk if for deletion 1-29 Future land Use Adoption: March 5. 2002 \.f' ( ~ The RE designation is intended for large lot, single-family detached residential dwellings, at a density of one unit per gross acre. These areas are not required to be served with central utilities, however when at all practical, service connections should be provided. The RE designation is acknowledged as potentially suitable for limited residential development under the following criteria: o All residential development must be in accordance with applicable standards and restrictions as set forth in the land Development Regulations; o All residential development proposals in excess of 10 units must be approved through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process as provided for in the land Development Regulations; o Any residential development in excess of 200 acres should be in conjunction with the establishment of a .community Development District, pursuant to Chapter 190, r:!orida Statutes, for the purpose of providing the necessary infrastructure facilities to support that development; and, o Residential densities are set at a maximum of one (1) unit per one (1) gross acre. RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN (RS) The Residential Suburban (RS) land use category is intended to act as a transitional area between the agricultural areas and the more intense residential areas in the eastern porUon of the County. This category is found predominantly along the western edge Df the urban fOnTI, but is also appropriate for areas of special environmental concern such as along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River ,and the Indian River Lagoon. The RS designation.,is intended for large lot, single-family detached residential dwellings, at a density of one to two units per gross acre. These areas are not required to be served wíth central utilities, however when at all practical, service connections should be required. RESIDENTIAL URBAN (RU) The Residential Urban (RU) classification is the predominant residential land use category in the County. This residential land use category provides for a maximum density of 5 dwelling units per gross acre. The RU designation is generally found between...the identified urban service areas and the transitionãl RS areas. These p'roperties need to be serviced with central water and wastewater services. These services may b~ províded by either a public utility or through private on-site facilities,. as would be·.pennitted in accordance with all applicable regulations. New development in the RU areas car. occur using traditional single-family or multi-family zoning designations or through the Planned Unit Development process. Sl. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Underfine is for addftion strite thretlgh if for deletion 1-29 Future Land Use Adoption: March 5. 2002 '-' ..., ( o Residential development shall be regulated by the intensity district in which it is to take place. In no case should gross residential density exceed 15 du/ac. o All uses shall be compatible with inlernal and external adjacent land uses. SPECIAL DISTRICT (SD) The intent of the Special District (SO) designation is to identify those areas where specific uses or combin~tions .of uses are anticipated. These include previously approved Community Development Dist~cts, are~s for which a site specific development plan or concept has been granted, or areas which by their location have specific issues and concerns for their development. Residential densities within an area designated as a Special District, are limited to what the current land use designation authorizes. Any increase over the present designation may be considered only through the Plan Amendment process. COMMERCIAL (COM) The Commercial (COM) land use designation is applicable to areas of future commercial development, in addition to {hose existing developed commercial areas. Future commercials areas should be located at points of high transportation access, with specific action taken to prevent the development of new linear commercial strips. Although this plan supports the location of higher intensity commercial uses at tlie intersection of arterial· roadways, it should not be interpreted to mean that every intersection should be designated for commercial activities. Unless otherwise designated on the future land use maps, applications for commercial use should be done in conjunction with a detailed review of the impacts of such development on adjacent property. specifically noting what, if any, negative neighborhood impacts could result. The Commercial (COM) designation is intended to accommodate all commercial zoning districts as identified under St. Lucie County's Land Development Regulations- Office and general retail uses are considered the principal uses within the COM designated areas. INDUSTRIAL (IND) This land use designation is applied to specific äreas of the County identified as suitable tor . industrial use. This laDd use designation is intended to be implemented through both the heavy and light industrial zoning distiicts, with the specific criteria for zoning application as provided for under the policies of the Future Land Use Element. 81. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Underline is 'or addition strate: Ihl'ðtlgh if 'or deletion 1-31 Future Land Use Adoption: March 5, 2002 '-' ( ( ( '..,J J ulle 4, 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ßOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS In accordance with the Sl. Lucie County Land Development Code, you are hereby advised that BECKER HOLDING CORPORATION, has petitioned Sl. Lucie County for a Change in Future Land Use Cla~sification from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (ResideJ1tial Urban) for the following described property: Location: Northwest corner of the intersection of Selvitz and Ralls Road. THE PROPERTY'S LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS A V AILABLE UPON REQUEST The first public hearing on the petition will be held a1 7:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on June 19, 2003, County Commissioner's Chambers, St. Lucie County Administra1ion Building Annex, 2300 VirginÜJ A venue, Fort Pierce, Florida. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at that time. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be considered. Written comments to the Planning and Zoning Commission should be received by the County Planning Division at least 3 days prior to a scheduled hearing. County policy discourages communication with individual Planning and Zoning Commission and County Commission on any case outside of the scheduled public hearing(s). You may speak at a public hearing, or provide written comments for the record. The proceedings of the Planning and Zoning Commission are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Planning and Zoning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or heari{lg, he will need a record of the proceedings. For such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross- examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. If it becomes necessary, a public hearing may be continued to a date~ertain. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Director at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting at (772) 462- 1777 or T.D.D. (772) 462-1428. If you.no longer own property adjacent to the above-described parcel, please forward this notice to the new owner. Please call 772/462-1577 if you have any questions, and refer to: File Number PA-03-003. Sincerely, ST. LUCIE COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION E£~/~ Ed Merritt, Chairman JOHN D. DRUHN, D,~r"cr No 1 . DOUG COWARD. DI~rricr No.2· PAULA A. LEWIS. Disrricr No," . FRANNIE HUTCHINSON D,wlCr No 4 . CLIFF OARNES. Disrricr No.5 Counry AdminiSlloror - Douglos M, Anderson 2.100 Virginio Avenue · Fort Pierce. FL .14982-5652 Administration: (772) 462-1590 · Plonning: (772) 462-2822 · GISlTechnicol Services: (772) 462-155.1 Economic Development: (772) 462-1550 · Fox: (772) 462.1581 Tourist/Convenrion: (772) 462-1529 · Fox: (772) 462-21.12 '" CI OJ ·E CI VJ C .!æ ft e ~ .s .5 :Ë Ii ~~ '~ U OÐOÐ 2 C t.:)=Ö Õ C :::c : Ë t , c. 'is , 0 'II ::"ii = ~¡ t .. ::o.s ;!~a ¡!¡: c;» :: :::I f'I e~ 'E < ·:ð ~ 'õ.s - ;: fi~ E OÐ 1: C .= ¡;¡¡ o¿ '-' ~ 8 o:;¡Ñ:~ an V"'\ r- V"¡'O\ -:t -:t' - -:t -:t . '~ I I""") 00 00 \0 00 C. 0\0\0\ 0\ Ñ~~~~ ~¡~I~I;~i~iO!~i~¡~-!~)~'¡~1~;~~·;M:OO:~~~1.~ ~:o 0 01010;~:~~Mi~i~!~'OI_,~!O -;OOMIM O\:~~'~o'o,~,~'~,~ 0 ~ ~ 0\ ~ N ~ 0\ ~~ ;:!; .,. .,. .,..~ q .,. ..,. ~'" ~ .,. .,. ~ ~ 'T r;- ~ .,. ,. '- \0 0 \0 \0..... ~ 00 00,00 00 00 00 00 0\ 00 00 00 r- 00 N 0\0\0\0\0\0\0\I'o0\-:t0\0\ 0\0000 -:t-:t-:t-:t-:t-:t-:tN-:t~-:t-:t.....-:t.....~ MMr"\~MMMf"I"1Mf""1f""")f"I")""""""MM ( 8 r8r~; ~1,'~'!§j'~"I'~'1h=i~1~1 ~;~ ~¡V\~,M ~ ~ ~1~1I'o -:t -:t!-:tl-:t¡~'- ~!~I~ ~ ~I ~.~i~'~ ~;~;_;M -:-1-1 ~'OO.OO 00 ~;~iOO; 100100'00 0\'0\'0\ 0\0\,0\'0\' 10\,0\10\1 ~ -:t:-:t -:tl-:t -:t,-:t;-:tl-:t'¡-:tl ~ M'M;M;M.M!M! iM¡M MJ 00 00 0\ 0\ -:t -:t .....,..... 'II 3 ....J -J ....J .....J ...J ....J ....J ...J ...J ....J ...J ....J ...J ....J ...J ....J ....J ....J ....J ....J ....J ....J ...J ....J ....J ....J ....J ....J -J.....J ...,J:_L...Jl...J'...,J ....J; VJ u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u.'u.,u. u.,u. LL. u.,u.,u.: f'I Q Q N .... f'I N .... on .c u .>( '" ... II) II) CIS u m ': ~ E uë:<ü ët:o.. ~~~ II) ... ·ü U iii U ~j~~~ Q) .!! .~ .!:! ë:V)0..0..0.. t: t: t: t: t: o 0 0 0 0 u.0..u.u.LL. II) ØJ ë:J IU ~\:J~.3u .~ C ~ ~ 'Ë 0.. ~ C cñ ë: ,~ t .>( 0 t: t ~~j~~~ uu..cu u u u u '- \- cu .... u u u .~ ë:ë:mo.. t:t:~t o 0 u 0 u.u.>u. O.J GJ U U ~ ~ ~ ~ .!! .~ .~ u o..o..o..ë: t t: t: t: o 0 0 0 u.u.u.u. u u u u ... ... 0:0: t: t: o 0 u. u. u u u u u u u u u u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' u .!:! .!:! .!:! .!:! .!:! u u .!:!:.~: ë: 0.. 0.. 0.. 0.. 0.. ë:' ë: 0.., 0.. t: t: t: t t: t: t: t: t: t: o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u. u. u. u. u. U. LL.: U. U. U. u II) u u ... ... u .~ ë:o.. t: t o 0 u. u. è o 0 II) N ... u C Q C C "0. -J '" C C C C cñ ...J '" -J ...J ...J -J -J ex:: .>( II) .>II. .>( .>( .>( ... .>( .>( I::: "0 .>II. u Q > u '" 0 u u u u u :0 C ã) 0 -J ~ 0 0 0 cñ "0 "0 ... 0 0 "0 "0 II) -J E E ~ E ex: ex: u E E ex: ex: > "0' ::I C ë.. "0, ... .>II. "0 E "0 ... ... ... .2 ... E ~ E ... ~ .. II) u E E ... .. '" '" « .. 0::: U ...' 0:: ' Q CIS C '" ÜQ Q Q Q '" \0 '" \0 '" Q 0 ... ... u '" '" C Q "0 "0 -:t u Q ,~ '" Q J::i' 0 '" :I: ex: ~ :I::Î! N :I: 0 :I: ::I ::I u :I: :I: ... ... -:t ... :ë '" ..c ... ... ... ë .... ~ ~ ... ... 0.. 0.. V) ... ... '" '" 1'0 bQ....~cu 1-.. ,_ U U U U U ~~~ " 3 u ... u ~ ~ Cu';; "0' u ~ '" > > u .>( = Õ > > > ~ N .>( ~ > > C C ~ .>( .>( > > ..... ~.~ v ~ >- '" ~ ;J '" '" '" ~ ~ ~ ~OÕ >< '" >< '" ~ V) ~ ::I ::I '" '" ~ ~ "0 "0 >< .- (I) 'II II) 0 ex: -:t 0.. 0 0 0 0 V) V) z 0 0 UJ UJ 0 o a:: (/) ,{') r>'. V), ~ -:t -:t m 0 0 V) -:t -:t \0 ~ \0 -:t -:t m 0 m 0 0 ~ 0 0 1'0 0 0 N 0 ~ 01- N (., \!> ~ ~ -:t N 0 N ë; N N Ñ 0\ N \0 \0 0 0 0 \0 0\ -:t 0 0 1'0 00 00 ~ -:t 0 0 0 o -:\0 G:> (<'1''-''- 0( N N \0 0\ 0 N N 0\ ..... 0 0 0 0 N 0 N \0 \0 ~ 0 Q N N <'I ~ t.O N;""'):""""" 1(."4! ("'1 ~ ~ \0 ~ -:t 00 <'1 ..... ..... r- <'I -:t -:t 0.. -:t 0.. -:t ..... ..... ~ -:t -:t ,..., ..... -:t -:t 0.. .,... f"I')'C"") "'f "('1;«) '~,~ \Q '" ",: '" "" ... þj¡þj¡ E ::I ::I .. 0 0 Z 0 0 on .!! u ... "0 '~ e < "5. (' .. U '; Z ~ ::E '"' -J "'1:; :=; .... ex: m è: ~ '" U '~ E '" ~,::E C '" ~ as ¡J:: : ; t{'J C u u m V) V) ... C ... ~ U '" II) ,D è:2 Ü EI~~~! : :OJ u -'" :ë ..!!! <ü C C e 0 oS o ,D, U'C '" '" E¡,g, !ä: !ä:J~i ;¡ä · "0 ... ... ,,D ,D 0 ~ -¡¡ <II '" > '" <II j <II '" '" U ~~ 0 ~Ö ::I, ::I ""II), '::E'-' ¡i5 z .U.1 Uc:) ex: ~ cñ ex: V) V) CL.!Ot~! ;UJ; fO') ::I ... II) C e .t; '" · C ~ Z ~ m t N "á.-J ., ~:E e .¡: E · ..c II) Z U 0 C '" E <II ... o U. >. .E <II bI)'" CIS..c ... <II U '" O:I: ~ ~ t:. '" ... ~:§ gp~ :I: V) r: .~ ::I, ,0.. ' .t! , :å:å'2 >. >. ~ "R < < 'ü ü ::¡¡ .5:..2, ~ ~,!ä ~ ~ -J,-J,::E,::E¡::E, § ~ E ~ mc:) SSõ t: t: t: ::I ::I '" mmu U.1 u. ~o..o.. §~~ ~öö . . - 1 ' :O::'cx¡......fV}:LL.~~! I >,ex:'tii:<ü!..ci ~I t:1 "" : ...:~! t: ,...'"O;"Oe-¡~¡uIE~, ,,-,0): '" t:,cc """,',DIO, ,s,s ..". ", "': '" 01> -,,ci ,,,,I "" ¿. o..,ex:,ex: ....';;>-,<:t-, ....'....' . .:._.~ ..._L. -.f----~. --r- ·l-·~·-t-·_-: , j ! ' , oo....::E ~'~ ~ .~ " S S S .~ .~ ex:ex:ex:o...... UJm ~ ~.'; 0..c ~ð~ c C C C '" '" èè '" '" ~~ ::t: t: II) ,D o ex: ex:UJ ] E ~,2 .!:! .g 3 :;; ~ex:o~ ~ e- o 0 ..c U uu e- ë bI) .5 .5 o ".!: <II, <II ,u t a~;¡ ¡~: ,~~, ¡f,~ ¡ :;a: I - . :a: 0' . t- t .' : I I 'õ! ; «:U ......' >! > " ¡ I, .¡- ::I'::: , ; c! CI= g¡ e: t, t 'ë' c, ~'È. : "'!~¡ä2¡~ ' ! '·"'51=:å:å 13 " 'II, 'II' å; 11)' c: E=, C g II g !,' ð c, o'.c,.c, 0 !!! '" till :a, ~......., c, fa ; >, >. ~ < 0( ·ü 'e, .t;~i::l :J¡.c .... faj:e'~: ~,U e:ø:: ~ -5i; till; t¡..~¡.- o:=i=j.oE', U u C '. C ¡ ì,,! £!' e, 2 ::1.::1, ,.I; I 0'" " -J 0' ''II '" ::I >" "0 "0 I:! 'II' ", 0.. '" .. 'Z <¡mimic:) m:m mlml UjU!&::&:'LL.ìLL.:æ:O,::t::::t::::t:,.5¡.5:_!~!~¡:.J¡:J::E::E¿ ~'O\ o'-:t N'~.-,§ <'1,00'N'N ~'o-~ -:t 00 ..... -:t 0\0\0 .~ O\:~I'~ ~I'o 2 8 8!Q 8,Q Q' 12'8'8 Q,Q 0'8000 0 0 0:0 Q'O Q'018 8 0 õ Q Q:g 0'88' !Õ OQ S 8 8 8 0 ~ 8 8 8 8 88 8 8 88 0 Q18 N ~ ~ Õ - ~ 8\O·~ ~N Q õ'8- 0 S 0 0 \0 ~ ,..., - ~ :g:; -:t -'õ Si8 8 888,88 Q Õ 8 8'8 8;0 88 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8,8 8 88¡8 8:8 "~ S S¡~:~ =:~ ~ S S st~:~ ~ S,~ ~ ~ S ~ S;::¡'='S:~~ S'Si. .:~ ~:.... '" t.t'\~_:N~......t_ _ '" t.t'\ "" -;N N '" N ~ N t.t'\ N·"':..... "IIII:t''''' M'N "'¡"":- -IN M ~ ~¡~~~~:~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~:~ ~ ~~,~ ~ ~,~'~i~:~:~¡~~!~ ~ ~ ~~.~,~:~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~ ~:~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~,~ ~;~:~ ~:~ . ¡ , , , , u' 1.51 tr . ð j I I .!! ~ g 5c " jl ::: .';: Ii .2 .~ :; I ¿::E CL..~.~ ~i ~:g¡õ¡r-I:g :;'1' 8¡2!~1818 8, -iÕI- .,.,'N -, 2:~!8 8ìÕ:8¡ ~ ~II~ ~i~i~II' -:t 0 <'1 ~I"",,-:t SI~I:;: Ò'Õ¡'Õ'I' ~<'1N"""""'" -:t,-:t -:t ~ -:t¡-:tl N,Nlt:'I,N..C"I,N'1 Ii :: .~ i¡"E :~ c: o -:: " E a- ~ .: ~ :ë é- . c. 0 ¡it! U ,:r: :: to:) :; . · ë; p= :: I'I!~ Io! ~ " t Ie ~ ,~c :;ëi 'T I' :s ff'I Ii E 'T ' E « lOA. ,U a- I:'; ~ ~:ë 1;; : tI ~ "E l1li ,1: c: .. B.= tI · e::E '-' o ~1~¡~r~!~!~·~ o 00 O:~'OOM N 0 ""' Q\ r"'- ',,",,0\ \0 r"'- 0:1' ""' r; ~ "f "f'o:I' ";' "f "f "f M M f" _1M N '" 0\00 00000000 o 000\ 0\0\0\0\ M \00:1' 0:1'0:1'0:1'0:1' ~ O~ ~~~..... c. Ñ M CI CI N ...... M N ...... on .... - S ..J ..J CI) t.L. t.L. .c u '" U ro U o ~ C U [il: èEt: U ~ ~ U U U U ... .... U U -ª~~ ~~~ !-..J..J..J..J..J Ut.L.t.L.t.L.t.L.t.L. ¡:;: .c Õ ~ ::x: II> II> .... a- '1:1 '1:1 '« o ]o~ ~ ~ e t.L.>~ Cl)Ö::õ 8~:::E '" N '<t ..... ..... ... .... U U > > Ö::Ö:: 0\ 0:1' N N N M ..... ... .... cc \Ø .... E " "z 'V) tI ,E '. :z . .,p ,: .... 'E '. . :z ro t.L.~~>. ü ~õ g ..c '" ¡;¡ '" :w:::Euz 'Of<'! .... E, . z '1:1 ,C '" ~ o IX , '" "'0 o ..:.t. V) è -:::.¡¡¡~ - '" ... c ... ~ ';; ß ¡; ~ii51X N .... E '. Z ü< f!~ !- 'Ë UJUJ .... ~c ë:: '" E ci5< u ..5 '" :; o u V) ~.~ C'C ::I ::I ,0,0' uu " ", 'ü 'ü ::I ::I ..J..J ci5~ Ii i: ¡I . e-' Ii i8' ¡Ii ,; : ãI " '!ol~'- ¡I-:'œ' fä;:¡¡..:.t. ' ,¡... "" _ C r! aI 'j E =; ~">,ß -g :'," , CO! 0 aI ._ ..:.t. , Z:;CII:;¡œ'CI)'CI)iV) ¡r';ªi'§ §,;!,;g ~ 'è!)'o 0 8 8 ~ .........NOO\O ~'- 0 N .,., 0 è!)'o 0 0 0 0 ''Ie: .....'~ 0 ~ ~ ~ :c 0 0 0 ~ :;:a :g ;! :g :g 0 ;" ~'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J- NNNNNN ..J..J..J u.t.L.u. u '" ., co E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t.~ o..il:il:P- '" t: t: t: ., 0 0 0 :::Ll..u.u. U U U U U U ... ... ... cu .~ cu il:a..il: t: t: t: 000 Ll..t.L.t.L. U U U U ... .... ,!,! U a..il: t: t: o 0 u. u. U > <"0 ",IX '¡: !:j '60 ';; ... - >~ 000 O'<t M ""' N ..... C ...J è....ð~ oC 0 E~~'" U ;> > :::Eö::ö::~ NN co ::::)N:qO ~MMo.. ..J "Ecou. '" è ~ "5 '" bIJ ö::¿~ e- o u 00 .E ti '" l: C o ... U ~~~ E " E ü U'~ 0 U ci5~~> No:I' 0,0 00 00 - N 00:1' 00 00 ..... N NO M '" 0\ 0 N M '<t '<t N N ;g~~g;8 000 r"'- 00000 0:1' 0\ o 000 00000 00000 N N M M 00 M.......... "''''o:I'NN 0000\0\ M M f""") M N 0:1' '<t '<t '<t ..,. NNNNN '" "" E o .r: !- 0\ .,., ..... '" ,,",0 ..,. .,., ~V:> 00 - 0\"" ..,. M .....M N,N N N N 0 ""' ""' .,., '-"1"'- 00 00 00 0\ 0\ 0\ 0:1'''''0:1' MMM ...J..J..J u.u.u. c C ...J...J .¥ ..:.t. u u o 0 C ê ê :; '" "" "" :¡;:¡;o .¥..:.t.U '" "" ;> 00:.:3 '" '" r"'- '" '" N O\O\N ~ M M ~ ., ~ "" .r: U 'E 'E u u u '" .r:..cO V')V)Ct:: '" '" .~ ,5 :::::: 00 C' o ~ "" 'ü u u ... '" u u Æ ~.~ c C C '" '" u ccc ~ .~ co 'ii " g, ~~~ 00 o o o ..,. '<t o 0, N o '" o ..... ..,. ..... ( ...,/ ,."" N ... o N ~ ... A. '-' '....,¡ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS "~' "=f,."" ·'.·,~'eJ···"·e'·'I' "'·E"''''·~''''''··, ,..,".e COUNTY ~. F LOR I D A ,;:'." GROWTH MANAGEMENT October 7, 2004 In accordance with the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, you are hereby advised that BECKER HOLDING CORPORATION has petitioned St. Lucie County for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban) and R/C (Residential Conservation) for the following described property: Location: Northwest corner of the intersection of Selvitz and Ralls Road. THE PROPERTY'S LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST The second public hearing on the petition will be held at 6:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on October 18,2004, County Commissioner's Chambers, St. Lucie County Administration Building Annex, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at that time. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be considered. The County Planning Division should receive written comments to the Board of County Commissioners at least 3 days prior to a scheduled hearing. County policy discourages communication with individual Board of County Commissioners on any case outside of the scheduled public hearing( s). You may speak at a public hearing, or provide written comments for the record. The proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings. For such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross- examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. If it becomes necessary, a public hearing may be continued to a date-certain. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Director at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting at (772) 462- 1777 or T.D.D. (772) 462-1428. If you no longer own property adjacent to the above-described parcel, please forward this notice to the new owner. Please call (772) 462-1577 if you have any questions, and refer to: File Number: PA-03-003. Sincerely, ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS /J~~/~~ P'a~la Lewis, Chairman JOHN D, ßRUHN, District No, 1 . DOUG COWARD, District No, 2 . PAULA A, LEWIS, District No, J . FRANNIE HUTCHINSON. District No 4 . CLIFF ßARNES. District No, 5 County Administrator - Douglas M, Anderson 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce. FL 34982-5652 Administration: (772) 462-1590 · Planning: (772) 462-2822 · GISrrechnical Services: (772) 462-1553 Economic Development: (772) 462-1550 · Fax: (772) 462-1581 Tourist Development: (772) 462-1529 · Fax: (772) 462-2132 www.co.st-Iucie.fl.us NO~CEOFCHA~ -~THEFUTURELAND USE MAP OF '1"Þf! S1: LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHEN~VEPLAN "'" The SI. Lucie County Board 01 County Commissioners will consider an ordinance to change the Future Land Use designation of the lands indicated on the map in this advertisement. A public hearing on this proposal will be held before the Board of County Commissioners on October 18. 2004. at 6:00 P.M., in the County Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, 51. Lucie County Administration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. The purpose of this public hearing is to consider the Department of Community Allairs, Objection, Comment and Recommendation Report on the proposed change and whether or not to adopt an ordinance changing the Future Land Use designation on approximately 72 acres Irom RS (Residential Suburban - 2 dulsc) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) and RlC (Resource Conservation - 1 du/5ac). L- r I I \ \ ' fl ~ '~ì J' )i \\ ' , I ~-1 :::'\; II ~ H '\~ LJ '0 a:: I1J c :;< c Q) ..., [ _SUbje~. SU, bjec /, ~y " \ .~ --..... ~ N A Petition Applicant: Becker Holding Corporation Petition Number: PA·03·003 Location: Northwest corner 01 Selvitz Road and Ralls Road Copies 01 the proposed amendment and draft ordinance may be obtained Irom the 51. Lucie County Growth Management Department, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982, Any questions may be directed to Diana Waite, Planner III at 772·462-1577. All proceedings before the Board 01 County Commissioners are electronically recorded, If a person decides to appeal any decision made with respect to any' matter considered at the hearing, they will need a record 01 the proceedings and that for such purpose, they may need to ensure that a verbatim record 01 the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. At the request of any party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during the hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross examine any individual testifying during the hearing upon request. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA /S/ PAULA LEWIS. CHAIRMAN PUBLISH DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2004 ~ '-' To: Submitted By: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: RECOMMENDATION: ...I 3-6 Agenda Request Item Number: Meeting Date: 10/18/04 Consent Regular Public Hearing La . [ ] [ ] [ ] [X ] Quasi-JD [X Board of County Commissioners Growth Management Consider adoption of Ordinance 04-030 approving the BJK, Inc. application requesting a change in the Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac). The 48.72 amendment site is located south side of Okeechobee Road (SR 70), approximately Y2 milt:: vvç~. of the Florida Turnpike. The Florida Department of Community Affairs had no objections to the proposed future land use change. Other agencies had recommendations and comments related to traffic, historic preservation and Ten Mile Creek. Approval of the proposed change from RS to RU Future Land Use designation would allow a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre or 244 dwelling units that would be part of a larger 366-acre project, to be known as Creekside. N/A On February 19, 2004, the Local Planning Agency, by a vote of 7 to 1, recommended approval of the request. On April 6, 2004, the Commission approved transmittal of the requested change in future land use from the RS (Residential Suburban) to the RU (Residential Urban). Adopt Ordinance 04-030 approving the BJK, Inc. request for a change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential, Urban). COMMISSION ACTION: ciJ APPROVED D DENIED c=J OTHER CURRENCE: Approved 5-0 ouglas M. Anderson County Administrator County Attorney ¡;J/ . Finance.: Environ. Resources; Coordination! Signatures Mgt. & Budget: Fire Dept: Utility: Purchasing: Public Works: Other: '-" ~ Board of County Commissioners: 10/18/04 GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Administration MEMORANDUM DATE: County Commissioners ./ j Randy Stevenson, Interim Growth Management Director ~ October 13, 2004 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: BJK, Inc/Application for a Change in Future Land Use Ordinance 04-030 On April, 14,2004, the Commission approved transmittal of the requested BJK, Inc. change in future land use to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. The Department's Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report (ORC) found no objections to the proposed amendment. The ORC Report is attached for your review and comments from other state agencies, which refer to the entire 364 acre BJK, Inc. site, are summarized below along with how these comments are being addressed. 1. The Florida Division of Historical Resources concerns are related to the protection of archeological and historical resources. As part of the Creekside Planned Unit Development process, the applicant provided an archeological survey that identified three archeological sites. One of those sites was deemed potentially significant by the state Division of Historical Resources and a Phase II Study, which is underway, was recommended. None of the sites identified in the Archaeological Survey were located on the 48.72 acres that is the subject of this amendment. Staff has requested that the Phase II survey and detail plans of proposed improvements in the area of the identified archaeological sites be provided. Following the receipt of this information the Historical Commission will consider the significance of the site based on its importance in the local or regional history of the area and compliance with the County's historic resource protection standards. 2. District 4, Department of Transportation (DOT) comments included concerns that the County did not identify how it will alleviate transportation impacts of the increased traffic due to this land use change along SR70/0keechobee Road between SR 712/Kings Highway and 1-95. The Crossroads area, (Turnpike to 1-95), is a larger transportation issue than this small land use amendment can address and will only slightly impact. One of DOT's comments that has been considered during the review of the Creekside PUD is to "ensure proposed developments will provide interconnectivity, transit infrastructure, internal paths, external connectivity including parking facilities, proximity of complimentary uses, and provide a "sense of place" that is relative to the regionaVlocal perspective of proposed land uses. Please see the report for the discussion of transportation and access management issues that are outside the scope of this future land use change. 3. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection commented on the water and wastewater analysis as well as the importance of Ten Mile Creek to the CERP project and the need to provide a stormwater management plan that is consistent with the objectives of the CREP projects in the area. As part of the Creekside PUD process the applicant has been working with the South Florida Water Management District. Staff has also requested the applicant coordinate with Jeff Beal, FDEP Division of Marine Resources, regarding the projects' restoration proposals and to ensure development of the larger project does not inhibit future restoration efforts along Ten Mile Creek. ....... ..." October 13, 2004 Page 2 Subject: BJK, Inc. Future Land Use Amendment 4. The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council stated the County should consider whether more than one FLUM designation would be appropriate for this site, the entire 364 acre tract. They also recommended the County and developer coordinate with the South Florida Water Management District to ensure that an adequate buffer is created adjacent to Ten Mile Creek to protect it from impacts related to the development and that the county provide a potable water analysis and ensure sufficient capacity exists to service the proposed future development. The amendment site is part of a larger 364 acre PUD development, known as Creekside. Although the above comments are not objections, each comment has been considered through the review of the Creekside PUD, which includes the FLU amendment site. The Creekside PUD proposes 840 dwelling units resulting in an overall density of 2.2 du/ac and 55,000 square feet of commercial uses. If approved, the change to the County's Future Land Use Map will provide for urban land use densities within the urban service area and adjacent to the MXD (Crossroads Mixed-Use Activity Area) Future Land Use which allows a variety of uses, including residential, commercial and industrial uses. The adjacent MXD designation to the east allows residential densities greater than the five dwelling units per acre permitted under the proposed RU Future Land Use. The proposed RU designation is an appropriate designation between the MXD and lower density designations to the west. Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan and to further the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed RU Future Land Use Designation would allow slightly higher densities adjacent to the Crossroads Mixed-Use Activity Area to provide a transition to the lower density future land use designations to the west A copy of the original staff report and the Florida Department of Community Affairs Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report are attached for your reference. Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 04-030 changing the Future Land Use Designation on the subject property from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential, Urban). cc: County Administrator County Attorney File ~ ''''*''' 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 ORDINANCE NO. 04-030 File Number PA-03-007 AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY; AUTHORIZING AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made the following detenninations: 1. BJK, Inc., a Florida Corporation presented a petition for a change in Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2du/ac) to RU (Residential, Urban - 5du/ac); 2. On February 19,2004 the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing notice at least 15 days prior to the hearing and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property, and has recommended that this Board approve the hereinafter described request for a change in Future Land Use Classification from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2duJac) to RU (Residential, Urban - 5du/ac) for the property described in Part A below; 3. On April 6, 2004, this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing notice at least 15 days prior to the hearing and notifying by mail the owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. 4. On April 6, 2004 this Board authorized the transmittal of this petition to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further agency review in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; and 5. On October 18, 2004 this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Fort Pierce Tribune and the Port St. Lucie News on October 8, 2004 and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. ~ ...., 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 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: A. CHANGE IN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION The future land use designation set forth in the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan for the property described as follows: BEING A TRACT OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 35 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRmED AS FOLLOWS: BEGIN AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF OKEECHOBEE ROAD (STATE ROAD 70), AND THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 475.50 FEET OF THE EAST 1/2 (ONE HALF) OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 (ONE QUARTER) OF SAID SECTION 26; THENCE S 00°38'12" E, ALONG LASTLY SAID LINE, A DISTANCE OF 1,015.06 FEET; THENCE N 76°55'35" W A DISTANCE OF 192.11 FEET; THENCE N 84°03'21" W A DISTANCE OF 115.71 FEET; THENCE S 88°22'46" W A DISTANCE OF 127.13 FEET; THENCE S 77°36'36" W A DISTANCE OF 111.69 FEET; THENCE S 65°57'54" W A DISTANCE OF 255.96 FEET; THENCE S 57°01'29" W A DISTANCE OF 269.40 FEET; THENCE S 87° 11'51" W A DISTANCE OF 420.31 FEET; THENCE S 88°39'50" W A DISTANCE OF 506.80 FEET; THENCE N 00°38'12" W A DISTANCE OF 1,196.48 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH A NON TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,730.79 FEET, THE CHORD OF wmCH BEARS N 85°30'32" E, AND BEING THE AFORESAID SOUTH IGHT-OF-WAY LINE OKEECHOBEE ROAD (STATE ROAD 70); THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 438.97 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°12'37"; THENCE S 89°53'10" E A DISTANCE OF 1,067.56 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,044.08 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 349.33 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°47'30"; THENCE N 80°19'20" E A DISTANCE OF 75.32 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 48.72 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. owned by BJK, Inc. is hereby changed from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2duJac) to RU (Residential, Urban - 5duJac). B. FINDING OF CONSISTENCY October 18, 2004 Ordinance 04-030 File No: PA·04-007 '-' ....,¡ 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 This Board specifically determines that the approval of this change in the Future Land Use Element is internally consistent with the policies and objectives contained in the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, specifically Policies 11.1.3.6 and 11.1.3.7 of the Capital Improvements Element, which identify this approval as a Preliminary Development Order and provide for the recognition that impacts of this approval on the public facilities of St. Lucie County will not occur until such time as a Final Development Order is issued. C. CHANGES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS The St. Lucie County Growth Management Interim Director is hereby authorized and directed to cause these changes to be made in the Future Land Use maps of the Future Land Use Element of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and to make notation of reference to the date of adoption of this Ordinance. D. 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. E. 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 ofthis Ordinance. If this Ordinance or any provision thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstances, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstances. F. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE This ordinance shall be applicable as stated in Paragraph A. G. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Bureau of Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida, 32304. October 18, 2004 Ordinance 04-030 File No: PA-04-007 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 '-' ...., H. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS The Growth Management Interim Director shall send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Department of Community Affairs, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399- 2100. I. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect upon the issuance by the State Land Planning Agency of a Notice of Intent to find the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(9), Florida Statutes, or until the Administration Commission issues a final order finding the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(10). .L ADOPTION After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows: Chainnan Paula A. Lewis xxx Vice Chainnan John D. Bruhn xxx Commissioner Cliff Barnes xxx Commissioner Doug Coward xxx Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson xxx PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2004. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY Chairman October 18, 2004 Ordinance 04-030 File No: PA-04-007 ~ "WI 1 ATTEST: 2 3 4 5 6 DEPUTY CLERK 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 dw 19 20 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: COUNTY ATTORNEY October 18, 2004 Ordinance 04-030 File No: PA-04-007 co ~')i' ,-' "'0 L{) '- o "j I LL - C) f J c :1 o~ +-' CO '- o 0.. '- o~ ()- « L{) ~ K ~~ - o c tl"'i' I~' ~ ~ ~ JJI _..". "" ~ '~ ~ .ø ,........ ~ "" ~_ ~ /-n=. /" ·C. \" =.J~ ~ ~F-=J . .::: h: w-\\ . ~l~ IV\..... ,,. \ ~~~~'f\ :x,' :~~t· ~~l' ðL ~~I/' (; ,-) r a: (.// '\ íl o ., \\ r i ~ ~.¡. '- ~ ~ I __ I~~~: ~ ~~ m~~ ~~~gj::~~~ . . . . " ..: . ~ " =t. " . 0 . - .. . . .. . -- I -- I '- J ---w- ~ . ~S;1 ,.- - ---a:- ~ ~ III I ----- . T I:~ I II" ~ I~I--!I \ \~ =.=: === II ~.. I -¡----- "-. I . , " J -l±t - - - - \ . .. - -(!;--- \ '--~--- \ --:- I o if) , ~l\l ~ )~: ~.~ a: ~~ rr/:/ -:- IE . == - VJ a: ~ ~ J OJ r;:r.J . a: .... TII ,.....:...., . ~ ....:- . '-- -=-- Q)~ cn~ :J--=- "O~ c ~ j~ . L.{) N rk <é Cò o U) { ~ , a.. ...- z f ,i III rr ~ Hi ¡,'~' ~ If! :.: ~ III : a II ~ « I · d!! ~ .iI § CI ~ II t '~ Q. : , Co I'f IX ~ ,I tit If 2- <'0 "C c: :J o .D Q) U .~ Q) C/) c: <'0 .D :s · · · · · 2- <'0 "C c: :J o .D Q) U êi5 a:: ¡¡: õ þ G · · · · · · · en Q) ii5 U 'ë c:en '-ã; c:U êi5êã ::::a. '-.. <'0.... o a.g O·!!!E I .J::.:J I-en ~~ ~ . .., DEPARTMENT "Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call home" STATE OF flORIDA OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS EB BUSH Governor THADDEUS l. COHEN, AlA Secretary June 28, 2004 I' If . ..... t:. . /!JO ~~ ]})~ ArJ-er5ð7î J)al\ 111c1írkf~ 1k.4J<.¡ Skv"t"..J·' 5ÖY) The Honorable Paula A. Lewis Chairman, St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Dear Chairman Lewis: The Department of Community Affairs has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for St. Lucie County (DCA No. 04-1), which was received on April 27,2004. Copies of the proposed amendment have been distributed to appropriate state, regional and local agencies for their review, and their comments are enclosed. The Department has reviewed the comprehensive plan amendment for consistency with Rule 9J- 5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C) and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes (F.S.) and has prepared the attached Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report which outlines our findings concerning the comprehensive plan amendment. Our concerns focus on the need for additional data and analysis to address public facility and transportation impacts, and the need for more specific intensity and mixed use standards so that the potential impacts ofthe land use change can be more accurately determined. For your assistance, we have attached procedures for final adoption and transmittal of the comprehensive plan amendment. If you have any questions, please call Ken Metcalf, AICP, Regional Planning Administrator, or Jamie Coker, Planner, at (850) 922-1816. Sincerely yours, ô~~ Charles Gauthier, AICP Chief of Comprehensive Plannin CG/jcs Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report Review Agency Comments / cc: V'Mr. David Kelly, Planning Manager Mr. Michael Busha, Executive Director, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council 255- SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD· TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399·2100 p~one: 850,488,8466/Suncom 278.8466 FAX: 850.921.?781/Suncom 291.0781 Internet address: ht!p://www.dca.s!a!e.rl.us CRITICAL ST ATE COSCERN FIELD OFfiCE 2 79& OVt.·I~I.".1S HighwJ)'. SU¡I~ 212 f,1arJlhon, Fl J3050-~:?:!7 DOS! 289·1"'02 CO,\\MUNITY PLA"'ING l555 Shumald OJk Boulevard TJIIJh."..... fL 31399·2100 (6501 Jß6·2356 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 2555 ShumJrd OJk BoulevJrd Tall.h.ssee, FL 31399·2100 (850) J 13·9%9 HOUSING & COM\\UNITY DEVELOPMENT 2555 Shum.rd O.k Soulevard Tallahassee. Fl 3239~1100 (8501 466·7956 '-' ..." TRANSMITTAL PROCEDURES Upon receipt of this letter, the St. Lucie County has 60 days in which to adopt, adopt with changes, or determine that the County will not adopt the proposed amendment. The process for adoption of local government comprehensive plan amendments is outlined in s. 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.), and Rule 9J-II.0 II, F.A.C. The County must ensure that all ordinances adopting comprehensive plan amendments are consistent with the provisions of Chapter 163.3 I 89(2)(a), F.S. Within ten working days of the date of adoption, the County must submit the following to the Department: Three copies of the adopted comprehensive plan amendments; A listing of additional changes not previously reviewed; A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, which were not included in the ordinance; and A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes to the Department's Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report. The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a compliance review, make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent. In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendments, and pursuant to Rule 9J-II.0 II (5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to the Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. Please be advised that Section 163.3 I 84(8)(c), Florida Statutes, requires the Department to provide a courtesy information statement regarding the Department's Notice of Intent to citizens who furnish their names and addresses at the local government's plan amendment transmittal (proposed) or adoption hearings. In order to provide this courtesy information statement, local governments are required by law to furnish the names and addresses of the citizens requesting this infonnation to the Department. Please provide these required names and addresses to the Department when you transmit your adopted amendment package for compliance review. In the event there are no citizens requesting this information, please inform us of this as well. For efficiency, we encourage that the information sheet be provided in electronic format. '-' """" INTRODUCTION The following objections, recommendations and comments are based upon the Department's review of St. Lucie County 04-1 proposed amendment to their comprehensive plan pursuant to s. 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.). The objections relate to specific requirements of relevant portions of Chapter 91-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), and Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. Each objection includes a recommendation of one approach that might be taken to address the cited objection. Other approaches may be more suitable in specific situations. Some of these objections may have initially been raised by one of the other external review agencies. If there is a difference between the Department's objection and the external agency advisory objection or comment, the Department's objection would take precedence. Each of these objections must be addressed by the County and corrected when the amendment is resubmitted for our compliance review. Objections that are not addressed may result in a determination that the amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have raised an objection regarding missing data and analysis items, which the local government considers not applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a statement justifying its non-applicability pursuant to Rule 91-5.002(2), F.A.C., must be submitted. The Department will make a determination on the non-applicability of the requirement, and if the justification is sufficient, the objection will be considered addressed. The comments that follow the objections and recommendations section are advisory in nature. Comments will not form bases of a determination of non-compliance. They are included to call attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive, concerning planning principles, methodology or logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar, organization, mapping, and reader comprehension. Appended to the back of the Department's report are the comment letters from the other state review agencies and other agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are advisory to the Department and may not form bases of Departmental objections unless they appear under the "Objections" heading in this report. ~ ....; DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAffiS OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY AMENDMENT 04-1 June 28, 2004 Division of Community Planning This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 9J-ll.0 1 0 ~ """" OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS St. Lucie County PROPOSED AMENDMENT DCA #04-1 The St. Lucie County amendment 04-1 contains three Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments. The Department has identified objections regarding map amendments Home Dynamics and Lucie Rock, LLC. These objections, recommendations, and comments are intended to assist the County in fulfilling the statutory planning requirements and in ensuring its comprehensive plan will achieve the County's desired objectives. Home Dvnamics (003-005) - 35.4 acre FLUM chan2e from 8.18 acres of County Commercial (COM) to County Residential Hi2h (RH. 15dulac). 22.82 acres of COM to County Residential Medium CRM. 9du/ac). 0.54 acres of County Residential Urban (RU. 5 du/ae) to RH. and 3.75 acres ofRU to RM. Lucie Rock. LLC (003-006) - 95 acre FLUM chan2e from County Residential Suburban fRS. 2du/ac) to 57.83 acres of County Mixed Use - Orane:e Avenue Hie:h Intensitv (MXD-Orane:e Ave.. 5-15 du/ae) and 37.84 acres of MXD Medium Intensitv (5-9 du/ae). ORC OBJECTIONS: 1) ImDact Analvsis (Home Dvnamics. Lucie Rock) - The supporting data and analysis does not demonstrate that the amendment will be served by adequate public facilities and transportation facilities to maintain the adopted LOS standards through the five-year and long range planning periods on Interstate 95 (FllIS) and other significant roadways based upon the maximum extent of potential development allowed. The Fort Pierce Utility Authority is identified as the provider of water and sewer services to the amendment area. However, the status of applicable consumptive use pennits or plant capacity infonnation was not included in the amendment package. In considering the maximum potential of the land use category, the Department notes that the Mixed Use Development district does not contain a percentage distribution of mix for the high, medium and low intensity development areas, except for the 40% limitation on residential use. Therefore, it appears the floor area ratio (FAR) for each individual type ofland use within the high or medium intensity area could be maximized for a total FAR of 5.0 and 3.25 for all uses combined within the high and medium areas, respectively. Furthennore, the Department notes that the plan does not include a height limit. So, it is possible the maximum FAR could be achieved. For example, with the 50% lot coverage allowed, a FAR of5.0 would be accommodated with a lO-story building. ~6 C;pH.I [Rule 9J-5.005{2)(a), Rule 9J-5.00((.(Ì2)(a) and (3)(b) 1, Rule 9J-5.0 1 t VI)(f), Rule 9J-5.0 19 (3)(f)(g)(h)(i) and (4)(b)2, F.A.C., and Section 163.317t(3)(a)3¡¡M-(~(c) and 0)5, F.S.] 1 - '-' ...", RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) Impact Analvsis (Home Dynamics. Lucie Rock) - The transportation analysis should be conducted based on the maximum potential as previously described, in addition to the maximum residential density allowed. The analysis for the short and long range planning periods should include a forecast of background growth, including committed projects, and the additional density/intensity allowed by the amendments. Provide verification £Tom the Fort Pierce Utility Authority that sufficient capacity exists to serve the site based on the maximum allowable densities and intensities for the land use category. The data and analysis should include the projected water and sewer demand for the proposed amendments, existing demand and other proposed demand. Consider, in the analysis, the status of any existing consumptive use permits issued by the water management district and whether they will need to be renewed or revised to meet projected demand. Also, indicate the proximity of the collection system and the extent to which it must be expanded to serve the site. A useful tool in preparing capacity analysis is the St. John's River Water Management District potable water worksheet, which is included in this report. For the Mixed Use Development district, as an alternative, the County could further define controlling mixed use proportionate shares for each land use type allowed and include a height limitation in the plan or other intensity standard to limit the total FAR for the land use category. The Department recommends that the COtUlty further define these standards for the Mixed Use Development land use category rather than deferring to LDR controls as the plan currently does. If the County requires additional time to correct this deficiency in the plan, specific caps could be shown as a footnote on the FLUM for this site and other amendments as an interim measure. CONSISTENCY WITH THE TREASURE COAST STRATEGIC REGIONAL POLICY PLAN The TCRPC has not identified objections based on consistency with the SRPP. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The supporting data and analysis does not demonstrate the amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan Chapter 187, Florida Statutes: Goal 7(a) Water Resources, Policy 7(b)5, Goal 15(a) Land Use, Policies 15(b)3 and 6, Goal 19(a) Transportation, Policies 19(b)3 and 13. RECOMMENDATION: Revise the amendments as previously recommended. 2 SOUTH ~ORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT """'" 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33406 . (561) 686-8800 . FL '\'ATS 1·SOO·432·20,l5 . TOD (561) 697·2574 Mailing Address: p, O. Box 2,1680, West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680 . www.sfwmd.go\' May 13, 2004 I 0 ~jV\ 51''! (òc( '- :--:.;' ~':;.~-~~--~-~' :.- . ", I' T''? F 1'\" ':. '':'',_i~ _ :~¡ ,~ I J"'. I: . _. "'0 I , , ,',i !I Iii I: ,i ili,; '¡\}j.';j! Ii. ¡ 0i !' L_...~~~_ww J I . ,....;.:, ~'J R?M asp , .. ".': ,"".~·~:.,~~_f!tOC~ING TE.~M· '... ¡ GOV 08-32 Ray Eubanks, Administrator Plan Review and DRI Processing Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 Dear Mr. Eubanks: Subject: Proposed Amendment Comments St. Lucie County, DCA# 04-1 South Florida Water Management District staff has reviewed the above subject document and we have determined that that all three proposed amendments (SLC File No. PA-03-005, PA-03-006, and PA03-007) lack the required potable water facility capacity analysis. The applicants need to include the required analysis to support the proposed FLUM amendments and to demonstrate that adequate water supply facilities and service will be available concurrent with the impact of development. In addition, the applicant for PA-03-005 (Home Dynamics, Inc.) needs to include correspondence from the Ft. Pierce Utility Authority verifying their ability to serve the proposed development. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Jim Golden at (561) 682-6862 or me at (561) 682-6779. Sincerely, I~~ ~ P.K. Sharma, AICP Lead Planner Water Supply Planning & 8evelopment Division PKS~g c: Ken Metcalf, DCA Michael Busha, TCRPC David Kelly, St. Lucie County GOI'[f:,'IIZvr; F¡)'IA'l1 £\'£ClIT/V£ o.=nl...T NicoJj,}, Guti':rrez, Ir.. E~q" Oldit l-'¡¡n,eJ., nn1uks-TI,on,.lS¡ I'Ù"-C/Iil/r Irpia ~1. 8dgllt> Mich.,,,,) Collins Hugh 1\1, EnSli5h Lt'nn.u1 E, Lin,Ühl, r,E, Ke\'in McCarty Harl.:\ey R. Thornton Trudi K \\'iliiams, r.E, H\?nry Dean. £'ti.'¡:IlIÙI(' Dire..·/,'r '-' .,¡ FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE Glenda E. Hood Secretary of Sta te DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES .._---~_.. ~.-.. 0; ,"'" 12 \ - ""0\ G; (,',: ¡s \' \: \:,: ., . '"' Ii. L.' L-.' - ~-"".. . ¡ i. ,..J __...........---..-. ," , J Jr" . ! ~ \ ~ì '\ ? I 20ÛL! I ' \\ i 1 ~!I1Y..... ! : ',', ~ I \ ,L;!'·'¡\';',.~,1,:g~0~C; :~". L .....-.. Mr. Ray Eubanks Department of Community Affairs Bureau of State Planning 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 1 D tJlll May 17,2004 5/)-1 (¿JLf Re: Historic Preservation Review of the St. Lucie County (04-1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request Dear Mr. Eubanks: According to this agency's responsibilities under sections 163.3177 and 163.3178, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, we reviewed the above document to detennine if data regarding historic resources have been given sufficient consideration in the request to amend the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. We reviewed three proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Map to consider the potential effects of these actions on historic resources. While our cursory review suggests that the proposed changes may have no adverse effects on historic resources, it is the county's responsibility to ensure that the proposed revisions will not have an adverse effect on significant archaeological or historic resources in St. Lucie County. However, for Amendment PA-003-007, although this amendment area does not contain any sites listed in the Florida Master Site File or the National Register of Historic Places, it remains the county's responsibility to ensure that potentially significant historic resources will not be adversely affected by this action. The amendment parcels appear to have -at least moderate archaeological site probability, as significant archaeological resources were encountered on the opposite side ofTen Mile Creek. The most effective way to guarantee that such sites are not damaged is for the county to sponsor or require historic resource surveys so thal it can ensure its archaeological resources and historic structures more than 50 years old will be considered when substantive changes in land use are proposed. If you have any questions regarding our comments, please feel free to contact Susan M. Harp of the Division's Compliance Review staffåt (850) 245-6333. Sincerely, ~¡¿. I~,~ 1/ Frederick Gaske, Acting Director 500 S. Bronough Street . Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 · http://www.f1heritage.com o Director's Office (850) 2-45-63t'0' FAX: 2-45-6-135 o Archaeological Research (550) 2-15-64-44 . FAX: 2-15·6436 81iistoric Preservation (550) 2-45-6333 . FAX: 2-45-6.ß7 o Historical Museums (830) 245-6400 . FAX: 245-6-133 o Palm Beach Regional Office (561) 279-1-175· FAX: 279-H7ó o 51. Augustine Regional Office 0 Tampa Regional Office (90-4) 825-5()'¡5 . FAX: 825-5()'¡-4 (813) 272-3S-B . FAX: 272-23-10 MAY-28-2004 16:51 '-' P.07 J.,~:~ ~,'" :, .. ,.,...: .:. . i.. NtH' '¡ 4 .';"'~' I,.:,:!'.::,:.;,-: '. . ".:- . ST. LUCIE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION 2300 Virginia Avenue Telephone: 772-462-1593 Fort Pierce, FL 34982~5652 Facsimile: 772-462-2549 "'f TO: T eny Hess Deputy Director Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Marceia Lathou(1)~ MFa Planner FROM: DATE: May 24. 2004 RE: St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Draft Amendments - DCA Reference No. 04-1 MPO staff has reviewed the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Amendments for SLC File No. PA- 03-006 (Lucie Rock, LLC), SLC File No. P A-03..Q07 (BJK, Inc.) and SLC File No. P A-OJ-005 (Home Dynamics Inc.). MPO staff notes that none of the above-referenced projects call for construction of major, public roadways or new lanes on existing coad....'ë1ysJ and are found to be consistent with the MFO's adopted 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan. Thank you for the opportunity to rcview these plan amendments. If you have any questions, pl~ase do not hesit4:1te to contact me at (772) 462-1593. cc: Lois Bush, FDOT District 4 Randy Stevenson, Interim Growth Management Director, SLC " Transportation Planning for Ft Pierce, Port St. Lucie, 51. Lucie Village and St. Lucie County '\.; ~ Florida Department of Transportation DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT 3400 West Commercial Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309-3421 Telephone: (954) 777·4411 Fax: (954) 777·4197 Internet Email: Rerrv.oreillv(@.dot,statc,t1.us' Toll Free: 1-866·336-8435 ...., JEß ßUSU GO\'ER~OR JOSE ABREU SECRETARY May 14, 2004 Mr. Ray Eubanks, Community Program Administrator Plan Review and DRI Processing Team Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 \ t ~ ~ù* ?\ð'-\\ :':W 2.4 2004 I I - "- . -- .-_-_-:.."..·~·.-.:L..~ . L. . ,-~;~';:;>,;;a..k~~~.blI~fL....__, ' Dear Mr. Eubanks: SUBJECT: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments ORC Review Local Government: St. Lucie County DCA Amendment # 04-1 The Department has reviewed the proposed comprehensive plan amendments for St. Lucie County. Enclosed are objections, recommendations, and comments. Based on this review, the Department recommends that a formal,review of these proposed amendments occur. . Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the review process. If you have any comments or questions about this letter, please contact me at (954) 777-4490. Sincerely, 1~~W-1 Gerry O'Reilly, P.E. Director of Transportation Development District Four 00:T5 .. Enclosures cc: B. Romig, FDOT Central Office K. Metcalf, DCA N. Ziegler, FDOT 4 L. Hymowitz, FDOT 4 T. Scheck.,,\itz, FDOT 4 File: 4270.05 www.dot.state.fl.us ® R:C'rCL.ED =:.=»Eñ '--' ...I DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIONS, RECOl\1MENDA TIONS & COM1'vIENTS RESPONSIBLE DIVISION/BUREAU: Planning Department NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT: S1. Lucie County DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 4/28/04 DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA: 5/04/04 REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS: 5/30/04 ELEMENT: BJK me (P A-03-007) Future Land Use Element DCA Amendment # 04-1 RULE DEFICIENCY: 9J-5.005(2)(a) 9J-5.019(4)(c)13 The proposed Future Land Use Map amendment would change the land use designation of a 49-acre parcel from Residential Suburban (2 dwelling units per acre) to Residential Urban (5 dwelling units per acre). This site is located adjacent to SR 70/0keechobee Road, which is a Florida Intrastate Highway System (FlliS) facility and is part of a 366-acre development of 800 residential units and limited commercial uses. CONCERN: The County did not identify how it will alleviate transportation impacts of the increased traffic due to this land use change along SR 70/0keechobee Road between SR 713/Kings Highway and 1-95. DISCUSSION: The transportation planning process is an iterative cycle that relies on local· governments to identify projected impacts to roadways based on proposed land use changes to the Future Land Use Map. A function of the comprehensive planning process is to identify projected demand for services in order to ensure these services would be available prior to the impacts of development on public facilities. The support documents indicate that impacts to SR 70/0keechobee Road between the Turnpike and 1- 95 will be addressed when a formal development application is submitted. Therefore, the County should identify policies and strategies that would mitigate impending transportation impacts within this urbanizing area. These policies should include strategies and design criteria to ensure that, in the short- and long-term planning horizons, mobility along SR 70/0keechobee Road will be sufficient to serve this and future development. For example, policies should be provided to implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to serve the proposed residential units, which the support documents indicate, are in proximity to employment centers. TDM includes such strategies that can be most effective, and achieve noticeable results if implementation is phased with the proposed developments, such as Park & Ride facilities, car and van pools, and transit. (Continued) '-' ~ DISTRICT 4, DEPARTl\IENT OF TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COl\tIMENTS RESPONsmLE DIVISIONIBUREAU: NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT: DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: DATE 11EMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA: REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS: Planning Department St. Lucie County 4/28/04 5/04/04 5/30/04 ELEMENT: BJK Inc (P A-03-007) Future Land Use Element DCA Amendment # 04-1 RULE DEFICIENCY: 9J-5.005(2)(a) 9J-5.019( 4)( c) 13 DISCUSSION Continued: The Department, the St. Lucie County MPO ·and the Martin County MPO are training Workforce Development staff in the function of Employee Transportation Coordinators (ETC). The ETC works with employers to address workforce transportation needs. The County should coordinate with Ms. Marceia Lathou, St. Lucie MPO Planner, at (772) 462-1671 to identify areas for collaborative efforts with the ETC. Additionally, the County should include policies to ensure proposed developments will provide interconnectivity, transit infrastructure, internal paths, external connectivity including parking facilitie's proximity of complimentary uses, and provide a "sense of place" that is relative to the regional/local perspective of proposed land uses. RECOMMENDATION: The County should provide policies, strategies, and design criteria to ensure that along SR 70/0keechobee Road, a Florida Intrastate Highway System (FillS) facility, mobility would be sufficient to serve this and future development in the short- and long-term planning horizons. .. REVIEWED BY: Terry Scheckwitz. AlCP PHONE: 954-777-4490 REVIEWED BY: Larry Hymowitz. AlCP PHONE: 954-777-4490 .REVIEWED BY: Nancy A. Ziegler PHONE: 954-777-4490 2 '-' "will DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS RESPONSffiLE DMSIONIBUREAU: Planning Department NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT: St. Lucie County DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 4/28/04 DA IE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA: 5/04/04 REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS: 5/30/04 ELEMENT: Lucie Rock, LLC (P A-03-006) Future Land Use Element DCA Amendment # 04-1 RULE DEFICIENCY: 9J-5.005(2)(a) and (c) 9J-5.005(4) 9J-5.019(3)(t) The proposed Future Land Use Map amendment would change the land use designation of a 94-acre parcel from Residential Suburban (2) to MXD-Orange Avenue that is currently vacant and located on the southwest side of! 95. The Mixed Use Development (MXD) designation is specific to 195 interchange areas. CONCERN: The County did not provide traffic data and analysis to address impacts to regional roadway network, including I 95, in the short- and long-term planning horizons. DISCUSSION: Each local government comprehensive plan shall include at least two planning period, usually a 5-year and a 10-year (consistent with the MPO's Long Range Transportation Plan) planning timeframe. Therefore, the data and analysis provided in support of the proposed amendment should be revised to include level of service impacts the proposed land use would have in the short- and long-range planning horizons. RECOMMENDATION: The County should provide transportation data and analysis to identify impacts to the regional roadway network, including I 95, in the short- and long-term planning horizons. " REVIEWED BY: Terry Scheck-witz. AICP PHONE: 954-777-4490 REVIEWED BY: Larry Hymowitz. AICP PHONE: 954-777-4490 REVIEWED BY: Nancy A. Ziegler PHONE: 954-777-4490 3 , , t~"·, .....,~,., '.,.~O.,~;.'(.,riO,Y," ..,' . ~~~~~~'-.--'ç;:':~ ", ...~' ';";s..2"'~~ ' - :"~tl;tP!ì"; : ''''''-:;'j,'',;':. ';.....: .; .:-_:, ',' .. : -i ;,.'. '..'~ FLOR A''''''''''·' ;,,; , .'". ' " ,',. .,..ff:·';:!V,,'}::'j·'·,""":':..:·;';:"-·', ",...", "., .- ".., ,.-.' ,." -. ~, '" ,\ .' . " . . ~~~ \..f Department of Environmental Protection ..",.¡ Jeb Bush Governor Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Tallahassee. Florida 32399-3000 Colleen M. Castille Secretary June 3, 2004 Mr. D. Ray Eubanks Bureau of Local Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 tD ~¡V\ ~ \ ¿q ()~ Re: Proposed Amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, DCA 04-1 Dear Mr. Eubanks: The Office ofIntergovernmental Programs of the Department of Environmental Protection has reviewed the above-referenced amendment under the required provisions of Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 9J-5 and 9J-l1, Florida Administrative Code. Our comments and recommendations are provided to assist your agency in developing the state's response. Comments: File Number PA-03-00S, Home Dynamics, Inc.: 1. Although the applicant indicates that there is sufficient sanitary waste treatment capacity available in the Ft. Pierce wastewater treatment plant, the reviewer could not find a letter from the utility confinning available capacity. In view of the fact that the area is experiencing rapid growth and demand on existing wastewater treatment systems, it is recommended that the City of Ft. Pierce confinn that treatment capacity is available in its facility to meet the anticipated demand of this land use amendment. 2. It is also recommended that a letter indicating that potable water will also be available from the service provider. 3. Although the applicant indicatès that the wetlands on the property have been invaded with exotic plant species, it is recommended that the environmental survey being planned for the property be completed prior to adoption of the land use amendment, with a view toward restoring the on-site wetlands. File Number PA-03-006, Lucie Rock, LLC: 1. The reviewer could not find an analysis of the increased sanitary treatment demand resulting from the proposed increase in land use density. Similar concerns exist for this development as were expressed in the Home Dynan».s,~ ~nÇ~cP.Ð9P-,~~þ,ª~gye, and although the applicant indicates Prin(~d on r~cyc1~d p"p~r. '-' 2 ...,¡ that there is sufficient sanitary waste treatment capacity available in the Ft. Pierce wastewater treatment plant, there has been no confinnation of that fact from the City of Ft. Pierce. In view of the fact that the area is experiencing rapid growth and demand on existing wastewater treatment systems, it is recommended that the City ofFt. Pierce also confirnl that treatment capacity is available in its facility to meet the anticipated demand of this land use amendment. 2. It is recommended that an analysis of the increase in potable water demand also be perfonned for this proposed increase in land use density, with an accompanying letter from the service provider indicating that the required level of service will be met. File Number PA-03-007, BJK. Inc.: 1. Similar concerns regarding potable water and wastewater concurrency exist for this project as expressed above for Lucie Rock, LLC and Home Dynamics, Inc. It is recommended that the required 91-5 analysis be perfonned for increases in potable water and wastewater demand and that written confinnation be provided by the relevant utilities. 2. Because the 10 Mile Creek restoration project is an important part of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), it is recommended that any development of this property meet the Environmental Resource Pennitting requirements of the South Florida Water Management District, by either minimizing or treating stonnwater nmoffthat may adversely impact the 10 MPe Creek. Considerable commitment of public funds has been made to restore surface water quality in this region 1, and to balance the salinity ofthe water column in the downstream estuary; consequently, it is imperative that the stonnwater management phm for this property be consistent \vith the objectives of the CERP projects in the area. Please call me at (850) 245-2163 if you have any questions regarding this response. Sincerely, . ~~ Robert W. Hall Office oflntergovernmental Programs .. . lOver 1.2 Billion dollars is programmed for restoration in this area. . I . ,JUl'i-C::C::-¿~~"'I 10' C::,;) '-" .."", TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL 301 EAST OCEAN BOULEVARD SUITE 300 STUART, FLORIDA 34994 PHONE: 772-221-4060 FAX: 772-221-4067 FAX TRANSMISSION Date: /P .... ;lJ.. - 01 . Fax Number: 't5" 0 - t.f ~ ~ - 3309 Number of Pages (including cover sheet): ~ Operator: Pen Y1 1 4; ;).0 p' .'\1\ To: Ja.\IVt' ~ Coke. r From: I-&(('i ~e.S S r'.~l Project: Òraft- A W\~c{V\1\;~S +cJ +he <51-. Lucie Cc-m.f· PIa.'t1 'Dc.A- ~. fJð. 04-1 Comments: " ,JUN-~¿-2ØØ4 16: 24 'w ...." TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL MEMORANDUM To: Council Members AGENDA ITEM 6F From: StaŒ Date: June 18, 2004 Council Meeting Subject: Local Govell1mcnt Comprehensive Plan Review Draft Amendments to the $1. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan DCA Reference No. 04-1 Introduction The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, requires that Council review local government comprehensive plan amendments prior to their adoption. Under the provisions of this law, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) prepares an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report on a proposed amendment only if requested to do so by the local government, the regional planning council, an affected person or if an ORC Report is otherwise deemed necessary by the DCA. If th~ local government requests the DCA to prepare an ORC Report, then Council must provide the DCA with its own objections, recommendations for modification, and comments on the proposed amendment within 30 days of its receipt. Background St. Lucie County is proposing three Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments to the County comprehensive.plan. The County has requcsted that the DCA undertake a formal review of the amendments. Evaluation Fultlre Land Use Map Amendments The proposed FLUM amertdments are summarized in Table I, and the locations are shown on the attached maps. .. P.02 JUN-¿¿-¿~~4 lb'¿4 P.03 '-' ...,¡ Table 1 Proposed Amendments to the Future Land Use Map St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan DCA Reference No. 04-1 Amendment Approx. Current Proposed Approximate Location NumberlName Acreage FLUM FLUM Desi~nation Desienntion No. L 94.3 RS MXD- on Rock Rd., approx. 0.5 mile north of Lucie Rock, LLC Orange Ave Orange Ave., on southwest side of 1- (P A-03-006) 95 No.2 48.7 RS RU on south side of Okeechobee Rd., BJK Inc. approx. 0.5 mile west of the Florida CPA-03-007) TurnDike No.3 34.5 COM RH on the southwest comer of Edwards Home Dynamics RU Rd. and South 251h St. Corporation (PA-03-005) Total 177.5 Leeend to FLUM Designations COM MXD-Orange Ave. RS RU RH Commercial Mixed Use Orange Avenuc/I-95 Activity Area Residential Suburban - maximum 2 dwelling units per acre Residential Urban - maximum 5 dwelling units per acre Residential, High - maximum 15 dwelling units per acre 1. Lucie Rock, LLC (PA-03-006)- This 94.3-acre parcel is located on Rock Road approximately 0.5 miLe north of Orange Avenuc on the southwestern side ofl-95. The property currently contains a citrus grove, lake, and vacant land. Most of the native vegetation has becn cleared. The proposal is to change the FLUM designation from Residential Suburban to Mixed Use Orange AvenuelI-95 Activity Area, which would allow industrial uses on the site. The surrounding FLlny1 designations include Public Facilities to the south; Residential Suburban to' the north, east, and west; and Mixed Use District to the south. The St. Lucie County Correctional Facility is located directly south of the subject amendment on the south side of the adjacent North St. Lucie Water Management District Canal. Vacant land and a citrus grove management office are located to the east, active mir1ing activities and vacant lands are to the west, and I-95 is adjacent to the l10rth boundary of the subject parcel. JUN-¿¿-¿~~4 Ib:¿~ ~ .....,¡ The County staff report indicated that the proposed amendment would increase intensities and industrial useS near 1-95 without adversely affecting future residential areas [0 the west. 2. BlK Inc. (PA-03-007) - This 48.7-acre parcel is located on the south side of Okeechobee Road approximately 0.5 mile west of the Florida. Tumpike. The amendment is part of a 366-acre parcel planned for development Llnder the County Planned Unit Development (PUD) program. The site contains land that was recently cleared of an abandoned citrus grove. The proposal is to change the FLUM designation from Residential (2 dwelling units pcr acre) to Residential (5 dwelling units per acre). The surrounding FLUM designations include Residential Suburban (2 dwelling units per acre) to the north and west, Mixed Use-Crossroads to the east, and Residential Conservation to the south. The site is surrounded by citrus groves, vacant land, and a single family development. The South Florida Water Management District Ten Mile Creek Attenuation Area is adjacent to the south side of the subject parce1. The County staff report indicated that approval of the proposed change to Residential Urban would increase the allowable number of dwelling units on the site from 97 to 244. The change would also allow for the possibility of limited commercial and institutional uses. 3. Home Dynamics Corporation (PA-03-00S) - This 35.4-acre parcel is located on the southwest comer of South 25th Street and Edwards Road. The property was cleared previously and is now dominated by Brazilian pepper, an invasive exotic speciès. The proposal is to change the FLUM designation from Commercial and Residential Urban (5 dwelling units per acre) to Residential High (15 dwelling units per acre). The surrounding FLUM de~ignations include Commercial to the north and Rcsidential Urban (5 dwelling units per acre) to the east, west, and south of the subject parcel. A convenience store, commercial office, and single family homes are located to the east of the parcel across South 25111 Street. Single-family homes are located to the west, and the Forest Grove Middle School is located to the south. A small shopping p1aza and vacant land are located north of the parcel on the north side of Edwards Road. The County staff report indicates that given the requirements of the County's Land Development Code, it may not be possible to achieve the maximum density of 15 dwelling units per acre .pn this parcel. The Local Planning Agency recommended denial of the petition. On April 13, 2004, the County received a request fi"om the applicant's represcntativc requesting a revision to the application. The proposed revision seeks to provide three diftèrent FLUM designations (Residential Urban, Residential Medium, and Residential High) rather than one Residential High designation. This proposal would result in reducing the overal1 density on the proposed amendment site from 530 dwelling units to 361 dwelling units. The County P.04 ,JUN-22-2004 16:25 P.0S ~ ..."" staff indicated that the three separate FLUM designations on one 34.5~acre parcel would not represent good planning practices and would not be binding on a future pun. Extraiurisdictional Impacts Letters were sent to the following local governments or organizations seeking comments on the effects of the proposed amendments on plans, policies, and activities, especially areas of potential conflict: St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), St. Lucie County School District, and the City of Fort Pierce. As of the date of the con1pletion of this rep011, Council had received onc comment memorandum from the St. Lucie MPO. The memorandum indicated that the proposed amendmcnts are considered consistent with the MPO's adopted 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan. No detrimental extrajurisdictional impacts were identified during the review of these amendments. Effects on Sie:nifieant Regional Resources or Faei1ities Analysis of the proposed amendments indicates that they would not have adverse effects on significant regional resources or facilities. However, as the a.ttached letter from the South Florida Water Management District indicates, required potable water facility capacity analysis has not been provided for any of the amendments. Obiections, Recommendations for Modification, and Comments A. Objections 1. None B. Comme£1ts 1. The 48.7-acre BJK Inc. property is part of a 366-acre parcel that is being planned for a PUD. Thc PUD is planned to include approximately 800 dwelling units consisting of single-family and multifamily units, limited commercial, and recreational uses. According to infonnation provided by the County, the proposed change in the future land use designation for the subject parcel would authorize a higher residential density than can be developed on the site. Therefore, the County should consider whether more than one FLUM designation would be appropriate for this site. . , 2. The BlK Inc. property is located adjacent to the South Florida Water Management District Ten. Mile Creek Attenuation Area. The developer and County should coordinalc with the District to ensure that an adequate buffer is created adjacent to Ten Mile Creek to protect it from impacts related to tbe development. · JUN-22-2004 16: 26 P.06 '--' ...." 3. As noted by the South Florida Water Management District, the County sbould provide a potable water facility capacity analysis and demonstrate sufficient capacity exists to service the proposed f1lture development. Recommendation Council should adopt the above comments and approve tbeir transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. Attachments .. TOTAL P. 06 \.;í ..,J /' ~~ fL- '-- _.J Í\ April 6, 2004 Agenda Request Item Number: Meetina Date: Consent Regular Public Hearing Leg. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Quasi-JD [X To: Submitted By: Board of County Commissioners Community Development SUBJECT: Consider application of BJK Inc. (continued from M,arth 16, 2004), or a Change in Future Land Use Classification from RS (Residential Suburban - du/ac) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) for 48.72 acres located on the south side of Okeechobee Road (SR 70), approximately Y2 mile west of the Florida Turnpike. BACKGROUND: The current future land use classification allows for residential uses at a density of 2 dwelling units per acre, or in the case of this specific parcel a total of 97 dwelling units. Approval of the proposed change to the RU Future Land Use classification would allow a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre or 244 dwelling units on the amendment site. The 48.72 acres that are the subject of this petition are part of a 366-acre development site under a single ownership. The 366-acre project is proposed to include approximately 800 residential dwelling units and limited commercial uses. FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A At the February 19, 2004, public hearing on this matter, the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency, by a vote of 7 to 1 (Ms. Hammer voted against), recommended approval of the requested change in future land use classification from the RS (Residential Suburban) to the RU (Residential Urban). RECOMMENDATION: On March 16, 2004, the Commission continued the public hearing on this item until April 6, 2004. Approve transmittal of the BJK Inc. petition for a change in Future Land Use classification from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential, Urban) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter 163, Florida Statues. COMMISSION ACTION: CJ APPROVED CJ OTHER CONCURRENCE: D DENIED Douglas M. Anderson County Administrator Coordination! Signatures Véounty Attorney / Finance.: /Énviron. Resources; q '1.-' ~ Mgt. & Budget: Fire Dept: Utility: Purchasing: Public Works: Other: \1~ '-" TO: ...", Board of County Commission: April 6, 2004 File Number PA-03-007 MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Board of County Commissioners FROM: Community Development Director DATE: March 30, 2004 SUBJECT: Application of BJK Inc., for a Change in Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) LOCATION: CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: EXISTING ZONING: PARCEL SIZE: PROPOSED USE: SURROUNDING ZONING DESIGNATIONS: SURROUNDING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS: SURROUNDING EXISTING LAND USES: South Side of Okeechobee Road (SR 70), approximately .5 mile west of the Florida Turnpike. RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/ac) 48.72 acres Residential AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/ac) to the east and west. RC (Residential Conservation) to the south, and AG-2.5 (Agricultural - 1 du/2.5ac) to the north, across State Route 70. RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to the north, west, and MXD-Crossroads (Mixed Use- Crossroads) to the east. RC (Residential Conservation) to the south. A citrus grove, vacant land, South Florida Water Management Districts Ten Mile Creek Attenuation Area and a single-family home surround the parcel. ~ March 30, 2004 Page 2 ,.." Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 UTILITY SERVICE: The subject property is within the County's service area identified within the St. Lucie County Water and Wastewater Master Plan. Water and Sewer lines are located along Okeechobee Road. TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS RIGHT-OF-WAY ADEQUACY: Okeechobee Road (SR 70) is a 200-foot wide, State owned, right-of-way. SCHEDULED IMPROVEMENTS: Construction of a recreational path along Okeechobee Road (SR 70) will begin within the next 12- 16 months. TYPE OF CONCURRENCY DO"" 'U~"- ""'1"""-" 'I~ED: Concurrency Deferral Affidavit. COMMENTS The petitioner, BJK Inc., is requesting a change in the Future Land Use Designation of RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) on 48.72- acres located about ~ mile west of the Florida Turnpike, between State Route 70 and Ten Mile Creek. The amendment site is part of a larger parcel. The site contains land recently cleared of an abandoned citrus grove. The amendment site's current future land use designation allows residential uses up to 2 du/ac or 97 total dwelling units. Approval of the proposed change to RU would allow up to 5 dwelling units per acre or 244 total dwelling units allowing the possibility of limited commercial and institutional uses. The future land use application package includes a Traffic Impact and Environmental Statement that were utilized to evaluate the proposed future land use amendment. Copies of these reports are attached. The amendment site is part of a larger proposed development site totaling 366 acres. The remaining 317 acres will retain their existing RS (Residential Suburban) Future Land Use designation. Portions of the remaining lands are also designated RlC (Residential IConservation) and will retain that designation. The entire 366-acre site is planned for development through the County's Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. The PUD is proposed to include approximately 800 dwelling units, consisting of single-family and multi-family units, limited commercial and recreational uses. A change in future land use for the subject 48.72 acres would allow slightly higher residential (2.3 du/ac rather than 2 du/ac) densities that can be distributed throughout the entire 366-acre PUD site. On February 19, 2004, the proposed amendment was presented before the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency (LPA). Following a public hearing on this petition and hearing no opposition to and with one member of the public appearing in support of the petition, the LPA voted 7 to 1 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners. On March 16, 2004, the Board of County Commissioners continued the public hearing on this petition until April 6, 2004. ~ March 30, 2004 Page 3 ....J Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 A future land use amendment is considered to be a preliminary development order and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property. No right to obtain a final development order, or any other rights to develop the subject property are granted or implied by the County if the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of Capacity. *********************************************** Any proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan may be reviewed by several state and regional agencies. The Department of Community Affairs is charged with determining whether amendments are consistent with and further the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the State Comprehensive Plan, the Strategic Regional Policy Plan and Rule J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The following sections address the proposed amendment's consistency with each of these plans. CONSISTENCY WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN In reviewing this application for a proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Future Land Use Map, staff finds that the following Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the County Comprehensive Plan are the primary components applicable to this petition. FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT The proposed amendment does not conflict with the goals, objectives and policies of this element. The application states "the proposed amendment will help ensure a high quality of environment by allowing the comprehensive planning, design and construction of a unique community, which will blend a variety of housing choices with a large passive recreation and preservation area along Ten Mile Creek," The proposed change to the County's Future Land Use Map will provide for urban land use densities adjacent to the MXD-Crossroads Future Land Use area that allows a variety of uses, including residential, commercial and industrial uses. The Future Land Use Element describes the requested RU (Residential Urban) classification as "the predominate residential land use category in the county" The RU designation is generally found between the existing urban areas and the transitional RS areas. These properties need to be serviced with central water and wastewater services." The subject lands are located within a ~ mile of the Florida Turnpike and existing mixed-use land use designation. It is also in an area of the County where central water and sewer services are being extended to service the Seminole Tribe of Florida, Hawks Nest development, directly west of the amendment site. Objective 1.1.5: In coordination with the other elements of this plan, future development within the Planned Urban Service Area shall be directed to areas where urban and community services/facilities can be provided in the most efficient and compact manner so as to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. ~ March 30, 2004 Page 4 ....I Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 The proposed amendment discourages sprawl, pursuant to this Objective, and Section 9J-5.006{b){7), FAC. Urban sprawl is discouraged by the proposed amendment's location within the existing urban service boundary and its close proximity to urban facilities and employment centers. The amendment site, when combined with the other 317 acres of the proposed PUD project will allow development of the site in a moderate density range of two to three units per acre. The site's close proximity to transportation and employment centers would help to reduce future home to work trips on the County's roadways. Urban and community services currently exist or will be available along the State Route 70 corridor concurrent with the development of the project. Representatives of the petitioner have indicated that sufficient water and wastewater capacity is currently available from St. Lucie County. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order, a Certificate of Capacity indicating that all adequate infrastructure services are available is required. Central water and sanitary sewer facilities required for any future development proposal along with roadway, and other public facilities are the responsibility of the developers and not the local government. St. Lucie County is extending a water and sewer line along State Route 70 to service the Seminole Tribe of Florida Hawks Nest project west of the amendment site. State Route 70 borders the amendment site on the north, thereby providing easy access to major arterials and emergency evacuation routes. Policy 1.1.5.3: When considering any amendment to the Future Land Use Maps of the County's Comprehensive Plan, the County Commission shall make the following findings, supported by the other elements of this Plan, prior to taking any approval actions granting an individual amendment to the Future Land Use Maps: a. That the property under a land use amendment application is adjacent to, or within no more than 1,14 mile of the same or greater type of land use classification. The proposed RU Future Land Use classification is located adjacent to the MXD- Crossroads (Mixed Use-Crossroads) Future Land Use classification to the east. This particular MXD land use category allows residential densities greater than the five dwelling units per acre permitted under the requested RU Future Land Use classification. In addition, COM (Commercial) Future Land Use classification is located directly north of the amendment site, on the north side of State Route 70. b. That the property under land use management consideration lies within the Five Year Capital Improvement Program of the Water and Wastewater Master Plan for St. Lucie County or otherwise meets the requirements of Policy 1.1.5.4. The project lands are within the County's utility service area and water and sewer lines are being extended to serve the Seminole Tribe of Florida lands west of the amendment lands. '--' March 30, 2004 Page 5 ,.." Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 Goal 1.2: Recognize that land use and transportation must be considered concurrently in all planning, and to the extent feasible, modify current land use patterns to decrease dependence on the automobile in order to minimize the need for future roadway expansion and promote the use of alternate modes of transportation. Providing higher densities in close proximity to existing and proposed employment, retail and recreational areas will further the County's policy to promote the use of alternative modes of transportation. Policy 1.1.9.7: Enforce Section 6.02.02 of the land development regulations to protect the watercourses identified below: North Fork of the St. Lucie River - from the Martin County line to the confluence with Five & Ten Mile Creeks Five Mile Creek - from the confluence of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River to the Florida East Coast Railroad, Glades Cut-Qff Branch Line. Ten Mile Creek - from the confluence of North Fork of the St. Lucie River to McCarty Road. (Beyond these points, channelization effects are so great that natural course and habitat are lost) Section 6.02.02 contains the County's Shoreline Protection standards creating zones protection along Ten Mile Creek. The boundaries of the waterways are broadly construed to include natural fingers and oxbows, including man made enhancements for boat channels. A portion of the amendment site is located along the historic Ten Mile Creek waterway, approximately 400 feet north of the Creek channel. The required Environmental Impact Report to be submitted with any final development plans will identify any waterways or fingers on the project site and the limiting development zone. Although, the RIC (Residential Conservation) classified lands within the subject parcel were excluded from the petitioners request, a portion of the amendment site is expected to fall within those areas protected under the County's Shoreline Protection standards. The exact setback lines will be determined through the development review process. The remaining natural floodplain wetlands along the creek contain a remnant oxbow identified for reconnection within the Feasibility Study for the Reconnection of Wetlands and Oxbows along the North Fork of the S1. Lucie River (FDEP, 2003). Any future compensating floodplain storage or wetland mitigation should be directed towards reconnection of the historic waterway to the main Creek channel. Policy 7.1.6.8: By December 31, 2002, the County shall enact regulations that will further protect the integrity of sites identified by St. Lucie County as significant resources. At a minimum the regulations shall provide that: a. No existing archaeological sites shall be excavated, scarped, leveled, or altered without supervision of a profession archaeologist utilizing acceptable techniques; b. An archaeological survey may be required as part of development reviews; -- ~ '-" March 30, 2004 Page 6 ..." Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 c. If evidence of historical or archeological value is exposed through construction or site preparation, work on that location will be temporarily suspended until evaluation by the County or their designees. Several archaeological sites are located within close proximity to the amendment lands. The Williams Midden, State Site File No.8SL7, and the Ten mile Creek Water Preserve Area Critical Restoration Project are located to the south of the site along Ten Mile Creek. During the recent survey of the Ten Mile Creek Water Preserve Area four prehistoric archaeological sites and two isolated artifacts were identified during the survey that were documented as important in determining the prehistory of the region. Based on the results of the survey, it was recommended that all four resources be considered eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. The archeological survey of the Ten Mile Creek Attenuation project lands consisted of a survey of grove lands along the Ten Mile Creek system much like the project site and resulted in the identification of numerous archaeological resources. Given the above and the location of the property within two zones likely to contain archaeological sites (Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, 2002), an archeological survey will be required as part of any development application. As part of site plan review, an archaeological survey of the larger project lands (366 acres) will be required to determine the presence of archaeological material. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Statement based upon a "worst-case" traffic generation rate for residential uses under the proposed future land use classification. The traffic analysis contrasting the trip generation potential of the maximum number of single family units under the proposed land use verses the existing land use demonstrates sufficient capacity currently exists to accommodate the maximum number of units. Policy 2.1.1: The St. Lucie County transportation system shall be reviewed in coordination with any requested changes to the Future Land use Element or other related components of this plan. A report on the impacts to the system brought about by any proposed land use changes shall be prepared and presented to the Board of County Commissioners as part of the review of that Land Use change. The applicant has provided a Traffic Statement as part of the Future Land Use amendment application. An updated report will be required before any final development order approval is obtained. The proposed change in Future Land Use designation from RS (2 du/ac) to RU (5 du/ac) would result in an additional 147 dwelling units, increasing the trip generation potential by 1,551 vehicle trips per day. The maximum number of residential trips under the existing and proposed Future Land Use designation was distributed on the affected roadways segments as proposed within the applicants Traffic Statement. Ninety percent of future trips are expected to occur to the east towards the interstate system and the City of Fort Pierce. These trips were added to the existing volumes on each roadway link within the study area to determine the effective Volume/Capacity Ratio of the proposed amendment. The Capacity and LOS analyses indicate that the proposed change in land '-' . March 30,2004 Page 7 ...." Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 use will not significantly reduce the level of service upon the affected segments if development occurred at this time. The Pre and Post Level of Service was determined for both the maximum development under the existing and proposed Future Land Use designations. The results are summarized below: Roadway Link Existing Volume/Capacity - Volume/Capacity. Volume/LOS LOS RE FLU LOS RU FLU (Spring 2003) Development Development SR70 (West of Site) 7,000/B 7,088/ B 7,238/B SR70 (East of Site) 7,000/B 7,796/B 9,131/B 2002 FOOT Quality/Leve/ of Service Handbook The Metropolitan Planning Organization staff stated that although Spring 2003 traffic counts west of the Florida Turnpike on Okeechobee Road (SR 70) indicate Level of Service (LOS) B, counts at stations east of the Turnpike and easVwest of 1-95 indicate LOS C. Traffic counts on Kings Highway (SR 713), just north of Okeechobee Road also indicate LOS C. Although the applicant's traffic summary does not distribute vehicles on these roadways, the additional trips are not expected to lower the Level of Service below the adopted standard of LOS D on these roadways. The project's traffic distribution on segments within a two-mile radius will be required before any final development order approval. The Long Range Transportation Plan and Adopted FDOT Work Program for FY 2003/04-08 includes adding lanes to accommodate increased traffic on Okeechobee Road east of the Florida Turnpike. The FDOT study entitled "Okeechobee Road Planning and Conceptual Engineering (PACE) Study Need Statement notes that the section between Florida's Turnpike and 1-95 currently experiences congestion and is perceived to be dangerous by local stakeholders. The proposed change in Future Land Use will increase the trip generation potential by 1,551 trips per day. This will not cause Level of Service problems on the sections of SR 70 west of the Turnpike. However, at such time as a formal development application is submitted, the applicant may need to address any impact on SR 70 east of the Turnpike. HOUSING ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Objective 5.1.2: In order to facilitate the development of industries (industrial and commercial) providing numerous positions, the County shall encourage the development of housing conducive to the attraction of these new industries and which have been identified as a need within St. Lucie County. The proposed higher densities in close proximity to existing and proposed employee centers will further this objective. ~ March 3D, 2004 Page 8 "wi Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. A Certificate of Capacity showing all necessary infrastructure improvements will be available as required prior to obtaining any Final Development Order. Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Solid Waste Sub-Element The proposed amendment is not in conflict with this element. The County's Solid Waste facility currently has a 37-year capacity based upon current usage and would have sufficient capacity to service the maximum density of the proposed Future Land Use amendment and not reduce the Level of Service (LOS) standards for the County's solid waste facility as set forth by Policy 6B.1.1.1. Drainage and Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element The proposed amendment does not conflict with this sub-element. Objective 6C.1.3. The County shall enforce existing Land Development Regulations, which support the protection and maintenance of the natural functions (flow and storage) of the 100-year floodplain and other natural drainage features. The amendment site is entirely located within the 100-year floodplain of Ten Mile Creek. Although the amendment site has been cleared and numerous drainage canals constructed to allow past agricultural activities, any development on the project site will have some impact on the Creek's floodplain. Future development of the site will require any remaining natural drainage features (flows and storage) to be maintained. Any future development proposals will require compliance with the County's Shoreline Protection and Flood Damage Prevention Standards, which are intended to control the alteration of natural floodplains and natural protective barriers. The amendment site's southern boundary is adjacent to RlC (Resource Conservation) classified lands along the north side of Ten Mile Creek. Based upon review of The Feasibility Study for the Reconnection of Wetlands and Oxbows along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River (FDEP, 2003) that indicate the historic creek's location, the southern portion of the amendment site is adjacent to a small finger of the historic waterway that has been cutoff from the main Creek channel. The FDEP study identified two oxbow and wetland reconnection alternatives in or adjacent to the larger project site. Any compensation required for the loss of floodplain functions should be directed towards the identified oxbow reconnection and wetland restoration projects. Coordination with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the South Florida Water Manager District should be sought to provide compensating floodplain wetlands storage that enhances overall restoration efforts along Ten Mile Creek. ~' March 30, 2004 Page 9 ...., Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 The extent to which any natural drainage features remain on site will be determined through an Environmental Impact Report that is required as part of development applications. The proposed change in future land use classification is not expected to place additional development pressures on the remaining natural resources but rather provides for a slight increase in residential units that can be distributed throughout the entire 366-acre project through the PUD process. Potable Water Sub-Element The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. The applicant has reported that St. Lucie Utilities will provide both potable water and sanitary sewer service to the site. A 12" water main will be located on the north side of SR 70 and an 8" sewer line on the south side. These water and sewer services are currently being extended to service the Seminole Tribe of Florida Hawks Nest project just west of the subject site. Prior to any Final Development Order approvals, the applicant would need to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service the project. COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Ten Mile Creek and adjacent natural areas can be protected through the maintenance of remaining natural features, strict adherence to the County's Shoreline Preservation Zones and by providing floodplain storage compensation areas that are consistent with Ten Mile Creek restoration efforts. Ten Mile Creek and downstream water bodies have been targeted by local, state and federal agencies for preservation and restoration. The South Florida Water Management District owns lands adjacent to the amendment site and St. Lucie County has targeted lands to the east for conservation. Sufficient buffers should be provided between any developable areas and adjacent public lands to eliminate the potential of adverse impacts to public resources. Policy 7.1.3.3: The County shall cooperate with the appropriate regulatory and management agencies to implement comprehensive and coordinated management plans of the Indian River Lagoon in order to improve the biological health of the Lagoon. The amendment site is included within the Indian River Lagoon Feasibility Plan as a natural area restoration site. Joint state, regional and federal agencies have funded a feasibility study that identified an oxbow just south of the amendment site that was cut off from the main Creek channel during dredging activities and is proposed for restoration. Any future development plans should be designed in conjunction with State staff to ensure the restoration efforts are not inhibited. The applicant should consider the restoration of this oxbow as part of any required wetland mitigation or floodplain storage compensation area plan. '-' March 30, 2004 Page 10 ~ Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 Objective 7.1.4: St. Lucie County shall strive to obtain or maintain water quality and trophic state index classifications of "good" for the Indian River Lagoon, Five Mile Creek, Ten Mile Creek, and the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The County shall enact appropriate regulations that provide for the maintenance or improvement of water quality. The slight increase in residential density is not expected to result in additional development pressures on the remaining natural features or further degrade the adjacent waterway. The amendment site is part of a larger parcel that contains land zoned RlC (Residential Conservation) along Ten Mile Creek that were excluded from the petition. A significant portion of the Ten Mile Creek river course and floodplain is isolated from the creek's main branch because of dredging that occurred in the 1920-40's. This resulted in a significant loss of floodplains and oxbow's being cut off from the main water channel, reducing the Creeks ability to naturally store waters and filter nutrients. The riverine dredging and subsequent land use intensification resulted in degradation of the quality of water in Ten Mile Creek and downstream waterbodies, including the S1. Lucie Estuary. The Reconnection of Wetlands and Oxbows along the North Fork of the North Fork S1. Lucie River is part of the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) Feasibility Study, our area's portion of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. To accelerate this portion of the IRL project, several state and federal agencies funded Florida Department of Environmental Protection pilot studies and the Feasibility Study of the Reconnection of Wetland and Oxbows along the North Fork of the Sf. Lucie River (FDEP, 2003). The study identifies restoration areas along the North Fork and it's major tributaries, Five Mile and Ten Mile Creeks. Coordinating with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the South Florida Water Management District regarding any required compensating floodplain storage locations designs and mitigation requirements could further the above objective. CONSERVATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies found within the conservation element. Goal 8.1: The natural resources of St. Lucie County shall be protected, appropriately used, or conserved in a manner which maximizes their function, and values. The proposed amendment site is located just north of the Ten Mile Creek shoreline, the largest natural tributary to the North Fork of the S1. Lucie River. The RlC Future Land Use classification between the Creek's shoreline and the amendment site and strict enforcement of the County's Natural Resource Protection Standards should protect the adjacent natural areas and public lands from adverse impacts. ' Policy 8.1.1.2: St. Lucie County shall facilitate development that maximizes energy efficiency and sustainability. This should include techniques that will reduce the total fossil fuel energy required to build and maintain urban land uses. This shall include standards that promote mixed land use patterns, urban infill, public transit '-' . March 30, 2004 Page 11 ...." Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 and provide non-motorized interconnections between land use types to reduce auto dependence and vehicle miles traveled. Providing for urban land use densities within the urban service area will further this policy. The site's close proximity to major educational, retail and employment sectors can be expected to reduce the vehicle miles traveled. Non-motorized and public transit facilities within the proposed development site along Okeechobee Road would accommodate future non-motorized users and further this policy. Policy 8.1.3.1: The County's land development regulations shall include the use of programs to protect or maintain floodplain, such as reduced parking, conservation easements, cluster site plan and micrositing of buildings. The County shall continue to strictly enforce regulations that direct development away from the floodplains and provide upland buffers along the floodplain. Prior to any development approval an Environmental Impact Report will be required that identifies remaining floodplain features and functions on the amendment site. In general, the floodplain that once covered much of the amendment site has been lost as a result of past clearing and drainage activities. Development of the site can occur with little or no impact to the remaining natural resources and adjacent waters if the development and accessory facilities are located outside of any area containing natural floodplain functions (storage or flow) and any remaining natural areas within the amendment boundary are preserved. Development designs that provide a native habitat buffer between impervious areas and drainage features, including stormwater management areas with reduce any offsite impacts. Compensating floodplain storage areas should be located and designed in coordination with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the South Florida Water Management District. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE Policy 9.1.1.1: Level of Service for Recreation and Open Space shall be as follows: Community Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents in the unincorporated area. Regional Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents countywide The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Locating residential units in this area will provide for the efficient use of these recreational facilities. Recreation and Open Space Level of Service demands are based on the 2000 Census reported persons per household of 2.47 and the 244 maximum dwelling units allowed under the proposed Future Land Use designation of RU, the resultant population estimate for the amendment site is 603 persons. Maximum development of the amendment site under the RU classification would require 3.01 acres of recreational and open space lands to meet the level of service standards for community parks (5 acres per 1,000 persons). The 48.72 acre project site contains sufficient land area to accommodate the recreation needs of it's future residents and is within close proximity to recreational areas proposed as part of the Ten Mile Creek Water Preserve Area and the County's Environmentally Significant Lands Program. ~ . March 30, 2004 Page 12 ..., Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Policy 11.1.4: No right to obtain final development order, nor any other rights to develop (B)(3}(b) the subject property have been granted or implied by the County's approval of the preliminary development order without determining the capacity of public facilities. Sufficient capacity is expected to be available to service the proposed amendment site. Approval of the requested Future Land Use change is a preliminary development order and as such does not reserve public facility capacity for the subject property. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order a Certificate of Capacity must be obtained to ensure adequate facilities and capacities are available concurrent with development. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The following goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan apply to this amendment: WATER RESOURCES.187.201 (7}(a) Goal: Florida shall assure the availability of an adequate supply of water for all competing uses deemed reasonable and beneficial and shall maintain the functions of natural systems and the overall present level of surface and ground water quality. Florida shall improve and restore the quality of waters not presently meeting water quality standards. The proposed amendment is not expected to reduce the quantity or quality of the area's water resources nor is the slight increase in density expected to place increased development pressure on the natural systems, including Ten Mile Creek. Future development of the site must comply with the County's shoreline protection standards that prohibit development activities or shoreline alteration along the Ten Mile Creek shoreline, including the alteration of native vegetation and habitat, unless such alterations are associated with access points to the waterway. The applicant intends to propose residential development through the PUD process that allows clustering of units to avoid impacts to on-site and off-site water resources. Any final development order would require the concurrence of the South Florida Water Management District. The previously cleared agricultural lands within the amendment site will provide sufficient lands for future residential development and associated infrastructure without impacting on-site water resources or adjacent public lands. NATURAL SYSTEMS AND RECREATIONAL LANDS.187.201 (9)(a) Goal: Florida shall protect and acquire unique natural habitats and ecological systems, such as '-'" March 30, 2004 Page 1 3 ...,J Petition: BJK, Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 wetlands, tropical hardwood hammocks, palm hammocks, and virgin long leaf pine forests, and restore degraded natural systems to a functional condition. The subject lands contain few natural areas and are not expected to result in the loss of natural habitats. LAND USE. 187.201(16)(a) Goal: In recognition of the importance of preserving the natural resources and enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner. Representatives have indicated that sufficient capacity is currently available from St. Lucie County through an agreement to provide water and wastewater from the Port St. Lucie system. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order, a Certificate of Capacity indicating that all adequate infrastructure services are available is required. Central water and sanitary sewer facilities required for any future development proposal along with stormwater management, roadway, and other public facilities are the responsibility of the developers and not the local government. The amendment site is bordered on the north by an intrastate highway (SR 70) that will provide easy access to streets interior to the development project and provide direct access to an emergency evacuation route (SR 70), which connects, to the Florida Turnpike and 1-95. The proposed amendment to the future land use classification is not expected to adversely affect the quality of life in the immediately surrounding area. The proposed amendment site is within an area with existing or proposed public facilities sufficient to support residential development. PUBLIC FACILITIES. 187.201 (18)(a) FS: Florida shall protect the substantial investments in public facilities that already exist and shall plan for and finance new facilities to serve residents in a timely, orderly, and efficient manner. The amendment would maximize the efficient use of the existing and proposed public facilities in furtherance of this state goal. TRANSPORTATION. 187.201 (20) FS: directs future transportation improvements to aid in the management of growth and promotes an intermodal transportation system. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers this goal. An analysis of the impact of the proposed amendment on effected roadways has been provided. The applicant's Traffic Impact Statement is based upon a "worst-case" traffic generation for the site utilizing the maximum allowed density under the proposed RU Future Land Use classification. The analysis indicates that an additional 147 single-family dwelling units would not reduce the level of service on State Route 70. If the site were developed for multifamily purposes, the trip generation would be reduced from the single-family demand that was utilized in the traffic analysis. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers this goal. An analysis of the impact of the proposed amendment on effected roadways has been provided. The proposed amendment lands are located adjacent to a State Highway and emergency evaluation route. '-" March 30, 2004 Page 14 ..." Petition: BJK. Inc. File Number: PA-03-007 CONSISTENCY WITH THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN The following are the primary regional goals and polices that apply to this petition: Strategy 1.1.2: Promote compatibility of urban areas, regional facilities, natural preserves and other open spaces. The proposed amendment furthers this goal. The proposed change in future land use provides for an increase in density in the urban area where existing public facilities are being extended. The amendment provides for the efficient use of regional facilities and allows slightly higher residential densities in close proximity to existing and proposed retail, education and employment centers. Policy 8.1.1.1: All development should take place concurrent with or after the provision of necessary infrastructure and services. The proposed amendment site is located in an area where the necessary water, wastewater are currently being extended and roadway capacity is currently available. Development of residential units on the site encourages the location of housing units within close proximity to major employment sectors to facilitate any future transit system and to provide convenient access to emergency evacuation routes. CONCLUSION Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban) to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed Future Land Use Classification change would slightly increase residential densities in the urban area and thereby further goals to provide for a compact urban form and reduce vehicular trips through the development of a multi-modal transportation system. Staff recommends approval of the BJK, Inc. petition for a change in Future Land Use classification from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban) and authorize transmission of the amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. ~ '-' c o ~ ro '- o üc.. c 0 Ü ~ro ((}"O .~ o LL « ..... z ~ ~! I ~~.¡ I ¡ .~..~ II ~ I 'o..CX) 00 99 ('t')('t') 00 «« 0...0... þ. I) \ to ~ z ;:) o ü a:: w > iï âiõ C ~o -, () .- ïD:ïi " Q) +-' ! .-. co 0° 1-""" ò: .s .... I I = . :;¡ I :II! II: z « Õ ~ 0:"2 ,.,." .... ~ "" ~,. .'~ ,..r""''''· ! 1 .. '" ~/ II: s þ' ! S S£ ! S 9' ! AlNnO:J 3380H:J33>tO \ 'eo II: .... ~ z ;:) o ü .... z :II! ~ « II: :2 .... .. '" II: ..it.. . II\'~"":"", ~ ~~ø ~~~-~cJ: lq~ / /1Cr ~I-- )i.JW / . I . flC::--- J~ /_--./ I :-------- tJ-=: j -_u2~ . - ~ ~ .~ r - Ilr. J ..W . \ \ ¡! i 61:; ~ ( :.. -'--' I' . 0.':.:: ~ ~ t~ \ .....- to-- I .... IU'.'" ,,\ I' \ I ~ ~: ~~~~.\ : o lì:-I ~):~ ~J) I Cl. I' : ~ ~ij~ ~ : o -: I ~~~ [', : o ~: U; ~ "" "" """ ~"'~¡f ¡ _ ~ \ - Ii ~~ ..... 1/,,;; , r,\. 3r- )1 , , 0 ' I ,~ , I 'Q: I '''J., I ,_ _ __ _ _. __ _ fS.. __ __ _ __ ____ _ _ _..! ~~\ ~\ ~ ,-,- ~"'~~~~~ \ ~~~~ K .Iò -- -:, ~::'\ ~ '"' " ~;r; ,~" :'\. ~[~ ,~ I- .. .... .., \ "...YTS1I .e _ ~ 'OW........... . / ~:.I--!I ,\ ~ =M =: === I 'I i·' >, I J -~--- , \ . '. - ----- \ -~- ~-- co \J ~ o LLi-- « - ~ J (!) ø l - ~ ~~ . Ü C I I'''':''~'¡'';'' . ¡..:....:. " ~ . . ¡..;,.,.: . . . .. . . . . ~~ ..r;;~' ~ : 'H'" . Q- . II J .. .. ' .-... ,. -- -- I !II I I III I .... 'Y'I~ ....:...... . - ....:...... . - . - ...:..., . ~ ~ ~ ~ H .Ji ~ Cò "~ " ~--- z f ,j U) " ! fI! ¡.o ~ II. :J . E [h " of. ¡u III 11 '1 ~iS [}II ~ ~ I~~ ,h Ii J Ii '" ~ " II I, ~ <0 1:J c: :J o .0 CD U .~ CD (/') c: <0 .0 ~ · · · · · · ~ <0 1:J c: :J o .0 ~ CD <0 ~ 1:J CD c: ë: ~ '.0 LL CD õ= ~E ü~ - . I I : I I I : I COil a 9 cry a (f) CD «~ o...'õ C:(f) --ã3 cð E ~ CD <0 ,...... :¡a 2- Q.U a u.92.. 9 :ë-§ !-(f) ~~ c 0 .- +-' CO ~ ~ 0 ctI "0 Cl. c: :J 0 ~ .c 0 Q) U 0 .~ Q) (/) co c: ctI .c -0 .... :J .- · ~ · 0 · - · ,LL · · « ~ ctI "0 c: :J . 0 Ü .c ~ C Q) ctI U "0 (¡) c: ë: :J 0 u:: .c ~ Q) o = J ~ E CO Ü ~ · · · · · · · 00 · 0 0 I C") 0 (/) Q) ö: co U 'ë c:(/) .- ëi) oð c:U ........ Q)ctI :t;:Q. t--- ctI.... Q.U 0 Q) 9 .!!lE .£::J I-(/) C") ~ 0 « 0.. 11~ -z t ,;)\ ~ III , ~ Jif '~ ill! 5 ~ f" ~. . æ It: ·ì!! I liJ ~ CI ~ h~ ~ ~ :Ii ,rl II c o +-' CO ~ o Cl. ~ o o co 1J ~ o u... « . ü c ~ J m Q) en :::> "'C c .5 -- ... ......... .... 'L~ - z t ,j .. III o ~ Hi ¡. i?:' If' ~ pi '... ' ~ l!l i Š ["1 '< K II: ~ îld ,t. III ~ (\ 1:) c: :J o .0 Q) () .~ Q) CIJ c: (\ .0 ::5 · · · · · · ~ (\ 1:) c: :J o .0 ~ Q) (\ e 1:) Q) c: ã: ð '.0 Lr Q) õ= ~E ü~ · . ! I · I · I : I co . I o o I (V) o en Q) «~ 0..'6 c:en --ã) oð E ~ Q)(\ '.. 1ã ~ o ~.~ 01 1: -§ I-en ~~ -'I. \If') - z ~ f ~ ~ II) ..- JIf t' ~ II. " . iJ Pi ¡ " l' ~ LL I · l~ ~ ·iI ~ II~ \.:( i I't ~ :::¡ ,I ,rj d ~ (\ 1:1 c: I :J 0 .c ø Q) u « '2; Q) en c: (\ .c :s · · · · · · c o +-' ro ~ o Q. ~ o o ro "'0 ~ o LL ,-- ---,- « L{') 'fJ ø « o c ~ J CO ~ (\ 1:1 c: :J o .c ~ Q) (\ ~ 1:1 Q) c: ë: Õ u:.c Q) o = ~E G ~ . . 1 . : . 1 . : . 001. o 9 C't) o CIJ Q) «"§ 0-'6 c:CIJ .- ëi5 oð E ~ m¡g, f'.. (\..... o a.~ 01 1! :g t-CIJ ~~ [QianaW ait~~:=º40406ßÔC"';=.: Page n "" . þ , . "'I ..... ~ \...Þ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA REGULAR MEETING Date: April 6, 2004 Tape: 1-4 Convened: 3:00 p.m. Recessed: 4:30 p.m. Re-convened: 6:00 p.m. Adjourned: 9:38 p.m. Commissioners Present: Chairperson, Paula A. Lewis, Frannie Hutchinson, John D. Bruhn, Cliff Barnes, Doug Coward Others Present: Doug Anderson, County Administrator, Ray Wazny, Asst. County Administrator, Heather Young, Asst. County Attorney, Dennis Murphy, Community Development Director, Paul Phillips, Airport Director, Marie Gouin, M & B Director, Beth Ryder, Community Services Director, Jack Southard, Public Works Director, Leo Cordeiro, Solid Waste Manager, Millie Delgado-Feliciano, Deputy Clerk I. MINUTES ( 1027) It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve the minutes of the meeting held March 16,2004; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. 2. PROCLAMA TIONS/PRESENT A TIONS A. Resolution No. 04·125- Proclaiming April 5,2004 through April II, 2004 as" National Public Health Week" in St. Lucie County, Florida. It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Barnes, to approve Resolution No. 04- 125; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. Ms. Diane Walgren, Health Department was present to accept the proclamation. B. Resolution No. 04·122- Proclaiming April 18, 2004 through April 24, 2004 as "St. Lucie County Crime Victims' Rights Week" in St. Lucie County, Florida. It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Barnes, to approve Resolution No. 04-122; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. Chief Deputy, Gary Wilson Sheriff's office, was present to accept the proclamation. C. The County Administrator read upcoming events and scheduled meetings. RAl. PROCLAMA nON Resolution No. 04-129- Proclaiming April 11,2004 through April 17, 2004 as "Public Safety Telecommunications Week" in St. Lucie county Florida. It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve Resolution No. 04-129; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. Capt. Ken Merrick, SLC Fire District was present to accept the proclamation. n)I~~~_~~~~~40406.~()ê\.; : Page 2 ~ ..J 3. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Mark Orr, attorney for the Migrant Workers families who were in a fatal crash this past week, addressed the Board and requested the Board consider waiving the cost of the Fairgrounds for a fundraiser for the families this Saturday. Ms. Linda Tapia, Gomez Productions, addressed the Board and provided infonnation on the community support as wen as individual agencies support, i.e the Sheriffs office, the Mayor of the City ofFt. Pierce, Southern Eagle, and Circle H Citrus. Mr. Bobby Rodriguez, Director of the Latin Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Board and asked their support for this request. Letters of support were submitted for the record. Com. Hutchinson stated she was in support of this request because it was a tragedy which occurred in our back yard. Com. Coward stated he too was in support of waiving the fee. fI\, Lewis expressed her concern with waving the fee since there is a policy in place for not for profit organizations. Com. Barnes stated he shared the same concerns as Com. Lewis and wasn't sure where to draw the line if this was approved. Com. Coward suggested staff possibly pursuing assistance from the private sector to pay the fee. Com. Bruhn stated he had a difficult time charging families for any of the facilities in their time of need. Com. Hutchinson suggested staff review alternatives for the funding and bring the results back to the Board at 6:00 p.m. Mr. Carl Benkert, Lakewood Park resident, addressed the Board regarding the Oakland Estates development which is now in the planning and zoning stage. He expressed his concerns with the density in the Lakewood Park area. Ms. Susan Caron, Indrio Road resident, addressed the Board regarding her home and the view from her back yard where it shows the proposed Emerson Estates development and the affect it would have in the surrounding area. Ms. Julie Orbin, Lakewood Park resident, addressed the misunderstanding regarding the second wen at Holiday Pine to accommodate Potorfino Shores. The County Administrator stated at this point they are not sure whether or not they will be building a second wen, their priority is to get the existing water treatment plant offline. Ms. Orbin asked if any new developments could be pulIed off the agenda until it is known what would be done in the area. Com. Lewis stated she believed this could not be done. There are many legal issues i.e. advertising and codes and regulations have not been set as yet with regard to the Charrette. Com. Coward stated there is zoning in place and anyone who requests developing that is consistent with their current zoning would be pennitted to move forward. The issue is 2 ....J " ~ Page 3 J rQ[!~~W~!!<~þ40406.dOC\..,.~,V that there is a speculative developing interests coming in who are buying up agricultural land outside the urban service boundary in hopes that they would give the similar approach in developing as the City of Port St. Lucie has which would give them new development rights. These are the developments which should be put on hold until to do a plan on how the region should be built out and we move forward with the Charrette. Com. Barnes stated they could not take away existing rights and there is a misconception on what the County can do by the people and the developers. The County must comply with existing laws since the Charette laws have not been written to this point. It does not mean they give away rights they don't have, but the county must follow the rights they have right now. Mr. Grant Dunn, Lakewood Park offered $300.00 on behalf of his wife and himself against the fee for the Fairgrounds to assist the fundraiser for the migrant workers killed in the car accident. Ms. Eileen Novak, Lakewood Park resident, addressed the Board regarding the dirt piled on Palimar Road. She also commented on the proposed single family homes which to her estimation would be 5 feet apart from each other. Ms. T.A. Weiner, Okeechobee Road resident, addressed the Board on the growth and the environmental impact and the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. David Kelly, Planning Manager advised Ms. Weiner that the Stipulated Agreement has been approved so, they in fact have a new Comp Plan. 4. CONSENT AGENDA It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Barnes, to approve the Consent Agenda with the corrections and additions as noted; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. 1. WARRANT LIST The Board approved Warrant List Nos. 27,28 and 29. 2. PUBLIC WORKS A. Lennard Road I MSBU- Paving & Drainage (SLC) - The Board approved Amendment No.3 to Work Authorization No.8 to the Agreement for Engineering Services with Culpepper & Terpening Inc., for Task 10, Surveying Services, and Task 13, Fencing in the amount of $11,940.00 for Acquisition purposes. B. Hannony Heights M.S.B.U.· Potable Water Improvements FPUA- The Board approved advertising for Initial Public Hearing- The Board accepted the petitioning baIlots and granted pennission to advertise the Initial Public Hearing to be heard on May 4, 2004 which is a night Board meeting. C. Request to approve Budget Resolution No. 04-106, Equipment request EQ04-245- and Budget Amendment BA 04-141- The Board approved Resolution No. 04-106 establishing the budget for the Florida Department of Agriculture Grant, Equipment Request EQ04-245 for the purchase of a watering truck and Budget Amendment No. BA 04· 141. D. Amendment No. I to the Grant Agreement with DEP for the River Park Bame Boxes- The Board approved Amendment No. 1 to the Grant Agreement with the DEP for the River Park Bame Boxes, 3 rº¡~~~'!:!ªK~:~]j40406 .dOC_~=·:_== ,~=~':.~.-........_'..' Page 401 'J E. Request for a Public hearing on St. Lucie Citrus Mining Pennit Application- The Board approved a public hearing to be held on May 4,2004 or as soon thereafter as possible to consider the request of the St. Lucie Citrus Mining Penn it Application. F. Change Order No.2 in the amount of $18,744.02 for modifications to the South Jenkins Road Extension project- The Board approved and authorized the Chainnan to sign Changer Order No.2 in the amount of $1,666,718.94 to Ranger Construction Industries, Inc., for design modifications and additions made to the plans to increase safety awareness to the traveling public and carry out several construction activities. G. Change Order No.6 for Wharton-Smith to decrease the amount by 542,688.00 for the St. Lucie County Fairgrounds- The Board approved with the Chainnan's signature, Change Order No.6 for Wharton- Smith to decrease the amount by $43,688.00 for the St. Lucie County Fairgrounds. H. Amendment No.7 to the Consultant Agreement with Inwood Consulting Engineers for S. 25111 St. Roadway Widening Project- The Board approved Amendment No.7 to Inwood Consulting Engineers Consultant Agreement for S. 25111 St., at the intersection of Midway Road in the amount of551,796.65 and authorized the Chainnan to sign. I. Request for Third Amendment to Contract # C02·0 1·258 entered into between St. Lucie County and CEM Enterprises, Inc., to provide Enhanced Swale Maintenance services for the Road & Bridge Division of Public Works- The Board approved the Third Amendment to the Contract and increased the contract total amount to $550,000.00 per year, and authorized the Chainnan to sign. 3. UTß..ITIES A. Changer Order with Astaldi Construction Corp. for construction services related to the Seminole water line extension in the amount of 523,807.18 - The Board approved the Change Order with Astaldi Construction Corp. for construction services in an amount of 523,807.18. B. Change Order for Speegle Construction II, Inc., for additional controls and equipment to improve the operation of the reclaimed water pumping system at the North Hutchinson Island Wastewater Treatment Facility in the amount of $9,182.31- The Board approved the Change Order with Speegle Construction II, Inc. C. Work Authorization with LBFH Inc., for engineering services for the preparation of a Water Supply Facilities Work Plan Amendment in the amount of$4I,120.00 - The Board approved the Work Authorization with LBFH Inc. 4. COMMUNITY SERVICES 4 [þ'(ari~W>ªK~=,]40406.d()c .~ ~...,,~:>~ .,. ...", Page 51 A. Resolution No. 04·113 and the 2003/04 application for the U.S.c. 5307 Federal Transit Administration Grant- The Board approved the grant application and Resolution No. 04·113 accepted the grant and authorized the Chainnan to sign all documents necessary. B. Approval of Amended Contract between the State of Florida Department of Health and St. Lucie County for Operation of the Health Department and approval for the Health Department to purchase a vehicle for $20,000 with funds ITom the allocation approved by the Board for FY04 budget- The Board approved the amended contract between the State of Florida Department of Health and the County, approved used of 20,000 of the $863,000 approved budget allocation to purchase a vehicle and authorized the Chainnan to sign all pertinent documents necessary and to approve EQ04-25I. C. Acceptance of the grant award of the Fy03 Rural Area Capital Equipment Support grant from the Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged and approval of Budget Resolution No. 04·123· The Board approved accepting the grant, approved Resolution No. 04-123 and authorized the Chair to sign all documents necessary to execute the grant. D. Appointment of members to the Treasure Coast Community Services Tripartite Board for the St. LucielMartinlOkeechobee County Community Action Agency- The Board approved the re-appointment of the current representatives for St. Lucie County to the Treasure Coast Community Action Agency Board. E. Approval of Contract with Nancy Phillips & Associates L.C. to provide professional services to plan and write the FY04 Community Development Block Grant Program- The Board approved the contract with Nancy Phillips & Associates L.C. 5. PURCHASING A. First Extension to Contract No. C003-04·293 with Ranger Construction Industries, Inc.- The Board approved the First Extension to contract C03-04- 293 with Ranger Construction Industries, Inc., for the purchase of asphalt millings and authorized the Chainnan to sign the extension as prepared by the County Attorney. B. First extension to Contract No. 03-04-294 with Dickerson Florida Inc.,- The Board approved the first extension to contract C03-04-294 with Dickerson Florida, Inc., (secondary vendor) for the purchase of Asphalt Type S3 and Asphalt Sticker for patching and repairing of public roads in St. Lucie County and authorized the Chainnan to sign the extension as prepared by the County Attorney. C. First Extension to Contract C03-04-295 with Ranger Construction Industries Inc.,- The Board approved the first extension to contract C03-04-295 with Ranger Construction Inc., (primary vendor) for the purchase of Asphalt Type S3 and Asphalt Stickler for the patching and repairing of public roads in St. Lucie County and authorized the Chainnan to sign the extension as prepared by the County Attorney. D. Bid Waiver and Piggyback Martin County Auction Services Contract- The Board approved the waiver of the bid process, awarded contract to Karlin Daniel & Associates to provide auction services and authorized the Chainnan to sign the contract as prepared by the County Attorney. E. Award Bid # 04-26 Media Equipment for TV Studio - The board approved awarding Bid # 04-026 Media Equipment for TV Studio to the lowest bidders, B & H Photo Video-$53,323.50 Digital Video Systems- $2,606.61 and Encore Broadcast Equipment Sales- $8,895.00. 5 [Qiâ!Ía y.\ta~t!~~º40406:d~~~~~:~=.:: ,'.~" ~. "" Page 6 F. First Extension for suppliers listed on the Bid Award Fonn to Furnish and Install Fencing- The Board approved the first extension to the contracts with the suppliers on the Bid Award Fonn to Furnish and Install Fencing and authorized the Chainnan to sign the extensions as prepared by the County Attorney. G. First Extension with the suppliers listed on Bid A ward Fonn for Rental of Construction and Industrial Equipment- The Board approved the first extension to the contracts with the suppliers listed on the Bid Award Fonn for Rental of Construction and Industrial Equipment and authorized the Chainnan to sign the extensions as prepared by the County Attorney. H. Software (Intangible Assets) Removal- The Board approved the removal ofthe asset numbers from the Software Intangible Asset Inventory of the BCe. I. Bid # 04-030 Weatherbee Road and U.S. I Intersection Improvements- Reject bid- The Board approved rejecting Bid # 04-030 Weatherbee Road and U.S. I Intersection Improvements and directed staff to revise the plans and bid document and re-bid this project in anticipation of receiving lower bids. J. RFP# 04-017- Design!Build for Open Space Pool- The Board approved negotiating with Recreation Design & Construction Inc., for Design/Build for Open Space Pool and bring back to the Board an acceptable negotiated price. K. Pennission to advertise Invitation for Bid for the installation of Bleachers at South County Stadium- The Board approved the advertising of Bleachers at South County Stadium. L. Bid # 04-013 Purchase of I Vibratory Soil Compactor w/smooth Drum· Cancel award to Nortrax Equipment Co. and reject all bids· The Board approved the request to re-bid the equipment. 6. COUNTY A 1TORNEY A. Bear Point Mitigation Bank·Work Authorization No.5 (03-05·395) with Hazen and Sawyer Engineers, P.C. for Additional Perfonnance Verification and Construction Certification Services- The Board approved the proposed Work Authorization No.5 with Hazen & Sawyer Engineers, P.e. for the Bear Point Mitigation Bank and authorized the Chainnan to execute. B. Revocable License Agreement- URS Corporation-Monitoring Well on Old Dixie Highway- The Board approved the Revocable License Agreement, authorized the Chainnan to execute the Revocable License Agreement and instructed URS, Corporation to record the Agreement in the Public Records of St. Lucie County. C. Airport Industrial Park- Contract for Sale and Purchase with Arthur Hungerford- The Board approved the proposed Contract for Sale and Purchase of five Airport Industrial Park lots with Arthur Hungerford and authorized the Chainnan to sign the contract. D. South 25'" St. Roadway Widening-Midway Road to Edwards- Temporary Easement- Jerry and Margaret Davis- The Board accepted the Temporary Construction Easement, authorized the Chainnan to sign Resolution No. 04-126 and directed staff to record the documents in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, F1orida. 7. INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE 6 H~i.ª"na_~~ª-!.:j)40406.dôê .~~~', ,',. ..", Pa9~i~ A. Approve Change Order No. I in the amount of $1 ,984 for the Orange A venue Canal Starr Farms culvert replacement project- The Board approved and authorized the Chairman to sign Change Order No. I in the amount of $1 ,984 for the Orange Avenue Canal Starr Farms culvert replacement project for a total contract of $205,239. B. Change Order No. I to Contract # 03·12-744- Summerlin Seven Seas, Inc.lJohn Brooks Park- The Board approved Change Order No. I with Summerlin Seven Seas, Inc., to increase the contract amount by $12,850.00 and authorized the Chairperson to sign the Change Order as prepared by the County Attorney. C. Change Order No.2 to Contract # 03-11-763- Property SolutionslRock Road Correctional Facility- The Board approved Change Order No.2 with Property Solutions to increase the contract amount by $12,649.00 and contract time an additional 10 days and authorized the Chairperson to sign as prepared by the County Attorney. 8. AIRPORT A. Security Coverage/Fencing Budget Resolution- The Board approved the Budget Resolution No. 04-116 for the Florida Department of Transportation Joint Participation Agreement $60,000 grant for security coverage/fencing at the St. Lucie County International Airport. B. Budget Resolution for the Benefit/Cost Analysis for proposed parallel runway· The Board approved the Budget Resolution No. 04-117 for the Florida Department of Transportation Joint Participation Agreement $8,333 grant for benefit cost analysis/fencing at the St. Lucie County International Airport. C. Benefit Cost Analysis scope of work- The Board approved Work Authorization No. I with PBSJ for $165,740 for the preparation of the Benefit/Cost Analysis for the proposed parallel runway at St. Lucie County International Airport. 9. GRANTS Authorize the submittal ofa grant application to the Florida Inland Navigation District Waterways Assistance Program- This grant will provide $267,000 for the dredging of Taylor Creek- The Board approved the submittal of the grant application to the Florida Inland Navigation District and approved the attached Resolution No. 04-124. 10. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT A. Scenic Highway Corridor Management Entity Agreement- The Board approved the Corridor Management Entity Agreement. B. Ratification of the Tourist Development Council's decision to approve a $2,000 Special Event Grant Application for the Wings N Wheels Event organized by the Victory Children's Home, funding from the County's Tourist Development Council's grant agreement- The Board approved the proposed Special event Grant Agreement and application in the amount of $2,000 to Victory's Children's HomelWings N Wheels as drafted by the County Attorney and authorized the Chairman to sign. C. The Tourist Development Council would like to institute a St. Lucie County Hotel Survey Cash Contest that will run for one year. Quarterly winners to receive cash prize of $250. Total winnings for the year will amount to $1,000 and will come out of Tourism revenue- The Board approved using $1,000 from Tourism revenues for cash prize of $250 each for this survey contest. 7 tQ~a.riª,~~!~:~'040406 .doc ~ ....J Page 8 II. ADMINISTRA nON A. Central Florida Foreign Trade Zone Board of Directors· The Board approved ratifying Mr. Rudy Howard to the Central Fla. Foreign Trade Zone Board of Directors. B. Environmental Advisory Committee- The Board ratified the requested appointments to the Environmental Advisory Committee. ADDITIONS CA-I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Board approved the Final Record Plat approval for Parcel 21 @ The Reserve (Briarclif1) and authorized staff to complete the final processing of this Plat. CA-2 UTILITIES The Board approved the first Payment request to FPUA for the North County Districts bulk interconnection with FPUA in the amount of$163,795 and also approved the interfund loan from the General Fund Reserves to be repaid with interest at 2%. CA-3 The Board approved the selection of Sun Trust Bank as the successful bidder for a $10 million line of credit to provide financing for the acquisition of land in St. Lucie County for a new Research and Education Center and approved to have the County Administrator sign the commitment letter. 6. COUNTY ATTORNEY Landfill Gas- Memorandum of Understanding Between Tropicana Products, Inc., and St. Lucie County- Consider staff recommendation to approve the MOU and authorize the Chainnan to sign the MOU. It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Coward, to approve staff recommendation and authorized the Chairman to sign the MOU; and, upon roll call motion carried unanimously. Recessed: 4:30 p.m. REGULAR AGENDA Re-Convened 6:00 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS CONTINUED (Tape 2) Mr. Bob Bangert, Holiday Pines, addressed the Board regarding the growth and accommodating this growth, increases in density, and utilities. Mr. Alex Brown, 13939 Indrio Road, addressed the Board in the timing of the growth and the Regional Planning Commission's plan. Mr. John Arena, Ft. Pierce addressed the Board and read the "Did You Knows" from a brochure. The County Administrator advised the Board that Core Communities will be funding the fee in its entirety for the Fairgrounds. Any additional funds received will be given to the families of the migrant workers . 8 Lí?:i~rj~:Wa.!t~>~º40406.d()ê '"", '-oJ Page 9J S.A PUBLIC WORKS Lebanon Road MSBU- Continuation of Initial Public Hearing Potable Water Improvements FPUA- Consider staff recommendation to not approve Resolution No. 04· 065 creating the Lebanon Road M.S.B.U. The M.S.B.U Coordinator addressed the Board and read a letter received from Kathleen Humphrey stating her request to withdraw the petition in favor of the project. It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve staff recommendation; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. S.B PUBLIC WORKS (2-1789) Revels Lane I MSBU- Second Public Hearing to amend the Project Boundary and approve a Preliminary Assessment RolI- Consider staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 04-115 amending the project boundary and approve a revised preliminary assessment roll for the Revels Lane I Municipal Services Benefit Unit. It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to adopt Resolution No. 04- 115; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. S.C COUNTY ATTORNEY (2·1920) Petition for Abandonment- Abandon the Avenue C, West of Angle Road, a 25ft. platted right of way, in Home Acres Unit 2 Resolution No. 04-118- Consider staff recommendation to approve Resolution No. 04-118, Proof of Publication of the Notice of Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. Mr. Steve Tierney, attorney for the petitioner, advised the Board he was present to answer any questions the Board may have. It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Coward, to approve staff recommendation; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. S.D COUNTY ATTORNEY (2·11065) Consider Draft Ordinance 04-007 Amending the St. Lucie County Land Development Code by Amending Section 1.13.01 to Provide for Clarification of Board Enforcement Responsibilities; Deleting Section 11.13.03 Enforcement Procedure; and Amending Section 11.13.04 Other Penalties and Remedies to Clarify the Initiation of Other Enforcement Proceedings- Staff has no recommendation at this tine. This meeting is for the pUlpose of public comments and testimony providing any direction to amend or otherwise modify this draft ordinance. The second public hearing on this matter will be held on April 20, 2004 or as soon thereafter as possible. No action required. S.E COUNTY ATTORNEY (2-11126) Ordinance No. 04-016- Creating Section 7.10.24 Land Development Code, to Establish Height Limitation- this is the first of two required public hearings on Ordinance No. 04- 016 and no specific action is required at this time. 9 [Q¡a.~a:~~it~~=040406.dOC", '~ Page 10 Mr. Lloyd Bell, Port property owner addressed the Board and stated his fonnal objection to any proposal to discriminate against the activities or intennodel method of utilization of a modem Port. The Asst. County Attorney stated this would only take affect in the unincorporated areas only. Mr. Craig Munt, Hutchinson Island, addressed the Board in opposition to any type of increase in container heights in the county. No action required at this time. S.F COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (2-11596) Consider the application of Lucie Rock, LLC (Continued from March 16, 2004) requesting a Change in Future Land Use Classification ITom RS to MXD-Orange Avenue for 94.34 acres located on Rock Road, approximately.5 miles north of Orange Avenue, on the southwest side ofI-95- Consider staff recommendation to approve the transmittal of Lucie Rock, LLC petition for a change in Future Land Use Classification from RS to MXD Orange A venue to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The Board members disclosed their discussions with the petitioner and the attorney with the exception of Com. Barnes who was on vacation. Mr. Bobby Klein, attorney for the petitioner addressed the Board and was available for any questions. Ms. Valentine Sennan, President of the Homeowners Association of Timberlake Estates, addressed the Board in opposition to this change in future land use. Mr. Kline advised the Board that the sand pit Ms. Sennan spoke of was not their property and is not subject to this hearing. Com. Hutchinson addressed the notification process. The Community Development Director advised the Board of their process and how it has been expanded. Com. Coward stated he was not interested in any more billboards being placed in this location and he wanted to make it clear for the PUD that he will not support any billboards. Mr. Kline stated there is an existing billboard and there is no ability under the county's rules to place a billboard anywhere on the property. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve staff recommendation; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. S.G COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (2-12882) Consider the Petition of Mark Pye to define a Class "An Mobile Home as a detached single family dwelling unity to be placed on 26.63 acres ofland located at 8630 Carlton Road in the AG-5 zoning district, Draft Resolution No. 04-023- Consider staff recommendation to approve Draft Resolution No. 04-023 to define a Class A Mobile Home as a Detached Single Family Dwelling Unit. Mr. Phillip Stickles area resident addressed the Board in favor of this petition. 10 (Q¡¡"-~ w¡jitã=::Q40406.doc \b. -J'. Page 11 j 'WI It was moved by Corn. Bruhn, seconded by Corn. Hutchinson, to approve staff recommendation; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. 5.H COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (2-12700) \.) Consider approving draft Ordinance 04-005 formerly Ord. 03- 025 creating a Countywide Law Enforcement Impact Fee- Consider staff recommendation to approve Draft Ordinance 04- 005 imposing a Countywide Law Enforcement Impact Fee. If approved the fee will become effective July I, 2004. 2.) Consider approving Interlocal Agreements between St. Lucie County, the Town of St. Lucie Village, the City of Port St. Lucie and the City of Ft. Pierce in regard to the collection of Countywide Law Enforcement Impact Fee and authorize the Chairman to sign the agreements. Mr. Craig Munt, Hutchinson Island, addressed the Board in favor of this issue. It was moved by Corn. Bruhn, seconded by Corn. Coward, to approve Ordinance 04-005; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. Note: item 2 is not a public hearing but has been included in this part of the board agenda for consolidation purposes. It was moved by Corn. Coward, seconded by Corn. Barnes, to approve the Interlocal Agreements; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. 5.1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Consider transmittal of an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The amendment provides for a change in Future Land Use Classification from RE to RU for 47.96 acres located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Indrio Road and Emerson A venue-Consider staff recommendation to Deny the request of Glassman Holdings LLC for a change in Future Land Use classification from RE to RU and extension of the Urban Service Area Boundary Line. This item was postponed per the request of the petitioner. 5 J. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (2·12954) Consider Draft Resolution 04-078 approving the request of Reitano Enterprises, Inc., for a change in zoning from the AG-I zoning district to the CG zoning district for property located on the east side of Koblegard Road, approximately 330 feet north of the intersection of Indrio Road and Koblegard Road- Consider staff recommendation to approve Draft Resolution No. 04-078. Mr. Joe Fresha, agent for the petitioner addressed the Board and noted he was available for any questions. Ms. Susie Caron, Indrio Road resident, questioned if this request conforms with the Charrette. She was advised this was not the statement made and this was not a new re-zoning. II (ºT~~ia ~W~i~~~=º40406.doc ~, 'J Page 12, It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Coward, to approve Resolution No. 04-078; and, upon roll caB, motion carried unanimously. 5.K COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT- (2-1349) Consider application ofBJK Inc., (continued from March 16,2004 for a change in Future Land Use Classification from RS to RU for 48.72 acres located on the south side of Okeechobec Road (SR70 approximately Y. mile west of the Florida Turnpike - Consider staff recommendation to approve the transmittal of the BJK Inc., petition for a change in Future Land Use Classification. AB Board members disclosed their contact with the petitioner. Com. Coward also met with the engineer. Mr. Michael Houston, Houston, Cuozzo, representing the petitioner, addressed the Board on this issue. Ms. Pamela Hammer, The Reserve addressed the Board regarding giving increased density and what the residents wiB receive. Her main concerns were the schools and the impact it would have. She would like to see a number of acres given to the School District as weB as the Fire District. Mr. Butch Terpening, Culpepper and Terpening, advised the Board of what the developers have addressed concerning agreements sent to the respective Boards, i.e. School Board and Fire District. Ms. Ethel Sullivan, resident, addressed the Board regarding density in her area and asked smaBer lots be required which would decrease the density. She would like to see the area kept as a greenbelt with srnaBer houses. Mr. Paul Gagion, resident and adjacent property owner, expressed his support with the development in his area. Ms. Julie Orbin, Lakewood Park addressed the over crowding of schools and the transporting of the children to schools which she felt was an accident waiting to happen. Com. Hutchinson stated the BCC does not have jurisdiction as to where the School Board decides to build their schools and in speaking with the School Board, they have advised her that they do not want a school in that area. Com. Coward stated there needs to be closer communication with both the developers and the School Board regarding the schools and the impact the development will have on the schools. Com. Hutchinson would like for the public to understand that the BCC does not have the authority to teB the School Board where to place the schools or how large to make them. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve staff recommendation; and, upon roB caB, motion carried unanimously. 5.L COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BJK USB extension- Applicant submitted a letter withdrawing the request for Amendment to the existing Urban Service Boundary Lines. 12 (Diah~W~~iJ~.::J40406..dOC·~... ' Page 13J ~ S.M PUBLIC WORKS( 3-1277) Continuation of the request for Florida Rock Mine - North Plant (Ft. Pierce Quany) to increase their hours for crushing operations from 6:00 a.m - 6:00 p.m. to 4:00 a.m.- 12:00 a.m.- Consider staff recommendation to approve the increase in hours for crushing operations under the existing pennits subject to the listed special conditions. Com. Lewis advised the Board that she has received notification from the following persons that they are not in favor of this project. Mr. Brunklebank and Arthur and Monica ElIiott . Ms. Tracy Hayden, representing Florida Rock addressed the Board regarding the blasting and the procedure for advising the residents of when the blasting would take place. Mr. Jeff Straw, VP Gerysonics, addressed the Board regarding the noise and stated that the noise measures welI within the county's established guidelines. Mr. Kenny Smith, Plant Manager advised the Board the cost of bringing in another crusher was too high. Mr. Smith requested the times of the operation be adjusted to the following: Monday thru Wednesday- 5:00 a.m.- 9:00 p.m. Thursday and Friday - 6:00 a,m. - 6:00 p.m. Saturday- 6 :00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Com. Bruhn and Com. Coward advised those present of the crusher not being operable when they visited the site. Com. Lewis and Com. Hutchinson stated the crusher was operating when they visited. Com. Lewis stated the noise was not intolerable. Ms. Sara Worsham, attorney for the TC Airpark Homeowners Assn., addressed the Board and stated this operation had an adverse impact in the community. Com. Barnes stated he felt there was more of a noise impact from the private planes in the area than the mine crusher. Mr. Phillip Stickles, area resident advised the Board that more materials being taken out would mean more trucks. Mr. Jeff Kenworthy- Sky King Drive addressed the Board and read his letter into the record requesting this petition be denied. Mr. Rene St. June, area property owner stated the sound measurement taken was in the daytime and this was not offensive, the evening is what he is more concerned about. Mr. AI Weinberg, area resident, gave a history of the blasting and the actual impact. Com. Coward stated he had met with Mr. Weinberg. Mr. Darren Brown, 35 year area resident, stated his opposition to his petition. Ms. Stacey Brown area resident addressed the Board regarding the blasting and stated her opposition to the extended hours. Ms. Elliott, TC Airpark resident addressed the Board in opposition to the extended hours and operation and would like to keep the area quiet. 13 t~i~ijjWª1~e~: 040406.d()c\v' '.. " ò::¿/ Page 14 Ms. Diane BoswelI, TC Airpark resident, addressed the Board and stated she would like to keep the piece and quiet in her area for as long as possible, Com. Barnes stated he would consider Mr. Smith's proposal of the adjusted hours and it be on a temporary trial period. Com. Coward stated he was standing with the neighbors. This is a short term solution and the pieces do not fit together. Com. Bruhn stated he had a difficult time extending the hours since he was not able to hear the crusher operating. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve the request for the adjusted hours as stated by Mr. Smith for the tria] period of 6 months; and also attempt to convert the diesel pump to electric pump also the breaking of the haulers wiII be COlTccted and the crusher be below grade; and, upon roII calI, the vote was as follows: Aye's: Hutchinson, Barnes, Lewis; Nay's: Bruhn, Coward; motion carried by a vote of 3 to 2. S.N. PUBLIC WORKS Applicant has submitted a letter requesting this agenda item be pulIed from the agenda. It wiII be re-noticed and rescheduled for a future Board meeting. - Capron Trails Mine. PHA-l COUNTY ATTORNEY Consider Draft Ordinance No. 04-018- Regulations for properties and facilities owned or leased by St. Lucie County by regulating the areas available for golf activities, prohibiting the distribution of park lands and cOlTection of the Director's title. Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve Ordinance 04-018 and authorize the Chairman to sign the ordinance. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve Ordinance No. 04-018; and, upon roII calI, the vote was as folIows: Nay: Bruhn; Aye's: Coward, Hutchinson, Barnes, Lewis; motion carried by a vote of 4 to 1. There being no further business to be brought before the Board, the meeting was adjourned. Chairman Clerk of Circuit Court 14 '-" ..J AGENDA ITEM 10: BJK. INC. - FILE NO. PA-03-007: Ms. Diana Waite, presenting Staff comments stated that Agenda Item # 10 was the application of BJK Inc., for a change in the Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 duJac) to RU (Residential Urban - 5 duJac) on 49-acres located about Y2 mile west of the Florida Turnpike, between State Route 70 and natural areas located along Ten Mile Creek. The amendment site contains land recently cleared of an abandoned citrus grove. She continued that the amendment site's current future land use designation allows residential uses up to 2 duJac or 99 total dwelling units. Approval of the proposed change to RU would allow up to 5 dwelling units per acre or 248 total dwelling units and limited commercial and institutional uses. The future land use application package includes a Traffic Impact and Environmental Statement that was utilized to evaluate the proposed future land use amendment. Ms. Waite stated that the amendment site is part of a larger development site with the remaining 316.40 acres retaining their existing RS Future Land Use designation. The entire 366-acre site is planned for development through the County's Planned Unit Development process. An extension of the western portion of the development site's Urban Service Area Boundary line is the subject of PA-03-008. The PUD is proposed to include approximately 800 dwelling units, consisting of single-family homes and multi- family units, limited commercial and recreational uses. A change in future land use for the subject 49 acres would allow slightly higher residential densities that can be distributed through the entire 366-acre PUD site. Ms. Waite stated that the proposed change to the County's Future Land Use Map will provide for urban land use densities adjacent to the MXD-Crossroads Future Land Use area that includes a variety of uses, including residential, commercial and industrial uses. The amendment site is part of a larger parcel that contains land zoned R/C (Residential Conservation) along Ten Mile Creek. Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed Future Land Use Classification change would slightly increase residential densities in the urban area and thereby further goals to provide for a compact urban form and reduce vehicular trips through the use of multi-modal transportation facilities. Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval and that the petition be transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review. Chairman McCurdy questioned if the applicant was present. Mr. Mike Houston, Houston Cuozzo Group, stated that they were representing the applicant, BJK, Inc. He stated that this property has been in the planning process for quite a while. He advised that both this and the next item were intended to lay the ground work for their master PUD (Planned P&Z I LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 29 of 34 ~ ...., Unit Development), which would provide a mix of residential uses, small village commercial, and community recreational. He continued that it is a unique site where the creek would become a major element in the planning of that site. He stated that this request is a change from two units to the acre to three. He continued that the previous project discussed is along their projects eastern boundary. He also complimented staff and their report on the land use amendment. He stated that this project is slightly less than a mile from the turnpike entrance and they want to provide a variety of housing products with low densities. He continued that he or Butch Terpening from Culpepper and Terpening were there to answer any questions. Mr. Grande questioned how this project relates to the current urban service boundary. Ms. Waite explained that this portion of the project is within the urban service boundary. Ms. Hammer questioned if an agreement for water and wastewater with the Port St. Lucie system was in place as stated on page 13 of the staff report. Mr. Butch Terpening from Culpepper and Terpening stated that they have not yet executed an agreement by the Board of County Commissioners but they are currently in discussions about it. Mr. Lounds questioned where the State preserve was in relation to both of these properties. Mr. Terpening stated that the lO-Mile Creek attenuation basin, which is about 1,100 acres, is directly south of the property. He continued that they have been working with the County and the State to have joint utilization of and development of amenities. Mr. Hearn questioned if the applicant owned all of the property between the cross hatched areas. Mr. Terpening stated that they do own all of that property, but those areas are not being included in this request. Ms. Hammer questioned what type of guarantee they had that if this request is approved that the applicant would not utilize the 5 units per acre that is allowed under the new land use. Ms. Waite explained that this request for RU (Residential Urban) land use only applies to 49 acres of the site. Ms. Hammer questioned how increasing the density would reduce trip generations as stated in the staff report. Mr. Houston stated that the multi- family homes proposed would generate fewer trips than single-family homes. Ms. Hammer questioned if the roads would be installed prior to building. Mr. Kelly explained that would be addressed during the site plan process. Ms. Hammer questioned what kind of impact this would have on schools. Mr. Kelly explained that there is a methodology for calculating this and it is the same one used to calculate impact fees. Chairman McCurdy opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Paul Gagnon, 9864 Okeechobee Road, stated that he lives across from the second portion of this project, complimented Mr. Kosar on the project, and stated he was in favor of this request. Seeing no one else, Chairman McCurdy closed the Public Hearing. P&Z I LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 30 of 34 '-' ""'" Mr. Merritt stated that after considering the testimony presented during the public hearing, including staff comments, I hereby move that the Local Planning Agency of St. Lucie County recommend that the S1. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners grant approval to the application of BJK, Inc., for a Change in Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban) and transmit the petition to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review because this fits the nature of the area and improves the area. Motion seconded by Ms. Morgan. Upon a roll call vote the motion was approved with a vote of 7·1 (with Ms. Hammer voting against) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 31 of 34 NOTICE OF CHAN~TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP cJl!'"THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ..."" The St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners will consider an ordinance to change the Future Land Use designation of the lands indicated on the map in this advertisement. A public hearing on this proposal will be held before the Board of County Commissioners on October 18, 2004, at 6:00 P.M., in the County Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor of the St. Lucie County Administration Annex, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida, The purpose of this public hearing is to consider the Florida Department of Community Affairs, Objection, Comment and Recommendation Report on the proposed amendment and whether or not to adopt an ordinance changing the Future Land Use designation on approximately 48.72 acres from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2 du/ac) to RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac). L=r- ì ~ J~ Petition Applicant: BJK Inc. Petition Number: PA-03-007 Location: Okeechobee Road (SR 70), approximately .5 mile west of Gordy Road Copies of the proposed amendment and draft ordinance may be obtained from the St. Lucie County Growth Management Department, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982. Any questions may be directed to Diana Waite, Planner III at 772·462·1577, All proceedings before the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded. If a person decides, to appeal any decision made with respect to any matter considered at the hearing, they will need a record of the proceedings and that for such purpose, they may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. At the request of any party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during the hearing will be swom in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross examine any individual testifying during the hearing upon request. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS , ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA ISI PAULA LEWIS, CHAIRMAN PUB-'ISH DATE: OCTOBER', 2004 ~ ..., GROWTH MANAGEMENT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS October 7,2004 In accordance with the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, you are hereby advised that BJK INC., has petitioned St. Lucie County for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from RS (Residential, Suburban) to RU (Residential, Urban) for the following described property: Location: South side of Okeechobee Road (SR-70), 1/2 mile west of Gordy Road. THE PROPERTY'S LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS A V AILABLE UPON REQUEST The second public hearing on the petition will be held at 6:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on October 18,2004, County Commissioner's Chambers, St. Lucie County Administration Building Annex, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at that time. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be considered. The County Planning Division should receive written comments to the Board of County Commissioners at least 3 days prior to a scheduled hearing. County policy discourages communication with individual Board of County Commissioners on any case outside of the scheduled public hearing(s). You may speak at a public hearing, or provide written comments for the record. The proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings. For such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross- examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. If it becomes necessary, a public hearing may be continued to a date-certain. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Director at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting at (772) 462- 1777 or T.D.D. (772) 462-1428. If you no longer own property adjacent to the above-described parcel, please forward this notice to the new owner. Please call (772) 462-1577 if you have any questions, and refer to: File Number: PA-03-007. Sincerely, ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ~ ~ /1-1.vL5J . Paula Lewis, Chainnan JOHN D, ßRUHN, District No, 1 . DOUG COWARD, District No, 2 . PAULA A, LEWIS, District No J . FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, District No, 4 . CLIFF ßARNES, District No, 5 County Administrator - Douglas M, Anderson 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce, FL 34982-5652 Administration: (772) 462-1590 · Planning: (772) 462-2822 · GISfTechnical Services: (772) 462-1553 Economic Development: (772) 462-1550 · Fax: (772) 462-1581 Tourist Development: (772) 462-1529 · Fax: (772) 462-2132 www.co.st-Iucie.fl.us '-' ~ ~M 0 ~NOOOOO N m ~~NONN ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~y~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~æ~~æ8~~~oo~~~~~~~oo~~~oo~~~~~~ ~~~m~~~omm~~~~~~~g~~~m~~~~~mm IÑ~~~~~~~~~~~MMMMMM~MM~~~~~~~~ ~JIO~~IO<ü~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ J:: J:: J:: J:: J:: 00000 III III III III III III '- ~ ÆÆÆÆÆ'6I~ '61~ ~_~ê,_I~ê~~fffff~,~ê~~ê~~ê~ê~ê Q) C Q) CD1¡:·CD·"" Q) Q) Q) IIIIIIIIIIIIIIICDI"~ CD CD Q) Q) CD CD Q) CD Q) CD ~¡~~¡III~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~=~~=ëe~~~ØØøøø~e~~e~~~~~~~~ B~~~~~~8&&&~~~~~~8~~8&~&~&&~& ~ ~ M M ~ m m ~ Œ ~~ M ~ ~~~~~ *~~ * * - ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~ ø ~CD~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~1!~~~ ~~~~~ Q)~~ø ~CDø~CD III 00000 !l20l~~00s~~~~~~I~s~~mom'6fijfifi ~c~ficQE'6fi~~~~~~~E~~E~!~~~~~~~ ø~-8ææÕ~~~~~NNNNNS~~S~-~-~O~O~~O~ ~~ ~~O'-~__ xxxxxø~ ø~x-x 00 ~05005~~OOØSSSSS~>ø~>SØS~M~-M ~~ ~o _o__~ ~o~m~ ~ ~MN~M ~~8~~888~~~ooooo~8~~~o~oõ8gg8 C~~ø~~~mOOOON~~~~~~mN~~~~~~~~~~ ù ... C C- ~~ t:1D l'- ~~ GO ë~ ~C') g,q 0< 'ii~ >~ ~Iii f~ Eq E< 8~ . 0 c.... .2; ø- :!E -;, c .5 0= _1\1 ,,::I Q) E III C II. ~ Q) c ~ E 8 III C -' oð ~ ~ II C C CD ~ ~ "e 0 ~ 1\1 C II. '- ! ~ ~ 1ij C o ~ CD .,c ~~ j~ 00 ~., ~ "E i o :I: ~ ~~~c.. "E E'-Q)E i ~ ~lg'E ~ 0~::1II5:: I.,~~~~ ü > III ~ "ë III e E III j ü 8 oð ø ~~ III CD_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ e ~ c III ø ~ ,g¡ ~ëi) -g:§ z~ c c ::> o ?Q) '- I!? '" CD Q) :ëõ ã) Øü c.. CD 'ii III fi ~ ~ ~~~~MMM ~~MO ~~~~~~~ g~~~ ~""NN~~~ NNN~ c\JÑLbLbtbJ,JJCDLbLb~'¢ Cl)CI)~~~~~~~~N~ ~~~~~~~~~~~g:¡ MMMMMMMMMMMN ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ J:: o c ~~êê~~êÆê~8.9 £ £ £ £ £ £ £ ~ £ £1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ii ~ ~I~ 8 &&&&&&&O~&~CD ~ ~ * ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~Q) ;: '- '- CD ~ ~ CD 1! I~ 00 1! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :: 0 ~I.:::: .~.~! O~~~~~fi~I ~ ~ ~ fi ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ .!! äj a¡1 g:.~ ~~~æNNNS>~'ë'- --~~~~~ø Q)O'_O øØOO'3'3'3Ll)¡¡¡~êi5z MM;'3;;'3;~~~m~,...~- ~~èiSèiS8~~~~:g¡.s~ (f)('W)Ø)O')tl)ùSìi)T""(")T""(OiO < I~ o ., ø ~ww ü8~~~~~ {! {! !ä !ä .!1! .!1! .!1! «~~..9..9..9 III ~ c 'C < Ë ø c c ~~I§§-E-E~ ~~~~~~~ ø c ~ ~ æ 8 0Ø ~~~ ~~~~øøø ee'3'3~~~ III III III III III ." ." I Ic..c...,.,., Ow B:2 e ~ (!O B o 0 0 :: Q) CD.5 .5 ?.5 :¡ ~ ¡; ~8~ 8 ë ë ~ë 11 9 ~ ~ ~ ø ~ ø ~ I~ E ~ e ~ E õ ~.~~ .~ 0 .2 8.2 c.. ~ 8.8 ~~~ I~ I 8~ ø~ CD J:: ø ~ ~~~ ~ 0 ø~ ~~ ~ j ~ ~ ~~w~ w ~ ~~ ~~ '6 i Q) ~ e~~~ ~ j ~j ~j a¡ ~ ~ E ~~j~ j ~0 I~ 3~ ð 5 ~ ~ 3 0~ ~¡1!¡oæ);:~ ~JJJIJ~;:~!;:clc?'-~I!?~~~~~~~~~!!ä"EE~ êoê~ßJ~~~~ ø~~ø~ccc~~~Q)~0==I§~~~~0~1<8 ~J::::>Q)J:: ."oð~ ~"'~~"'::>::>::>:ë8,g¡ã)80~~"'~ºQO~'3_øc øOØ:I:ü~~CD:I:Z00ØØ0>c..Z>c..Oøoø ~c.. Z~>OvO(!(!>0~~~ ~§I~--§Ig-ª -w mm§§ mr ;~~~~II~'~i~I!!I!!!i~I~~~~i'i'i~m~IIII~~~ilil!ll~ ~~I C~~MM2g2~~~~~~~~~~_~~~~~~~NNN~ª~~~~~~~ ~~g -NMMMMMMMM~~~~~~~~~~~""~~~~~~~~~~~~""""~"" ø~CI) I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I~NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN o .!!! 'q¡ J:: ø ~ "'0 IT- "7 f0 ., E J!! e (! ~ ¡~ \~ \X 'cf1 ~- ~~ ¿ 0- <J ' 1eõ\t u } '-' To: Submitted By: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: RECOMMENDATION: COMMISSION ACTION: 00 APPROVED [=:J OTHER Approved 5-0 Motion to deny. - "'*" Agenda Request 3c- Item Number Date: October 18, 2004 Consent Regular Public Hearin Le ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] Quasi-JD [ X ] Board of County Commissioners Growth Management D DENIED /k Consider adoption of Ordinance 04-032 approving the Home Dynamics Inc. request for a change in Future Land Use designation from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RM (Residential Medium - 9 du/ac) and RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac) for 34.5 acres located on the southwest corner of Edwards Road and South 25th Street. The Florida Department of Community Affairs objected to the amendment based on the lack of data and analysis supporting the proposed future land use change. The applicant has provided the Department and County staff with the data and analysis to address the Department's concerns. If approved, the future use of the 35.4 acre commercial site would be for residential uses, allowing up to 369 dwelling units and limited commercial neighborhood uses. The applicant has submitted a PUD, Fontera, proposing the development of 347 single family and multi family dwelling units. The PUD is scheduled for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission on October 21, 2004. _ N/A At the February 19, 2003 public hearing on this matter, the Local Planning Agency, by a vote of 7 to 1 continued the public hearing to March 18, 2004. On March 18, 2004, the Local Planning Agency by a vote of 5 to recommended denial of the petition. On April 20, 2004, the Commission transmitted a modified future land use changing the easterly 300 feet from COM and RU to RH and the remainder of the property to RM. Adopt Ordinance 04-032 approving the Home Dynamics Corporation petition for a Change in Future Land Use designation from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RM (Residential, Medium 9 du/ac) and RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac). Coordination! Signatures Mgt. & Budget: Other: Purchasing: Other: l;ounty Attorney Originating Dept.: Finance: \.f ...., GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Administration MEMORANDUM FROM: Randy Stevenson, Interim Growth Management Director J TO: County Commissioners DATE: October 13, 2004 SUBJECT: Home Dynamics Corp./Petition for a Change in Future Land Use Ordinance 04-032 On April 20, 2004, this Board approved transmittal of the Home Dynamics Corporation petition for a Change in Future Land Use designation from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac) and RM (Residential, Medium - 9 du/ac) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (Department) for review under Chapter 163, Florida Statues. The Department found that the supporting data and analysis did not demonstrate the amendments consistency with the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan Chapter 187, Florida Statutes. Since then, the applicant has provided the Department and County staff with revised data and analysis. County staff has received copies of the correspondence between the applicant and the Department which indicates the Departments concerns have been addressed. On March 18, 2004, the Local Planning Agency voted 5 to 1 to forward a recommendation of denial based on the applicant's original request for a change from COM to RH on the entire 35.4 acres, which would have allowed up to 530 dwelling units. Prior to the April 20, 2004, St. Lucie Board of County Commissioners hearing the applicant modified its original request. The Commission ultimately transmitted a request to change the eastern 300 feet (along 25th Street) to RH and the remainder of the parcel to RM, along with directions that that staff research what the developer has done in other communities. Staff has researched the internet and found 14 Home Dynamic communities located between Palm Beach to Davie, 10 of these are sold out. Their web site also is promoting five upcoming communities including Torino Lakes in the City of Port St. Lucie. The Company was not found listed on the Southeast Florida Better Business Bureau web site. If adopted, the proposed ordinance would change the Future Land Use designation on 35.4 acres from COM (31 acres) and RU (4.29 acres) to RM (26.57 acres) and RH (8.72 acres) allowing up to 369 dwelling units. The applicant's Planned Unit Development (PUD) proposal for the project lands, known as Fontera, is scheduled for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission on October 21, 2004. The PUD includes 347 dwelling units made up of a mix of single family homes and multi-family homes. Staff's primary concern with the PUD is the applicant's failure to meet the County's building spacing requirement along the 25th Street and Edwards Road right of way. Under the building spacing formula approximately 56 feet is required between the buildings and the public right-of-way, the proposed PUD only provides 25 feet. Staff believes that the internal designs justify a variance from the building spacing formula, however the minimum setback between the public right-of-way and buildings should be '-' ..., October 13, 2003 Page 2 Subject: Home Dynamics Inc. Future Land Use Amendment maintained to provide a better noise buffer for residents of the community and a visual buffer along major roadways. From the early review of this request staff has been concerned that it would be difficult to achieve the proposed density while maintaining the mix of single family and multi family housing. The mix has been maintained at the expense of the minimum setbacks from the roadways. The land use decision to be made by this Commission is whether the current commercial designation or a residential designation is more appropriate. If you collectively believe that the residential designation is the more appropriate choice, you have some latitude in what is adopted. You may adopt the RM (Residential, Medium) and RH (Residential, High) consistent with the transmittal to the Department, or you may recommend a residential land use or mixed of residential land uses that result in a lower number of potential dwelling units. These include RU (Residential, Urban with a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre) and RM (Residential, Medium with a maximum of 9 dwelling units per acre). Staff understands that its concerns as expressed above relate primarily to the PUD currently under review, other PUD issues include wetlands and turn lanes. Staff's comments concerning the PUD are intended only to alert the Board and the applicant of the concern. Staff would note that the future land use amendment is a preliminary development order and does not imply that any particular development scenario can occur on the property. In addition, the proposed amendment will allow up to the maximum density but does not guarantee that the maximum level of dwelling units is feasible or will ultimately be determined appropriate for the site. Adoption of Ordinance 04-031 will allow the applicant to seek residential development up to the maximum allowed by the future land designations but does not ensure that the maximum level of development is feasible. Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance 04-032 approving the Home Dynamic Inc. change in Future Land Use from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban) to RM (Residential, Medium) and RH (Residential, High). If you have any questions regarding this petition please let us know. cc: County Administrator County Attorney Mark Mathes File '-' '..J 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 ORDINANCE NO. 04-032 File Number PA-03-005 AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY; AUTHORIZING AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made the following determinations: 1. Home Dynamics Inc., presented a petition for a change in Future Land Use Designation from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban) to RH (Residential, High); 2. On March 18, 2004 the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing notice at least 15 days prior to the hearing and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property, and recommended that this Board deny the a change in Future Land Use Designation from COM (Commercial) to RH (Residential, High - 15du/ac) for the property described in Part A below; 3. On April 20, 2004, this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing notice at least 15 days prior to the hearing and notifying by mail the owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. 4. On April 20, 2004 this Board authorized the transmittal of a change in Future Land Use Designation form COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban) to RM (Residential, Medium) and RH (Residential, High) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further agency review in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; and 5. On October 18, 2004 this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Fort Pierce Tribune \..; ....,/ 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 and the Port St. Lucie News on October 8, 2004 and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: A. CHANGE IN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION The future land use designation set forth in the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan for the property described as follows: That certain parcel situate, lying and being in St. Lucie County, Florida, more particularly described as: The Northeast % of the Northeast % of Section 29, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, less the East 300 feet and LESS AND EXCEPT the following: Right-of-way for Hawley Road (South 25th Street), right-of-way for Edwards Road, and right-of-way for North St. Lucie River Water Management District Canal located along the Western boundary of the above described land. LESS ALL OF THE FOLLOWING: PARCEL "c" A strip of land lying in Section 29, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, and being more particularly bounded and described as follows: COMMENCE at the Northeast corner of said Section 29; thence South 00º06'35" East, along the East line of said Section 29, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence South 89259'07" West, a distance of 40.00 feet, to the intersection of the South right-of-way of Edwards Road and the West right-of-way of South 25th Street; thence continue South 89259'07" West, along said South right-of-way of Edwards Road and parallel with the North line of said Section 29, a distance of 310.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue South 89259'07" West, along said South right-of-way of Edwards Road and parallel with said North line of Section 29, a distance of 499.71 feet, to the Point of Curvature of a curve concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 1392.58 feet; thence along the arc of said curve, through a central angle of 18241 '28" Southwesterly 454.29 feet, to a point 25.00 feet, at a right angle, East of the West line of the Northeast % of the Northeast % of said Section 29; thence South 00207'41" West, parallel with said West line of the Northeast % of the Northeast %, a distance of 21.15 October 18, 2004 Ordinance 04-032 Page 2 File No: PA-04-007 ~ ...." 1 feet to a Point of Intersection of a line 25.00 feet, at a right angle, East of said 2 West line of the Northeast 1A of the Northeast 1A of Section 29 and a curve 3 concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 1372.58 feet; thence along the arc 4 of said curve, through a central angle of 181258'34"; Northeasterly 454.59 feet to a 5 Point of Tangency; thence North 891259'07" East, parallel with said South right-of 6 -way of Edwards Road, a distance of 499.74 feet; thence North 001206'35" West, 7 parallel with said East line of Section 29, a distance of 20.00 feet, to the POINT 8 OF BEGINNING; containing 0.438 acres, more or less. 9 10 PARCEL"D" 11 12 A strip of land lying in Section 29, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie 13 County, Florida, and being more particularly bounded and described as follows: 14 15 Commence at the Northeast corner of said Section 29, thence South 001206'35" 16 East, along the East line of said Section 29, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence 17 South 891259'07" West, a distance of 40.00 feet to the intersection of the South 18 right-of-way of Edwards Road and the West right-of-way of South 25th Street, 19 said point being at the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue South 891259'07" 20 West, along said South right-of-way of Edwards Road and parallel with the North 21 line of said Section 29, a distance of 310.00 feet; thence South 001206'35" East, 22 parallel with the said East line of Section 29, a distance of 20.00 feet; thence 23 North 891259'07" East, parallel with said North line of Section 29, a distance of 24 290.00 feet; thence South 001206'35" East, parallel with said East line of Section 25 29, a distance of 230.00 feet; thence North 891259'07" East, parallel with said 26 North line of Section 29, a distance of 20.00 feet, to a point on said West right- 27 of-way of South 25th Street; thence North 001206'35" West, along said West right- 28 of-way of South 25th Street and parallel with said East line of Section 29, a 29 distance of 250.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; containing 0.248 acres, 30 more or less 31 32 owned by Home Dynamics Incorporated, is hereby changed from CG (Commercial) 33 and RU (Residential, Urban) to RM (Residential, Medium - 9du/ac). 34 35 and 36 37 The East 300 feet of the Northeast 1A of the Northeast 1A of Section 29, 38 Township 35 South, Range 40 East, LESS AND EXCEPT the following: 39 40 Right-of-way for Hawley Road (South 25th Street), right-of-way for Edwards 41 Road, and right-of-way for North St. Lucie River Water Management District 42 Canal located along the Western boundary of the above described land. 43 October 18, 2004 Page 3 Ordinance 04-032 File No: PA-04-007 '-' ...." 1 lESS All OF THE FOllOWING: 2 3 PARCEL "c" 4 5 A strip of land lying in Section 29, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, S1. Lucie 6 County, Florida, and being more particularly bounded and described as follows: 7 8 COMMENCE at the Northeast corner of said Section 29; thence South 00º06'35" 9 East, along the East line of said Section 29, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence 10 South 89º59'07" West, a distance of 40.00 feet, to the intersection of the South 11 right-of-way of Edwards Road and the West right-of-way of South 25th Street; 12 thence continue South 89259'07" West, along said South right-of-way of 13 Edwards Road and parallel with the North line of said Section 29, a distance of 14 310.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue South 89º59'07" 15 West, along said South right-of-way of Edwards Road and parallel with said 16 North line of Section 29, a distance of 499.71 feet, to the Point of Curvature of a 17 curve concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 1392.58 feet; thence along 18 the arc of said curve, through a central angle of 18º41'28" Southwesterly 454.29 19 feet, to a point 25.00 feet, at a right angle, East of the West line of the Northeast 2 0 1A of the Northeast 1A of said Section 29; thence South 00207'41" W est, parallel 21 with said West line of the Northeast 1A of the Northeast 1A, a distance of 21 .15 22 feet to a Point of Intersection of a line 25.00 feet, at a right angle, East of said 23 West line of the Northeast 1A of the Northeast % of Section 29 and a curve 24 concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 1372.58 feet; thence along the arc 25 of said curve, through a central angle of 18º58'34"; Northeasterly 454.59 feet to a 2 6 Point of Tangency; thence North 89º59'07" East, parallel with said South right-of 27 -way of Edwards Road, a distance of 499.74 feet; thence North 00206'35" West, 28 parallel with said East line of Section 29, a distance of 20.00 feet, to the POINT 29 OF BEGINNING; containing 0.438 acres, more or less. 30 31 PARCEL "D" 32 33 A strip of land lying in Section 29, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, S1. Lucie 34 County, Florida, and being more particularly bounded and described as follows: 35 36 Commence at the Northeast corner of said Section 29, thence South 00206'35" 37 East, along the East line of said Section 29, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence 38 South 89º59'O7" West, a distance of 40.00 feet to the intersection of the South 3 9 right-of-way of Edwards Road and the West right-of-way of South 25th Street, 40 said point being at the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue South 89259'07" 41 West, along said South right-of-way of Edwards Road and parallel with the North 42 line of said Section 29, a distance of 310.00 feet; thence South 00206'35" East, 43 parallel with the said East line of Section 29, a distance of 20.00 feet; thence October 18, 2004 Ordinance 04-032 Page 4 File No: P A-04-007 '-' ...., 1 North 89º59'07" East, parallel with said North line of Section 29, a distance of 2 290.00 feet; thence South 00º06'35" East, parallel with said East line of Section 3 29, a distance of 230.00 feet; thence North 89º59'07" East, parallel with said 4 North line of Section 29, a distance of 20.00 feet, to a point on said West right- 5 of-way of South 25th Street; thence North 00º06'35" West, along said West right- 6 of-way of South 25th Street and parallel with said East line of Section 29, a 7 distance of 250.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; containing 0.248 acres, 8 more or less 9 10 PARCEL "E" 11 12 A strip of land lying in Section 29, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, S1. Lucie 13 County, Florida, and being more particularly bounded and described as follows: 14 15 Commence at the Northeast corner of said Section 29, thence South 00º06'35" 16 East, along the East line of said Section 29, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence 17 South 89º59'07" West, a distance of 40.00 feet to the intersection of the South 18 right-of-way of Edwards Road and the West right-of-way of South 25th Street; 19 thence South 00º06'35" East, along said West right-of-way of South 25th Street 20 and parallel with said East line of Section 29, a distance of 250.00 feet to the 21 POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 00º06'35" East along said West right-of- 22 way of South 25th Street and parallel with said East line of Section 29, a 23 distance of 160.65 feet; thence South 89º59'07" West parallel with North line of 24 said Section 29, a distance of 20.00 feet; thence North 00º06'35" West parallel 2 5 with said West right-of-way of South 25th Street, a distance of 160.65 feet; 26 thence North 89º59'07" East parallel with said North line of Section 29, a 27 distance of 20.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; containing 0.074 acres, 2 8 more or less. 29 30 PARCEL "F" 31 32 A strip of land lying in Section 29, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, S1. Lucie 33 County, Florida, and being more particularly bounded and described as follows: 34 35 Commence at the Northeast corner of said Section 29, thence South 00º06'35" 3 6 East, along the East line of said Section 29, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence 37 South 89º59'07" West, a distance of 40.00 feet to the intersection of the South 3 8 right-of-way of Edwards Road and the West right-of-way of South 25th Street; 39 thence South 00º06'35" East along said West right-of-way of South 25th Street 40 and parallel with said East line of Section 29, a distance of 410.65 feet to the 41 POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue South 00º06'35" East along said West 42 right-of-way of South 25th Street and parallel with said East line of Section 29, a 43 distance of 877.12 feet to a point on the South line of the Northeast % of the October 18, 2004 Ordinance 04-032 Page 5 File No: PA-04-007 ~ ...", 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 Northeast % of Section 29; thence South 891219'20" West, along said South line of Northeast % of the Northeast % of Section 29, a distance of 20.00 feet; thence North 00206'35" West, parallel with said West right-of-way of South 25th Street, a distance of 877.35 feet; thence North 891259'07" East, parallel with the North line of said Section 29, a distance of 20.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; continuing 0.403 acres, more or less. PARCEL "G" A strip of land lying in the Northeast % of Section 29, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, and being more particularly described as follows: Commence at the Northeast corner of said Section 29, thence South 001206'35" East, along the East line of said Section 29, a distance of 60.00 feet; thence South 89259'12" West, a distance of 60.00 feet to a point on the West right-of- way line of South 25th Street and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the herein described strip of land, thence South 00206'35" East, along said West right-of- way line and parallel with the East line of said Section 29, a distance of 1268.02 feet, to a point on the South line of the Northeast % of the Northeast %; thence South 891219'26" West, along said South line, a distance of 20.00 feet; thence North 00206'35": West, along a line parallel to the aforementioned East line of said Section 29, a distance of 1268.25 feet, to a point on the South right-of-way line of Edwards Road; thence North 891259'12" East, along said South right-of- way line and parallel to the North line of Section 29, a distance of 20.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the herein described strip of land. owned by Home Dynamics Incorporated, is hereby changed from CG (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban) to RH (Residential, High). Location: Southwest corner of the intersection of South 25th Street and Edwards Road. B. FINDING OF CONSISTENCY This Board specifically determines that the approval of this change in the Future Land Use Element is internally consistent with the policies and objectives contained in the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, specifically Policies 11 .1.3.6 and 11 .1.3.7 of the Capital Improvements Element, which identify this approval as a Preliminary Development Order and provide for the recognition that impacts of this approval on the public facilities of St. Lucie County will not occur until such time as a Final Development Order is issued. October 18, 2004 Ordinance 04-032 Page 6 File No: P A-04-007 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 '-' ...., C. CHANGES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS The St. Lucie County Growth Management Interim Director is hereby authorized and directed to cause these changes to be made in the Future Land Use maps of the Future Land Use Element of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and to make notation of reference to the date of adoption of this Ordinance. D. 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. E. 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 circumstances, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstances. F. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE This ordinance shall be applicable as stated in Paragraph A. G. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Bureau of Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida, 32304. H. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS The Growth Management Interim Director shall send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Department of Community Affairs, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100. October 18, 2004 Page 7 Ordinance 04-032 File No: P A-04-007 ~ '11tt1IIIII 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 h EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect upon the issuance by the State Land Planning Agency of a Notice of Intent to find the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(9), Florida Statutes, or until the Administration Commission issues a final order finding the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(10). J. ADOPTION After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows: Chairman Paula A. Lewis xxx Vice Chairman John D. Bruhn xxx Commissioner Cliff Barnes xxx Commissioner Doug Coward xxx Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson xxx PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2004. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY Chairman ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: DEPUTY CLERK COUNTY ATTORNEY October 18, 2004 Page 8 Ordinance 04-032 File No: P A-04-007 18/88/2064 68:34 772223e22ß LUCIDOANDASSOCIATES PAGE 02 " aðs. ~ VI ¿ '-' '1ftIIIIII Mark Mathes From: Mark Mathes Sent: Wednesday. September 22,2004 10:35" M To: ·...mI..COkørOdca.st8te.ft.us· Subject: RE: Home dynamics Thanks. We will make sure our responses are include d in the tinal adoption transmittal. Mark Mathes ---()riginat Message--- From: Jðmie.Coker@ldCa.staœ.ft.U$ (malltD:Jan IÌe.Coker«.adca.st.ate.ft.us] Sent. Wednesday, September 22, 20049:58 It ., To: Mark Mathes; Roger. WilburnOdca.5tate.ft.t 5 Subjects RE: Home dVnamics Malt(: Received your .mail and concøplually It appears thllt you have answered our questions. prcMded that these ltana get iRlo the adoption. Sut. I don't Nlieve I can oflcialtJ r.... our objection or say that we wouldn't hev. a probl.., with the lmendment pecIcage unal we review the adopted ORC pøckBge and issue our notice of, ompllnce (NOO, which i. definitely decided on by people higher up then myself. I have forwarded !his .maD on to Roger Wilbum , he i8 our new ading section administrator when Ken Metcalf leaves in a couple of week.. Perh~ ps Roger would have a different opinion. ..... ........ CntINIIIw4Juc......".c~ To cJ....eo..'Oèa....,tI.&!P Q; cKell..........IIIItI.II.IS. ....111 'IE: He... ~ OW2'/2OOC 04:5' JIM -Original Message--- From: Jamie.Coker(Icka.staœ.n.us [maiItQ:Jam e.Cokridca.st.ate.fI.us] Sent: Wednesdey, September 08,200410:13 A'" To: Mark Matfaes Cc: Ken.MelaIfOdca.state.fI.us SubJ-ct: Home drnamJcs Mark Mathes} Jemie: We are hoping the infuJ1T1( lion provided wiD allow you to release your objection and would Uke to receive confirmation, f this prior to the finel adoption pubic: hearing in October. Marlc called the office today for your .mail addr .S. r wanted to at ... give you some feedback to the fax you sent me in respon.. to our ORC (I S we hllVøn1 been Bbl. to bilk - _cept on each 10J8/2004 lele812~e4 08:34 11:¿2L3e22~ Lu...;lìJUANLJA~~UCIAIt:..~ PAbt:.. ~3 ,& "ð~ .. VA. ,¡.. ~' ,wi othe(~ voice maiO. 1) Tramc - Your letter to Ken states th.t the tra Ie related objeCtion is not applcable to the project. Is this because of. potential reduction in trips ~ As a note. it Ioob lke the mbles lire missing 3.75 acres in the Residential Urban I Residential ME dium categories in the calculations. I took the acre. amounts from the previous~ 5ubrninell proposed paclœge 1hIIt we ORC'd. (Mark Mathes] We do not beleve they apply fc r a couple of reasons, First. the objection is noting that the analysis did not use worst case dev.lo )ment scenario when in feet we did. SeCOnd, the change in /and use does indeed result in a red. ced potenliellraffic impact, If we failed to consider II 5mB" acreage of RUIRM land, this would not cl enge the resulting conclusion. 2) Water & Wastewater Capøcity . how do the I JbIe$ address not only the current existing & proposed (with this amendment) demøncs, but ( !her projeds using these f8cilities ~.e. other proposed amendments). It appe.ra that these abies .ddress only the impects Home Dynamics wiff hIVe on the facility. See ~ 2 of our ORC UOI ler Recommendations. (Marie Mathes) The table contains an analysis 0 'not only the current existing & proposed (with this amendment) demand, Th. capacity letter from the utility provider addresses other projects using these facilties. THere are no other amendmen' s in this cycle proposing to use these direct facilities. 3) Water & Wastewøler Treatment pa.nrs - the ! UrmI8lJ IsIl 2000 ERe.. conmttted to wøtw & 1200 ERC's committed to wøstew.ter. Does th s include.. existing, proposed amendment & other proposed amendments? S.. PIIg8 2 of our OR :: under Recommendations. (Mark Mathes] As the letter indicet.., the Utility considers both existing demand and future demand based upon reserved capaåty. As this letter is Irovided directly by the utility provider, its representations are indeed vald. Unfortunately we are not able to direct the provider as to the specific format of their response. I trust, the lett tr in its current format is acceptable. 4) Our ORC al80 suggested including Ih. consu l1ptiv. U8e permit ltMua. I didn't 88e that in this faxed pøckllgll, perhaps that could be included, lith your next aubmi1lal. (Mark Mathes) We have ~t commenced permit! n9 on the noted project to date. 5) The letter from the Ft. Pierce Ulilty AuIhoftty oob ok, bull would suggest that a table or other type of analysis better show wh8t the w.ter & VI astawater Trelltm_t Plan summary is hying to explain (my Ø3 above) to d.monltrBte "at this. liter is vlllld. (Mark Mathes] As the letter indicates. the Utility ~nsiders both existing demand and future demand based upon reserved capaàty. As this letter is J rovided directly bv the utifity provider. its representations are Indeed valid. Unfortunately, we are not able to direct th. provider as 10 the specific format of their response. I trust. the left. f in its current format is acceptable. I hope this Is the kind of feedb8ck you we,. look ng for. Feel free to write back or ca. (we know how ther. been going II) .. your convMience. Please note: Floñda hIlS III very broad pubic rec )Ids law. MosI wriU_ COI"Im1IØIications to or from It&te otnci.ls regaRlng ..... businfts .. pubic records awailøbfe to the pubic IIInd media upon request. Your e-mail communications may be St bject to public disclosure. 101Il2OO4 16/88/2004 08:34 77222313226 LUCI DOANDASSOCI ATES PAGE 05 \w'.., ~ ~~'} V~V' V '0_..- ,.." ~Ilv .' Lucido'" Associatcs r~nd Plannin:¡¡/L!,lIdscapc: An:hi1tOurc , , July '}.7, 2004 Ken Metcalf Community Planning, Depattment of Co~munjty Affairs 2555 ShumArd Oak Blvd. TaHahasSeé, FL32399-2100 . . RE: Home Dynamics - Requell tor Revie" ofRespoase to ORC,Report for Futlre Land Ule Amead..eaC (l)CAN04-81¡ SLCI¥ 003- )OS; LA II J413>. Dèar Mr. MetcaJf: , . Thank you for tile OppoÌ1unity to discuss with ye II the ORC rePort on the noted project. Based upon our conversation. please accept this correSpondence IS our request for an informal re\liewof our proposed' response to the DCA objections. The IttIctied Slpport materia!, we belicv~. fully addresses the objection related tó the need for an analysis of water and $Iwer capacity. Per OUf phone cOhvcrsation. the' traffic , . ~Ia~cd objection was not applicable to our projCt I. Nevertheless, _e have included a summary traffic .' , analysis that clearly demonstrates that the propo~ :d land Use will have less traffic Ünpaet than the cUlTent : 'and, use. ' Given that dIe clUTcntSLC Comprehcl si\'e Plan is internally con,sistcnt as roquircd bÿ statute" ' our fiodiná that the proposed land use will have, reduced.traffic impact,demonstrates that nosbort term ' 'or lonl tam impacts wifl occur O\'cr what' has air :aðy been accolMlodat~ wítñin the SLC ' " ' Comprehensivc PI~. . piease provide a responsc as to your informal rev cw as to whether the attached ".later-ials fully address the DCA objections. .' , " . . , , ' .'. . . , Th~~ you in advance for your timely'response. J f you have any queSti~ns or çommcnts, pl~ COIJ~ me directly. '.' " : Sincerely, '\Iv.~,- ~ark D. Mathes, AJCP PlanDing Director ENCL. , , cc: Alejandro De Ifano (J set via Rgular mãiJ) , Noreen Dreyer (1 set via regular mail) . \I 701 Ea~ Oce:ln ~o\llcYllrd StuSH. PI[I¡id:a ,H994 .772 I :l10.21,OO Pn.. 772 I 2'-3;021.0 18/8S/2ÐÐ4 08:34 772223£1228 LUCIDOANDAbSOCIA1~S PAGE i:Jb '-" ~ RE: ' H.ome Dy...mics - RequClt for FUlta re Land l1,t 4....endmc:.n (DCA#04-01.SLC# 003-005; LA If 1413) . Trame Impact 8mtemerat ·Atraffic analysis' con~sting the .rip gcneratio I pott;ntial·o{tbe proposed Ia.nd use versus the existing land use demonstrates a potential ~duction in t )e trjps thai could be generiled from tbe site. The anaJysis was provided for Ð worst-case development see lI.rio. The max.imum residential density was utjJizéd for .the proposed land use categories, and the maxil1um non-residential intensity, based upon the maximum allowable building coverage, was used for the t wring land uses. Contrary tQ the Lucie Rocks, LLC (003-006) amcndmen. application, the propo5e( land use for this projec;t does not aUow for mixed-use development. Consequently, the analysis prey¡. .usly pr~)Vidcdis accurate, A summary of ou'r analysis i's provided below. " . ',',' . . Trip generation rates are obtained trom the Insti ute ofTraospoJ1ation Engineer's Trip Generation, 61t1 Edition,. aSSUmes i land Use of 2 t 0 - Single-F~Hy Detached Housing for the proposed fUture land uSe. '. Trip generation fJtes for the existing futun: land use assume I Jand use of 120 ':"' Shoppin¡ Center. . The independent variable; I.OOOgsf, is uSed for the c; :isti". Jand uSe based UpoD the maxirnum building coverage allowed code (50'/0). ." AS requited by the ORC rcP9Ì1, the max.imum d, nsity or intensity allowed bý code is used to determine the maximum developll)tl1t for eacb fu~ land 11S~8a:ca8e. The co~crcial zoning districts that impletDent the Commercial future land use aUo\\ for 50% building cover. and up to three floors. Given, the acreag~, the resulting rnax.imum allòwable de vclopment is 2.025 million square feet. Due to tlie extreme unlikely nature of this sceoari~, a "Like! f~' scenario is also presented below based upot) the typical suburban yield of approKfmatcly J O,OOOsJ of development per acre of land. TIle estimate trip generation of theâbovc dcvelOJHD!Dt scenarios fi lIows. . , " " , Table 1: Trip Distribatioa Fþtwre Laad Use Notes 2.025 rnsf . , 205 .131 _. . , :The following trip generatjon CquatiQl)sfrom the I Œ Manual were ~j)jzed. - ITE Land Use 210 - Sin'de.Family Dc1achcdV 'eékdayTrips: LN(T)... O.920LN(~) + 2.7Ó7 ITE Lånd Use 820 -ShoDj)inl! Center: W~CkØay Trips: ~(T);: O.643LN(X) + 5.866 _ .. , ." IB/BB/2ØØ4 08:34 ï72223EJ22¡;J LUCIDOANDASSDCIATES PAGE ß7 ..... .-.-- .....,¡ , RE: HOlDe J)"namj~ - Reque!tt fol' "~ahl re Luð Usc Amendment (DCA#04-01; SLCN 003-00$. LA '# J41.3) 1"raflic Impact Statement - continued , Table 2: TJ:affic Impact Putan Land Use frip Gel eratiun Notes. Will be used 15 buffer 14 III Ii B.d upon ,the trip ~ncration, the worst-case d :veJopment allowances uftbe pro~se4 future land use would result i'n a substantial reduction isshon te 10 andlona term jmp~t to the area's roadways compared to the worSt-case development that co lid oècur under the existiñg tùhlre land designations. E\1en more, based upon the worst·case devcJóplt cnt allowa.nces of the proposed future land use, the . rcsulting,bip genoution would be substantially I :55 than even a ~ore modest deveJopment scenario under the existina fUhJre land use desianations. Con~ ¡ucndy, thc propoŠcd.request for a Janet use arnen~men' would result in less demand for road capacity th. n the cWTCRtlyapproved SLCComprehensive PJan . ' rransportation Elcment is' based upon and less n: ad caPacity than the CUrrently approved pJans of the SLC MPOorFpOT.· , '. 0, S~cc the SLC Comprehensi\'C PI8I\ has been feu ld to be c~sjstent internally consistentby DCA, the ro~d network i$ adequate to meot the level of seJ'1 ice standards of the cumnt future land use categories ' both in thc short tenn as well as the lona term. A» the proposed request rcØuces the demand for road ' èapacity, the SLC Comprehensive 'PJ811 will reme n internally consistent withtbc proposed future laud use ·categorics. A specific analysis of the trip generat on of the propošcd fbture land üse, assignrnent of trips ' " to the network, a dcrtennination of specific ConeUI rency evalUation' will be provided along with the . . . application for development apProval. COIJCWl'C[ cy measures within,thc SLC Compn::hcnsive Plan and' . . Lan4 ~velopmcnt Regu1itions wiUensuré tIt.t a lequate capacity existS tosct'Vice this project ~t the time . . of dcvclopmeñt .- lB/88/2004 08:34 7722230226 Eapøeen 0 Plauners 0 SUrveyors LUC I DOAt~DASSOC I A TES PAGE 09 ....,¡J Sun-Tech Engineering, Inc. 1600 West o.aJd~tld Pllrk Bm)levard Fort Laudemale, Fl. 333 I, (954) 777·JJ23/Fax (95") 777-JlJ,4 E-IMiI: sunttc¡"Ontnttcheng.con, Water and Wastewater Capacity The water and wastewater service for t lis project is provided by the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority. A letter stating the availabilit) of water and wastewater service is atlachect The fol/owing is an analysis of the wate . and wastewater flows for the property with its existing future land use designation. Th s is an estimate based on assumptions of the possible development of the site with cc mmercia' use. The assumption for development is a shopping center with two 15o.seat r ~staurants, two seMce stations, 100,000 square feet of office space and 500,000 square feet of rerail space. Use Area Office Space 100,000 sf Retail Space 500,000 sf Restaurants 300 seats Service Stations 4 restrooms Rate Gallons per ERCs day ) GPD/100 sf 10,000 33.33 GPD/100 sf 25,000 83.33 o GPD/seat 9,000 30 GPD/restroom 1,000 3.33 Totals 45.000 150 1 ~ r .; 250 The following is an analysis or the water 2 nd wastewater flows for the property with the proposed future land use designation. Thi J is based on devel0J>ment of the site for residential use. The development assump ion is for 200 townhomes and 147 single- family homes. Use Area Townhomes 200 units 21, Single Family 147 units 301 Gallons per " Rate day ERCs I GPD/unit 42,000 140 I GPD/unit 44,100 147 Totals 86,100 287 18/88/2004 08:34 7722230220 LUCIDOANUAb~U~l~I~~ r~ .&.u '- ..."J Sun-Tech Engineering, Inc. 1600 Wc:~t Oakland PArk BL)ulcvélrd Fore laudcrd.1Ie, FL 33311 (954) 777·312,) I Fax (954) 777-3] 14 E-mail: 1II....tech@:¡unttchen([.com Engineen 0 PJanners 0 Survcyon Water and Wastewater Treatmen t prants Based on information obtained from th ~ Fort Pierce Utilities Authority, the permitted capacity of the water treatment plant i~ 14.6 mgd and the wastewater treatment plant is 10 mgd. The average daily flow of the Nater treatment plant is approximately 9 mgcf. The average daily flow of the wastewater tr !atment plant is approximately 6 mgd, The Fort Pierce Utilities Authority reports outsta ¡ding water treatment plant commitments at approximately 2000 ERCs and the out ;tanding wastewater treatment plant commitments at approximately 1200 ERCs. LU: I DUAr..¡OA~~LJI,.;! A I t.~ 18/88/2004 0S:34 772223Ð220 tORT FL..~CE UT.~ flES AtJTHORITY . "Committed 10 Quality~ r.....yL ...... '''w/JI 113 N. Second Street (34950) Post OffICe Box 3191 fort PIerce. Florida 34948-3191 Phone 772-466-1600 Fax 772·489-0396 Via: Fax 954-777.3114 June 16, 2004 [A~~{Q) Stephanie A. Groves, P.E. Project Manager Sun-Tech Engineering, Inc. 1600 West Oakland Park Blvd. Fort Lauderdale, FL 33311 Re; Water and Wastewater Avo tiJability for Frontera SW corner of South 25th S' :reet and Edwards Road Dear Ms. Groves: As requested, the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority would like to confirm the availability of water and waste", ater service for the above referenced location. Availability is, howeve', contingent upon construction of the required infrastructure. payment (f the applicable fees and charges. and completion of a City of Fòrt Pierce. \nnexation Agreement. We trust this letter provides you the information necessary to move forward with your project Should you need additional information relating to water or wastewater service, please conh Ict this office at extension 3423. Sincerely, . ~ !/Åkð(Î4rJ~ David A. Mellert Environmental Engineer DAM/fkm L'\Catx~t"04 "111' r...... ....F__~,IIC ~ STATE OF flORIDA OF COMMUNITY .....,J DEPARTMENT "Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call home" AFFAIRS JEB BUSH Govcrnor J line 28, 2004 /1 f . ~~. The Honorable Paula A. Lewis Chairman, St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Dear Chairman Lewis: THADDEUS l. COHEN, AlA SccrctJry txJ f.JJ.J ]))~ ArJ~r5ð7î ])al\ ~,1CUI~ ~{(4J¿1 S~V-f'Jl 5ÖY) The Department of Community Affairs has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for St. Lucie County (DCA No. 04-1), which was received on April 27, 2004. Copies of the proposed amendment have been distributed to appropriate state, regional and local agencies for their review, and their comments are enclosed. The Department has reviewed the comprehensive plan amendment for consistency with Rule 91- 5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C) and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes (F.S.) and has prepared the attached Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report which outlines our findings concerning the comprehensive plan amendment. Our concerns focus on the need for additional data and analysis to address public facility and transportation impacts, and the need for more specific intensity and mixed use standards so that the potential impacts of the land use change can be more accurately determined. For your assistance, we have attached procedures for final adoption and transmittal of the comprehensive plan amendment. If you have any questions, please call Ken Metcalf, AICP, Regional Planning Administrator, or Jamie Coker, Planner, at (850) 922-1816. Sincerely yours, C>~~ Charles Gauthier, AICP Chief of Comprehensive Plannin CG/jcs Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report Review Agency Comments cc: v'Mr. David Kelly, Planning Manager Mr. Michael Busha, Executive Director, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD· TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399·2100 Phone: 850,488,8466/Sun-::om 278.8466 FAX: 850.921.?781/Suncom 291.0781 Internet address: b...L!.J2://www.dca.state.rl.us CRITICAL ST ATE CO:-.:CERN fiElD OffICE 2i'J& O"NSt....J~ High\\'J~'. Su¡l~ 21:! f\1JrJthon. Fl 3J05O-~~17 (05) 28\)·:!..$02 CO.\\.\\UNITY PLA~N\NG 1555 Shumard OJk Boulevard TJIIJh.""", FL 32399-~100 (850) 488-235& E,\IERGENCY .\\ANAGEMENT 2555 ShumJrd Oak Boulevard T .1I.h.".<. Fl 3~)99-2100 (850) 4\ 3-9%9 HOUSING & COM.\IUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2555 Shum.rd O.k Boulev.rd TJllahassee, Fl 3239~~ 100 (8501488-795& '-" ....J TRANSMITTAL PROCEDURES Upon receipt of this letter, the St. Lucie County has 60 days in which to adopt, adopt with changes, or determine that the County will not adopt the proposed amendment. The process for adoption of local government comprehensive plan amendments is outlined in s. 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.), and Rule 9J-II.0 II, F.A.C. The County must ensure that all ordinances adopting comprehensive plan amendments are consistent with the provisions of Chapter 163 .3 I 89(2)(a), F.S. Within ten working days of the date of adoption, the County must submit the following to the Department: Three copies of the adopted comprehensive plan amendments; A I isting of additional changes not previously reviewed; A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, which were not included in the ord inance; and A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes to the Department's Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report. The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a compliance review, make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent. In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendments, and pursuant to Rule 9J-II.0 11 (5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to the Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. Please be advised that Section 163.3184(8)( c), Florida Statutes, requires the Department to provide a courtesy information statement regarding the Department's Notice of Intent to citizens who furnish their names and addresses at the local government's plan amendment transmittal (proposed) or adoption hearings. In order to provide this courtesy information statement, local governments are required by law to furnish the names and addresses of the citizens requesting this infonnation to the Department. Please provide these required names and addresses to the Department when you transmit your adopted amendment package for compliance review. In the event there are no citizens requesting this information, please inform us of this as well. For efficiency, we encourage that the information sheet be provided in electronic format. ......, ~ INTRODUCTION The following objections, recommendations and comments are based upon the Department's review ofSt. Lucie County 04-1 proposed amendment to their comprehensive plan pursuant to s. 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.). The objections relate to specific requirements of relevant portions of Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), and Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. Each objection includes a recommendation of one approach that might be taken to address the cited objection. Other approaches may be more suitable in specific situations. Some of these objections may have initially been raised by one of the other external review agencies. If there is a difference between the Department's objection and the external agency advisory objection or comment, the Department's objection would take precedence. Each of these objections must be addressed by the County and corrected when the amendment is resubmitted for our compliance review. Objections that are not addressed may result in a determination that the amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have raised an objection regarding missing data and analysis items, which the local government considers not applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a statement justifying its non-applicability pursuant to Rule 9J-5.002(2), F.A.C., must be submitted. The Department will make a determination on the non-applicability of the requirement, and if the justification is sufficient, the objection will be considered addressed. The comments that follow the objections and recommendations section are advisory in nature. Comments wi II not form bases of a determination of non-compliance. They are included to call attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive, concerning planning principles, methodology or logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar, organization, mapping, and reader comprehension. Appended to the back of the Department's report are the comment letters from the other state review agencies and other agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are advisory to the Department and may not form bases of Departmental objections unless they appear under the "Objections" heading in this report. '-' -..J DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAffiS OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY AMENDMENT 04-1 June 28, 2004 Division of Community Planning This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 9J-ll.0 1 0 ~ ....J OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS St. Lucie County PROPOSED AMENDMENT DCA #04-1 The St. Lucie County amendment 04-1 contains three Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments. The Department has identified objections regarding map amendments Home Dynamics and Lucie Rock, LLC. These objections, recommendations, and comments are intended to assist the County in fulfilling the statutory planning requirements and in ensuring its comprehensive plan will achieve the County's desired objectives. Home Dvnamics (003-005) - 35.4 acre FLUM chanee from 8.18 acres of County Commercial (COM) to County Residential Hieh (RH. 15du/ac). 22.82 acres of COM to County Residential Medium (RM. 9du/ac). 0.54 acres of County Residential Urban (RU. 5 du/ac) to RH. and 3.75 acres ofRU to RM. Lucie Rock. LLC (003-006) - 95 acre FLUM chanee from County Residential Suburban (RS. 2du/ac) to 57.83 acres of County Mixed Use - Oran2e Avenue Hi2h Intensitv (MXD-Oran2e Ave.. 5-15 du/ae) and 37.84 acres ofMXD Medium Intensitv (5-9 du/ae). ORC OBJECTIONS: 1) Impact Analvsis (Home Dvnamics. Lucie Rock) - The supporting data and analysis does not demonstrate that the amendment will be served by adequate public facilities and transportation facilities to maintain the adopted LOS standards through the five-year and long range planning periods on Interstate 95 (FIRS) and other significant roadways based upon the maximum extent of potential development allowed. The Fort Pierce Utility Authority is identified as the provider of water and sewer services to the amendment area. However, the status of applicable consumptive use pennits or plant capacity infonnation was not included in the amendment package. In considering the maximum potential of the land use category, the Department notes that the Mixed Use Development district does not contain a percentage distribution of mix for the high, medium and low intensity development areas, except for the 40% limitation on residential use. Therefore, it appears the floor area ratio (FAR) for each individual type ofland use within the high or medium intensity area could be maximized for a total FAR of 5.0 and 3.25 for all uses combined within the high and medium areas, respectively. Furthennore, the Department notes that the plan does not include a height limit. So, it is possible the maximum FAR could be achieved. For example, with the 50% lot coverage allowed, a FAR of5.0 would be accommodated with a 10-story building. ~6 ç.pH.I [Rule 9J-5.00S{2)(a), Rule 9J-5.00(l.(Ì2)(a) and (3)(b)1, Rule 9J-5.01 r Ø)(f), Rule 9J-5.019 (3)(f)(g)(h)(i) and (4)(b)2, F.A.C., and Section 163.317i(3)(a)3¡M'tè-(t5)(c) and 0)5, F.S.] 1 \w- ..J RECOMMENDATIONS: I) Impact Analysis (Home Dvnamics. Lucie Rock) - The transportation analysis should be conducted based on the maximum potential as previously described, in addition to the maximum residential density allowed. The analysis for the short and long range planning periods should include a forecast of background growth, including committed projects, and the additional density/intensity allowed by the amendments. Provide verification from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority that sufficient capacity exists to serve the site based on the maximum allowable densities and intensities for the land use category. The data and analysis should include the projected water and sewer demand for the proposed amendments, existing demand and other proposed demand. Consider, in the analysis, the status of any existing consumptive use permits issued by the water management district and whether they will need to be renewed or revised to meet projected demand. Also, indicate the proximity of the collection system and the extent to which it must be expanded to serve the site. A useful tool in preparing capacity analysis is the St. John's River Water Management District potable water worksheet, which is included in this report. For the Mixed Use Development district, as an alternative, the County could further define controlling mixed use proportionate shares for each land use type allowed and include a height limitation in the plan or other intensity standard to limit the total FAR for the land use category. The Department recommends that the County further define these standards for the Mixed Use Development land use category rather than deferring to LDR controls as the plan currently does. If the County requires additional time to correct this deficiency in the plan, specific caps could be shown as a footnote on the FLUM for this site and other amendments as an interim measure. CONSISTENCY WITH THE TREASURE COAST STRATEGIC REGIONAL POLICY PLAN The TCRPC has not identified objections based on consistency with the SRPP. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The supporting data and analysis does not demonstrate the amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan Chapter 187, Florida Statutes: Goal 7(a) Water Resources, Policy 7(b)5, Goal 15(a) Land Use, Policies 15(b)3 and 6, Goal 19( a) Transportation, Policies 19(b)3 and 13. RECOMMENDATION: Revise the amendments as previously recommended. 2 SOUTH"T'LORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT .., 3301 Gun Club Road. West Palm Beach. Florida 33406 . (561) 686-8800 . FL W ATS 1·S00-432·20~3 . TOO (361) 697·2574 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2~6S0. West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680 . www.sfwmd.go\· May 13, 2004 I 0 ~jV\ 51 i'i (òtf '- ._~:. "·-:;·_-~~-=-~-"I .:!. ,I i,7 f- :0-:-11' .."' ': .:"H'_!~ -,:~¡_ /,_1 Ï' : ,',I ! Iii ¡: ¡::I; \1Ul'A~ :'J< I ;¡í; ·r;/;,,:'._ iCJ¡ ; L, '···....-_.w J I ' . ..:-~ ~'J R?M sSP , ,. ".: '0..";'.'" ~'!~fiWCES,)!NG TE."M· '". . GOV 08-32 Ray Eubanks, Administrator Plan Review and DRI Processing Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 Dear Mr. Eubanks: Subject: Proposed Amendment Comments St. Lucie County, DCA# 04-1 South Florida Water Management District staff has reviewed the above subject document and we have determined that that all three proposed amendments (SLC File No. PA-03-005, PA-03-006, and PA03-007) lack the required potable water facility capacity analysis. The applicants need to include the required analysis to support the proposed FLUM amendments and to demonstrate that adequate water supply facilities and service will be available concurrent with the impact of development. In addition, the applicant for PA-03-005 (Home Dynamics, Inc.) needs to include correspondence from the Ft. Pierce Utility Authority verifying their ability to serve the proposed development. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Jim Golden at (561) 682-6862 or me at (561) 682-6779. Sincerely, f/efhv~ ~ - P.K. Sharma, AICP Lead Planner Water Supply Planning & Gevelopment Division PKS/jg c: Ken Metcalf, DCA Michael Busha, TCRPC David Kelly, St. Lucie County COIO£ftV/.'VG FO,-JlW E.\'£CI./TIVE OFT!l.T Nicoij< J, Cutiérr.:-z. Jr.. E'q,. CIM;' I'i,mcl,¡ Hr""ks,Thom.1S. 1'i,,·,Chlir irvì., ~1, P,"gllP Mi..:h.,,,,1 Collins HuSh 1\1, EnSlish Lcnn.1!'1 E Lind.¡hl, r,E, Ke\'in /vkC¡¡rty Harkl.:-y R Thornton Trudi K. \\ïlìiams. P,E, H¿nry Dear.. £x¡';.:tltÙ,,· rh'l~,,''''r \wf ...., FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ST ATE Glenda E. Hood Secretary of State DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES ---.- -' .-" f2 :-: \: - \ ~ \ .'.. P "', \~ i ,; \' " , ~ \ i'¡~ l:) ~~ - ~......:,::.. , ': ::.J r ~~" --..-'- -" ..- " ; ~ . . \\ \ \ ~!.IIY 2 \ 20ÙLj , . '." ~ I JI ,L~"':;"';',.~,I,:',~~,"~I~~~~; ::' L .,...." Mr. Ray Eubanks Department of Community Affairs Bureau of State Planning 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 1 D tfi1 May 17,2004 S/JI (6L( Re: Historic Preservation Review of the St. Lucie County (04-1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request Dear Mr. Eubanks: According to this agency's responsibilities under sections 163.3177 and 163.3178, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, we reviewed the above document to determine if data regarding historic resources have been given sufficient consideration in the request to amend the S1. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. We reviewed three proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Map to consider the potential effects of these actions on historic resources. While our cursory review suggests that the proposed changes may have no adverse effects on historic resources, it is the county's responsibility to ensure that the proposed revisions will not have an adverse effect on significant archaeological or historic resources in St. Lucie County. However, for Amendment PA-003-007, although this amendment area does not contain any sites listed in the Florida Master Site File or the National Register oj Historic Places, it remains the county's responsibility to ensure that potentially significant historic resources will not be adversely affected by this action. The amendment parcels appear to have ~t least moderate archaeological site probability, as significant archaeological resources were encountered on the opposite side ofTen Mile Creek. The most effective way to guarantee that such sites are not damaged is for the county to sponsor or require historic resource surveys so that it can ensure its archaeological resources and historic structures more than 50 years old will be considered when substantive changes in land use are proposed. If you have any questions regarding our comments, please feel free to contact Susan M. Harp of the Division's Compliance Review staffåt (850) 245-6333. Sincerely, ~¡¿- /~)~ 1t Frederick Gaske, Acting Director 500 S. Bronough Street . Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 · http://www.flheritage.com o Director's Office (850) 2-i5·63CO . FAX: 2-i5-6·ß5 o Archaeological Research (850) 2-i5-64-i4 . FAX: 2-i5·6436 B1iistoric Preservation (850) 245-6333 . FAX: 245-6437 o Historical Museums (850) 245-6400 . FAX: 245-6433 o Palm Beach Regional Office (561) 2ï9-H75 . FA..\: 2ï9·H7ó o St. Augustine Regional Office 0 Tampa Regional Office (904) 825-5~5 . FAX: 825-504-1 (813) 272-38-13· FAX: 272·23-10 MAY-28-2004 15:51 P.07 '-' f. i ;'" " ....,." . .. ..' . (~: j) \~ , ; ~ '~f . 4 :j. ',,~ .. . .: , .:::!"j:I:-:." ,~. ;', ¡. . '". ;""1 ST. LUCIE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION 2300 Virginia Avenue Telephone: 772-462-1593 Fort Pierce. FL 34982-5652 Facsimile: 772-462-2549 TO: Terry Hess Deputy Director Treasure Coast Regional Plan.ning Council Marc:eia Lathou01ì~ MPO Planner FROM: DATE: May 24, 2004 IŒ: St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Draft Amendments - DCA Reference No. 04-1 MPO staff has reviewed the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Amendments for SLC File No. P A- 03-006 (Lucie Rock, LLC), SLC File No. P A-03-007 (BlK, Inc.) and SLC File No. P A-03-00S (Home Dynamics Inc.). MPO staff notes that none of the above-referenced projects caJI for construction of major, public roadways or new lanes on existing roady.'aYs and are found to be consistent with the MFO's adopted 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan. Thank you for the opportunity to review these plan amendments. If you have 3ny questions, ph~ase do not hesitate to contact me at (772) 462.1593. cc: Lois Bush, FDOT District 4 Randy Stevenson, Interim Growth Management Director, SLC " Transportation Planning for Ft Pierce, Port St. Lucie, 51. Lucie Village and St. Lucie County ........ .....,J Jf.ßßUSH GO\'ERI"OR Florida Department of Transportation DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT 3400 \Vest Commercial Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309-3421 Telephone: (954) 777·4411 Fax: (954) 777-4197 Internet Email: £errv.oreillv(@.dot.state,tl.lIs' Toll Free: 1·866·336·8435 JOSE ABREU SECRETARY May 14, 2004 Mr. Ray Eubanks, Community Program Administrator Plan Review and DR! Processing Team Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 \ tJ X-- fI\A 0\;7'\ \ :'/\ Y 2.4 2004 I I I, :" :,.,' .:~':;-"'·'_""'h L.. -<::~',:",:.~:::J.,;s~fL§E~t~_,.__" Dear Mr. Eubanks: SUBJECT: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments ORC Review Local Government: St. Lucie County DCA Amendment # 04-1 The Department has reviewed the proposed comprehensive plan amendments for 81. Lucie County. Enclosed are objections, recommendations, and comments. Based on this review, the Department recommends that a formal review of these proposed amendments occur. . Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the review process. If you have any comments or questions about this letter, please contact me at (954) 777-4490. Sincerely, Áy~~~ Gerry O'Reilly, P.E. Director of Transportation Development District Four oo:TS " Enclosures cc: B. R011Ùg, FDOT Central Office K. Metcalf, DCA N. Ziegler, FDOT 4 L. Hymowitz, FDOT 4 T. Schec1..."....itz, FDOT 4 Fik 4270.05 www.dotstatefl.us o R=C'I'CLËO ::':)E" '-' ....,J DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMlVIENTS RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU: Planning Department NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT: St. Lucie County DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 4/28/04 DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA: 5/04/04 REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS: 5/30/04 ELEMENT: BJK Ine (P A-03-007) Future Land Use Element DCA Amendment # 04-1 RULE DEFICIENCY: 9J-5.005(2)(a) 9J-5.019(4)(c)13 The proposed Future Land Use Map amendment would change the land use designation of a 49-acre parcel from Residential Suburban (2 dwelling units per acre) to Residential Urban (5 dwelling units per acre). This site is located adjacent to SR 70/0keechobee Road, which is a Florida Intrastate Highway System (FillS) facility and is part of a 366-acre development of 800 residential units and limited commercial uses, CONCERN: The County did not identify how it will alleviate transportation impacts of the increased traffic due to this land use change along SR 70/0keechobee Road between SR 713/Kings Highway and 1-95. DISCUSSION: The transportation planning process is an iterative cycle that relies on local' governments to identify projected impacts to roadways based on proposed land use changes to the Future Land Use Map. A function of the comprehensive planning process is to identify projected demand for services in order to ensure these services would be available prior to the impacts of development on public facilities. The support documents indicate that impacts to SR 70/0keechobee Road between the Turnpike and 1- 95 will be addressed when a formal development application is submitted. Therefore, the County should identify policies and strategies that would mitigate impending transportation impacts within this urbanizing area. These policies should include strategies and design criteria to ensure that, in the short- and long-term planning horizons, mobility along SR 70/0keechobee Road will be sufficient to serve this and future development. For example, policies should be provided to implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to serve the proposed residential units, which the support documents indicate, are in proximity to employment centers. TDM includes such strategies that can be most effective, and achieve noticeable results if implementation is phased with the proposed developments, such as Park & Ride facilities, car and van pools, and transit. (Continued) 1 '-" ...,J DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COl\tIMENTS RESPONSIBLE DIVISION/BUREAU: NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT: DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA: REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COM:MENTS: Planning Department St. Lucie County 4/28/04 5/04/04 5/30/04 ELEMENT: BJK Inc (PA-03-007) Future Land Use Element DCA Amendment # 04-1 RULE DEFICIENCY: 9J-5.005(2)(a) 9J-5.019( 4)( c) 13 DISCUSSION Continued: The Department, the St. Lucie County MPO 'and the Martin County MPO are training Workforce Development staff in the function of Employee Transportation Coordinators (ETC). The ETC works with employers to address workforce transportation needs. The County should coordinate with Ms. Marceia Lathou, St. Lucie MPO Planner, at (772) 462-1671 to identify areas for collaborative efforts with the ETC. ' Additionally, the County should include policies to ensure proposed developments will provide interconnectivity, transit infrastructure, internal paths, external connectivity including parking facilitie's proximity of complimentary uses, and provide a "sense of place" that is relative to the regional/local perspective of proposed land uses. RECOMMENDATION: The County should provide policies, strategies, and design criteria to ensure that along SR 70/0keechobee Road, a Florida Intrastate Highway System (FillS) facility, mobility would be sufficient to serve this and future development in the short- and long-tenn planning horizons. .. REVIEWED BY: Terry Scheckwitz. AICP PHONE: 954-777-4490 REVIEWED BY: Larry Hymowitz. AICP PHONE: 954-777-4490 .REVIEWED BY: Nancy A. Ziegler PHONE: 954-777-4490 2 ~ ..J DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS RESPONSlliLE DIVISIONIBUREAU: Planning Department NAME OF LOCAL GOVERN1\.1ENT: St. Lucie County DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 4/28/04 DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA: 5/04/04 REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS: 5/30/04 ELEMENT: Lucie Rock, LLC (P A-03-006) Future Land Use Element DCA Amendment # 04-1 RULE DEFICIENCY: 9J-5.005(2)(a) and (c) 9J-5.005(4) 9J-5.019(3)(t) The proposed Future Land Use Map amendment would change the land use designation of a 94-acre parcel from Residential Suburban (2) to MXD-Orange Avenue that is currently vacant and located on the southwest side of! 95. The Mixed Use Development (MXD) designation is specific to I 95 interchange areas. CONCERN: The County did not provide traffic data and analysis to address impacts to regional roadway network, including I 95, in the short- and long-term planning horizons. DISCUSSION: Each local government comprehensive plan shall include at least two planning period, usually a 5-year and a 10-year (consistent with the MFO's Long Range Transportation Plan) planning timeframe. Therefore, the data and analysis provided in support of the proposed amendment should be revised to include level of service impacts the proposed land use would have in the short- and long-range planning horizons. RECOMMENDATION: The County should provide transportation data and analysis to identify impacts to the regional roadway network, including I 95, in the short- and long-term planning horizons. \ REVIEWED BY: Teny Sched.."witz. AICP PHONE: 954-777-4490 REVIE\VED BY: Lany Hymowitz. AICP PHONE: 954-777 -4490 REVIEWED BY: Nancy A. Ziegler PHONE: 954-777-4490 ... J ~~/." .,.,,,'" .a¡ ..,.~ '~"u.d. ¡V~~;Y., -, ;~~~~~\, _O~7:?7;"'5: ".. <$"'~"~ .,.~" ? (iX;?',~.,... ',=:îst?'\1'> , , ":-, .::,.' .' ~ . -' ~ :.,. -' ',: FLOR A,,·';;,;..'·,··',,' ,: ''.. .,.... "-"; .~'. .." .j -,,'.' "..,.",~,;V:'\:,',.~·, .', I <:,.:, . ' ~~~ '-" Department of Environmental Protection ...J Jeb Bush Governor Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399·3000 Colleen M. Castille Secretary June 3, 2004 Mr. D. Ray Eubanks Bureau of Local Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 tD ~;Vì ~ \ cq [)~ Re: Proposed Amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, DCA 04-1 Dear Mr. Eubanks: The Office ofIntergovemmental Programs of the Department of Environmental Protection has reviewed the above-referenced amendment under the required provisions of Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 9J-5 and 9J-ll, Florida Administrative Code. Our comments and recommendations are provided to assist your agency in developing the state's response. Comments: File Number PA-03-005, Home Dynamics, Inc.: 1. Although the applicant indicates that there is sufficient sanitary waste treatment capacity available in the Ft. Pierce wastewater treatment plant, the reviewer could not find a letter from the utility confirming available capacity. In view of the fact that the area is experiencing rapid growth and demand on existing wastewater treatment systems, it is recommended that the City of Ft. Pierce confirm that treatment capacity is available in its facility to meet the anticipated demand of this land use amendment. 2. It is also recommended that a letter indicating that potable water will also be availaþle from the service provider. 3. Although the applicant indicatès that the wetlands on the property have been invaded with exotic plant species, it is recommended that the environmental survey being planned for the property be completed prior to adoption of the land use amendment, with a view toward restoring the on-site wetlands. File Number PA-03-006, Lucie Rock, LLC: 1. The reviewer could not find an analysis of the increased sanitary treatment demand resulting from the proposed increase in land use density. Similar concerns exist for this development as were expressed in the Home Dynan;¡.),g,S;, ~n~~cP.m.Rq~Þ~ÞAye, and although the applicant indicates Princ,d on ,"cycled pap"" ¥ 2 '..J that there is sufficient sanitary waste treatment capacity available in the Ft. Pierce wastewater treatment plant, there has been no confirmation of that fact from the City of Ft. Pierce. In view of the fact that the area is experiencing rapid growth and demand on existing wastewater treatment systems, it is recommended that the City ofFt. Pierce also confim1 that treatment capacity is available in its facility to meet the anticipated demand of this land use amendment. 2. It is recommended that an analysis of the increase in potable water demand also be perfonned for this proposed increase in land use density, with an accompanying letter from the service provider indicating that the required level of service will be met. File Number PA-03-007, BJK. Inc.: 1. Similar concems regarding potable water and wastewater concurrency exist for this project as expressed above for Lucie Rock, LLC and Home Dynamics, Inc. It is recommended that the required 9J-5 analysis be performed for increases in potable water and wastewater demand and that written confirmation be provided by the relevant utilities. 2. Because the 10 Mile Creek restoration project is an important part of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), it is recommended that any development of this property meet the Environmental Resource Permitting requirements of the South Florida Water Management District, by either minimizing or treating stormwater nmoffthat may adversely impact the 10 Mile Creek. Considerable commitment of public funds has been made to restore surface water quality in this region I, and to balance the salinity of the water column in the downstream estuary; consequently, it is imperative that the stormwater management plan for this property be consistent \vith the objectives of the CERP projects in the area. Please call me at (850) 245-2163 if you have any questions regarding this response. Sincerely, . ~~ Robert W. Hall Office of Intergovernmental Programs .. . lOver 1.2 Billion dollars is programmed for restoration in tills area. . t It. .JUI"'-G:C:-C::::~:'H::::J'+ J.D- c....J '-" "'" TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL 301 EAST OCEAN BOULEVARD SUITE 300 STUART, FLORIDA 34994 PHONE: 772-221-4060 FAX: 772-221-4067 FAX TRANSMISSION Date: /P - 2J- - 04 . Fax Number: <t~ 0 - t.f ~ ~- 3309 Number of Pages (including cover sheet): It Operator: Pen r1 1 '-I; d..-O p' 1-11\ To: Ja.vvt; €. Co~ r From: ~r('1 ¡.Je..S S r.IU.I. Project: ÒraPf- A W'\~c{vvt,~S +ù +he Sf. LUc~'e CCJlttf' PIQ.'1 bCA U· f\Jð. 04-1 Com ments: " ,JUN-¿¿-Z004 15: 24 P.02 '-" ...J TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL MEMORANDUM To: Council Members AGENDA ITEM 6F From: Staff Date: June 18, 2004 Council Meeting Subject: Local Govemmcnt Comprehensive Plan Review Draft Amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan DCA Reference No. 04-1 Introduction Thc Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, requires that Council review local government comprehensive plan amendments prior to thcir adoption. Under the provisions of this law, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) prepares an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report on a proposed amendment only if requested to do so by the local government, the regional planning council, an affected person or if an ORC Repl)rt is otherwise deemed necessary by the DCA. If th~ local government requests the DCA to prepare an ORC Report, then Council must provide the DCA with its own objections, recommendations for modification, and comments on the proposed amendment within 30 days of its receipt. Back~round St. Lucie County is proposing three Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments to the County comprehensive.plan. The County has requested that the DCA undertake a formal review of the amendments. Evaluation Future Land Use Map Amendments The proposed FUJM amendments are summarized in Table 1, and the locations are shown on the attached maps. JUN-¿¿-¿004 Ib:¿4 P.03 '-' ..J Table 1 Proposed Amendments to the Future I.and Use Map St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan DCA Reference No. 04-1 Amendment Approx. Current Proposed Approximate Location NumberlName Acreage FLUM FLUM Desi~nation Desie:nntion No. L 94.3 RS MXD- on Rock Rd., approx. 0.5 mi1e north of Lucie Rock, LLC Orange Ave Orange A VC., on southwest side of 1- (P A-03-006) 95 No.2 48.7 RS RU on south side of Okeecbobee Rd.) BJK Inc. approx. 0.5 mile west of the Florida (PA-03-007) Turnpike No.3 34.5 COM RH on the southwest corner of Edwards Home Dynamics RU Rd. and South 251h St. Corporation (PA~03-005) Total 177.5 Lef?:end to FLUM Designations COM MXD-Orange Ave. RS RU RH Commercial Mixed Use Orange Avenuc/I-95 Activity Mea Residential Suburban - maximum 2 dwelling units per acre Residential Urban - maximum 5 dwelling units per acre Residential, High - maximum 15 dwelling units per acre 1. Lucie Rock, LLC (PA-03-006)- This 94.3-acre parcel is located on Rock Road approximately 0.5 mile north of Orange Avenue 011 the southwestern side ofl-95. The property currently contains a citrus grove, lake, and vacant land. Most of the native vegetation has been clearcd. The proposal is to change the PLUM designation from Residential Suburban to Mixed Use Orange AvenuelI-95 Activity Area, which would allow industrial use$ on the site. The surrounding FLlRy1 designations include Public Facilities to the south; Residential Suburban to' the north, east, and west; and Mixed Use District to the south. The St. Lucie County Correctional Facility is located directly south of the subject amendment on the south side of the adjacent North St. Lucie Water Management District Canal. Vacant land and a citrus grovc management office are located to the east, active rniI1ing activities and vacant lands are to the west, and 1-95 is adjacent to the north boundary of the subject parcel. JUN-¿¿-¿0~4 Ib:¿~ t-'.k4 '-' ...., The County staff report indicated that the proposed amendment would increase intensities and industrial uses near 1·95 without adversely affecting future residential are~s ro the west. 2. BJK Inc. (PA·03-007) - This 48.7-acre parcel is located on the south side of Okeechobee Road approximately 0.5 mile west of the Florida Tumpike. The amendment is part of a 366-acre parcel plarmed for development LInder the County Planned Unit Development (PUD) program. The site contains land that was recently cleared of an abandoned citrus grove. The proposal is to change the FLUM designation from Residential (2 dwelling units per acre) to Residential (5 dwelling units per acre). The surrounding FLUM designations include Residential Suburban (2 dweIling units per acre) to the north and west, Mixed Use-Crossroads to the ea..;t, and Residential Conservation to the south. The site is surrounded by citrus groves, vacant land, and a single family development. The South Florida Water Management District Ten Mile Creek Attenuation Area is adjacent to the south side of the subject parcel. The County staff report indicated that approval of the proposed ehaTlge to Residential Urban would increase rhe allowable number of dwelling units on the site from 97 to 244. The change would also allow for the possibility of limited commercial and insritutional uses. 3. Home Dynamics Corporation (PA-03-00S) - This 35.4-acre parcel is located on the southwest comer of South 25th Street aTld Edwards Road. The property was cleared previously and is now dominated by Brazilian pepper, an invasive exotic species. The proposal is to change the FLUM designation from Commercial and Residential Urban (5 dwelling units per acre) to Residential High (15 dwelling units per acre). The surrounding FLUM de~ignations include Commercial to the north and Residential Urban (5 dwelling units per acre) to the east, west, and south of the subject parcel. A convenience store, commercial office, and single family homes are locatcd to the east of the parcel acroSs South 25111 Street. Single-family homes are located to the west, and the Forest Grove Middle School is located to the south. A small shopping plaza and vacant land are located north of the parcel on the north side of Edwards Road. The County staff report indicates that given the requirements of the County's Land Development Code, it may not be possible to achieve the maximum density of IS dwelling units per acre .pn this parcel. The Local Planning Agency recommended denial of the petition. On April 13, 2004, the County received a request from the applicant's representativc requesting a revision to the application. The proposed revision seeks to provide three diftèrent FLUM designations (Residential Urban, Residential Medi um, and Residential High) rather than one Residential High designation. This proposal would result in reducing the overall density on the proposed amendment site from 530 dwelling units to 361 dwelling units. The County .JUN-22-2004 16:25 P.05 ~ ...." staff indicated that the three separate FLUM designations on one 34.5·acre parcel would not represent good planning practices and would not be binding on a future pun. Extraiurisdictional Impacts Letters were sent to the following local governments or organizations seeking comments on the effects of the proposed amendments on plans, policies, and activities, especially areas of potential conflict: S1. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), St. Lucie County School District, and the City of Fort Pierce. As of the date of the conlpletion of this report, Council had received onc comment memorandum from the St. Lucie MPO. The memorandum indicated that the proposed amendments are considered consistent with the MPO's adopted 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan. No detrimental extrajurisdictional impacts were identified during tbe review of these amendments. Effects on Si£T1ificant Regional Resources or Facilities Analysis of the proposed amendmcnts indicates that they would not have adverse effects on significant regional resources or facilities. However, as the a.ttached letter from the South Florida Water Management District indicates, required potable water facility capacity analysis has not been provided for any of the amendments. Obiections, Recommendations for Modification, and Comments A. Objections 1. None B. Comments 1. The 48.7-acre BJK Inc. property is part of a 366-acre parcel that is being planned for a PUD. The PUD is planned to include approximately 800 dwelling units consisting of single-family and multifamily units, limited commercial, and recreational uses. According to information provided by the County, the proposed change in the future land use designation for the subject parcel would authorize a higher residential density than can be developed on the site. Therefore, tbe County should consider whether more than one FLUM designation would be appropriate for this site. 2. The BJK Inc. property is located adjacent to the South Florida Watcr Management District Ten. Mile Creek Attenuation Area. The developer and County should coordinate with the District to ensure that an adequate buffer is created adjacent to Ten Mile Creek to protect it from impacts related to tbe development. " , JUN-22-20Ø4 16: 26 P.06 ~ ...¡ 3. As noted by the South Florida Water Management District, the County should provide a potable water facility capacity analysis and demonstrate sufficient capacity exists to service the proposed fllture development. Recommendation Council should adopt the above comments and approve their transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. Attachments " TOTAL P.06 ~ To: Submitted By: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: RECOMMENDATION: COMMISSION ACTION: C!J APPROVED CJ OTHER ....I Agenda Request s--.;-¡ April 20, 2004 Item Number Date: Consent Regular Public Hearing Leg. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] Quasi-JD [ X ] Board of County Commissioners Community Development Consider the application of Home Dynamics Corporation· requesting a Change in Future Land Use Classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac) for 34.5 acres located on the southwest corner of Edwards Road and South 25th Street. The majority of the 35.4 acre amendment site has a COM (Commercial) Future Land Use classification allowing general commercial uses only; the remaining 3.2 acres of the site has a RU classification allowing residential uses up to 5 dwelling units per acre and limited commercial uses. Approval of the proposed change to RH (Residential, High) would allow up to 15 dwelling units per acre or 531 total dwelling units and limited neighborhood commercial, office and institutional uses. At the request of the Local Planning Agency, the applicant provided a draft concept plan that in staff's opinion did not provide for the superior quality anticipated by the Planned Unit Development process. The proposed future land use amendment is a preliminary development order and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property but allows the developer to seek development of the property for multiple-family uses. N/A At the February 19, 2003 public hearing on this matter, the Local Planning Agency, by a vote of 7 to 1 continued the public hearing to March 18, 2004. On March 18, 2004, the Local Planning Agency unanimously recommended denial of the petition. Approve transmittal of the Home Dynamics Corporation petition for a Change in Future Land Use classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter 163, Florida Statues. D DENIED Approved 4-0 (Commissioner Coward Absent) Motion to trans.mit fi RH d RM on the rest of the slle. petitioners request of300 oot an ~unty Attorney Originating Dept.: Finance: Douglas M. Anderson County Administrator ('!c) i.~;" ;~rf.rdinationl Signatures , (:' . J~gt. & Budget: ...-1E :¿ \( Other; \M Lh-"'.;. Purchasing: Other: ?' '-' ..." BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA REGULAR MEETING Date: April 20,2004 Tape: 1-3 Convened: 6:00 p.m. Adjourned: 9:45 p.m. Commissioners Present: Chairperson, Paula A. Lewis, John D. Bruhn, Frannie Hutchinson, Cliff Barnes, Doug Coward (absent) Others Present: Doug Anderson, County Administrator, Ray Wazny, Asst. County Administrator, Dan McIntyre, County Attorney, Dennis Murphy, Community Development Director, Millie Delgado-Feliciano, Deputy Clerk 1. MINUTES (1-024) It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve the minutes of the meeting held April 13, 2004; and upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. 2. PROCLAMA TIONS/PRESENT A TIONS A. Resolution No. 04-120- Congratulating Nora Porter on winning the St. Lucie County Scripps Howard Spelling Bee at the Port St. Lucie Community Center on Thursday, February 12,2004 and wishing her success in the National Competition to be held in Washington D.C. in May, 2004. It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Barnes, to approve Resolution No. 04- 120; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. B. A presentation was made by Ken Gioeli, Natural Resources Agent UF/St. Lucie County Cooperative Extension Office, congratulating the winners of the Natural Resources Photo Contest. C. Maxine Green and her group, "Granny's Gang" made a brief presentation of their concerns. Various members of Granny's Gang addressed the Board requesting they consider constructing sidewalks in the Angle Road area close to the schools. They also expressed their concerns with the crime in the city of Ft. Pierce (Lincoln Park area) as well as requesting a four way stop sign in front of Westwood High School. The Board stated they would look into the matter. '-' ..., D. The County Administrator read upcoming events. 3. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Peter Polizatto, 6034 Indrio Road, addressed the Board and read the attached letter. The County Attorney addressed the County's zoning laws. Mr. Phillip Stickles, Carlton Road resident, addressed the Board regarding their decision to postpone action on the mine issue until further information could be obtained. He stated his opposition to any more mines being located in the area. 4. CONSENT AGENDA (1-874) It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve the Consent Agenda and; upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. 1. WARRANT LIST The Board approved Warrant List No. 31. 2. COUNTY ATTORNEY A. White City Drainage Project- Canal D- The Board approved the Contract for Sale and Purchase with Ms. Hancock and Ms. Robinson, approved the resolution and authorized the Chairman to execute Resolution No. 04-133 and instructed staff to record Resolution No. 04-133 in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. B. White City Drainage Project- Canal F- The Board approved the Contract for Sale and Purchase with Mr. Arline, authorized the Chairman to execute the agreement, directed staff to close the transaction and authorized the Chairman to execute Resolution No. 04-135, and instructed staff to record Resolution 04-135 in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. C. Indrio North Savannas- First Amendment to Work Authorization No. 12- Boundary Surveys and Wetland Mapping- The Board approved the First Amendment to Work Authorization No. 12, and authorized the Chairman to sign the amendment. D. Release of Lien for St. Lucie County Code Enforcement order to impose fine/lien in Case No. 99120064 dated June 7, 2000- The Board authorized the Chairman to sign the Release of Lien. '-' -...I E. Resolution No. 04-119- Commending Kevin M. Gillette of Troop 405 for achieving the Rank of Eagle Scout- The Board approved Resolution NO. 04- 119 as drafted. F. Florida Yards & Neighborhoods Program- Interlocal Agreement with Martin County, City of Stuart and the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agriculture Services, Florida Cooperative Extension Service- The Board approved the proposed Interlocal Agreement with the Florida Yards and Neighborhoods Program, and authorized the Chairman to sign the Memorandum of Understanding. 3. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Simple Success Marketing Advertising Invoices- The Board approved payment of the invoices. 4. COMMUNITY SERVICES Resolution No. 04-132- The Board adopted Resolution No. 04-132- St. Lucie County Local Housing Assistance Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2005, 2005-2006, 2006-2007, State Housing Initiative Partnership Program. 5. PUBLIC SAFETY Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity- Permission to advertise for Public Hearing- The Board approved advertising for Public Hearing for the CON We Care, Inc. for Class B to be held at 9:00 a.m. on May 11,2004. 6. UTILITIES A. Utility Consulting Services- The Board approved for Anthony L. Elia to provide Utility Consulting Services in connection with the North County Utility District in the amount of $65,000. B. Payment Request for FPUA- The Board approved the second Payment Request for FPUA in the amount of $1,320,000 for the North County District's bulk interconnection and the interfund loan from the General Fund Reserves to be repaid with interest at 2%. REGULAR AGENDA (1-114) 5. COUNTY ATTORNEY A. Draft Ordinance No. 04-007- Amending the St. Lucie County Land Development Code by amending Section 11.13.01 to Provide for Clarification of Board Enforcement Responsibilities; deleting Section 11.13.03 Enforcement Procedures; and amending Section 11.13.04 other penalties and remedies to clarify the initiation of other enforcement proceedings- Consider '-' ...; staff recommendation to approve Ordinance No. 04-007 as drafted and authorize the Chainnan to sign. It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve Ordinance No. 04-007; and, upon roll call, motion canied unanimously. B. Draft Ordinance No. 04-016 Creating Section 7.10.24 Land Development Code to Establish a Height Limitation for Outside Storage of Intennodal Containers- Consider staff recommendation to detennine whether a height limitation for the outside storage of Intennodal containers is appropriate and to adopt Ordinance No. 04-016 as drafted. Staff changed their recommendation to continue this hearing for two weeks in order to answer concerns expressed from a previous meeting. Mr. Lloyd Bell, Port property owners, addressed the Board and stated this ordinance is very broad, it does not appear to be well thought out and affects everyone in the county. He asked if these are intennodel containers, what about the aircraft containers. Does this only apply to ship containers or all intennodel transportation and what do you do about the railroad. He stated he would consider any action an act of bad faith at a time when they fully expect to bring some resolution to the desires for the utilization of the port and the mega yachts. It was his understanding that he would cooperate with the county as long as the county cooperated in good faith and he would consider this a breech of good faith. Com. Barnes stated this does not apply to the Port because it is within the city limits. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to continue this item for two weeks, May 3, 2004; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. C. GROWTH MANAGEMENT- Draft Resolution No. 04-080- Request of Robert Rigel for a Conditional Use Pennit and Major Site Plan approval to allow for the construction of 49,820 sq. ft. mini-warehouse/self-storage facility, and 3,750 sq. ft., of general office space to be known as Hutchinson Island Storage and Office Complex- Consider staff recommendation to approve Resolution No. 04-080 as drafted. Mr. Roger Bayber, CSM Engineers, representing the petitioner, was available for questions. Mr. Charles Grande, Presidents Council, Hutchinson Island, addressed the Board in favor of the project. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve Resolution No. 04- 080; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. '--' ,..." D. Draft Resolution No. 04-077- Consider staff recommendation to approve Resolution No. 04-077 approving the Petition of Travis E. Murphy, Jr., as amended for a change in zoning from CN to CO. Mr. Howard Sercy, business partner, addressed the Board regarding his petition. Ms. Christa Storey, area resident, addressed the Board and stated staff has addressed her concerns. Wanted to confirm exhibit A map will be corrected. Staff advised her that the map would be corrected. It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve Draft Resolution No. 04-077; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. E. Draft Resolution No. 04-076- Consider staff recommendation to approve Resolution No. 04-076 the request of Cheryl and Mark Griffin for a Conditional Use Permit to allow landscaping and horticultural services in the AR-l zoning district for property located at 9290 Orange Avenue. Ms. Cheryl Griffin stated she had received 2 waivers from two surrounding residents and also advised the Board that one resident decided to remain neutral. She does not wish to build a wall barrier. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to continue this hearing on May 3, 20047:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. F. Draft Resolution No. 04-082- Consider granting Final Planned Unit Development approval for the project to be known as Palm Breezes Club, Planned Unit Development and a change in zoning from the PUD zoning for property located on the north side of Orange A venue. The Planning Manager advised the Board on condition # 4, they would like to add language that would require a transit stop be included. Mr. Butch Terpening, Culpepper and Terpening, addressed the Board and stated they have reviewed the conditions with staff and they concur and also concur with the addition of the transit stop. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve Resolution No. 04-082 subject to the 5 conditions and the addition of language; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. G. Draft Resolution No. 04-079- Consider staff recommendation to approve Resolution No. 04-079 granting the petition of Patricia Griffin Lowe for a ~ ...., Conditional Use permit to allow the operation of a riding school as an accessory use to a residential unit on property located at 7001 Gullotti Place in the AR-l zoning district. Ms. Patricia Griffin Lowe, petitioner, addressed the Board this issue. Mr. Jeffrey Shoenfield, property owner within 100 feet of said parcel, expressed his concerns if there would be a commercial stable, what is the limit of horses, how big a barn etc. His concern was if this would lower the value of his property. The Planning Manager stated there were no limitations on the animals; however, a barn is not permi tted. Ms. Lowe addressed Mr. Shoenfield's questions. She stated she would not have more than her two existing animals and will not be constructing a barn and will not be boarding animals. Mr. Shoenfield withdrew his objection. Unidentified gentleman, addressed the dirt road and who will be maintaining the road if it is used for commercial purposes. Ms. Lowe addressed the egress and ingress issue. It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve staff recommendation; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. (1-2955) H. Consider the application of Home Dynamics Corporation requesting a change in Future Land Use Classification from COM to RU to RH for 34.5 acres located on the southwest comer of Edwards Road and South 25th St. The Planning Manager advised the Board of the concern regarding density expressed by the P & Z Board. The applicant came back with a proposal limiting the density and staff provided a simpler solution. Mr. Mark Mathis, representing the applicant, addressed the Board on this issue. Their goal is to develop 360 units. Mr. John Ferrick, area resident, addressed the Board with his concern of placing a residential high in this area. He does not have a problem with residential urban. Mr. Charles Grande, Hutchinson Island, stated this plan came before the P & Z Board and denial to transmit was recommended. He stated if the Board was not going to follow the recommendation of the P & Z Board that the very least, he suggested with the new plan or the ~ ....I modifications, the applicant should be sent back to the P & Z and get a new recommendation from that Board. Ms. Pamela Hammer, P & Z Board member, addressed the Board and stated a member of the School Board stated in the proposal that children would be able to walk to school, however, one of the schools would not be in their zone and requested this be taken out from the proposal. The 15 units per acre constitute 3 times the number of kids in our schools. She asked the Board to turn this down and send it back to the drawing board. Ms. Kim Hopkins Willis, resident of Edwards Road, addressed the Board and requested they not change her community. Mr. Jonathan Ferguson, attorney for petitioner, addressed the Board and stated and introduced into the record six letters that were mailed to the surrounding property owners. He advised the Board that they did not receive comments or calls from those residents. Mr. Ferguson stated the applicant is trying to provide mixed housing needs for the area. Mr. Ferguson stated they did not disagree with the Planning Manager's characterization that the 3 land use categories is overly complicated and would like to drop back down to an earlier request that the 300 feet on the east of the property as it boarders 25th St., be designated RH and the remainder of the property be designated RM. This would be 8 and % acres RH and remainder 26 + acres RM. This would be a maximum of 370 units, however, he does not believe they would complete 370 units. Ms. Rona Perry, White City, stated her opposition to the developing of this many units in one area. She would prefer ranchettes and would like for them to look at other means of development. Com. Barnes stated he felt this needed more work and would like some guarantees. He would like to see the developer approach the School Board and see if they could use more property and also would like to see if there are plans to restore the flood planes. He would like to see more though going into this development. He does understand that with it now being commercial, they could wind up with a huge shopping center with much more traffic and he would rather see residential development. Mr. Alejandro DelFino, representing the developer addressed Com. Barnes questions on the quality of the homes and stated the pricing of the homes would depend on the market. There will not be any rentals, these homes are to be purchased. Com. Hutchinson stated she met with the representative a couple of weeks ago. Her one concern is everything else being considered in that area is of less density and this would change the flavor of the neighborhood also the fact there are no red lights other than Sunrise and Oleander. She would have a better comfort level if she knew what they were going to contribute. ~ ..., Com. Barnes asked if staff had reviewed any of the previous communities built by this developer. Staff stated they had not. Mr. Ferguson stated the developer had a website the Board and staff could review. It was moved by Com. Barnes to transmit the requested 300 ft. RH and balance of 26+ acres RM; but, also along with the transmittal that staff research what this developer has done in other communities and if it not to their liking they would reserve the right to review it again and deny it; seconded by Com. Hutchinson, and; upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. (2-1119) I. (a) Consider approving the petition of Reserve Homes Ltd., through Resolution 04-081 amending the existing Development Order for the Reserve a Development of Regional Impact and; The Community Development Director reviewed the changes and amendments to the project and also their discussions with the city of Port St. Lucie regarding the "Fields of Dreams" project. A review of the request of the connecting access in the Saddlebrook Drive area was discussed and it was concluded that this access would not be paved or opened to general traffic, but would utilized for emergency access only. The second access connection, Parcel 34 (the Lakes at PGA Village) was discussed and it was the consensus that this connection would be used for an interim period of two years, acceptable for the limited use of a connection from Parcel 34 into the city of Port St. Lucie. The developer will be constructing Commerce Center Drive from the Golf Learning Center down to and across the C-24 canal connecting to Village Parkway (aka Commerce Center Drive) as it comes up from the Tradition Development. The plans are, that roadway will be built within the next two years which will then allow for the construction of a new entrance point into the PGA Village development in the city allowing for the closure of connecting point of Parcel 34 and the City of Port St. Lucie. The internal bridge will be opened to vehicular traffic. The Community Development Director read the change in language amending the Final Development Order for Parcel 34. (b) Consider approving Resolution No. 04-083 amending the Final Development order for Parcel 34 (The Lakes @ PGA Village) and; (c) Consider approving Road Impact Fee Credit Agreement 04-002 between St. Lucie County and the Reserve Homes Ltd., In consideration for the expansion of the interstate 1i-95 and St. Lucie West/Reserve Blvd., interchange and the associated improvements to \.f ..." St. Lucie West/Reserve Blvd., between Reserve Commerce Center Drive and Peacock Blvd. Com. Hutchinson requested in item (a) the habitat mitigation/preservation issue be clarified. The Community Development Director stated, by agreeing to this, it does not go anywhere near approving anything in regards to the Fields of Dreams at this time and also, our environmental staff has gone through the site with the Reserve environmental staff and they are satisfied with the level of protection. Mr. John Sapo, Coltier Company, concurred with the Community Development Director's comments. They have addressed the issues of concern, i.e. the two vehicular connections between the Reserve DRI and the PGA DR!. They have also withdrawn their request for parcel 38, which was to be 6 lots in the back section of the Reserve and have agreed not to go forward with that in the future. The Community Development Director stated that within Resolution 04-081, there will have to be some additional clean up for some of the paragraph numberings. The final will be adjusted slightly for the correct numbering of those paragraphs. Mr. Norman Oak, Kings Mill section of the PGA Village, thanked the Board for their efforts in what has been established today. He is pleased with the 2-year agreement and he asked that it be noted in the resolution that Coltier will utilize a contractor's entrance and only use the connector road when necessary. He has also requested a 4-way stop sign be placed within Champion's Way and Commerce Roads. Mr. Sapo stated the 4-way stop is something they would be willing to do if the County would approve it. The Community Development Director stated there was a 4 way stop sign sometime ago. It was removed because Commerce Center Drive is an arterial roadway and they cannot permit stop signs along an arterial roadway. He does not believe this could happen. Mr. Jim Lamar, Property Owners of the Reserve, stated they are withdrawing their objection to the connector road and parcel 38 as they have come to an agreement as previously stated. Mr. Bill Kannel, Reserve Homeowners Association, expressed his concerns with the following: he requested seeing the exact location of the recreation area and the Fire Department land. In the resolution where it mentions the 81 acres for the Field of Dreams Park, he requested the 81 acres be deeded to the county and not to the city. Mr. Kannel stated they were pleased with the 2 year agreement and asked for guarantees from the developer that they will route construction traffic around the neighborhood whenever possible. Also, in the staff memo it stated that Village Parkway will not be completed for at least 2 years. The ask it be started as soon as possible and begin the entrance into the north parcel without waiting until 2006. They would also like a guarantee that construction traffic will be '-' .., blocked from access in the old original Kings Mill neighborhood. Also a legal interpretation of paragraph B in the Champion's Way resolution and tighten this paragraph. He asked that since Parcel 38 and Saddlebrook are not on the agenda tonight and asked the Board to seal this agreement on parcel 38 by putting it into a recordable instrument for everyone's protection. He asked the minutes include the agreement between the Reserve and Coltier and perhaps the language on page 3 of the staff memo could be adopted as part of resolution 04-081. Mr. Kevin Maculiff, area resident, concurred with the comments concerning the 4 way stop requested. Ms. Pamela Hammer, resident of the Reserve, addressed the Board that thanked them for their efforts on the roads and the solutions brought forth. Ms. Hammer stated, that during the negotiations, the developer stated construction traffic would go around on Village Parkway as long as possible then they would have to stop to do some of the paving and this is understood. Also, in staff's memo it stated they would open the road once it was all done down and across the bridge. This is not correct, they were to open the Village Parkway as fast as they could get it designed and built and have the entrance into the new PGA Village South! North Parcel from Village Parkway hopefully less than two years. The construction traffic has to be prohibited from going into the "Spy Glass" neighborhood. Dreams Park is something they know is coming, and there are conditions they can live with, however, there is one they cannot. When it comes time to take that land, they insist it must come to the County Commission, they cannot afford to have this land go to the city due to their past problems. They are also asking the 8 acres of recreation be illustrated on a map. Ms. Hammer in closing commended the developer. The County Attorney addressed the questions directed and stated that regarding parcel 38 there be language placed stating that there was an application which has been withdrawn and there was a representation that it would not be re-filed. Also, on the contractor's entrance, it would seem appropriate to memorialize what the developer has agreed to in some fashion. The County Attorney suggested directing staff to place the appropriate language restricting construction traffic as indicated and incorporated in the resolution along with language concerning parcel 38 and also incorporate the suggested amendment to resolution 04-83. The Community Development Director stated there are some corrections in the packet gi ven to the BCC. The east and west notations were mixed up and part of exhibit B, should be vice versa, this will be corrected. Also it needs to be noted that there are certain improvements that are required by the city of Port St. Lucie which are beyond the impact scope of the Reserve and Reserve will eligible for up to 100% credit of these improvements. The Chairperson stated she would prefer the backup be changed to numbers as opposed to letters. '-' ~ It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve items 51 a,b,c to include the changes and amendments; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. 6. CENTRAL SERVICES (3-138) Consider staffrecommendation to approve the Selection Committee's recommendation to move forward with the designlbuild expansion of the St. Lucie County Correctional Facility by Centex- Rooney/Schenkel Shultz at a cost of $ 18,995,000. Staff recommended tabling this item until April 27, 2004 until more information is obtained. It was the consensus of the Board to re-agenda this item for April 27, 2004. 7. GROWTH MANAGEMENT (3-831) Consider staff recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize a formal public hearing to consider the revocation of a previously issued Conditional Use Permit authorizing the operation of an air curtain incinerating on property located on the south side of Orange A venue. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to authorize a public hearing be scheduled with a date to be advised; and, upon roll call, motion camed unanimously. There being no further business to be brought before the Board, the meeting was adjourned. Chairman Clerk of Circui t Court ...... To: Submitted By: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: RECOMMENDATION: COMMISSION ACTION: ~ APPROVED [==:J OTHER '.....I- Agenda Request ~ft April 20, 2004 Item Number Date: Consent Regular Public Hearing Leg. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] Quasi-JD [ X ] Board of County Commissioners Community Development Consider the application of Home Dynamics Corporation' requesting a Change in Future Land Use Classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac) for 34.5 acres located on the southwest corner of Edwards Road and South 25th Street. The majority of the 35.4 acre amendment site has a COM (Commercial) Future Land Use classification allowing general commercial uses only; the remaining 3.2 acres of the site has a RU classification allowing residential uses up to 5 dwelling units per acre and limited commercial uses. Approval of the proposed change to RH (Residential, High) would allow up to 15 dwelling units per acre or 531 total dwelling units and limited neighborhood commercial, office and institutional uses. At the request of the Local Planning Agency, the applicant provided a draft concept plan that in staff's opinion did not provide for the superior quality anticipated by the Planned Unit Development process. The proposed future land use amendment is a preliminary development order and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property but allows the developer to seek development of the property for multiple-family uses. NIA At the February 19, 2003 public hearing on this maUer, the Local Planning Agency, by a vote of 7 to 1 continued the public hearing to March 18,2004. On March 18, 2004, the local Planning Agency unanimously recommended denial of the petition. Approve transmittal of the Home Dynamics Corporation petition for a Change in Future land Use classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ae) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter 163, Florida Statues. D DENIED Approved 4-0 (Commissioner Coward Absent) Motion to trans.mit , RH d R1\! on the rest of the sIte. petitioners request of 300 .oot an ~unty Attorney Originating Dept.: Finance: URRENCE: Douglas M. Anderson County Administrator DC) i:+=.,,, ;~e9fdinationl Signatures /. J Jy1gt. & Budget: ./fE IN Other: \røA) L"',·'~. Purchasing: Other: !' ~ -..I SiJi. ~(!H!I ~ " COUNTY FLORIDA~ GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Planning MEMORANDUM TO: County Commissioners FROM: " ~\ David Kelly, Planning Manager . " l./ DATE: April 14, 2004 SUBJECT: Home Dynamics Corp.lPetition for a Change in Future Land Use On April 13, 2004, staff received the attached fax from the applicant's representative requesting a revision to the above application. The proposed revision seeks to provide three different Future Land Use designations (RU, RM, and RH), rather than one RH designation, on the subject 35-acre site. This proposal would result in reducing the overall density on the amendment site from the 530 dwelling units allowed under the RH designation to 361 dwelling units that would be allowed under the requested _ designations. Staff's report addresses the original RH (Residential, High 15 du/ac) designation. Based on our evaluation, the proposed change from COM (Commercial) to RH (Residential, High) Future Land Use a designation was determined to be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Although the requested revision would result in reducing the overall density of the site addresses some of the Local Planning Agency concerns related to the RH designation, staff would note that the three separate Future Land Use designations on one 35-acre parcel does not represent good planning practices and would not be binding on a future Planned Unit Development. If the applicant's intention is to limit the possible density to 361 units this could be accomplished with a simpler modification that allows for RM and RH Future Land Use designations. If you have any questions regarding this petition please let us know. Cc: County Administrator County Attorney File , . '" . . . ' 't . . I , 84/1312804 13:5' 772223£:1221:' LUC1UUANUAb~U~lAI~~ t-'A\.:¡~ tH '-' ~~ V~,~~ , V~V ,V . . Lucido & Allloc\att!l I;Md Plannnl/i.&n~":lpe Archirccmre "".¡ . . ~prillj, 2004 FACSIMILE: 462-1,511 (2 pages) David Kelly, PlanningMana.tr St. Lucie County PJanning Division 2300 Vir¡Jnla A YC, Fort Pierce, FL 34982 " . RE: 2SI11 StÌ'ecfand Edwards Road - Revisi, oftS to Futur. Land Vse Alllen'dlllent (LA 1IJ 1.13) '. . Dear Mr. Kelly: On behalf of Home Dynamics C~rp., I. rcprcscnbl j vel of the current property OWDel'S, we hereby request , Ílnamendmentto our 1IPP1ieatioD fOr. future land' lie .endment to diè Sl Lude Comprehc;Dsive Plan. The proposed revision Is a n=sult óf our onpina c, ormftllion with staff, the Local PllnninS A¡enc:y, and . individual C~ss~rs relative to proper IrlftSi ioaiÐland maximum density fortht propcrt)'. . Our revised request seeks to desipiatc the westerl~ 300' 15 Residenti~1 U~ (RU), the cennl4SS' as , Resi~ntiaJ Medium (RM), and the eureriy 460' a : Residential Hip (R.H). This Ul'lDlCment ¡lIowl for a transirion,&om the acljKCftt R.esidentil1 Urbln t.nl : use to our welt to the de;ired high density residential . for our ~d projed. The requested RM agd , .H portions of~e site .e eDnli~cnt with the adjacent school to the south, commercial lands to the nonh, aDd 2$* Street to the elSt. ÇiiveJ the RU clesipation of the: wesletly 300' .olthc subjeçt.site, our request is a!so eonsiSleft' with the Idjaeent IlU 1and,uses fmher west: , ' ~ mix of land ¡lIeS aUow no more ihan' 361 resi, entla1 units. Throu¡h the PUD 1;oning inrendcd for this site v;a the applic_the ,crull U'anSitioning and I ufferina can· be easily accomplisbed in respect to thc sU1JOÙnding development., .,' " . ' . In support øf our request, plcase find encloSed a tlPy of. graphic dcpiCtÍJII tbe proposed lind use request. If you have.~)lquestion' or need addltlonaJ infon nation. pleaSe reel me to contaa ìne directly. We look fbrwarclloworking with you and your !lt&ft' on thi: pr.oject. Sinc:erely, ~ Mark D. Mathes, AJCP .PlaimiDI Director 'ENCL. èc: Alejandro Delfino John Ferguson Sabine Lang-Marks " ,.-\ \I 701 ~" Ocean IIl:Iulevard . SNUI. Plorida 31J99. 772 1220-2100 . 1'u 772 1223·0%20 . . . . . '-' ...I '!J .:,: 8~'~ sll'~ '1 i~t ~ _ !J I . II ~ ~! . ... JH f I! P !: I ! I l I I )11 IJ~¡f ~If ~::! J I I I . JIU L- (SUI ~S) IØIIS ,,~ ~. : -----.-----...---...-..-------. -..---------. -..-.--- I . i ! i i ! ¡ .... J J 'III ~!I. ---_._--~ .. 1.0 0); ~ l____________ --------------- ------------------------ IIII ¡!II .. ~ ~ ----------------------- ~------------------------------ I ;III i ¡!,r, I I \-- ... o o C') --.--......--. ~ Jt~ ~t! a I JI '-' 'wi Board of County Commission: April 20, 2004 File Number PA-03-005 MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: County Commissioners FROM: Interim Community Development Director DATE: April 14, 2004 LOCATION: Application of Home Dynamics Corporation, for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac) Southwest corner of South 25th Street and Edwards Road. SUBJECT: CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac) PROPOSED ZONING: CG (Commercial, General) and RM-5 (Residential, Multiple Family - 5 du/ac) PUD (Planned Unit Development) EXISTING ZONING: PARCEL SIZE: 35.4 acres PROPOSED USE: SURROUNDING ZONING DESIGNATIONS: Residential Townhomes and Condominiums CG (Commercial, General) and RS-4 (Residential, Single Family - 4 du/ac) to the north, I (Institutional) to the south, RS-3 (Residential, Single Family - 3 du/ac) to the west and CN (Commercial, Neighborhood), CO (Commercial, Office) and RS-4 (Residential, Single Family - 4 du/ac) to the east. SURROUNDING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS: COM (Commercial) to the north and RU (Residential, Urban -5 du/ac) to the east, west and south. SURROUNDING EXISTING LAND USES: A convenience store, commercial office and single-family homes are located to the east across South 25th Street. Single-family homes are located to the west and the Forest '-' April 14, 2004 File Number: PA-03-005 .....¡ Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page 2 Grove Middle School is located to the south. A small shopping plaza and vacant commercial land is located to the north, on the north side of Edwards Road. UTILITY SERVICE: The subject property is within the service area identified within the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA) District Master Plan. Water and Sewer lines are located along South 25th Street. TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS RIGHT-Of-WAY ADEQUACY: The existing road right-of-way for South 25th Street varies from 80 t0100 feet in width. SCHEDULED IMPROVEMENTS: Add lands and reconstruct South 25th Street from the intersection of Edwards Road to Midway Road. Construction will begin in late 2004. TYPE Of CONCURRENCY DOCUMENT REQUIRED: Concurrency Deferral Affidavit. COMMENTS The applicant is requesting a change in future land use classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential, High - 15 du/ac) for a 35.4-acre site located at the southwest corner of the intersection of South 25th Street and Edwards Road. The entire site is within the Urban Service Area. The majority of the site currently has a COM Future Land Use classification allowing general commercial uses only; the remaining 3.2 acres has a RU classification allowing residential uses up to 5 dwelling units per acre and limited commercial uses. Approval of the proposed change to RH would allow up to 15 dwelling units per acre or 531 total dwelling units and limited neighborhood commercial, office and institutional uses. The stated purpose of the requested future land use classification change is to "provide for high quality residential townhomes and condominiums in close proximity to employment centers." A change in the future land use classification would allow the applicant to seek a change in zoning from the property's existing COM (Commercial) and RM-5 (Residential, Multiple-Family - 5 du/ac) zoning classification to a Planned Unit Development. On February 19, 2004, the proposed amendment was presented before the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency (LPA). At the hearing, staff presented its report supporting the Change in Future Land Use. Staff's analysis determined that densities between 9 and 15 dwelling units per acre were appropriate and could be supported at this location. Staff further commented that these densities could be difficult to achieve given all other constraints placed on properties such as this. Following a public hearing on this petition the LPA voted 7 to 1 to continue this petition to the March 18, 2004 public hearing to allow the applicant time to provide a conceptual development '-' April 14, 2004 File Number: PA-03-Q05 "WÎ Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page 3 plan for the subject lands. The Agency members asked that a plan be developed demonstrating that densities greater than 9 dwelling units per acre could be achieved. The development team presented a concept plan that placed a combination of single family and multi family product on the site at a density of approximately 10.5 per acre. The concept plan left very little room for uses other than residential units, parking and drainage. On March 18, 2004, the LPA voted j.i11.aoimnl'sty,. to forward a recommendation of denial to the Board of County Commissioners. ~ - :5 -, The County's PUD (Planned Unit Development) process is intended to "achieve residential land development of superior quality through the encouragement of flexibility and creativity in design options . . ." In staff's opinion the concepts presented did not provide for the superior quality anticipated by the PUD process. At this time, staff continues to believe that densities in this range are appropriate at this location; however, we are unable to support the development concept provided. We understand that further plans are being developed. As of this date, those plans have not been presented for review. The proposed future land use amendment is a preliminary development order and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property but allows the developer to seek development of the property for multiple-family uses. No right to obtain a final development order, or any other rights to develop the subject property have been granted or is implied by the County if the requested comprehensive plan amendment is approved. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the future developer must demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of Capacity. ********************************************** Any proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan may be reviewed by several state and regional agencies. The Department of Community Affairs is charged with determining whether amendments are consistent with and further the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the State Comprehensive Plan, the Strategic Regional Policy Plan and Rule J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The following sections address the proposed amendment's consistency with each of these plans. CONSISTENCY WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN In reviewing this application for the proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Future Land Use Map, staff finds that the following Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the County's Comprehensive Plan are the primary components applicable to this petition. FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT The proposed amendment furthers with the goals, objectives and policies set forth with this element. The proposed RH Future Land Use classification can be considered complementary to the adjacent public school, and nearby retail and employment centers. The proposed RH Future Land Use classification provides a good transition from the existing and proposed commercial facilities to the north and east along the South 25th Street and Edwards Road corridor. '-' April 14, 2004 File Number: PA-03-005 'wi Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page 4 The petitioner's application for a change to the County's Future Land Use Map states the reason for this request is to "provide a mix of uses within the surrounding area and provide for high quality residential Townhomes and condominiums in close proximity to employment centers". The applicant states" the changes will allow Home Dynamics to develop the property as a mid to high-end Townhomes/condominium complex with recreational amenities". The Future Land Use Element describes the requested RH (Residential, High) classification as being applied to areas "intended to accommodate high density development, not to exceed 15 dwelling units per gross acre. In order to develop at this intensity, it must be possible to connect into a central water and wastewater service facility, and the subject property must be located in an area of the County which has available all urban services and facilities including fire protection, police, recreation, roadways, and schools." The subject lands are located in an area of the County with these required public services and facilities. Approval of the proposed amendment would result in residential densities higher than nearby residential areas. Existing lower density single-family homes to the east are separated from the project lands by South 25th Street, which is being expanded to a four-lane roadway. The three existing single-family homes on large lots to the west are separated from the subject property's western boundary by a 42-foot North St. Lucie River Drainage District Canal right-of-way. This canal right-of-way will assist to buffer the proposed higher density development from the existing homes. The northern portion of the subject parcel is bordered by Edwards Road, which contains a small strip center and vacant commercial lands along its north right-of-way. Objective 1.1.5: In coordination with the other elements of this plan, future development within the Planned Urban Service Area shall be directed to areas where urban and community services/facilities can be provided in the most efficient and compact manner so as to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. The proposed amendment discourages sprawl, pursuant to this Objective, and Section 9J- 5.006(b)(7), FAC. Urban sprawl is discouraged by the proposed amendment's location within the existing urban service area boundary and its close proximity to urban facilities and employment centers. The proposed RH Future Land Use classification would allow for the development of high density residential, and limited commercial neighborhood uses within an area served by adequate public facilities and in close proximity to existing retail, employment, and educational and recreational centers. The applicant is encouraged to cluster units in order to promote the efficient provision of services and provide additional open space within the urban area. Representatives of the petitioner have indicated that sufficient water and wastewater capacity is currently available from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. Ft. Pierce Utility has a water and sewer line along South 25th Street. The amendment site fronts on two major collector roads, South 25th Street and Edwards Road, both allow easy access to emergency evacuation routes (Virginia Avenue and Midway Road) that connect to 1-95. Policy 1.1.5.3: When considering any amendment to the Future Land Use Maps of the County's Comprehensive Plan, the County Commission shall make the following findings, supported by the other elements of this Plan, prior to taking any approval actions granting an individual amendment to the Future Land Use Maps: '- April 14, 2004 File Number: PA-03-005 '......,.. Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page 5 1. That the property under a land use amendment application is adjacent to, or within no more than 1,14 mile of the same or greater type of land use classification. The sites existing Future Land Use classification and that of property on the north side of Edwards Road is COM, a greater type of land use intensity than the requested RH classification. Several tracts within 1j.¡ mile of the site have an RM (Residential, Medium) Future Land Use classification that allows a maximum of nine dwelling units per acre. 2. That the property under land use management consideration lies within the Five Year Capital Improvement Program of the Water and Wastewater Master Plan for St. Lucie County or otherwise meets the requirements of Policy 1.1.5.4. The proposed property is located within the Five Year Capital Improvement Program for the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. Goal 1.2: Recognize that land use and transportation must be considered concurrently in all planning, and to the extent feasible, modify current land use patterns to decrease dependence on the automobile in order to minimize the need for future roadway expansion and promote the use of alternate modes of transportation. The proposed amendment will allow higher density residential housing in close proximity to retail, schools, recreational and employment centers. Increasing densities in this area promotes the use of alternative modes of transportation, including bicycling, walking and mass transit, thereby providing an opportunity to decrease dependence on the automobile. High-density residential development on the subject site would further efforts to develop a compact urban form that encourages mass transit and non-motorized transportation alternatives. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment does not conflict with this element. The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Statement based upon a "worst-case" traffic generation rate for residential uses under the proposed future land use classification. The traffic analysis contrasting the trip generation potential of a residential land use (Single Family) verses the existing commercial land use (Shopping Center) demonstrates a potential reduction in trips that could be generated from the site. Single family residential was utilized because of its higher vehicle trips per day. If developed for multifamily purposes, the trip generation would be further reduced. Policy 2.1.1: The St. lucie County transportation system shall be reviewed in coordination with any requested changes to the Future land Use Element or other related component of this plan. A report on the impacts to the system brought about by any proposed land use changes shall be prepared and presented to the Board of County Commissioners as part of the review of that land Use change. The applicant has provided a Traffic Impact Summary that reports the potential impacts to the transportation system brought about by the proposed land use change. The traffic summary indicates the proposed change in Future Land Use decreases the potential future vehicle trips from the subject site. The summary was based on a development scenario consisting of a shopping center under the existing COM classification and single family residential under the '-" April 14, 2004 File Number: PA-03-005 ....J Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page 6 requested RH classification. A comprehensive Traffic Impact Report will be required before any Final Development Order is obtained. The Metropolitan Planning Organization staff estimated the existing Level of Service based on Spring 2003 traffic counts at the followed affected roadways: Road Segment LOS S. 25th Street south of Edwards Road F S. 25th Street between Virginia Avenue and Edwards C Edwards Road between 25th Street and Selvitz C Edwards Road between Sunrise and S. 25th Street B Edwards Road west of Selvitz B Although the applicant's traffic summary does not distribute vehicles on these roadways, the additional trips are not expected to lower the Level of Service below the adopted standard of LOS D on these roadways. The MPO Long Range Transportation Plan and Adopted FOOT Work Program for FY 2003/04-2007/08 includes a project to add lanes and reconstruct South 25th Street from Midway Road to Edwards Road in FY 2004. Construction is to begin in late 2004. Widening of South 25th Street between Midway Road and Edwards will increase the existing F Level of Service on this segment. In summary, there will be sufficient roadway capacity to handle the proposed land use amendment. Site related improvements may be required at the project access points as well as potential intersection improvements at the intersection of Edwards Road and South 25th Street. The required improvements will be determined following a request for development authorization and submission of a comprehensive Traffic Impact Report acceptable to County staff. HOUSING ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Objective 5.1.2: In order to facilitate the development of industries (industrial and commercial) providing numerous positions, the County shall encourage the development of housing conducive to the attraction of these new industries and which have been identified as a need within St. Lucie County. The proposed Future Land Use change will provide for higher density residential units in close proximity to employment centers, including the Selvitz Road industrial area and the new 1.2 million square foot Wal-mart Distribution Center. This will provide a variety of housing types in close proximity to existing and proposed employment centers, including research and education centers, to assist the County in meeting their goal of attracting new industrial and commercial industrials to the County. INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. A Certificate of Capacity showing all necessary infrastructure improvements will be available is required prior to obtaining any Final Development Order. Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element "-' April 14, 2004 File Number: PA-03-005 ....J Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page 7 The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this sub-element. The amendment area is within the utility service area of the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. According to the applicant, wastewater service is available directly adjacent to the project site. The applicant has indicated that FPUA has sufficient capacity available to provide wastewater treatment and disposal for the allowable density of units. Solid Waste Sub-Element The proposed amendment is not in conflict with this sub-element. The County's Solid Waste facility currently has a 37-year capacity based upon current usage and would have sufficient capacity to service the maximum density of the proposed Future Land Use amendment and not reduce the Level of Service (LOS) standards for the County's solid waste facility as set forth by Policy 68.1.1.1. Drainage and Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element The proposed amendment does not conflict with this sub-element. Objective 6C.1.3. The County shall enforce existing land Development Regulations, which support the protection and maintenance of the natural functions (flow and storage) of the 1 DO-year floodplain and other natural drainage features. The southeastern portion of the amendment site contains 4.5 acres within the historic floodplain of Five Mile Creek and the project's western boundary is adjacent to a drainage canal that outfalls to Five Mile Creek approximately 800 feet south of the project boundary. However, the historic drainage pattern in the amendment area is highly developed and many of the natural drainage features have been lost. Multiple roads and the construction of drainage canals have altered historic drainage patterns. In addition, the amendment site was previously cleared. The site contains one wetland that has been degraded by the inundation by Brazilian Pepper that made it difficult to determine it's approximate size. The extent to which any natural drainage features remain on site will be determined through an Environmental Impact Report that is required as part of any future development proposal. The proposed change in future land use is not expected to place additional development pressures on the remaining natural resources but rather provides for an alternative use. The existing COM future land use classification allows the land to be development as intensely as the proposed RH classification. Any future development of the site will require any remaining natural drainage features to be maintained. Potable Water Sub-Element The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. The applicant has reported that the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority can provide potable water service for the subject site. FPUA owns and maintains a 12" diameter water main along the project's South 25th Street frontage road and has adequate capacity to provide potable water service to the site. Prior to any Final Development Order approvals, the applicant is required to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service the project. ~ April 14, 2004 File Number: PA-03-005 ...., Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page 8 COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined to not conflict with this element. The amendment site was previously cleared and contains a significant amount of exotic vegetation and few natural features. The proposed change in future land use is not expected to place additional pressures on any natural resources remaining on the site. A portion of the project site is located within 1,000 feet of the historical river course of Five-Mile Creek and is adjacent to a North St. Lucie River Water Control District (NSLWCD) Canal that flows into Five Mile Creek approximately 800 feet to the south. An estimated 4.5 acres in the southern portion of the project is within the 100-year floodplain. Five Mile Creek, is a natural tributary of the North fork of the St. Lucie River which is part of local, state and federal restoration efforts to improve water quality in the North Fork of the St. Lucie River Outstanding Florida Waters and downstream estuaries, the St. Lucie Estuary and Indian River Lagoon. GOAL 7.1.1: 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. The amendment site is located in the coastal area, within 1,000 feet of Five Mile Creek, a major tributary to the North Fork of the St. Lucie River, and includes 4.59 acres within the Creek's 100- year floodplain. Given the highly developed character of the area, and previous clearing of the amendment site, the majority of historic natural features of the project lands have been lost or highly degraded. The presence of any remaining natural features, and measures to protect those resources, will be identified within the Environmental Impact Report that is required prior to the issuance of any future development approvals, unless waived by the Board of County Commissioners. Future site designs can protect the nearby Five Mile Creek and floodplain through conserving any remaining natural features. In addition to meeting the minimum storm water management permitting requirements, impacts to Five Mile Creek and downstream Outstanding Florida Waters can be reduced or eliminated through providing vegetative buffers between impervious surface areas and any outfall points and considering the use of pervious surface materials in parking areas. The amendment site is also within an area the Archaeological Survey of St. Lucie County (2002) identified as an archeological zone of high site probability. An archaeological survey of the site should be required prior to the issuance of any development authorization to ensure no cultural materials are lost or damaged as a result of development. Objective 7.1.4: St. Lucie County shall strive to obtain or maintain water quality and trophic state index classifications of "good" for the Indian River Lagoon, Five Mile Creek, Ten Mile Creek, and the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The County shall enact appropriate regulations that provide for the maintenance or improvement of water quality. A significant portion of the floodplain of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and it's major tributaries, such as Five Mile Creek have been altered by past dredging activities that '-' April 14, 2004 File Number: PA-03-005 ..J Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page 9 accelerated storm water runoff from urban and agricultural uses. This resulted in a significant loss of natural filtration of nutrients that has resulted in degradation of the quality in Five Mile Creek and downstream waters. It will be important to cluster dwelling units, preserve the remaining natural features and provide a storm water treatment system that reduces the volume and velocity of storm water into the adjacent canal. CONSERVATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment is not in conflict with the goals, objectives and policies found within the conservation element. Goal 8.1: The natural resources of St. Lucie County shall be protected, appropriately used, or conserved in a manner which maximizes their function, and values. The proposed change in future land use classification is not expected to increase development pressures on any remaining natural resources on site. The amendment site is located in a highly developed area and the site was previously cleared. The site does contain a wetland that has been degraded by the inundation by Brazilian Pepper that made it difficult to determine it's approximate size. A full environmental impact report will be required prior to any final development approval. Any remaining natural features will be protected through the County's Natural Resource Protection standards. Policy 8.1.1.2: St. Lucie County shall facilitate development that maximizes energy efficiency and sustainability. This should include techniques that will reduce the total fossil fuel energy required to build and maintain urban land uses. This shall include standards that promote mixed land use patterns, urban infill, public transit and provide non-motorized interconnections between land use types to reduce auto dependence and vehicle miles traveled. The proposed RH Future Land Use classification will provide a higher density mixed land use pattern in furtherance of this policy. The site's close proximity to major educational, retail and employment sectors promotes non-motorized travel and can be expected to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Non-motorized and public transit facilities within the proposed development site in conjunction with proposed non-motorized facilities on adjacent roadways are required to accommodate users of alternative modes of transportation, including mass transit. Policy 8.1.3.1: The County's land development regulations shall include the use of programs to protect or maintain floodplain, such as reduced parking, conservation easements, cluster site plan and micrositing of buildings. The County shall continue to strictly enforce regulations that direct development away from the floodplains and provide upland buffers along the floodplain. Residential development on the site can occur with little or no impact to any remaining natural resources and adjacent waters if the development and accessory facilities are located in a manner that maintains natural areas and a native habitat buffer is provided between the adjacent drainage canal and the developable area of the site. The use of pervious materials for parking areas can also reduce the volume of storm water entering nearby waterways. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. '-' April 14, 2004 10 ...., Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page File Number: PA-03-005 Policy 9.1.1.1: level of Service for Recreation and Open Space shall be as follows: Community Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents in the unincorporated area. Regional Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents countywide Maximum development of the amendment site under the RH classification would require 6.56 acres of recreational and open space lands to meet the level of service standards for community parks (5 acres per 1,000 persons). The 35.4 acre project site contains sufficient land area to accommodate the recreation needs of it's future residents and is within 2 miles of several existing regional and community parks including the Lawnwood Recreation Area, North Fork of the St. Lucie River Ten Mile Creek Recreation Area, and Elks Park. Locating residential units in this area will provide for the efficient use of these recreational facilities. Recreation and Open Space Level of Service demands are based on the 2000 Census reported persons per household of 2.47 and the 531 maximum dwelling units allowed under the proposed RH Future Land Use classification, resulting in a population estimate of 1,312 persons. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Policy 11.1.4: No right to obtain final development order, nor any other rights to develop (B)(3)(b) the subject property have been granted or implied by the County's approval of the preliminary development order without determining the capacity of public facilities. A Certificate of Capacity must be obtained before a Final Development Order is issued. Policy 11.1.28: The County shall continue to require new development to meet level of service standards for both on and off site improvements, including local streets, water and sewer connection lines, stormwater management facilities, and open space. Sufficient capacity is expected to be available to service the proposed amendment site. Prior to the approval of any Final Development Order a Certificate of Capacity must be obtained to ensure adequate facilities and capacities are available concurrent with development. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The following goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan apply to this amendment: WATER RESOURCES. 187.201 (7)(a) Goal: Florida shall assure the availability of an adequate supply of water for all competing uses deemed reasonable and beneficial and shall maintain the functions of natural systems and the overall present level of surface and ground water quality. Florida shall improve and restore the quality of waters not presently meeting water quality standards. ~ April 14, 2004 11 ..wJ Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page File Number: PA-03-005 The proposed plan amendment is not expected to significantly increase demands on water resources of the State. Public water and sewer is available to the site and surface water impacts by any future development can be minimized through the protection of any remaining natural features on the site and installation of a storm water manage system that minimize storm water impacts to Five Mile Creek. The applicant should work with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the South Florida Water Management District to develop a storm water management plan that will minimize storm water impacts to Five Mile Creek. A storm water plan can include the use of pervious surfaces for the large parking areas that will be required for the project and providing native habitat between parking and impervious surface areas and the adjacent canal will reduce the volume and velocity of storm water from the site. NATURAL SYSTEMS AND RECREATIONAL LANDS. 187.201 (9)(a) Goal: Florida shall protect and acquire unique natural habitats and ecological systems, such as wetlands, tropical hardwood hammocks. palm hammocks, and virgin longleaf pine forests, and restore degraded natural systems to a functional condition. The proposed RH Future Land Use amendment would not impact natural systems that would result in the loss of unique natural habitats and ecological systems. The amendment site is within an area of urbanized St. Lucie County that has been altered by past development activities. The only remaining natural system in close proximity to the site is Five Mile Creek, which was altered by dredging in the 1930-40's. The North Fork of the St. Lucie River and it's major tributaries, including Five Mile Creek are proposed for restoration as part of the Indian River Lagoon Plan (CERP) and the Feasibility Study for the Reconnection of Wetlands and Oxbows along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The amendment site does not contain lands proposed for restoration as a part of these studies. To minimize impacts to Five Mile Creek and downstream waters the stormwater management designs and native vegetative buffering should be provided to maximize stormwater storage and filtering of pollutants before outfall to the nearby Creek. LAND USE.187.201 (16)(a) Goal: In recognition of the importance of preserving the natural resources and enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner. The proposed amendment to the future land use classification is not expected to adversely affect the quality of life in the immediate surrounding area. The site is located in an area that contains public improvements sufficient to support residential development. The applicant has indicated that sufficient capacity is currently available from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority to provide water and wastewater service to 531 dwelling units that would be allowed under the proposed amendment's maximum density. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order, a Certificate of Capacity indicating that all adequate infrastructure services are available is required as well as an Environmental Impact Report, unless waived by the Board of County Commissioners. PUBLIC FACILlTIE~ 187.201(18)(a)FS: Florida shall protect the substantial investments in public facilities that already exist and shall plan for and finance new facilities to serve residents in a timely, orderly, and efficient manner. "" April 14, 2004 12 ..", Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page File Number: PA-03-005 The amendment would maximize the efficient use of the existing and proposed public facilities in furtherance of this state goal. TRANSPORTATION. 187.201(20)FS: directs future transportation improvements to aid in the management of growth and promotes an intermodal transportation system. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the states goal to promote an intermodal transportation system. An analysis of the impact of the proposed amendment on affected roadways has been provided. The applicant's Traffic Impact Statement is based upon a "worst-case" traffic generation for the site utilizing the maximum allowed density under the proposed RH Future Land Use classification. The analysis indicates that an additional 531 single-family dwelling units would not reduce the level of service on Edwards Road and South 25th Street. If the site were developed for multifamily purposes, the trip generation would be less than that generated from the existing COM classification. CONSISTENCY WITH THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN The following are the primary regional goals and polices that apply to this petition: Strategy 1.1.2: Promote compatibility of urban areas, regional facilities, natural preserves and other open spaces. The proposed amendment furthers this goal. The proposed change in future land use provides for an increase in density in the urban area where existing public facilities are available. The proposed amendment provides for the efficient use of regional facilities and allows high-density residential development in close proximity to existing and proposed retail, employment centers and recreational centers. Policy 8.1.1.1: All development should take place concurrent with or after the provision of necessary infrastructure and services. The proposed amendment site is located in an area with the necessary water, wastewater and roadway capacity currently available. Development of high-density residential units on the site encourages the efficient use of services and promotes the use of the County's public transit services. CONCLUSION Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed Future Land Use Classification change would increase residential densities in the urban area and thereby further goals to provide for a compact urban form and reduce vehicular trips through the use of multi- modal transportation facilities. Staff analysis of this petition generally supports the requested change to RH. Staff would note that given the requirements of the County's Land Development Code, it may not be possible to ~ April 14, 2004 13 ....; Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation Page File Number: PA-03-005 achieve the maximum density of 15 du/ac on this parcel. Staff would also note that if approved, this would be one of the very limited number of parcels on the mainland of unincorporated S1. Lucie County with an RH designation. The land use decision to be made by this Commission is whether the current designation or a residential designation is more appropriate. If you collectively believe that the residential designation is the more appropriate choice, you have some latitude in your recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. You may recommend the RH (Residential, High) consistent with the applicant's request, or you may recommend a residential land use with a lower density. These include RU (Residential, Urban with a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre) and RM (Residential, Medium with a maximum of 9 dwelling units per acre). Staff recommends that the petition of Home Dynamics Corporations for a change in Future Land Use designation from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban) be transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review under Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. I INOFfiCIAL - ~~BIEC1 TO PLANNING & ZONIN8 COMMISSION APPROVAL AGENDA ITEM 8: HOME DYNAMICS CORPORATION - FILE NO. PA-03-005: Ms. Diana Waite, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 8 was the application of Home Dynamics Corporation for a Change in Future Land Use classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential High - 15 du/ac) for a 35.4-acre site located at the southwest comer of the intersection of South 25th Street and Edwards Road. The applicant is requesting a change in future land use classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential High - 15 du/ac) for a 35.4-acre site located at the southwest comer of the intersection of South 25th Street and Edwards Road. The entire site is within the Urban Service Area. Approval of the proposed change to RH would allow up to 15 dwelling units per acre or 531 total dwelling units and limited neighborhood commercial, office and institutional uses. The stated purpose of the requested future land use classification change is to "provide for high quality residential townhomes and condominiums in close proximity to employment centers." A change in the future land use classification would allow the applicant to seek a change in zoning from the property's existing COM (Commercial) and RM-5 (Residential Multiple-Family - 5 du/ac) zoning classification to a Planned Unit Development. On February 19, 2004, the proposed amendment was presented before the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency (LP A). At the hearing, staff presented its report supporting the Change in Future Land Use. Staff's analysis detennined that densities between 9 and 15 dwelling units per acre were appropriate and could be supported at this location. Staff further commented that these densities could be difficult to achieve given all other constraints placed on properties such as this. Following a public hearing on this petition the LP A voted 7 to 1 to continue this petition to the March 18,2004 public hearing to allow the applicant time to provide a conceptual development plan for the subject lands. The Commission asked that a plan be developed demonstrating that densities greater than 9 dwelling units per acre could be achieved. The development team presented a concept plan that placed a combination of single family and multi family product on the site at a density of approximately 10.5 per acre. The concept plan left very little room for uses other than residential units, parking and drainage. The County's PUD (Planned Unit Development) process is intended to "achieve residential land development of superior quality through the encouragement of flexibility and creativity in design options. . ." In staff's opinion the concepts presented did not provide for the superior quality anticipated by the PUD process. At this time, staff continues to believe that densities in this range are appropriate at this location; however, we are unable to support the development concept provided. We understand that further plans are being developed. As of this date, those plans have not been presented for review. P&Z I LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 19 of 22 JjNOFFICIAL- SUBJECT TO PLANNING & ZOMIN8 COMMISSION APPROVAL The proposed future land use amendment is a preliminary development order "and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property but allows the developer to seek development of the property for multiple-family uses. '-' Staff analysis of this petition generally supports the requested change to RH. Staff would note that given the requirements of the County's Land Development Code, it may not be possible to achieve the maximum density of 15 du/ac on this parcel. Staff would also note that if approved, this would be one of the very limited numbers of parcels on the mainland of unincorporated St. Lucie County with an RH designation. The land use decision to be made by this Commission is whether the current designation or a residential designation is more appropriate. If you collectively believe that the residential designation is the more appropriate choice, you have some latitude in your recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. You may recommend the RH (Residential, High) consistent with the applicant's request, or you may recommend a residential land use with a lower density. These include RU (Residential, Urban with a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre) and RM (Residential, Medium with a maximum of 9 dwelling units per acre). Based upon the infonnation provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval and that the petition be transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review. Chainnan Grande questioned if the applicant was present. Mr. Mark Matthes, Thomas Lucido & Associations, stated that he was the applicants representative. He advised that he and Mr. Delphino were there to answer any questions and agreed with Staff's report and recommendation. He stated that they needed more than 9 units per acre, but don't actually need the 15 units per acre that is allowed under the RH (Residential High) land use. However, there is not any in between land use available to request. He continued that they hope to time the submittal of the PUD (Planned Unit Development) so that the Board of County Commissioners hears this request and the PUD concurrently. He advised that he was there to answer any questions they might have. Mr. Grande stated that the corner of 25th Street and Edwards Road was good for a commercial business, but feels the applicant should be able to develop the rest of the property for residential at the RU land use density. Chairman Grande opened the public hearing. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 20 of 22 '-' UNOfFICIAL - ""'JECT TO PLANNING & lONlNa COMMiSSION APPROVAL Seeing no one, Chairman Grande closed the public hearing. Mr. Hearn stated that after considering the testimony presented during the public hearing, including Staff comments, I hereby move that the Local Planning Agency of St. Lucie County recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners deny the application of Home Dynamics Corporation, for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban) to RH (Residential High) because it is, in my opinion, too dense a zoning for that particular intersection and is not compatible with the surrounding uses and they have no guarantee that any particular type of plan is going to be developed on that property. Motion seconded by Mr. Merritt. Upon a roll call vote the motion was approved with a vote of 5-1 (with Mr. Trias voting against) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of denial. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18,2004 Page 21 of 22 '-' ...., AGENDAITE RATION -':FILE NO. PA-03-005: Ms. Diana Wai se in S feed that Agenda Item # 8 was the application of Home ynamics Co ation r a Change in Future Land Use classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential High - 15 du/ac) for a 35.4-acre site located at the southwest corner of the intersection of South 25th Street and Edwards Road. The majority of the site currently has a COM Future Land Use classification allowing general commercial uses only; the remaining 3.2 acres has a RU classification allowing residential uses up to 5 dwelling units per acre and limited commercial uses. Approval of the proposed change to RH would allow up to 15 dwelling units per acre or 531 total dwelling units and limited neighborhood commercial, office and institutional uses. Ms. Waite stated that the purpose of the requested future land use classification change is to provide for high quality residential town homes and condominiums in close proximity to employment centers. The proposed RH Future Land Use classification can be considered complementary to the adjacent public school, and nearby retail and employment centers. High density residential uses on the subject site provides an opportunity for families with children to reside within walking distance of the adjacent middle school and nearby Central High School, which is located within one mile of the subject site. Ms. Waite stated that approval of the proposed amendment would result in residential densities higher than nearby residential areas. Existing lower density single-family homes to the east are separated from the project lands by South 25th Street, which is being expanded to a four-lane roadway. The three existing single-family homes on large lots to the west are separated from the subject property's western boundary by a 42-foot North St. Lucie River Drainage District Canal right-of-way. This canal right-of-way will assist to buffer the proposed higher density development from the existing homes. The northern portion of the subject parcel is bordered by Edwards Road, which contains a small strip center and vacant commercial lands along its north right-of-way. Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed Future Land Use Classification change would increase residential densities in the urban area and thereby further goals to provide for a compact urban form and reduce vehicular trips through the use of multi-modal transportation facilities. Staff analysis of this petition generally supports the requested change to RH. Staff would note that given the requirements of the County's Land Development Code, it may not be possible to achieve the maximum density of 15 du/ac on this parcel. Staff would also note that if approved, this would be one of the very limited numbers of parcels on the mainland of unincorporated St. Lucie County with an RH designation. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 22 of 34 '-" .., Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval and that the petition be transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review. Chainnan McCurdy questioned if the petitioner or their representative were present. Mr. Mark Matthes, Lucido and Associates, stated they were the applicants representative. He advised that he and Mr. Delphino were there to answer any questions and agreed with Staff's report and recommendation. He stated that they needed more than 9 units per acre, but don't actually need the 15 units per acre that is allowed under the RH (Residential High) land use. However, there is not any in between land use available to request. He continued that they hope to time the submittal of the POO (Planned Unit Development) so that the Board of County Commissioners hears this request and the POO concurrently. Mr. Akins questioned why the POO (Planned Unit Development) was not being brought before them concurrently. Ms. Waite stated that they could not process the POO (Planned Unit Development) application until after the Future Land Use amendment is approved because the change in zoning would not be consistent with the existing land use. Mr. Matthes stated that the timing of a land use amendment is quite lengthy and a POO is a much shorter process, so they couldn't be brought to the Local Planning Agency together. Mr. Akins questioned what the proposed construction completion date would be and how would it coincide with the expansion of 25th Street. Mr. Matthes stated that they are working with the Engineering Department staff on that issue right now and would have more definitive answers when the POO (Planned Unit Development) is brought back before them. Mr. Akins questioned if they felt that the expansion of 25th Street would be complete before their build out date. Mr. Matthes stated that he did expect it to be prior to their build out but he wasn't sure that there wouldn't be some overlap in the construction time frame. Ms. Waite stated that construction on the 25th Street expansion would begin in 2004. Mr. Kelly stated that there is currently some acquisition being done in that area, but the project is funded. Ms. Hensley stated that this property is adjacent to one of their schools and that there was some mention about being within walking distance of the middle school and high school. She stated that was correct, however, St. Lucie County is not a community based school system, and student assignment designates what schools the children will go to, not necessarily the school closest to them. She advised that the applicant probably should not mention it because it does not guarantee anyone those schools, especially since the high school is not even in the same zone. Ms. Hammer stated that the applicant is requesting an increase in density from 5 units per acre to 15 units per acre, which is impacting the schools three-fold. She questioned what the developer is doing for the community. Mr. Matthes stated that as part of the POO (Planned Unit Development) process there is give and take and as they go through that they will have negotiations regarding the conditions of the development approval. He advised that infonnation is not relevant right now because this is not a POO (Planned Unit Development) request; it is a land use matter only. He stated that they would be P&Z I LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 23 of 34 ~ ..., paying the necessary impact fees, and opportunity for housing choice, a quality development of new residences, with on-site recreational amenities. Ms. Hammer stated that the impact fees collected only pay for construction, not for the additional teachers or busing. She questioned if these units would be for sale or rent. Mr. Matthes stated that they would most likely be for sale. Ms. Hammer stated that she felt the applicant should disclose in the agreement of sale that there is no guarantee that their children will go to those neighborhood schools. Mr. Hearn stated that they are being asked to increase the density in an area where they have no assurances that they will actually build what they are proposing. He continued that if the applicant decides not to build it and they have approved the land use change anything of any quality of this higher density could be built. Mr. Kelly stated that this is a change in future land use and that does not affect the zoning on the property. He advised that if someone else wants to develop the property they too would have to submit some sort of plan or change in zoning request, which would come back to them for their review either way. Mr. Grande stated that the applicant has stated that they need to have more than 9 units per acre, which is why they requested a RH (Residential High) land use. He stated that this is a very large change and he feels it is premature in the area. Mr. Delphino stated that they would not be building 15 units per acre, but needed to have more than 9 units per acre in order to develop between 330 and 360 units. He continued that they would not have any condos or rental units and that it would only be town homes and single-family homes. Chairman McCurdy opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman McCurdy closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Hearn stated that 9 units per acre on 35 acres would be over 300 units. Chairman McCurdy stated that the applicant did state they were proposing 330 to 360 units. Ms. Morgan stated that if the applicant has 360 units it would be approximately 11 units per acre. Ms. Hammer stated that she feels approving this change would give the applicant an entitlement attitude and she cannot support a change to 15 units per acre. She advised that she might be able to consider 9, but definitely not 15. Mr. Grande stated he felt the same way but he could not support any change without seeing a plan at the same time. Mr. Merritt stated that after considering the testimony presented during the public hearing, including Staff comments, I hereby move that the Local Planning Agency of St. Lucie County recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners approve the application of Home Dynamics Corporation, for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban) to RH (Residential High), and transmit the petition to the P&Z I LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 24 of 34 ~ ....J Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review because it fits the character of this neighborhood and they will have to come back with a PUD (Planned Unit Development) before development. It is impossible to put 15 units per acre on this site. Motion seconded by Ms. Morgan. Upon a roll call vote the motion failed with a vote of 3-5 (Mr. Akins, Mr. Grande, Ms. Hammer, Mr. Hearn, and Mr. Lounds voting against). Mr. Jonathan Ferguson, attorney for applicant, requested that the request be continued to the March 18, 2004 meeting to allow them time to provide more information and a draft site plan for review by the Local Planning Agency. Mr. Lounds made a motion to continue the application of Home Dynamics Corporation to the March 18, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission I Local Planning Agency Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. Motion seconded by Ms. Morgan. Upon a vote, the motion was approved 7-1 (with Ms. Hammer voting against) and continued to the March 18, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission I Local Planning Agency Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. P&Z I LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 25 of 34 '-' ..." Local Planning Agency Review: 03/18/04 File Number PA-03-005 MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: Local Planning Agency Planning Manager wc. March 10, 2004 FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Application of Home Dynamics Corporation, for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential High - 15 du/ac) Southwest corner of South 25th Street and Edwards Road. LOCATION: CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: RH (Residential High - 15 du/ac) EXISTING ZONING: CG (Commercial, General) and RM-5 (Residential Multiple Family - 5 du/ac) PUD (Planned Unit Development) PROPOSED ZONING: PARCEL SIZE: 35.4 acres PROPOSED USE: Residential Townhomes and Condominiums SURROUNDING ZONING DESIGNATIONS: CG (Commercial, General) and RS-4 (Residential Single Family - 4 du/ac) to the north, I (Institutional) to the south, RS-3 (Residential Single Family - 3 du/ac) to the west and CN (Commercial, Neighborhood), CO (Commercial, Office) and RS-4 (Residential Single Family - 4 du/ac) to the east. SURROUNDING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS: COM (Commercial) to the north and RU (Residential Urban -5 du/ac) to the east, west and south. r:} ~ v h1"1 ~ I"- '" ~~,~ ':t ~ \..f March 10,2004 Page 2 SURROUNDING EXISTING LAND USES: 'wi Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 A convenience store, commercial office and single- family homes are located to the east across South 25th Street. Single-family homes are located to the west and the Forest Grove Middle School is located to the south. A small shopping plaza and vacant commercial land is located to the north, on the north side of Edwards Road. UTILITY SERVICE: The subject property is within the service area identified within the Fc"" _ ree Utility Authority (FPUA' ~ .:-t Mastf'- ,\. Water and Sewer i- .Licated alGr '~,3.)uth 25th Street. L r,,,,,NSPORTATION IMPACT«:" ,. - ";('" ,,":V ~ P' .' . . J It. _ '1.. .JUl. ... 'MPRovt:IVIE:NTS: Add lands ard reconstruct SOU~, 25th Street from '¡:-¡e intersection of Ed,-, ;::,::S f.:~oad to fl.;::.. ,yay Road. ~- -C'~rl.:::ion wil! begir: ,. '.- ~ 2004. TYPE OF ~'- , DOCUMEN:- ~caUIRED: - -ç"'rré:., "wit. COMMENTS The applicant is requesting a change in future land use classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential High - 15 du/ac~ for a 35.4-acre site located at the southwest corner of the intersection of South 25t Street and Edwards Road. The entire site is within the Urban Service Area. The majority of the site currently has a COM Future land Use classification allowing general commercial uses only; the remaining 3.2 acres has a RU classification allowing residential uses up to 5 dwelling units per acre and limited commercial uses. Approval of the proposed change to RH would allow up to 15 dwelling units per acre or 531 total dwelling units and limited neighborhood commercial, office and institutional uses. The stated purpose of the requested future land use classification change is to "provide for high quality residential townhomes and condominiums in close proximity to employment centers." A change in the future land use classification would allow the applicant to seek a change in zoning from the property's existing COM (Commercial) and RM-5 (Residential Multiple-Family - 5 du/ac) zoning classification to a Planned Unit Development. On February 19, 2004, the proposed amendment was presented before the St. Lucie County local Planning Agency (lPA). At the hearing, staff presented its report supporting the Change in Future land Use. Staff's analysis determined that densities '-' March 10, 2004 Page 3 .."", Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation (' File Number: PA-03-005 between 9 and 15 dwelling units per acre were appropriate and could be supported at this location. Staff further commented that these densities could be difficult to achieve given all other constraints placed on properties such as this. Following a public hearing on this petition the LPA voted 7 to 1 to continue this petition to the March 18, 2004 public hearing to allow the applicant time to provide a conceptual development plan for the subject lands. The Commission asked that a plan be developed demonstrating that densities greater than 9 dwelling units per acre could be achieved. The development team presented a concept plan that placed a combination of single family and multi family product on the site at a density of approximately 10.5 per acre. The concept plan left very little room for uses other than residential units, parking and drainage. The County's PUD (Planned Unit Development) process is intended to "achieve residential land development of superior quality through the encouragement of flexibility and creativity in design options. . ." In staff's opinion the concepts presented did not provide for the superior quality anticipated by the PUD process. At this time, staff continues to believe that densities in this range are appropriate at this location; however, we are unable to support the development concept provided. We understand that further plans are being developed. As of this date, those plans have not been presented for review. The proposed future land use amendment is a preliminary development order and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property but allows the developer to seek development of the property for multiple-family uses. No right to obtain a final development order, or any other rights to develop the subject property have been granted or is implied by the County if the requested comprehensive plan amendment is approved. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the future developer must demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of Capacity. ********..************************************ Any proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan may be reviewed by several state and regional agencies. The Department of Community Affairs is charged with determining whether amendments are consistent with and further the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the State Comprehensive Plan, the Strategic Regional Policy Plan and Rule J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The following sections address the proposed amendment's consistency with each of these plans. CONSISTENCY WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN In reviewing this application for the proposed amendment to the 51. Lucie County Future Land Use Map, staff finds that the following Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the County's Comprehensive Plan are the primary components applicable to this petition. FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT The proposed amendment furthers with the goals, objectives and policies set forth with this element. \..f ..., March 10. 2004 Page 4 Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-å3-005 The proposed RH Future Land Use classification can be considered complementary to the adjacent public school, and nearby retail and employment centers. The proposed RH Future Land Use classification provides a good transition from the existing and proposed commercial facilities to the north and east along the South 25th Street and Edwards Road corridor. The petitioner's application for a change to the County's Future Land Use Map states the reason for this request is to "provide a mix of uses within the surrounding area and provide for high quality residential townhomes and condominiums in close proximity to employment centers". The applicant states" the changes will allow Home Dynamics to develop the property as a mid to high-end townhome/condominium complex with recreational amenities". The Future Land Use Element describes the requested RH (Residential High) classification as being applied to areas "intended to accommodate high density development, not to exceed 15 dwelling units per gross acre. In order to develop at this intensity, it must be possible to connect into a central water and wastewater service facility, and the subject property must be located in an area of the County which has available all urban services and facilities including fire protection, police, recreation, roadways, and schools." The subject lands are located in an area ot the County with these required public services and facilities. Approval of the proposed amendment would result in residential densities higher than nearby residential areas. Existing lower density single-family homes to the east are separated from the project lands by South 25th Street, which is being expanded to a four- lane roadway. The three existing single-family homes on large lots to the west are separated from the subject property's western boundary by a 42-toot North St. Lucie River Drainage District Canal right-ot-way. This canal right-of-way will assist to buffer the proposed higher density development from the existing homes. The northern portion ot the subject parcel is bordered by Edwards Road, which contains a small strip center and vacant commercial lands along its north right-of-way. Objective 1.1.5: In coordination with the other elements of this plan, future development within the Planned Urban Service Area shall be directed to areas where urban and community services/facilities can be provided in the most efficient and compact manner so as to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. The proposed amendment discourages sprawl, pursuant to this Objective, and Section 9J-5.006(b)(7), FAC. Urban sprawl is discouraged by the proposed amendment's location within the existing urban service area boundary and its close proximity to urban facilities and employment centers. The proposed RH Future Land Use classification would allow for the development of high density residential, and limited commercial neighborhood uses within an area served by adequate public facilities and in close proximity to existing retail, employment, and educational and recreational centers. The applicant is encouraged to cluster units in order to promote the efficient provision of services and provide additional open space within the urban area. ~ '....; March 10, 2004 Page 5 Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 Representatives of the petitioner have indicated that sufficient water and wastewater capacity is currently available from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. Ft. Pierce Utility has a water and sewer line along South 25th Street. The amendment site fronts on two major collector roads, South 25th Street and Edwards Road, both allow easy access to emergency evacuation routes (Virginia Avenue and Midway Road) that connect to 1-95. Policy 1.1.5.3: When considering any amendment to the Future Land Use Maps of the County's Comprehensive Plan, the County Commission shall make the following findings, supported by the other elements of this Plan, prior to taking any approval actions granting an individual amendment to the Future Land Use Maps: 1. That the property under a land use amendment application is adjacent to, or within no more than Y. mile of the same or greater type of land use classification. The sites existing Future Land Use classification and that of property on the north side of Edwards Road is COM, a greater type of land use intensity than the requested RH classification. Several tracts within % mile of the site have an RM (Residential Medium) Future Land Use classification that allows a maximum of nine dwelling units per acre. 2. That the property under land use management consideration lies within the Five Year Capital Improvement Program of the Water and Wastewater Master Plan for St. Lucie County or otherwise meets the requirements of Policy 1.1.5.4. The proposed property is located within the Five Year Capital Improvement Program for the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. Goal 1.2: Recognize that land use and transportation must be considered concurrently in all planning, and to the extent feasible, modify current land use patterns to decrease dependence on the automobile in order to minimize the need for future roadway expansion and promote the use of alternate modes of transportation. The proposed amendment will allow higher density residential housing in close proximity to retail, schools, recreational and employment centers. Increasing densities in this area promotes the use of alternative modes of transportation, including bicycling, walking and mass transit, thereby providing an opportunity to decrease dependence on the automobile. High-density residential development on the subject site would further efforts to develop a compact urban form that encourages mass transit and non- motorized transportation alternatives. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment does not conflict with this element. The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Statement based upon a "worst-case" traffic generation rate for residential uses under the proposed future land use classification. The traffic analysis contrasting the trip generation potential of a residential land use '-' ...." March 1 0, 2004 Page 6 Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 (Single Family) verses the existing commercial land use (Shopping Center) demonstrates a potential~n in trips that could be generated from the site. Single family residential was util~se of its higher vehicle trips per day. If developed for multifamily purposes, the trip generation would be further reduced. Policy 2.1.1: The St. Lucie County transportation system shall be reviewed in coordination with any requested changes to the Future Land Use Element or other related component of this plan. A report on the impacts to the system brought about by any proposed land use changes shall be prepared and presented to the Board of County Commissioners as part of the review of that Land Use change. The applicant has provided a Traffic Impact Summary that reports the potential impacts to the transportation system brought about by the proposed land use change. The traffic summary indicates the proposed change in Future Land Use decreases the potential future vehicle trips from the subject site. The summary was based on a development scenario consisting of a shopping center under the existing COM classification and single family residential under the requested RH classification. A comprehensive Traffic Impact Report will be required before any Final Development Order is obtained. The Metropolitan Planning Organization staff estimated the existing Level of Service based on Spring 2003 traffic counts at the followed affected roadways: Road Segment LOS S. 25th Street south of Edwards Road F S. 25th Street between Virginia Avenue and Edwards C Edwards Road between 25th Street and Selvitz C Edwards Road between Sunrise and S. 25th Street B Edwards Road west of Selvitz B Although the applicant's traffic summary does not distribute vehicles on these roadways, the additional trips are not expected to lower the Level of Service below the adopted standard of LOS 0 on these roadways. The MPO Long Range Transportation Plan and Adopted FOOT Work Program for FY 2003/04-2007/08 includes a project to add lanes and reconstruct South 25th Street from Midway Road to Edwards Road in FY 2004. Construction is to begin in late 2004. Widening of South 25th Street between Midway Road and Edwards will increase the existing F level of Service on this segment. In summary, there will be sufficient roadway capacity to handle the proposed land use amendment. Site related improvements may be required at the project access points as well as potential intersection improvements at the intersection of Edwards Road and South 25th Street. The required improvements will be determined following a request for development authorization and submission of a comprehensive Traffic Impact Report acceptable to County staff. HOUSING ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. ~ "wJI March 1 0, 2004 Page 7 Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 Objective 5.1.2: In order to facilitate the development of industries (industrial and commercial) providing numerous positions, the County shall encourage the development of housing conducive to the attraction of these new industries and which have been identified as a need within St. Lucie County. The proposed Future Land Use change will provide for higher density residential units in close proximity to employment centers, including the Selvitz Road industrial area and the new 1.2 million square foot Wal-mart Distribution Center. This will provide a variety of housing types in close proximity to existing and proposed employment centers, including research and education centers, to assist the County in meeting their goal of attracting new industrial and commercial industrials to the County. INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. A Certificate of Capacity showing all necessary infrastructure improvements will be available is required prior to obtaining any Final Development Order. Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this sub-element. The amendment area is within the utility service area of the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. According to the applicant, wastewater service is available directly adjacent to the project site. The applicant has indicated that FPUA has sufficient capacity available to provide wastewater treatment and disposal for the allowable density of units. Solid Waste Sub-Element The proposed amendment is not in conflict with this sub-element. The County's Solid Waste facility currently has a 37-year capacity based upon current usage and would have sufficient capacity to service the maximum density of the proposed Future Land Use amendment and not reduce the Level of Service (LOS) standards for the County's solid waste facility as set forth by Policy 6B.1.1.1. Drainage and Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element The proposed amendment does not conflict with this sub-element. Objective 6C.1.3. The County shall enforce existing Land Development Regulations, which support the protection and maintenance of the natural functions (flow and storage) of the 100-year floodplain and other natural drainage featu res. The southeastern portion of the amendment site contains 4.5 acres within the historic floodplain of Five Mile Creek and the project's western boundary is adjacent to a drainage canal that outfalls to Five Mile Creek approximately 800 feet south of the project boundary. However, the historic drainage pattern in the amendment area is highly developed and many of the natural drainage features have been lost. Multiple roads and the construction of drainage canals have altered historic drainage patterns. In '-' ~ March 10, 2004 Page 8 Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 addition, the amendment site was previously cleared. The site contains one wetland that has been degraded by the inundation by Brazilian Pepper that made it difficult to determine it's approximate size. The extent to which any natural drainage features remain on site will be determined through an Environmental Impact Report that is required as part of any future development proposal. The proposed change in future land use is not expected to place additional development pressures on the remaining natural resources but rather provides for an alternative use. The existing COM future land use classification allows the land to be development as intensely as the proposed RH classification. Any future development of the site will require any remaining natural drainage features to be maintained. Potable Water Sub-Element The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. The applicant has reported that the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority can provide potable water service for the subject site. FPUA owns and maintains a 12" diameter water main along the project's South 25th Street frontage road and has adequate capacity to provide potable water service to the site. Prior to any Final Development Order approvals, the applicant is required to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service the project. COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined to not conflict with this element. The amendment site was previously cleared and contains a significant amount of exotic vegetation and few natural features. The proposed change in future land use is not expected to place additional pressures on any natural resources remaining on the site. A portion of the project site is located within 1,000 feet of the historical river course of Five-Mile Creek and is adjacent to a North St. Lucie River Water Control District (NSLWCD) Canal that flows into Five Mile Creek approximately 800 feet to the south. An estimated 4.5 acres in the southern portion of the project is within the 1 DO-year floodplain. Five Mile Creek, is a natural tributary of the North fork of the St. Lucie River which is part of local, state and federal restoration efforts to improve water quality in the North Fork of the St. Lucie River Outstanding Florida Waters and downstream estuaries, the St. Lucie Estuary and Indian River Lagoon. GOAL 7.1.1: 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. The amendment site is located in the coastal area, within 1,000 feet of Five Mile Creek, a major tributary to the North Fork of the St. Lucie River, and includes 4.59 acres within the Creek's 100-year floodplain. Given the highly developed character of the area, and previous clearing of the amendment site, the majority of historic natural features of the project lands have been lost or highly degraded. The presence of any remaining natural features, and measures to protect those resources, will be identified within the ~ .., March 10, 2004 Page 9 Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 Environmental Impact Report that is required prior to the issuance of any future development approvals. unless waived by the Board of County Commissioners. Future site designs can protect the nearby Five Mile Creek and floodplain through conseNing any remaining natural features. In addition to meeting the minimum storm water management permitting requirements. impacts to Five Mile Creek and downstream Outstanding Florida Waters can be reduced or eliminated through providing vegetative buffers between impervious surface areas and any outfall points and considering the use of pervious surface materials in parking areas. The amendment site is also within an area the Archaeological Survey of St. Lucie County (2002) identified as an archeological zone of high site probability. An archaeological survey of the site should be required prior to the issuance of any development authorization to ensure no cultural materials are lost or damaged as a result of development. Objective 7.1.4: 51. Lucie County shall strive to obtain or maintain water quality and trophic state index classifications of "good" for the Indian River Lagoon, Five Mile Creek, Ten Mile Creek, and the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The County shall enact appropriate regulations that provide for the maintenance or improvement of water quality. A significant portion of the floodplain of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and it's major tributaries. such as Five Mile Creek have been altered by past dredging activities that accelerated storm water runoff from urban and agricultural uses. This resulted in a significant loss of natural filtration of nutrients that has resulted in degradation of the quality in Five Mile Creek and downstream waters. It will be important to cluster dwelling units, preserve the remaining natural features and provide a storm water treatment system that reduces the volume and velocity of storm water into the adjacent canal. CONSERVATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment is not in conflict with the goals, objectives and policies found within the conservation element. Goal 8.1: The natural resources of 51. Lucie County shall be protected, appropriately used, or conserved in a manner which maximizes their function, and values. The proposed change in future land use classification is not expected to increase development pressures on any remaining natural resources on site. The amendment site is located in a highly developed area and the site was previously cleared. The site does contain a wetland that has been degraded by the inundation by Brazilian Pepper that made it difficult to determine it's approximate size. A full environmental impact report will be required prior to any final development approval. Any remaining natural features will be protected through the County's Natural Resource Protection standards. Policy 8.1.1.2: St. Lucie County shall facilitate development that maximizes energy efficiency and sustainability. This should include techniques that will reduce the total fossil fuel energy required to build and maintain urban land uses. This shall include standards that promote mixed land use patterns, urban infill, public transit "-' """" March 1 0, 2004 Page 10 Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 and provide non-motorized interconnections between land use types to reduce auto dependence and vehicle miles traveled. The proposed RH Future Land Use classification will provide a higher density mixed land use pattern in furtherance of this policy. The site's close proximity to major educational, retail and employment sectors promotes non-motorized travel and can be expected to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Non-motorized and public transit facilities within the proposed development site in conjunction with proposed non-motorized facilities on adjacent roadways are required to accommodate users of alternative modes of transportation, including mass transit. Policy 8.1.3.1: The County's land development regulations shall include the use of programs to protect or maintain floodplain, such as reduced parking, conservation easements, cluster site plan and micrositing of buildings. The County shall continue to strictly enforce regulations that direct development away from the floodplains and provide upland buffers along the floodplain. Residential development on the site can occur with little or no impact to any remaining natural resources and adjacent waters if the development and accessory facilities are located in a manner that maintains natural areas and a native habitat buffer is provided between the adjacent drainage canal and the developable area of the site. The use of pervious materials for parking areas can also reduce the volume of storm water entering nearby waterways. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Policy 9.1.1.1: level of Service for Recreation and Open Space shall be as follows: Community Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents in the unincorporated area. Regional Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents countywide Maximum development of the amendment site under the RH classification would require 6.56 acres of recreational and open space lands to meet the level of service standards for community parks (5 acres per 1,000 persons). The 35.4 acre project site contains sufficient land area to accommodate the recreation needs of it's future residents and is within 2 miles of several existing regional and community parks including the Lawnwood Recreation Area, North Fork of the S1. Lucie River Ten Mile Creek Recreation Area, and Elks Park. Locating residential units in this area will provide for the efficient use of these recreational facilities. Recreation and Open Space Level of Service demands are based on the 2000 Census reported persons per household of 2.47 and the 531 maximum dwelling units allowed under the proposed RH Future Land Use classification, resulting in a population estimate of 1,312 persons. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. '-' ..., March 10,2004 Page 11 Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Policy 11.1.4: No right to obtain final development order, nor any other rights to develop (B){3)(b) the subject property have been granted or implied by the County's approval of the preliminary development order without determining the capacity of public facilities. A Certificate of Capacity must be obtained before a Final Development Order is issued. Policy 11.1.28: The County shall continue to require new development to meet level of service standards for both on and off site improvements, including local streets, water and sewer connection lines, stormwater management facilities, and open space. Sufficient capacity is expected to be available to service the proposed amendment site. Prior to the approval of any Final Development Order a Certificate of Capacity must be obtained to ensure adequate facilities and capacities are available concurrent with development. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The following goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan apply to this amendment: WATER RESOURCES.187.201 (7)(a) Goal: Florida shall assure the availability of an adequate supply of water for all competing uses deemed reasonable and beneficial and shall maintain the functions of natural systems and the overall present level of surface and ground water quality. Florida shall improve and restore the quality of waters not presently meeting water quality standards. The proposed plan amendment is not expected to significantly increase demands on water resources of the State. Public water and sewer is available to the site and surface water impacts by any future development can be minimized through the protection of any remaining natural features on the site and installation of a storm water manage system that minimize storm water impacts to Five Mile Creek. The applicant should work with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the South Florida Water Management District to develop a storm water management plan that will minimize storm water impacts to Five Mile Creek. A storm water plan can include the use of pervious surfaces for the large parking areas that will be required for the project and providing native habitat between parking and impervious surface areas and the adjacent canal will reduce the volume and velocity of storm water from the site. NATURAL SYSTEMS AND RECREATIONAL LANDS.187.201 (9)(a) Goal: Florida shall protect and acquire unique natural habitats and ecological systems, such as wetlands, tropical hardwood hammocks, palm hammocks, and virgin long leaf pine forests, and restore degraded natural systems to a functional condition. '-" ..,J March 10, 2004 Page 12 Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 The proposed RH Future Land Use amendment would not impact natural systems that would result in the loss of unique natural habitats and ecological systems. The amendment site is within an area of urbanized St. Lucie County that has been altered by past development activities. The only remaining natural system in close proximity to the site is Five Mile Creek, which was altered by dredging in the 1930-40's. The North Fork of the St. Lucie River and it's major tributaries, including Five Mile Creek are proposed for restoration as part of the Indian River Lagoon Plan (CERP) and the Feasibility Study for the Reconnection of Wetlands and Oxbows along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The amendment site does not contain lands proposed for restoration as a part of these studies. To minimize impacts to Five Mile Creek and downstream waters the stormwater management designs and native vegetative buffering should be provided to maximize stormwater storage and filtering of pollutants before outfall to the nearby Creek. LAND USE. 187.201 (16)(a) Goal: In recognition of the importance of preserving the natural resources and enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner. The proposed amendment to the future land use classification is not expected to adversely affect the quality of life in the immediate surrounding area. The site is located in an area that contains public improvements sufficient to support residential development. The applicant has indicated that sufficient capacity is currently available from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority to provide water and wastewater service to 531 dwelling units that would be allowed under the proposed amendment's maximum density. Prior to the issuance of any Final Development Order, a Certificate of Capacity indicating that all adequate infrastructure services are available is required as well as an Environmental Impact Report, unless waived by the Board of County Commissioners. PUBLIC FACILITIES. 187.201(18)(a)FS: Florida shall protect the substantial investments in public facilities that already exist and shall plan for and finance new facilities to serve residents in a timely, orderly, and efficient manner. The amendment would maximize the efficient use of the existing and proposed public facilities in furtherance of this state goal. TRANSPORTATION. 187.201(20)FS: directs future transportation improvements to aid in the management of growth and promotes an intermodal transportation system. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the states goal to promote an intermodal transportation system. An analysis of the impact of the proposed amendment on affected roadways has been provided. The applicant's Traffic Impact Statement is based upon a "worst-case" traffic generation for the site utilizing the maximum allowed density under the proposed RH Future Land Use classification. The analysis indicates that an additional 531 single- family dwelling units would not reduce the level of service on Edwards Road and South ~ .."" March 10,2004 Page 13 Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: P A-03-005 25th Street. If the site were developed for multifamily purposes, the trip generation would be less than that generated from the existing COM classification. CONSISTENCY WITH THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN The following are the primary regional goals and polices that apply to this petition: Strategy 1.1.2: Promote compatibility of urban areas, regional facilities, natural preserves and other open spaces. The proposed amendment furthers this goal. The proposed change in future land use provides for an increase in density in the urban area where existing public facilities are available. The proposed amendment provides for the efficient use of regional facilities and allows high-density residential development in close proximity to existing and proposed retail, employment centers and recreational centers. Policy 8.1.1.1: All development should take place concurrent with or after the provision of necessary infrastructure and services. The proposed amendment site is located in an area with the necessary water, wastewater and roadway capacity currently available. Development of high-density residential units on the site encourages the efficient use of services and promotes the use of the County's public transit services. CONCLUSION Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed Future Land Use Classification change would increase residential densities in the urban area and thereby further goals to provide for a compact urban form and reduce vehicular trips through the use of multi-modal transportation facilities. Staff analysis of this petition generally supports the requested change to RH. Staff would note that given the requirements of the County's Land Development Code, it may not be possible to achieve the maximum density of 15 du/ac on this parcel. Staff would also note that if approved, this would be one of the very limited number of parcels on the mainland of unincorporated S1. Lucie County with an RH designation. The land use decision to be made by this Commission is whether the current designation or a residential designation is more appropriate. If you collectively believe that the residential designation is the more appropriate choice, you have some latitude in your recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. You may recommend the RH (Residential, High) consistent with the applicant's request, or you may recommend a residential land use with a lower density. These include RU (Residential, Urban with a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre) and RM (Residential, Medium with a maximum of 9 dwelling units per acre). ~ March 10, 2004 Page 14 "'WIll Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval and that the petition be transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review. Attachment cc: County Administrator County Attorney File ~ March 10,2004 Page 15 "'" Petition: Home Dynamics Corporation File Number: PA-03-005 Suggested motion to recommend approval/denial of this requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment. MOTION TO APPROVE: AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY OF S1. LUCIE COUNTY RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVE THE APPLICATION OF HOME DYNAMICS CORPORATION, FOR A CHANGE IN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM COM (COMMERICAL) AND RU (RESIDENTIAL URBAN) TO RH (RESIDENTIAL HIGH), AND TRANSMIT THE PETITION TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR FURTHER REVIEW 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 LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY RECOMMEND THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DENY THE APPLICATION OF HOME DYNAMICS CORPORATION, FOR A CHANGE IN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM COM (COMMERICAL) AND RU (RESIDENTIAL URBAN) TO RH (RESIDENTIAL HIGH), BECAUSE. . .. CITE REASON(S) WHY - PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] ~ ...." 1L'" Z en Ü E§ CU·- c..... ~~ og (])~ E8 o I L{) o o I cry o « a.. .. A ,;i! I ..~ j I l~ II ~ . t o \ t i! '. ... .. õ.§~' ~ cr ..... . ~. ç Q)aj ~ z '0'0. ~ ç :) 0 ~o z u (L-.J :) 0 .... w; _. U -- a:: I - 'IIW3 .... ~ ! I z ã: ... f= '" ~ 'I a:: a I « :II I _ ...wn .. ~ _nM cr Z « .l-' -., ë5 ~ , r ... '" ... I """ " .. ~ cr .. ~ S liE ! S K ! S K ! '\ .. AlNno::> 3380H~33)0 ~ """ A Petition of Home Dynamics Corporation to request a Change in Future Land Use Classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban) to RH Residential Hi h). . . · . · . · · " · · · .. . N.S.L.R.W.....D. Canol No.9 · · r ' · oJ . · "8 . · ! . ! · 1/1 , · "8 o IE j u ~ · .............a.II. ~.. . _r___ - CU CU ... - en .£:. - 10 N .£:. - :J o en PA 03-005 ~ This pattern indicates subject parcel 5è":~ ~~_ ! Map prepared Ncwember 26. 2003 r ..... .... .. ~ --- .............. ... ....... ~ ... N .... ... ...... .... ..... . .... .. ----- - ~ -... --- .... . . ......... ...... ~ ...., Zoning Home . Dynamics Corporation ,. en a: , · . . · RS-4 CG · C\J I W a: PUD · . . N.S.L.R.W....D. CanOl No. 9 AR-1 C ~ o Õ ~ u :f . 111LL....M..D 1;;... _ . .... c.... ... ¡; ~ RM-5 RS RS-4 PA 03-005 ~ This pattern indicates subject parcel Sè"~_~~ GIS .-<._.,.,:,., Map prepared November 26, 2003 RM-9 RS-3 -- ,.. .. ..... ....... ........... - ....... ...,... .., N ... .., ....... o.-t ,... . ...... .. ............ ..... ...".... .......... ,....... ...... - . ....,...... ....... ~ Land Use Home Dynamics Corporation I · . , \ . I~ . --- - , RM . __ a HIYI I . COM , . RU . . , f · N.S.L.R.W.M.D. Canal No.9 ...", , ( . r---' ~ · . - · . -.- --.- - "-- · . -. "-- '"a ~ RLJ - . · - · . - ;-- "'-2---;- r-;- ~ . ~1. ! ~o_ lit · ~. -- -,"-- i · Vi . _~ -;- 7 ~- - "-- · , f--- - ~I Edwards Road I ....u........ ~_ . I _.~- / r-!;- , 'I- , · · RU ./ , f-- - - ,/ . -' -~-'-: / ----=:-.- .. , ~ :/ ~ tt: ~-¡:-i-: :! , ~t-- ...,;--_;·t..a. CUt--:-- . . . £ CII · . ~~ --= i ~rI 'xIlr'JY ;. , . l' · :-ùI V1 . 1"'1 .._ f- L-......." - I-- - · ~ ,. .. ¡¡:; ,L...¡; AWl nu, N , . , . . . " ,.,1 . .1 .c. - :I o ~ !'/X.//-;1'7777~L/////~~~ ~- \ :\'\ ¡ ~ . . . II . . . , ,. . . .¡. .! Elizabeth Avenue .1, .1. ..1'1' ... ~1' RU RU RM ~ " \N.S.L.R.D.D. Canol NO.: '- ~ I P A 03-005 ~ This pattern indicates subject parcel I ~ 0'\ €,o.\ co ","'......... iIP ,_,~I ~ f\C)f c.1I"~ an ~",o'f i. ¡g ,,~ . I: .A . . ,9.-0..,/,-...:e. ~~ GIS ~...>_ ;,,". Map prepared November 26. 2003 t ... "'IP .. --- ........ III' ......... '"' ....... ..-- .... N .... .... ....... ~ ~ . ..... .. ............ - ~ ......... ......... ..... . . ........... -..... ~ ....I P A 03-005 W////~ This pattern indicates ~ subject parcel <..'-/,.,/; ~ t /~./_''''- Vf>~ _~ GIS .~",_~ Map pt'8p111ed November 26. 2003 .,.,. ,..., ... ...., .,....., .............. ... ...... ...... -- N 'IIIINI......................~..,...___ ___ ~ ......, lit....... III.. . . .......... -.... '-' ..., -.. 0 Residential development shall be regulated by the intensity district in which it is to take place. In no case should gross residential density exceed 15 du/ac. o All uses shall be compatible with intemal and external adjacent land uses. SPECIAL DISTRICT (SD) The intent of the Special District (SO) designation is to identify those areas where specific uses or combinations of uses are anticipated. These include previously approved Community Development Districts, areas for which a site specific development plan or concept has been granted, or areas which by their location have specific issues and concerns for their development. Residential densities within an area designated as a Special District, are limited to what the current land use designation authorizes. Any increase over the present designation may be considered only through the Plan Amendment process. COMMERCIAL (COM) The Commercial (COM) land use designation is applicable to areas of future commercial development, in addition to atose existing developed commercial areas. Future commercials areas should be located at points of high transportation access, with specific action taken to prevent the development of new linear commercial strips. Although this plan supports the location of higher Intensity commercial uses at the intersection of arterial· roadways, it should not be interpreted to mean that every intersection should be designated for commercial activities. Unless otherwise designated on the future land use maps, applications for commercial use should be done in conjunction with a detailed review of the impacts of such development on adjacent property, specifically noting what, if any, negative neighborhood Impacts could result. The Commercial (COM) designation is intended to accommodate all commercial zoning districts as identified under St. Lucie County's Land Development Regulations- Office and general retail uses are considered the principal uses within the COM designated areas. INDUSTRIAL (IND) This land use designation is applied to specific areas of the County identified as suitable fer industrial use. This land use designation is intended to be implemented through both the heav ¡ and light industrial zoning districts, with the specific criteria for zoning application as provided fer under the policies of the Future Land Use Element. Underline is for add~ion strilte thretfgh if for deletion st. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan 1-31 Future Land Use Adoption: March 5, 2002 '-' ...J The RE designation is intended for large lot, single-family detached residential dwellings, at a density of one unit per gross acre. These areas are not required to be served with central utilities, however when at all practical, service connections should be provided. The RE designation is acknowledged as potentially suitable for limited residential development under the following criteria: o All residential development must be in accordance with applicable standards and restrictions as set forth in the Land Development Regulations; o All residential development proposals in excess of 10 units must be approved through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process as provided for in the Land Development Regulations; o Any residential development in excess of 200 acres should be in conjunction with the establishment of a Community Development District, pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, for the purpose of providing the necessary infrastructure facilities to support that development; and, o Residential densities are set at a maximum of one (1) unit per one (1) gross acre. RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN (RS) The Residential Suburban (AS) land use category is intended to act as a transitional area between the agricultural areas and the more intense residential areas in the eastern portion of the County. This category is found predominantly along the western edge of the urban form, bu~ is also appropriate for areas of special environmental concern such as along the North Fork of the St. Lucie Aiver ,and the Indian River Lagoon. The AS designation is intended for large lot, single-family detached residential dwellings, at a density of one to two units per gross acre. These areas are not required to be served with central utilities, however when at all practical, service connections should be required. RESIDENTIAL URBAN (RU) The Residential Urban (AU) classification is the predominant residential land use category in the County. This residential land use category provides for a maximum density of 5 dwelling units per gross acre. The AU designation is generally found between the identified urban service areas and the transitional AS areas. These properties need to be serviced with central water and wastewater services. These services may be provided by either a public utility or througl. private on-site facilities, as would be permitted in accordance with all applicable regulations. New development in the AU areas car. occur using traditional single-family or multi-family zonin6 designations or through the Planned Unit Development process. ....--.. Undertine is for addition strilte tI'II'8t1gh if for deletion St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan 1-29 Future land Use Adoption: March 5, 2002 ~ ...J -. RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (RM) The Residential Medium (RM) land use category is to be applied to those areas that are within, or planned to be within, areas of central community services. A maximum residential density of nine dwelling units per gross acre is pennitted under this land use designation. If required, the actual density is subject to the satisfactory completion of the rezoning process, which would include complete review of the physical suitability of the property for development at the proposed intensity. _ Medium density residential land uses can act as a transition between the lower intensity RU areas and the more intense land use designations. Zoning applications within the RM land use area include single-family, multi-family, or PUD zoning. RESIDENTIAL HIGH (RH) Areas designated Residential High (RH) are intended to accommodate high density development, not to exceed 15 dwelling units per gross acre. In order to develop at this intensity, it must be possible to connect into a central water and wastewater service facility, and the subject property must be located in an area of the County which has available all urban services and facilities including fire protection, police, recreation, roadways, and schools. MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (MXD) - The intent of the Mixed Use Development (MXD) designation is to identify those areas where innovative land use concepts are encouraged. Application of this district should be with prudence, and should be only to those areas where traditional land use classifications do not afford the desired flexibility and community input in land use planning necessary to address local concerns. Candidates for this district include all 1-95 interchange areas, the S1. Lucie County International Airport, Community Development Districts created pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes and areas of special or unique environmental consideration that may not be appropriate for traditional land use designations. Uses within the areas classified as Mixed Use should be segregated as to intensity and indicated in the fonn of a concept master plan which is to be included as a part of the land use designation process. In the following criteria, in addition to those as cited in Objective 1.1..6, are to be used in the development of Mixed Use areas: o Unless otherwise compliant with the identified intensity classification, any change in zoning shall be to the Planned Unit Development (PUD), Planned Non-residential Development (PNRD) or Mixed Use Development (MXD), as described in the St. Lucie County Land Development Regulations. Those properties with compatible existing zoning designations are encouraged to develop under the PUD, PNRD or MXD regulations. Underline is for addition .--- strike Ihretlgh if for deletion 51. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan 1-30 Future Land Use Adoption: March 5. 2002 NOTICE OF CHA~ TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MA THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN .."", Thé St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners will consider an ordinance to change the Future Land Use designation of the lands indicated on,the map in this advertisement. A public hearing on this proposal will be held before the Board of County Commissioners on October 18, 2004, at 6:00 P.M., in the County Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, 51. Lucie County Administration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. The purpose of thi!) public hearing is to consider the Department of Community Affairs, Objection, Comment and Recommendation Report on the proposed amendment and whether or not to adopt an ordinance changing the Future Land Use designation on approximately 35.4 acres from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential, Urban - 5 du/ac) to RM (Residential, Medium - 9 du/ac) and RH (Residential, High -15 du/ac). I ell, 11 ,.-L- / '-- __I , ~ i L-.J \1 ¡I Petition Applicant: Home Dynamics Inc, Petition Number: PA·03·005 Location: Southwest corner of the intersection of South 25th Street and Edwards Road. Copies of the proposed amendment and draft ordinance may be obtained from the St. Lucie County Growth Management Department, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982. Any questions may be directed to Diana Waite, Planner III at 772·462·1577. All proceedings before the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any decision made with respect to any matter considered at the hearing, they will need a record of the proceedings and that for such purpose, they may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. At the request of any party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during the hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross examine any individual testifying during the hearing upon request. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA ISI PAULA LEWIS, CHAIRMAN PUBLISH DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2004 '-' ...I BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ~ T.·~eJt:'I't::' '~.., ',.... COUNTY ~, FLORIDA ---, GROWTH MANAGEMENT October 7, 2004 In accordance with the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, you are hereby advised that HOME DYNAMICS CORPORATION has petitioned St. Lucie County for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban) to RH (Residential High) and RM (Residential Medium) for the following described property: Location: Southwest corner of the intersection of South 25th Street and Edwards Road. THE PROPERTY'S LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS A V AILABLE UPON REQUEST The second public hearing on the petition will be held at 6:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on October 18,2004, County Commissioner's Chambers, St. Lucie County Administration Building Annex, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at that time. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be considered. The County Planning Division should receive written comments to the Planning and Zoning Commission at least 3 days prior to a scheduled hearing. County policy discourages communication with individual Planning and Zoning Commission and County Commission on any case outside of the scheduled public hearing(s). You may speak at a public hearing, or provide written comments for the record. The proceedings of the Planning and Zoning Commission are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Planning and Zoning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings. For such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross- examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. If it becomes necessary, a public hearing may be continued to a date-certain. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Director at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting at (772) 462- 1777 or T.D.D. (772) 462-1428. If you no longer own property adjacent to the above-described parcel, please forward this notice to the new owner. Please call (772) 462-1577 if you have any questions, and refer to: File Number: PA-03-005. Sincerely, ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS /'~ ~/',~ Paula Lewis, Chairman JOHN D, ßf\UHN, Disrrict No, 1 . DOUG COWAf\D, Disrricr No, 2 . PAULA A, LEWIS, Disrricr No, J . Ff\ANNIE HUTCHINSON, Disrricr No, 4 . CLIFF ßAf\NES, Disrricr No 5 County Adminisrroror - Douglas M, Anderson 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce, FL 34982-5652 Administration: (772) 462-1590 · Planning: (772) 462-2822 · GIS/Technical Services: (772) 462-1553 Economic Development: (772) 462-1550 · Fax: (772) 462-1581 Tourist Development: (772) 462-1529 · Fax: (772) 462-2132 www.co.st-Iucie.fl.us r I i I II II Ii " II " Ii 'I I, 'j Ii ,I II II ¡I ,I II II Ii Ii II II /1 II Ii ¡ I I Ii I I, Ii II I :i 'i I I i II Ii s III 1& 11 & ... - c: .. .. I! it I! 1.1 l~ II~ & ! !! f! IE CP ð~ <ø! I) ! III ~ ~ ~~:! ~ ~ "t f"'ì t-". "!t ob 0000 "" 000- 00 .,."" "" ,.-¡ r'I""¡ r-". Co: g; Ñ~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ 0000000000 0\0\0\0\0'1 "":t''"t'.q-'"t'..q- f"'1 rr) f"'1 f'O'j f"'ì ('I ("I ~~~rr¡1'f') ~~~t"'IOO ":"~ ...., 00 00 0-00 """" .... .... .... .... ("'I t'1 V(";ì \I) 00 oo"'i 01"1 ~: ~ r:, ......0000 00000 ::¿~~ ~~~~~~ t'I ("1 ('1 N C'I t"'1 000000000000 0-.0-..0\0-.0\0\ ..q-""I:t"tt'll:f"tt"tt f"'ìf"1f"'ìMf"'ìro"l ...., ~~~~~ 'í'~""~~ N N ("'-1 C"I 00 00 00 00 0\0\ 0\0\ <II:t'll:f 'II:f"":t' t"")t"'j ('f')f"1 "will ...., °3~~~V)~~ ~-9-9~~~~~ ('"'-I"'-INt'10N ~1 000000001#"')00 00 0\0\0\0\0\0'\ 0\ -.:t"tt<o:t'o:t'''Cf''II:f ~ f"Ît""'IMt""'¡('t')f""') n t"-I ("I 00 00 00 00 "" "" .... .... 00 00 \I) \I) t"1 ('I 11(";1 00 00 0000 "" "" .... .... 00 00 0000 """" ........ 01 ~: ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ~ ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti I ... ... '" U " " U U U ~ ~ U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U U U C u U U U U U U U U U U U U U ~ U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U u þ~~~t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ü¡f¡f¡fæ>¡f¡f¡f¡fl.l.¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡fl.l.¡f¡fl.l.¡f¡f¡f¡f¡fl.l.¡f~¡f¡f¡f¡f¡fæ¡f ~.5j l~~~o iE!j!jf,Ii:! ~ôðð~ðð :g8aao~~ -«;:; ~ ~ f"'ì f'1 ø. >0 ' Ë:¡ . Z 01) 01, E' .;., . 01 E .' z' I") 01 E . Z ~ 1"1:' 13 ¡¡ .;.ð " ~ .šC: 13 It ~ ~,!:! 15 >.!!.~"" t:: e ~ g !!.,." >. u e .. t: Ii ,." ~ !!.:z: .... ell] ~ e ~ 11~~~~ Zl.Iwen<...¡ c: c c c: c c ..J..J..J..J..J..J 888888 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..c..c:..c.c.c..c: cncncncncnCl) I""'¡ I,fj"'" 0'1 C""1 t'1 C""I t'1 t'1 f""') 0\0\0\0\0'10'1 C""I N ("I t'1 ('1 t"1 ci5 ~ 05< \I) ... ....~ 05 Ii ::> " ~Õ ~g: 00,"" ....-<t _c__~_ en t-enen~en 0500505"05<Ì5 1,fj~V')I,fjIl'1V"¡-.::t ("I.:! N N >< N N ~~~~~~'" ~¡;:;~~08(,' f""')V"¡r<')r<')Ø,..fl"ìt"") rJ:Ic.ncñ 05 05 05<Ì5 V"¡II")-.::t~ ("1""'1"'" N Cl.)CI'.)CI)c.n gg:!ê r<') t"") fI"ì f""') <Ì5 <Ì5<Ì505 """""" N N""'I en "'en S§= P')P')t""j~ "" i:IG <Ì5'Ë 05 " ~ ~ ",iE .... ...., ~ 1"1 < is. < ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <Ì5<Ì5 <Ì5i:IG««««< ~~~~fiii]iiiii enen",,,,i'JøøøtL:øøøøø ...., \I) g :: ~ ...., :t '" \I) \I) .... - If'\ .... :!:!- ::~;:=;~~~~~~~ ('fj ('fj M MOO,...., ,...1 ""'1 - ,....1 t'1 N ,...1 ,....1 " '¡¡ 'I: ~ ,." ... " .5 ¡i ::.: " - ,!:! ~ ~ g ¡g <U~ ~~~ " " " .. .. .. 000 i:IGi:IGi:IG .... " '¡j o U < 05 15 " ,!::1 ¡¡¡ N 'õ .. >. o ~ o .... " ~ " ~ t: ¡f .... o '" ~ ::> ð '" r; :2 ~ Ið~ '" .. .. " " " C .S c 'æ..'æ ",en", ~ >. c o 05 c < c.. ~ ~ ~ u c ~ '" '" .. 01) " c.. o 1.1. = ~ C '2 ...J -. ~ ê ~ ~ '§> ~,~ ~ ð~~>~~~ w c o E " > i:Cw "ë-~ :g ~ .... .... .... ..J 0 0 o..J ~~~iii-2 ;.:;ø¡fi:IGi:lGi:IG¡5 '" :E ð ... " :J' 2 ~ c ~ " "" c < ] ~ ð~ .~ u .. .5 >. '" '¡:;-5 .;¡ ~ t:: '" ~ '" ::> '" ~~ð ðð u~.£ ~~~ i .§ ~ Ë Ë ,~ """15 1515e- 00 ~ ~~~g~~~ c: en ,5 N C en ~ rn rn ~ " :.s 'i 8. = 05 ~ '2 15 '2 '2 S~~j£~8~,ª~~~ ... .... rJ § ~ Ið~ Ii t e!''''' o ~ ~ø ~ ~ ~ c .5 .S i"æëü en",,,, E ::> ø ~ ~ i:IG ~~ " C ~ '6 .... .... < ø .~~ ~ U ~ ~ CU ~~::i;~ 1.1. "" ,~ U-8 ~;!~~ 1.I.ø::,."ø o " ,S -¡¡ ::> a- u ~ < >. .. .c .- .c ;t o " ø..J ..Jen " " .§ ·S " " >,." -¡¡ ~ 5 ~ð~ .S j ! j ... " ÞO >. rn 1/1 2 ~ § ~ ~,."ø¡¡¡ .. .. " e!' ::> ø - 1::_- E ::! ~ :ê e i:lG68 ... 0 """ ~! ;··~·~I'" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ §~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~! ~ ~ ~ ....; ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~,.~,~ I"'.~I.~ 181 88"''''....~~~§§8§§§88§ 8 ---§-§§........'" "'''''''i ji' .j. .j · ~ ~~ªªªªªª..........~"'''''''~~.... ~ ~~~....~........~~~~~~ ' e ~ ~~¡;::¡;::¡;::¡;::¡;::¡;::¡;::~~~~~sssssS(sssssssssssss ---------~~oo~~œ~~~oo~~~~~~ooœoo~oooooooo~oo~oooooooo = ~, N N N M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ,...1 "I N N N ,...,1 N ,....1 N N N N N N N N ('1 (', r;: N N ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N~~ " B ] i = J i ,5= ~ t 1(.1 r.JJ Co:! E . . ..& II I~ f! I~ (.I 'I! II ~ I_i Ir-7 I II I i¡.!e-r iLl'''' " ~ '-'~ ~V);;:;;:('I ""$$$&: ~I N N 00 00 00 "'0>'" ~ ~ ~ ..., .., .., ;~ ¡i ~ ,ti ti ti ti "'1' ~I: ~I, =11 OJ :; ~ 'I, U :; :iii:. 1¡~i6 !~(.I:iLJ. OJ " " ~ ~ ~ OJ OJ OJ ~~~ t: t: t: ¡f¡f¡f 00 ~~~ ~~.., N N 00 00 "'''' ~ ~ .., .., ð;ð;~~ $ $;;;;;; NN 0000 "'''' ~~ ..., .., :t~N:20 ~~NNN ";I~,,( 00 00 "" "'0>'" ~~~ t"'j,.,.., ('f") .., r-r-"" ~V'¡'" N~ ~,.¡ g:~ ~ ~ .., ..., N 0\ "I:t\Coooooo~ t"1 ~V')0\0I0\t"ì ON N I,Q 'II:f ~ <o::t ("I NO~C'It"'jMI"'ìr--- ~O d-. ~ ~~~~ ~ -.:tt"")~""1' ~ ('f"", t"ì f"'j t"i t"ì &~ ~..., ..., ..., ..J ðtititititititititititititititititititititititititi ii ): Ii ~~~~ I' < < < < <Ï5 !: ] J ] ] ; :: i3' i3 ¡:¡ ¡:¡ .Ê ,,~ ¡¡j¡¡j ¡¡¡ ¡¡¡ ~ li:g ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 Il ~ N N M N ~ ¡; \C i: ... ;¡ i ¡!z ¡¡ ¡III) if i! il:Z: i: d OJ ~ ¡¡ '~ ~ ø:I¡f ..c..c..c ~ ~ ~ uucuuCOCQa::I tttt~~~ ~~~~'i:'i:'i: t: t: t: t: !j t! ij ¡f¡f¡f¡fClClO '" c OJ OJ..c1: u u ~ ~ u'~ ~ C ~ ~ u ê ~ u ¡¡ ¡¡ OJ OJ ¡¡ ~ ~ ~ OJ OJ ¡¡ OJ OJ ¡¡ u ~~~~t:~<Ï5cø:l~~~~~~t:e t: t: t: t: ~ t: t: ~ E t: t: t: t: t: t: ~ ~ ¡f¡f¡f¡fa¡f~~~¡f¡f¡f¡f¡f¡fa~ OJ OJ > > « -s-s ~i ¡¡¡¡¡¡ ~~ N N ..c..c..c u u u ~~~ ê ê ê :ë:ë:ë !I< !I< !I< õõõ NNN U U !:! cñci5", """"'0 UU~~> «ø:lø:læ~~~~ -s -s e e e '" '" '" '" £!~]~~~]]]]r- ~~]~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~"'''' "'~ 0~~~~~88g;~0 a.. C""-1 N r-- r--- r-- ('f") M N N ø.. """"'0 ';;: 'S; ";; ~ ~ ~ CICIO >- co ~~ ~~ ~ 0 'IS.. ~ ~ c < "" ]~Q 1: ~.!!G ~:g æðu~æ~ 5~~~5~ ZOø:l ø:I 88::;0 0 M-r---c...f'l'ìè:. """"'0 "'QG~~~ë; ! ! ¡ ~ ~ '~ ~~~~ªð õ-_OJ",~ ",::;;§CI~"" ("I t"ì ~ - 00 -- Or--- t"iMro"'\Nt---.:r '0 > Cë .. .. ... OJ OJ OJ -ã-ã-ã "iJ 'ü 'ü ~ ~ ~ N 'õ c < N ::E < ij .... >- ro '" -s OJ co -g C ~ ~ 'C; 'E 'C; ~ If 'ë 'ë '6 " o .. co j ~ _ 0 .Q .Q '" ~ :.: "0:': J: 0 < i¡~, .. ~ c co '<:1 ~ " E .¡;: :E 'C; ,I. OJ '" Ü co u ¡z ~ ¡;j CI. Z '" :¡ Ii.... II &I ii E ;i~ ii-· I' I' ii Ii II i¡ Ii. iie Ii = lit.- ¡I I: c ~;f01. ~ Ii :i Ë, ¡:: ¡:: ij.1 ii- Ci il~:;::C " I: !; '" Ii ::E ¡¡<'II 5 Ii Ë:"5i'~ 11;;!'ð] .. ... ~Në~riJ!~ ;!¡~ið~~~ ~~< C >- e ~ Š " CI~j >- .... ~ QJ OJ > Ii ::;.:!-e ~r§~ E E ~ ¡Q ~ ~ § ~ ::C::C~¡:: ; > c § '~ CI::C E E " " J:¡J:¡ ~ ~ ~ g ~ææ.Q ::c < -; < :s! ~ ~ 0 CI CI ,~ ,~ ~ C 0:'::':;>0;>0;>022- i5]~~~ððð~~~ > .g ~ ~ ~~ ~ Clø:Iø:I c c c ~ ~ ~ e e e ø:Iø:Iø:I E E ~ ¡Q ~ ~ § ~ ::C::C~¡:: .... " 8 >-ij Š ~ ~j ø:I IX t: co ~<~ IX",,,, ~ ,5 W t: - '" OJ ~ OJ 01) J:¡ ë! ¡:: ï~ ~LJ.~U ê ~ ð~ c o '" E '" E=é!! ; c ð ~ eel: :s! ~ ¿S~~~~ E E " " J:¡J:¡ '" '" u '" co .. ææ ~l~m~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -.-.-,- - .., ..., i ~ ~ § § § 8 8 8 8 8 8 jªªªªªi --------- ŠS~S$ ---NNNNNN '~~~~œ œ~~~~~~~~~~ NNMNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~§~§§-oo~§ ~~Innu ~~~~~~~~~ r!i~~~~~~~~ e- o U '" u 'ë .. C >- CI OJ E o ::c ¡¡: o U OJ '¡:j 3 '" OJ '" 0 .~ tË <~ ~ e 0'0 "" .[ ·ü u' 3;;: <Ï5 ... o 'E ~ ø:I rig c ..c o u ....'" ~ '" c :.: OJ 0. 01)0. « ~ - ~ "-" Agenda Request Item Number Date: 3:D October 18, 2004 Consent Règular Public Hearing Leg. ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] Quasi-JD [ X ] BACKGROUND: Consider Ordinance 04-031 adopting the Lu e Rock, LLC request for a change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-9S Activity Area - Medium and High Intensity Levels). The Florida Department of Community Affairs found that the transmitted data and analysis did not demonstrate that the amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan Chapter 187, Florida Statutes. The Department also objected to the lack of clarity in the County's MXD policies within its Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. To address the Department's concerns for this amendment, the applicant has provided revised data and analysis and recommended specific caps on future development. To: Submitted By: Board of County Commissioners Growth Management SUBJECT: Approval of the proposed change to the MXD Future Land Use designation would allow developers to seek approval for commercial, industrial or residential uses up to the maximum allowed under the MXD policies and the approved Ordinance. Any future development of the property must be through the PUD, PMUD or PNRD process. The appropriate intensity and mix of uses, and their location would be determined at that time. FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A On February 19, 2003, the Local Planning Agency, by a vote of 7 to 1, recommended a change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-9S Activity Area - Medium and High Intensity Levels). RECOMMENDATION: On April 6, 2004, the Commission transmitted a change in Future Land Use from RS (Residential, Suburban) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-9S Activity Area - Medium and High Intensity Levels) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Adopt Ordinance 04-031 approving the Lucie Rock, LLC request for a change in Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to MXD- Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-9S Activity Area). CURRENCE: ~ COMMISSION ACTION: ~ APPROVED D DENIED [==:J OTHER Approved 5-0 ~ Douglas M. Anderson County Administrator county Attorney ¡I;~ Originating Dept.: Coordination! Signatures Mgt. & Budget: Other: Purchasing: Other: \..; ....,,¡ Board of County Commissioners: 10/18/04 GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Administration MEMORANDUM TO: County Commissioners FROM: Randy Stevenson, Growth Management Interim Director IL DATE: October 13, 2004 SUBJECT: Lucie Rock, LLC/Petition for a Change in Future Land Use Ordinance 04-031 On April 6, 2004, the Commission approved transmittal of the Lucie Rock, LLC proposed change to the Future Land Use Map to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (Department). The Department's Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report found that the supporting data and analysis did not demonstrate that the amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan Chapter 187, Florida Statutes and cited the information necessary to address the Department's objections. The Department also requested that the County further define controlling mixed use proportionate share for each land use type allowed and include a height limitation in the plan or other intensity standards to limit the total Floor Area Ratio for the MXD Future Land Use category rather than deferring to the land development regulations. Since addressing the larger MXD issues of the Future Land Use Element cannot be completed within the timeframe required to adopt the Lucie Rock amendment, the Department recommends that specific caps be shown as a footnote on the FLUM (Future Land Use Map) for this site and other amendments as an interim measure. Staff has reviewed the applicants requested caps and additional data and analysis that would limit the type of future development within the amendment site to 60% IND (Industrial), 30% RES (Residential), and 10% COM (Commercial). The required additional data and analysis for these ratios indicate they will not exceed the level of service standards at this time. Staff would note that the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map is a preliminary development order and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property. No right to obtain a final development order or any other rights to develop the subject property are granted or implied by the County if the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of Capacity. If approved, Ordinance 04-031 will set the maximum level of development on the amendment site. The specific location and mix of uses on the amendment site, the appropriate type of industrial and commercial uses and residential densities, would be determined through the planned development process. Any change in zoning in the MXD Future land use areas must be to PUD, PNRD or MXD to ensure compatibility with surrounding lands uses. '-' .....,¡ October 13, 2004 Page 2 Subject: Lucie Rock, LLC Ordinance 04-031 The proposed change to the Future Land Use Map would allow up to 56.6 acres of industrial use, 9.43 acres of commercial use and 28.3 acres of residential use on the 94.34 acre tract. These uses would be guided by the MXD policies of the comprehensive plan and Ordinance 04- 031. Staff believes that, with the addition of a limitation on height of structures (60 feet) and the applicant's proposed caps, the Department's concerns are addressed. The proposed MXD would allow Industrial, Commercial and/or residential uses to be proposed for development. Staff understands the Department's confusion over application of the MXD designation. Staff believes that the MXD designation precludes development at the intensities that are of concern to the Department. We intend to clarify the Comprehensive Plan's MXD language in a future amendment. A copy of the original staff report, the Florida Department of Community Affairs Objections, Recommendation and Comments (ORC) Report and the applicant's response to the ORC report are attached for your reference. Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 04-031 granting the Lucie Rock, LLC Future Land Use change from RS (Residential, Suburban) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area - Medium and High Intensity Levels). cc: County Administrator County Attorney Robert Klein File ~ ....I 1 ORDINANCE No. 04-031 2 File Number PA-03-006 3 4 AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE ST. 5 LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY IN ST. LUCIE 6 COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY; AUTHORIZING 7 AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; 8 PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; 9 PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA 10 DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF 11 COMMUNITY AFFAIRS; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING 12 FOR ADOPTION. 13 14 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, 15 has made the following determinations: 16 17 1. Lucie Rock, LLC presented a petition for a change in Future Land Use 18 Designation from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2du/ac) to MXD-Orange 19 Avenue (Mixed Use Development-Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area - 20 Medium and High Intensity). 21 22 2. On February 19, 2004 the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency held a 23 public hearing on the petition, after publishing notice at least 15 days priorto 24 the hearing and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the 25 subject property, and has recommended that this Board approve the 26 hereinafter described request for a change in Future Land Use Designation 27 from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2du/ac) to MXD-Orange Avenue (Mixed 28 Use Development-Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area) for the property 29 described in Part A below; 30 31 3. On April 6, 2004, this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after 32 publishing notice at least 15 days prior to the hearing and notifying by mail 33 the owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. 34 35 4. On April 6, 2004 this Board authorized the transmittal of this petition to the 36 Florida Department of Community Affairs for further agency review in 37 accordance with the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; and 38 39 5. On October 18, 2004 this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after 40 publishing a notice of such hearing in the Fort Pierce Tribune and the Port 41 St. Lucie News on October 8, 2004 and notifying by mail all owners of 42 property within 500 feet of the subject property. 43 44 45 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners 46 of St. Lucie County, Florida: '-' ....,¡ 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 A. CHANGE IN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION The Future Land Use Designation set forth in the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan for the property described as follows: The South One-half of the Southwest one-quarter of Section 2, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, Less and except all rights-of-way of record. Together With That part of the Northeast one-quarter of the Southwest one-quarter of Section 2, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, lying Southwesterly or 1-95 less and except the East 93 feet and the South 60 feet for Road and Canal right-of-way. All lying and being in St. Lucie County, Florida. Together With From the Southeast corner of the Northwest one-quarter of the Southwest one-quarter of Section 2, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, run North 00°08'13" West along the one-quarter section line 60 feet to the Point of Beginning, thence continue North 00°08'13" West 846.63 feet to the Southerly Right-Of-Way line for Interstate 95 Highway; thence run North 60°08'02" West along said right-of-way line 107.58 feet; thence run North 62°25'28" West 300.24 feet; thence run North 60°08'02" West 182.77 feet; thence run South 00°11'29" West 346.62 feet; thence run South 60°08'02" East 354.41 feet; thence run south 00°08'13" East, 607.48 feet; thence run North 89°53'47" East, 210 feet to the Point of Beginning. Location: Northwest corner of the intersection of Rock Road and Canal No. 44. owned by Lucie Rock, LLC, is hereby changed from RS (Residential, Suburban - 2du/ac) to MXD-Orange Avenue (Mixed Use Development-Orange Avenue/l-95 Activity Area) with intensity levels and limitations as shown on Exhibit A, Future Land Use Map. B. FINDING OF CONSISTENCY This Board specifically determines that the approval of this change in the Future Land Use Element is internally consistent with the policies and objectives contained in the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, specifically Policies 11.1.3.6 and 11.1.3.7 of the October 18, 2004 Ordinance 04-031 Page 2 '-' "wII 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 Capital Improvements Element, which identify this approval as a Preliminary Development Order and provide for the recognition that impacts of this approval on the public facilities of St. Lucie County will not occur until such time as a Final Development Order is issued. C. CHANGES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS The St. Lucie County Growth Management Interim Director is hereby authorized and directed to cause these changes to be made in the Future Land Use maps of the Future Land Use Element of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and to make notation of reference to the date of adoption of this Ordinance. D. 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. E. 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 circumstances, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstances. F. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE This ordinance shall be applicable as stated in Paragraph A. G. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Bureau of Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida, 32304. October 18, 2004 Page 3 Ordinance 04-031 \.; ..."", 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 H. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS The Growth Management Interim Director shall send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Department of Community Affairs, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100. I. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect upon the issuance by the State Land Planning Agency of a Notice of Intent to find the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(9), Florida Statutes, or until the Administration Commission issues a final order finding the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(10). J. ADOPTION After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows: Chairman Paula A. Lewis xxx Vice Chairman John D. Bruhn xxx Commissioner Cliff Barnes xxx Commissioner Doug Coward xxx Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson xxx PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2004. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY Chairman October 18, 2004 Page 4 Ordinance 04-031 '-' 1 ATTEST: 2 3 4 5 6 DEPUTY CLERK 7 '-11 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: October 18, 2004 Page 5 COUNTY A TIORNEY Ordinance 04-031 ~ ,.., Exhibit A Lucie Rock, LLC change in Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential, Suburban) to MXD (Mixed Use-Orange Avenue1-95 Activity Area) ~ II I-~~)-I I I", II --.-': T þ-J " II 1-1 1'-.......... '" II ~ J)- ........................... ........., ~II ~'iT.- ......... ' J_ ......... ¡--- ......... \- ......... ~1It.! - ~ N.5.LR.D.o. Canal No. '3 I 1/ s ¡> I I I 1,,- III' Iii I ~~ ~~~ '- .................. I IIL___ ~ ~~~ .........J I I ~ '/ %-~/ ~~~r--~ '/ II f//~, '/ ~/ '.h ~ 1I'~ ~ ~ ] "- ~,~, '~/ /~ ~ / ~ r--.... fI m /' ~ '/ '/ ~ ~~ ~ f~ ~ ~ í'~/ /~/ f//'Jh/. '/////, r/// '///'~ ~O'/.Í~/ / 'l'/////// $/ //W.ij // 'l"//.Í, ~//J?'/~ n N.5.L.W.M.D. _, Canal . ; i - II I I I I] r I I = \ III1 [ 11/- -~ v- = I I I I I r I 1-- = IIII I II 1-. *Note: Future development shall be limited to the following land uses and ratios: INO (Industrial) 60%, COM (Commercial) 10%, and RES (Residential) 30%. The height of all building and structures shall be no more than 60 feet. 5è /-~ &.-4'- t GIS ^",_,::;-' Map prepared FebruSly 2, 2004 Map revised October 12, 2004 P A 03-006 ~ This pattern indicates '..LL.U subject parcel ==Ë=-==:~===- N '-" ..., RESPONSES TO OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS ST. LUCIE COUNTY PROPOSED AMENDMENT DCA #04-1 LUCIE ROCK, LLC (003-006) Objection #1: The supporting data and analysis does not demonstrate that the amendment will be served by adequate public facilities and transportation facilities to maintain the adopted LOS standards through the five-year and long range planning periods on Interstate 95 (FlliS) and other significant roadways based upon the maximum extent of potential development allowed. Response: As shown by the attached Traffic Statement, developing the property as 100% commercial development (Scenario 5: Maximum Commercial) results in the maximum possible traffic increase. Under this scenario, the proposed future land use could result in a traffic increase of 40,049 VPD, in which event Orange Avenue west of 1- 95 would not have sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic increase. The development will therefore be limited to the following land use maximums: IND (Industrial) 60%, COM (Commercial) 10% and RES (Residential) 30%. As shown by the Traffic Statement, limiting the property to the foregoing land use maximums will insure that there will be sufficient capacity on all applicable roadways to accommodate the traffic increase resulting from the development of the property, taking into account committed projects. Objection #2: The Fort Pierce Utility Authority is identified as the provider of water and sewer services to the amendment area. However, the status of applicable consumptive use permits or plant capacity information was not included in the amendment package. Response: As explained above, the development will be limited to the following land use maximums: IND (Industrial) 60%, COM (Commercial) 10% and RES (Residential) 30%. As shown by the attached Utility Analysis, the Fort Pierce Utility Authority has sufficient water and wastewater capacity to provide for the foregoing land use maximums, taking into account committed projects. Objection #3: In considering the maximum potential of the land use category, the Department notes that the Mixed Use Development district does not contain a percentage distribution of mix for the high, medium and low intensity development areas, except for the 40% limitation on residential use. Therefore, it appears the floor area ratio (FAR) for each individual type of land within the high or medium intensity area could be maximized for a total FAR of 5.0 and 3.25 for all uses combined within the high and medium areas, respectively. Response: The County's Comprehensive Plan is not interpreted that way. Nevertheless, as explained above, the development will be limited to the following land use maximums: {OOOO1221.2} ~ ...; IND (Industrial) 60%, COM (Commercial) 10% and RES (Residential) 30%. The County's Comprehensive Plan limits (a) Industrial development to .5 FAR in the High Intensity Area and .25 FAR in the Medium Intensity Area, (b) Commercial development to 1.0 FAR in the High Intensity Area and .75 FAR in the Medium Intensity Area, and (c) Residential Development to 5 to 15 DU per acre in the High Intensity Area and 5 to 9 du per acre in the Medium Intensity Area. The FAR is calculated on a per acre basis based upon how each acre is developed. For example, assuming that the maximum amount of Commercial (10% of the entire property, or 9.43 acres) is developed within the 57.57 acre High Intensity Area, and the balance of the High Intensity Area (48.14 acres) is developed as Industrial, then the maximum FAR of the High Intensity Area would be only 0.58 (see calculations attached as Exhibit "A"). Assuming the maximum amount of Industrial (60% of the property or 56.6 acres) is developed, and 48.14 acres of Industrial is developed within the High Intensity Area, the balance of the Industrial development (an additional 8.46 acres) would have to be constructed in the Medium Intensity area and would therefore be limited to only .25 FAR as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. Objection #4: Furthermore, the Department notes that the plan does not include a height limit. So, it is possible the maximum FAR could be achieved. For example, with the 50% lot coverage allowed, a FAR of 5.0 would be accommodated with a lO-story building. Response: The foregoing land use maximums addressed in the response to Objection #3 also address this objection. Attached letter from SFWMD dated Mav 13. 2004: Objection: South Florida Water Management District staff has reviewed the above subject document and we have determined that all three proposed amendments lack the required potable water facility analysis. The applicants need to include the required analysis to support the proposed PLUM amendments and to demonstrate that adequate water supply facilities and service will be available concurrent with the impact of development. Response: As explained above, the property will be limited to the following land use maximums: IND (Industrial) 60%, COM (Commercial) 10% and RES (Residential) 30%. The attached Utility Analysis demonstrates that, based upon the foregoing land use maximums, and taking committed projects into account, sufficient capacity exists to serve the proposed development. Attached letter from Florida Department of State dated Mav 17. 2004: Objection: None. {OOOO1221.2 } ~ """" Attached letter from 81. Lucie MPO dated Mav 24. 2004: Objection: None Attached letter from Florida Department of Transportation dated Mav 14. 2004: Objection: The County did not provide traffic data and analysis to address impacts to regional roadway network, including 1-95, in the short and long-term planning horizons. Response: As explained in more detail above, the development will be limited to the following land use maximums, thereby insuring sufficient roadway capacity: IND (Industrial) 60%, COM (Commercial) 10% and RES (Residential) 30%. Attached letter from Florida Department of Environmental Protection dated .June 3. 2004: Objection: The reviewer could not find an analysis of the increased sanitary treatment demand resulting from the proposed increase in land use density. . . although the applicant indicates that there is sufficient sanitary waste treatment capacity available in the Ft. Pierce wastewater treatment plant, there has been no confirmation of that fact from the City of Fort Pierce. In view of the fact that the area is experiencing rapid growth and demand on existing wastewater treatment systems, it is recommended that the City of Ft. Pierce also confirm that treatment capacity is available in its facility to meet the anticipated demand of this land use amendment. Response: As explained above, the property will be limited to the following land use maximums: IND (Industrial) 60%, COM (Commercial) 10% and RES (Residential) 30%. The attached Utility Analysis demonstrates that, based upon the foregoing land use maximums, and taking committed projects into account, sufficient capacity exists to serve the proposed development. Furthermore, attached is a copy of a letter from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority's Director of Water & Wastewater Systems, confirming the availability of sufficient water and wastewater capacity to serve the proposed development. Attached letter from Treasure Coast Ree:ional Plannine: Council dated .June 18. 2004: Objection: None. {OOOOI221.2 } \w' ...., Exhibit "A" FAR Calculations for Response to Objection #3 Total Property = 94.34 acres 10% Commercial = 9.43 acres Total Acreage of High Intensity Area = 57.57 acres Portion of High Intensity Area Developed as Commercial = 9.43 Portion of High Intensity Area Developed as Industrial = 48.14 1.0 FAR x 9.43 acres Commercial = 9.43 FAR/acre 0.5 FAR x 48.14 acres Industrial = 24.07 FAR/acre Total = 33.5 FAR/acre 33.5 FAR/acre /57.57 acres (total acreage of High Intensity Area) = 0.58 FAR {OOOO1221.2} ~ ...J LUCIE ROCK· LUA UTILITY ANALYSIS The maximum possible utility (water demand and wastewater flow) impacts associated with the Land Use Amendment can be calculated by estimating the flows associated with the maximum potential development for both the current and proposed Land Use and applying the need to the Ft. Pierce Utility Authority plant capacities. The property is a total of 94.34 acres in size and located south of 1-95, and west of Rock Road. Existing Future Land Use The current land use is RS (Residential Suburban), which allows for a maximum development potential of 2 residential dwelling units per gross acre of land. Applying the development rate of 2 units per acres yields a total of 188 dwelling units. The Utility use rates are estimated to be 100 gallons/capita/day for water consumption, and 85 gallons/capita/day for wastewater flow generation. The average population per household in St. Lucie County is 2.5 persons/Dwelling Unit. The existing condition water and wastewater demand is calculated as follows: Water Demand Land Development Maximum Water Use ~ Develoµment . ERC Rate Demand RS Residential 188 DU 100gpcp * 2.50person/DU 47,000 gpd Wastewater Demand Land Development Maximum Wastewater Use ~ Development ERC Rate Demand RS Residential 188 DU 85gpcp * 2.50person/DU 39,950 gpd p:mydocslprojectslO3-243/reports '-' ..." Proposed Future Land Use The proposed land use is MXD (Mixed Use) with a mix of both High Intensity and Medium Intensity areas. The maximum development potential from a water and wastewater demand standpoint under St. Lucie County Zoning Code for both the High Intensity and the Medium Intensity portion would be the combination of allowable uses producing the maximum use within the MXD land use. The code allows for a maximum of 40% high intensity residential development (15 DU /Acre), a maximum building coverage in the light industrial zoning district of 50%, and a maximum building coverage in the commercial and office zoning district of 40%, of the gross land area. In detennining the maximum development potential, the various allowable development combinations will be explored. The development scenario combinations to be explored will be the maximum residential development in combination with industrial, commercial and office; along with each non-residential use as stand-alone. The maximum allowable residential development using 40% of the total project area and highest intensity of 15 dwelling units per acre yields a maximum of 566 dwelling units. The water and wastewater usage for each individual land use is based upon the average daily demand associated with the maximum potential development. The average water and wastewater uses are as follows for the various land uses: Water Wastewater Residential: Commercial: Industrial: Office: 100 gallons/day/ capita 125 gallons/day/1,OOO square feet 150 gallons/day/1,OOO square feet 120 gallons/day/l,OOO square feet 85 gallons/day/capita 106.25 gallons/day/l,OOO sf 127.5 gallons/day/l,OOO sf 102 gallons/day/l,OOO sf The estimated water and wastewater demand generated by the property in the various potential development scenario's are calculated as follows: Scenario 1: Maximum Residential & Industrial Total Area = 94.34 acres Residential Development Industrial Development = 40% x 94.34 acres x 15 DU/ac = 566 DU = 60% x 94.34 acres x 50% coverage = 1,232,835 SF Water Demand Land Use RS IND Development ~ Residential Industrial Maximum Development 566 DU 1,232,835 sf ERC Rate 100gpcp * 2.50personlDU 150gpd/l,000 sf Water Demand 141,500 gpd 184,925 gpd Total: 326,425 gpd p:mydocslprojectslO3-243/repon. ~ Wastewater Demand Land Use RS IND Development ~ Residential Industrial '-' Maximum Development 566 DU 1,232,835 sf ERC Rate 85gpcp * 2.50personIDU 127.5gpd/l,000 sf Total: Wastewater Demand 120,275 gpd 157.186 gpd 277,461 gpd Scenario 2: Maximum Residential & Commercial Total Area = 94.34 acres Residential Development Commercial Development Water Demand = 40% x 94.34 acres x 15 DUlac = 566 DU = 60% x 94.34 acres x 40% coverage = 986,268 SF Land Development Maximum Water Use ~ Development ERC Rate Demand RS Residential 566 DU 100gpcp * 2.50personIDU 141,500 gpd COM Shopping Center 986,268 sf 125gpd/l,000 sf 123.284 gpd Total: 264,784 gpd Wastewater Demand Land Development Maximum Wastewater Use ~ Development ERC Rate Demand RS Residential 566 DU 85gpcp * 2.50personIDU 120,275 gpd COM Shopping Center 986,268 sf 106.25gpd/l,000 sf 104,791 gpd Total: 225,066 gpd Scenario 3: Maximum Residential & Office Park Total Area = 94.34 acres Residential Development Office Development Water Demand Land Use RS COM Development ~ Residential Office Park p:mydocslprojectslO3-243/reports = 40% x 94.34 acres x 15 DUlac = 566 DU = 60% x 94.34 acres x 40% coverage = 986,268 SF Maximum Development 566 DU 986,268 sf ERC Rate 100gpcp * 2.50personIDU 120gpd/l,000 sf Water Demand 141,500 gpd 118,352 gpd Total: 259,852 gpd '-' Wastewater Demand Land Use RS COM Development ~ Residential Office Park Maximum Development 566 DU 986,268 sf Scenario 4: Maximum Industrial Total Area = 94.34 acres Industrial Development Water Demand Land Use IND Development ~ Industrial Wastewater Demand Land Use IND Development ~ Industrial ERC Rate 85gpcp * 2.50personlDU 102gpd/1,000 sf Total: """" Wastewater Demand 120,275 gpd 100.599 gpd 220,874 gpd = 94.34 acres x 50% coverage = 2,054,725 SF Maximum Development 2,054,725 sf Maximum Development 2,054,725 sf Scenario 5: Maximum Commercial ERC Rate 150gpd/1,000 sf ERC Rate 127.5gpd/1,000 sf Total Area = 94.34 acres Commercial Development = 94.34 acres x 40% coverage = 1,643,780 SF Water Demand Land Use COM Development ~ Shopping Center Wastewater Demand Land Use COM Development ~ Shopping Center p:mydocslprojectslO3-243Irepons Maximum Development 1,643,780 sf Maximum Development 1,643,780 sf ERC Rate 125gpd/1,000 sf ERC Rate 106.25gpd/1,000 sf Water Demand 308,209 gpd Wastewater Demand 261,977 gpd Water Demand 205,473 gpd Wastewater Demand 174,652 gpd ~ ...", Scenario 6: Maximum Office Park Total Area = 94.34 acres Office Development Water Demand Land Use COM Development ~ Office Park Wastewater Demand Land Use COM Development ~ Office Park = 94.34 acres x 40% coverage = 1,643,780 SF Maximum Development 1,643,780 sf ERC Rate 120gpd/l,000 sf Water Demand 197,254 gpd Maximum Development 1,643,780 sf ERC Rate 102gpd/l,000 sf Wastewater Demand 167,666 gpd As demonstrated above, the maximum potential development from a water and wastewater demand standpoint is scenario No.1, maximum residential and industrial combination. The proposed future land use can result in a maximum increase in water demand of 279,425 gpd and wastewater demand of 237,511 gpd over that of the existing land use. The property will be served by the Ft. Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA) 25th Street Water Treatment Facility and the FPUA Water Reclamation Facility. As of June 2004 the impacts to the existing plants will be as follows: Existing Condition FPUA 25th Street Water Treatment Facility Pennitted Capacity Average Daily Flow Committed Flow Present Capacity 10,500,000 gpd 8,600,000 gpd 837,625 gpd 1,062,375 gpd 47,000 gpd 1,015,375 gpd Current Potential Demand Remaining Capacity p:mydocslprojectslO3-243/reports '-' FPUA Water Reclamation Facility Penni tted Capacity Average Daily Flow Committed Flow Present Capacity Current Potential Demand Remaining Capacity ...." 10,000,000 gpd 5,800,000 gpd 711,982 gpd 3,488,018 gpd 39,950 gpd 3,448,068 gpd Proposed Maximum Condition FPUA 25th Street Water Treatment Facility Pennitted Capacity Average Daily Flow Committed Flow Present Capacity Current Potential Demand Remaining Capacity FPUA Water Reclamation Facility Pennitted Capacity A verage Daily Flow Committed Flow Present Capacity Current Potential Demand Remaining Capacity 10,500,000 gpd 8,600,000 gpd 837,625 gpd 1,062,375 gpd 326,425 gpd 735,950 gpd 10,000,000 gpd 5,800,000 gpd 711,982 gpd 3,488,018 gpd 277,461 gpd 3,210,557 gpd The existing FPUA plants have ample capacity to serve the maximum potential scenario land use. In light of the traffic impacts associated with the maximum potential development of the property, the development will be limited to the following land use maximums to insure that the existing transportation network is not impacted. IND (Industrial) COM (Commerical) RES (Residential) p:mydocslprojectslO3-243/reports 60% x 94.34 = 56.60 acres 10% x 94.34 = 9.43 acres 30% x 94.34 = 28.31 acres '-' ..., The same restrictions can be calculated for the water and wastewater demand to insure that capacity exists within the existing system. The restricted land use areas can be converted into developable areas using the same coverage amounts referenced above. The development potential is calculated as follows: IND (Industrial) COM (Commerical) RES (Residential) 60% x 94.34 x .50 coverage = 1,232,835 SF 10% x 94.34 x .40 coverage = 164,378 SF 30% x 94.34 x 15 DU/ Acre = 425 Dwelling units And results in the following water and wastewater demand: Water Demand Land Use RS COM IND Development ~ Residential Shopping Center Industrial Wastewater Demand Land Use RS COM IND Development ~ Residential Shopping Center Industrial Maximum Development 425 DU 164,378 sf 1,232,835 sf ERC Rate 100gpcp * 2.50person/DU 125gpd/l,000 sf 150gpd/ 1,000 sf Total: Water Demand 106,250 gpd 20,547 gpd 184,925 gpd 311,722 gpd Wastewater Demand 90,313 gpd 17,465 gpd 157.186 gpd 264,964 gpd As demonstrated above, if the property limits the associated land uses within the MXD Land Use to the amounts presented above, the resultant water and wastewater demands are under the maximum development scenario, and the existing treatments plants have ample capacity to serve the Land Use change. p:mydocslprojec.sI03-243/repons Maximum Development 425 DU 164,378 sf 1,232,835 sf ERC Rate 85gpcp * 2.50person/DU 106.25gpd/l,000 sf 127.5gpd/l,000 sf Total: '-" .."", LUCIE ROCK - LUA TRAFFIC STATEMENT The maximum possible traffic impacts associated with the Land Use Amendment can be calculated by estimating the trips associated with the maximum potential development for both the current and proposed Land Use and applying the trips to the existing roadway network. The property is a total of 94.34 acres in size and located south of 1-95, and west of Rock Road. The maximum possible trip generation for the property can be estimated by applying the generation rates found in the Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition. Existing Future Land Use The current land use is RS (Residential Suburban), which allows for a maximum development potential of 2 residential dwelling units per gross acre of land. Applying the development rate of 2 units per acres yields a total of 188 dwelling units. The ITE Land Use Codes used to estimate the trips generated is 210 "Single-Family Detached Housing". The estimated trips generated for the property in the existing condition is calculated as follows: Land Use Development ~ Maximum Development ITE Trip Rate Trip Generation RS Residential 188 DU .920Ln(74)+2.707 1,853 VPD Proposed Future Land Use The proposed land use is MXD (Mixed Use) with a mix of both High Intensity and Medium Intensity areas. The maximum development potential from a trip generation standpoint under St. Lucie County Zoning Code for both the High Intensity and the Medium Intensity portion would be the combination of allowable uses producing the maximum traffic within the MXD land use. The code allows for a maximum of 40% high intensity residential development (15 DU /Acre), a maximum building coverage in the light industrial zoning district of 50%, and a maximum building coverage in the commercial and office zoning district of 40%, of the gross land area. In determining the maximum development potential, the various allowable development combinations will be explored. The development scenario combinations to be explored will be the maximum residential development in combination with industrial, commercial and office; along with each non-residential use as stand-alone. The maximum allowable residential development using 40% of the total project area and highest intensity of 15 dwelling units per acre yields a maximum of 566 dwelling units. p:mydocslprojectslO3-243/reports '-" """'" The ITE Land Use Codes used to estimate the various trips generated by the development opportunities will be Code 230, "CondominiumITownhouses", Code 110 "Light Industrial", Code 820 "Shopping Center", and Code 750 "Office Park. The estimated trips generated for the property in the various potential development scenario's are calculated as follows: Scenario 1: Maximum Residential & Industrial Total Area = 94.34 acres Residential Development Industrial Development Land Use Development ~ RES IND Multi-Family Light Industrial = 40% x 94.34 acres x 15 DUlac = 566 DU = 60% x 94.34 acres x 50% coverage = 1,232,835 SF Maximum Development ITE Trip Rate 566 DU 1,232,835 SF .85Ln(566)+2.55 7.47(x/l,000) - 101.92 Total Scenario 2: Maximum Residential & Commercial Total Area = 94.34 acres Residential Development Commercial Development Land Use Development ~ RES Multi-Family COM Shopping Center Trip Generation 2,801 VPD 9.107 VPD 11,908 VPD = 40% x 94.34 acres x 15 DUlac = 566 DU = 60% x 94.34 acres x 40% coverage = 986,268 SF Maximum Development ITE Trip Rate 566 DU 986,268 SF .85Ln(566)+2.55 .65Ln(x) + 5.83 Total Scenario 3: Maximum Residential & Office Park Total Area = 94.34 acres Residential Development Office Development Land Use Development ~ RES Multi-Family COM Office Park p:mydocslprojectslO3-243/reports Trip Generation 2,801 VPD 30,063 VPD 32,864 VPD = 40% x 94.34 acres x 15 DUlac = 566 DU = 60% x 94.34 acres x 40% coverage = 986,268 SF Maximum Development ITE Trip Rate 566 DU 986,268 SF .85Ln(566)+2.55 1O.75(x/l,000) + 747.41 Total Trip Generation 2,801 VPD 11,350 VPD 14,151 VPD '-' Scenario 4: Maximum Industrial Total Area = 94.34 acres Industrial Development Land Use Development ~ IND Light Industrial ....I = 94.34 acres x 50% coverage = 2,054,725 SF Maximum Development 2,054,725 SF Scenario 5: Maximum Commercial ITE Trip Rate Trip Generation 7.47(x/l,000) - 101.92 15,247 VPD Total Area = 94.34 acres Commercial Development = 94.34 acres x 40% coverage = 1,643,780 SF Land Use Development ~ COM Shopping Center Maximum Development 1,643,780 SF Scenario 6: Maximum Office Park Total Area = 94.34 acres Office Development Land Use Development ~ COM Office Park lTE Trip Rate Trip Generation .65Ln(x) + 5.83 41,902 VPD = 94.34 acres x 40% coverage = 1,643,780 SF Maximum Development 1,643,780 SF Trip ITE Trip Rate Generation 1O.75(x/1,000) + 747.41 18,418 VPD As demonstrated above, the maximum potential development from a traffic generation standpoint is the stand-alone commercial scenario. The proposed future land use can result in a maximum increase in traffic of 40,049 VPD over that of the existing land use. The study area for the property centers around the Kings Highway/I-95 and Orange A venue intersection. A trip distribution of the anticipated increase in trips due to the land use change, analyzed using the maximum potential development (Scenario 5, maximum commercial), is estimated to be as follows: Orange A venue East Orange Avenue West Orange A venue East of 1-95 1-95 North of Orange A venue 1-95 South of Orange A venue Kings Highway North Kings Highway South p:mydocslprojectslO3-243/reports 75% 25% 20% 20% 20% 5% 10% 30,037 VPD 10,012 VPD 8,010 VPD 8,010 VPD 8,010 VPD 2,002 VPD 4,004 VPD '-" .....I The distributed trips calculated above are added to the existing volumes and committed trips assigned to the roadway links within the study area. To determine the Level of Service, Table 4-1, of the FDOT 2002 Quality/Level of Service Handbook was used for both the existing (Pre-Development, including committed) and Post-Development Levels of Service of the roadway links. The following is a summary of the results. V olume/LOS Project Volume/L.O.S. Roadway Link Pre-Develop Traffic Post-Development Orange A venue East of 1-95 12,800/B 8,010 20,81O/B West ofl-95 17,700/B 30,037 47,737/F East of Shinn Road 4,300/A 10,012 14,312/D Kings Highway North of Orange Ave 13,200/C 2,002 15,202/C South of Orange Ave 8,700/B 4,004 12,704/B Interstate 95 (1-95) North of Orange Ave 41,900/C 8,010 49,91O/D South of Orange Ave 56,700/C 8,010 64,71O/C A portion of the existing roadway network does not have sufficient capacity to accommodate the maximum potential development of the proposed Land Use as demonstrated in the table above. In light of the traffic impacts associated with the maximum potential development of the property, the development will be limited to the following land use maximums to insure that the existing transportation network is not impacted. IND (Industrial) COM (Commerical) RES (Residential) 60% x 94.34 = 56.60 acres 10% x 94.34 = 9.43 acres 30% x 94.34 = 28.31 acres The restricted land use areas can be converted into developable areas using the same coverage amounts and ITE Codes used above. The development potential is calculated as follows: IND (Industrial) COM (Commerical) RES (Residential) 60% x 94.34 x .50 coverage = 1,232,835 SF 10% x 94.34 x .40 coverage = 164,378 SF 30% x 94.34 x 15 DU/ Acre = 425 Dwelling units p:mydocslprojectslO3-243/repons '-" ...." And results in the following traffic generation: Land Use Development ~ Maximum Development ITE Trip Rate Trip Generation IND Light Industrial RES Multi-Family COM Shopping Center 1,232,835 SF 425 DU 164,378 SF 7.47(x/l,000) - 101.92 .85Ln( 425)+2.55 (.65Ln(x) + 5.83).85 Total 9,107 VPD 2,196 VPD 7,974 VPD 19,277 VPD The above referenced calculation includes a conservative 15% reduction in the commercial traffic generation to account for pass-by trip and internal capture within the project. Using the same trip distribution as referenced above, the trips calculated in the restricted land use are added to the existing volumes and committed trips assigned to the roadway links within the study area. The results of the existing (Pre-Development, including committed) and Post-Development Levels of Service of the roadway links are summarized as follows: Volume/LOS Project Volume/L.O.S. Roadway Link Pre-Develop Traffic Post-Development Orange A venue East of 1-95 12,800/B 3,855 16,655/B West of 1-95 17,700/B 14,458 32,158/D West of Kings Highway 4,300/ A 14,458 18,758/D East of Shinn Road 4,300/ A 4,819 9,119/C Kings Highway North of Orange Ave 13,200/C 964 14, 164/C South of Orange Ave 8,700/B 1,928 10,628/B Interstate 95 (1-95) North of Orange Ave 41,900/C 3,855 45,755/C South of Orange Ave 56,700/C 3,855 60,555/C As demonstrated above, if the property limits the associated land uses within the MXD Land Use to the amounts presented above, the surrounding roadway network will have sufficient capacity within the existing roadway system to accommodate the proposed Land Use change. p:mydocslprojeclslO3-243/repons --.,. """" DEPARTMENT "Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call home" STATE OF flORIDA OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS lEU BUSH Governor THADDEUS l. COHEN, AlA Secretary June 28, 2004 I' II . '" l:,. . bO ~(L ]);~ ArJ~r5ðf) ful\ 1l1c:íÍrk¡f'€... ~a..4J¿1 S~\!-e-,., 5ÖY) The Honorable Paula A. Lewis Chairman, St Lucie County Board of County Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Dear Chairman Lewis: The Department of Community Affairs has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for St Lucie County (DCA No. 04-1), which was received on April 27, 2004. Copies of the proposed amendment have been distributed to appropriate state, regional and local agencies for their review, and their comments are enclosed. The Department has reviewed the comprehensive plan amendment for consistency with Rule 9J- 5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C) and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes (F.S.) and has prepared the attached Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report which outlines our findings concerning the comprehensive plan amendment Our concerns focus on the need for additional data and analysis to address public facility and transportation impacts, and the need for more specific intensity and mixed use standards so that the potential impacts of the land use change can be more accurately determined. For your assistance, we have attached procedures for final adoption and transmittal of the comprehensive plan amendment If you have any questions, please call Ken Metcalf, AICP, Regional Planning Administrator, or Jamie Coker, Planner, at (850) 922-1816. Sincerely yours, C>~~ "" , - 2D04 CG/jcs o..uw,.·,.,..... aT. lU<;IF ~N~(]f:.....f"Jr COUNr"" FI Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report Review Agency Comments , CC: v'Mr. David Kelly, Planning Manager Mr. Michael Busha. Executive Director, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council 255- SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD· TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2100 h:l . 8 - 0 "8 8 8 4 6 6 / Sun rom 2 7 8 . 8 4 6 6 FAX: 8 5 0 . 9 2 1. 0 7 8 1 / Sun com 2 9 1 . 0 7 8 1 P one. :I ,"', - ï Internet address: htto://www,dca.state,' .us CRITICAL ST ATE CO~CERN FIELD OFFICE :? i9ú O....ers(".)\ High\\'J~·. SU¡I~ 211 f\larJthon, Fl JJ05O-~~2ì (05) 28¡J·l~02 COMMUNITY PLA~"HNG :!555 Shumard OJk Bouh.'vard TJIIJh."",,, Fl ]2399-~100 (850) 488-2])6 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 2555 ShumJrd OJk Bouh~vard hIlJhJss,., Fl ]~]99-2100 (650) 41 ]·9969 HOUSING & COM.\IUNITY DEVElOP.\\ENT 2555 Shumard Oak 50ulevJrd hIlJhm... FL 32]9~~ 100 (650) .66-7956 ~ 'WI TRANSM[TT AL PROCEDURES Upon receipt of this letter, the St. Lucie County has 60 days in which to adopt, adopt with changes, or determine that the County will not adopt the proposed amendment. The process for adoption of local government comprehensive plan amendments is outlined in s. 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F .S.), and Rule 9J-II.0 II, F.A.C. The County must ensure that all ordinances adopting comprehensive plan amendments are consistent with the provisions of Chapter 163.3 I 89(2)(a), F.S. Within ten working days of the date ofadoption, the County must submit the following to the Department: Three copies of the adopted comprehensive plan amendments; A listing of additional changes not previously reviewed; A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, which were not included in the ordinance; and A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes to the Department's Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report. The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a compliance review, make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent. [n order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendments, and pursuant to Rule 9J-II.0 II (5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to the Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. Please be advised that Section 163.3 I 84(8)(c), Florida Statutes, requires the Department to provide a courtesy information statement regarding the Department's Notice of Intent to citizens who furnish their names and addresses at the local government's plan amendment transmittal (proposed) or adoption hearings. In order to provide this courtesy information statement, local governments are required by law to furnish the names and addresses of the citizens requesting this information to the Department. Please provide these required names and addresses to the Department when you transmit your adopted amendment package for compliance review. In the event there are no citizens requesting this information, please inform us of this as well. For efficiency, we encourage that the information sheet be provided in electronic format. ~ ....,J INTRODUCTION The following objections, recommendations and comments are based upon the Department's review of St. Lucie County 04-1 proposed amendment to their comprehensive plan pursuant to s. 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.). The objections relate to specific requirements of relevant portions of Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), and Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. Each objection includes a recommendation of one approach that might be taken to address the cited objection. Other approaches may be more suitable in specific situations. Some of these objections may have initially been raised by one of the other external review agencies. If there is a difference between the Department's objection and the external agency advisory objection or comment, the Department's objection would take precedence. Each of these objections must be addressed by the County and corrected when the amendment is resubmitted for our compliance review. Objections that are not addressed may result in a determination that the amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have raised an objection regarding missing data and analysis items, which the local government considers not applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a statement justifying its non-applicability pursuant to Rule 9J-5.002(2), F.A.C., must be submitted. The Department will make a determination on the non-applicability of the requirement, and ¡fthe justification is sufficient, the objection will be considered addressed. The comments that follow the objections and recommendations section are advisory in nature. Comments will not form bases of a determination of non-compliance. They are included to call attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive, concerning planning principles, methodology or logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar, organization, mapping, and reader comprehension. Appended to the back of the Department's report are the comment letters from the other state review agencies and other agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are advisory to the Department and may not form bases of Departmental objections unless they appear under the "Objections" heading in this report. - '-" 'WI DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAffiS OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY AMENDMENT 04-1 June 28, 2004 Division of Community Planning This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 9J-l1.0 1 0 '-" """'" OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS St. Lucie County PROPOSED AMENDMENT DCA #04-1 The St. Lucie County amendment 04-1 contains three Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments. The Department has identified objections regarding map amendments Home Dynamics and Lucie Rock, LLC. These objections, recommendations, and comments are intended to assist the County in fulfilling the statutory planning requirements and in ensuring its comprehensive plan will achieve the County's desired objectives. Home Dvnamics (003-005) - 35.4 acre FLUM chan2e from 8.18 acres of Countv Commercial (COM) to Countv Residential Hi2h (RH. 15dulac). 22.82 acres of COM to Countv Residential Medium (RM. 9du/ac). 0.54 acres of Countv Residential Urban (RU. 5 du/ac) to RH. and 3.75 acres of RU to RM. Luciè Rock. LLC (003-006) - 95 acre FLUM chan2e from Countv Residential Suburban (RS. 2du/ac) to 57.83 acres of Countv Mixed Use - Orane:e Avenue Hie:h Intensitv (MXD-Orane:e Ave.. 5-15 du/ac) and 37.84 acres ofMXD Medium Intensitv (5-9 du/ac). ORC OBJECTIONS: 1) Impact Analvsis (Home Dvnamics. Lucie Rock) - The supporting data and analysis does not demonstrate that the amendment will be served by adequate public facilities and transportation facilities to maintain the adopted LOS standards through the five-year and long range planning periods on Interstate 95 (FIHS) and other significant roadways based upon the maximum extent of potential development allowed. The Fort Pierce Utility Authority is identified as the provider of water and sewer services to the amendment area. However, the status of applicable consumptive use pennits or plant capacity infonnation was not included in the amendment package. In considering the maximum potential of the land use category, the Department notes that the Mixed Use Development district does not contain a percentage distribution of mix for the high, medium and low intensity development areas, except for the 40% limitation on residential use. Therefore, it appears the floor area ratio (FAR) for each individual type of land use within the high or medium intensity area could be maximized for a total FAR of 5.0 and 3.25 for all uses combined within the high and medium areas, respectively. Furthennore, the Department notes that the plan does not include a height limit. So, it is possible the maximum FAR could be achieved. For example, with the 50% lot coverage allowed, a FAR of5.0 would be accommodated with a 10-story building. ~6 ~P"t..I [Rule 9J-5.005{2)(a), Rule 9J-5.00Ci(t¿)(a) and (3)(b)I, Rule 9J-5.01 r Rt)(t), Rule 9J-5.019 (3)(t)(g)(h)(i) and (4)(b)2, F.A.C., and Section 163.317t(3)(a)3fWHt')(c) and (j)5, F.S.] 1 , . '-' ,.., RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) Impact Analvsis (Home Dynamics. Lucie Rock) - The transportation analysis should be conducted based on the maximum potential as previously described, in addition to the maximum residential density allowed. The analysis for the short and long range planning periods should include a forecast of background growth, including committed projects, and the additional densitylintensity allowed by the amendments. Provide verification from the Fort Pierce Utility Authority that sufficient capacity exists to serve the site based on the maximum allowable densities and intensities for the land use category. The data and analysis should include the projected water and sewer demand for the proposed amendments, existing demand and other proposed demand. Consider, in the analysis, the status of any existing consumptive use pennits issued by the water management district and whether they will need to be renewed or revised to meet projected demand. Also, indicate the proximity of the collection system and the extent to which it must be expanded to serve the site. A useful tool in preparing capacity analysis is the St. John's River Water Management District potable water worksheet, which is included in this report. For the Mixed Use Development district, as an alternative, the County could further define controlling mixed use proportionate shares for each land use type allowed and include a height limitation in the plan or other intensity standard to limit the total FAR for the land use category. The Department recommends that the County further define these standards for the Mixed Use Development land use category rather than deferring to LDR controls as the plan currently does. If the County requires additional time to correct this deficiency in the plan, specific caps could be shown as a footnote on the FLUM for this site and other amendments as an interim measure. CONSISTENCY WITH THE TREASURE COAST STRATEGIC REGIONAL POLICY PLAN The TCRPC has not identified objections based on consistency with the SRPP. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The supporting data and analysis does not demonstrate the amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan Chapter 187, Florida Statutes: Goal 7(a) Water Resources, Policy 7(b)5, Goal 15(a) Land Use, Policies l5(b)3 and 6, Goal 19(a) Transportation, Policies 19(b)3 and 13. RECOMMENDATION: Revise the amendments as previously recommended. 2 SOUTH ~RIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT """" 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33406 . (561) 686-8800 . FL WATS 1·800·432·20.¡5 . TOO (561) 697-2574 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2'¡680. \Vest Palm Beach. FL 33416-4680 . www.sfwmd.go\' May 13, 2004 10 ~jV\ 51 i'i (iJ~ '- ~--:;. "·:;··_~--:'--~-·-I :.- , !". II ,;".; r~ Jll! , ':. .: '::'q._ì~ _.:~i_ /.~ / j) ,! , ,;'. 'I/ill: ,Ii iii },)ft~: .. ant ¡ ëJ i !' L ,-.~--~-.. J I ' "":-:1 ~'J P?M BSP '.. ".: .".~·;..',,~~_~CESSING TEAM' ". .. ¡ GOV 08-32 Ray Eubanks, Administrator Plan Review and DRI Processing Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 Dear Mr. Eubanks: Subject: Proposed Amendment Comments St. Lucie County, DCA# 04-1 South Florida Water Management District staff has reviewed the above subject document and we have determined that that all three proposed amendments (SLC File No. PA-03-005, PA-03-006, and PA03-007) lack the required potable water facility capacity analysis. The applicants need to include the required analysis to support the proposed FLUM amendments and to demonstrate that adequate water supply facilities and service will be available concurrent with the impact of development. In addition, the applicant for PA-03-005 (Home Dynamics, Inc.) needs to include correspondence from the Ft. Pierce Utility Authority verifying their ability to serve the proposed development. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Jim Golden at (561) 682-6862 or me at (561) 682-6779. Sincerely, f/eUvv~ - P.K. Sharma, AICP Lead Planner Water Supply Planning & 8evelopment Division PKSfjg c: Ken Metcalf, DCA Michael Busha, TCRPC David Kelly, S1. Lucie County COIO£F:Vf,VC IhH/W EXECl/TIVE OFffa: Nico)j,; , Cuti~rr~z. Jr.. E~q,. 0,.,;' Pan1eJl' nn'toks·Tholn.1S¡ I'Ú,"-ùwir J¡-pÌ.:l ~1. ßd~lIè Mi.:h.l~1 Collins Hugh M, English L.'nnoH't E Lind.lh!. r,E. Kt>\'in IvkCarty Harkley R. Thornton Trudi K WiHialm. r.E. H¿nry Dean. [,r,'::IIIÙIt,' (jirl~i.·'lr ~ '...I FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ST ATE Glenda E. Hood Secretary of State DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES \ :-:::,-r.;'í:7¡ .. f2 ;"\ ~ ~ \; , . ~ ì ii' II., G l :::d......;,::.... ", .J L· ..__...- . I , '\ ;~) r " .--..-' . \ ~ , i: \ I \ '""I\v, 2 \ 20\)[\ ' :, q ; ~ 1\ ',' " ....'\ L-. ...-;:,::::7::-:::'--" \ ..:- '_,i\.n, .~,'.~~.,.~:~l!;·,~~~~~:: ;,~~ : -:. . L ........ Mr. Ray Eubanks Department of Community Affairs Bureau of State Planning 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 1 D tfi1 May 17,2004 S/JI (Ó1( Re: Historic Preservation Review of the St. Lucie County (04-1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request Dear Mr. Eubanks: According to this agency's responsibilities under sections 163.3177 and 163.3178, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, we reviewed the above document to detennine if data regarding historic resources have been given sufficient consideration in the request to amend the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. We reviewed three proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Map to consider the potential effects of these actions on historic resources. While our cursory review suggests that the proposed changes may have no adverse effects on historic resources, it is the county's responsibility to ensure that the proposed revisions will not have an adverse effect on significant archaeological or historic resources in St. Lucie County. However, for Amendment P A-003-007, although this amendment area does not contain any sites listed in the Florida Master Site File or the National Register oj Historic Places, it remains the county's responsibility to ensure that potentially significant historic resources will not be adversely affected by this action. The amendment parcels appear to have -at least moderate archaeological site probability, as significant archaeological resources were encountered on the opposite side ofTen Mile Creek. The most effective way to guarantee that such sites are not damaged is for the county to sponsor or require historic resource surveys so thaL it can ensure its archaeological resources and historic structures more than 50 years old will be considered when substantive changes in land use are proposed. If you have any questions regarding our comments, please feel free to contact Susan M. Harp of the Division's Compliance Review staffåt (850) 245-6333. Sincerely, ~¡¿_/~)~ t Frederick Gaske, Acting Director 500 S. Bronough Street. Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 · http://www.flheritage.com o Director's Office (850) 2-15·63CO . FAX: 2~5-6-I35 a Archaeological Research (S50) 2-15-64-1-1 . FAX: 2-15-éH36 S1iistoric Preservation (850) 2-15-6333 . FAX: 2-15-éH37 a Historical Museums (850) 245-6400 . FAX: 245-6-133 o Palm Beach Regional Office (561) 279·1.175 . FA,.':: 279-1-176 a St. Augustine Regional Office 0 Tampa Regional Office (90-1) 825·50-15 . FAX: 625-50-1-1 (613) 2ì2-3s.t3 . FAX: 272-23-10 MRY-28-2ØØ4 15:51 '-' P.07 ",~'\ .l,'" f·~~ .:' i." N.L\ l' '; 4 .>'/~ . . .~ , '.[;~:::I::. ;'.. ';":. . ...... ST. LUCIE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION 2300 Virginia Avenue Telephone: 772-462~1593 Fort Pierce. FL 34982~5652 Facsimile: 772.462-2549 TO: Terry Hess Deputy Director Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Marc:eia Lathou 01) ~ MPO Planner FROM: DATE: May 24. 2004 IŒ: St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Draft Amendm~nts - DCA Reference No. 04-1 MPO staff has reviewed the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Amendments for SLC File No. P A- 03-006 (Lucie Rock, LLC), SLC File No. P A·03-007 (BlK, Inc.) and SLC File No. P A-03-005 (Home Dynamics Inc.). MPO staff notes that none of the above-referenced projects ca)) tor construction of major, public roadways or new lanes on existing coad,^'aYs, and are found to be consistent with the MFO's adopted 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan. Thank you for the opportunity to review these plan amendments. If you have any questions, ph~ase do not hesi~1te to contact me at (772) 462-1593. cc: Lois Bush, FDOT District 4 Randy Stevenson, Interim Growth Management Director, SLC " Transportation Planning for Ft .Pierce, Port St. Lucie, 51. Lucie Village and Sf. Lucie County '-' ~ Florida Department of Transportation DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT 3400 West Commercial Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309-3421 Telephone: (954) 777·4411 Fax: (954) 777·4197 Internet Email: £errv.oreilly(@'dol,state.ll.lIs' Toll Free: 1·866·336-8435 ...,j JEB BUSH GOVERi\OR JOSE ABREU SECRETARY May 14, 2004 Mr. Ray Eubanks, Community Program Administrator Plan Review and DR! Processing Team Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 \I:J \-0 * 0\ð'\ \ ù ,';\Y 2 4 2004 I I I, . ...., ~'. _. :-:. :..:. ~--;~.'~'- ~...-.:;...~ l. "_/. ,;..;~::'L'~;~.I.C~jË~:~.,.__, ' Dear Mr. Eubanks: SUBJECT: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments ORC Review Local Government: St. Lucie County DCA Amendment # 04-1 The Department has reviewed the proposed comprehensive plan amendments for S1. Lucie County. Enclosed are objections, recommendations, and comments. Based on this review, the Department recommends that a formal review of these proposed amendments occur. . Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the review process. If you have any comments or questions about this letter, please contact me at (954) 777-4490. Sincerely, A;~~~ Gerry O'Reilly, P.E. Director of Transportation Development District Four 00:15 . , Enclosures cc: B. Romig, FDOT Central Office K. Metcalf, DCA N. Ziegler, FDOT 4 L. Hymowitz, FDOT 4 T. Sched.\vitz, FDOT 4 Fit.:: 4270.05 www.dotstate.fl.us o A=:'fCLEO :::.=»ë:" '-" ~ DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIONS, RECOM1\'IENDA TIONS & COMMENTS RESPONSIBLE DIVISION/BUREAU: Planning Department NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT: S1. Lucie County DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 4/28/04 DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA: 5/04/04 REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS: 5/30/04 ELEMENT: BJK Ine (P A-03-007) Future Land Use Element DCA Amendment # 04-1 RULE DEFICIENCY: 9J-5.005(2)(a) 9J-5.0 19(4)( c) 13 The proposed Future Land Use Map amendment would change the land use designation of a 49-acre parcel from Residential Suburban (2 dwelling units per acre) to Residential Urban (5 dwelling units per acre). This site is located adjacent to SR 70/0keechobee Road, which is a Florida Intrastate Highway System (FlHS) facility and is part of a 366-acre development of 800 residential units and limited commercial uses. CONCERN: The County did not identify how it will alleviate transportation impacts of the increased traffic due to this land use change along SR 70/0keechobee Road between SR 713/Kings Highway and 1-95. DISCUSSION: The transportation planning process is an iterative cycle that relies on local' governments to identify projected impacts to roadways based on proposed land use changes to the Future Land Use Map. A function of the comprehensive planning process is to identify projected demand for services in order to ensure these services would be available prior to the impacts of development on public facilities. The support documents indicate that impacts to SR 70/0keechobee Road between the Turnpike and 1- 95 will be addressed when a formal development application is submitted. Therefore, the County should identify policies and strategies that would mitigate impending transportation impacts within this urbanizing area. These policies should include strategies and design criteria to ensure that, in the short- and long-term planning horizons, mobility along SR 70/0keechobee Road will be sufficient to serve this and future development. For example, policies should be provided to implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to serve the proposed residential units, which the support documents indicate, are in proximity to employment centers. TDM includes such strategies that can be most effective, and achieve noticeable results if implementation is phased with the proposed developments, such as Park & Ride facilities, car and van pools, and transit. (Continued) 1 '-" -.11 DISTRICT 4, DEPART1\1ENT OF TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIONS, RECOMM:ENDA TIONS & COl\'IMENTS RESPONsmLE DIVISION/BUREAU: NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT: DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNNIENT: DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA: REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS: Planning Department St. Lucie County 4/28/04 5/04/04 5/30/04 ELEMENT: BJK Inc (P A-03-007) Future Land Use Element DCA Amendment # 04-1 RULE DEFICŒNCY: 9J-5.005(2)(a) 9J-5.019( 4)( c) 13 DISCUSSION Continued: The Department, the St. Lucie County MPO 'and the Martin County MPO are training Workforce Development staff in the function of Employee Transportation Coordinators (ETC). The ETC works with employers to address workforce transportation needs. The County should coordinate with Ms. Marceia Lathou, St. Lucie MPO Planner, at (772) 462-1671 to identify areas for collaborative efforts with the ETC. ' Additionally, the County should include policies to ensure proposed developments will provide interconnectivity, transit infrastructure, internal paths, external connectivity including parking facilities proximity of complimentary uses, and provide a "sense of place" that is relative to the regionalllocal perspective of proposed land uses. RECOMMENDATION: The County should provide policies, strategies, and design criteria to ensure that along SR 70/0keechobee Road, a Florida Intrastate Highway System (FillS) facility, mobility would be sufficient to serve this and future development in the short- and long-term planning horizons. " REVŒWED BY: Terry Scheckwitz. AICP PHONE: 954-777-4490 REVŒWED BY: Larry Hymowitz. AICP PHONE: 954-777-4490 ,REVIEWED BY: Nancy A. Ziegler PHONE: 954-777-4490 2 '-'" '...." DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS RESPONSIDLE DMSIONIBUREAU: Planning Department NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT: St. Lucie County DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 4/28/04 DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA: 5/04/04 REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS: 5/30/04 ELEMENT: Lucie Rock, LLC (PA-03-006) Future Land Use Element DCA Amendment # 04-1 RULE DEFICIENCY: 9J-5.005(2)(a) and (c) 9J-5.005(4) 9J-5.019(3)(t) The proposed Future Land Use Map amendment would change the land use designation of a 94-acre parcel from Residential Suburban (2) to MXD-Orange Avenue that is currently vacant and located on the southwest side of! 95. The Mixed Use Development (MXD) designation is specific to I 95 interchange areas. CONCERN: The County did not provide traffic data and analysis to address impacts to regional roadway network, including I 95, in the short- and long-term planning horizons. DISCUSSION: Each local government comprehensive plan shall include at least two planning period, usually a 5-year and a 10-year (consistent with the MFO's Long Range Transportation Plan) planning timeframe. Therefore, the data and analysis provided in support of the proposed amendment should be revised to include level of service impacts the proposed land use would have in the short- and long-range planning horizons. RECOMMENDATION: The County should provide transportation data and analysis to identify impacts to the regional roadway network, including I 95, in the short- and long-term planning horizons. .. REVIEWED BY: Terry Scheck-witz. AICP PHONE: 954-777 -4490 REVIEWED BY: Larry Hymowitz. AICP PHONE: 954-777-4490 REVIEWED BY: Nancy A. Ziegler PHONE: 954-777-4490 3 ;, c;,"'~,' ,;~1Écr/¡¡~~;Y.~"" Si~~~~'~' - ..,~~:,.~~,-;~'~7~ :i~ ...."'$ ",: ,<.'l; 5:, ~ " ~~"/;>~i.(.'ï,:;.'r<';~',: """"\.,\j if'" ., f F@!~~;/\ .Þl'; . . ~~=:~~ '-' ..., Department of Environmental Protection Jeb Bush Governor Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Tallahassee. Florida 32399-3000 Colleen M. Castille Secretary June 3, 2004 Mr. D. Ray Eubanks Bureau of Local Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 l D ~;V\ ~ \ q \ i>f Re: Proposed Amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, DCA 04-1 Dear Mr. Eubanks: The Office of Intergovernmental Programs of the Department of Environmental Protection has reviewed the above-referenced amendment under the required provisions of Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 9J-5 and 9J-ll, Florida Administrative Code. Our comments and recommendations are provided to assist your agency in developing the state's response. Comments: File Number PA-03-00S, Home Dynamics, Inc.: 1. Although the applicant indicates that there is sufficient sanitary waste treatment capacity available in the Ft. Pierce wastewater treatment plant, the reviewer could not find a letter from the utility confirming available capacity. In view of the fact that the area is experiencing rapid growth and demand on existing wastewater treatment systems, it is recommended that the City of Ft. Pierce confirm that treatment capacity is available in its facility to meet the anticipated demand of this land use amendment. 2. It is also recommended that a letter indicating that potable water will also be availaþle from the service provider. 3. Although the applicant indicatès that the wetlands on the property have been invaded with exotic plant species, it is recommended that the environmental survey being planned for the property be completed prior to adoption of the land use amendment, with a view toward restoring the on-site wetlands. File Number P A-03-006, Lucie Rock, LLC: 1. The reviewer could not find an analysis of the increased sanitary treatment demand resulting from the proposed increase in land use density. Similar concerns exist for this development as were expressed in the Home DynanMS~ ~fì':~cP.;9P5~~ÞR:~gye, and although the applicant indicates P(int~d on '~cycl~d POP~(, \wt "'-II 2 that there is sufficient sanitary waste treatment capacity available in the Ft. Pierce wastewater treatment plant, there has been no confinnation of that fact from the City of Ft. Pierce. In view of the fact that the area is experiencing rapid growth and demand on existing wastewater treatment systems, it is recommended that the City ofFt. Pierce also confirn1 that treatment capacity is available in its facility to meet the anticipated demand of this land use amendment. 2. It is recommended that an analysis of the increase in potable water demand also be performed for this proposed increase in land use density, with an accompanying letter from the service provider indicating that the required level of service will be met. File Number PA-03-007, BJK. Inc.: 1. Similar concerns regarding potable water and wastewater concurrency exist for this project as expressed above for Lucie Rock, LLC and Home Dynamics, Inc. It is recommended that the required 9J -5 analysis be perfonned for increases in potable water and wastewater demand and that written confinnation be provided by the relevant utilities. 2. Because the 10 Mile Creek restoration project is an important part ofthe Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), it is recommended that any development of this property meet the Environmental Resource Pennitting requirements of the South Florida Water Management District, by either minimizing or treating stonnwater mnoffthat may adversely impact the 10 Mile Creek. Considerable commitment of public funds has been made to restore surface water qu~lity in this region 1, and to balance the salinity of the water column in the downstream estuary; consequently, it is imperative that the stonnwater management plan for this property be consistent \vith the objectives of the CERP projects in the area. Please caU me at (850) 245-2163 if you have any questions regarding this response. Sincerely, . ~~ Robert W. Hall Office of Intergovernmental Programs .. . lOver 1.2 Billion dollars is programmed for restoration in this area. " " "'UI~-CC-C:~~' J.O' C.:J r.~.I. ~ ..",¡ TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL 301 EAST OCEAN BOULEVARD SUITE 300 STUART, FLORIDA 34994 PHONE: 772-221-4060 FAX: 772-221-4067 FAX TRANSMISSION Date: 10.... 2J-- 0'-/ ,Fax Number: ~~o-tf~~- 3309 Number of Pages (including cover sheet): (p Operator: Pen t1 ~ 4-; d.-O p' .'\1\ To: Ja.vvt\ ~ Coke. r From: i-ex ('1 ¡.Je.S S Project: Òraft A YV\~olvY\,~s +cJ +he <;f~ L()c.~e. CCJ'ttf' PIa..'1 1:>cA ~. fJð. 04-1 Comments: ., ,JUN-¿¿-¿~~4 lb: ¿4 '-' 'WI TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL MEMORANDUM To: Council Members AGENDA ITEM 6F From: Staff Date: June 18, 2004 Council Meeting Subject: Local Govemment Comprehensive Plan Review Drat{ Amendment'i to the S1. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan DCA Reference No. 04-1 Introduction The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, requires that Council review local government comprehensive plan amendments prior to their adoption. Under the provisions of this law, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) prepares an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report on a proposed amendment only if requested to do so by the local government, the regional planning council., an affected person or if an ORC Report is otherwise deemed necessary by the DCA. If th~ local governmellt requests the DCA to prepare an ORC Report, then Council must provide the DCA with its own objections, recommendations for modification, alld comments 011 the proposed amendmcnt within 30 days of its receipt. Background St. Lucie County is proposing three Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments to the County comprehensive.plan. The County has requested that the DCA undertake a formal review of the amendments. Evaluation Future Land Use Map Amendments The proposed FLUM amertdments are summarized in Table 1, and the locations are shown on the attached maps. P.02 -'UI~-C:C:-¿1::J1::J4 lb' ¿4 1".03 '-" ...,¡ Table 1 Proposed Amendments to the Future I.,and Use Map St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan DCA Reference No. 04-1 Amendment Approx. Current Proposed I Approximate Location NumberlName Acreage FLUM FLUM Desi1!patlon Desie:nntion No. L 94.3 RS MXD- on Rock Rd., approx. 0.5 mile north of Lucie Rock, LLC Orange Ave Orange Ave., 00 southwest side of 1- (PA-03-006) 95 No.2 48.7 RS RU on south side of Okeechobee Rd., BJK lne. approx. 0.5 mile west of the Florida (PA-03-007) Tumoike No.3 34.5 COM RH on the southwest corner of Edwards HOOle Dynamics RU Rd. and South 25th St. Corporation (PA-03-00S) Total 177.5 Lee:end to FLUM Desi2nations COM MXD-Orange Ave. RS RU RH Commercial Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area Residential Suburban - maximum 2 dwelling units per acre Residential Urban - maximum 5 dwelling units per acre Residential, High - maximum 15 dwelling units per acre 1. Lucie Rock, LLC (PA-03-006) - This 94.3-acre parcel is located on Rock Road approximately 0.5 mile north of Orange Avenue 011 the southwestern side ofI-95. The property currently contains a citrus grove, lake, and vacant 1and. Most of the native vegetation has becn clearcd. The proposal is to change the FLUM designation from Residential Suburban to Mixed Use Orange A venuelI-95 Activity Area, which would allow industrial uses on the site. The surrounding FLlnyf designations include Public Facilities to the south; Residential Suburban to' the north, east, and west; and Mixed Use District to the south. The St. Lucie County Correctional Faeility is located directly south of the subject amendment on the south side of the adjacent North St. Lucie Water Management District Canal. Vacant land and a citrus grOYC management office are located to the east, active mining activities and vacant lands are to the west, and I-95 is adjacent to the north boundary of the subject parcel. JUN-¿¿-2004 Ib:¿~ P.04 '-' ...." The County staff report indicated that the proposed amendment would increase intensities and industrial useS near 1·95 without adversely affecting future residential areaS (Q the west. 2. BJK Inc. (PA.03-007) - This 48.7-acre parcel is located on the south side of Okeechobee Road approximately 0.5 mile west of the Florida Tumpike. The amendment is part of a 366-acre parcel plarmed for development under the County Planned Unit Development (PUD) program. The site contains land that was recently cleared of an abandoned eitrus grove. The proposal is to change the FLUM de~;ignation from Residential (2 d\ve1ling units per acre) to Residential (5 dwelling units per acre). The surrounding FLUM designations include Residential Suburban (2 dwelling units per acre) to the north and west, Mixed Use-Crossroads to the east, and Residential Conservation to the south. The site is surrounded by citrus groves, vacant land, and a single family development. The South Florida Water Management District Ten Mile Creek Attenuation Area is adjacent to the south side of the subject parcel. The County staff report indicated that approval of the proposed change to Residential Urban would increase the allowable number of dwelling units on the site from 97 to 244. The change would also allow for the possibility of limited commercial and ins£Ïtutional uses. 3. Home Dynamics Corporation (PA-03-005) - This 35.4-acre parcel is located on the southwcst comer or South 25th Street and Edwards Road. The property was cleared previously and is now dominated by Brazilian pepper, an invasive exotic species. The proposal is to change the FLUM designation from Commercial and Residential Urban (5 dwelling units per acre) to Residential High (15 dwelling units per acre). The surrounding FLUM de~ignations include Commercial to the north and Rcsidential Urban (5 dwelling units per acre) to the east, west, and south of the subject parcel. A convenience store, commercial office, aod single family homes are located to the east of the parcel across South 25th Street. Single-family homes are located to the west, and the Forest Grove Middle School is located to the south. A small shopping p1aza and vacant land are located north of the parcel on the north side of Edwards Road. The County staff report indicates that given the reqllirements of the County's Land Development Code, it may not be possible to achieve the maximum density of 15 dwelling units per acre .pn this parcel. The Local Planning Agency recommended denial of the petition. On April 13, 2004, the County received a request from the applicant's representative requesting a revision to the application. The proposed revision seeks to provide three diftèrent FLUM designations (Residential Urban, Residential Medium, and Residential High) rather than one Residential High designation. This proposal would result in reducing the overal1 density on the proposed amendment site from 530 dwelling units to 361 dwelling units. The County .J~N-22-2ØØ4 16:25 t-'.Ið~ '-" """" staff indicated that the three separate FLUM designations on one 34.5·acre parcel would not represent good planning practices and would not be binding on a future pun. Extraiurisdictional Impacts Lctters were sent to the following local governments or organizations seeking comments on the effects of the proposed amendments on plans, policies, and activities, especially areas of potential conflict: St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), St. Lucie County School District, and the City of Fort Pierce. As of the date of the con1pletion of this report, Council had received onc comment memorandum from the 8t. Lucie MPO. The memorandum indicated that the proposed amendments are considered consistent with the MPO's adopted 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan. No detrimental extrajurisdictional impacts were identified during the review of these amendments. Effects on Sismificant Regional Resources or Facilities Analysis of the proposed amendments indicates that they would not have adverse effects on significant regional resources or facilities. However, as the attached letter from the South Florida Water Management District indicates, required potable water facility capacity analysis has not been provided for any of the amendments. ObiectioI1s, Recommendations for Modification, and Comments A. Objections l. NODe B. Commel1ts 1. The 48.7-acre BJK Inc. property is part of a 366-acre parcel that is being planned for a PUD. The PUD is planned to include approximately 800 dwelling units consisting of single-family and multifamily units, limited commercial, and recreational uses. According to information provided by the County, the proposed change in the future land use designation for the subject parcel would authorize a higher residential density thaIl can be developed on the site. Therefore, the County should consider whether more than OIle FLUM designation would be appropriate for this site. 2. The BJK Inc. property is located adjaceIlt to the South Florida Watcr Management District Ten. Mile Creek Attenuation Area. The developer and County should coordinate with the District to enSure that an adequate buffer is created adjacent to Ten Mile Creek to protect it from impacts related to the development. " · lUN-22-2004 16: 26 P.06 \wf ...., 3. As noted by the South Florida Water Management District, the County should provide a potable water facility capacity analysis and demonstrate sufficient capacity exists to service the proposed fllture development. Recommendation Council should adopt the above comments and approve their transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. Attachments .. TOTAL P.06 "-' To: Submitted By: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: RECOMMENDATION: COMMISSION ACTION: CJ APPROVED CJ OTHER ~unty Attorney Originating Dept.: Finance: ...., Agenda Request ",/ ¡., - ._) (- April 6, 2004 Item Number Date: Consent Regular Public Hearing Leg. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] Quasi-JD [ X ] Board of County Commissioners Community Development ''I Presented By ~~ '·1)ev lopment Director ( / Consider the application of Lucie Rock, LLC {cpJlün'ued from March 16, 2004} requesting a Change in Future Land Use -ClaSsification from RS {Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac} to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area) for 94.34 acres located on Rock Road, approximately .5 mile north of Orange Avenue, on the southwest side of Interstate 95. The amendment property currently contains a citrus grove, a lake and vacant land, with little native vegetation. The petitioner is seeking a change in the future land use classification in order to "permit industrial uses more appropriate to adjacent uses, including the St. Lucie County Correctional Facility". The correctional facility is located approximately 130 feet to the south. The proposed change in the Future Land Use to MXD-Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area would allow industrial uses on this site. The proposed MXD Future land use classification will require any change in zoning be to PUD, PNRD or PMXD and the uses to be segregated to ensure compatibility with surrounding residential land uses. N/A At the February 19, 2003, public hearing on this matter, the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency, by a vote of 7 to 1, recommended approval of the requested change in future land use classification from RS (Residential, Suburban) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area) On March 16, 2004, the County Commission continued the public hearing on this matter until April 6, 2004, at the request of the applicant. Approve transmittal of the Lucie Rock, LLC petition for a Change in Future Land Use classification from RS (Residential, Suburban) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter 163, Florida Statues. CONCURRENCE: D DENIED Douglas M. Anderson County Administrator c:.,___ Coordination! Signatures Mgt. & Budget: .,..other: ll'" \'\~) Purchasing: Other: ~ ...., Board of County Commission: April 6, 2004 File Number PA-03-006 MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Community Development Director DATE: March 30, 2004 SUBJECT: Application of Lucie Rock, LLC, for a Change in Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/l-95 Activity Area) LOCATION: Approximately .5 mile north of Orange Avenue on Rock Road, on the south side of Interstate 95. CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: RS (Residential Suburban- 2 du/ac) PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/l-95 Activity Area}1 MXD-Medium and MXD-High EXISTING ZONING: AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/ac) and IX (Industrial Extraction) PARCEL SIZE: 94.34 acres PROPOSED USE: Industrial SURROUNDING FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS: P/F (Public Facilities) to ~he south. RS (Residential Suburban 2 du/ac) to the north, east, and west. MXD is located to the southeast. SURROUNDING ZONING DESIGNATIONS: I (Institutional) to the south, AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/ac) and IX to the west, AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/ac) to the north and IX (Industrial Extraction) to the east. '-" ...." March 30, 2004 Page 2 Petition: Lucie Rock. LLC File Number: PA-03-006 SURROUNDING EXISTING LAND USES: The S1. Lucie County Correctional Facility is located directly south of the project lands, on the south side of the adjacent North S1. Lucie Water Management District (NSLWMD) Canal. Vacant land and a citrus grove management company office are located to the east; active mining activities and vacant lands to the west, and 1-95 runs along the north boundary. UTILITY SERVICE: The subject property is within the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority Service Area. Public water and sewer lines are located south of the site along Rock Road. TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS: RIGHT-Of-WAY ADEQUACY: The existing right-of-way width along Rock Road is 50 feet. The Access Road separating the amendment parcels has a 60-foot road right-of-way owned by the State of Florida. SCHEDULED IMPROVEMENTS: None TYPE Of CONCURRENCY DOCUMENT REQUIRED: Concurrency Deferral Affidavit. ****************************************************** COMMENTS The applicant St. Lucie Rock, LLC, is requesting a change in the Future Land Use classification from RS (Residential Suburban) to MXD-Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/l-95 Activity Area) for a 94.34-acre tract on Rock Road, just north of the St. Lucie County Correction Facility. The site's existing RS Future Land Use classification allows agriculture, low-density residential, institutional and neighborhood commercial uses. The subject property currently contains a citrus grove, a lake and vacant lands. The change in the future land use classification is being sought to "permit industrial uses more appropriate to adjacent uses, including the S1. Lucie County Correctional Facility". The correctional facility is located approximately 130 feet to the south. No expansion of the mining operation is anticipated. The surrounding area consists of a variety of uses including industrial extraction, office, industrial, institutional and vacant lands. Existing industrial uses are located just southeast of the project, in the MXD-Orange Avenue/l-95 Activity Area on the east side of Rock Road. These uses include American Concrete and the Ft. Pierce Auto Auction. The applicant has proposed less intense uses (MXD-medium) on the southwestern portion of the amendment site adjacent to residential land uses to the west. Palm '-' ""'" March 30, 2004 Page 3 Petition: Lucie Rock, LLC File Number: PA-03-006 Breezes PUD is located southwest of the site and a 148-acre vacant residential tract is located to the west. Palm Breezes PUD is a proposed 646 unit single-family development on 151 acres. A change in the Future Land Use of the subject property to MXD-Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area requires the identification of the intensity level of future uses (low, medium or high) as part of the amendment process. The proposed intensity levels are to be segregated as to ensure compatibility with internal and external land uses. The proposed amendment would allow (Medium Intensity) less intense development to be located adjacent to future residential areas while more intense (High Intensity) development would be located along 1-95 and in close proximity to existing high intensity development areas on Rock Road. Any change in zoning in the MXD Future land use areas must be to PUD, PNRD or MXD to ensure compatibility with surrounding lands uses. Staff is concerned for future compatibility between this site and the residential lands to the west. The proposal to limit the western portion of the amendment site to medium intensity is the applicant's response to the concern. Staff would note, that the southern amendment parcel contains an existing natural pine flatwood buffer along a Fort Pierce Farms Water Control District Canal on the parcels western boundary that can assist to buffer industrial uses from future residential areas to the west. On February 19, 2004, the proposed amendment was presented before the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency (LPA). Following a public hearing on this petition to the proposed Future Land Use amendment and two members of the public speaking in opposition, the LPA voted (7 to 1) to forward the proposed amendment to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. On March 16, 2004, the Board of County Commissioners continued the hearing until April 6, 2004. A future land use amendment is considered to be a preliminary development order and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property. No right to obtain a final development order, or any other rights to develop the subject property are granted or implied by the County if the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of Capacity. ****************************..*************** Any proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan may be reviewed by several state and regional agencies. The Department of Community Affairs is charged with determining whether amendments are consistent with and further the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the State Comprehensive Plan, the Strategic Regional Policy Plan, Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes, and Rule J-5, Florida Administrative Code. CONSISTENCY WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN In reviewing this application for a proposed amendment to the S1. Lucie County Future Land Use Map, staff finds that the following Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the County Comprehensive Plan are applicable to this petition. ~ ...., March 30, 2004 Page 4 Petition: Lucie Rock, LLC File Number: PA-03-006 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT The proposed future land use amendment is consistent with this element. The proposed MXD-Medium classification can protect future residential areas to the west and southwest from negative impacts that could be generated from industrial uses. Uses that may present a nuisance or health risk to proposed residential areas can be directed to the eastern portion of the amendment site and along 1-95. The MXD Orange Avenue 11- 95 Interchange Future Land Use classification in conjunction with a future planned development allow the County to control the type and location of facilities to ensure that the future uses are compatible with the residential areas to the west. The southern parcel contains a natural pine flatwood buffer along its western boundary that should be maintained to buffer industrial uses from future residential areas to the west. MXD (Mixed Use Development) The intent of the Mixed Use Development designation is to identify those areas where innovative land use concepts are encouraged. Application of this district should be with prudence, and should be only to those areas where traditional land use classifications do not afford the desired flexibility and community input in land use planning necessary to address local concerns. Candidates for this district include all 1-95 interchange areas, the 5t. Lucie County International Airport, Community Development Districts created pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes and areas of special or unique environmental consideration that may not be appropriate for traditional land use designations. Goal 1.1: Ensure the highest quality living environment 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. The site's close proximity to Interstate roadways, other industrial uses in the MXD areas and its lack of natural features makes it suitable for the proposed MXD classification. If the site is developed for industrial uses, adequate buffering is to be provided between the site and future residential uses to the west of the project site. Any future development plan should provide for the maintenance of the existing strip of pine flatwoods along the parcels southwestern boundary to buffer future residential uses to the west. OBJECTIVE 1.1.5: In coordination with the other elements of this plan, future development within the Planned Urban Service Area shall be directed to areas where urban and community services/facilities can be provided in the most efficient and compact manner so as to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. The proposed amendment directs industrial development activities into areas of the county already serviced with urban services such as water and sewer, pursuant to this Objective. Urban sprawl is discouraged by the proposed amendment's location in the urban service area and its close proximity to regional roadways and existing '-' ...." March 30, 2004 Page 5 Petition: Lucie Rock, LLC File Number: PA-03-006 industrial/commercial uses. Development under the proposed amendment would likely consist of light industrial and commercial uses consistent with those in the nearby MXD area. Policy 1.1.5.3: When considering any amendment to the Future Land Use Maps of the County's Comprehensive Plan, the County Commission shall make the following findings, supported by the other elements of this Plan, prior to taking any approval actions granting an individual amendment to the Future Land Use Maps: 1. That the property under a land use amendment application is adjacent to, or within no more than 114 mile of the same or greater type of land use classification. The proposed MXD-Orange Avenue Future Land Use classification is the same as that located 100 feet southeast of the site, on the east side of Rock Road. 2. That the property under land use management consideration lies within the Five Year Capital Improvement Program of the Water and Wastewater Master Plan for St. Lucie County or otherwise meets the requirements of Policy 1.1.5.4. The amendment area is located within the Five Year Capital Improvement Program of the Fort Pierce Utility Authority. Objective 1.1.8: Property owners investments, their quality of life and the single family neighborhood, as a defined residential area, shall be protected from the encroachment of commercial and/or other inappropriate land uses through consistent and predictable application of the Land Development Regulations. The less intense MXD-Medium classification is proposed for the southwestern portion of the amendment site to ensure that more compatible, less intense uses are adjacent to residential land uses. This will assist in protecting future residential areas from encroachment of inappropriate industrial and commercial uses. Any development of the subject site will require application through the Planned Non-Residential Unit Development or Planned Mixed Use Development process that provides flexibility to ensure that uses are located in a manner that protects future residential areas to the west. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Policy 2.1.1: The St. Lucie County transportation system shall be reviewed in coordination with any requested changes to the Future Land use Element or other related component of this plan. A report on the impacts to the system brought about by any proposed land use changes shall be prepared and presented to the Board of County Commissioners as part of the review of that Land Use change. The applicant provided a traffic statement estimating the trips associated with the maximum potential development for both the current and proposed Future Land Use '-" ...",/ March 30, 2004 Page 6 Petition: Lucie Rock, LLC File Number: PA-03-006 classifications and applied the trips to the existing roadway network. The maximum development potential from a trip generation standpoint would be a light industrial park. This would generate an estimate 14,321 vehicular trips per day. This is an increase of 12,468 VPO over that of a single-family development under the existing RS Future Land Use classification. The Level of Service was determined using the maximum development under the existing and proposed Future Land Use classifications. The results are summarized below: Roadway 2003 Volume/Capacity - Volume/Capacity - Volume/LOS LOS RS FLU LOS MXD FLU Development Development Orange Avenue 17,700/8 18,256/ 8 (West of 1-95) 27,076/8 Orange Avenue 4,300/A 5,597/A 8,596/A (East of Shinn Road) 2002 FOOT Qua/ity/Leve/ of Service Handbook The St. Lucie County Metropolitan Planning Organization has reported that St. Lucie County Spring 2003 traffic counts at stations expected to be impacted by future development of the proposed site were operating at LOS A, B, or C. The closest count stations to the proposed project are located on Orange Avenue east and west of 1-95 and both are operating at LOS B. The St. Lucie MPO 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) includes needed road widening improvements (adding lanes) for 1-95, Kings Highway, Angle Road, and Okeechobee Road in the vicinity of the proposed project. The LRTP also includes a reconstruction improvement for Orange Avenue, west of Kings Highway. The Kings Highway, Angle Road, and Orange Avenue improvements are not part of the Cost Feasible Plan and are not funded. However, the LRTP and Cost Feasible Plan include needed intersection improvements for Kings Highway at Orange Avenue and for Kings Highway at Angle Road. The Adopted FOOT Work Program For FY 2003/04 - 2007/08 includes road resurfacing projects for 1-95 and for Kings Highway, and road widening improvements (adding lanes) on Orange Avenue east of the Turnpike. HOUSING ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT '-' ..J March 30, 2004 Page 7 Petition: Lucie Rock, LLC File Number: PA-03-006 The applicant has provided documentation that water and sewer service is available. Prior to any Final Development Order for the property the applicant must obtain a Certificate of Capacity, which demonstrates sufficient capacity in these services exists to serve the property. · Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this sub-element. The subject property is within the Fort Pierce Utility Authority's Service area. Prior to any final development order approvals, the applicant would need to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service the project. · Solid Waste Sub-Element The proposed amendment is not in conflict with this sub-element and would not reduce the Level of Service standards for the County's solid waste facility as set forth by Policy 68.1.1.1. The County's Solid Waste facility currently has a 37 -year capacity based upon current usage. · Drainage and Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element The proposed amendment is not inconsistent with this sub-element. In accordance with Objective 6C.1.4.2 of this element, all development will be conditioned on the availability of services necessary to maintain the level of service standards for stormwater set forth in Policy 6C.1.1.2. Objective 6C.3.2 requires development to protect the functions of natural groundwater recharge areas. Prior to development taking place the project will also require an Environmental Resource Permit from the South Florida Water Management District. · Potable Water Sub-Element The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this sub-element. The subject property is within the Fort Pierce Utility Authority's service area and existing water lines located along Rock Road. Prior to any Final Development Order approvals, the applicant would be required to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service the project. COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. The subject site is not located within the coastal planning area. CONSERVATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Goal 8.1: The natural resources of St. Lucie County shall be protected, appropriately used, or conserved in a manner which maximizes their function, and values. ~ ~ March 30, 2004 Page 8 Petition: Lucie Rock, LLC File Number: PA-03-006 The subject property contains little native vegetation. No adverse impacts on the natural environment are anticipated, as development on this site is not expected to impact the County's natural resources. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. Residential development is not anticipated. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT The propc.'~ .',j ;:>"'-' - ~ c c.:..rmined not to conflict with this element. . "..it! new development to meet level of serv: ';:: ?~:""~.d~r(!s for b~·~ ,," ~,.~ ~rr-s'te improvements, including local streets, water::,·~'.; sewer connec':ion ;,::':. :'" 3tormwater management facilities and open space. The a~ of the proposed Future Land Use Amendment has signed a Concurrency Deferral Affidavit that defers the reservation of capacity in public facilities. The Affidavit states liSt. Lucie County can make no guarantee that adequate public facilities will be available when I apply for the Final Development Order" and that lithe issuance of a preliminary development order without a Certificate of Capacity creates no vested or other rights to develop the subject property," A Certificate of Capacity must be obtained before the issuance any final development orders for development of this property. Policy 11.1.4: No right to obtain final development order, nor any other rights to develop the subject property have been granted or implied by the County's approval of the preliminary development order without determining the capacity of public facilities. A Certificate of Capacity demonstrating sufficient public facilities are available to support any future development proposal must be obtained before a final development order is issued. ECONOMIC 12.2.1.1: Develop an area-wide land use plan that will increase opportunities for business and industry consistent with smart growth principles. The County's Economic Development Division staff has indicated they are not able to fill the requests of individuals looking for parcels within light industrial park subdivisions. ~ ..., March 30, 2004 Page 9 Petition: Lucie Rock, LLC File Number: PA-03-006 CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE 187.201(16), FS: In recognition of the importance of preserving the natural resources and enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner. The subject property is located in an area of industrial and commercial activities with scattered residential and agricultural uses also found in the area. With adequate buffering from future residential uses to the west and oversight of industrial materials and solvents that would be detrimental to adjacent canal waters, light industrial/commercial activities on the subject site are not expected to adversely affect the quality of life in the immediately surrounding area and natural resources. The proposed amendment is located in an urbanized area that continues to receive significant public improvements to support the growing commercial and industrial centers locating in the area. Currently, significant capacity exists to serve the proposed amendment area and not reduce the existing Level of Service of public facilities. WATER RESOURCES. 187.201 (8), FS: Addresses the maintenance of the quality and quantity of ground and surface water natural resources. The proposed amendment is not incompatible with existing local and regional water supplies and protection measures for the ground and water natural resources. Any final development order would require the concurrence of the South Florida Water Management District. NATURAL SYSTEMS AND RECREATIONAL LANDS. 187.201(10), FS: Addresses the protection, acquisition and restoration of unique natural habitats and ecological systems. The project lands consist of an existing orange grove, lake and vacant land with little native vegetation. Development of the property for MXD purposes can occur without negative impacts to the County's natural systems. PUBLIC FACILITIES. 187.201(18), FS: Promotes the protection of existing public facilities and the timely, orderly, and efficient provision of new facilities. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers this policy because it would maximize use of the existing and proposed public facilities. TRANSPORTATION. 187.201 (20), FS: Directs future transportation improvements to aid in the management of growth and promotes an intermodal transportation system. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers this goal. An analysis of the impact of the proposed amendment on effected roadways has been provided. The subject site is located on Rock Road, 2,646 feet (.5 miles) north of a State Highway (SR 68) and in close proximity to the Interstate and Intrastate Highway Systems. Mixed land uses in this area can reduce vehicle miles for those industrial/commercial uses that access these highway systems and assists to develop the employment clusters that further efforts to develop a mass transit system. '-' 'will March 30, 2004 Page 10 Petition: Lucie Rock, LLC File Number: PA-03-006 CONSISTENCY WITH THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN The following are the primary regional goals and polices that apply to this petition: Strategy 1.1.2: Promote compatibility of urban areas, regional facilities, natural preserves and other open spaces. The proposed Future Land Use Amendment is not inconsistent with the Strategic Regional Policy Plan (SRRP) and would encourage the location of additional industrial/commercial development in an area served by adequate infrastructure. The proposed amendment is compatible with, and complementary to the areas existing industrial/commercial land uses and can be compatible with proposed residential development uses to the west with adequate buffering and the appropriate siting of any future industrial/commercial uses. Policy 8.1.1.1: All development should take place concurrent with or after the provision of necessary infrastructure and services. The proposed amendment would result in directing industrial/commercial development to a suitable location in the urbanized area of the County served by ample public facilities and services. The proposed amendment site is located in an area with the necessary water, wastewater and roadway capacity currently available. Future industrial uses would occur within close proximity to existing industrial employment sectors to facilitate development of a transit system and to provide convenient access to emergency evacuation routes. CONCLUSION Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed MXD Future Land Use Classification change would increase intensities and industrial uses along the 1-95 interchange while providing an opportunity to protect future residential areas to the west. Staff recommends the Commission authorize transmittal of the Lucie Rock, LLC petition for a change in Future Land Use classification from RS (Residential Suburban) to MXD- Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenuell-95 Activity Area) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Attachment cc: County Administrator County Attorney File '-' .., ..... z 0 A (I! I --I --I CD ~ 0 ..~ j I 0 9 0 a: cry '1 ~ II 0 " Q) <t: 0 a.. \ c. ~ ' ::J , --I w ~ .. .. II< II< ~ ::> ~ 0 () z -- ::> C 0 _._.u' .... ., -iíiiíi' () a: ........0 ~ I ().~ - - -- if .~ ct1 I z w ! 0 () w ¡::: ~ :0 ~ 0 I ~ ~ I a... --1 -- ... ..'1IÐ II< II< ~ 0 tZ-) -, ~ r w w .. I tI!" . .. .. .. II< -'- II< ~. S K 1 S ç[ 1 ç " 1 '\ .. AlNnO~ 3380H~33)O '-" ...." A Petition of Lucie Rock. LLC for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from RS (Residential. Suburban) to ~[}-"-{1ndustrial). \1'\'--",' , " , , " " " ' , ' , ' , , , N.U.R.o.o. e...... 4) _Ie.. - P A 03-006 V///////I This pattern indicates ~ subject parcel 'I " " " ~ '_1 I, ~'{J c~ ~- II -.- , Il- I ~~ I-- ~(r- ............/ - ~r--}- I - T ~ - , , .5'''+0 , , ~ Ilì' ~~% :--~ l I,ll ", ~~~ ið-------i 'i'l ~W'/.~ ..... " I I' L___ ~~~~~ "J " 0~fl ~~~~ '/ '/ '/ j/~/ ) jj/ '/ / ~/ ,////, -..........:.u_ :/ ~/ ~ "/j '/: / ) / ~) ~ ~ ~ '/: ~ ~~ , "'-. ~ ~ ? ~~ )j/) ~ ) // " ~ ~ ~ ~~) ) ~ ~)~ ~ ~ ~ ) ~ ~ j '/ "/ // j '/ ) j"/ 0) ~.' r---. ) j,/ ~ - )) ~/ :~ j , ) ~ '/ j ~ '/%),¡ //) / ~~ ~ "/ "/ / '/ ) // ~) j) ) h /. "/ ~ í. ~ l¡ j)) ~/ /~j:// j~~'~ ~~~/~~~@@J ~~ ~~~ N.I.L.__ I - I III , I I I J r I I I I I = \" I I l , / - -~ E- = I J-I - F= ~I r,H- .- ~.L-;.~~~ ! Mop ~ I'oÞr'*\' 2. - r ==:::;=::::~=... N ......, Zoning '........ , ........ ~........ '",-- ........A.G-1 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ 11.5.1..11.0.0. C_.... .) AG-1 -,,,- PUD AR-1 - P A 03-006 V//////.A This pattern indicates ~ subject parcel ..." Lucie Rock, LLC II - ~pr.l.}- I II - T:::r II - II - ¿ I I -r~· .~ c- ~ \. =-~ AG-1 AG-1 I~~ II ~.:.ø ____-, I I 'l"/ /. ~ ~/.,. - I f'-.. ~~~ ./0/. --~ I I II', ~ ~~~3 ; ~It -.............. I :~¡: IX "AG--1~~_ )t..J,'ix. T 1]1 L___ Wí~~ 'J I I ~///~~~%@~... ~~~~~~~ ~~ ~ /~~~~~~ ~~]~ "'-- 1~~lf~~;~~~~~~~ = , / / 1 / 1 / / 1 % ~~ %:% ~ )//1 W/ ~ . -.... 1% ~ 1//1 II ~ ~/~~~Ø~ %~~ ~ IX % ~W/ /~ / 1 1 /~ ~~0/~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~ i~ ~~~~~ I II.S.I....ILD. IH AR-1 .rR8-4 I m r I II ~ rTl I l I / - I I" - r IIII I H-I .... CG CG St-./-~~~ t 0Ia 7'.....~ Mop ~ F*'-Y 2._ ==:s-:.:æ:-=..==:-=- N ~ Land Use '......... " " , " ......... TiU~ ..................1) ......... ......... """ """ ......... ......... """ """ ..a.L....u.u. c....... oJ RS _rc.w RU - PA 03-006 V/////~ This pattern indicates ~ subject parcel '...",,¡. . Lucie Rock, LLC 'I ~ ~!",..L}-I I II - T ~ II - II --~ ~II ~.:~: , '"- ~~ r- RS "ZJ~ I ~ ; I ~..... ____-, , r-.... 1,'·.'01. I- I II " ~. ø" ~~~ I , I """ ~ '~~ _____J ,], L___ % ~ """J II ~ ~ "- ~ ø..ø ~~ ~ 1 ~~~~/~~ ~~~ . ~ . ~ I 0/'.1- «:: /' )/) / % II /''/ / ~ ~ //)~~ oS I ~ , ~ ~0 ~/~~ ~~ i ~ ~~I j,/ ~~~~~~:~ '" '/ ~ /~ / ~) ~) / ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~:~ ~ ~ ., ~" I?'~'Í/// // '// /)/~/' ; R' ~ ~~ ~í ~ ~ ~~ ~/,// ~Íj~~~~ · " ~.~~~~. /l,S.I..W.ll.ll. I PIF PIF MXD- Orange Ave RU I"""IlTT I I I I J' I I I I ;:r\ I I I J I I I I / f- COM :='J I rl II I r =..-1 I I r I I I I I r-r se.-.h"7.~~ ! Mop "'--' -...y 2, - f ==::::-==::-:-~.. N \.r ....., Lucie Rock, LLC .... -, " -. . .?"*- ctn·t;!"","~,;n.;,,·1I1Ji· ~"~"!,II'" .'; ··n·' i' 4D:¡~j'f' ~F' i'¡' ¡, 1, i i. ",;' ::d, : ~ : r q ~ ~ I I ,. ~ ~ J ' " ' " I l 'I , ,~ . . ! :" ' J~. fr i ; . -:, ~ 'I~:' ì ; ; j ; II ¡, r~ : ~ i .' ,"',' I ~ . , ! : : : 'III: I II r ¡ . " ,; l, I " ¡ ;' "':¡',:,:n¡: t"li :1 i r,:: ~¡,; \' "¡~I' ~ 11 t I'" 1 , I., I ! " , .,~. I , . \ , I ~ \. t , ;. ~1~· ," ~~. ~ l ? j i ..: ' 'I: P A 03-006 V/////~ This pattern indicates ~ subject parcel 5r./.~~-' t GIS '? ~'='-. Mop "'--' ~ 2..... ==::::-=:E:-:"~='" N '-' 'WI AGENDA ITEM 9: LUCIE ROCK. LLC. - FILE NO. PA-03-006: Ms. Diana Waite, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 9 was the application of Lucie Rock, LLC, for a Change in the Future Land Use classification from RS (Residential Suburban) to MXD-Orange Avenue (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I- 95 Activity Area) for a 94.34-acre tract on Rock Road, just north of the St. Lucie County Correction Facility. The site's existing RS Future Land Use classification allows agriculture, low-density residential, institutional and neighborhood commercial uses. The subject property currently contains a citrus grove. The petitioner is seeking a change in the future land use classification in order to "permit industrial uses more appropriate to adjacent uses, including the St. Lucie County Correctional Facility". The correctional facility is located approximately 130 feet to the south. Ms. Waite continued that the surrounding area consists of a variety of uses including industrial extraction, office, industrial, institutional and vacant lands. The existing industrial uses are located just southeast of the project, in the MXD-Orange A venue/I-95 Activity Area on the east side of Rock Road. These include American Concrete and the Ft. Pierce Auto Auction. She stated that the applicant has proposed (MXD-medium) intensity for the western portion of the amendment site to insure that future uses are compatible with the adjacent resident land uses to the west. This addresses staff concerns for the future compatibility of this site and the residential lands to the west. Staff would note, that the southern amendment parcel contains an existing natural pine tlatwood buffer along a Fort Pierce Farms Water Control District Canal on the parcels western boundary that can assist to buffer industrial uses from future residential areas to the west. The MXD Future land use will ensure that any change in zoning is to POD, PNRD or MXD and the uses are segregated to ensure compatibility with surrounding residential land uses. Ms. Waite stated that higher intensity uses that may present a nuisance or health risk to residents to the west can be directed to the eastern portion of the amendment site along or the portion of the amendment site along 1-95. The MXD Orange/I-95 Interchange Future Land Use classification allows the County to control of the type and location of facilities to ensure the type of future uses are compatible with the residential areas to the west. The southern parcel contains a natural pine tlatwood buffer along its western boundary that should be maintained to buffer industrial uses from future residential areas to the west. Ms. Waite stated that based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed MXD Future Land Use Classification change would increase intensities and industrial uses along the 1-95 interchange while providing an opportunity to protect future residential areas to the west. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 26 of 34 '-' ....¡ Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval and that the petition be transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review. Chairman McCurdy questioned if the petitioner was present. Mr. Bobby Klein stated he was there on behalf of the applicant and complimented Staff for their suggestion to change their request from IND (Industrial) to MXD. He also stated that they support Staff's recommendations and was there to answer any questions. Mr. Grande questioned if the POO (Planned Unit Development), PNRD (Planned Non- Residential Development), and PMOO (Planned Mixed-Unit Development) all carried the same requirements for plan submittals. Mr. Kelly confirmed that was correct. Chairman McCurdy opened the Public Hearing. Ms. Valentine Sermons, 1545 Pine Burg Lane, stated that she resides in Timberlake Estates, which is directly behind this proposed project. She continued that the area is highly residential and they don't want this area turned industrial. She stated there are 31 lots in her development that are anywhere from a half acre to an acre. She also stated that she could look out her kitchen window and see this project site. She advised that they just found out about this petition because the letters only went out to the four residents in the back of the development. She stated that they are completely opposed to this project. Ms. Sarah Span stated that she lives directly across from the subject property. She stated that she took pictures of the area and it is a not very pleasing view across 1-95. She continued that there is dirt and sand already stacked up very high in the area. Chairman McCurdy questioned how long Ms. Span has lived there. Ms. Span stated she has been there for fourteen years. Chairman McCurdy questioned if the sand mine was there prior to her moving in. Ms. Span stated that it was not there that she was aware of. Chairman McCurdy stated that he believed that sand mine operation was in operation before Timberlake Estates was ever established. Ms. Span stated that they just removed some trees and now it is causing her health issues. Chairman McCurdy stated that the trees blocked the view of the operation previously, which might be why she didn't realize it was there. Seeing no one else, Chairman McCurdy closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Lounds stated that when the pepper trees were cleared off of 1-95 it did open the view of the pit, which has been there almost twenty years. He questioned if the applicant could present something to clean up that area. He stated that the Timberlake Estates area is a very nice development and would feel more comfortable with this request if he knew exactly what the applicant planned on doing on the site. Mr. Hearn stated that he is concerned about the broad spectrum of things that can be done in an industrial land use and if he knew exactly what the applicant was putting in there it would make this more comfortable to him. Mr. Grande stated that they are requesting an P&Z I LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 27 of 34 ~ ..."J MXD future land use. Mr. Bobby Klein stated that their original request was for an industrial land use but they changed their request to MXD to ease the concerns about what could be done on the site with an industrial land use. He also stated that they did try to purchase the existing pit to include in this request but were unsuccessful. He advised that they are aware of the concerns of the neighboring communities and will do everything possible to ease those concerns with their property's use. He continued that under the MXD future land use they would be required to submit some plan (POO, PMUD, or PNRD) on this site and it would be brought before them for their review. Mr. Lounds stated that after considering the testimony presented during the public hearing, including Staff comments, I hereby move that the Local Planning Agency of St. Lucie County recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners grant approval to the application of Lucie Rock, LLC, for a Change in Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential Suburban) to MXD-Orange A venue (Mixed Use Orange A venuelI-95 Activity Area), and transmit the petition to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review because I think it is consistent with the industrial area that is there, the correctional facility, industrial heavy, and commercial that is there. Mr. Lounds also stated that when this plan comes back that everyone within the Timberlake Estates subdivision be notified, even if they are outside of the 500-foot boundary. Mr. Kelly confinned that they would make sure that everyone is notified when the plan comes back before them. Motion seconded by Mr. Akins. Upon a roll call vote the motion was approved with a vote of 7-1 (with Ms. Hammer voting against) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P&Z I LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 28 of 34 (Qiana Waiti-]40406~dÔC~~' -..J Page 1 ] ~ . L l..'<. \ ~_ ¿'Co \::. - ~C'''S~ \ (') ~~'€ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA REGULAR MEETING Date: April 6, 2004 Tape: 1-4 Convened: 3:00 p.m. Recessed: 4:30 p.m. Re-convened: 6:00 p.m. Adjourned: 9:38 p.m. Commissioners Present: Chairperson, Paula A. Lewis, Frannie Hutchinson, John D. Brulm, ClifT Barnes, Doug Coward Others Present: Doug Anderson, County Administrator, Ray Wazny, Asst. County Administrator, Heather Young, Asst. County Attorney, Dennis Murphy, Community Development Director, Paul Phillips, Airpon Director, Marie Gouin, M & B Director, Beth Ryder, Community Services Director, Jack Southard, Public Works Director, Leo Cordeiro, Solid Waste Manager, Millie Delgado·Feliciano, Deputy Clerk 1. MINUTES ( 1027) It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve the minutes of the meeting held March 16,2004; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. 2. PROCLAMA nONS/PRESENTATIONS A. Resolution No. 04- 125- Proclaiming April 5, 2004 through April 11, 2004 as" National Public Health Week" in St. Lucie County, Florida. It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Barnes, to approve Resolution No. 04- 125; and, upon ro11 call, motion carried unanimously. Ms. Diane Walgren, Health Depanment was present to accept the proclamation. B. Resolution No. 04-122- Proclaiming April 18,2004 through April 24, 2004 as "St. Lucie County Crime Victims' Rights Week" in St. Lucie County, Florida. It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Barnes, to approve Resolution No. 04-122; and, upon roll ca11, motion carried unanimously. Chief Deputy, Gary Wilson Sheriffs office, was present to accept the proclamation. C. The County Administrator read upcoming events and scheduled meetings. RA 1. PROCLAMA nON Resolution No. 04· I 29- Proclaiming April I 1,2004 through April 17,2004 as "Public Safety Telecommunications Week" in SI. Lucie county Florida. It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve Resolution No. 04-129; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. Capt. Ken Merrick, SLC Fire District was present to accept the proclamation. r[)ii!~"iw..~ª~ þ40406.doc ~: -----------'--------...",¡- Page 2 _ 3. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Mark Orr, attorney for the Migrant Workers families who were in a fatal crash this past week, addressed the Board and requested the Board consider waiving the cost of the Fairgrounds for a fundraiser for the families this Saturday. Ms. Linda Tapia, Gomez Productions, addressed the Board and provided infonnation on the community support as well as individual agencies support, i.e the Sheriffs office, the Mayor of the City of Ft. Pierce, Southern Eagle, and Circle H Citrus. Mr. Bobby Rodriguez, Director of the Latin Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Board and asked their support for this request. Letters of support were submitted for the record. Com. Hutchinson stated she was in support of this request because it was a tragedy which occurred in our back yard. Com. Coward stated he too was in support of waiving the fee. "!I\, Lewis expressed her concern with waving the fee since there is a policy in place for not for profit organizations. Com. Barnes stated he shared the same concerns as Com. Lewis and wasn't sure where to draw the line if this was approved. Com. Coward suggested staff possibly pursuing assistance from the private sector to pay the fee. Com. Bruhn stated he had a difficult time charging families for any of the facilities in their time of need. Com. Hutchinson suggested staff review alternatives for the funding and bring the results back to the Board at 6:00 p.m. Mr. Carl Benkert, Lakewood Park resident, addressed the Board regarding the Oakland Estates development which is now in the planning and zoning stage. He expressed his concerns with the density in the Lakewood Park area. Ms. Susan Caron, Indrio Road resident, addressed the Board regarding her home and the view from her back yard where it shows the proposed Emerson Estates development and the affect it would have in the surrounding area. Ms. Julie Orbin, Lakewood Park resident, addressed the misunderstanding regarding the second well at Holiday Pine to accommodate Potorfino Shores. The County Administrator stated at this point they are not sure whether or not they will be building a second well, their priority is to get the existing water treatment plant offline. Ms. Orbin asked if any new developments could be pulled off the agenda until it is known what would be done in the area. Com. Lewis stated she believed this could not be done. There are many legal issues i.e. advertising and codes and regulations have not been set as yet with regard to the Charrette. Com. Coward stated there is zoning in place and anyone who requests developing that is consistent with their current zoning would be pennitted to move forward. The issue is 2 Page 3 ] 1 QIã~-:vvª,t~~~:Q40406.doc '~ ....,/ that there is a speculative developing interests coming in who are buying up agricultural land outside the urban service boundary in hopes that they would give the sim1lar approach in developing as the City ofPon St. Lucie has which would give them new development rights. These are the developments which should be put on hold until to do a plan on how the region should be built out and we move forward with the Charrette. Com. Barnes stated they could not take away existing rights and there is a misconcc1!;"~ on what the County can do by the people and the developers. The County mw with existing laws since the Charette laws have not been written to this po' , not mean they give away rights they don't have, but the county must follov' Uley have right now. Mr. Grant Dunn. Lakewood Park offered ~ 300.00 or against the fee :01' the Fairgrounds to assist ¡he fu' in the car accident. ,,: w'fc :mJ himself , ,u.: m¡r-~'1t \>orkers killed "..... ro' ~ _w..t:':~",-... ,'"",.....v'w.... ~(:J ~~b.\'P _':J...I.,,;:~ :"'\".. ...,..11\,;,. ";~. '" ¿j",,- ..... ~ """~--""m,..,..' 9 :._~_~..., 0"-' .\....,,..... ·....hPI'Oi.· -....- tV!!. 1.Ii&VlQ h.c:uy, r:¡¡......... has been approved 50. :hc)' in fact have a new COI:ìp p1::~. 4. CO:\;,; ;,CL,'DA J'o ',' Corn Co\\ ~'-.;lh......_ ...j _ .. :3~n}e.s, h . "COilS,,", - "'na ¡addi(I"":"'" ~r' ,..,..,fø~ . --....¥\ fuu ..... - ca:. Ullia'''n..o....... 1. WARRANT LIST The Board approved Warrant List Nos. 27,28 and 29. 2. PUBLIC WORKS A. LeMard Road I MSBU- Paving & Drainage (SLC) - The BoarG approved Amendment No.3 to Work Authorization No.8 to the Agreement for Engineering Services with Culpepper& Terpenin~, :òl . for Task 10, Surveying Services, and Task 13, Fencing in the amoum of $11 ,940.00 for Acquisition purposes. B. Harmony Heights M.S.B.U.- Potable Water Improvements FPUA- The Board approved advertising for Initial Public Hearing- The Board accepted the petitioning ballots and granted permission to advertise the Initial Public Hearing to be heard on May 4, 2004 which is a night Board meeting. C. Request to approve Budget Resolution No. 04-106, Equipment request EQ04-24S- and Budget Amendment BA 04-141- The Board approved Resolution No. 04-106 establishing the budget for the Florida Depanment of Agriculture Grant, Equipment Request EQ04-24S for the purchase ofa watering truck and Budget Amendment No. BA 04- 141. D. Amendment No. 1 to the Grant Agreement with DEP for the River Park Bame Boxes- The Board approved Amendment No. 1 to the Grant Agreement with the DEP for the River Park Bame Boxes, 3 rp·i!~~:W![e~~]40406.dOC '-".":.' ' -r Page 4] E. Request for a Public hearing on St Lucie Citrus Mining Pennit Application- The Board approved a public hearing to be held on May 4,2004 or as soon thereafter as possible to consider the request of the St. Lucie Citrus Mining Pennit Application. F. Change Order No.2 in the amount of 51 8,744.02 for modifications to the South Jenkins Road Extension project- The Board approved and authorized the Chainnan to sign Changer Order No.2 in the amount of $1,666,718.94 to Ranger Construction Industries, Inc., for design modifications and additions made to the plans to increase safety awareness to the traveling public and carry out several construction activities. G. Change Order No.6 for Wharton·Smith to decrease the amount by 542,688.00 for the St. Lucie County Fairgrounds- The Board approved with the Chainnan's signature, Change Order No.6 for Wharton- Smith to decrease the amount by 543,688.00 for the St Lucie County Fairgrounds. H. Amendment No.7 to the Consultant Agreement with Inwood Consulting Engineers for S. 25111 St. Roadway Widening Project- The Board approved Amendment No.7 to Inwood Consulting Engineers Consultant Agreement for S. 25111 St., at the intersection of Midway Road in the amount of$5 I ,796.65 and authorized the Chainnan to sign. I. Request for Third Amendment to Contract # C02-0 1-258 entered into between St. Lucie County and CEM Enterprises, Inc., to provide Enhanced Swale Maintenance services for the Road & Bridge Division of Public Works- The Board approved the Third Amendment to the Contract and increased the contract total amount to 5550,000.00 per year, and authorized the Chainnan to sign. 3. UTß.ITIES A. Changer Order with Astaldi Construction Corp. for construction services related to the Seminole water line extension in the amount of 523,807.1 8 . The Board approved the Change Order with Astaldi Construction Corp. for construction services in an amount of$23,807.18. B. Change Order for Speegle Construction II, Inc., for additional controls and equipment to improve the operation of the reclaimed water pumping system at the North Hutchinson Island Wastewater Treatment Facility in the amount of $9,182.31- The Board approved the Change Order with Speegle Construction II, Inc. C. Work Authorization with LBFH Inc., for engineering services for the preparation ofa Water Supply Facilities Work Plan Amendment in the amount ofS41 ,120.00 - The Board approved the Work Authorization with LBFH Inc. 4. COMMUNITY SERVICES 4 ll)ia,!~ ~~~~:Q40406.doc , ~: :~ =- ~ ...I Page 5 ] A. Resolution No. 04-113 and the 2003/04 application for the U .S.C. 5307 Federal Transit Administration Grant- The Board approved the grant application and Resolution No. 04-113 accepted the grant and authorized the Chainnan to sign all documents necessary. B. Approval of Amended Contract between the State of Florida Department of Health and St. Lucie County for Operation of the Health Department and approval for the Health Department to purchase a vehicle for $20,000 with funds from the allocation approved by the Board for FY04 budget- The Board approved the amended contract between the State of Florida Department of Health and the County, approved used of 20,000 of the $863,000 approved budget allocation to purchase a vehicle and authorized the ("'. :man to sign all pcninent documents necessary ar¡d to approv~04-25 J C. k¡e grant a\' f the Fyf' , I al pment St",-J(l gran. Irom thr' . ,da COß1~ Jf" .Jor Di$:lc!"~"'--" ·valorr ,Jlutit' 4-I;¿j· fne Board .' grar ,esc J. 0'" ., , .. authorized ..... "'...... '" ".~II all docl" .w;;s~ov i;, I '. .\lte ,¡., D, Appoirlt-,..·· c' .-......þ";i .', :1.. 'T"~(;.._ -e ~o., ,. ",dt)' ~>..' . ~ Tripartite .,.. .' - . ·'~,p/M--:~'O\((···· ."-. 'ou." - .;.., I\ction Agency- 'lITe.. .~s for St. .L.~....~ \""'v.",U.L)' 10 lhe 1.",..._...'" ,-...,_,,)~ ............ ":r)n I"L.... d. E. ' r~o~,_ 10 provide ........;¡¡s.o¡.... ..,.;. >I\;;:S to rlan ¡¡'.w .. .,.w ,,~ Ì' Y04 CcmmL.í"'l DeveJopment P'ock Grant Program· The Beard approved the contract with Nancy Phillips & Associates L.C. S. PURCHASING A. First Extension to Contract No. COO3·04-293 with Ranger Construction Industries, Inc.- The Board approved the First Extension to contract C03-04- 293 with Ranger Construction Industries, Inc., for the purchase of asphalt miJIings and authorized the Chainnan to sign the extension as prepared by the County Attorney. B. First extension to Contract No. 03-04-294 with Dickerson Florida Inc.,- The Board approved the first extension to contract C03·04-294 with Dickerson Florida, Inc., (secondary vendor) for the purchase of Asphalt Type 53 and Asphalt Sticker for patching and repairing of public roads in St. Lucie County and authorized the Chainnan to sign the extension as prepared by the County Attorney. C. First Extension to Contract C03-04-295 with Ranger Construction Industries Inc.,- The Board approved the first extension to contract C03-04-295 with Ranger Construction Inc., (primary vendor) for the purchase of Asphalt Type S3 and Asphalt Stickler for the patching and repairing of public roads in St. Lucie County and authorized the Chainnan to sign the extension as prepared by the County Attorney. D. Bid Waiver and Piggyback Martin County Auction Services Contract- The Board approved the waiver of the bid process. awarded contract to Karlin Daniel & Associates to provide auction services and authorized the Chainnan to sign the contract as prepared by the County Attorney. E. Award Bid # 04-26 Media Equipment for TV Studio - The board approved awarding Bid # 04-026 Media Equipment for TV Studio to the lowest bidders, B &. H Photo Video-$S3,323.S0 Digital Video Systerns- $2,606.61 and Encore Broadcast Equipment Sales- $8,895.00. 5 [óia:ÐiwaiÍ~- -:º40406 .do~. =~~,=:= '-' Page 6 P. First Extension for suppliers listed on the Bid Award Form to Furnish and Install Fencing- The Board approved the first extension to the contracts with the suppliers on the Bid Award Form to Furnish and Install Fencing and authorized the Chairman to sign the extensions as prepared by the County Attorney. O. First Extension with the suppliers listed on Bid Award Form for Rental of Construction and Industrial Equipment- The Board approved the first extension to the contracts with the suppliers listed on the Bid Award Form for Rental of Construction and Industrial Equipment and authorized the Chairman to sign the extensions as prepared by the County Attorney. H. Software (Intangible Assets) Removal- The Board approved the removal of the uset numbers from the Software Intangible Asset Inventory of the BCC. I. Bid # 04-030 Weatherbee Road and U.S. I Intersection Improvements- Reject bid- The Board approved rejecting Bid # 04-030 Weatherbee Road and U.S. I Intersection Improvements and directed staff to revise the plans and bid document and re-bid this project in anticipation of receiving lower bids. J. RFP# 04-017- DesignlBuild for Open Space Pool- The Board approved negotiating with Recreation Design & Construction Inc., for Design/Build for Open Space Pool and bring back to the Board an acceptable negotiated price. K. Pennission to advertise Invitation for Bid for the installation of Bleachers at South County Stadium· The Board approved the advertising of Bleachers at South County Stadium. L. Bid # 04-013 Purchase of I Vibratory Soil Compactor w/smooth Drum- Cancel award to Nortrax Equipment Co. and reject all bids· The Board approved the request to re-bid the equipment. 6. COUNTY A ITORNEY A. Bear Point Mitigation Bank-Work Authorization No.5 (03-05-395) with Hazen and Sawyer Engineers, P.C. for Additional Performance Verification and Construction Certification Services- The Board approved the proposed Work Authorization No.5 with Hazen & Sawyer Engineers, P.c. for the Bear Point Mitigation Bank and authorized the Chairman to execute. B. Revocable License Agreement- URS Corporation. Monitoring Well on Old Dixie Highway- The Board approved the Revocable License Agreement, authorized the Chairman to execute the Revocable License Agreement and instructed URS, Corporation to record the Agreement in the Public Records of SI. Lucie County. C. Airport Industrial Park- Contract for Sale and Purchase with Arthur Hungerford- The Board approved the proposed Contract for Sale and Purchase of five Airport Industrial Park lots with Arthur Hungerford and authorized the Chairman to sign the contract. D. South 25" St. Roadway Widening-Midway Road to Edwards- Temporary Easement- Jerry and Margaret Davis- The Board accepted the Temporary 'Construction Easement, authorized the Chairman to sign Resolution No. 04-126 and directed staff to record the documents in the Public Records of SI. Lucie County, Florida. 7. INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE 6 I Diana Waite ::]>40406. doc ~,n. , .J Page 1 A. Approve Change Order No. I in the amount of$1 ,984 for the Orange Avenue Canal Starr Farms culvert replacement project- The Board approved and authorized the Chairman to sign Change Order No. I in the amount of $ I ,984 for the Orange Avenue Canal Starr Farms culvert replacement project for a total contract of $205,239. B. Change Order No. I to Contract # 03-12-744- Summerlin Seven Seas, Inc.lJohn Brooks Park- The Board approved Change Order No. I with Summerlin Seven Seas, Inc., to increase the contract amount by $12,850.00 and authorized the Chairperson to sign the Change Order as prepared by the County Attorney. C. Change Order No.2 to Contract # 03-11-763- Property Solutions/Rock Road Correctional Facility- The Board approved Change Order No.2 with Property Solutions to increase the contract amount by $12,649.00 and contract time an additional 10 days and authorized the Chairperson to sign as prepared by the County Attorney. 8. AIRPORT A. Security Coverage/Fencing Budget Resolution- The Board approved the Budget Resolution No. 04- I 16 for the Florida Department of Transportation Joint Participation Agreement $60,000 grant for security coverage/fencing at the St. Lucie County International Airport. B. Budget Resolution for the Benefit/Cost Analysis for proposed parallel runway- The Board approved the Budget Resolution No. 04- I 17 for the Florida Department of Transportation Joint Participation Agreement $8,333 grant for benefit cost analysis/fencing at the St. Lucie County International Airport. C. Benefit Cost Analysis scope of work- The Board approved Work Authorization No. I with PBSJ for $165,740 for the preparation of the Benefit/Cost Analysis for the proposed parallel runway at St. Lucie County International Airport. 9. GRANTS Authorize the submittal of a grant application to the Florida Inland Navigation District Waterways Assistance Program- This grant will provide $267,000 for the dredging of Taylor Creek- The Board approved the submittal of the grant application to the Florida Inland Navigation District and approved the attached Resolution No. 04-124. 10. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT A. Scenic Highway Corridor Management Entity Agreement- The Board approved the Corridor Management Entity Agreement. B. Ratification of the Tourist Development Council's decision to approve a $2,000 Special Event Grant Application for the Wings N Wheels Event organized by the Victory Children's Home, funding from the County's Tourist Development Council's grant agreement- The Board approved the proposed Special event Grant Agreement and application in the amount of $2,000 to Victory's Children's HomelWings N Wheels as drafted by the County Attorney and authorized the Chairman to sign. C. The Tourist Development Council would like to institute a SI. Lucie County Hotel Survey Cash Contest that will run for one year. Quarterly winners to receive cash prize ofS250. Total winnings for the year will amount to $ I ,000 and will come out of Tourism revenue- The Board approved using $ I ,000 from Tourism revenues for cash prize of $250 each for this survey contest. 7 ~Q~ài!ª 'Wj1!~ :)40406.dOC'-'-" ----------------------- --.., Page 8 ] I. ADMINISTRATION A. Central Florida Foreign Trade Zone Board of Directors- The Board approved ratifying Mr. Rudy Howard to the Central Fla. Foreign Trade Zone Board of Directors. B. Environmental Advisory Committee- The Board ratified the requested appointments to the Environmental Advisory Committee. ADDITIONS CA-] COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Board approved the Final Record Plat approval for Parcel 21 @ The Reserve (Briarclif1) and authorized staff to complete the final processing of this Plat. CA·2 UTn..ITIES The Board approved the first Payment request to FPUA for the North County Districts bulk interconnection with FPUA in the amount ofS163,795 and also approved the intcrfund loan from the General Fund Reserves to be repaid with interest at 2%. CA-3 The Board approved the selection of Sun Trust Bank as the successful bidder for a $10 million line of credit to provide financing for the acquisition ofland in SI. Lucie County for a new Research and Education Center and approved to have the County Administrator sign the commitment letter. 6. COUNTY ATTORNEY Landfill Gas- Memorandum of Understanding Between Tropicana Products, Inc_, and St. Lucie County- Consider staff recommendation to approve the MOU and authorize the Chainnan to sign the MOU. It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Coward, to approve staff recommendation and authorized the Chairman to sign the MOU; and, upon roll call motion carried unanimously. Recessed: 4:30 p.m. REGULAR AGENDA Re-Convened 6:00 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS CONTINUED (Tape 2) Mr. Bob Bangert, Holiday Pines, addressed the Board regarding the growth and accommodating this growth, increases in density, and utilities. Mr. Alex Brown, ] 3939 Indrio Road, addressed the Board in the timing of the growth and the Regional Planning Commission's plan. Mr. John Arena, Ft. Pierce addressed the Board and read the "Did You Knows" from a brochure. The County Administrator advised the Board that Core Communities will be funding the fee in its entirety for the Fairgrounds. Any additional funds received will be given to the families of the migrant workers . 8 t Q:"~E~i..¡f~ ~]40406.doc ~ ....J Page 9 ] S.A PUBLIC WORKS Lebanon Road MSBU- Continuation of Initial Public Hearing Potable Water Improvements FPUA· Consider staff recommendation to not approve Resolution No. 04- O6S creating the Lebanon Road M.S.B.U. The M.S.B.U Coordinator addressed the Board and read a letter received from Kathleen Humphrey stating her request to withdraw the petition in favor of the project. It wu moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve staff recommendation; and, upon roU caU, motion carried unanimously. S.B PUBLIC WORKS (2·1789) Revels Lane I MSBU- Second Public Hearing to amend the Project Boundary and approve a Preliminary Assessment RolI- Consider staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 04-115 amending the project boundary and approve a revised preliminary usessment roU for the Revels Lane I Municipal Services Benefit Unit. It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to adopt Resolution No. 04· lIS; and, upon roU call, motion carried unanimously. S.C COUNTY ATTORNEY (2-1920) Petition for Abandonment- Abandon the Avenue C, West of Angle Road, a 25ft. platted right of way, in Home Acres Unit 2 Resolution No. 04-118- Consider statT recommendation to approve Resolution No. 04-118, Proof of Publication of the Notice of Public Records ofSt. Lucie County, Florida. Mr. Steve Tierney, attorney for the petitioner, advised the Board he was present to answer any questions the Board may have. It wu moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Coward, to approve statT recommendation; and, upon roU call, motion carried unanimously. S.D COUNTY ATTORNEY (2-11065) Consider Draft Ordinance 04-007 Amending the St. Lucie County Land Development Code by Amending Section 1.13.01 to Provide for Clarification of Board Enforcement Responsibilities; Deleting Section 11.13.03 Enforcement Procedure; and Amending Section 11.13.04 Other Penalties and Remedies to Clarify the Initiation of Other Enforcement Proceedings- StatThas no recommendation at this tine. This meeting is for the purpose of public comments and testimony providing any direction to amend or otherwise modify this draft ordinance. The second public hearing on this matter will be held on April 20, 2004 or as soon thereafter as possible. No action required. S.E COUNTY ATTORNEY (2-11126) Ordinance No. 04-016- Creating Section 7.10.24 Land Development Code, to Establish Height Limitation- this is the first of two required public hearings on Ordinance No. 04- 016 and no specific action is required al this time. 9 J])i'!!18 W8iij~þ40406.dOC~ -----~-----_._- , ...,,- Page 1 ~ Mr. Lloyd Bell, Port property owner addressed the Board and stated his fonnal objection to any proposal to discriminate against the activities or intennodel method of utilization of a modem Port. The Asst. County Attorney stated this would only take affect in the unincorporated areas only. Mr. Craig Munt, Hutchinson Island, addressed the Board in opposition to any type of increase in container heights in the county. No action required at this time. S.F COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (2-1 1596) Consider the application of Lucie Rock, LLC (Continued from March 16, 2004) requesting a Change in Future Land Use Classification from RS to MXD-Orange A venue for 94.34 acres located on Rock Road, approximately .5 miles north of Orange A venue, on the southwest side of 1·95- Consider staff recommendation to approve the transmittal of Lucie Rock, LLC petition for a change in Future Land Use Classification from RS to MXD Orange Avenue to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter ]63, Florida Statutes. The Board members disclosed their discussions with the petitioner and the attorney with the exception of Com. Barnes who was on vacation. Mr. Bobby Klein, attorney for the petitioner addressed the Board and was available for any questions. Ms. Valentine Sennan, President of the Homeowners Association of Timber]ake Estates, addressed the Board in opposition to this change in future land use. Mr. Kline advised the Board that the sand pit Ms. Sennan spoke of was not their property and is not subject to this hearing. Com. Hutchinson addressed the notification process. The Community Development Director advised the Board of their process and how it has been expanded. Com. Coward stated he was not interested in any more billboards being placed in this location and he wanted to make it clear for the PUD that he will not support any billboards. Mr. Kline stated there is an existing billboard and there is no ability under the county's rules to place a billboard anywhere on the property. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve staff recommendation; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. 5.G COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (2-12882) Consider the Petition of Mark Pye to define a Class "A" Mobile Home as a detached single family dwelling unity to be placed on 26.63 acres ofJand located at 8630 Carlton Road in the AG-5 zoning district, Draft Resolution No. 04·023- Consider staff recommendation to approve Draft Resolution No. 04-023 to define a Class A Mobile Home as a Detached Single Family Dwelling Unit. Mr. Phillip Stickles area resident addressed the Board in favor of this petition. 10 r~8.Ò~w,¡¡~ ~~0406.dOC~:_ ~--_..- ...., Page 11 ] It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve staff recommendation; and, upon roIl caIl, motion carried unanimously. S.H COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (2-12700) I.) Consider approving draft Ordinance 04-005 formerly Ord. 03- 025 creating a Countywide Law Enforcement Impact Fee- Consider staff recommendation to approve Draft Ordinance 04- 005 imposing a Countywide Law Enforcement Impact Fee. If approved the fee will become effective July I, 2004. 2.) Consider approving Interlocal Agreements between St. Lucie County, the Town of St. Lucie Village, the City of Port St. Lucie and the City of Ft. Pierce in regard to the coIlection of Countywide Law Enforcement Impact Fee and authorize the Chairman to sign the agreements. Mr. Craig Munt, Hutchinson Island, addressed the Board in favor of this issue. It was moved by Com. Bruhn, seconded by Com. Coward, to approve Ordinance 04-005; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. Note: item 2 is not a public hearing but has been included in this part of the board agenda for consolidation purposes. It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Barnes, to approve the Interlocal Agreements; and, upon roIl caIl, motion carried unanimously. S.J COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Consider transmittal of an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The amendment provides for a change in Future Land Use Classification from RE to RU for 47.96 acres located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Indrio Road and Emerson A venue-Consider staff recommendation to Deny the request of Glassman Holdings LLC for a change in Future Land Use classification ftom RE to RU and extension of the Urban Service Area Boundary Line. This item was postponed per the request of the petitioner. S J. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (2-12954) Consider Draft Resolution 04-078 approving the request of Reitano Enterprises, Inc., for a change in zoning from the AG-I zoning district to the CG zoning district for propeny located on the east side of Koblegard Road, approximately 330 feet north of the intersection of Indrio Road and Koblegard Road- Consider staff recommendation to approve Draft Resolution No. 04-078. Mr. Joe Fresha, agent for the petitioner addressed the Board and noted he was available for any questions. Ms. Susie Caron, Indrio Road resident, questioned if this request conforms with the Clwrette. She was advised this was not the statement made and this was not a new re·zoning. II rDlan8:W8~~40406.dOC~_~, -.J Page 12 It was moved by Com. Hutchinson, seconded by Com. Coward, to approve Resolution No. 04-078; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. S.K COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT- (2-1349) Consider application of BJK Inc., (continued from March 16, 2004 for a change in Future Land Use Classification from RS to RU for 48.72 acres located on the south side of Okcec:hobee Road (SR70 approximately Yí mile west of the Florida Turnpike - Consider staff recommendation to approve the transmittal of the BJK Inc., petition for a change in Future Land Use Classification. All Board members disclosed their contact with the petitioner. Com. Coward also met with the engineer. Mr. Michael Houston, Houston, Cuozzo, representing the petitioner, addressed the Board on this issue. Ms. Pamela Hammer, The Reserve addressed the Board regarding giving increased density and what the residents will receive. Her main concerns were the schools and the impact it would have. She would like to see a number of acres given to the School Disbict as well as the Fire District. Mr. Butch Terpening, Culpepper and Terpening, advised the Board of what the developers have addressed concerning agreements sent to the respective Boards, i.e. School Board and Fire District. Ms. Ethel Sullivan, resident, addressed the Board regarding density in her area and asked smaller lots be required which would decrease the density. She would like to see the area kept as a greenbelt with smaller houses. Mr. Paul Gagion, resident and adjacent property owner, expressed his support with the development in his area . Ms. Julie Orbin, Lakewood Park addressed the over crowding of schools and the transporting of the children to schools which she felt was an accident waiting to happen. Corn. Hutchinson stated the BCC does not have jurisdiction as to where the School Board decides to build their schools and in speaking with the School Board, they have advised her that they do not want a school in that area. Com. Coward stated there needs to be closer communication with both the developers and the School Board regarding the schools and the impact the development will have on the schools. Com. Hutchinson would like for the public to understand that the BCC does not have the authority to tell the School Board where to place the schools or how large to make them. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Bruhn, to approve staff recommendation; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. S.L COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BJK USB extension- Applicant submitted a letter withdrawing the request for Amendment to the existing Urban Service Boundary Lines. 12 [º-îa~~ ytalte..:..Q40406.doc~' , ~ Page 13_ S.M PUBLIC WORKS( 3-1277) Continuation of the request for Florida Rock Mine - North Plant (Ft. Pierce Quarry) to increase their hours for crushing operations from 6:00 a.m - 6:00 p.m. to 4:00 a.m.- 12:00 a.m.- Consider stafT recommendation to approve the increase in hours for crushing operations under the existing pennits subject to the listed special conditions. Com. Lewis advised the Board that she has received notification from the foIlowing persons that they are not in favor of this project. Mr. Brunklebank and Arthur and Monica EIliott . Ms. Tracy Hayden, representing Florida Rock addressed the Board regarding the blasting and the procedure for advising the residents of when the blasting would take place. Mr. JefT Straw, VP Gerysonics, addressed the Board regarding the noise and stated that the noise measures weIl within the county's established guidelines. Mr. Kenny Smith, Plant Manager advised the Board the cost of bringing in another crusher was too high. Mr. Smith requested the times of the operation be adjusted to the foIlowing: Monday thru Wednesday- 5:00 a.m.- 9:00 p,m. Thursday and Friday - 6:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. Saturday- 6 :00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Com. Bruhn and Com. Coward advised those present of the crusher not being operable when they visited the site. Com. Lewis and Com. Hutchinson stated the crusher was operating when they visited. Com. Lewis stated the noise was not intolerable. Ms. Sara Worsham, attorney for the TC Airpark Homeowners Assn., addressed the Board and stated this operation had an adverse impact in the community. Com. Barnes stated he felt there was more of a noise impact from the private planes in the area than the mine crusher. Mr. Phillip Stickles, area resident advised the Board that more materials being taken out would mean more trucks. Mr. Jeff Kenworthy- Sky King Drive addressed the Board and read his letter into the record requesting this petition be denied. Mr. Rene St. June, area property owner stated the sound measurement taken was in the daytime and this was not offensive, the evening is what he is more concerned about. Mr. Al Weinberg, area resident, gave a history of the blasting and the actual impact. Com. Coward stated he had met with Mr. Weinberg. Mr. Darren Brown, 35 year area resident, stated his opposition to his petition. Ms. Stacey Brown area resident addressed the Board regarding the blasting and stated her opposition to the extended hours. Ms. Elliott, TC Airpark resident addressed the Board in opposition to the extended hours and operation and would like to keep the area quiet. 13 r Dia~~ ~~¡f(~- 040406.dO~ .J Page l' Ms. Diane Boswell, TC Airpark resident, addressed the Board and stated she would like to keep the piece and quiet in her area for as long as possible. Com. Barnes stated he would consider Mr. Smith's proposal of the adjusted hours and it be on a temporary trial period. Com. Coward stated he was standing with the neighbors. This is a short tenn solution and the pieces do not fit together. Com. Bruhn stated he had a difficult time extending the hours since he was not able to hear the crusher operating. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve the request for the adjusted hours as stated by Mr. Smith for the trial period of 6 months; and also attempt to convel1 the diesel pump to electric pump also the breaking of the haulers will be cOrTeCted and the crusher be below grade; and, upon roll call, the vote was as follows: Aye's: Hutchinson, Barnes, Lewis; Nay's: Bruhn, Coward; motion carried by a vote of 3 to 2. S.N. PUBLIC WORKS Applicant has submitted a letter requesting this agenda item be pulled from the I!genda. It will be re-noticed and rescheduled for a future Board meeting. - Capron Trails Mine. PHA-I COUNTY ATTORNEY Consider Draft Ordinance No. 04-018- Regulations for propel1ies and facilities owned or leased by SI. Lucie County by regulating the areas available for golf activities, prohibiting the distribution of park lands and correction of the Director's title. Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve Ordinance 04-018 and authorize the Cbainnan to sign the ordinance. It was moved by Com. Barnes, seconded by Com. Hutchinson, to approve Ordinance No. 04-018; and, upon roll call, the vote was as follows: Nay: Bruhn; Aye's: Coward, Hutchinson, Barnes, Lewis; motion carried by a vote of 4 to I. There being no ful1her business to be brought before the Board, the meeting was adjourned. Chainnan Clerk of Circuit COUI1 14 '-' 'WI AGENDA ITEM 9: LUCIE ROCK. LLC. - FILE NO. PA-03-006: Ms. Diana Waite, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 9 was the application of Lucie Rock, LLC, for a Change in the Future Land Use classification from RS (Residential Suburban) to MXD-Orange A venue (Mixed Use Orange A venue/I- 95 Activity Area) for a 94.34-acre tract on Rock Road, just north of the St. Lucie County Correction Facility. The site's existing RS Future Land Use classification allows agriculture, low-density residential, institutional and neighborhood commercial uses. The subject property currently contains a citrus grove. The petitioner is seeking a change in the future land use classification in order to "permit industrial uses more appropriate to adjacent uses, including the St. Lucie County Correctional Facility". The correctional facility is located approximately 130 feet to the south. Ms. Waite continued that the surrounding area consists of a variety of uses including industrial extraction, office, industrial, institutional and vacant lands. The existing industrial uses are located just southeast of the project, in the MXD-Orange A venue/I-95 Activity Area on the east side of Rock Road. These include American Concrete and the Ft. Pierce Auto Auction. She stated that the applicant has proposed (MXD-medium) intensity for the western portion of the amendment site to insure that future uses are compatible with the adjacent resident land uses to the west. This addresses staff concerns for the future compatibility of this site and the residential lands to the west. Staff would note, that the southern amendment parcel contains an existing natural pine flatwood buffer along a Fort Pierce Farms Water Control District Canal on the parcels western boundary that can assist to buffer industrial uses from future residential areas to the west. The MXD Future land use will ensure that any change in zoning is to PUD, PNRD or MXD and the uses are segregated to ensure compatibility with surrounding residential land uses. Ms. Waite stated that higher intensity uses that may present a nuisance or health risk to residents to the west can be directed to the eastern portion of the amendment site along or the portion of the amendment site along 1-95. The MXD Orange/I-95 Interchange Future Land Use classification allows the County to control of the type and location of facilities to ensure the type of future uses are compatible with the residential areas to the west. The southern parcel contains a natural pine flatwood buffer along its western boundary that should be maintained to buffer industrial uses from future residential areas to the west. Ms. Waite stated that based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. The proposed MXD Future Land Use Classification change would increase intensities and industrial uses along the 1-95 interchange while providing an opportunity to protect future residential areas to the west. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 26 of 34 '-' .., Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval and that the petition be transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review. Chairman McCurdy questioned if the petitioner was present. Mr. Bobby Klein stated he was there on behalf of the applicant and complimented Staff for their suggestion to change their request from IND (Industrial) to MXD. He also stated that they support Staff's recommendations and was there to answer any questions. Mr. Grande questioned if the PUD (Planned Unit Development), PNRD (Planned Non- Residential Development), and PMUD (Planned Mixed-Unit Development) all carried the same requirements for plan submittals. Mr. Kelly confirmed that was correct. Chairman McCurdy opened the Public Hearing. Ms. Valentine Sermons, 1545 Pine Burg Lane, stated that she resides in Timberlake Estates, which is directly behind this proposed project. She continued that the area is highly residential and they don't want this area turned industrial. She stated there are 31 lots in her development that are anywhere from a half acre to an acre. She also stated that she could look out her kitchen window and see this project site. She advised that they just found out about this petition because the letters only went out to the four residents in the back of the development. She stated that they are completely opposed to this project. Ms. Sarah Span stated that she lives directly across from the subject property. She stated that she took pictures of the area and it is a not very pleasing view across 1-95. She continued that there is dirt and sand already stacked up very high in the area. Chairman McCurdy questioned how long Ms. Span has lived there. Ms. Span stated she has been there for fourteen years. Chairman McCurdy questioned if the sand mine was there prior to her moving in. Ms. Span stated that it was not there that she was aware of. Chairman McCurdy stated that he believed that sand mine operation was in operation before Timberlake Estates was ever established. Ms. Span stated that they just removed some trees and now it is causing her health issues. Chairman McCurdy stated that the trees blocked the view of the operation previously, which might be why she didn't realize it was there. Seeing no one else, Chairman McCurdy closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Lounds stated that when the pepper trees were cleared off of 1-95 it did open the view of the pit, which has been there almost twenty years. He questioned if the applicant could present something to clean up that area. He stated that the Timberlake Estates area is a very nice development and would feel more comfortable with this request if he knew exactly what the applicant planned on doing on the site. Mr. Hearn stated that he is concerned about the broad spectrum of things that can be done in an industrial land use and if he knew exactly what the applicant was putting in there it would make this more comfortable to him. Mr. Grande stated that they are requesting an P&Z I LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 27 of 34 \.r .."",j MXD future land use. Mr. Bobby Klein stated that their original request was for an industrial land use but they changed their request to MXD to ease the concerns about what could be done on the site with an industrial land use. He also stated that they did try to purchase the existing pit to include in this request but were unsuccessful. He advised that they are aware of the concerns of the neighboring communities and will do everything possible to ease those concerns with their property's use. He continued that under the MXD future land use they would be required to submit some plan (PUD, PMUD, or PNRD) on this site and it would be brought before them for their review. Mr. Lounds stated that after considering the testimony presented during the public hearing, including Staff comments, I hereby move that the Local Planning Agency of St. Lucie County recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners grant approval to the application of Lucie Rock, LLC, for a Change in Future Land Use Designation from RS (Residential Suburban) to MXD-Orange Avenue (Mixed Use Orange Avenue/I-95 Activity Area), and transmit the petition to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review because I think it is consistent with the industrial area that is there, the correctional facility, industrial heavy, and commercial that is there. Mr. Lounds also stated that when this plan comes back that everyone within the Timberlake Estates subdivision be notified, even if they are outside of the SOO-foot boundary. Mr. Kelly confinned that they would make sure that everyone is notified when the plan comes back before them. Motion seconded by Mr. Akins. Upon a roll call vote the motion was approved with a vote of 7-1 (with Ms. Hammer voting against) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P&Z I LPA Regular Meeting February 19, 2004 Page 28 of 34 NOTICE OF CHANL TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ~ The St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners will consider an ordinance to change the Future Land Use designation of the lands indicated on the map in this advertisement, A public hearing on this proposal will be held before the Board of County Commissioners on October 18, 2004, at 6:00 P.M" in the County Commission Chambers, 3'd Floor, S1. Lucie County Administration Building. 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. The purpose of this public hearing is to consider the Department of Community Affairs, Objection, Comment and Recommendation Report and whether or not to adopt an ordinance changing the Future Land Use designation on approximately 94.34 acres from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac) to MXD·Orange Ave (Mixed Use Orange Avenuel '-95 Activity Area). tot. ]'-' ~?>.>o, ~~/~ ti'/.z::';?'-;-" lf~:::;'~ sUb'iect~~1;fMj(1f~~ái " ' . , '1".://'.//""'0.,':':;,- '0;- 'I. Property iØ,:;;t%<'~'i:1W)1'; "'" r~~/x,</~,;::.://,~/;/./.;~~~~ ~ I I i [E¿ ~ I [~ ¿J -- . I Oran e Avei . -LJ I l~_l . I __ ___-L-._. ----, N A ~ '\;\ \~ \'\\ " I', )~~. ",l~;}\rl' ..... ~\\ I ~ Petition Applicant: Lucie Rock LLC Petition Number: PA-03·006 Location: Rock Road, adjacent to 1-95 and the St. Lucie County Correction Facility Copies of the proposed amendment and draft ordinance may be obtained from the SI. Lucie County Growth Management Department, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982. Any questions may be directed to Diana Waite, Planner III at 772·462-1577. All proceedings before the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any decision made with respect to any matter considered at the hearing, they will need a record of the proceedings and that for such purpose, they may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. At the request of any party to the proceedings, irídividuals testifying during the hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross examine any individual testifying during the hearing upon request. BOARD OF COUNTY CO....ISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA IS/ PAULA LEWIS, CHAIR..AN PUBLISH DATE: OCTOBER I, 2004 '-' .."" BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ~ =r'.'~'eJ' "'e"""IE- '~'" """X\" COUNTY 01' F LOR I D A '-', GROWTH MANAGEMENT October 7, 2004 In accordance with the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, you are hereby advised that LUCIE ROCK, LLC., has petitioned St. Lucie County for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from RS (Residential, Suburban) to MXD - Orange Avenue (Mixed Use - Orange Avenue) for the following described property: Location: Northwest corner of the intersection of Rock Road and Canal No. 44. THE PROPERTY'S LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS A V AILABLE UPON REQUEST The second public hearing on the petition will be held at 6:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on October 18,2004, County Commissioner's Chambers, St. Lucie County Administration Building Annex, 2300 Virginw Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at that time. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be considered. The County Planning Division should receive written comments to the Board of County Commissioners at least 3 days prior to a scheduled hearing. County policy discourages communication with individual Board of County Commissioners on any case outside of the scheduled public hearing(s). You may speak at a public hearing, or provide written comments for the record. The proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings. For such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross- examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. If it becomes necessary, a public hearing may be continued to a date-certain. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Director at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting at (772) 462· 1777 or T.D.D. (772) 462-1428. If you no longer own property adjacent to the above-described parcel, please forward this notice to the new owner. Please call (772) 462-1577 if you have any questions, and refer to: File Number: PA-03-006. Sincerely, Sþ~~I~ ~O~A~OMMISSIONERS Paula Lewis, Chairman / JOHN D, ßRUHN, District No, 1 . DOUG COWARD, District No, 2 . PAULA A, LEWIS, District No, J . FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, District No, 4 . CLIFF ßARNES, District No 5 County Administrotor - Douglos M, Anderson 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce, FL 34982-5652 Administration: (772) 462-1590 · Planning: (772) 462-2822 · GIS/Technicol Services: (772) 462-1553 Economic Development: (772) 462-1550 · Fax: (772) 462-1581 Tourist Development: (772) 462-1529 · Fax: (772) 462-2132 www.co.st-Iucie.fl.us '-' M ~ (') >0 .. " = .Q II U. ~ ,... ., 01 CIICII CllOI ~CO ~ ~ ~ 0101 (I)"" ClIO .,CII ""CII CII 1010 109 ClIO g CII 00 ,...10 ~¡§¡ ~IO CII<':I <':I ~~ f6~ .,., ~ <':1<':1 10., .,(') ~:g :g <':I~ ~ ~ ~ OCII ~ IO~ 10 ~ ~ ~~ m":' ,.:.,... OIm OICII enOl ~,.:. ,.:.(\ ~~ <':I.f ,.:..,.:.. ~g NN NCII ,...., coco CO" 0" .,., ,...0 ,...CO .,., <':I" .,CO .,10 èJ,èJ, (I) CO ~g CII- enOl 01 en <':I en enOl en(') en en C;;C;; -en 010 enOl 1001 enOl ~OI 0., .,., ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ <':I" .,(\ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~¡g CO(') <':1<':1 (')(') (')<':1 <':1<':1 (')~ CII<':I ~ ....1....1 ....1....1 ....1....1 ...J..J ....1....1 ....I ....I ...J..J ....1....1 ....1....1 ....1....1 ....1....1 ....I ....I ....1....1 ....I ....I ....1....1 1-0 ....I u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. UZ u.. .:= 0 '" oS! oS! Q) - '" '" Q) Q) ID ~ "E "E ~ ~ '" '" Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) CD Q) Q) .. Q) Q) .:= 41 41 41 Q) 41 41 41 &:: ~ ~ e ~ "0 ~ ~ 41 41 ~ "0 ~ ~ r3 r3 ~ ~¡ o 0 ~~ ~ e o 0 0 ~"O 41 41 41 41 ::;, 41 CD 0 o 41 ::;, 41 CD rJ rJ 41 41> 4) 4) 41 41 Q; èü '" ~ 41 .. "EI§ ä:ä: ä:ä: jä: ë: Q; ã;ä: '" ,- ä: iÏi iÏi .- ä: ä: 41 ä:ä: ä:ä: ä:ä: &:: .- .- 0 ....Ill. oS!ä: ",11. 11.- 8.£ I.~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ä: ä:~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~¡: ~~ rJ~ ~~ ~~ ~5 ~ E e:= o 0 o 0 o 0 0_ _ 0 o 0 0 ,- 0 o 0 o 0 41 0 o 0 00 o~ o 41 0 u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u.. ~ ~ :¡;u.. u..1l. u..u.. 3:u.. u..u.. u..u.. ..Ju.. u..rn 03: 0 0 CII - ! 0 - oð ¡ 01 )é- ~ "0 ID u.. wID > > ã! .g ãi ãi CII ãi rn )( 0 ¡;¡ ¡;¡ ., '" 0 0 ãi w 0 a:: "0 "0 "0 .~ '0 "0 - i e:"O (I) ~ a:: a:: a:: 41 "0 CD 41 "0 ~ a 41 ~ ~ ã: ....I a:: -"0 ~ ~ e: rJ rJ > 41 a:: > > a:: ~<{ > CD rJ = a:: ,... 0 3: rJ <{ E c( <{ 0 E 0 a:: <{ &:: <{ Ñg e: e: &:: 41 ~ .5: !!! '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2> 8 8 ""- ~ E ~ ,g¡ ~~ ~ 41 ,... 41 (\ '" '" 41 g en 01 ¡: (I) 10 ~ ~u.. ::;,-'" .. &:: o ,_ &:: e: &:: &:: e: CII 8 CII ':; ,... ,... ,... ., .Q &:: '" '" 'ë 'ë ~"O ::;, 41 41 41 e: c( e: e: a:: -'" &:: &:: 0 0 41 41 J:- 'Ë' '91 ~¡ .., .., .., I!! I!! I!! ~ ~ 4i C\ CII .g ! e 11. It) CII :¡; - 41 &::.., 4i fij ~ rJ )( > ... rJ rn rn rn 0 3: 3: 0 0 :i )( 3: )( :¡; )( )( IDO 0 rn )( )( ä:rn :> :> )(;: 0 S S S S 0 S S~ 'ë ....I u.. CD - 0 It) 0 (') ID ;:¡; Sg ~ Ñ Ñ 0 0 8 ;; §~ 0 - o~ "'0 0 8 - C\ g 0 Cõ g g ., 0 0 0 0 g ., 0 0 It) o~ ~C\ ~g 0 ~ ~ ,... ,... ,... ., ~ ., Lñ (I) 01 Il.~ .,,... <':I (') 00 è? C\ (\ CII It) <':I co 10 It) 11. (') 11. 11. 11. ~It) It) (\ 11. 11. CII ~C\ o <':I (\ C\ 11.,... 41 E '" &:: u.. '\::! .., 41 e: .:= &:: 41 '" ~ Ìii Ìii 0 ~ rn &:: 'Ë - - 41 .!g E e: '" 41 &:: ID ....I - '\::! =' ~ 41 41 ~ &:: .Q e: &:: 0 ~ '" ~ a:: 0 ID rn ~ 0 Q) E )( '" e: (! (!(! Q) (! :¡; u.. c a:: II: &:: Q; ~ .~ i"ª I"ª Z ,!!! I~ .:=II: ~ :¡; Q)S Z Ii 0 Q) .- rJ &:: Q) GI Q) e: Q) e &:: ... ~ rJ GI rJ rJ I~ ~ -;:: e: rJ rJ &:: rJ &:: ::;, 0 > 0 0 '" Q) 0 0= '" 0 S¡5 u .., w .., .., ..,w wC .., ..,w U II: e: 0 Õ ;3 I e 0 u 0 c 0 '" '" u uu 0 "0 0 ~ ~ u g .&:: &:: .!: Q) :!2 "0 ....I ....I ....I - ~ j &:: &:: ....I E 0 .&:: ....I ....I ....I rJ .Q ::;, ::;, ....I 'iñ '" Iõ: .2 -'" ""- -'" Q) ~ ::;, 0 0 l- ra ¡¡: > ~ Ü e: it; u.. lit; g g g e Q) u u a:: ~ g ....I Õ II:: Õ e: Q) Q) ID ~ "8 "8 =' II: a:: II: &:: (! ~ g &:: "8 ~ I!! ?- Q; ~ I~ ~ ~ 41 4i 4i !!l Q) Q) Q) j ~ ~ = '" &:: ::;, '0 '0 ci: GIll. e: ~ ~ fa 8 rJ Q) rJ ~ &:: ~ &:: ~ ¡: ::;, ::;, w 15:¡; ~ iii iii iii 0 ãí 0 ¡;¡ '0 '0 '0 '" 'Ë .:= ,~ iii e: ....I ....I J: ~ êi5 Æ ~ ~ êi5 ;: ::;, ::;, ::;, ~ ~ ;: 0 0 ::;, 41 êi5 êi5 a~ Z Z Z :¡; :¡; :¡; ....I ....I ....I rn rn rn .., ¡:: rn Z rn > rn It) § ~ ~ ~ ~ 01 ~ ~ ~ § ~ ~ ~ ~ ,... co § :g ; ~ ~ § ,... ~ ~ § ~ ~ ~ ~ ., § §§ 8 § § õ § § è? ~ § § § § § co Ñ § ~ ~CII § § § § 8 CII C\ C\ è? C\ C\ 8 C\ C\ § 8 8 C\ § 8 §§ ~ 8 g CII 8 g 8 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ C\ (') g C\ Ñ ~ ~ ~ CII Ñ CII <':I (\ ~ ;; õ ;; ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~~ Q ~ ~ ~ Ñ Ñ (') ., ., CII è? è? ~ CII CII (') 0 ..- ~ ~ Ñ CII Ñ Ñ ~ C\ C\ C\ (') ., ., ., ., ., (I) (I) (I) (I) è? ~ C\ C\ C\ CII C\ C\ C\ C\ CII CII C\ C\ CII CII CII C\ CII CII CII C\ (\ CII C\ (\ 0 .... ..- ..- .... .... ~ g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g è? è? è? è? C;;C;; C\ CII CII C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ CII CII N N N CII CII (\ CII N C\ CII N CII N CII C\CII .. e: ~ 1:: ., Q. 110 0..J ....J C _ ~-'" Q.g 011: J .!! ~3 >0 . §! E9 Ec 8Q, ~.§ .2. UI .- ~õ. 0.5 0= - ., 0:1 ,.."" (I) ,... ., ., ""<':1 en <':I en It) ....., N.... ~<':I ;~ (I) .,., (\ ~ ~ .... ,... ,.:..,.:.. ,.:. ,.:. ,.:. ., .,., ., ., 11. en 0101 en 01 -., ~~ ., ~ N<':I <':I Q) š...J ....1....1 ....1....1 ..J..J rnu.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q¡ Q¡ Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) ä:ä: ä:ä: ä:ä: ä: >~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ,,,. 0 o 0 o 0 00 Uu.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. ., ~ CJÍ .... .c I:! " :I Q) 0 &:: e: e:..J .5j~ C) ....I e: > -'" Q)'C: c( ~~~ <II -'" '" "C i¥:¡; ~ <II~::;' C) .0 '" Q) 'ë ~ -g,~ rJ .§ Q) e: '" oS!.:=:9 üä: ::;, ~I- .., urnJ: -00; &jg en ,...<':1(1) 0 ,.......0 ~~ (1)(1) (I) (I)(I)C\ coco .... coco(') rJ e: '" It -'" rJ ::;, - '" .:= -'" :g c ::;, 0 ~ - ;: -- i ....I ~ !:! -'" &:: ID C) I!! 0 C) Q) C ..J u.. 0 ~ ....I 0 e: ~ '0 ~ tt II rJ &:: e: ::;, :;; Q) '" rJ = :¡; ~ tt 0 .:= ªI~ 0 C) ..!) e i5 ::;, 0 E CD ã: ID II: I-rn , '" C) ...J e: a::u.. c Z C) .., <II 'ë ....I <II 0 Q; '" C) "t: '~I~ ~ ~ ~ I'~ UI e: .8 .5 ~ ~ Æ e: e: C) 4( &:: ~ C) SB 0 <{ ID ~ co 10 0 GO ~ .,(1) UI :3 :3 ~ ~ ~~ II " 9 9 .... ~ ~ C\I C\ 010 ;; C\I <':I C\CII 0 0 0 0 00 9 9 9 ç 9 99 .... .... .... ..... ~ .... ~ 0 0 0 0 ::ð 00 Q 10 10 10 <.9 1010 N N N C\I N Nt'\, )( g g g g g gg <II l- N CII CII C\I C\ CIICII ;,. ;; 1:: o ~ o . w j .! ! E ¡:: '-' ..." 1'-1'- I'- u; U'I I'- ~~ N C\ NI'- 101'- ìõ .,..,. M M .,. .,.~ M U'I'" Q).,. 0)0) M'" NO ~~ &JÕ 0) M.,. .,.0) en 0) M'" 0)0) §~ en 0) .,.en ~~ M .,..,. ~~ NN ~M ;x¡~ ~N g~ ~~ ~~ N'" ~~ ~~ ~~ Q) Mt') ~~ MT'" .,. .,..,. .,.t') .,.~ T'" ~ ~ I'- 0 T'" ~ ~ ~ ~ T'" ~ ,..:. ,.:..~ ,..:. ~ ~ ,..:.,..:. ~~ ,..:. ,..:. ~~ ,..:. ~~ ~ .,. "'U'I .,. ~~ ~ .,. .,. en en en en en 0)0) 0) en~ en en en en ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ..J..J ..J..J ..J..J ..J..J ..J....J ....J..J ..J..J ..J..J ....J....J ....J..J ..J..J ..J..J ....J..J ....J..J ....J ....J ..J....J ....J u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u.. .c 0 III .!!! CD CD CD ~Æ CD CD CD.c CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD ~ 5 0 CD CD ·õ CD CD Q CD CD CD !:! !:! e ~ ot: E !:! e ~ ~ e e !: ~ e e e ::] 0 !:! .3 ~ e e e f::? !:! Q¡ c ~ 0 ..J ~ CD Q) CD CD .!!!~ ::] .!!! GI CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD Q) CD= lií£ CD CD CD CD CD CD ä:ä: ,- 0 ä:ä: .811. ä:ä: ä:ä: ä:ä: ä:ä: ä:ä: ä: ~ ä: ,- liíä: ä:ö: ö:ö: ö: CL~ 11. CD t: ~ t:t: t:cB t:t: t:~ -t: t:t: t:t: t:t: t:t: t:t: t: c t:t: t:t: t:t: t:t: t: o 0 & o 0 &j CD 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 00 0::] o 0 o .- o 0 o 0 o 0 0 u..u.. u..u.. :Eu.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..u.. u..O CLu.. u..:E CLu.. u..u.. u..u.. u.. g N CD > < "" ð ~ co c iD cO ~o é3 c"c C ..J ~ ~ C C ~ Oz lií () III 50 ....J 0 cO ..J C ..JO CD O..J "C CD Q) ..JCD ~~ ~~ ~a: CD 'E ~ ¡¡¡ CD CD~ ..J CD CD 8lií 0 ~ CD CD GI a: ~ g C) i!: -i!: i!:Š III 1\1 ~ ~ I~ ~g 0 ~I\I .,. .!c¡ .c Ei!: i!: .6 I~ t')M t:t: T'" ::] 1\It: (J)::] c ~I~ CD CD ::] g; .5= ,8w CD.c - ::] .sCL Q)Q) .0.0 "C c CDI~ 1\1 )( ~i! t:,8 .cD C)~ ~Æ 1\1.0 c ~ ~ 1\1 - 1\1 1\1 W :g E _ CD CD 1\1 EJ: 11. CD CD- < E E CD CD .6 c ~ .,. c w'" c c ~ T'" .c .c c )( > .6 CD ~ .s: ï=ï= - .c ~ )( .- ë3ï= "'-0: ,- ~ )(z ö:Æ ~ )( )( ()~ (J) (J) 11. 0 '" cB~ cB~ CLJ: ~~ (J)Z cBU'I (J)CL cBS ~~ I'-M ~ t') :2..J M W COU'l (J)U'I ~¿;j .,..,. o/'- ~ :g~ 8 co8 en M ON 1'-1'- 00 U'I~ NO) t')0 ~R I'-~ ;è\i U; 00 ~~ :8 N ¿;j CL~ coQ) CL~ g~ .,.CO (00) ~co t').,. Q)Q) I'- Q)~ N Q)~ -N ~ ~ NT'" 10- -M Q) 11.11. c ~ 1\1 .c g '" a: E C) ~ c t:. 1\1 Q¡ i ê c -E c c c 0 'Ë 0 c c '" ~ e ~ ::] "C êi5 '~ "E c ~ c C) i~~ ....J 1i .!!! ~ "3 III Q¡ ~ 'S 0 e ~ ~ c c CD - 1\1 !! "E "3 ai () r- .. C) ë - - :> ~ I.~ fo- c E E ::] u.. GI (J) CD I~ E ·c jj ..J GI g ::] 'i z CD 1\1 Õ 11. C) ..J "") > J: lií .s: 2 "C (J) CD CD ....J III !! 1\1 (J) .c c CD if III CD () r- "E CD c :E c iã "") "") CD :õ2 -g "") III 1\1 ¡¡¡ CD !! CD "C C :E "") CD CD ~ C "") III .c 1i () Qj CD W CD 1\1 III !! 1i c 5 8 .!!! .c ~ :.ö:.ö !! III E t: E c ..J I.g¡ ¡¡¡ ·0 "C .c 1\1 !! - !! () 0 Æ en 1\1 > 'c ~ '" 1i "") .0.0 CD C 0 læ SS 1\1 u.. ::] 1: III "") W c iã "") ~ :i '" () :!2 III Z Q¡ III C C > c 11. ~ "C CD C ~ ., 11. c III (J) E c ....J I~ ¡¡¡ 0 I!? Q¡ ~ g 1i 0 0 '" !! ~ 0 () c ë IC c c e III c c ¡¡¡ .. c I~ c ~ üi 15 ~ "E ..J .. ¡¡¡ CD I~ -E ~~ g ~ !! III C CD "E ::] 'S c ~ c Ii 'Ë I.~ ~ i :!2 e ::] 0 0 c CD c 0 c "3 ~ '" .c ::] "3 ....J CD ., 0 r- E .. C) e j !! .c (J) C) .c 1\1 '" 0 ~ J: lií z E .!!! E E ..J 0 CD (J) 1i J: 0 (J) 0 0 u.. if C) a: "") 0 '" CD 0 êi5 :E 2 "C ë C) "") 1\1 :> 0 () a: jj "") CD "") J: r- "") "") () c 0 J: :E Ii; '" I~ .3 1i III CD C Õ :E c Ii :Q g "E r- "") 5 0 CD ::] CD () 0 :s! 1\1 "E "") "") c i X! '" 1i ~ J .. !! "C :2 III :2 0 CD a: I~ I·e 1\1 ~ Q) III CD :E E I!? B g ~~ 'c .~ > i c ·c !! E E Ii; .c ¡¡¡ E i c ~ l:ë 0 ::] .c 1\1 III !! .2 Õ 0 ~ j 1\1 0 CD 1\1 12 tf "") ~ .c c ~~ () ë3 0 0 0 u.. C) J: J: J: III III :E :i z 11. 11. a: a: (J) r- :> :> "'") "'") "") ij .., Q) ij 9 ~ 9 § ~ ~ '¥ en ij t') en ¡ ij ij ij 9 ~ .,. ~ '¥ ~ ij t') ~ ~ /'- i U'IU'I ~ § ~ ~ ~ § § § ~ § § § § ~~ g ¿;j M /'- /'- § Q) en M ~ {::; ..¡. ~ .n ~ U'I ij M .,. CII N 0 .n en N ~ co Ñ .;, ~ T'"N t') ~ ij ~ 8 N Õ 8 N ij N N N ~ Õ Õ Õ 8 Õ Õ 8õ 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 99 Õ Õ ij ~ õ õ õ - õ ij ~ ij ~ ~ õ õ õ ij ~ ~ ~ õ õ õ õ õ ~ ~ õ Õ (;0 0 0 10 <9 co <9 co <9 <9 co co <9 <9 <9 '¥ <9 <9 <9 10 <9 <9<9 N N N N ~ N ~ N g N N g N ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N g NN g g g g g g g ~ ~ ~ g g ~ ~ g ~ g g g g g ~ g g ~ gg N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NN ~ Ul W NO'f1CE U I III II8Ia .J ST, LUCIE COUNTY BOARD Of COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA Ma rch 16, 2004 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE is hereby given in accordance with Sec· tion 11,00.03 of the SI. Lucie County Land Devel· opment Code and in accordance with the provi· sions of the SI. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, that the following applicants have requested that the SI. Lucie County Board of Commissione consider their following requests: I LUCIE ROCK, LLC., for a Change in Future Lln Use Classification from RS (Residentiel Subur banI to MXD-Orange Avenue (Mixed Use Devel· opment . Orange Avenue) for the following de- scribed property: . THE SOUTH ONE·HALF Of THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER Of SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 35 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS AND EXCEPT ALL RIGHTS·OF· WAY OF RECORD, TOGETHER WITH: 2 35 39 THAT PART Of NW 1/4 Of SW 1/4 MPDAF: FROM SE COR Of NW 1/4 Of SW 1/4 RUN N DEG 08 MIN 12 SEC W 60 FT FOR POB, TH CON N 0 DEG OB MIN 13 SEC W 846,63 FT, TH N 80 DEG 08 MIN 02 SEC W ALG SD RIW 107.58 FT, TH N 62 DEG 25 MIN 28 SEC W 300.24 FT, TH N DEG 08 MIN 02 SEC W 182,77 FT, TH S 0 D£G 11 MIN 29 SEC W 346,62 FT, TH S 60 DEG 08 MIN 0 SEC E 354,41 FT, TH S 0 DEG 08 MIN 13 SEC E 607.48 FT, THN 89 DEG 53 MIN 47 SEC E 210 TO POB (6.77 AC) (OR 1362-1224) ANO 2 35 39 THAT PART Of NE 1/4 OF SW 1/4 LVG SWL Y Of 1-95 RIW-LESSE 93 FT AND LESS S 80 FT FOR RD AND CANAL RS/W- (14.02 AC) (OR 1362-1224) Location:Northwest corner of the intersection 0 Rock Road and Canal No. 44, BJK INC,. for a Change in future Land Use Clessill ~ cation from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU ¡ (Residential Urban) for the following described property: BEING A TRACT Of LAND LYING IN SECTION 27 TOWNSHIP 35 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, ST. LU CIE COUNTY, fLORIDA, AND BEING MORE PAR- TICULARL Y DESCRIBED AS fOLLOWS: BEGIN AT THE POINT Of INTERSECTION OF THE . SOUTH RIGHT-Of·WAY LINE Of OKEECHOBEE J ROAD (STATE ROAD 70), AND THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 475,50 FEET OF THE EAST 112 (ONE HALF) OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 (ONE QUARTER) Of SAID SECTION 26; THENCE S 00 . 38'12" E, ALOHG LASTLY SAID LINE, A DIS- TANCE OF 1,0' 06 fEET; THENCE N 76' 55'3&" W A DISTANCl ùF 192,11 FEET; THENCE N 84" 03'21" W A DISTANCE Of 115.71 FEET; THENCE S 88 . 22'46" W A DISTANCE OF 127.13 FEET; THENCE S 77 '36'36" W A DISTANCE OF 111. FEET; THENCE S 65 ' 57'54" W A DISTANCE OF 255.96 FEET; THENCE S 57 . 01'29" W A DIS- - TANCE Of 269,40 FEET; THENCE S 87' 11'51" W - A DISTANCE Of 420.31 fEET; THENCE S 88 " 39'50" W A DISTANCE OF 506,BO FEET; THENCE N 00 . 38'12" W A DISTANCE Of 1,196.48 FEE ~ TO THE INTERSECTION WITH A NON TANGENT: CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, HAVING A ' RADIUS OF 2,730,79 fEET, THE CHORD OF . WHICH BEARS N B5 ' 30'32" E, ANO BEING THE - AFORESAID SOUTH IGHT·OF-WAY LINE OKEE CHOBEE ROAD (STATE ROAD 70); THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAIO CURVE, DISTANCE Of 438.97.. FEET THROUGH A CEN TRAL ANGLE Of 09 . 12'37"; THENCE S 89 . 53'10" E A DISTANCE Of 1,067,56 FEET TO THE BEGINNING Of A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,044.0B FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 349.33 fEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09 '47'30"; THENCE N 80· 19'20" E A DISTANCE Of 75.32 FEET TO THE ~ POiNT or BEGINNING, CONTAINING 48,72 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Location:South side of Okeechobee ROld (SR·70) - 1/2 mile west of Gordy Road. BJK INC" for In extension of the Urban Service Boundary Line for the following described pro erty: Being a tract of Ilnd lying in Section 27, Towlllhl 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, F~ . " '-" ..." ITEM NO. DATE: 4 1 0/18/04 AGENDA REQUEST REGULAR: ( x ) PUBLIC HEARING: ( ) CONSENT: ( ) TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUBMITTED BY (DEPT): ADMINISTRATION SUBJECT: Staff request for the Board to approve ttlrricane-related legislative issues. BACKGROUND: In the aftermath of Hurricane Frances and Jeanne specific areas were identified where State Legislation may improve responsiveness or prevent damage in future storm events. FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A. PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached AfteLAction Reports and forward a letter to the local Legislative Delegation and the Florida Association of Counties asking that the attached outlined requests be considered in future State Legislation. COMMISSION ACTION: CE: KAPPROVED 0 DENIED o OTHER: Motion to approve all After- Approved 5-0 Action Reports with the exception of the last item regarding demolition costs of destroyed homes and forward Review and Approvals reports as request by staff. ê( County Attorney: ,., ~ 0 Management and Budget: Dou M. Anderson County Administrator o Purchasing: o Originating Dept: 0 Other: o Other: o Finance: Check for copy only if applicable: Anyone with a disability requiring accommodations to attend this meeting should contact the Sf. Lucie County Community Services Manager at 772-462-1777 or TTD 772-462-1428, at least 48 hours (48) prior to the meeting. H:\RAY\AGENDAS 2004\10,19,04 HURRICANE ISSUES,DOC '-' "will COUNTY ADMINISTRATION MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Douglas M. Anderson, County Administrator DATE: October 14, 2004 RE: St. Lucie County After-Action Report- Legislative Issues and Emergency Operations/Special Needs Facility Legislative Issues relating to Hurricane Frances and Jeanne are summarized below. · All new Nursing Homes, Assisted Congregated Living Facilities and Dialysis Centers should be required by the State to have adequately sized electric generators installed before approval. These generators should have no less that a 72-hour supply of fuel. · The State should more strongly regulate the reintroduction of mobile homes to a storm damaged area. Under current law, mobile homes built over 20 years ago can be moved into a storm-damaged area. Legislation should be enacted to prevent moving any pre-1994 mobile home into any coastal storm damaged area. Also, construction of CBS homes should be permitted on the existing slabs where mobile homes have been destroyed with any State requirements being streamlined. · A regional Special Needs/Emergency Operations Facility, as proposed to the State, is required to efficiently manage a disaster. State funding is required to assist construction of this center. · Dialysis Units - Dialysis Facilities should be required as part of their disaster plan to have a contract with a provider to deliver emergency water supplies as soon as a hurricane warning is posted for the southeast coast of Florida. · Adequately sized generators are needed immediately after a hurricane event to power up local grocery store chains. These should be pre-staged in protected areas. · Destr pi cost DMAljc H:\RAY\AGENDAS 2004\10.19.04 HURRICANE ISSUES. DOC ~ ~ AFTER-ACTION REPORT October 15, 2004 ISSUE: Nursing Homes, Assisted Congregate Living Facilities (ACLF), and Dialysis Centers are not required to have emergency generators sufficient to power their facility. Their loss of power caused some problems in the shelters and also requested priority status for return of electricity from the power companies. REMEDY: The Agency for Health Care Administration should require the above facilities to install emergency generators sufficient to power the facility during a power failure with storage tanks to hold 72 hours of fuel. If the legislature does not enact legislation, then the Board of County Commissioners should pass a local ordinance. ACTION AGENCY: This is an issue that should be enacted by the State Legislature. If the legislature does not enact this requirement, then the County Attorney should write an ordinance for the Board's approval requiring any facility in St. Lucie County to install an emergency generator. H:\RAY\AGENDAS 2004\10,19,04 HURRICANE ISSUES,DOC ISSUE: REMEDY: '-' ....,; AFTER-ACTION REPORT October 15, 2004 Many mobile homes were destroyed during Hurricanes Frances and Jeanne. To avoid future destruction in the event of disasters, many changes need to be made to the requirements of mobile homes brought into a disaster-prone areas. Below is a list of necessary changes to legislation: 1) All used mobile homes either relocated within or brought into St. Lucie County or any other coastal counties must be Wind Zone III certified. A set-up contractor or dealer cannot repair or remodel used mobile homes without first obtaining a building permit from the local jurisdiction. Any contractors performing such work must possess a state certified license for the type of remodel or repair work being performed. A used mobile home, which needs repairs or remodeling, must first be evaluated by a Florida Licensed Architect or Engineer to certify that the particular mobile home conforms to the "NO MORE OR LESS THAN" language in 15-C-2-0081 or permit will not be issued. If a mobile home is deemed "totaled" by the local Building Official, that particular mobile home cannot be reconstructed, repaired, or remodeled and must be removed from the site and not brought back under any circumstances to any part of the State. All accessory structures must not be directly attached to a Mobile Home. Only 4th wall-constructed will be permitted. Only the AAF Manual referred to in Chapter 20 be allowed for engineering design of aluminum structures or sit specific engineering. 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) ACTION AGENCY: These are issues that should be enacted by the State Legislature. If the Legislature does not enact this requirement, then the County Attorney should write ordinances for the Board's approval requiring the above changes. H:\RAY\AGENDAS 2004\10,19,04 HURRICANE ISSUES.DOC ~ ,.." AFTER-ACTION REPORT October 15, 2004 ISSUE: Many homes destroyed by the hurricanes may never be rebuilt. The homeowners with insurance coverage may not receive the amount of money required to rebuild the structure. The homeowner will take the money that they received and leave the burden of demolition on the municipality and the taxpayers. REMEDY: Destroyed homes with insurance coverage should have a portion ofthe claim placed in an escrow account should the property not be rebuilt to pay for demolition costs. ACTION AGENCY: This is an issue that should be enacted by the State Legislature. If the Legislature does not enact this requirement, then the County Attorney should write an ordinance for the Board's approval requiring that destroyed homes with insurance coverage place a portion of the claim in an escrow account to pay for demolition costs. H:\RAY\AGENDAS 2004\10,19,04 HURRICANE ISSUES,DOC ...., Public Works Code Compliance Division Memorandum TO: Doug Anderson, County Administrator Ray Wazny, Assistant County Administrator FROM: Dennis M. Grim, Code Compliance Manager / Building Official SUBJECT: Changes to State legislation in response to resent hurricanes DATE: October 14,2004 Mobile Homes Due to the recent stonns impact upon not only St. Lucie County but most of the cities and counties across the state, we are requesting changes to the legislation as follows: 1. All second-set (used) mobile homes either relocated within or brought into St. Lucie County or any other coastal counties must be Wind Zone III certified. 2. A set-up contractor or dealer cannot repair or remodel used mobile homes without first obtaining a building pennit from the local jurisdiction. Any contractors perfonning such work must possess a state certified license for the type of remodel or repair work being perfonned. 3. A used mobile home which needs repairs or remodeling must first be evaluated by a Florida Licensed Architect or Engineer to certify that the particular mobile home confonns to the "NO MORE OR LESS THAN" language in 15-C-2-0081 or a pennit will not be issued. 4. If a mobile home is deemed "totaled" by the local Building Official, that particular mobile home cannot be re-constructed, repaired or remodeled and must be removed from the site and not brought back under any circumstances to any part of the State. 5. All accessory structures must not be directly attached to a Mobile Home. Only 4th wall constructed will be pennitted. 6. Only the AAF Manual referred to in chapter 20 be allowed for engineering design of aluminum structures or sit specific engineering. An attemp~Change the Wind Zone classification for St. Lucie County and ~oastal counties as designated in the Installation for Manufactured Housing Guide, from our current designation as Wind Zone II County to a Wind Zone III County would be next to impossible and would have to be done at the State or local level. Per a telephone conversation with Mr. Rick Mendlen, Senior Engineer at the office for manufactured housing in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday, October 13, 2004. Mr. Mendlen's agency deals only with "New" Mobile Homes. Fire and Catastrophic Escrow Account Do to the recent hurricanes that have devastated the State of Florida, many homes that have been destroyed may never be rebuilt. The homeowner may not get the amount of monies required to rebuild the structure. The homeowner will take what money that they received and leave the structure as is for the county or city to deal with, adding additional burden to the municipality and tax payers to have the structure razed. Legislation on a state level to make it mandatory for insurance companies to pay a portion of the insurer's settlement check to be placed into an escrow account set up by the municipality to hold the money until such repairs are made or the structure is razed. This will prevent someone from just walking away and leaving the burden to others to take care of. If they do walk away the money that was deposited in the escrow account under their name will be used to raze the structure, therefore limiting the municipality's burden. If the owner rebuilds or has the structure razed, the money would be released to them after an inspection completed by local jurisdiction's Building Official or Designee. This legislation would apply to any insurance claim such as, fire, hurricane, tornado, or any other natural disaster that would make the structure uninhabitable. At this time there is no Florida Statute that supports this proposed change. '- ...., AFTER ACTION REPORT 10/13/2004 ISSUE: Emergency Operations Center is too small to support essential personnel during an emergency. There is inadequate workspace, no place to bunk at night or relax during shift release or a media center to operate nom. REMEDY: County needs to find means to finance a new EOC to provide a better work environment for disasters. The facility should stand alone as an EOC wired and ready to be used at a moments notice. Grants should also be sought through mitigation funds and other means. ACTION AGENCY: Administration will work with Public Safety, Architects Design Group and the State of Florida to achieve this goal. uff - Dialysis AFTEr" AFTER ACTION REPORT October 14, 2004 ISSUE: Dialysis facilities need large amounts of water for their clients and do not keep reserve supplies in the quantities necessary. REMEDY: Dialysis facilities should be required as part of their disaster plan to have a contract with a provider to deliver emergency water supplies as soon as a hurricane warning is posted for the southeast coast of Florida. ACTION AGENCY: The St. Lucie County Health Department should ensure that dialysis facilities have included this action in the emergency plan and have followed through with it when hurricane warnings have been posted. "-' ...." AFTER-ACTION REPORT October 15, 2004 Issue: Grocery Store Chains were unable to open immediately after the storm, because power was not restored. Remedy: A suggestion was made to require specific grocery stores to have back-up emergency power from generators. Having some grocery stores open immediately after a hurricane event would take pressure off relief agencies. There are issues below that need to be considered: · Grocery stores with generators may not have staff available immediately after a storm event to provide service. Many employees will have evacuated. · Transportation lanes to stores with generators may not be cleaned after a storm event, preventing customer, employees and food re-supply access. . Grocery stores with generators may be damaged and unsafe after the storm event. It may be more desirable to pre-stage three (3) large capacity generators, capable of powering up a grocery store, in a protected location purchased and stored by each major grocery store chain, i.e.: a chain would be considered three (3) or more stores within the county. Once the storm event has ended, these would be placed at the north county, central county and south county grocery stores as transportation lines are open and upon notification that staffing is available for undamaged stores. Action Agency: This is an issue that should be enacted by the State Legislature. If the legislature does not enact this requirement, then the County Attorney should write an ordinance for the Board's approval requiring major grocery store chains in St. Lucie County to purchase, store, and maintain at least three (3) large capacity generators and the fuel necessary for use immediately after an emergency. H:\RAY\AGENDAS 2004\10,19,04 HURRICANE ISSUES,DOC ',-, ""'" REVISED ITEM NO. 5 DATE: October 18. 2004 AGENDA REQUEST REGULAR: (X) PUBLIC HEARING: ( ) CONSENT: ( ) TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ....., SUBMITTED BY (DEPT): ADMINISTRATION SUBJECT: CIVIC CENTER STATUS BACKGROUND: SEE ATTACHED MEMORANDUM FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A PREVIOUS ACTION: SEE ATTACHED MEMORANDUM RECOMMENDATION: STAFF IS SEEKING DIRECTION ON WHETHER THE COUNTY SHOULD REPLACE THE ROOF, AIR-CONDITIONING AND STAGE AT THE CIVIC CENTER OR BEGIN PLANNING TOWARDS A REPLACEMENT FACILITY AT A LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED. \ COMMISSION ACTION: o APPROVED KOTHE'R: o DENIED COdE: Douglas Anderson County Administrator Commission requested item be brought back with more infoD11ation and cost estimates. Review and Approvals º County Attorney: -º Management and Budget: º Purchasing: º Originating Dept: º Other: º Other: º Finance: Check for copy only, if applicable: Anyone with a disability requiring accommodations to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Manager at 772-462-1777 or TTD 772-462-1428, at least 48 hours (48) prior to the meeting, ~ ..."" TO: COUNTY ADMINISTRATION MEMORANDUM 04-198 FROM: DATE: RE: Civic Center Status As you know, the St. Lucie County Civic Center roof received significant damage during Hurricanes Frances and Jeanne. This is our special needs shelter. We attempted to make temporary repairs, but were unsuccessful. It has been determined, for the civic center to become functional; the entire roof must be replaced, including replacing the a/c units. The estimated cost to replace both the roof and the a/c units is in excess of $1 ,000,000. Also, Pete Keogh has informed us the stage would have to be replaced. As you know, since 2001, we have been attempting to get state funding to build a new Special Needs Shelter/Emergency Operations Center facility out at the St. Lucie County Fairgrounds. Following these storms, I have discussed this situation with Governor Bush and FEMA Director, Michael Brown. I am in the process of preparing a letter explaining this situation to Governor Bush of which I will be copying Michael Brown and the Legislative Delegation. As you know, we are currently using the civic center for a warehouse for hurricane supplies, i.e. tarps, bottled water, MREs, etc. I am suggesting that we delay any major improvements to the civic center until two things are determined; Issue one, whether or not we will be successful in ettin federal and/or state f . to construct a new Special Nee s Shelter/Emer enc 0 erations Center; issu two we need to determine if we want replace the civic center with a new facili to serve its func Ion. n ebruary 2003, see attache a IC e, staff presented the Board with a campus plan at which time a replacement facility for the civic center was discussed. This plan was to be revised in order to save the trees adjacent to the parking lot. The 2003 Civic Center Capital Budget contained $200,000 for partial air-conditioning replacement and $300,000 for a roof resurfacing (not replacement). Of this $500,000; $170,000 of this money was reallocated to the emergency sewer muffin eater at the Rock Road Jail on July 8,2003, and $43,000 of this money was allocated April 15, 2003 for air- conditioning repairs at the civic center. This leaves a balance of $287,000 in the Civic Center Capital Budget, which has been on hold since the February 2003 Campus Plan Workshop. ~ . ~ Page 2 October 14, 2004 Civic Center Status The civic center continues to receive additional damage as we receive additional rain. Per the attached memorandum, we are not booking any events into this facility until further notice. In the interim, the Equestrian Facility will be ready for use November 30th to host events. Staff will continue to seek outside funding assistance to construct a New Special Needs Facility/Emergency Operations Center at the Fairgrounds. Staff is seeking Board direction on whether the County should replace the roof, air- conditioning and stage at the civic center or begin planning towards a replacement facility at a location to be determined. DMNab 04-198 c: Ray Wazny, Assistant County Administrator Faye Outlaw, Assistant County Administrator Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney Pete Keogh, Parks and Recreation Director Roger Shinn, Central Services Director Attachments \ '-" """'" '.,'~ Ji' ! ~ ' , '-.- COUNTY ADMINISTRATION FROM: Douglas M. Anderson, C MORANDUM 04-199 TO: Board of County Com DATE: October 15, 2004 RE: Civic Center Please find attached additional information regarding Agenda #5 on the St. Lucie County Civic Center. I had Patti Raffensberger of the Parks & Recreation Department provide me with the number of events over the past five years and corresponding revenue. DMAlab 04-199 c: Ray Wazny, Assistant County Administrator Faye Outlaw, Assistant County Administrator Dan Mcintyre, County Attorney Pete Keogh, Parks and Recreation Director , \ \.r Page 1 of 1 """" Patti Raffensberger - Number of Events _._.____.___...__....._.___._..__~_.__________~____.....w·_·______··__····_ From: To: Date: Subject: Rosemary Kelley Patti Raffensberger 10/15/20049:41 AM Number of Events ___._w...·._.·__··____ Patti, below is number of events not the number of days the facility was used: Show Events: 2000 - 67 2001 - 63 2002 - 53 2003 - 58 2004- .50 1341(,31 ,;2.(, III I (If) ~~l " ~ 0, I 4 ~ S¡. ó;¡.4 (~~~uJ.4rJ..1J' ~ - ò=) The 2004 is the total number scheduled thru December. Total - 291 \ \ '~"\\7r= n . -' ,,'. 'J"'.. :I~i "L DC j _'.~ ¿~~: 6 co. ADM¡¡·~. OFFICE ¡; 1p.. f fr., nn("l1mp.nts%20and%20Settings\Administrator\Local%20Settings\ T emp\GW} 00... 10/15/2004 Page 1 of 1 '-' ..., Douglas Anderson - Civic Center Bookings From: To: Date: Subject: cc: Linda Brown Douglas Anderson 10/13/2004 1:42:53 PM Civic Center Bookings Patti Raffensberger; Peter Keogh ~N~~ Pete has requested that we let you know that as directed during Startegic Planning, he has informed staff that all pending events/programs at the Civic Center are to be cancelled and that staff is to no longer accept bookings for this facility. LB file:/ /C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Administrator\Local%20Settings\ Temp\G W} 00... 10/18/2004 .-. SPACE CRUNCH Replacing civic center an option By Eve Modzelewski J. þt/Ö3 staff writer , ..J ~ {, \ t? (f FORT PIERCE - St. 'Lucie County has long since outgrown its government offices and civic center on Virginia ,Avenue,andofficials met Thursday to start pla¡Í1i.Ìllg"ex- pansion of the càmþuS.~,f; <; Over the next decade, .c6rimiu- nity Development DirectórDenhis Murphy proposed cori'structing five new buildings within the county. O\vned block of land bound east-to· west by South 23rd and South 25th streets and north·ta·south by Vir- ginia and Rhode Island avenues. The project, which is still being developed, could involve tearing dO\vn the St. Lucie County Civic Center years from now and building a much bigger, 125,OOO.square.foot center including a posh conference_ center. ,'''''r':'~-,' "~,,,', '..... The existing civic centt:!r hªs be- come functionally obsolete, MiÌÌ-phy said. , As it stands, the propòsal would, involve razing hundreds of trees, in~ eluding oaks and pines, but commís~ CIVIC CENTER sion Chairman Cliff Barnes said he preferred a strategy that would pre- FROM B1 serve more of the wooded areas of tion of the, building in ex- the property. 'change for an acre 'next to Instead of low·rise buildings, the St. Lucie CoUnty Health Barnes said he wants taller struc· Department on Milner Drive. tures. Instead of paved parking ak throughout the complex, Barnes sug. The district alsowquld m e gested a parking deck across South fmancial 'contributions to 23rd Street that could also serve the other buildings in exchange nearby Lawnwood Recreation Com- for the land. plex and Lawnwood Elementary School. Also included in the first Both measures could help pre· phase of the plan is a $1.7 serve the natural habitat, he said. million chiller facility for the "I wouldn't want to cut any of county utilities department. those trees down until we've gone up as much as we could," Barnes Construction of a new of- said. "Buildings need to be where we . flce building is planned to , already have cleared land." start in 2005-06. The civic I The county plan calls for con· center project, if ap P,., r,oved' '" jl, struction to start in fiscal year tart fì ral 2003-04 of a $1.5 million maintenance wouldn't s or seve ' facility for the St. Lucie County Fire years.' ,,'~::' " : District. The building, whi~h v:ill ~e The 'plan is in its ;early fully funded by the fire dIstrIct, IS stages and Thursday's meet. planned for the northeast corner of 1ng , . tended for county, Rhode Island Avenue and 23rd w~ ~ 't·· e'dÍrec Street. .- comnnSSlOners OgIV ,', ,~, The county plans to give the 2'Ý2 'lion to Murphy ,andothe~tacres t,o the fire district for construc- working on the proje~.,,·: \ See CIVIC CENTER, RI'; - F!vF!,mnrl7F~IF!~kl@J>;cr¡nn>;,com -- '-'" AGENDA REQUEST ..., ITEM NO. (¡;; bATE: JULY 81\ 2003 INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE REGULAR [)(] PUBLIC HEARING [ ] CONSENT [ , ] TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED BY: ROGER SHINN DIRECTOR SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): CENTRAL SERVicES . SUBJECT: ROCK ,ROAD JAIL WASTEWATER SCREENING FACILITY / REALLOCATI.ON OF FUNDS . ' BACKGROUND: Fort Pierce Utilities Authority '(FF?UA) provides utility services to the Rock Road Correctional Facility. Staff has received notification from FPUA indicating they have experienced a series of operational problems resulting from products discharged from the Correctional Facility into the sewer system resulting in expenses incurred by FPUA to investigate the problem, repair equipment, respond to mechanical failures and removal of these products from the force main (please see attachment). A consent order was issÚ\3.d by FPUA dire'cting St. Lucie County to correct the debris problem by January 2004 or incur fines of up to $1,000.00 per day. Recognizingthe need to address this issue staff would like to proceed with a Work Authorization with Hazen and Sawyer, currently under continuing contract with St. Lucie County Contract #C03-02-235, to provide engineering services for the design of a screening facility for the removal of debris entrained in the Rock Road Correctional Facility waste stream at a cost of $28,560.00. IFF Funds budgeted to replace the a/c units and roof at the Civic Center are available añd staff is requesting to reallocate $170,000.00 for use toward the Engineering Services of $28,560.00, with remaining funds of $141,440.00 to be used for the purchase and installation of the screening facility at Rock Road Jail. - \ ¡, FUNDS '~VAlL: Funds will be made available in: 316-1940-546200-1527 \ (Rock Road Jail Maintenance/Improvements) PREVIOÙS ACTION: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the reallocation of available .IFF Funds for the Civic Center in the amount of $170,000.00, allow staff to process a Work Authorization with Hazen and Sawyer, Contract #C03-02-235, authorize the chairman to sign the Work Authorization to provide engineering services for the ~ck Road Jail Wastewater Screening Facility and use remaining funds for the purchase and installation of this facility to be completed before the compliance deadline imposed by FPUA . "">,". -' MISSION ACTION: Ii! APPROVED [] DENIED [1 OTHER: NCE: Approved (5·0) . Do Anderson '" County Administrator Coordination/Siqna~ures Mgt. & Budget fL¿) '~t~ ..../ . , \ County Attorney.~ þQJ /-1 Oñginating Dept {ft- Finance: (Check for Copy only, if Applicable) Purchasing Mgr.: Other: Other: Eff. 1/97 ~ ..." DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL SERVICES MEMORANDUM TO: Doug Anderson, County Administrator Roger Shinn, Direct~ ~ FROM: DATE: July 2, 2003 SUBJECT: Wastewater Screening Facility/Rock Road Jail ************************************************************************************* As a cost-saving alternative to purchasing a new \Vastewater Screening Facility at the Rock Road Jail, it was suggested that perhaps a re-furbished model would be available. Staffhas investigated this option and this type of equipment that is needed at the jail is not re-furbished. \ \ ~---. -..----.. Roger A Shinn - Sewer L!\.."IUffin Monster ...,J Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Jerry, Pat Tighe Parenteau, Jerry 6/27/039:32AM Sewer Line-Muffin Monster I have ascertained that a 'local' distributor is located somewhere near Orlando, Florida. The name of the firm and contact number of the company that provides re-furbished equipment is listed below: J.W.C. Environmental Contact Person: Rodney Lavancher 407- 628- 1880 This company provides complete service; from extracting of the 'old' equipment to installing the 'new' equipment. It is also my understanding that this firm will even supply 'Loaner' equipment while the current equipment is being repaired or re-furbished. cç: \ \ .? 6- Shinn, Roger A cJ. £V ' /'. I GÝø~ / ¡it tII' b /611 .-.1.: ¡9 i~¡¿/"'1 pt1 r.'!IIi; ~ ) íjtß' r rf /Ø" (j ,JI/ f 7_,;11 /M? ¿; ß/t ;j1P r¡fl,c ,d µJr!, IV r, .ftí) 1#/ IWt'( (pit r/1 ¡/ø< ¡Jtl tJ¡d _ }l ~ ~(¡¡II (II' .rft,4 .;J 1't!cI~¡ifJ ¡¡p' ~ ~h /ø ß".lb:¿,v Jl'b ~ pJ 4ffl ¡YU ~ ¡{Ii( ¡lp( viP 1° y / ~- =- ~ -.-, ,I , -:. ...., , - - -, .~ #. - - :: : -- . ... =:,. :: -=. =-=- : :!':.: ~~~:"':·:-3·: ;)t,cne 772-400-1 to:: Fax 772-489.(.J:: May 1, 2003 Clyde Hissong, Superintendent St. Lucie County Jail Maintenance Division 900 N Rock Road Fort Pierce, FL 34951 Re: Solid Waste in Wastewater Discharge Dear Mr. Hissong, Since utility services were provided to the St. Lucie County (SLC) Correctional Facility located at 900 N. Rock Road, the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA) has experienced a series of operational problems resulting from solid waste products discharged from the Correctional Facility into the sewer system. In early 1999, pressures on the force main serving the facility increased to levels that impacted the ability of lift stations downstream of the Correctional Facility to operate properly. Solid waste products were removed from five-miles of force main in June, 1999 at a cost to FPUA of $20,000. After clearing the force main, pressures returned to normal and the lift stations operated within their normal ranges. The Source of the solid waste products was traced to the Correctional Facility. In August 2001, the Correctional Facility was classified as a Significant Industria! \'User under FPUA's Pretreatment Program. The facility's Industrial Wastewater [Discharge Permit prohibits the discharge of solid or viscous pollutants in amounts that cause obstruction to the flmv through the sewer system. By mid 2002, force main pressures increased to a point that lift station mechanical failures resulted. A downstream lift station experienced sheared impeller bolts due to high force main pressures. Solid waste products were again removed from the force main in December, 2002 at a cost to FPUA of 513,500. Total expenses incurred to date by FPUA for removal of solid waste from the Correctional Facility's discharge are $33,500. This figure does not include the time and expenses required to respond to mechanical failures, repair equipment, and investigate the problem. Solid Waste Disposal 03,03,03 Sf Lucie Counry hi: - - \.f 'wIÌ - - -~ ~-: ;'"'a'"'c-2 .'.: _-"::.5,~ 2....:.--:cr'=es=;:;~.: :.: recover costs associated :,:.~ :~:; d,scr:arge of pollutants tha~ obstruct f1O'.'i or cause interference in the S~¡I¡eí systen-:. Furthermore. this ordinance provides escalating enforcement 3ction including ci'/il penalties up to S 1,000 per day, per violation and ultimately, termination of utilities service for chronic violations. Pretreatment Inspections of the Jail Facility were conducted by FPUA on June 17, 2002 and December 30, 2002. Photographs of solid waste in the wet well of the lift station serving the Correctional Facility were included in summary letters for the above inspections. These photographs and a description of operational problems caused by solid waste discharges from the Jail Facility were most recently documented to you in a letter dated January 21, 2003 (copy attached). A 270-day compliance period is hereby allocated to SLC to allow for installation of effective solids removal equipment. On or before January 31, 2004, the SLC Correctional Facility at 900 N. Rock Road, Fort Pierce, shall cease and desist disposal of solid waste products to the FPUA sewer system. Failure to meet the " January 31, 2004 compliance deadline may result in the imposition of civil . penalties in the amount of $1,000 per day for each and every day thereafter that solid waste is discharged to the sanitary sewer. In addition to civil penalties, FPUA may seek reimbursement of costs associated with the removal of solid ,"vaste discharges from the facility, which total $33,500 to date. Timely resolution of the solid waste discharge problem and interim measures undertaken prior to the compliance date to minimize solid waste in the Correctional Facility's waste stream will be primary considerations in the assessment of fines or recovery of costs, Please complete and return the enclosed Consent Order (see enclosed diskette). The Consent Order should include a realistic schedule for achieving compliance with appropriate milestones delineated and it should be signed by the County Administrator. If you have any questions, please call me at (772) 4p6-1600, extension 3475. \ Sincerely, FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY ~~4~ William G. Thiess, P.E. Director of WaterNVastewater Systems Enclosure (Jan. 21 letter, 1 Diskette, 1 Photograph) cc: Mark Mathis, Pretreatment Coordinator Richard Stenberg, WRIWWS Superintendent Pretreatment File Solid Wast~ Disposal 03.03.03 $1. Lucie Counry hil ~' ......1". as<ewater s~ :~Oroe' :Ot\cS=;"~- 2RDE~ IN THE MA ITER OF [NAME OF INDUSTRY] [ADDRESS] FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY 113 NORTH 2NC STREET (PO BOX 3191) FORT PIERCE, FL 34950 (34948-3191) CONSENT ORDER WHEREAS, the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA) pursuant to the powers, duties and responsibilities vested in and imposed upon the utility by provisions of the City of Fort Pierce Sewer Use Ordinance (Ordinance J-4ss), have conducted an ongoing investigation of (Industry), and have determined that: 1. FPUA owns and operates a wastewater treatment plant which is adversely impacted by discharges from industrial users, including (Industry), and has a pretreatment program to control such discharges. 2. (Industry) has consistently violated the pollutant limits in its wastewater discharge permit as set forth in Exhibit I, attached hereto. 3. Therefore, to ensure that (Industry) is brought into compliance with its pennit limits at the earliest possible date, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND ORDERED, BETWEEN (INDUSTRY) AND THE DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES FOR FPUA, THAT [INDUSTRY] SHALL: \ è,. a, . By . obtain the services of a licensed professional engineer speciâlizing in wastewater treatment for the purpose of designing a pretreatment system which will bring (Industry) into compliance with its wastewa~er discharge permit. b, By , submit plans and specifications for the proposed pretreatment system to FPUA for review. c. By , install the pretreatment system in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted in item b above. d, By system. . cease and desis! discharge of solid waste to FPUA sanitary sewer (Industry) shall pay $1,000 per day for each and every day it fails to comply with the schedule set out in items a-d above. The $1,000 per day penalty shall be paid to the Finance Department of FPUA within 5 days of being demanded by FPUA. . 4. In the event (Industry) fails to comply with any of the deadlines set forth, (Industry) shall, within one (1) wor:king day after expiration of the deadline, notify FPUA in writing. This notice shall describe the reasons for (Industry)'s failure to comply, the additional amount of time needed to complete the remaining work, and the steps to be taken to avoid future delays. This notification in no way excuses (Industry) from its responsibility to meet any later milestones required by this Consent Order. 5. Compliance with the terms and conditions of this Consent Order shall not be construed to relieve (Industry) of its obligation to comply with its wastewater discharge permit which remains in. full force and effect. FPUA reseNes the right to seek any and all remedies available to it under SectIOn 2 of the City of Fort Pierce·.Sewer Use Ordinance for any violation cited by this order. ":';~l'~~r( ~':9r3~, ' - ..'-- - "-., "'1 -~ - --- ...., W~ S';St.ems Ca-zser.t Oroe' - v'iojation of the Consent Order shall conStitute a further violation of the City of Fort Pierce Sewer Use Ordinance and subjects (Industry) to all penalties described by Section 2 of the Sewer Use Ordinance ¡ Nothing in this Consent Order shall be construed to limit any authority of FPUA to issue any other orders or take any other action which it deems necessary to protect the wastewater treatment plant, the environment or the public health and safety. SIGNATORIES FOR (INDUSTRY): Date Name and Title Industry Name Address FOB FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY: Date Elie J. Boudreaux, P.E., Director Fort Pierce Utilities Authority P.O. Box 3191 Fort Pierce, Florida 34948-3191 ':\ \ ---- - -- ~i-\LL' \r\-D S.L\WìIR ...J - .::"'1 -: - - " - ;': :!;=:_':.-i~ :=.-:: . - - - - - - ... :-: ::.:_:- .:.~:.'" ::':~:: :: ~r' =e::: ~ _ 3..1;..:- :: ° J·39··:.c€¿ :~_t ::~ '::=·.~2=·: Ma¡ 2ì. 2003 Mr. Jerry Parenteau Contract Coordinator ST. LUCIE COUNTY 2300 Virginia Avenue Ft. Pierce, Florida 34982 St. Lucie County Correctional Center Wastewater Screen in 0 Facility Dear Mr. Parenteau: We are pleased to submit for your review and approval a proposal for providing screening facilities for the St. Lucie County Correctional Center Wastewater Screening Facility. This scope of work is based on our discussions regarding providing a screening devise to filter debris leaving the Correctional Center before entering the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA) lift station. The proposed project budget is $28,560 and includes: · Four project plan sheets with technical specifications. · Contract documents will be prepared in the consultant's CSI format. · St. Lucie County staff will locate utilities in the vicinity of the proposed screen location and assist in other utility identification work. As discussed, FPUA will not allow modification of their existing lift station to accommodate this screening facility. The screening facility must operate independent of the existing FPUA lift sta,tion. " If Ydv have any questions or need additional information, please let me know. ,V Irul Yo/jrs, ¡í / / H:ZEN 'C/, J'SAWYjlr}(1~ /, I, ,[' If I ~0/l'~1¡lf1/V , t, /I/D i¡l.i' lev ~,- \.. R hard M. Schoenborn, P.E. 1 ~ ... ,/ ~"!,. \,,/ rincipal Engineer ' I c: Robert B, Taylor, Jr., P.E. Joseph J. Franko, P.E.' FtP:ProposalsStLucieCounty049,doc _ ", ~e..'fc(".N~· ~r7':'" '.1. wooat:ury.N'f· Ut;c~rS~C'd:eµl..e' rL. Ce~~~íf "!r. '::a,~:;'" ,'J: a ::"Jr:r:! ·,e. ~1:r·]IJ~. "1(:"''''':-:';.0. :.~;j_::~.' . o. ;:':~ =.. ~j,I"~~._~::_' ;;';:-~ "-" ~ .:: - .; TEME,',: OF WORr-: ST. LUCIE COUNTY CENTRAL SERVICES ST. LUCIE COUNTY CORRECTIONAL CENTER SCREENING FACILITY BACKGROUND St. Lucie COUNTY Centra! Services Office currently provides facilities engineering assistance to the St. Lucie COUNTY Correctional Center. Wastewater generated at the Correctional Center passes through an on-site comminuter and flows into a pumping station owned and operated by the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA). The pumping station that serves the Correctional Center also serves the St. Lucie COUNTY Emergency Operations Center (SLCEOC). On May 1, 2003, St. Lucie COUNTY was informed by letter by FPUA that debris from St. Lucie COUNTY sewers has damaged FPUA wastewater equipment. A consent order was included with the letter that directs SLC to correct the debris problem by January 2004 or incur fines of up to 51,000 per day. As part of the terms of the consent order, SLC is directed to hire a consulting firm familiar with wastewater treatment processes' hence the COUNTY retained the services of Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. (CONSULTANT). Observations made by St. Lucie COUNTY staff indicate that the debris originates at the Correctional Center. The purpose of this proposal is to provide engineering services for the design of a screening facility for the removal of debris entrained in the SLC Correctional Center waste stream. SCOPE OF WORK TASK 1 - AS-BUILT SURVEY CONSULTANT shall develop an as-built sur;ey of the prison area in the vicinity of the proposed screen and existing lift station in order to develop final site plan finished floor elevation and final grading. The project is to be located completely on correctional \ center property. TASK 2 - SOILS INVESTIGATIONS CONSULTANT shall coordinate the subcontracting of a soils investigation at the proposed screen facility to determine the load bearing capacity and the stability of the soil for the proposed structures. 'Nork shall include two soil borings taken to a minimum depth of twenty feet. Results, profile, and determinations shall be described in a letter report, TASK 3 - DESIGNIBID DOCUMENTS CONSULTANT shall prepare a design for construction of a new screen facility. The screening facility design will include a mechanical bar screen, float controls, local control panel, and pad mounted dumpster type receptacle for screenings accessible to commercial garbage disposal vehicles. Electrical power at 3-phase, 480-volts is FtP,ProposalsSt,LucieCounty046,doc Page 1 of 4 '-' "..,J :ë; ::.:: ::::è '.. ---= - ~--.::. :': _-=-::è' 5:= '-= 3:,'==- -; 72C:liljl w::í r:;e ,~. :,--= =.(,S:·;--,;: :- ;--:.-- ;.=.:: 5-=,'_·-=-- :.-3: =,(.:5 :,-.-= '::,--:--eCLCG Cs;::e~ iílto the FPUA ~ :,-i::': s~at,cr'¡"a:eí se-, =i: :: tr.e 5,:;; '.',;:¡ :::e prC)'/ided by an extension of the -= Cs",çNater service tD tne :;-5;,= CCi..:-:-:ínuteí statior,. CONSULTANT will provide :esign of the screening fadll!: The CONSULTANT will provide and coordinate the s:jccontracting of electrical designs from tr.e local power source to tr.e screening facility. The COUNTY will locate underground water, sewer and electrical u:¡nties prior to design In the vicinity of the proposed screening site. Design drawings will include: Drawing 81 C1 C2 E1 i Cover Sheet ¡ Site Layout Plan General Notes and Legend I Screening Facility Sections and Details ! Electrical General Notes and Electrical Site Plan Description Contract documents will be submitted to the Central Services office for review at the 90% set stage of completeness. CONSULTANT will meet with the COUNTY at the 90% set submittal stage to receive one complete set of review comments to be included in the final design documents. Additional comments can be incorporated on an hourly rate basis. CONSULTANT will provide COUNTY "'lith a final check set prier to bidding. TASK 4 - BIDDING ASSISTANCE CONSULTANT shall provide the COUNTY '.'lith 1 copy of the bid documents as well as original hard copies and electronic files. COUNTY shall be respons:bie for advertising and sale of bid documents. CONSULTANT shaii assist the COUNTY with clarification and issuance of addenda and shall attend a prebid conference. COUNTY shall review and tabulate bids and prepare recommendation of award. TASK 5 - CONSTRUCTION SERVICES CONSULTANT shall attend the preconstruction conference and review all shop \ drawings. CONSULTANT shall provide periodic (1 per wee:':) inspections of 'construction activities and attend construction progress meetings on an as needed 'S,asis, The COUNTY will provide da¡-to-day construction inspection services. C'ONSUL T ANT shall provide inspection ser,¡ices on a time (hourly rate) and materials basis. TASK 6 - PERMITTING SERVICES The project will be constructed totally within the property limits of the St. Lucie COUNTY Correctional Center. The facility is served bj the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA). Preliminary discussions with the FPUA indicate that a permit is not required. However, they requested that a letter with design plans be submitted for the screening facility and site. CONSULTANT will provide one set of plans with cover let:er to the FPUA wastewater division. FtP.ProposalsStLucieCounty046,doc Page 2 of 4 ~ '...,¡ - .5::_:3:: :: -.5 ".:- -:.::¿:'Õ: :,-¿: ::- =J::= :-=-~..: ,s 'c: ~s':;~'~:.:;.:: -.::- :,-:15 proJect. ~:','I-:;,-=- =:J::::: --::::.;'_es:e: a ¡e:::.:;- ",:-:esç;~ ;:::ia,îs 2:':; sutr.-:ittec fer :";e screening faciii:j 2~C S,:S CONSULTANT '.'/;; :rc'¡ice cr.e seE of plans wit~ cO'le:- letter to the FDEP, Building permit applications and submittals. if required. will be the respcfìsibility of the Contractor. ASS U MPTI 0 N SIC LARI FICA TIONS 1. Disruption of environmentally sensitive areas is not intended or anticipated with this project work. Environmental permitting and wetland delineation is not included. 2. Any opinion of the construction cost prepared by CONSULTANT represents its judgment as a design professional and is supplied for the general guidance of the COUNTY. Since CONSULTANT has no control over the cost of labor and material, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, CONSULTANT does not guarantee the accuracy of such opinions as compared to Contractor bids or actual costs to COUNTY. 3. CONSULTANT will prepare Contract Documents (plans and technical specifications) based on Construction Standards Institute (CSt) format as modified by the CONSULTANT. COUNTY will provide "front-end" documents' and assemble the front-end documents, the technical specifications, and plan sets into bid-ready sets. Completely assembled, bid-ready contract documents will be issued by the COUNTY. COUNTY will maintain the list of bidders and issue addenda as required. 4. The proposed facilities are located within unincorporated SL Lucie COUNTY. Based on discussions with Central Services staff review by SL Lucie COUNTY Planning and Zoning Department is not required. ',' \ \ 5, SL Lucie County Central Services staff and maintenance staff at the SL Lucie County Correctional Center will assist in the identification and verification of the lowest connected drain point. FIP. Propos als St. Lucie Co un ly04 6, doc Page 3 of 4 ~ COMPLETION DATES Description Task 1 - As Built Survey Task 2 - Soils Investigations Task 3 - Design/Bid Documents Task 4 - Bidding Assistance Task 5 - Construction Services Task 6 - Permitting Services COMPENSATION Description Task 1 - As Built Survey Task 2 - Soils Investigations Task 3 - Design/Bid Documents Task 4 - Bidding.Assistance Task 5 - Construction Services Task 6 - Permitting Services Expenses (Reproduction and Travel) '\ \ FtP.Proposa/sSt.LucieCounty046,doc Page 4 of 4 TOTAL ..., Time for Completion from Receipt of Notice to Proceed 4 Weeks 4 Weeks 12 Weeks 16 Weeks Based on NTP to Contractor 12 Weeks Amount S 2,250 S 840 S 19,040 S 1,600 S 4,120 S 360 S 350 $ 28,560 '-' '....I Picture taken 7-1-2003. This picture reflects the cause of the FPUA lift station to mal function, FPUA needed to lift the pumps out and discovered plastic wraps, bed sheet material as well as mattress material that clogged the impeller, causing it not to work. It took FPUA over four hours to correct this problem. :-=~'.- ....-- ,.. ..,..~ ,,-~..... ;r.,. ---t~. _- __" " \:7\r.l; ,.:"/,,-:i..' . \. 6··.....- --~·.r··t·~.·,.- ~&>~iiJ~ ',_ ;.i;: :~~;~~\f. ~~"-;~f'1t¿~-' ",c"l~ -~, 'if ,-, ~"."..J' , " i:;,~~~-}:_~~';~'~~ ;~.~ -.>. ~ -. -I ¡"t ,'~~¡.;., ti5~" }¡,~- c' ~~ I,:f }- ," . r'i .'~ i ~:- 1: ·<i.~.- ....' :.L, ;{ff~¡ t-j /ï -' t'., ¡,,filt ..' " , ~ ~ " - ;"f'. ' ,- "¡ ,/i ' ,",c{ ~' .};1' ...' , . .7 , ;/- '..iF /. 1 ".~,,"-',"~- ~'~ '.'~"'. ,,"'" ú..f £,;" "'- l' _....~ ~¥ _..J-,:-;i:~-r'}:~ .~_"':i';:'T' 12:11PH '-' ....I Picture taken 7-1-2003 "..- ..... ,7'''~- 1 12: 1 0 PH , ' ~, ~ ..." '-' ...., l:~~'· ;).. ., ~::< '~~~l~ " - . -:-. -.. -~,;, -. ~ . - ... ._~ - ~- _ __4. · . · . -. .;\ .' · < ". ·-f; Þ'4i- . ~~',~--~ .,'"..." ' ' ~---~~... ' - 1 .' ~ r:-.'1 " ~ '...,,/ ~ ...., "-' , ...., AGENDA REQUEST ITEM NO 6-C DATE: April 15,2003 REGULAR [ ] PUBLIC HEARING [ ] CONSENT[X] TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED BY: SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): PURCHASING Edward Parker Purchasing Director SUBJECT: Award of Bid 03-033, Repairs to Civic Center Air Conditioner BACKGROUND: On March 19, 2003 Bid #03-033 was opened for the Repair of the Civic Center Air Conditioning. Five hundred and seventy four (574) vendors were notified, fourteen (14) bid documents were distributed and two (2) responses were received. Based on our review of the bids, we recommend the award to Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. for a total of $42,990.00; they being the low bidder. Bid tabulation sheet attached. FUNDS AVAIL.: Maintenance Improvement 316-1931-546200-1525 PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the award of Bid 03-033, to Siemens Technologies, Inc. for the Repa¡'rs to the Civic Center Air Conditioner, for the total amount of $42,990.00 and authorize the Chairman \0 sign the contract as prepared by the County Attorney COMMISSION ACTION: CE: , IX! APPROVED [] DENIED [ l OTHER: (4-0) Comm. Lewis absent Doug A d rson County Administrator County Attomey:_X Originating Dept: Finance: (Check for Copy only, if Applicable) ¡J~ Mgt & Budget:_X Purchasing Mgr.:_X ¿~I , . Other: Other. "-' ' -..I /l / ! ---/ , r......? \./ f MEMORANDUM CENTRAL SERVICES TO: Ed Parker, Purchasing Director FROM: Jerry Parenteau, Projects Coordinator, Central Senices DATE: April rh 2003 SUBJECT: Bid # 03-033 PROJECT: Repairs to Civic Center Air Condition. \Ve recommend the low bidder Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. For the amount of $42,990.00. Funds available # 316-1931-546200-1525 These repairs are necessary because of unsafe structural conditions and to keep the c,ooling at a minimal level only. ,\ \ 9;)¿U"f:kdd Jerry Parenteau att. r--..> (f) E3 v ~ '-'-' c: ::D ::> ~::::; I -0 - ::::a --- rï n I >n ¡;-¡ '-J !.Jì r-r; -.., < n -....- -0 C"'JrJ 0 ::::: - ¡O--..... .~_. 'W ~' -..,.. - -< N '-J / \.t' en ~M WM zo OM -0 en~ ~~o z:Eëã ::>:E. 0°1- uUw w~w _ :I: uzen ::>::>z ....10 ·uo .... - ø enu-~ z 0"...1 - Z o~ ° ~\od: E :E Ol- e a. 00 z 0 ° M . . U N ~ @) <t M ~ 0 W 0 .... N Z 0) W en T"" u W J: U U 'U ~ :> '0:: 0:: oCt U W :E L!- en ° ....I 0:: oCt e 0:: W <t .... z a. z W W W a. c 0 0 0 0 - . r:a 0 L() W 0) f'.. 0) T"" en ~ oCt N M or;t L() r:a 4;h ~ u z - ~ en :E en . W 0:: U .... 0 Øz en c z- >-...1 en u.~ z ëcñ ~:I: W ...JW _U > 5Ø <x: < w oooLi zec en....l~ O:E zO~ - ...I en< W Zu - a. :E J: :E ul- W U...J WtJ) - W « ~w en .... a. a.3: ,'~ '-.I ~ t'- 10 ~ N "r"'" ;. e w I- ::> ec -I< 0:: e I- w tJ) u. e I- tJ) 0 l- e z z w (J) w > w :E jjJ z ::> () < () w E 0 a:: c- e 0 :E (J) u 0 e c ..: fa () ec III - (I) U. LL LL "0 0 0 0 s:: 0:: 0:: a:: fa E w w w (1) III III III "0 :E :E ~ ~ ::> ::> ::> (1) n '-' '~ Page 1 of 1 Douglas Anderson - Civic Center Bookings J' JI,~l'" ~T>t From: To: Date: Subject: cc: Linda Brown Douglas Anderson 10/13/20041:42:53 PM Civic Center Bookings Patti Raffensberger; Peter Keogh Pete has requested that we let you know that as directed during Startegic Planning, he has informed staff that all pending events/programs at the Civic Center are to be cancelled and that staff is to no longer accept bookings for this facility. LB \ file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Administrator\ T ,oc~ 1% ?OSf'ttina~\ T pmn\n un 00 1 () 11 A 1')"(\ A