HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 07-11-06 - Evening
July 11, 2006
6:00 P.M.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
WELCOME
ALL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED.
ALL MEETINGS PROVIDED WITH WIRELESS INTERNET ACCESS FOR PUBLIC CONVENIENCE.
PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES AND PAGERS PRIOR TO ENTERING THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS.
PLEASE MUTE THE VOLUME ON ALL LAPTOPS AND PDA'S WHILE IN USE IN 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 general 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 TOO (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting.
o,J
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
www.co.st-Iucie.fl.us
Doug Coward, Chairman
Chris Craft, Vice Chairman
Joseph E. Smith
Paula A. Lewis
Frannie Hutchinson
District No.2
District No.5
District No. 1
District No.3
District No.4
July 11, 2006
6:00 P.M.
Invocation
Pledge of Allegiance
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. GROWTH MANAGEMENT/STRATEGY & SPECIAL PROJECTS
Ordinance No. 06-031 adopting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment relating to the establishment of the
Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay Zone - Consider staff recommendation to conti.vu~is
public hearing until August 14, 2006 at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as may be heard. OVV
2. GROWTH MANAGEMENT/STRATEGY & SPECIAL PROJECTS
First reading of Ordinance No. 06-030 adopting land development regulations to apply to property
generally located in the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay Zone boundary - No action
required. The Board is to consider adopting Ordinance No. 06-030 at its second reading public hearing
scheduled for August 14, 2006 at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as may be heard. \ / /
Û~-
END OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ~
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 S1. Lucie County Community Services
Manager at (772) 462-1777 or TOO (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting.
Aaenda Reauest
Item Number:_1_
DATE: July 11, 2006
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [X]
CONSENT [ ]
TO: Board of County Commissioners
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY : Growth Momt. I Strateoy & Special Projects
Michael Brillhart
Strategy & Special Projects
SUBJECT:
Consider Ordinance No. 06-031 adopting a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to establish the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay
Zone.
BACKGROUND:
The Comprehensive Plan Amendment was adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community
Affairs (DCA) on October 11, 2005 during Transmittal Round RLSA 06-1.
The applicant has responded to the DCA Objections. Recommendations and
Comments report as reflected within the Rural Land Stewardship Area Goals,
Objectives, and Policies document (as shown in the attached notebook).
FUNDS AVAILABLE:
NA
PREVIOUS ACTION:
The Local Planning Agency recommended approval of the Rural Land
Stewardship Area (RLSA) Comprehensive Plan Amendment on September
1, 2005. There was a recommendation to have an outside consulting firm
review the proposed land development regulations for consistency with the
goals, objectives and policies for this program. This review and analysis is
anticipated to be completed for Board consideration at its August 14, 2006
public hearing date.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board continue this public hearing until August
14, 2006 at 6:00 p.m.
[X APPROVED
[ ] OTHER:
[ ] DENIED
Approve 5-0 Motion to
continue to August 14, 2006
at 6:00 p.rn. or as soon
thereafter as may be heard.
COMMISSION ACTION:
Douglas M. Anderson
County Administrator
County Attorney: &
Originating Dept: _
Coordination/Sianatures
Management & Budget: _
Finance:
Environ. Resources:
Purchasing _
I'RISlDfNT I< C.E.O.
S,eph"J\ R. ~<1i11e'. PL.
L,tCl'lIvr VICt PntsuH:.:,a " C.O.O.
K,:"i" T. \V;thh. PL.
LXtCUTI\'!:. Viet I'Rf8IDtNIS
Jall1e' A Sellen, \I.S.I'.
Carol D. Conner. PL.
Viet PlnslI,usT &: C.EO.
H. \vilii,,,)! C:"ok. C.!'.A.
VICt I'RI'SIDIXIS
It L~IKC' lkl111CU, p.r.
1'\dl haæe. RL·\
r\. CtoiT,,,,- Àk1'\dll. .·\ICJ~ HI\
Eric L. Warren. P.!..
Lori \\""I>\>.I';,,¡,. P.L.
HtA )QUARltRS/CtNTRAI. I'I.ORII)'\
·F~n Nt'''' Broad Sm:n
(j,hlndo. 1'1. .'2SH
Td: ¥FA22..B.\O
F~lX: ~í07.~i22..ìJ29
\'I."'\\'"\\.·~nH('wjt'U;: .com
NORTII CtNlR,\1. FtORIlJA
541 Fieldaöl Orin'
The ViII,I!:e,. FE .12 62
Td, .\52.751 .26 ~o
hx: .J52J~ 1.2(,~·
SOl'lIiL\ST ¡:\ORlfM
100 S\\' Alh.111:· :\wnue
S"il<' 200
S"mn. Fl. )<199··,
Td: --'2.219.<\00.'
Lu" --'2.219..'218
\\:(, (Ïwl!{' ¡aJting communities.
July 1 J, 2006
HAND DELI\'ERED; l~·:'L\JL
1\1r. Bob Nix, .-\ICP
Director of Growth \ [anagement, St.Lucìe County
2300 \'jrgínia :\venue
Fo1't Pierce, FL 34982·5652
Subject:
Sl. Lucie County
Rural L'1I1d Stewardship :\rea (RLS:\.)
Overlay Zone Comprehensive Phll1 Goal, Objectives and Policy
\lSC\,' No.: Q(¡·OI21
Dear l\lt. Nix:
.\s requested by the St. Lucie C01.l11ty Growth Management Department, l\1SC\\' is
pleased to present the attached report offering initial comments and a critique of the
proposed Comprehensive Plan .\mendment entitled "Rural Land Stewardship Area
O\'erlay Zone Comprehensive Plan Goal, Objectives and Policy" (draft dated May 22,
2(06).
Following general obsel\'aÜons, the report summarizes the amendment, and then
presents comments according to the policies in the proposed Comprehensi\T Plan
.\mendment.
?\lSC\,\', lne. is a community planning and engineering finn with nearly 30 years of
experiencc in Florida, with offtccs in Stuart and Orlando. MSCW is acknowledged as
a state leader in promoting sustainable conunwlity design, with many of its projects
recognized for their application of sustainable planning practices. .-\ diverse and
expert team of professionals contributed to and managed this project, including the
following:
· James _-\. Sellen, 1\lSP, who brings over 30 years of public and privatc scctor
experience and sen'ed as the Orange County Planning Director.
·
RidHlrd W. Unger, .-\ICP, CND, with more than 27 years of public and
private sector experience, including City of Orlando Bureau Chief, where he
admmistered the ZOUlng Code, and managed Crb~111 Design and Growth
\1anage1llenl Planning.
·
James E. .\.naston·Karas, with over 20 years of experience, including
analyzing and composing growth management legislation, mamlt,>1ng water
resource projects and coordinating local government advocacy.
,
~
\"'~,~I
1.8.
SOUTlUASl' FLORIDA
100 S\\' Alb,uw Awnue
SlIit~ 200
Stum. FL .'\.j')'),¡
'I'd; -·\:~.219AOO.\
htx: ~-2.2}9.221ð
-_._-_._-_..-_._.__.-_._--_._-_._-_._~~_.~...
Wi- create /({Sting comJ1lllllitieJ.
.
Project team members with expertise 111 urban dt~sign, land development
regulation drafting and application, economic and market analysis, and
environmental sciences.
~lSC\\' will bt~ prepared to present the highlights or this report, together with its
commcnrs on the proposed corresponding development regulations, at the July 11,
2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting. It is our undersmnding that the
applicílnt involved with this proposal ílnd the project's consultants will receive a copy
of this report in advance of the meeting.
It is our pleasme working with YOll on this project. Should you have any questions,
please do not hesitate to contílct me.
Sincerely,
~ ~r)
./.
j ¿,t. ., ' r /
~X,,~~p, .ë;,
Team Leader
R\\T:sh
Enclosures - Letter, Report
Cc:: James .\. Sellen, James E. Anaston-K:tras
P;lge 2
1\k Bob 1'ix
July 11,2006
PRELIMINARY REVIEW AND CRITIQUE OF THE
ST. LUCIE COUNTY PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT:
"ADAMS RANCH STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES')
(May 22, 2006 version) I
A. General Considerations
51. Lucíe County is to be commended for embarking on the application of one of the State of
Florida's most innovative strategies intended to preserve valuable agricuhurallands, preserve cultural
and historic heritage, presen'c natur:1l habitats, and promote a form of developmem that cncourag(~s
sustainable conununities and discourages sprawl. O"crall, the amendmenr being considered b~' the
St. Lucie COllnry Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) should accomplish its imended purposc.
.\s nXJuested by St. Lucie County staff, 1\J5C\'\/ is pleased to pnwick this report to assist the BOeC
in its e\':lluation of the Goals, Objectives and Policies contained in the Pl'Oposed Comprehensin:
Plan ,\mendmenr.
.\s is the case with the corresponding Development Regulations, the establishment of stewardship
areas in St. Lucic County should follow the adoption of a clear ,'ision of the County's future land use
pattern. State law calls for encouragement of \'isioning pursuant to Section 163.3167 (11).
\,lith a clearly established long-term \'ision, the Count~· can decide where the innovativc RlI1'aJLand
Stewardship :\rea (RLS:\) planning tool can be employed, and where 'rowns, Villages, or Hamlets
will be located. Accordingly, it will determine where prcsern.'d open spaces, natural areas, and
agricultural lands will be located :md managed within the RLS:\s. \X¡ithout an adopted vision, the
County risks choosing a "leapfrog," scattered development pattern.
In parallel with comments offered on the proposed Development Regulations, this Comprehensive
Plan:\mcndment would be impnwcd with an enhanced commitment to provide a Master Plan with
enough detail to better determine components sllch as the size, form, and compatibility of the
proposed Stewardship Receiving :\1'ea. In addition, the smallest increments of proposed
development (Hamlets and Compact Rural Developments) are not large enough to ~'idd desirable
urban form.
r:.llvironmcntaJ considerations are also presented below. Among these suggestions ¡ue: Ensure that
the relative weights to be used for the calculation of stewardship credits be scicntificaU~' reviewed.
and expand the list of indicMOl' species used in the indexing system so it is applicable cmll1t~'wîde.
The degree of detail presented in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amcndmem is unusual. GÍ\'C11
the nature of this new program, the amount of detail ma~' be justified; however, it ma~' suffice to
decrease the amount of detail in the¡\mcndment, while increasing desired detail in the Den:lopment
Regulations. Reading the proposed amendment in concert with the corrcsponding Development
Regulations, many of the comprehensive plan pt{}\'isions arc duplicated in the Development
, The title of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment should be changed to: "St. Lucie County Rural Land
Stcwardship Area Overlay. Comprehensive Plan Goal. Objectivcs and Poljçies:'
Page I of9
II
Regulations. The appropriarc mix is to present oyctarching policies and objecti\'cs in the
Comprehensi\'(' Plan Amendment, and the implemcntation derails in the Development Regulations.
B. Summary of the Proposed Rural Land Stewardship Amendment
'fhe Rural J .and Stewardship ¡\re'1 .\mendment is guided by its m-crarching and primar~' Gm11 to
create the RlS,\ Overlay arca and 10 "... protect and conscn"c agricultural lands... to direct
incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitats...to discourage sprawl...to include a
functional mix of land uscs.. .and to promote economic diversification." 'ro enable St. Lucie COllnLY
to reach this Goal, the amcndmcIH prm-ides for four Objecti"es, each with its more specific policies.
These Objecti,"es prodde for:
1. Esrablíshing the PUl1)()SC and structure of an RLSA (Stewardship sending areas, recel\"lng
area$, credits, credit ,"alucs, index factors):
.,
F.stablishing inccntivc-based policies to protect and COI15Clye agricultural lands and cultural
heritage within an lU,S.\:
.3. Establishing policics to protcct and conservc water <Illality, wctlands ,md habitats within an
RLS,\;
4. Establishing policies to promotc sustainable development patterns, discoumge Spl11\\"1, and
pt:o\"Ïde illllO":uivc land use planning rechniqucs and economic diversitication within an
IUSA.
The amendment also ddines the numerous terms that arc unic]uc to the ¡USA, and fivc figures thai
illusrrate:
1. The locarÎon of the County'S first lUSA ()vcrla\'
. .
The Stewardship Credit workshe<~t
.3. The Natural Resource Index "lap for the subject properties
4. Thc Sending Area Land Cse Layer ¡\Iarrix
,). The Recei,"ing :\ rea Cha ractcristics
")
To be consistent with the proposed RLS:\ Amendmcl1l, any future regulations and de"c1opmclll
proposals which apply to this newly established RLS:\ O,"crlay, or arc located within an RLS,\
Ovcrlay, must comply with and/or fulfill the C;oal, Objectives and Policies of this Amendmcnt.
The pending amendment creatcsan ovcrlay corresponding to the areas commonly known as Adams
Ranch and Cloud Grove. However, rhis amendment could be applied countywidc and could apply
to future ovcrla\" areas, if creared through an amendment to thc County Comprc.hensivc Plan.
C. Review of Proposed Plan Amendment by Selected Policy
Policies for Objective 1: Establish the genen\l purpose and structure to implement thc St.
Lucie County Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay.
Policy 1.4: This policy addresses expansion of the newly created RL5.\ Overlay area, which
will rccluirc a Futurc l.and l" se ,\Iap (FLC;"!) amendment. I f it is imended that the RLS:\
Page 2 of I)
,
.
()veda~' may be applied in other areas of the C()unt~·, the reference to a r:LL'I\1 should
include both creation and expansion of any JUS:\.
Policy 1.6: This policy addresses the mcthodology for establishing the Stewardship Sending
Area (SSA) credits and creation of an 5S.-\. The policy requires recording of a Stewardship
r:,ascment Agreement over each 55.\ within 120 (h-I~'S of the County approving the 5SA. It is
rccommended that the Policy states that the effective date of such S5.\ apprO\'al shaH be the
date the easement is recorded. It is also recommended that this County-appro\'cd casement
be recorded Iw St.Lucie County as an assurance for recotdation.
. .
1 tem (3) of this policy requires that the 5S,\ Credit Agreement run with the land and in fan}r
of the County. It also requires that one othcr grantee (generally a state agenc~' or stare
recognized land trust) be included in the agrecment. It appears that an~' agreement without
the second grantee would not be in compliance with the Comprehensin: Plan.
Policy 1.14: This policy p1'()\'ides for the creation of a Stewardship Receh-ing ,\rea (SRA) by
ordinance. !-lo\V('\Tr, the policy requires only a listing of pern1ined uses by parcels within
the SR.\.
There appears to be no minimum size for creating an SRA. \X/hile the goal of Objective 4 is
to cre;He ".. .sustainable developmem patterns, while discouraging urban sprawl, prodding
for the utilization of innovative land use planning rechni( \Jcs and promoting economic
di\'crsification," it will be difficult to create such a community if the size of the SRA is below
approximately 500 acres, for two main œasons.
First, the marketplace requires a critical mass of residential development to sustain enough
mixed land uses such as remil. off1cc and setTice uses.
Second, a neighborhood school is considered an essential clement of a sustainable
communit\". To SlIppOt't an :wcrage size clement:u'~' or K-8 school of 550 to 850 students, a
community of at least approximately 1,500 to 2,500 dwelling units is typically needed,
'["he proposed ComprehensÌ\'e Plan Amcndment does not 1'Ct]uÌ1"e sufficient detail about the
planned SR,\ to allow :1 polic~'-making body to make informed decisions. Therefore, it is
suggested that the County require the SR.:\ designation to be subject to the apprO\'al of a
i\1aster Plan for the entire SRA property.
The County should also consider establishing a minimum size for an SRA, such that onl~'
Towns or Villages become the de\'clopment form within an established SlC\. ,\ltcrnatÌ\'cI\",
the County could t'C()uire that an Slt\ include at least 011e school as a focal point of i~s
neighb()rhood(s).
Policy 1.7: The Index r:actors presented seem unique, and would be imptm"ed by
accommodating other indicat01's throughout the County. For example, the highest Listed
Species factors arc weighted towards the known caracara and snail kite habitats. 'fhcre are
other Listed Species in St. Lucie Counry that should also recein' this \':tlue or protection. It
also seems to be weighted towards the presel'\"atÏon of only bird species. The County may
Page:3 of9
18
want to consider modifying these critcria so value is given to Listed Species b:¡:.~ed on a
method such as the F\vC's Strategic Habitat Conservation :\rea model.
\,\'hile the assignmem of values used for calculation of Stewardship Credits meets state
standards, the C()unt~· should consider :1 scientific rcview of the relati\"e weights.
Policies for Objective 2: Establish incentive-based policies to protect and conserve
agricultural lands and open space, continue the viability of agricultural production and
preserve cultural heritage in St. Lucie County.
Policy 2.1: '['his polic~' rightfully acknowledges the importance of the agricultural sector of
the St. Lucie Count\" econO\11\'; ho\\'c\'er, it is not nece$S:'I1\' to cross-rc.ferencc the Right-to-
. .. . ,
Farm Act.
Policy 2.5: This appropriate polic~' recognizes thm the use of land for agriculture may not be
pcrpetually feasible, and therefore establishes an additional incentive. To encourage
continued agricultural operation of the land, a 0.5 additional Stewardship Credit may be
granted aftcr e\'er\" 15 years of agricultural production. This provision appears to be the
RL.sA c<luivalent of providing for potential future infill and or redevelopment of property
within a previously approved SR:\, which is a positin' feature of the Amendment.
Policies for Objective 3: Establish policies to protect and conscrve watcr qualit), and
quantity, as well as listed animal and plant species and thcir habitats by dirccting
incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habìtat through the establishment of
Hydrologic Stewardship Arcas (HYSA), Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSA) and Water
Retention Areas (\'VSA), where lands are volunta1'Ïly included in the Rural Land Stewardship
Area Overlay.
Policy 3.1: ll\'SAs should only include jurisdictional wetlands and submerged lands (e.g.,
natural ponds, lakes, ctc.). The COUI1t~· ma\' want to include man"\11adc surface waters for
water supply as an I-fYSA, but omit man-made surface waters for stormwatcr treatment or
conveyance.
Policy 3.2: Can a jurisdictional wetland function as an FlYSA aod IISA at the same time2
An argument could be prm'ìded, for insrance, that a large cypress strand provides significant
hydrological and ecological benefits. The County may want to consider whethcr this type öf
area descrves additional credit 01' is just "double dipping".
Policy 3.3: \X/RAs should only include surface waters and areas specific:lIly designed for
water supply or storl11water retention. Stonnwater retention should not include jurisdictional
\vetlands from Policy 3.1. While it is commendable to encourage bendits such as
groundwater recharge and enhanced water supply, it is problematic to mix in the objective of
pr<widing wildlife habitat. The County may want to consider creating two sub-dassitications
of \\fR:\s. One with an emphasis on stormwater retention that pro\"idcs little to no wildlife
habitat; and one with watcr supply that could provide significant wildlife benefits while
siml1haneousl~' proyiding for future water nceds. 'rhest' water supply areas could recein'
additional crcdit for pnH'iding wildlife habitat, while stormwatcr retention a\"Cas should not.
Page'¡ of I)
&I
Policy 3.8: Credits should be linked to State 01' Federal permits. It should be encouraged
that wildlife crossings and road crossings occur only at the narrowest point or where a field
road already exists. \Xietland crossings should have \\'ildlif(~ crossings for wetland- and
upland-dependent wikUifc; and a fence to funnel them to the crossing, which should be
included in any transportation improvements.
Policy 3.9 and Policy 3.10: \,\'RAs for stormwatct' rct(~ntion should not be encouraged as
habitat (see Policy 3.3).
Policy 3.12: This policy establishes the public benefn of the SSAs. rr includes language that
precludes the County from ever condemning land within :HlY desibtnated SS.\. While at this
time there may be no imentions of such action, this language appears to be an attempt to
bind future County Commissions from initiating one of their statutory authorities. The
County Attorney should consider the legal consequences of this policy and advise the
Commission accordingly.
Policies for Objective 4: Establish policies to accommodate future population growth
through sustainable development patternst while discouraging urban sprawl, providing for
the utilization of innovative land use planning techniques and promoting economic
diversification through establishment of Stewardship Sending Areas and corresponding
Stcwardship Receiving Areas.
Policy 4.'1: This policy establishes the basis for planning innovation to achieve sustainable
forms of denlopment within the RLSA O\'erlay. Specifically, the policy requites a
functional mix of uses, interconnecrivity and multi-modes of transportation within the SR.\s.
Fo\1l' forms of dcyelOpment arc provided, and each form is referenced to specitic policies.
The four forms are: Towns, Villages, Hamlets and Compact Runtl Development (CIU)).
Hamlets :lI1d CRDs may not be consistent with Policy 4.1, as discussed below.
\\'hile the TO\\'11 form could be large enough to begin to create ~l sustainable community
(with schools, retail, personal services, and offtce or employment centers, ete,), Hamlets (40-
IOU acres) and CRUs (less th:1l1100 acres) arc too small to create much more than large-lot
development or clustered residential development. A t density ranges of one-half to 2
du/acre (established in the Stcwardship LDRs), good design suggests that these forms of
development should be inc01vorated into Town or Village communities at their edges to
setTe as a transition tomral or agricultural lands.
'rbe CRD form that may be larger than 1 00 acres appears to be intended for resort (transient
residents arc allowed) or employment de,·c\opmcnt. Example of eco-tourist and research
facilities arc given, but these are clearly examples only; golf tcsorts and isolated industrial
buildings and parks could also be a 110\\'cd. The County should examine what type of
dc"elopment is desired under this form, and ins crt appropriarc language to assure
coufonni¡-\".
The fourth (b'elopmenr form, which is "Village," is comprised of 100 to 1,000 acl'Cs. ,\t
close to 1.000 acres, one or two sizeable "illages combined could suqmss the minimum
critical population to prc)\'ide a sustainable de"clopmem scenario. However. villages of onl\-
Page S of 9
II
a few hundred acres are unlikely to ensure a sustainable community or neighborhood, and
would likel~" resemble a t)' 1ical suburban deydopmcm.
Villages, Ihmlets and CRDs, which are rclati\'cly low density (one-half to 2 duíacrc) and at
¡he size the~" are defmed, may be inconsistent with the :\mendmem's Objective 4 and
SectÍon 163.3177(11 )(d) r:'.s. which require .Î//.flailltlblt' development. i\lo 'e spccificall~', the
Amendment's Policy 4.1 calls for a H... functional mix or use, interconnectivity and multi·
modes of transportation," which is difficult to cnsure in a smallcr-sized development of this
son.
Policy 4,5: This polic~" establishes the basis for SIL\ designation. .\ suggested
impt'()"emenr to this policy is to require the apprond of a i\1aster Plan for an entire SR:\ in
conjunction prior to the approval of the SR,\.
Policy 4.6: ,\ positive and essemial feature of the Amendment, this policy directs the
Count\' to adopt specific regulations for the RLSAs four development forms Crowns,
Villages, Hamlets and CRDs). If the County establishes a minimum size for SIC\s, the
Hamlet and CRl) forms could be eliminated and the basis for development within an SR"
would become similar to developments guided by the regulations of the County's Towns,
Villages and Countryside (rvC) Amendment.
Policy 4.6.1: This policy establishes the guiding principles for de\"clopmcm of Towns
within an SR;\. The minimum size of a Town is set at 1,000 acres; the maximum size is set at
5,000 acres. The principles establish a good basis for developing LDRs to guide
implementation of the Comprehensive Plan Goal, Objectivcs and Policies. Ho\\'(~\'er, there
arc no minimum or maximum d(~nsities pro\"Ìded in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. It
appears that this has been left to be established with the Stewardship LDRs, which pro\'Íd(~s
I ,,2.5du/acre in ·l'owns. It is recommended that the densities be established in the
Comprchensin.· Plan, with the LDRs reflecting the densities and pro\"Ìding thc standards for
meeting the rC<luired densities.
Policy 4.6.2: This policy establishes the guiding principles for development of Villages. The
minimum size of ~¡ Village is set at 100 acres; the maximum size is set at 1,000 acres. Again,
there are no minimum or maximum densities for Villages provided in the Comprehensive
Plan .\mendment. The proposed Development Regulations for the RLSA which correspond
to this :\ mendmcl1I esmblish densities of 1 to 2 duj acre in Villages, but densities should be
established in the Comprchensi\"e Plan Amendment.
\\/hi1e the principles prO\'ided arc desirable, it will be very difficult to develop a 100-500 acre
Village that can fulfill the principles stated. ,\ 200-unit development (tOO acres at 2du/ acre),
which is isolated from other development, is unlikely to support sufficicnt retail, office or
cÎ\-ic land uses that will be sustainable frol11 a market or business perspcctin~, ¡\ 200-unÎt
development can not support a school, ¡he traditional focal point and identity of a
neighborhood, so it is likeJr that children will be bused. Finall~', if a \'iUage is too small, it will
be difficult to provide a range of housing types and prices, including affordable housing.
Page () of <)
II
For comparison, 500 acres is thl..~ 111UlImUm size for a \'iUagc outside the Urban SelTice
Boundary which was recently adopted in the County's new 'I'VC development policy. This
size is more likely to result in s\lstainable developmenr pfltterns and form.
Policy 4.6.3: This policy establishes the guiding principles for development of -Iamlets.
Hmnlcts are intended to be 40-100 acres in size. As stand alone developments, it is difficult
to acknowledge this form of development as anything but an innO\'ati\'e form of sprawl. The
density of one-half to 2 du/ acre provided in the proposed Development Regulations would
yield a maximum development of 2()O units find could be flS few flS 20 units. This form of
development typicallv yields more vehicle-miles tra\'cled and road demands, since trips for
sel"\"ices, school t ravel, and commuting to work will be forced to incfCflsc.
\,\lith large lots; welh and septic tanks will be the norm, and are, therefore, not generaU~'
regarded as the most el1\"ironmenmUy susn\Înable form of development. .For those that
desire this form of de\'(~lopmenr, and to provide larger lots as part of a divt~rse housing
stock, "Hamlet" type development can and should be provided as part of, and at the edges
of, Town and Village dcvelopments. The CO\l11ty should reconsider the necessity of having a
"Hamlet" land use designation.
Policy 4.6.4: This policy establishes the guiding principles fOl" dcvelopment of CRDs. Thc
same concerns that apply to Ham.lets, abovc apply to CRDs. The COllnty should reconsider
the necessity of having a "Compact Rural De\'c!opmcm" land use designation.
Policy 4.12: This policy addresses transportario!1 issues with an emphasis on ro:lds. The
policy requires a transportation impact assessmcnt be provided with an :lpplication for :\11
SIL\. The assessment should be based upon a more derailed !\laster Plan for the emirI..' SIL\
which is submitted as part of the application.
The proponionHte fflir share standard, though it has been adopted 111 statc law, IS nor
recluired by local jurisdictions until December 1,2006.
Policy 4.13: '['his policy l'Cquires an SRA to pro\'ide adecluate ìnfrasrnlctttre concurrent with
development. It includes provisions that would allow septic tanks and wells to be used
within Hamlets and CRDs of less than 100 acres. Instead of promoting this form of utility
service, the COllnty should consider discouraging additional usage of potable wells and septic
s~'stcms to promote good land stewardship. \\!ithin SRA communities, sewer and water
systems should be required.
Policy 4.16: l11is policy ree]uires initial and continual fiscal modeling to \'crify that
de\'clopmem in the SRA is fiscally positi\"(: or neutral to St. Lucie County. The policy should
I:Cc uirc that the flrstfiscal model be run by the applicant prior to appr(wal of the SIC\. The
model should be based upon the Master Plan for the SI~-\.
Policy 4.18: I t is unclear how seycn credits arc derived. The credir system seems to be
wOfk~;ble, but deSCITes explanation as to its derivation. .
Policy 4.20: This policy addresses the use of HYSA, H.\S and \X!IC\ as counting toward
open space if cont:ìf,Yuous to an SRA.Thc magnitude: of these areas could preclude additional
Page 7 of I)
.
open space within the SR_\ for publ.ic purpose (parks, recreation). The County should
consider making this policy pennissive rather than mandatory, as in "...may count toward the
thirty-five percent open space..." rather than "... shan count..." Reexamination of this
policy on a casc-by-casc basis may be appropriate.
Policy 4.23: This policy st~\tes that the County will provide adjacent jurisdictions the
opportunity to review Stewardship Development Regulations and standards. Concomitant
development regulations haY(: been proposed and arc under review. Have Indian River,
Okccchobcc and Marrin Counties provided comments on the proposed Stewardship LDRs?
lntergm'ernmental coordination mechanisms such as this policy arc Í1npomuH tools to
promote good planning, and should be encouraged. Further, thÜ; policy should be
considered essential since an RLS:\ development could be of a large size and scale; and the
IUS\ law docs not require the Development of Regional Impact review in all cast~s (a
process designed to allow constructive input from and promote coordinalÍon with
neighboring gm·ernments).
Policy 4.24: 'fhis polin requires the provision of water reusc systems in all SRAs, which is
a commendablc goal, however the standard is weak since it is only "to the extent lit is
available." This standard could be strengthened by the County in order to appreciably
increase the installation of reuse water systems, an enyironmentally friendly practice.
Further, since reuse sysrcms will not occur where septic systems are permitted; the County
should consider prohibiting septic systems and wells in SR:\s.
This policy would be improved by rccluiring or encouraging the use of xeriscaping.
D. Other Observations
Definition of HSA should be redefmed to remove the word "preferred." \\/ho is to say what
habitat is preferred? The County may want to use the stare and federal government's defmitions of
Listed Species habitat. Saying Listed Species habitat, as defined by the F\'(!C and USF\X'S, should
suffice.
Definition of HYSA should specify jurisdictional wetlands and omit manmadt surface waters for
stormwftter retention.
Definition of Listed Species Habitat Indices there appears to be a typing error, üs it is not clear
what is meant by "state wading bird foraging?"
Definition of WRA should omit jurisdiction~¡\ wetlands.
RLSA Figure 2: Listed Species should be modified to be geared towards whole County (e.g.,
c:uacara/snail kite habitat given the highest index, there arc other species in the County that are just
as important)
RLSA Figure 2: Soils Surface/Water Indices arc confusing. Specific soil senes should be
identificd, \X"hat i$ a Xeric knoll, sand depression or flats soils?
Page 8 of 9
II
LIST OF ACRONYMS
CR D: Compact Rural Development
DO,\CS: ¡:Imida Deparuncnt of Agriculture and Consumer Selyices
DRI: Dc\"Clopment of Regional Impact
:Ll'.\I: Future Land L'se I\lap
F\'\'C: Florida Fish nnd \X!ildlifc Conservation Commission
HS;\: IIabirar Stewardship Area
11'r"SA: IIydrologic Stewardship ,\rea
LDC: St. Lucie County Land DevelopmetH Code
LDR: St. I,lIcie CoutHyLand Deyelopment Regul:1tions
NRI: Natural Resource Index
IU.S,\: Rural Land Stewardship Area
SFWMD: South F:lorida \X/ater Management District
SR.\: Stcwardship Receiving Area
SS.\: Stewardship Sending ¡\rea
'IYC: Towns, Villages, and Countryside
W.\ID: Water I\1anagcl11ent District
\VRA: \'\/aterRetention Area
Page 9 of9
.
.
ST. L
COUNTY
CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE
......~..
Sr. LUCIE COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
2200 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
Phone: (772) 595-9999
Fax: (772) 461-9084
PORr Sr. LUCIE VISITOR CENTER
Municipal Complex
Building A, Room 188
Port St. Lucie
Phone: (772) 807-9196
Fax: (772) 807-9790
SEVEN GABLES HOUSE VISITOR CENTER Cc:
482 N. Indian River Drive
Fort Pierce
Phone: (772) 468-9152
Fax: (772) 468-9826
www.SrLUCIECHAMBER.ORG
INFo@SrLUCIECHAMBER.ORG
:iF;
July 6, 2006
Doug Coward, Chairman
St. Lucie Board of County Commissioners
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
RE: Rural Lands Stewardship Program
Dear Chairman Coward:
On behalf of the St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce, I am
writing to express our support of the Adams Ranch Stewardship
Program being proposed in St. Lucie County.
We believe that this program will benefit Adams Ranch and help
preserve the future of agriculture in our county.
We admire the Adams family and their commitment to St. Lucie
County and the agriculture community. We urge you to help preserve
the rural lands of St. Lucie County and provide a way for the Adams
family to continue their cattle ranching operations and the stewardship
of their land for future generations.
Sincerely,
~ t{/ ßÆ
Linda W. Cox
Executive Director
Commissioner Chris Craft
Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson
Commissioner Paula Lewis
Commissioner Joseph Smith
Doug Anderson, SLC Administrator
Bob Nix, SLC Growth Management Director
Alto "Bud" Adams, Jr.
ORDINANCE NO. 06-031
AN ORDINANCE OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADOPTING
AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATING TO
THE CREATION OF A RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP AREA
(RLSA) OVERLAY ZONE WHICH SHALL APPLY TO PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED WITHIN AREA MORE SPECIFICALLY
DEPICTED IN EXHIBIT "A" HERETO, WHICH AMENDMENTS ARE
ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "B" HERETO; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND OTHER
AGENCIES AS REQUIRED BY LAW; PROVIDING FOR
ADOPTION; PROVIDING FORAN EFFECTIVE DATE; PROVIDING
FOR ADOPTION; AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION
WHEREAS, the 81. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners (the "Board") has
prepared a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to establish a Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA)
Overlay Zone to apply to property depicted within Exhibit A attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, the Board recommended approval fortransmittal of the proposed Rural Land
Stewardship Area (RLSA) Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Florida Department of
Community Affairs; and
WHEREAS, the Board has transmitted the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the RLSA
to the Florida Department of Community Affairs; and
WHEREAS, on December 30,2005, the Florida Department of Community Affairs provided
Objections, Recommendations, and Comments regarding the proposed RLSA Comprehensive Plan
Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Board has responded to the Objections, Recommendations, and Comments
with certain changes to the proposed RLSA Amendment that are reflected herein; and
WH EREAS, the adoption of the RLSA Amendment and its implementation by the adoption of
land development regulations shall serve to further guide land use and development within the
County, so that the public health, welfare and safety is protected and rural agricultural and
environmental resources of the County are further enhanced, promoted and protected from
impairment; and
WHEREAS, the Rural Land Stewardship Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment has
received public input and participation through public hearings before the Local Planning Agency
and the Board in accordance with Section 163.3181, Florida Statutes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
confirmed.
Section 2. Adoption of the Rural Land Stewardship Area Comprehensive Plan
Amendment. The Board hereby adopts the Rural Land Stewardship Area Comprehensive Plan
Amendment, attached as Exhibit B hereto, which amendment shall apply to that property generally
located in the Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay Zone as more specifically depicted in Exhibit A
hereto.
Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable
and if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall for any reason be held to be
invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections,
sentences, clauses, and phrases of this Ordinance but they shall remain in effect, it being the
legislative intent that this Ordinance shall stand notwithstanding the invalidity of any part.
Section 4. Transmittal. The County Growth Management Director is hereby directed to
ensure that this Ordinance and all necessary supporting data and analysis and other relevant
documents are forwarded to the Florida Department of Community Affairs and other agencies in
accordance with Section 163.3184(3), Florida Statutes.
Section 6. Effective Date. The effective date of the comprehensive plan amendments
shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration
Commission finding the amendments in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(1)(b),
Florida Statutes, whichever is applicable.
Recitals Adopted. Each of the above stated recitals is hereby adopted and
Section 6.
Adoption.
After motion and second, on second hearing and adoption, the vote on this ordinance was as
follows:
Chairman Doug Coward XXX
Vice Chairman Chris Craft XXX
Commissioner Joseph E. Smith XXX
Commissioner Paula A. Lewis XXX
Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson XXX
Section 7.
Codification.
day of
2006.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Deputy Clerk
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
BY:
County Attorney
Board of County Commissioners Review:
07/11/06
File Number PA-05-006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Board of County Commissioners
FROM:
Michael Brillhart, Strategy and Special Projects Director
DATE:
July 5, 2006
SUBJECT:
Application of Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart as agents for Family Lands
Remembered LLP to amend the adopted St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan to establish a Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay
Zone; establish certain goals, objectives and policies within the
Comprehensive Plan; and amend the future land use designation for
certain parcels of land in unincorporated St. Lucie County.
BACKGROUND
In July of 2001, the State of Florida made revisions to its Rural Land Stewardship Areas (RLSA)
legislation (F.S. 163.3177 11 (d)). The revisions allow eligible rural lands in excess of 10,000
acres to participate in a county approved RLSA program. The purpose of this program is to
promote rural land sustainability efforts through protection of natural resources and agriculture
lands by creating a RLSA Overlay Zone on the County's future land use map. This process is
accomplished through a rural stewardship comprehensive plan amendment that identifies a
Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) to be protected from future development activity and
designates a Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) where development credits can be transferred.
A brief summary of the sequence of events for establishing a RLSA program through a
comprehensive plan amendment process includes:
1. amend the Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future
Land Use Map (FLUM). This is accomplished by establishing rural land stewardship
Goals, Objectives, and Policies (GOPs) within the FLUE relating to an RLSA Overlay
Zone and by creating an SSA and SRA land use designation within the Overlay Zone. A
transfer credit matrix will determine the amount of acres that can be transferred between
the SSA and SRA. An applicant must submit an SSA and SRA application to begin this
credit transfer as part of the receiving area development review process
2. adopt implementing land development regulations within the County's Land
Development Code (Section 4.05.00) that approves the transfer of credits from the
sending area to receiving area and regulates development activities for both the
sending area and the receiving area.
3. approve the assignment of transferable credits and the development order for the
July 11, 2006
Page 2
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
receiving area. Review a formal application of the receiving area development plan,
possibly in the form of a DRI application, and adopt a development order for the
proposed receiving area site plan. The proposed "Cloud Grove" property located along
Minute Maid Road just north of the Florida Turnpike is identified as the primary receiving
area and will be processed through a DRI application.
COMMENTS
Staff has reviewed the proposed amendments as reflected within this particular RLSA
comprehensive plan amendment application. Review criteria for the RLSA program and its
proposed rural sending and receiving area(s) as stipulated in F.S. 163.3177 11(d) include the
following:
a. compatibility with surrounding uses
b. identify 25 year population projections for the rural land stewardship area
c. acceptance of an environmental habitat credit matrix for the sending area
d. the provision for adequate water and sewer services for the RLSA boundary
e. the development of acceptable design standards for roadways within the RLSA to ensure
the separation between the rural and urban service area boundaries
f. the requirement for mixed use development within the proposed receiving area reflective of
a rural village settlement pattern
The following comments and concerns summarize the attached staff comments provided within
this report:
1. This amendment application does not represent the application for site specific
development of the Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) at this time. A more stringent
review of a proposed receiving area site plan/DRI will occur at some time after the
County has approved the SRA application prior to DRI application review and approval.
2. At some time when an official DRI site development application for the SRA "Cloud
Grove" property is submitted to the County, a more detailed analysis on road/traffic
circulation, water and sewer service, and open space management must occur.
REVIEW BY THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
At its September 1 sl meeting, the Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed the Adams Ranch
Stewardship plan amendment application for consistency with State statutes. By a vote of 4 to
3, the Commission approved the motion to forward the plan amendment to the Board of County
Commissioners for review and approval with a recommendation of transmittal to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs. There was a recommendation presented at this meeting that
a consulting firm review and analyze the proposed land development regulations for consistency
with the proposed goals, objectives and policies for this program and their potential impacts to
the affected properties within the Overlay Zone.
On June 8, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a workshop to review the proposed
land development regulations. The proposed regulations (attached as Exhibit B under Agenda
July 11, 2006
Page 3
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Item #2) have been revised to include modifications requested and recommended by the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners continue this public hearing until
August 14, 2006 at 6:00 p.m.
ATTACHMENTS
RLSA Overlay Zone (Exhibit A)
Ordinance No. 06-031
Staff comments
EAC comments
Letters of Support
Transmittal letter dated October 11, 2005
Legal ad for BOCC review
p & Z Commission minutes
~
.....
c:
::)
o
Ü
CD
"0
::)
-J
......
en
!
~
t
EXHIBIT A
(I)
"Cns
c ..~ ~
ns~ns
..J<e-
_ L.
I! .8- ~
~.co
0:::(1)_
,,"E<e
G)ns0
(I)~..J
OQ)O:::
Q.... -
00
s;.
D..
z~
A"
~I
~I
.~ :
!!~
~l
I:
~
~
~
2!
1
3
Jf¡un~ øaqoq:Jaa~O
Il)
o
o
N
cD
...
êii
::I
0)
~
1:1
!!?
ttI
Q,
!!?
Q,
Q,
ttI
::E
t
<.;)
~
~
;;
.3
..
;)
ORDINANCE NO. 06-031
AN ORDINANCE OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADOPTING
AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATING TO
THE CREATION OF A RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP AREA
(RLSA) OVERLAY ZONE WHICH SHALL APPLY TO PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED WITHIN AREA MORE SPECIFICALLY
DEPICTED IN EXHIBIT "A" HERETO, WHICH AMENDMENTS ARE
ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "B" HERETO; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND OTHER
AGENCIES AS REQUIRED BY LAW; PROVIDING FOR
ADOPTION; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; PROVIDING
FOR ADOPTION; AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION
WHEREAS, the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners (the "Board") has
prepared a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to establish a Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA)
Overlay Zone to apply to property depicted within Exhibit A attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, the Board recommended approval for transmittal of the proposed Rural Land
Stewardship Area (RLSA) Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Florida Department of
Community Affairs; and
WHEREAS, the Board has transmitted the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the RLSA
to the Florida Department of Community Affairs; and
WHEREAS, on December 30, 2005, the Florida Department of Community Affairs provided
Objections, Recommendations, and Comments regarding the proposed RLSA Comprehensive Plan
Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Board has responded to the Objections, Recommendations, and Comments
with certain changes to the proposed RLSA Amendment that are reflected herein; and
WHEREAS, the adoption ofthe RLSA Amendment and its implementation by the adoption of
land development regulations shall serve to further guide land use and development within the
County, so that the public health, welfare and safety is protected and rural agricultural and
environmental resources of the County are further enhanced, promoted and protected from
impairment; and
WHEREAS, the Rural Land Stewardship Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment has
received public input and participation through public hearings before the Local Planning Agency
and the Board in accordance with Section 163.3181, Florida Statutes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals Adopted. Each of the above stated recitals is hereby adopted and
confirmed.
Section 2. Adoption of the Rural Land Stewardship Area Comprehensive Plan
Amendment. The Board hereby adopts the Rural Land Stewardship Area Comprehensive Plan
Amendment, attached as Exhibit B hereto, which amendment shall apply to that property generally
located in the Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay Zone as more specifically depicted in Exhibit A
hereto.
Section 3. Severabilitv. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable
and if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall for any reason be held to be
invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections,
sentences, clauses, and phrases of this Ordinance but they shall remain in effect, it being the
legislative intent that this Ordinance shall stand notwithstanding the invalidity of any part.
Section 4. Transmittal. The County Growth Management Director is hereby directed to
ensure that this Ordinance and all necessary supporting data and analysis and other relevant
documents are forwarded to the Florida Department of Community Affairs and other agencies in
accordance with Section 163.3184(3), Florida Statutes.
Section 5. Effective Date. The effective date of the comprehensive plan amendments
shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration
Commission finding the amendments in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(1)(b),
Florida Statutes, whichever is applicable. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the
Administration Commission, these amendments may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of
a resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs, Division of Community Planning, Plan Processing Team. An
adopted amendment whose effective date is delayed by law shall be considered part of the adopted
plan until determined to be not in compliance by final order of the Administration Commission.
Then, it shall no longer be part of the adopted plan unless the Board adopts a resolution affirming its
effectiveness in the manner provided by law.
Section 6.
Adoption.
After motion and second, on second hearing and adoption, the vote on this ordinance was as
follows:
Chairman Doug Coward
Vice Chairman Chris Craft
Commissioner Joseph E. Smith
Commissioner Paula A. Lewis
Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson
xxx
XXX
XXX
XXX
XXX
Section 7.
Codification.
Provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated in the Code of Ordinances of St. Lucie
County, Florida, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other
appropriate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish
such intention; provided, however, that Sections 3 through 7 shall not be codified.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 1th day of
July.
2006.
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Deputy Clerk
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
BY:
County Attorney
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
NOTICE OF INTENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie
County, Florida, will consider County Ordinance No. 06-031 which would provide for the
adoption of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment relating to the establishment of the Rural Land
.
Stewardship Area Overlay Zone. A public hearing will be held before the St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners on Tuesday, the 11th of July, 2006 at 6:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard in the St. Lucie County Commission Chambers at the
St. Lucie County Administration Building Annex, Third Floor, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort
Pierce, Florida. Matters affecting your personal and property rights may be heard and acted
upon. All interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written comments received
in advance of the public hearing will also be heard.
Copies of the proposed ordinance may be obtained from the County Attorney's Office,
St. Lucie County Administration Building Annex, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida,
34982. Amendments to the Ordinance may be made at the public hearing.
If any person decides to appeal any decision made with respect to any matter
considered at the meetings or hearings of any board, committee, commission, agency, council
or advisory group, that person will need a record of the proceedings and that, for such
purpose, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record
should include the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the
request of any party to the proceedings, 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.
The title of this Ordinance is:
ORDINANCE NO. 2006-031
THIS NOTICE EXECUTED and dated this 29th day of June, 2006
Submitted by:
Daniel S. McIntyre
County Attorney
PUBLISH DATE: July 1, 2006
PUBLISHER: The Tribune; Port St. Lucie News
TYPE AD: Legal Ad
PROOF TO: St. Lucie County Attorney's Office
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Florida 34982
BILL TO: Board of County Commissioners
Acct. No. 11504098
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Florida 34982
June 21,2006
Page 3
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Land Development Regulations
COUNTY STAFF COMMENTS
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning Division
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Michael Brillhart, Strategy and Special Project Manager
FROM:
Diana Waite, Planner III
DATE:
August 23, 2005
SUBJECT:
Rural Land Stewardship Area
The following comments are based on my review of the subject amendments.
. Pursuant to Florida Statute Chapter 163.3177(11)(d)(4)(a) the application is to provide a
process for the implementation of innovative planning and development strategies which
provide for a functional mix of land uses, including adequate available workforce housing,
including low, very-low and moderate income housing for the development anticipated in the
receiving area and which are applied through the adoption by the local government of
zoning and land development regulations applicable to the rural land stewardship area. A
method was not found that will result in providing adequate workforce house, including low,
very low and moderate income housing in the SRA as required under Chapter
163.3177(d)(c)?
. To ensure that SRA residents have open space and recreation areas close to their homes,
open space will comprise a minimum of 35% of the gross acreage of an individual SRA
Town, Village or CRD or Hamlet over 100 acres. The proposed SRA Characteristic Chart
(Attachment E proposed LDC Section 4.12.07 1.1) reduces Recreation & Open Space to a
minimum of 1 % of gross acres within an Hamlet or CRD 100 acres or less in size. These
smaller developments would not meet the County's LOS for community parks facilities
requiring 5 acres/1000 residents in the unincorporated county.
Based on the 2000 Census persons per household of 2.47 and the maximum dwelling units
allowed within a CRD or Villages 100 acres or less, the resultant population estimate for a
100 acre development would be 494 persons. A minimum of 2.47 acres per 100 gross acres
should be provided to meet recreation and open space level of service standards set forth in
Policy 9.1.1.1.
June 21, 2006
Page 4
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Land Development Regulations
· Natural Soil Landscape Positions were utilized for the projects soil survey, but the map was
not included within the application. Please include the soil map.
· A surface water management permit for the V Bar 2 Ranch was submitted, rather than
Adams Ranch.
· The application includes a map of Wetland Categories, I, II and III which are intended to be
those wetlands identified in Conservation Objective 8.1.14.1 of the County's Comprehensive
Plan. The map includes the stormwater retention area on Cloud Grove as one of these
wetlands. The retention area does not meet the criteria for designation as a Wetland I, II or
III.
· Policy 2.5: "Agriculture is a benefit to St. Lucie County as it provides open space, recharges
groundwater, provides employment and conserves and protects floodplains. If agriculture
activities are protected and conserved by designating agriculture lands as an SSA,
Agriculture Stewardship Credits shall be granted as specified in the LDC Stewardship
District. In addition, .5 Credits per acre shall be given for each 10 years thereafter that the
land continue to remain in an agricultural production."
Comment: Pursuant to Policy 1.5, SSA designation requires a perpetual restrictive
easement to be recorded for each SSA that runs with the land. Policy 2.5 would
provide additional dwelling units in perpetuity. At a minimum residential density is
removed from the property designated SSA. It seems inconsistent to grant additional
credits, in perpetuity, that translate into additional residential density. Please explain.
· The last paragraph of Policy 3.6 and entire Policy 3.7 should be eliminated. It appears
to be redundant in that SSAs provide for the removal of layers that will be specified
through the SSA designation process. If Ag1 or Ag2 uses are not removed through a
SSA designation then those uses can continue as allowed under existing regulations.
Alternative language: The property's exiting zoning shall continue to apply to the land
within the RLSA until such a time as the land or a portion of the land becomes
designated as an SSA or SRA. Designation of an SSA or SRA occurs only upon the
request of the property owner and upon the adoption of a resolution by the SLC
BOCC.
· Policy 3.8 - Recommendation: Provide credits only to those that have submitted a
restoration plan and/or obtained permits required to a carry out the proposed
restoration. Restoration credits could be incrementally allocated to ensure that the
restoration has taken place and is successful.
· On Attachment C, indicate the acres of each NRI'ndex Value.
· Please provide data and analysis that indicates the maximum density/intensity that
could be generated as a result of this amendment. Also, can the maximum credits
generated within the RSLA be accommodated within the potential sending areas?
June 21,2006
Page 5
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Land Development Regulations
**********************************************************************
Attachment B Proposed Amendments to the test of the St. Lucie County Zoning Ordinance
Stewardship Area Overlay.
4.12.01 Definitions
. Context Zones. Areas that establish the use, intensity and diversity within a '-,illage
developed area.
. LDC Section 4.12.06(8)(3) -If the applicant 36Serts demonstrates...., including but not
limited to GonveFsion of Gitrus grove to pasúHe, ...
a.
d. Stewardship Credits 5haII may be authorized
e. ORe Two or more of the following eligibility criteria shall be used in
evaluating an applicant's request for Restoration Stewardship Credits:
v. Land where restoration V'."Ðuk/ improvement environments for reGre3tion
and eGO tourism aGtivities. Land containing Hydric soils that can be
restored to reestablish historic water flows.
June 21, 2006
Page 6
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Land Development Regulations
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning Division
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Michael Brillhart, Strategy & Special Projects Director
FROM:
Sheryl Stolzenberg, Senior Planner
DATE:
August 24, 2005
SUBJECT:
Comments on Rural Stewardship proposal
I have the following comments:
Overall comment:
With any change to a comprehensive plan (even for an overlay), a local government needs to provide data
and analysis showing that there is a need for this specific change. The Rural Stewardship application
identifies that fact that the County is facing development pressures and that agriculture is experiencing
serious problems, but it is not clear that this is enough to support this particular change at this particular
location. At the outset of a rural stewardship application, statute indicates that the local government is to
notify DCA in writing of its intent to designate a rural stewardship (was this done?), and 'describe the basis
for the designation, including the extent to which the rural land stewardship area enhances rural land
values, controls urban sprawl... etc.'
In order to demonstrate that this approach will control sprawl and not simply allow development outside of
an urban services boundary, the County needs to be able to show a need for all the additional development
that appears to be proposed herein. The present population projections contained in the County's plan
don't reflect the need for this additional residential development - in fact, policies in the plan currently state
that the acreage shown on the future land use map are expected to be sufficient for some time to come.
A greater influx of persons is definitely now underway, and the plan needs to be updated - but no current
population estimate or revised projection has been performed. In order to demonstrate the need for the
stewardship, the County and applicant need to demonstrate why all the additional residential units are
required.
Other specific comments:
1. The enabling legislation in Chapter 163 states that a plan amendment designating a rural
stewardship area shall provide for 'criteria for the designation of receiving areas within rural
stewardship areas in which innovative planning and development strategies may be applied.
Criteria shall at a minimum provide for the following: adequacy of suitable land to accommodate
June 21, 2006
Page 7
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Land Development Regulations
development so as to avoid conflict with environmentally sensitive areas, resources and habitats;
compatibility between and transition from higher density to lower intensity rural uses; the
establishment of receiving area service boundaries which provide for a separation between
receiving areas and other land uses within the rural land stewardship area through limitations on the
extension of services; and connection of receiving areas with the rest of the rural land stewardship
area using rural design and rural road corridors.' I am concerned that the policies as specified do
not provide the needed minimum criteria.
a. The Group 4 policies in the Rural Stewardship application are intended to address
criteria for accommodating development, but are so general that 'criteria' cannot be
said to have been provided.
b. For example, Policy 4.7 states that the perimeter of each SRA (Stewardship Receiving
Area) 'shall be designed to provide a transition from higher density and intensity uses
within the SRA to lower density and intensity uses on adjoining property. The edges of
SRAs shall be well defined and designed to be compatible with the character of
adjoining property. Techniques such as, but not limited to setbacks, landscape
buffers... etc.' A better approach would have been to require that SRAs restrict their
most intense and dense uses toward the center, with declining intensity as they
approach the (rural) lands at their boundaries, or to match the abutting uses - if the
abutting use is active agriculture, the edge of the SRA should be active agriculture,
etc. Edges of SRAs might logically be places where farmers markets might locate.
c. Policy 4.9 identifies allowable open space areas within or contiguous to an SRA to
provide a buffer between the SRA and conserved areas. Included among the open
space uses is a golf course, but the use of intensive chemical to create the fairways
raises the question of how compatible this use is with surrounding rural lands, and the
amount of water needed to irrigate a golf course means that a golf course would be
competing directly with agricultural uses for water.
d. Policy 4.10 says that an SRA 'must have either direct access to a County collector or
arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer that has adequate
capacity to accommodate the proposed development in accordance with accepted
transportation planning standards. No SRA shall be approved unless the capacity of
County collector or arterial roads serving the SRA is demonstrated to be adequate in
accordance with the level of service standards established in the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan Transportation element in effect at the time of SRA designation.'
It is not clear how this fits with the statutory requirements that receiving areas are to
connect with the rest of the rural land stewardship area using 'rural design and rural
road corridors.' Also, at present, the County's Transportation Element does have a
level of service for rural roads - it is LOS C. The County's plan also calls for any
development that is outside of the urban service area boundary to become 100%
responsible for the impacts of development. If the rural road expected to serve an SRA
will not be able to meet the adopted LOS of C, will the SRA developer be responsible
for the road improvement - and, if so, will it still be a 'rural road' as required by
statute?
e. Policy 4.11 indicates that SRAs will be required to address adequacy of infrastructure.
Typically, at the plan amendment stage, an analysis is done to determine if other parts
of the comp plan (Le., potable water, sanitary sewer,etc, ) will need to be revised to
support a land use amendment. This is not a concurrency reservation - it is an
analysis to determine whether other plan changes are needed. Performing this
June 21, 2006
Page 8
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Land Development Regulations
g.
analysis requires information on how many housing units or square feet of
nonresidential are anticipated. Since so much of the rural stewardship is kind of a 'first-
come-first-served situation, with applicants seeking designation rather than areas
being idenfied up front as receiving areas, this analysis can't be done until the
development stage when it is too late to make changes in the comp plan. That can be
a critical issue where water is concerned. The County needs, at a minimum, to know
the maximum number of units and square feet that can be allowed overall in the rural
stewardship in order to plan for how much demand will be placed on water supplies,
regardless of who the provider is. The County will be required to specify in its
Conservation Element what the total 'urban' (developed area) demand for water will
be, consistent with the SFWMO Water Supply Plan that will be updated by July 2006.
Again, the issue of population projection assumes great importance here.
Policy 4.12 addresses fiscal impact and indicates that techniques such as Community
Development Districts or Special Districts 'shall be encouraged'. Unless the County
changes its existing policies with respect to provision of service beyond the Urban
Services Boundary, CODs or Special Districts shall need to be reauired.
Policy 4.15 indicates that 'public benefit uses' shall not count toward maximum
acreage limits of the SRAs. One of the public benefit uses listed is municipal golf
course. Since this use will be in direct competition with agricultural uses for water
(unless golf courses are mandated to use grey water), I don't see a golf course in a
rural stewardship as a 'public benefit use.'
f.
2. This may have been addressed, and I simply can't find it - the County would greatly benefit
from having pOlicies in this document that specify which types of areas in the Rural
Stewardship will never be available as receiving areas, and then an analysis of all the
remaining areas to determine the maximum population and employment that could be
anticipated if all other eligible areas apply to be SRAs. This would help the County to
understand exactly how much development might result.
June 21, 2006
Page 9
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Land Development Regulations
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Engineering Division
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Michael Brillhart
FROM:
Ron Harris
DATE:
August 25, 2005
SUBJECT:
Adams Ranch Rural Lands Stewardship
I have the following suggestion for the Section 4.12.07 paragraph "G" sub-paragraph 1 located
on page 31 of the proposed text amendments to the LDC;
"The SRA Plan and SRA Master Plan shall be prepared by an urban planner who possesses an
ACIP certification, together with at least one of the following:"
A. Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Florida.
B. A qualified environmental consultant.
C. A Landscape Architect licensed in the State of Florida.
D. Professional Surveyor and Mapper licensed in the State of Florida.
Considering the magnitude of the project and the numerous boundary and right of way lines
which will be an integral part of the proposed project it is imperative that a Surveyor be included.
This is the only discipline licensed under Florida Statutes with the expertise to create and
determine boundary locations.
I suggest that it shall be mandatory that ALL of the above disciplines be included on the
Development Team.
Sub-Paragraph 2, should include the requirement for the submittal of a Boundary Survey and
Topographic Survey.
I will provide additional comments ASAP.
Ron Harris
June 21,2006
Page 10
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Land Development Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
Environmental Resources Division
MEMORANDUM
*******************************************************************************************************
**
TO:
Michael Brillhart, Strategy & Special Projects Director
FROM:
Environmental Advisory Committee
DATE:
September 16, 2005
RE: Adam's Ranch Rural Lands Stewardship Program
Draft Comprehensive Plan/Land Development Code Amendments
Review materials dated May 2005
*******************************************************************************************************
***
The Environmental Advisory Committee has reviewed the Adams Ranch Rural Lands
Stewardship Program and would like to compliment the Adams Ranch, Family Lands
Remembered, and the rest of the development team involved with the development of this
visioning plan. We support the overall concept of this incentive-based system that
encourages the voluntary protection and private stewardship of natural resources through a
system where the more environmentally valuable the land, and the more uses eliminated,
the greater the number of credits that the landowner can transfer. Particularly, we were
very impressed with the estimate that the majority of the natural communities currently
existing within the 16,466 acre Adam's Ranch are proposed to be preserved.
At our August 18,2005 EAC meeting, Ernie Cox with Gunster Yoakley & Stewart P.A.,
addressed many of the concerns we had about the details of the Comprehensive Plan and
Land Development Code (LDC) amendments to the RLSP. We have outlined below each
of our concerns followed by a summary of Mr. Cox's responses.
First, Mr. Cox explained to the Committee that some of our concerns will not be
addressed until later in the process. He explained that there are really three pieces of
the Stewardship plan. The first is the establishment of the overlay and the creation of
the text in both the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Code. If the
BOCC votes to transmit these amendments, it will then go to the Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) in Tallahassee for their review. The DCA has 60 days to do
their review and they will issue what they call an Objections, Recommendations and
Comments Report. The County then will have 60 days to reconsider the amendments,
consider the comments in the ORC Report, make any revisions that they think need to
be made and then have an Adoption Hearing. The Adoption Hearing should take place
S:IBRILLHARTìRURALLAMDSIRLSA-EACNOTES.DOC
right after the first of the year. If the BOCC approves it at that point, it goes back up to
DCA and they get a chance to find it in compliance. If all this works as planned, the
Comprehensive Plan will be adopted and found in compliance by DCA probably
February or March, 2006. At the time of adoption the BOCC will consider and vote on
the Land Development Code. Mr. Cox informed us that many of our concerns will be
answered by language that will be added to the Land Development Code. Step Two is
going to be the creation of the Stewardship Sending Area, the Stewardship Sending
Agreement and a Stewardship Easement. That is where the credits are created and
restrictions of the use of the property that the easement is going to go on are identified.
Step Three is the Stewardship Receiving Area application, which is essentially the
master plan under the Stewardship Program, for any receiving sites. The Stewardship
Sending Area application and the Stewardship Receiving Area application will probably
be submitted toward the end of this year and this committee will be involved in
reviewing the material in each of those steps before they are considered by the P & Z
and the BOCC.
EAC Comment #1) There are several issues that are not clear with regards to the
water storage, stormwater, water flow patterns.
o Is there an overall water supply plan for the whole watershed? What
is the plan for stormwater movement in general? (i.e.; how and
where will stormwater drain to?) What is proposed final destination?
Will it be kept on-site or outfall into a specific canal?
Mr. Cox's Response: The district is working on a long term water supply plan for the
whole watershed for the area. The creation of the overlay will not change any of the
existing drainage features. Nothing is going to change on the Sending Area, but as the
district constructs the reservoir they will be in close coordination with the Adams Ranch
managers on making sure they are consistent, because there is an ability for Adams
Ranch to hold some water and to do some movement of water in and out of that system
that will be mutually beneficial. The District is going to build a reservoir close to SR 70
on the southern portion of Adams Ranch on the canal. They are not proposing any
changes at all with any of the drainage structures, any of the elevations, any of the
canals, or any of the retention ponds on Adams Ranch.
Currently Cloud Grove has a water permit with the water management district and it
discharges in two locations after treatment (settling). One is by the Turnpike just to the
west of Minute Maid Road and the other is out of the reservoir down under the Turnpike
again to C-25. After that it dumps into the Indian River. Current agriculture owners
test the water as need be and it is monitored in conjunction with their agriculture
operations. At the time of the Stewardship Receiving Area application, detailed
engineering drawings, drainage and retention plans, the locations of the stormwater
ponds, the locations of the culverts, the sizes, the calculations done by the engineer,
detailed plans, and detailed water treatment plans will be submitted. There will be
retention ponds and exfiltration trenches for treatment of water throughout the town.
Those will then be reviewed by the County's engineering staff and SFWMD staff. They
have to have the Master Plan before they start designing that system. Modern
stormwater techniques will be used to first reduce the amount that is coming off, and
S:IBRILLHARì\RURALLAMDSIRLSA-EACNOTES.DOC
second, increase the quality of the water that is coming off the site. It is likely that the
final destinations would stay the same, C-25, but after treatment.
o Are the locations on the Overlay Map the existing locations or
proposed locations? Will this system be planned in specifically
designated areas prior to implementing the credit transfers and be
developed based on that plan or will the location of the system be
based on locating it as a result of where landowners have chosen to
eliminate development rights?
Mr. Cox's Response: The Stewardship Receiving Area on Cloud Grove is going to
involve everything you see in pink and light blue (on map) and will be incorporated in a
system. Nothing is going to change on the Sending Area.
o Will this project result in adding densities to the Indian River Lagoon
Drainage Basin?
Mr. Cox's Response: Yes, the project will result in adding densities to the Indian River
Lagoon.
o Is there a clear plan for the cleaning water before it is discharged?
Will wetlands be used as polishing cells?
Mr. Cox's Response: There will be a clear plan for cleaning water, and we may use
wetlands to help clean the water. It will be in the Stewardship Receiving Area
application. We will be using reuse water for irrigation. We will be working with county
utilities as to whether they would prefer us to do a separate plant or to ultimately be part
of a system that they would do. Once we have a concept design of the town the
engineers are going to start talking with us.
o The information provided stated that the Cloud Grove reservoir will
be managed and enhanced to provide for wildlife. This reservoir has
been identified as Snail Kite critical habitat area; will it be restored to
specifically provide nesting and foraging habitat for the Snail Kite?
What are the specific restoration and management plans for the
reservoir? Will it be used as part of any stormwater system?
Mr. Cox's Response: The Cloud Grove reservoir is going to be restored for the Snail
Kite. Once the property is developed and that reservoir is being used for stormwater
discharge the potential to have Snail Kites should increase. One of the problems is that
the current water elevations are not conducive to snails and so it is not currently utilized
by Snail Kites. The plan will be to look at the whole 640 acres and determine which
areas would be best to be restored, how many acres should be restored, and then
change the elevation. Conceptually, the receiving area for stormwater from the town
will be the reservoir and this plan will work together with the restoration plan. There will
also be some dikes put in to separate stormwater that would be treated from water that
would be utilized for environmental restoration. Mr. Ed Weinberg with EW Consultants,
the environmental consultant is on the RLSP team and has some experience in
restoring Snail Kite habitat. He stated that it is not necessarily a water quality issue as
much as it is a hydroperiod issue to accommodate Snail Kites. It is very important to
provide the circumstances that Apple Snails can breathe, which has to do with
S:IBRILLHARTlRURALLAMDSIRLSA-EACNOTES.DOC
hydroperiod and vegetation, like bullrushes and some of the vegetation density that a
Snail Kite would nest in. Islands for bird rookeries will be constructed as part of the
restoration plan and conceptually he would expect the areas that would be restored
would be closest to the north for a couple reasons. They want to make it not only an
environmental amenity but also passive recreation area. The idea is to go up on the
dike and visit a kiosk with information about what birds are commonly seen in the area
and actually look out with binoculars and see them. Details about where that and a
walking trail around the reservoir would be located will be submitted with the SRA
application. They will also have to go through permit review with the water
management district and coordinated with the Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission
and the US Fish & Wildlife Service. There is a Safe Harbor Provision in the
Endangered Species Act, which essentially says that if you design a plan to attract
species to your property and manage them it is not used against you and you can
manage for those species.
o If a waste water treatment plant is constructed in a SRA, will the use
of recycled waste water be a requirement for irrigation of lawns and
golf courses, etc.? The report states that individual potable water
supply wells and septic systems, limited to a maximum of 100 acres
of any Hamlet or CRD of 100 acres are permitted on an interim basis.
Will there be an amount of time specified for the allowable interim
period before a centralized/decentralized community system is made
available?
Mr. Cox's Response: There are some additional incentives in the growth management
bill that was passed by the governor this past summer that provides for not only use of
grey water recycling, but some additional incentives that are provided with some
funding options to encourage developers and local governments to work together to
come up with alternative water supply plans. As they get into designing not only the
water system, but the wastewater system and stormwater system, they are going to
research all those possibilities. When SLC staff receives the drawings of the water
treatment they will bring it back to EAC. The maximum of 100 acres is an interim basis
as such time as those areas would be larger than that. It is an option, if it is needed.
No specific time period is identified on this. The idea in putting it together is it would be
a maximum 100 acres. There is a size limitation as opposed to a time limitation.
Currently, a builder could go out there and build 5 acre lots on the whole property with
well and septic. The town plan is 5,000 acres with no intention of any interim well and
septic on the property in Phase I. Cloud Grove is 6,000 acres and the town is going to
be about 5,000 acres.
o Who will be responsible for monitoring and managing the
stormwater and wastewater systems? EAC recommends that water
quality is a primary concern with this entity.
Mr. Cox's Response: Monitoring and managing the stormwater/wastewater systems
would likely be a CDD (Community Development District), or similar entity. We agree
with water quality. One of the things we are trying to do in the design of the town is,
although there is not a physical connection with Adams Ranch - this is a stewardship
S:IBRILLHART\RURALLAMDSIRLSA-EACNOTES.DOC
program that involves Adams Ranch, to design and promote the town with the same
preservation objective that we have with the ranch. We are seeing some interesting
things to be done. For instance, the University of Florida is starting to pay attention to
developed areas and starting to do some things on water, wastewater, and vegetation.
We are going to try to incorporate some of those things. Also, if you can use native
vegetation, you will lower you water needs requirement. This is a new way of doing
things, but we think there are some economic reasons in addition to environmental
reasons for doing it and people are becoming more educated about this so they are
now asking for it when they move into a new community.
EAC Comment #2) Policy 1.5 of the Compo Plan Text Amendment states that a
perpetual restrictive easement shall be recorded for each SSA, shall run with the
land and shall be in favor of SLC and one of the other entities listed. EAC
recommends that all conservation easements be dedicated to a third entity. We
would like to suggest Audubon or the Nature Conservancy. What authority will
the grantees have? How active will they be in the oversight or enforcement of
management practices? Also, please clarify if "run with the land" is equivalent to
"in perpetuity". This policy further states that for each SSA, the Stewardship
Agreement will identify the specific land management measures that will be
undertaken and the party responsible. Who will write the Stewardship Agreement
(buyer or seller)? Will SLC, as easement grantees be able to review and approve
of the Stewardship Agreements prior to their acceptance?
Mr. Cox's Response: It will be a perpetual easement. If any property covered by an
easement were to be transferred to someone else, or another entity the easement
would go with it. They are proposing to follow the statutes on who the easements are
granted to. The intent is that one of the grantees would be St. Lucie County. Another
would be the Florida Department of Agriculture, because the Stewardship Sending Area
easement is going to be on Adams Ranch. The grantees will have authority to enforce
the terms of the easement. In general what they are going to be is restrictions on what
can't be done. The Stewardship Agreement will specify the allowed management
activities. The common opinion is that Adams Ranch should continue to do what they
have been doing for many years as they have done it correctly. What we are seeing at
Adams Ranch is the result of a long-term management program that is leading to a gain
in natural habitat, native cover and forest cover. How to ensure that in the future? The
best choice is that the agricultural operation that has been successful at it continues. Is
there a way to guarantee that? We don't know. There certainly does have to be a set
of criteria met, regardless of who is running it. A third party grantee is not needed on
this particular operation because it is going to be a continuing agriculture operation.
Eric Draper, with Audubon, is going to be working with us on creating the plan, but they
would not want to put an easement in favor of an organization that doesn't have as its
mission the continuation of agriculture. All easements will be binding documents
approved by the BOCC. One will have more detailed scientific direction on
management that will be managed by the CDD. There will be a COD to manage the
SRA as opposed to the family, so it will be done differently. The CDD is overseen by its
own board that is responsible for the construction and the maintenance of all the
facilities. Essentially a CDD is a government of its own that has limited geographic
S:\BRILLHAR"T\RURALLAMDS\RLSA-EACNOTES. DOC
responsibilities, but allows you to finance, build and maintain stormwater, internal road,
landscaping, preserve areas. The conditions of approval for the project and criteria
have to be met and the Board has to answer to the project criteria for the county. If the
County says, for instance, this area will be maintained the following way, the CDD is not
maintaining it, the County is able to go in and says you are not meeting your conditions
of approval. Regardless of what mechanism is managing, and same thing goes with
Adams Ranch, the County has the ability to enforce the conditions of approval.
EAC Comment #3) Who will be responsible for the management of the Habitat
Stewardship Areas? Will SLC be responsible for monitoring to ensure proper
management is taking place? EAC recommends annual inspections by the
grantees named on the conservation easements. What is the recourse or
mitigation actions that can be required of a landowner if there are impacts to any
habitat protected under a conservation easement? Will management plans be
reviewed and updated on a periodic basis?
Mr. Cox's Response: Adams Ranch will be responsible for managing the Habitat
Stewardship Areas. There aren't any on Cloud Grove. Annual inspections by the
grantee - the County is going to be one grantee. The grantee would have the ability to
have an inspection whenever the grantee thinks they want one. There are currently
lawyers working on a draft of this agreement that we can work through. The
Stewardship Sending agreement and easement would be reviewed by the County.
Impacts to habitat protected under a conservation easement will be enforceable by the
grantee of the Stewardship agreement. It should be a living document that can be
adapted to the things that arise down the road. There is really good data for what the
baseline condition is, if that baseline changes we need to figure out a way to modify the
agreement
EAC Comment #4) What management activity will be involved in Ag 2
specifically? There is a high incentive to strip everything down to Ag 2. If you
are allowed cattle on the property, will a maximum density be set? Would impacts
to native vegetation allowed under current Agriculture Exemptions be allowed?
Sod farming and concentrated feed lots are very intensive agriculture activities;
EAC recommends they be removed from being allowable uses in Ag 2.
Mr. Cox's Response: Adam's Ranch will evaluate these things as it relates to the
Stewardship Agreement that they are working on. They may consider if sod should
move to Ag 1 instead of Ag 2.
EAC Comment #5) When properties, identified to be SRA's, are developed will
they still be required to mitigate for impacts to habitats per the existing Land
Development Codes?
Mr. Cox's Response: Stewardship Receiving Area would be required to mitigate for
any impacts, if there were any.
EAC Comment #6) The report states that a list of protected species found on the
amended lands has been compiled. Has a map been created identifying the
S:IBRILLHARnRURALLAMDSIRLSA-EACNOTES.DOC
nesting, foraging, burrowing, usage areas by these species to use in the
determination of credits?
Mr. Cox's Response: There are some maps that resulted in putting together
compilation of the black and white map that may be printed in color. They will provide a
color NRI map and we have got a detail data set by species. We really don't have any
nesting sites on the property. The data for each of the species and habitats has been
evaluated to then result in the index map.
EAC Comment #7) Is the Wetland Map FLUMQ9 final? Has any agency (FDEP,
SFWMD, or USACOE) verified the wetland boundaries and whether each wetland
is isolated or connected?
Mr. Cox's Response: We have not done wetland jurisdictional determinations out there
because we don't plan to do any impacting of it, so they are general wetland
boundaries.
EAC Comment #8) How were the values of their land quantified? Please justify
how the matrix was designed and how numerical values were assigned? How
were those values determined? EAC would like assurances that higher than
necessary numeric values are not being assigned to lands that are not high
quality habitats so that if this same matrix is used on other parts of the county in
future TDR projects the value of a truly high quality habitat is not so high that the
density credit awarded does not result in a disproportionate increase in density.
Please identify what the density would be if all the properties were developed
under current zoning versus what the potential maximum density could be if all
possible credits were taken advantage of and transferred to SRA's.
Mr. Cox's Response: The way the credits will work is the main credit areas are: soils,
which is based on the soil survey map; land cover, which is based on the FLUCCS
mapping with greater detail based upon months and months of field work; the listed
species, habitat values on the different pieces; and then the cover to whether it is a
water retention area or a habitat stewardship area or a hydrologic stewardship area.
The hydrologic stewardship area, which is the dark blue on the overlay map was
created using all of the data that was gathered on the property, land use, land cover,
whether it was hydric or not, the soils, the water location, the species, designations, all
this data was gathered and evaluated and re-evaluated, looked at, field checked, and
then Ann Redmond and the Wilson Miller staff tried to evaluate the relative value of
each particular area. Their conclusion was from a land cover/land use from an
environmental perspective if you had four things; native species, hydric, with a special
habitat designation to existing Comp Plan, modernized species value that would get a
higher credit generation value, down to non-native, non-hydric no special habitat low
species value. That is a weighted average based upon how valuable is it. Soils and
surface water based upon what they added from environmental perspective. Listed
species, the more you have the higher credits you receive with Group 1 and 2 being the
federally listed wading birds and then adding Cara Cara and Snail Kites as your most
important species. In addition to species habitat being there they give you an indication
of the strength of the area. That is how the weighting was done. The SRA the water
retention areas had high value followed by the habitat stewardship. The bottom one on
S:IBRILLHARTlRURALLAMDSIRLSA-EACNOTES.DOC
the agriculture, this was in response to discussions with individual commissioners and
watching and looking at the existing Comp Plan the importance of also promoting
continuing agricultural operations and to kind of explain how you get there: if you go up
to the top, where they start talking about removing land use layers, if you remove
residential uses - the 1 for 5 - you generate .4 of a credit. If you remove the
conditional and general uses you get .2 additional. Earth mining and processing
another .2, Ag Group 1.1, Ag Group 2.1 - the way the Ag credit goes is if you only
remove the residential use from a layer you don't get the Ag credit because you can still
do things more intensive than agriculture. If you remove the first three; residential,
general conditional, earth mining, to Ag 1 then you would be eligible for the Ag credit,
because you are basically saying that nothing more intensive than agriculture can ever
be done here. If you went all the way down and said agriculture couldn't be done on
this property, you don't get that 1 credit. The reason for that was to try to put an
incentive in the system for continuing agriculture. From a credit generation perspective
it will generate more credits by leaving it in agriculture then it would be taking it out of
agriculture. This is how you actually get to the credit generation. This is all in a
database and all the data is put in on the GIS. If you are looking at a particular acre,
that acre would score depending on where it fits in this matrix. It is all done on a
computer system and each acre gets a different score. It is an extremely complicated
process that entails a lot of time in gathering the material that goes into the end result.
It is not perfect, but the effective part is the outcome. This is one of the first attempts to
quantify with objectively verifiable data different values of different systems out on the
ground. Stewardship Sending applications must be evaluated, based on specific maps,
what is on the ground and the specific score generations based upon the criteria. EAC
will have an opportunity to review this application and it would ultimately go to the
BOCC.
If you took Cloud Grove and Adams Ranch and you didn't do this program at all and
wanted to divide it up into 5-acre ranchettes, you would put 4,500 5-acre ranchettes on
22,500 acres. Under the program, Adams Ranch will generate about 45,000 credits if
you took every single credit available. In order to entitle an acre of property you need 7
credits. So you divide the 45,000 by 7 you end up with 6,428 acres, if you were to do a
town, which is the most intensive, your minimum would be 6,428 x 2 = 12,800 and
multiple by 3 (6,428 x 3= 19,284) maximum. If you did towns, and I don't expect that
we are all going to do towns that would be your max numbers of units that you would
end up with. We are planning to put a Stewardship Sending Area easement on about
12,000 maybe 12,500 acres of the best environmental areas on Adams Ranch. Not the
citrus grove, not the pasture without hammock, and not all of it because Adams is
retaining some of it, but let's say 12,500 and we are planning on doing a town of 5,000
acres. That is going to take 35,000 credits, which will leave the Adams family with
potentially 10,000 credits they can do something else with, if they wish, or they could
sell it to someone else, if someone else wanted to be in the program in the future. The
proposed town design will be somewhere between 10,000-15,000 units with all the
mixed use that comes with it. That would be in the Stewardship Receiving Area
application. The maximum density would be19,284 if you do all towns, which is most
intensive. If you end up doing hamlets or villages, the maximum densities go down
S:IBRILLHARnRURALLAMDSIRLSA-EACNOTES.DOC
substantially. The North County Charrette plan was 35,000. Once this plan is
established that individuals like the Adams Ranch will want to do their own stewardship
and add acres to it. There are a lot of families here that would want to remain in
agriculture. There will be 10,000 credits remaining on Adams that won't be part of an
SSA that they could do their own SRA or they could sell to someone else that wanted to
do a village.
EAC Comment #9) Will a mass transit plan be developed for the proposed
communities?
Mr. Cox's Response: When the designing main road corridors, for instance the
Turnpike interchange connecting out in the middle of the Indrio Road corridor, certainly
on the part that we have control over, we are going to reserve right-of-way for future
transit - we are not going to build it - but if we don't reserve some right-of-way for it we
are never going to put it in 30 years from now. This continues that in the future we may
use something but cars and we will need more area for transportation.
We have also attached the minutes from the 8/18/05 EAC meeting so that you could
review the entire discussion on the issues outlined above. We appreciate the opportunity
you have given us to review this report and your consideration of the EAC's questions and
concerns and look forward to receiving additional information on this project as it
progresses through its development.
cc: SLC Board of County Commissioners
Planning & Zoning Board
Doug Anderson, SLC Administrator
Faye Outlay, Asst. SLC Administrator
Vanessa Bessey, ERD Director
Family Lands Remembered LLLP
Adams Ranch
Gunster Yoakley & Stewart PA
WilsonMiller, Inc.
EW Consultants, Inc.
S:IBRILLHARTlRURALLAMDSIRLSA-EACNOTES.DOC
June 28, 2006
1111111]
IiWDID
...
St. Lucie County Planning Commission
2300 Virginia Avenue
Ft. Pierce, FL 34982
Received By
JUL 3 2006
RE: Adams Ranch
C:;rowih Management
Dear Commission Members:
1000 Friends of Florida, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, growth management advocacy organization,
wishes to comment on your consideration of the proposed rural land stewardship area for Adams
Ranch. We have participated in the development of this program through the Legislature, and
be1ieve it can offer viable alternatives to traditional methods of rural land development,
continuation of agricultural land uses, and open space protection. As a new program, however,
care should be taken to apply this new concept appropriately in the context of the different
circumstances each local government faces when asked to enter into such programs. Our
comments are based on the June 12,2006, Overlay Goals, Objectives and Policies document, and
the June 16, 2006, Overlay Zone LDRs document.
We have had the privilege of touring the Adams Ranch, and came to experience first hand the
fine stewardship and personal pride the family shows in managing this unique piece of Florida.
The program as proposed certainly offers both a means of protecting (I) a way of life now and
into the future, and (2) some ofthe best example of native habitat and vegetation in St. Lucie
County.
In our opinion, several substantive issues should be resolved either before approval for this
proposal is given or before any additional projects of this type are considered. Those issues
include (1) the context in which Adams Ranch, and Cloud Grove, fit into future development
patterns in the rural part ofthe county; (2) the relationship of this project to the just approved
TVC amendment in the northeastern part of the county; and (3) the appropriate amount of
development that not only can be accommodated at Cloud Grove, but also the remaining
development rights either reserved to Adams Ranch or made available for other development
elsewhere in the county. These points are further discussed below.
First, we believe the maximum potential offered by the rural land stewardship process can best
be realized when the local government has taken the time to discuss, with the public and
landowners, how the overall rural development pattern is expected to develop in the future. Is
Adams Ranch the only project you expect? Should there, or could there, be four, five, ten or 20
such projects? How much growth and development is the county prepared to accept in the rural
area? Are you prepared to authorize additional development rights for keeping land in
agricultural production? What portion of your projected population growth over the next 20
years should be accommodated in rural areas instead of inside the urban service boundary?
What demands will various development proposals place on water resources, especially
Everglades restoration projects? If these questions can be answered, we think it becomes easier
to judge the merits of Adams Ranch.
1000 Friends of Florida . PO.Box 5948 . Tallahassee, FL 32314-5948 · phone 850.222.6277 · fax 850.222.1117 · www.1 OOOfriendsofflorida.org
Board of Directors . Lester Abberger, President, Tim Jackson, Vice President, F Gregory Barnhart, Secretary, Stephen Cutright, Treasurer
Kathy Castor, Robert S. Davis, J. Allison DeFoor, Joel Embry, Mike Garretson, Robert W. Hopkins, Allen N. Jelks, Jr., Alex M. Jernigan, Ralph B. Johnson, Curtis Kiser,
James C. Nicholas, Steve Pfeiffer, Sibille Hart Pritchard, C. Allen Watts, Nathaniel P. Reed, Chairman Emeritus, John M. DeGrave, President Emeritus
Charles G. Pattison, AICP, Executive Director
S1. Lucie County Planning Commission
June 28, 2006
Page Two
Second, the Towns, Villages and Communities (TVC) amendment was just approved, with
certain credits and bonuses, including design standards, open space requirements, and many
other innovative features. How do you know how many towns, villages, hamlets and/or compact
rural developments should be authorized, 7inot only for this project but remaining rural areas? Is
there any reason that the rural lands stewardship project should have a completely different set of
standards? If the county was comfortable with those requirements, is there a need to "reinvent
the wheel"? To the extent that Cloud Grove is to be a well designed community, why should it
not be required to meet the codes and incentives used by the TVC?
Third, and last, is getting comfortable with the amount and location of development that the
proposal authorizes. To be completely honest, it is practically impossible to read and understand
how much development may be authorized given the many bonuses and credits being proposed.
To some extent, flexibility and incentives are what makes the project work, but if no one can tell
you how much development could be located at Cloud Grove, how are you to make an infonned
decision on site suitability, community character, and appropriate levels of infrastructure? In
addition, since future sending and receiving areas may be designated by ordinance and not by
plan amendment, the ability of the public to understand and participate in the process is being
limited. How many sending and receiving areas are appropriate, and where might they be
located? To the extent that the new community will still be surrounded by rural land uses, it
seems very important to us to decide up front, with full public disclosure, what the maximum
levels of development are so that unintended results do not occur in the future. This is as
important to Cloud Grove as it is for remaining development on Adams Ranch, and similarly,
you must be able to detennine if there are to be any "residual" development rights that might be
transferred to other development sites in the county.
Thank you for considering our comments. We ask that this correspondence to be made part of
your Thursday evening hearing record.
Sincerely,
Cl~
Charles G. Pattison, AICP
Executive Director
cc: Ernie Cox
Eric Draper
Michael Busha
- 6 {dUô
Grace EStock
1:1 Del Prado St
Port St Lucie, FL 34952
w 'lB,"J I"'ÃJ ~' -
II'! l~''',i ¡!:ll ~--..3-,~~
/' "t' ~.::.n ,,,..'" I r'·, ; ¡ "~",;/J.ì'EJ", ~ [,.,
,.' \ i ," /1' ,
I'"~ . ..i'J '\
r'!I:¡' -- : ¡
u~ . '. ~
'.J JUL 6 2006 lU
(l
íWh¿, d () / 2. éJ () h
--....... - R
LII¥.L
-'-
b Cu~ ~~
Sj;L8~ ' ,
~3"" ~ A ~
u ¿:7 ~ ï/1/'·e~
Fl. /d,~ F L 3.).L
¡I'l'i?-
~~~~
~þALJi;~~ '.<1 p A '. " . .
...& ¡ bu/ -yJ /V>V ¿~. a.JJ1 ~ ;;;t;u~ Z
~ð dJ, <g~ '""- """!f ' i '/.1, ." ~~
~~tk~ ç' ~~" A¿-"
,,~~~~, . (/ 1
~(ç r~;fck,,~ í?~~ ¿. £4, 19%ð~ j~
~~-k~~/-tJ~;A-kN~'
J-w'åu.&Uu~~~ r~r/
~ cw ~ f~ ~4'£/z~~ ~ ~~~J
^ ~~ d ~/~ C;.-a,v ~ tI:-v ~ &'''''Ý~' .
~u .' . J {I /¡:;'j/ d
øk~~Þ-J-0<U~¿¿~ t<
I~~~~ -þJ.t1 ~rYftL-l~1¡ ~
~¿.~ ~ av <1:/ J1M/~ áY ~J CL-
~ £t4d;~ #t~fl&-tÚ~~: ,Jv--
~,~~ z:~; æ ~ ~~~.é"¿~
~ &:i~r-:-:~_cwL ÜbW'~~
+z//oL<uéL h~ .I ~ n --¡;j" ~ " {;tJ(!¿
V'- .- ~~
. ~. ~3 f'¡
A~'£~ 1YI. ~
~~
~()fJ:i
.---.
Supply Ca of Rorida, /nc.
VETERINARY SUPPLIES
P.O. BOX 1759
2300 N. W. 9TH ST.
OKEECHOBEE, FL 34973-1759
863-763-0650
~'-""'. ~ ~.nl. 'T'QîJ r¡p ~í? ~ ~...
. D p." i', ' ,. \ ,I 11:'. r¡
¡ ,~:~. .. \J ¡'.,,~J
I !
(",. JUN 2 2 2006 U
June 19.2006
Doug Coward, Chairman
St. Lucie Board of County Commissioners
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
Re: Rural Lands Stewardship Program
Dear Chairman Coward:
I've been in business for 40 years supporting the Dairy & Beef Cattle Ranches in the South
Florida area. We've been hit with two Dairy buyouts that have reduced the cow numbers to one
half of what they were before the buyouts. We do business in the South Florida area including
St. Lucie County.
Our business is family owned and the future doesn't look too promising ifthe pressure continues
on pasture land as it has. Houses seem to be taking the place of cows.
For this reason 1 believe the Rural Larld Stewardship is a good idea; not only for Bud Adams, St.
Lucie County, agriculture, and the cattle industry, but also for the environment.
Thank you for helping preserve the Adams Family tradition of Ranching & Stewardship ofthe
land for future generation. Maybe even helping to save my business.
s~..~..
Èmory w:t
Cc: Commissioner Chris Craft
Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson
Commissioner Paula Lewis
Commissioner Joseph Smith
Doug Anderson, SLC Administrator
Bob Nix, SLC Growth Management Director
Alto "Bud" Adams, Jr.
~~
"TO PROTECT, UPHOLD, AND ENHANCE THE PRESTIGE OF THE TERM 'INDIAN RIVER'."
INDIAN RIVER ~ ~~
p.o. Box 690007 · Vero Beach, FL 32969
Phone: 772/562-2728 · Fax: 772/562-2577 · Email: info@ircitrusleague.org
The Honorable Doug Coward
Chairman
St. Lucie County Commission
2300 Virginia Avenue
Ft. Pierce, FL 34982
Dear Cbairm~ard: ~--1- ~
On behalf of the Indian River Urns League, its 900 grower members, and 31
commercial packinghouses, I want to express their unanimous support to amend the St.
Lucie County Land Development Code to establish regulations for the Rural Lands
Stewardship area overlay.
e¿; ðdf,.(!,
&~
J.iJtù- 7'ì1e
~~-
~ð.
June 20, 2006
P JR: ,rry ~ 16 W 1]; ~~
' !,
. ,
r JUN 2 2 2006 ¡'
This program is a workable solution to keep permanent open space for agriculture,
recreation, and wildlife, which also allows the landowners to be paid for keeping the
property undeveloped in perpetuity. The program does not cost the taxpayers of St. Lucie
County and requires development to pay its own way.
As a Commissioner, you know that the public is demanding more open space, clean
water, clean air and quality habitat, and the Rural Lands Stewardship Program can
accomplish all of this with no monetary costs to the taxpayer, thus providing a win-win
for the public, the private landowners, agriculture and the environment.
On behalf of our grower members, we urge your support of this proactive program that
provides a better future for St. Lucie County.
Sincerely,
~c;~2-7'~
Executive Vice President
DCB/kss
The term 'INDIAN RIVER' when used to describe the origin of Citrus Fruit. refers to a territory on the East Coast of Florida, along the Indian River
__ Federal Trade Commission -- '930
QID','¡
.I
í\i
W\~¡
f1"'c' 'ffl1 '17 ~17 jÆ fñì
JUN 2 2 2006 ~
~ --, -,---~~--~--.
Dear Mr. Coward,
œ:6oC!..C-
&.fUmUu
~ 'Tn e.
~
St. Lucie County Commission
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
Attn: Doug Coward, chairman
cc: St. Lucie County Commissioners
As an eighth-generation Floridian from a ranching family, I appreciate the value of our
state's rural heritage. The pace and poorly planned nature of current development is eroding
the original character of Florida, as well as the ecological fabric that sustains us. For this
reason I commend St. Lucie County for considering the environmental and culturaL value of
rural lands as you make your development plans.
I believe the Rural Land Stewardship program, as proposed by the Adams Ranch, is an
exemplary solution for balancing heritage and environment with planned growth. This
approach allows us to get out ahead of the curve of development and purposefully select the
most environmentally valuable lands for conservation at the same time as we defIne
appropriate sites for new communities.
As an environmental photojournalist, I have worked throughout the world to bring profile
to issues that deserve the attention of the public and our leaders. Florida's rural lands,
ranches in particular, are possibly the most misunderstood, underappreciated landscape in
the state. They are also the most pivotal, where a single landowner can decide the fate of
tens of thousands of acres. These observations led me to discontinue my job with the
Smithsonian in Washington, DC and return home to get involved.
In 2004 I founded The Legacy Institute for Nature & Culture (LINe), a non-profIt working
to promote conservation and sustainability through communications and educational
programs. You can read more at W\V\',' JJNCus. On the home page you will fInd a link to
Preserving Florida's Ranchlands. This audio program, produced by the Florida Humanities
Council for NPR, captures what I believe to be the best course of action for the future of
Florida - to keep our ranches as ranches. Please consider these ideas as you chart the course
for your county.
Best regards,
~
Carlton Ward Jr.
PO Box 1802
LEGACY INSTITUTE FOR NATURE & CULTURE
Tampa, Plorida 33601 tel/fu 813.251.025 www.LINC.uI
ORDINANCE NO. 2006-030
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LUCIE COUNìY
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY CREATING SECTION
4.05.00 (ST. LUCIE COUNìY RURAL LAND
STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY ZONE); CREATING
SECTION 4.05.01 (PURPOSE AND INTENT); CREATING
SECTION 4.05.02 (SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE
TO THE RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP AREA (RLSA)
OVERLY ZONE); CREATING SECTION 4.05.03
(ESTABLISHMENT OF RLSA OVERLAY ZONE); CREATING
SECTION 4.05.04 (LAND USES ALLOWED IN THE RLSA
OVERLAY ZONE); CREATING SECTION 4.05.05
(STEWARDSHIP CREDITS); CREATING SECTION 4.05.06
(LANDS WITHIN THE RLSA OVERLAY ZONE PRIOR TO
SSA OR SRA DESIGNATION); CREATING SECTION
4.05.07 (SSA DESIGNATION); CREATING SECTION
4.05.08 (SRA DESIGNATION); CREATING SECTION ;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS,
SEVERABILIìY AND APPLICABILIìY; PROVIDING FOR
FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION AND CODIFICATION AND
AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has
made the following determinations:
1. Section 163.3177(1l)(d), Florida Statutes, authorizes a county to establish a
Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) to promote sustainability and protection of natural
resources for eligible rural land in excess of ten thousand (10,000) acres; and,
2. On August 1, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County,
Florida, adopted the St. Lucie County Land Development Code.
3. The Board of County Commissioners has adopted certain amendments to the
St. Lucie County Land Development Code, through the following Ordinances:
5trllsh thrslIgh passages are deleted.
Underlined passages are added.
91-03 - March 14,1991 91-09 - May 14, 1991
91-21 - November 7,1991 92-17 - June 2, 1992
93-01 - February 16, 1993 93-03 - February 16, 1993
93-05 - May 25, 1993 93-06 - May 25, 1993
93-07 - May 25, 1993 94-07 - June 22, 1994
94-18 - August 16, 1994 94-21 - August 16, 1994
95-01 - January 10, 1995 96-10 - August 6, 1996
97-01 - March 4, 1997 97 -09 - October 7,1997
97-03 - September 2, 1997 99-01 - February 2, 1999
99-02 - April 6, 1999 99-03 - August 17, 1999
99-04 - August 17, 1999 99-05 - July 20, 1999
99-15 - July 20, 1999 99-16 - July 02,1999
99-17 - September 7, 1999 99-18 - November 2,1999
00-10 - June 13, 2000 00-11 - June 13, 2000
00-12 - June 13, 2000 00-13 - June 13, 2000
01-03 - December 18, 2001 02-05 - June 24, 2002
02-09 - March 5, 2002 02-20 - October 15, 2002
02-29 - October 15, 2002 03-05 - October 7, 2003
04-02- January 20, 2004 04-07- April 20,2004
04-33- December 7, 2005 05-01- March 15, 2005
05-03- August 2, 2005 05-04- August 2, 2005
05-07- January 18, 2005 05-16- August 16, 2005
5. On June 29, 2006, the Local Planning Agency/Planning and Zoning Commission
held a public hearing on the proposed ordinance after publishing notice in the Port St.
Lucie News and the Tribune at least 10 days prior to the hearing and recommended that
the proposed ordinance be approved.
6. On July 11, 2006, this Board held its first public hearing on the proposed
ordinance, after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Port St. Lucie News and the
Tribune on July 4, 2006.
7. On , this Board held its second public hearing on
the proposed ordinance, after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Port St. Lucie
News and the Tribune on
8. The proposed amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code
are consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the St. Lucie
County Comprehensive Plan and are in the best interest of the health, safety and public
welfare of the citizens of St. Lucie County, Florida.
Str~eh t"'pe~!I'" passages are deleted.
2
Underlined passages are added.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
St. Lucie County, Florida:
PART A. The specific amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code to
read as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporate hereto in their entirety.
PART B.
CONFLICTING PROVISIONS.
Special acts of the Florida legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St.
Lucie County, County ordinances and County resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with
this ordinance are hereby superseded by this ordinance to the extent of such conflict.
PART C.
SEVERABILITY .
If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be
unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions
of this ordinance. If this ordinance or any provision thereof shall be held to be
inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstance, such holding shall not affect its
applicability to any other person, property, or circumstance.
PART D.
FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE.
The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this ordinance
to the Bureau of Administrative Code and Laws, Department of State, The Capitol,
Tallahassee, Florida 32304.
PART E.
EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance shall take effect on
,2006.
PART F.
ADOPTION.
After motion and second, the vote on this ordinance was as follows:
Chairman Doug Coward
Vice Chairman Chris Craft
Commissioner Joseph E. Smith
Commissioner Paula A. Lewis
Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson
xxx
XXX
XXX
XXX
XXX
Strllsll tAraklg'" passages are deleted.
3
Underlined passages are added.
PART G.
CODIFICATION.
Provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated in the Code of Ordinances of St.
Lucie County, Florida, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or
other appropriate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or
relettered to accomplish such intention; provided, however, that Parts B through G shall
not be codified.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this _ day of
,2006.
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Deputy Clerk
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS
County Attorney
g: \ordnance \2006 \06-030.doc
StPlleh tl'lP8I1g1'1 passages are deleted.
4
Underlined passages are added.
October 11, 2005
Mr. Ray Eubanks, Plan Processing Administrator
Bureau of Local Planning, Division of Community Planning
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oaks Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
RE: Transmittal of Proposed St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Dear Mr. Eubanks,
In accordance with Rule 9J-11.016(1)(a), F.A.C., St. Lucie County is transmitting eight (8)
copies of the proposed Rural Lands Stewardship Comprehensive Plan amendments, including
support data, to the Department of Community Affairs. The St. Lucie County Planning and
Zoning Commission reviewed these proposed amendments in a public hearing on September 1,
2005, and recommended transmittal with one (1) revision. The St. Lucie County Board of
County Commissioners reviewed these proposed amendments on September 22, 2005, and
approved their transmittal, including revisions as suggested by County staff, the Planning and
Zoning Commission (Local Planning Agency) and informal discussion with DCA staff.
Amendments to the Future Land Use Element and the Future Land Use Map are included in this
transmittal. The area included within the overlay represents approximately 22,383 acres.
Pursuant to Chapter 163.3184, F.S., the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
hereby requests that the Department of Community Affairs conduct a review of the Plan
Amendments transmitted herewith, prior to their final adoption, and the State's subsequent final
determination of compliance.
One (1) copy of this entire transmittal package including associated data and analysis and
support documents, is being sent, on the same date as this letter, to the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP), the Florida Department of Transportation District Four (FDOT),
the Department of State (DOS), the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), and
the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD).
An Executive Summary is included in this package under Tab 2 that summarizes the plan
amendments content and effect. St. Lucie County proposes to hold the adoption hearing on
these proposed amendments in January 2006.
There is no portion of these proposed amendments that are applicable to an Area of Critical
State Concern (ACSC). They are not located within Orange, Lake or Seminole counties and are
not subject to the Wekiva River Protection Area, pursuant to Chapter 369, Part III, F.S.
Additionally, the amendments are not subject to a joint planning agreement and are exempt
from the limit of two (2) amendments per year, pursuant to Section 163.3177(11 )(d).
The availability of and demand on sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, traffic
circulation and recreation will be analyzed at the time of Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA)
submittal. 8t. Lucie County staff granted a deferral of the review of their availability and demand
since the application was strictly for an Overlay designation, which does not change the existing
land use or permitted uses of the subject property. The SRA application will also include
archeological or historic resource data and a St. Lucie County school impact worksheet.
Detailed information regarding the compatibility of the proposed land use amendments with the
Future Land Use Element goals, objectives and policies and those of other affected elements is
located in Tab 3 Future Land Use Map Amendment Application, Attachment B.
Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions about this submittal package. I can
be reached at (772) 462-1594 or michaelbtã>.stlucieco.Qov
Sincerely,
Michael Brillhart, Strategy and Special Projects Director
Cc: St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Doug Anderson, County Administrator
Raymond Wazny, Assistant County Administrator
Faye Outlaw, Assistant County Administrator
Daniel Mcintyre, County Attorney
Lindy McDowell, Florida Department of Environmental Protection (w/enclosures)
Gerry O"Reilly, Florida Department of Transportation District Four (w/enclosures)
Susan Harp, Florida Department of State (w/enclosures)
Michael Busha, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (w/enclosures)
Henry Bittaker, South Florida Water Management District (w/enclosures)
Commissioner Charles Bronson, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services (w/enclosures)
Kenneth D. Haddad, Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission
Carlos Vergara, Family Lands Remembered (w/enclosures)
Alto "Bud" Adams, Adams Ranch (w/enclosures)
Anita Jenkins, WilsonMiller, Inc. (w/enclosures)
Ernest Cox, Esq., Gunster, Yoakley and Stewart (w/enclosures)
Robert Raynes, Gunster, Yoakley and Stewart (w/enclosures)
September 9,2005
In accordance with the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, you are hereby advised that the Board of
County Commissioners will consider certain amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan to
establish a Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) overlay, amend the future land use designation on certain
parcels of land in the unincorporated area of St. Lucie County, and amend certain other goals, objectives and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan including:
Establish a Rural Lands Stewardship Area overlay as part of the Future Land Use
Element and Future Land Use Map
Amend Policy 1.1.1.1 to add "RLSA" as a Land Use Category
Establish a Rural Lands Stewardship "sending" and "receiving" area
A public hearing on the proposed amendments will be held before the Board of County Commissioners, at
6:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as possible, on September 22, 2005, 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 Growth Management Department's
Planning Division should receive written comments to the Board of County Commissioners at least 3 days
prior to the 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 Board of County Commissioners 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 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.
Copies of the proposed amendments may be obtained from the 8t. Lucie County Growth Management
Director's Office, St. Lucie County Administration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida
34982, and are also available for viewing during regular business hours (8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.) in the office
of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Administration Building Annex,
2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982.
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 within or adjacent to the above-described property, please forward this notice
to the new owner. Please call (772) 462-2822 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
8t. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Frannie Hutchinson, Chair
C:\Documents and Settings\LPA notice. doc
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
AGENDA
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Charles Grande, Chairman; Bill Hearn, Vice-Chairman; Stephanie Morgan, Pamela
Hammer, John Knapp, Ed Lounds, Ramon Trias, Carson McCurdy and Kathryn Hensley.
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Russell Akins without notice.
OTHERS PRESENT:
Mr. David Kelly, Planning Manager; Ms. Heather Young, Assistant County Attorney;
Mr. Hank Flores, Planner III; Ms. Linda Pendarvis, Planner II; Mr. Michael Brilhart,
Strategy and Special Project Director; Ms. Karen Butcher, BikeIPedestrian Coordinator;
and Ms. Talea Owens, Administrative Secretary.
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Grande called to order the meeting of the St. Lucie County Planning and
Zoning Commission at 6:03 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
DISCLOSURES
ANNOUNCEMENT
Chairman Grande gave a brief presentation of the procedures as of what to expect for
today's meeting.
1
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission/ Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
The Planning and Zoning Commission is an agency that makes recommendations to
the Board of County Commissioners on land use matters.
These recommendations are made after consideration of staff recommendation and
infonnation gathered at a public hearing, such as those we will hold today.
The meeting will progress in the following manner:
· The Chairman will call each item.
· Staff will make a brief presentation on the facts of the request.
· The petitioner will explain his or her request to the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
· Members of the public will be allowed to present information
regarding the request.
· The public portion of the meeting will be closed and the Planning and
Zoning Commission will discuss the request. Further public comment
will not be accepted unless the Planning and Zoning Commission has
specific questions.
· The Planning and Zoning Commission will vote on its
recommendation after its discussion. For legal reasons, the motion
may be chosen and read from a script provided by staff. Motions
both for and against are provided to the Planning and Zoning
Commission members.
· The recommendation is then forwarded to the St. Lucie County Board
of County Commissioners for their consideration and vote, usually
within the next Month.
2
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission/ Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
Once again the Planning and Zoning Commission acts only in an advisory capacity for
the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners. If you are not happy with the
outcome of this hearing, you will have the opportunity to speak at the public hearing in
front of the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners.
The roll call was made and Chainnan Grande asked if there were any other
announcements to be made.
A few of the P&Z Commission members stated they have spoken with a number of
residents, and attorneys.
Mr. Michael Brilhart, Strategy and Special Project director stated this is a proposed
comprehensive plan amendment to establish a Rural Land Stewardship area program, in
St. Lucie County.
In 2001, the state of Florida revised it's previously adopted legislation on Rural Land
Stewardship. Based upon the revised legislation in 2001, staff has received a
comprehensive plan amendment application for review, as part of a transmittal comp plan
amendment process. The process includes reviewing the proposed application, to assure
that it is in compliance with the Rural Land Stewardship area program.
Mr. Brilhart stated the proposal of the Rural Land Stewardship area program is a three
part process:
1. Review to the RLSA Program
2. Continuation after DCA's review and Establishment of land development codes
and a sending area of transfer credits matrix
3. Looking at a receiving area and the ability to transfer credit rights, through the
program at the recommendation of the board, to the receiving area
Mr. Brilhart stated this special meeting is reviewing only the first part-process ofthe
Rural Land Stewardship area Program.
Mr. Brilhart stated the particular application needs to be reviewed with a
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners based upon the establishment of
a Rural Land Stewardship Area Program. The current meeting does not discuss nor
3
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission/ Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
enclose LDRs or transfer of development rights or specific rural area receiving area. This
will come before the Local Planning Agency at a later day.
Mr. Brilhart stated staff has reviewed the merits of establishing a sending area for the
Adams Ranch property. He stated staff understands the ability and the merits of
establishing the Rural Land Stewardship Area Program as a preserved easement in
perpetuity from future single family development at a 1-5 density. He stated staff also
understands that as apart of the Rural Land Stewardship Area Program package, there is a
future receiving area that will be reviewed at a later date. He stated staff will be making
particular comments, only on the overall intent of the project, versus a specific sending
. . .
area-receIvmg area reVIew.
Mr. Brilhart stated based upon the comments, most of staffs comments were pertinent to
both, a sending area and a receiving area. However for the present meeting, staff
understands that it meets that 10,000 acre minimum threshold, it is within a rural area,
outside of the Urban Service Area Boundary. He added that it has an ecosystem quality
which includes designated habitat preservation areas.
The consultants will present the specifics of the application.
Chairman Grande asked if there were any other questions of staff.
Mr. Ernie Cox, a lawyer with Gunster & Yoakley representing Family Lands
Remembered through the Adams Ranch Property, stated they have submitted a draft of
the proposed Land Development Code to implement the comprehensive plan
amendments. Mr. Cox stated they submitted a draft of the proposed Land Development
Code because they felt that the newness of the Rural Land Stewardship Program and
application should include a proposed Land Development Code draft so that as staff is
reviewing the comprehensive plan, they can also review the draft.
Mr. Cox stated the LDR draft will be reviewed by the County staff once they have benefit
of the Department of Community Affairs' comments.
Mr. Trias stated this proposal is identical to the TVC Element's proposal.
Mr. Cox stated there are two speakers that are a part of their presentation that will speak
on the applicant's behalf.
Chairman Grande asked who the partners in the Family Lands Remembered group are.
4
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
Mr. Cox stated Family Lands Remembered is a Florida limited liability partnership. He
stated there are three partners. The three partners of Family Lands Remembered are
Enrique Tomayo and his two brother-in-Iaws, Warren Prescott and Carlos Brigarra. Mr.
Family Lands Remembered have contractual relationships with Adams Ranch
Incorporation (Mr. Adams Sr. is owner) and with the owners ofthe Cloud grove
(Running W. Citrus).
Mr. Mike Adams stated the Adams Ranch was founded in 1937 by his grandfather, Judge
Adams. Adams Ranch got incorporated in the 1960's. Mr. Adams stated his father and
grandfather instilled the generational use of the Adams Ranch into their family in the
1960's.
In the 1980's, the Adams Ranch was involved in the Comprehensive plan. The upland
preservation portion of that was created with the County's obligation toward the
Comprehensive plan, to set aside approximately 12,000 acres of upland habitat. He
stated he served on that committee for quite some time.
Mr. Adams stated back in the 80's, their family was not interested in selling the Adams
Ranch. Mr. Adams stated the Adams family was approached last year, to sell the Adams
Ranch and they declined because they were not interested.
Mr. Adams stated the Rural Land Stewardship Program has similar ideas and
preservation philosophies as Adams Ranch. He stated the Rural Land Stewardship
Program looks at and focuses on the whole of the different aspects of the Adams Ranch.
He stated the Rural Land Stewardship Program creates more flexibility than most
common traditional conservation easements.
Mr. Adams stated through the Rural Land Stewardship Program, their family feels that it
is an opportunity for them to reach and continue their goals of managing the Adams
Ranch land.
Mr. Mike Adams' father was not able to be present at the meeting, so Mr. Mike Adams
will be reading his father's comments. Mr. Mike Adams' father stated:
"The question is not about me or the way that the land has been managed in the
past. It is about the future of St. Lucie County, our children, and our grandchildren. Will
they work cattle and horses? Will they grow citrus? Will there be any agriculture? Or
will sprawl envelop the entire county?
The Rural Land Stewardship is a new concept that encourages good management and
development practices. The fact that a project such as this has never been done before is
5
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September 1" 2005
6:00 P.M.
not a negative. It is an exciting opportunity to be on the cutting edge and a model for
agricultural land preservation, conservation and sound development." Mr. Mike Adams
stated his father regrets not being able to attend the meeting.
Chairman Grande thanked Mr. Adams. Chairman Grande asked if there were further
questions.
Mr. Eric Draper, the policy director for Florida Auto bond, stated he has been involved in
land conservation activities in Florida for approximately two decades. He stated their
interest at Auto bond and for most stated wide conservation organizations is to try to
protect as much of Florida's vanishing landscape as they possibly can. He stated their
goals at one time were to protect as much 3 million acres of land.
He stated from a state wide perspective, Florida is losing up to 200,000 acres annually, of
bird and wildlife habitats. He stated Florida Auto Bond is trying to protect as much
habitat land as they can. He stated they are losing land, while trying to preserve an acre
for every acre that they lose. He stated the limited dollars that the state has available for
Florida forever are not going to the kind of large ecosystem level important tracks, such
as Adams Ranch.
He stated Florida Auto Bond has been looking at new state wide policies to create new
land conservation strategies. He stated the Rural and Family Lands Protection Act
emerged out of the governor's Growth Management Study Commission about four or
five years ago.
The Rural and Family Lands Protection Act targeted the protection of a million acres of
farmland over the next 10 years. He stated the Rural Land Stewardship Area concept was
approved by the legislature. He stated the Rural Land Stewardship Area concept was
used in Collier County and preserved up to 18,000 acres of Florida Panther Habitat.
Mr. Draper stated well managed ranches are some of the best concentrations of wildlife
habitat in the state of Florida.
Chairman Grande asked if there were any questions of Mr. Draper.
Mr. Hearn asked Mr. Draper what his projected additional density that will be created
from most of the rural land project is.
Mr. Draper stated for every acre that gets developed, they will end up protecting 3 or 4
acres per plant. He stated 1:3 is a good ratio.
6
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
Chairman Grande stated the goal of the Auto Bond society is directed more towards the
preservation of the areas that they are attempting to preserve and less concerned with the
specifics of what the ratio of new units versus existing entitlements are. He added there
is a concern that any community built outside of the Urban Service Boundary, should be
sustainable.
Mr. Lounds arrived.
Mr. Lounds asked how the Auto Bond society works, in relation to protecting what you
buy from other government agencies/government agencies, and from taking over what
you want to preserve.
Mr. Draper stated they are a land owner in the state of Florida. He stated they a series of
preserves that manages approximately 60,000 acres in the state of Florida. He stated
when the government or any other governmental agencies take their parcels or land, they
file lawsuits against them.
Mr. Lounds stated his concern is how to protect Adams Ranch, and preventing their
stewardship from being taken over by another government agency, which has rules and
regulations granting them the right to take the Adams Ranch Stewardship program.
Mr. Rentals stated the starting point of stewardship is that it is a principle based new
planning technique. He stated some to the principles can be customized but there are
some universal parts of stewardship. He stated the first universal part of stewardship is
that it is an incentive based program. He stated it is a program that is an option to
property owners. It is not a mandatory program to participate in. He stated it seeks to
balance natural resource protection, continued agricultural viability and coming up with a
way to encourage a higher quality of development that can be more sustainable over a
longer period of time.
Mr. Rentals stated stewardship is a technique to try to create the equation that balances
resource protection, continued agricultural viability and coming up with a way to
encourage a higher quality of development that can be more sustainable over a longer
period of time. He stated stewardship sometimes compete in interests in a way that
works well.
Mr. Rentals stated the legislature states the Rural Land Stewardship is a program that the
state encourages counties and rural land owners to consider implementing. He stated it is
a favored program. He stated the Rural Land Stewardship program is favored because it
maintains and enhances the economic value for rural land and. Mr. Rentals stated the
7
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September 1" 2005
6:00 P.M.
Rural Land Stewardship program is a technique to control sprawl. He added it creates a
new way to incentivise activities for rural land areas.
Chairman Grande asked if development rights were removed from the Adams Ranch
would the value increase.
Mr. Rentals stated the residual value of a sending area would decrease.
Mr. Rentals listed a few of the changes that have taken place to prepare for incentivising
activities for rural land areas;
1. Primarily, ownership of 50,000 acres of land was required to do a Stewardship
program. This amount to acreage requirement was reduced to 10,000 acres.
2. A property owner can initiate the process of pulling corporation in the local
government but it does not depend on the local government to take the first step.
Mr. Rentals stated the DR! Exemption has been added in the past session.
Mr. Hearn asked if the DRI Exemption was only for the sending area only or for both, the
receiving area and the sending area.
Mr. Rentals stated it would be for the receiving. He stated the DR! Exemption is a
legislative option. It is not an automatic "tag along" for receiving areas as they are
proposed. DR! Exemptions are optional.
Mr. Trias asked for further elaborations on the DR! Exemption program.
Mr. Rentals stated continued listing the changes that have taken place to prepare for
incentivising the rural land area;
3. He stated Rural Land stewardship Program was originally a natural resource
technique. He stated agricultural and local space may be values, which the
County may want to incentivise for protection and not for natural resources
preservation only.
4. He stated the Rural Land Stewardship Program has moved away from a process,
to match up to a protected populated.
Mr. Rentals stated the Adams Ranch property does not have a sending or receiving area.
He stated property owners have to petition the County to create a sending or receiving
8
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
area. Until receiving or sending areas are petitioned to be developed, no changes will
take place on the properties.
Mr. Rentals stated the Rural Land Stewardship Program allows the Adams Ranch to stay
in agricultural zoning. He stated by maintaining an agricultural zoning, the Rural Land
Stewardship Program will allow the Adams Ranch to continue providing private
protection for the natural resources in that area. He stated the Rural Land Stewardship
Program helps to protect and preserve the cultural, historic heritage of St. Lucie County.
Mr. Rentals stated the Rural Land Stewardship Program is an incentive-based program.
He stated the Rural Land Stewardship Program harness the economic activity of trying to
accommodate population growth in Florida. It creates a relationship with protection of
natural resources and it also provides a variety of different and diverse ways of living.
Ms. Ann Redman stated the index credit system is based on the quality of the natural
resources property within the rural area.
Mr. Rentals added the index credit system is a part of the Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Redman stated they have collected a lot of data on the subject property to build the
basics of the database requirements for the credit system and the credit matrix.
She stated there are quite a number of different types of ecological systems and habitats.
She stated there is a swamp system that is located near the western end of the entrance of
the property. Ms. Redman showed photos of the land area including more ecosystems
and habitats.
Ms. Redman stated the Adams Ranch have a variety of systems and ranches. She stated
there are cattle systems with lots of pasture. She stated endangered species also inhabit
the area. She stated Cabbage p
Chairman Grande asked what the acreage of Adams Ranch is.
Mr. Rentals stated Adams Ranch is 16,466 acres.
Mr. Lounds stated everyone does not want to live in wide-open pasture. He asked in
example, if someone decides that they want to put a house in an Oak Hammock, does the
Rural Land Stewardship Program prohibit this.
Mr. Rentals stated if the Oak Hammock's acreage scores 1.4 or greater, because ofthe
combination in index credits they will not be able to put a house in that Oak Hammock
9
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
but would have to find a place that has a lower score. He stated there is a fair amount of
land among the ranch that does not reach that higher score.
Chairman Grande asked if the index credits apply to the same receiving areas that are
being used for preservation.
Mr. Rentals replied no. He stated the index credits are used two ways. In one way, the
index credits are used as a factor in credit equations to jugulate credits. In addition, the
score is used to say that land that is not a part of the sending area, in the region of that
score, still has to be protected because of its value. Mr. Rentals stated a property can not
be both, a sending area and a receiving area, but it has to be one or the other.
Mr. Rentals stated the law states that the index credits must remain within the boundaries
of the stewardship program.
Mr. Rentals stated the entitlement of the receiving area is specific to a master plan that is
compared and filed with the County and has to be approved by the County. Within the
credit system, the calculations of the credits are sought up.
Mr. Rentals stated there is a policy that states a receiving area plan must incorporate a
minimum of 35% useful open-space, within the town, which was created to generalize
the credits.
Mr. Hearn asked if credits were required for any of the other developers, other than the
dwelling units.
Mr. Rentals stated yes. There are credits required for all of the developments except
things that are specifically designed to be public benefits uses,
Ms. Anita Jenkins, with Wilson-Miller Planning Manger, displayed and explained a few
slides showing the set up of the general perimeters of the growth management plan of the
Rural Land Stewardship Program.
The chart that she reviewed is in the growth management plan application. It set forth
and explains the types of developments that can occur in a stewardship area. It includes
the towns, villages and the hamlets that are involved in compact developments.
Ms. Jenkins stated the maximum size of a town is 5, 000 acres and the minimum size of a
town is 1,000.
10
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
Mr. Rentals stated with the Rural Land Stewardship Program, they are trying to offer the
incoming growth population a chance for better living.
Mr. Rentals stated within the Stewardship program, the credit values a market driven
economy. A credit value can not be drawn for the TDR's because the value floats with
the market and may change over time as the market demands change.
Mr. Ernie Cox stated the Adams Ranch is a tool to provide the family with money values.
He stated there is a confidential negotiated transaction between the Rural Land
Stewardship applicants, Family lands and the Adams family.
Mr. Cox stated there will be remaining credits from Adams Ranch that the Adams family
can use, if they wish to do a small receiving area or an open area, or if the program
expands in the future, it could be sold to another potential purchaser.
Mr. Cox stated the Adams Ranch could expand unto two circumstances:
1. Primarily, the land owner has to agree to want to be involved in the stewardship
program. The stewardship is a voluntary program, and no one is forced to be a
part of a stewardship. If the land owner wants to be a part of a stewardship, they
can ask and then the County will decide if they would like to add those land
owners to the stewardship program.
2. The premises program is an incentive based program, as established by the
legislature. The incentives have been established for better results.
Mr. Cox stated the Rural Land Stewardship Program, like the TVC Element is a new tool,
being presented to the County. He stated they look forward to working with the County
on the design of the towns and creating something that will be truly special and of worth
in this community.
Mr. Cox stated one of the goals of a stewardship is to accommodate population growth.
Chairman Grande opened the public hearing.
Ms. Susan Harris stated she lives over the line of St. Lucie County, in Indian River
County. She stated she lives in the area where the Cloud Grove is proposed to be
developed. She stated there are dirt roads, and more acres out in the area where she lives.
11
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission/ Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
Ms. Harris stated there are two airports where she lives and two large groves. She stated
the Board of County Commissions should consider the density rights of the people living
in the Rural Land Stewardship Program area.
Chairman Grande thanked Ms. Harris.
Mr. Tom Cowen stated he lives in Indian River County, next to the proposed
development site. He stated they area a flying community. He stated they have been a
community since 1984. He stated the Rural Land Stewardship Program concept is a good
concept to preserve land and develop cities into towns. However, their opposition is the
location of the proposed development.
Mr. Cowen stated they are concerned with the proposed development being placed in the
heart of an agricultural area. He stated he feels that there are a lot of areas in St. Lucie
County that would best suite the Rural Land Stewardship Program, rather than placing
10,000 or 12,000 people in the heart of an agricultural section.
Mr. Cowen stated his air-strip is right across the canal. He stated they have a 2500 ft. air-
strip and the direction of it goes from north to south.
Mr. Wayne Carlton stated the Adams should be commended for what they are trying to
accomplish. He stated there are a few owners that own the western part to the County,
which is the part of the County that needs to be preserved. He stated the more that part of
the County is fragmentized; the more difficult it becomes to preserve that area.
Chairman Grande thanked Mr. Carlton.
Chairman Grande closed the public hearing.
Mr. Lounds asked how the County can safeguard other government agencies from
wanting to take the stewardship away from Adams Ranch in the future. He asked what
are the provisions invested within a stewardship program that prevents the government
from taking away any rights or anything from it.
12
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
Mr. Cox stated they added a policy within their stewardship which states, if you have
property that is in a stewardship sending area, power lines, transmission lines or road-
rights-of-way are prohibited from going through it. He stated this prevents power lines
and such have you from interfering with conserved developments. He stated they can go
back and take a look at that policy and see if it can be expanded.
Mr. Lounds stated the whole idea of stewardships is to preserve a beautiful wonderful
way of life. He stated it is not the law that worries him, but the rules and regulations. A
committee can make rules and regulations, which no law abiding group can change.
Mr. Cox stated currently the legislature has a committee that is working on issues
involving property rights and he may follow up with that committee and see if there is
something that they can add, at a state perspective that would also protect stewardships.
Chairman Grande asked what the Local Planning Agency is being asked to pass with a
recommendation.
Mr. Michael Brilhart stated, under the Rural Land Stewardship Program proposal, the
credits are included within the application and they have been analyzed by the consultant.
He stated the particular "agreed to" transfers of those credits will have to be done through
the sending areas and the receiving areas applications.
Mr. Brilhart stated the recommendation for the adoption of a Future Land Use
Designation, creating an RLSA designation does not guarantee any transfers of credit
rights nor guarantee the right of a certain property to receive the amount of credit.
Chairman Grande asked if the analysis, which is part of the proposed development's
presentation, give the units rights to the sending area that has been identified, even
though they are not approving a sending area plan.
Mr. Brilhart pointed out that staffs understanding is that the applicants will be able to do
a specific review and analysis of the credit program as part to the second phase and not at
the particular phase.
13
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September 1" 2005
6:00 P.M.
Mr. Brilhart stated, if the petition is adopted it does not guarantee any credits for the
sending area or the receiving area, which will be done at a separate timeframe.
Under the legislation, either adopting the transfers or not adopting it, it will not hinder the
County's ability to recommend the transmittal from this particular creation. He stated at
some point and time staff will have to make a recommendation of whether or not to
recommend to the Board of County Commissioners to transfer the specific amount being
requested.
Chairman Grande asked if it would be logical for the Local Planning Agency to pass the
petition forward with a recommendation to approve and add a condition the specifically
states staff s understanding that the values and the credit matrix will be decided in a
subsequent application.
Ms. Heather Young stated explanation can be added for the recommendation, so that the
Board of County Commissioners will be aware of the Local Planning Agency's thought
process was, that lead up to the recommendation.
Mr. Cox clarified that they made three applications. He stated the first application was a
Future Land Use Map Amendment application, which was to establish the Rural Land
Stewardship Area map as an overlay. He stated they made application Comprehensive
Plan text amendments, which includes the goals, objectives and policies, the credit
worksheet, the NRI map and the towns' characteristics as part of the Comprehensive Plan
(this is for tonight's meeting). He stated the third application that they made is the Land
Development Code text Amendment which is not being presented tonight.
Mr. Cox stated there is a text amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and there is a map
amendment to the comprehensive plan that is being presented at this meeting. He stated
the credit matrix is a part of the application. He stated they are asking for the Planning
and Zoning Commission's recommendation to the County on the entire packet for
transmittal to obtain further discussion at the Board of County Commissioners, review
and the Department of Community Affairs, and the final approval/adoption at the Board
of County Commissioners after DCA. He stated this is in the plan and it sets up the
system.e
14
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September 1" 2005
6:00 P.M.
Mr. Knapp made a motion to recommend transmittal of the amendment to DCA
(Department of Community Affairs).
Mr. Trias seconded the motion.
Chairman Grande announced that the motion is to send the application to the County
Commission with a recommendation that is being forwarded to DCA, along with
comments about the inscriptions on the land use.
The roll was called.
Ms. Hammer said yes. She stated the County needs to send someone out to look at the
situation regarding the boundary line where St. Lucie County ends and Indian River
County begins and the surrounding residents to the proposed development reside.
Mr. Lounds said yes.
Mr. McCurdy said no.
Mr. Knapp said yes.
Mr. Trias said yes.
Mr. Hearn said no.
Chairman Grande said no.
Chairman Grande stated this application will be forwarded to the Board of County
Commissioners with a recommendation for transmittal to DCA (Department of
Community Affairs).
15
St. Lucie County
Planning and Zoning Commission! Local Planning Agency
Special Meeting
Commission Chamber, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
September I" 2005
6:00 P.M.
Comments:
Mr. Hearn stated he would like for the Board members to take a long hard look at what
the County's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code says about Future Land
Uses in the County.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted:
Approved by:
Talea Owens, Sr. Staff Assistant
Charles Grande, Chairman
16
Aaenda Reauest
Item Number:_2_
DATE: July 11 2006
REGULAR [ ]
PUBLIC HEARING [X]
CONSENT [ ]
TO: Board of County Commissioners
PRESENTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY: Growth Momt. / Strateoy & Special Projects
Michael Brillhart
Strategy & Special Projects
SUBJECT:
First reading of Ordinance 06-030 adopting land development regulations to
apply to property generally located within the Rural Land Stewardship Area
(RLSA) Overlay Zone boundary (Map A).
BACKGROUND:
The County Commission recommended transmittal of the Rural Land
Stewardship Area (RLSA) Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs on October 11, 2005. The proposed land
development regulations, as shown in Exhibit B and referenced in Chapter
4.05.00: Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlav Zone of the revised Land
Development Code, will guide and implement land use and development
activities within the RLSA Comprehensive Plan Amendment Overlay Zone
boundary.
FUNDS AVAILABLE:
NA
PREVIOUS ACTION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing regarding these
regulations on June 29, 2006. At this meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval by a vote of 5-2
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board approve and adopt Ordinance 06-030 at
its second reading on August 14, 2006.
[ ¥APPROVED
[ ] OTHER:
[ ] DENIED
Approve 5-0 Motion to
continue to August 14,2006
at 6:00 p.rn. or as soon
thereafter as may be heard.
COif
----
Douglas M. Anderson
County Administrator
COMMISSION ACTION:
County Attorney:
Originating Dept:
~
Coordination/Sianatures
-
Environ. Resources:
Purchasing
-
Management & Budget:
Finance:
PRESIDENT I!c c.E.O.
Stephen R. Miller, P.E.
ExECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT I!c C.O.D.
Kevin T. Walsh, P.E.
ExECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENTS
James A. Sellen, M.S.P.
Carol D. Conner, P.E.
VICE PRESIDENT I!c C.F.O.
H. William Cook, c.P.A.
VICE PRESIDENTS
R. Lance Bennett, P.E.
Neil Frazee, RLA
A. Geoffrey McNeill, AlCr, RLA
Eric E. Warren, P.E.
Lori Webb-Paris, P.E.
HEADQUARTERS/CENTRAL FLORIDA
4750 New Broad Street
Orlando, FL 32814
Tel: 407.422.3330
Fax: 407.422.3329
www.mscwinc.com
NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA
541 Fieldcrest Drive
The Villages, FL 32162
Tel: 352.751.2670
Fax: 352.751.2674
SOUTHEAST FLORIDA
100 SW Albany Avenue
Suite 200
Smarr, FL 34994
Tel: 772.219.4003
Fax: 772.219.2218
we create lasting communities. ~
July 8, 2006
OVERNIGHT MAIL; EMAIL
Mr. Bob Nix, AICP
Director of Growth Management, St. Lucie County
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982-5652
JUL 102006
Subject: St. Lucie County
Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA)
Overlay Zone Development Regulations
MSCW No.: 06-0121
Dear Mr. Nix:
As requested by the St. Lucie County Growth Management Department, MSCW is
pleased to present a preliminary report offering comments and a critique of the
proposed Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay Zone Development Regulations
("redline" draft dated June 16, 2006). The report presents preliminary fmdings
organized in the following sections:
1. General Observations
II. Environmental Considerations
III. Form and Design Considerations
N. Additional Considerations
This review is based on the following assumptions:
.
Because the Development Regulations have been acted upon by the Planning
and Zoning Commission they have been determined consistent with the
County's Comprehensive Plan and with the proposed Adams Ranch
Stewardship Area Overlay Amendment to the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan.
.
The scope of this review was limited to the proposed Development
Regulations. However, some consideration was given to proposed Adams
Ranch Stewardship Area Overlay Amendment to the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan, as certain aspects of the Development Regulations
mirror policies of the Adams Ranch Stewardship Area Overlay
Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
.
The proposed Adams Ranch Stewardship Area Overlay Comprehensive Plan
Amendment will be adopted.
SOUTHEAST FLORIDA
100 SW Albany Avenue
Suite 200
Stuart, FL 34994
Tel: 772.219.4003
Fax: 772.219.2218
Wécreate lasting communities.""
MSCW, Inc. is a community planning and engineering ftrm with nearly 30 years of
experience in Florida, with offtces in Stuart and Orlando. MSCW is acknowledged as a
state leader in promoting sustainable community design, with many of its projects
recognized for their application of sustainable planning practices. A diverse and
expert team of professionals contributed to and managed this project including the
following:
·
James A. Sellen, MSP, who brings over 30 years of public and private sector
experience and served as the Orange County Planning Director.
·
Richard Unger, AICP, CNU, with more than 27 years of public and private
sector experience, including City of Orlando Bureau Chief, where he
administered the Zoning Code, and managed Urban Design and Growth
Management Planning.
·
James E. Anaston-Karas, with over 20 years of experience, including
analyzing and composing growth management legislation, managing water
resource projects and coordinating local government advocacy.
·
Project team members with expertise in urban design, land development
regulation dl:afting and application, economic and market analysis, and
environmental sciences.
MSCW will be prepared to present the highlights of this report, together with a
forthcoming report which analyzes the County's proposed Comprehensive Plan
Amendment, at the July 11, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting. It is our
understanding that the applicant involved with this proposal and the project's
consultants will receive a copy of this report in advance of the meeting.
It is our pleasure working with you on this project. Should you have any questions,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
/7 ~ .'
~!4 JÁ..~
Rich W. Unger, AI'(f: c:(;7
T earn Leader
RWU:sh
Enclosures - Letter Report
C: James A. Sellen, Rich Unger,]ames E. Anaston-Karas
Page 2
Mr. Bob Ni.."
.T ulv 8, 2006
PRELIMINARY REVIEW AND CRITIQUE
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Gune 16, 2006 Draft)
A. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS
The proposed Development Regulations are generally consistent with the intent of the Rural Land
Stewardship Act (Section 163.3177 (11) (d), F.S.); however, the process of designating an RLSA
Overlay Zone begs the question: Will the location of RLSAs conform to the vision of the County's
future land use pattern?
With a clearly established long-term vision, the County can decide where the innovative RLSA
planning tool can be employed, and where Towns, Villages, or Hamlets will be located.
Accordingly, it will decide where preserved open spaces, natural areas, and agricultural lands will be
located and managed within the RLSAs. Without an adopted vision, the county risks choosing a
"leapfrog," scattered development pattern.
The proposed Development Regulations do not provide adequate specificity as to the location of
future SRAs within St. Lucie County. Therefore, it is presumed that the SRAs could be located
anywhere within the County. This raises the visioning issue, which is linked to the implementation
of the proposed Stewardship Comprehensive Plan amendment. Will it be the County's intent to
permit SRAs throughout the rural areas of the County or will they be restricted to certain areas,
possibly closer to, or within a certain distance of, existing Urban Service Boundaries? In addition,
the Development Regulations need to provide clarification about the intended design, form and
intensity of development within the SRAs.
The Development Regulations need greater clarification of environmental standards in both the
SSAs and the SRAs, as presented below. Clearer objectives, clarification of management plans, and
improvements to implementation tools are among the improvements suggested.
A cornerstone of growth management law in Florida is the opportunity for public participation, and
the provision of public information through the Sunshine Law. Accordingly, the time frames
allotted in the Development Regulations must be long enough to allow for full review by County
staff, as well as provide enough time for staff and the public to obtain additional project
information. This applies to all the SRA review processes presented in section 4.0S.08.E, starting
with the pre-application conference through the sufficiency review and staff report.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The following observations concerning countywide application of the RLSA Overlay are provided
relative to environmental standards, separated by Sending Areas and Receiving Areas:
Page 1 of 8
July 8, 2006
"
Stewardship Sending Area Designation - Section 4.05.07
Restoration Incentive Credits (Section 4.05.07.B.4; pg. 12):
The restoration tide is confusing, since much more than restoration is identified in this
section (i.e., enhancement, creation, preservation, etc.). It is suggested that creation of
upland habitat be discouraged, given historically low success rates.
Restoration credit should not be given fully until a permit from the regulating authority (e.g.,
SF\V11D) is obtained. This could be pro-rated even more based on the success of the
restoration work. This also lessens the workload on the County staff or consultant. Partial
credit can be given for identifying it as restoration and more for placing an easement over
the property, but full credit should be reserved until the agency that regulates those areas
consents. If the maximum number of credits available on an SSA is not to be used,
applicant should provide that number for future planning purposes.
Wildlife or habitat values should not be increased for a WRA designed to function as a
stormwater pond (e.g., Cloud Grove reservoir/Snail Kite habitat).
Eligibility Criteria (Section 4.05.07.BA.d; pg. 13):
Restoration eligibility criteria should include wildlife corridors (as specified by the County
overlay or FWC), flow ways, and large and diverse habitats.
Natural Resource Indices (Section 4.05.07.B.5.a; pg. 13):
Data collection parameters are not clear. The DRI data collection criteria for any SSA,
regardless of size, should be applied.
SSA Application (Section 4.05.07.C.3.c; pg. 16):
If an Index Value needs to be reassessed or "documented," a process and criteria should be
identified.
Stewardship Easement Agreement (Section 4.05.07.C. 7 .a; pg. 19):
Although specified in the land use table, an emphasis for passive recreation should be added
to the easement. Public access rights on the SSA should be defined.
Any WMD permit that involves wedands will also require a Conservation Easement, so
there will be some redundancy with the easements. Easements should be to at least one
agency with legal interest (e.g., an agricultural stewardship area should be dedicated to, at
least, the DOACS so the agency can monitor it).
The County, or grantee, will be responsible for managing the covenants of any Stewardship
Easement, and this could become a significant burden even if inspections and reports are
only generated once per year.
.
If easements or agreements are not honored once approved, or land loses habitat
quality, will credit be subtracted? Is the mechanism for compliance clear enough?
This possible deficiency could be addressed in these Development Regulations, or in
the specific easements or agreements.
Should financial performance guarantees (such as bonds, letters of credit or other
commonly used instruments) be required or is this specified in the County's current
Land Development Code?
.
Page 2 of 8
] uly 8, 2006
&I
Stewardship Receiving Area Designation - (Section 4.05.08. Pg. 22)
Suitability Criteria (Section 4.05.08.A.1.d; pg. 22):
Consistent with the acknowledged need for enhanced visioning, a Countywide map of areas
with anticipated high Natural Resource Indices would be helpful and would, therefore,
suggest where SRAs would be more or less desirable. Having this information would be
critical to long-range planning (e.g., knowing how many units will be possible in the SRAs,
etc.). Does the Natural Resource Index value of "greater than 1.4" omit areas that should be
saved?
Suitability Criteria (Section 4.05.08.A.1.h; pg. 23):
Assurances should be provided to avoid an SSA becoming encompassed by an SRA or
several SRAs. More simply, ecosystem functions are best served if large land areas are
provided and contiguous tracts are linked and not compartmentalized. The consequence to
avoid is "postage stamp" wetlands, or "hole-in-the-donut" preservation.
Natural Resource Index Assessment (Section 4.05.08.D.3; pg. 27):
Natural resource assessment should identify land uses and wetland boundaries on the SRA.
It should also identify potential wetland and listed species impacts from the Plan or Master
Plan.
SRA Plan and Master Plan (Section 4.05.08.G.1; pg. 34):
\Xlhile it is commendable to ensure high standards for the preparation of the Master Plan, the
qualifications of the preparers need to be more consistently defined in the Development
Regulations. For example, it is unclear what constitutes a "qualified environmental
consultant," and not clear why a plan would be sufficient if prepared by a certified (AICP)
planner with only one other licensed professional (a licensed engineer or landscape
architect).
Design Criteria (Section 4.05.08.1; pg. 35):
The various design criteria do not mention the stewardship concept as a planning
component. Although this is a receiving area, the SRA will incur most of the human impacts.
Stewardship should be mentioned and could be more important for those RLSA projects
that have the SSA and SRA contained on the same property.
Required Buffer (Section 4.05.08.1.6; pg. 56):
The Development Regulations need to clarify the application of required buffers in relation
to SSAs. Presumably, an SSA should not serve as a buffer. In addition, the Development
Regulations should more clearly address how an SSA within an SRA would be appropriately
buffered.
Infrastructure (Section 4.05.08.1.7.h; pg. 58):
Expand on the definition of "green" construction. Implementation of new-technology for
stormwater treatment (bioremediation, etc.) should be required.
Parks and Recreation (Section 4.05.08.].6; pg. 60):
The provision for a parks and recreation assessment should be expanded to show all
adjacent lands in public ownership. Integration into adjacent land's management plans, for
example, the long term water supply plan, should be encouraged.
"
Page 3 of 8
July 8, 2006
Open Space Definition (pg. 5):
Uses designated as open space should be re-evaluated for applicability as credit. Golf courses
are acceptable as open space, however stewardship credit for this land use is questionable.
Administration and Management of Land:
RLSA creates a liability by requiring land owners to maintain and manage the lands with high
natural resource and public benefit values, from which credits have been transferred, without
providing a means of generating a cash flow to cover these costs over time. This issue
should be addressed with each Easement Agreement
C. FORM AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
The following observations concerning countywide application of the RLSA Overlay are provided
relative to (Countywide) development patterns and the design of individual developments.
Stewardship Receiving Area Designation - (Section 4.05.08; pg. 22.)
Size: There appears to be no minimum size for an SRA. Villages within an SRA can be as small as
100 acres; therefore, this appears to be the de facto minimum should an SRA be the size of one
Village. With the proposed maximum density of 2 dulac, a lOa-acre Village could include only 200
dwellings (2 dulacre x 100 acres). At this size a Village would not support an elementary school,
would not likely support more than commercial use (e.g. convenience store) and is unlikely to have
any significant office/ employment center. This would likely result in residents having to drive to the
nearest urbanized area for daily services.
By TVC standards, the minimum size for a Village outside the Urban Service Boundary is 500 acres,
which, with 75 percent open space and a minimum density of 4 dulacre, would yield 500 units. This
is still not enough for a school or commercial support services, but is a better yield if attempting to
develop villages with a diverse housing stock (single family, multi-family; workforce and median-to-
high-end housing), and a walkable environment.
Proposed Comprehensive Plan Stewardship Overlay Objective 4 requires "sustainable development
patterns, while discouraging sprawl." Relative to this Objective and the lack of locational and sizing
parameters for SRAs, the questions to be asked are, "Is this discouraging sprawl? Are multiple, small
SRAs desired by the County? Are they desired throughout the County? Should there be a minimum
size for SRAs?"
Fonns of SRA Development - (Section 4.05.08C; pg. 24)
Four forms are provided, Towns, Villages, Hamlets and Compact Rural Development. While the
Town form could be large enough to begin to create a sustainable community (schools, retail,
personal services, office/employment) that for it residents, the Hamlet (40-100 acres) and CRD Oess
than 100 acre) forms are too small to create anything much more than large-lot developments or
clustered residential development. At density ranges of 1/2 to 2 dul acre, these forms of
development could be incorporated into Town or Village communities as their edges and transitions
to rural I agricultural lands. The CRD form that may be larger than 100 acres appear to be intended
Page 4 of 8
] uly 8, 2006
"
for resort (transient residents are allowed) or employment development. Example of eco-tourist and
research facilities are given, but these are clearly examples only.
The fourth form, Village, (if up to 1,000 acres and combined with another Village), begins to
become a sustainable development scenario. However, the lower end of the Village form of
development is unlikely to result in a sustainable community or neighborhood. Conversely, it is
likely to become a typical very suburban development.
The small-sized character and low density (1/2 to 2 du/acre) of Villages, Hamlets or CRDs may
result in a development pattern that compromises proposed Comprehensive Plan Objective 4,
which is to ensure sustainable development. With smaller sizes of development, it could become
more difficult to ensure a "functional mix of use, interconnectivity and multi-modes of
transportation," as required by Comprehensive Plan Policy 4.1.
If an objective of the Development Regulations is to be form-based, it should include more
prescriptive content. The applicant should be given more guidelines about how development might
look, rather than regulations that describe what is restricted or prohibited. Pages 35-57 present an
extensive set of design criteria for various development options, however visual design images are
not presented which would give examples of acceptable types of design to apply the guidelines. In
addition, design guidelines such as Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and building height to street ratios,
which are now included in the draft, are very difficult to translate to visual urban form without
graphical representation.
Stewardship Receiving Area Application Package - (Section 4.05.08D; pg. 26)
It appears that a fully developed Master Plan is not a pre-requisite for designating an SRA. Since
there are no size parameters for the SRA itself, they could range from less than 100 acres, and
become a Hamlet or CRD, to over 5,000 acres incorporating multiple Towns or Villages. The
County should consider requiring a more fully developed Master Plan as part of the application
package forSRA designation. Without a Master Plan, it will be difficult to determine whether the
design criteria established in Section 4.05.081 can be applied in a manner that will result in a Town,
Village or Hamlet that complies with the County Comprehensive Plan Policies for sustainable,
interconnected, mixed mode and mixed use developments.
Design Criteria - (Section 4.05.08.1; pg. 35)
The design criteria for developing within an SRA appear to be created to establish developments
based upon the principles and concepts of Traditional Town Design, New Urbanism and the New
Urbanism Transect. These are generally perceived within the community planning and development
industry as quality standards that can lead to sustainable community design. The recendy adopted
Town, Village and Countryside (I'Ve) design standards are also based upon the same New Urbanist
principles and Transect. A significant difference is that the densities allowed in the SRAs appear
about 25 percent lower than those of the TVC. In addition, the TVC requires more open space set
aside within the project than within an SRA.
Minimum Density: The gross density range for Towns of 2.0-2.5 du/ acre, translates into
approximately 3.0-3.85 net residential density, about 25 percent lower than the County's recendy
adopted TVC densities. These densities are indicative of fairly typical single family deta:.c~ed'
Page 5 of 8
July 8, 2006
suburban developments. This could make the provision of sufficient housing diversity a challenge,
especially the provision of work force housing. .
Commercial Uses: Regarding the reqUÌIed minimum Floor Area Ratios (FAR), the apparent intent
of the Development Regulations is to create intensities which would create more compact, mixed-
use non-residential development. However, the minimum 0.4 FAR for retail development could
preclude development that is only retail. Typically, retail development, even in a Town Center, will
choose to locate only on the first floor. This will yield an approximate retail FAR of about 0.25. If
office space is provided on the second floor, above the retail, the 0.4 FAR can be achieved.
However, if residential is placed over the retail, the FAR is not affected and the FAR minimum will
not be achieved. A potential solution is to allow residential to be counted as FAR if constructed over
retail space. It should still be used in density calculations as well.
Recreation and Open Space: Thirty-five percent of the land area is to be set aside for open space
in Towns and Villages, while the set aside appears to be less than 1 percent for developments of less
than 100 acres. To provide the same quality environment as other development in St. Lucie County,
the County should consider using the same standard for all SRA development, regardless of the size
or type of development. Additionally, the draft regulations reqUÌIe that 200 square feet of
community park be provided per dwelling in Towns. For a 1,000 acre Town (the minimum), this will
provide approximately 10 acres of community park.
Town and Village Design Criteria: As mentioned previously, the design criteria for Towns and
Villages represent the basic principles of Traditional Town Design. Consistent with New Urbanist
philosophy of allowing design flexibility, there could be many ways to achieve the different design
criteria. However, for the smallest of potential Towns (1,000 acres) or Villages (100 acres), it is
unclear whether such developments will be able to achieve the stated principles presented in the
Development Regulations to create:
·
"clearly defined neighborhoods with each having.. .retail, office, ClV1C, schools, parks or
other public spaces"
"a mixed use Town Center by co-locating residential, retail, office civic and other uses in the
Town Center"
"Internal capture of shopping and business trips ... and reserving adequate sites for transit
stops and shelters"
"a range of housing types and prices..., including housing for the Town's very low, low and
moderate-income households..."
"a land use balance at build out. .."
·
·
·
·
These statements included in the Development Regulations are very general and will reqU1!e
diligence to ensure that the intent, and not merely the letter, of the principles are fulfilled.
Hamlet and CRD Design Criteria: The design criteria are sufficient for allowing the type of
development described in the general description. The developments are intended to be smaller in
area and potentially isolated, but there appears to be no actual limit on the size of a CRD. Wells and
septic tanks are permitted if development size is less than 100 acres. Support commercial, retail,
office and service development is not required. For developments over 100 acres, sewer and water
service is reqUÌIed, with 2 duj acre development allowed. This development design is indicative of
fairly standard suburban development. Outside the Urban Service Boundary, this trn.et, of
Page 6 of 8
July 8, 2006
development could be considered inconsistent with the intent of the RLSA Overlay of providing an
alternative to sprawl. It is unclear why the Hamlet and CRD districts are needed. These development
types can be provided at the edge of Towns and Villages as a transition to the agricultural areas, in
the same manner as with the County's TVC Overlay.
Workforce Housing: While provisions are included for workforce housing or affordable housing,
sufficient detail is not provided to implement this challenging goal. Comprehensive Plan Policy 4.21
requires the provision of affordable and workforce housing pursuant to Florida Rule 9J -2.048,
F.A.c. This should be considered the minimum criteria for providing workforce housing.
Comprehensive Plan Policy 4.22 places the burden upon the County to ". . . among other possibilities
not specifically listed herein, consider opportunities..." to provide very low, low, and moderate
housing in each SRA.
The County should consider requiring that some affordable or workforce housing be provided by
the developer within any SRA. This could be done by requiring that a certain percentage of housing
units be constructed that are of a maximum, pre-determined size (square feet), such that the sales
and/ or rental prices will fall within the designated St Lucie County affordable or workforce housing
range. Other possibilities exist to ensure workforce and affordable housing is provided on-site or
off-site, which should also be considered.
Transportation: Though the Development Regulations propose to use the County's Land
Development Code (Section 11.02.09) for transportation impact assessment (pg. 58), it is unclear
how a well-designed accessibility system, and integration with the County's transportation system
will be achieved. For example, it is unclear how to achieve "rural design and rural road corridors,"
as contained in the draft (pg. 58) and in state statute, while accommodating the intensity of land use
which could be created in SRAs.
Though the Development Regulations also contain additional transportation impact assessment
standards (pg. 58-59), they are to be addressed only"... to the extent applicable, " which may prove
to be too weak a standard to ensure adequate planning of the transportation system.
Finally, "Transportation Demand Management" programs (pg. 38) should be explained. Though
TDM is laudable in theory, are there successful programs which can be more specifically promoted
in these Development Regulations which will produce tangible results?
D. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
4.05.07.F; (pg. 21): This is a commendable goal, although it is problematic for the Development
Regulations to bind future decisions of the BOCC, which is suggested by the SSA Amendment
language.
Several editorial changes are suggested and are available upon request.
Page 7 of 8
July 8, 2006
.
LIST OF ACRONYMS
AICP: American Institute of Certified Planners
CRD: Compact Rural Development
DOACS: Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
DRI: Development of Regional Impact
FAR: Floor Area Ratio
FWC: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
LDC: St. Lucie County Land Development Code
LDR: St. Lucie County Land Development Regulations
RLSA: Rural Land Stewardship Area
SFWMD: South Florida Water Management District
SRA: Stewardship Receiving Area
SSA: Stewardship Sending Area
TVC: Towns, Villages, and Countryside
\VJVfD: Water Management District
\XlRA: Water Retention Area
Page 8 of 8
July 8, 2006
.
"
JAMES E. ANASTON-KARAs
Planning Team Manager
100 SW Albany Avenue
Suite 200
Stuart, FL 34994
Tel: 772.219.4003
Fax: 772.219.2218
Cell: 772.341.0524
]im.Karas@MSCWinc.com
k
~:
\~
I
l-
ii
~
~
ORDINANCE NO. 2006-030
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY CREATING SECTION
4.05.00 (ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND
STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY ZONE); CREATING
SECTION 4.05.01 (PURPOSE AND INTENT); CREATING
SECTION 4.05.02 (SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE
TO THE RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP AREA (RLSA)
OVERLY ZONE); CREATING SECTION 4.05.03
(ESTABLISHMENT OF RLSA OVERLAY ZONE); CREATING
SECTION 4.05.04 (LAND USES ALLOWED IN THE RLSA
OVERLAY ZONE); CREATING SECTION 4.05.05
(STEWARDSHIP CREDITS); CREATING SECTION 4.05.06
(LANDS WITHIN THE RLSA OVERLAY ZONE PRIOR TO
SSA OR SRA DESIGNATION); CREATING SECTION
4.05.07 (SSA DESIGNATION); CREATING SECTION
4.05.08 (SRA DESIGNATION); CREATING SECTION ;
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS,
SEVERABILITY AND APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION AND CODIFICATION AND
AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has
made the following determinations:
1. Section 163.3177(1l)(d), Florida Statutes, authorizes a county to establish a
Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) to promote sustainability and protection of natural
resources for eligible rural land in excess of ten thousand (10,000) acres; and,
2. On August 1, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County,
Florida, adopted the St. Lucie County Land Development Code.
3. The Board of County Commissioners has adopted certain amendments to the
St. Lucie County Land Development Code, through the following Ordinances:
.5tpllell thr811gh passages are deleted.
Underlined passages are added.
91-03 - March 14,1991 91-09 - May 14, 1991
91-21 - November 7,1991 92-17 - June 2, 1992
93-01 - February 16, 1993 93-03 - February 16, 1993
93-05 - May 25, 1993 93-06 - May 25, 1993
93-07 - May 25, 1993 94-07 - June 22, 1994
94-18 - August 16, 1994 94-21 - August 16, 1994
95-01 - January 10, 1995 96-10 - August 6, 1996
97-01 - March 4, 1997 97 -09 - October 7,1997
97-03 - September 2, 1997 99-01 - February 2, 1999
99-02 - April 6, 1999 99-03 - August 17, 1999
99-04 - August 17, 1999 99-05 - July 20, 1999
99-15 - July 20, 1999 99-16 - July 02, 1999
99-17 - September 7,1999 99-18 - November 2, 1999
00-10 - June 13, 2000 00-11 - June 13, 2000
00-12 - June 13, 2000 00-13 - June 13, 2000
01-03 - December 18, 2001 02-05 - June 24, 2002
02-09 - March 5, 2002 02-20 - October 15, 2002
02-29 - October 15, 2002 03-05 - October 7, 2003
04-02- January 20, 2004 04-07- April 20,2004
04-33- December 7, 2005 05-01- March 15, 2005
05-03- August 2, 2005 05-04- August 2, 2005
05-07- January 18, 2005 05-16- August 16, 2005
5. On June 29, 2006, the Local Planning Agency/Planning and Zoning Commission
held a public hearing on the proposed ordinance after publishing notice in the Port St.
Lucie News and the Tribune at least 10 days prior to the hearing and recommended that
the proposed ordinance be approved.
6. On July 11, 2006, this Board held its first public hearing on the proposed
ordinance, after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Port St. Lucie News and the
Tribune on July 4,2006.
7. On , this Board held its second public hearing on
the proposed ordinance, after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Port St. Lucie
News and the Tribune on
8. The proposed amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code
are consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the St. Lucie
County Comprehensive Plan and are in the best interest of the health, safety and public
welfare of the citizens of St. Lucie County, Florida.
StPlleh thpellgh passages are deleted.
2
Underlined passages are added.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
St. Lucie County, Florida:
PART A. The specific amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code to
read as set forth in Exhibit" A" attached hereto and incorporate hereto in their entirety.
PART B.
CONFLICTING PROVISIONS.
Special acts of the Florida legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St.
Lucie County, County ordinances and County resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with
this ordinance are hereby superseded by this ordinance to the extent of such conflict.
PART C.
SEVERABILITY .
If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be
unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions
of this ordinance. If this ordinance or any provision thereof shall be held to be
inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstance, such holding shall not affect its
applicability to any other person, property, or circumstance.
PART D.
FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE.
The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this ordinance
to the Bureau of Administrative Code and Laws, Department of State, The Capitol,
Tallahassee, Florida 32304.
PART E.
EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance shall take effect on
,2006.
PART F.
ADOPTION.
After motion and second, the vote on this ordinance was as follows:
Chairman Doug Coward
Vice Chairman Chris Craft
Commissioner Joseph E. Smith
Commissioner Paula A. Lewis
Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson
xxx
XXX
XXX
XXX
XXX
Strtlel\ thrstlgk passages are deleted.
3
Underlined passages are added.
PART G.
CODIFICATION.
Provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated in the Code of Ordinances of St.
Lucie County, Florida, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or
other appropriate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or
relettered to accomplish such intention; provided, however, that Parts B through G shall
not be codified.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this _ day of
,2006.
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Deputy Clerk
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS
County Attorney
g: \ordnance \2006 \06-030.doc
Strijeh t,",r8ijgh passages are deleted.
4
Underlined passages are added.
Board of County Commissioners
07/11/06
File Number PA-05-006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Board of County Commissioners
FROM:
Michael Brillhart, Strategy and Special Projects Director
DATE:
July 5, 2006
SUBJECT:
Review of proposed Land Development Regulations that will apply to
property generally located within the proposed Rural Land Stewardship
Area (RLSA) Overlay Zone
BACKGROUND
In July of 2001, the State of Florida made revisions to its Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA)
legislation (F.S. 163.3177 11 (d)). These revisions to this State land management initiative were
made to promote sustainability and protection of natural resources for eligible rural land in
excess of 10,000 acres.
A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is being proposed for St. Lucie County that incorporates
these requirements through the creation of an RLSA Overlay Zone on the County's Future Land
Use Map (FLUM). The land within the Overlay Zone includes the Adams Ranch property
representing approximately 16,464 acres and the Cloud Grove DRI representing approximately
6,000 acres (see Exhibit A). The proposed Plan Amendment will include the creation of an
RLSA land use designation of the FLUM. The County Commission transmitted the RLSA
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs on October
11, 2005.
This Plan Amendment also identifies Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA) that will be protected
from future development through the transfer of development credits and Stewardship
Receiving Areas (SRA) where development rights credits can be transferred to. Future
development of the SSA (+ 12,000 acres of the Adams Ranch) and the SRA (+ 5,000 acres of
Cloud Grove) will be guided and implemented through the Overlay Zone land development
regulations. Approximately 4,400 acres of Adams Ranch within the Overlay Zone may be
eligible to serve as either an SSA or an SRA due to its low Natural Resource Index (NRI) value.
The proposed regulations, as shown in Exhibit B and referenced in Section 4.05.00 - Rural
Land Stewardship Area Overlay Zone of the Land Development Code, will be used to
implement land use and development activities within this Overlay Zone. These regulations are
being presented to the Board of County Commissioners for adoption through Ordinance No. 06-
July 11, 2006
Page 2
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Land Development Regulations
030. They will specifically identify the types and scale of development activities relevant to
properties within the SSA and SRA locations. Transfer of development credits criteria and
conveyance requirements are also contained therein.
COMMENTS
State implementation standards for the RLSA program including criteria for the proposed rural
SSA and SRA, as stipulated in F.S. 163.3177 11(d), include:
a. the requirement for compatibility with surrounding uses
b. receiving area designed to meet 25 year population projections
c. a Natural Resource Index (NRI) value used in calculating and measuring environmental
habitat credits for the sending area
d. the provision for adequate water and sewer services for the RLSA boundary
e. the development of acceptable design standards for roadways within the RLSA to ensure
the separation between the rural and urban service area boundaries
f. the requirement for mixed use development within the proposed receiving area development
reflective of a rural town, village or hamlet settlement pattern
The applicant has worked with County staff and the State Department of Community Affairs to
ensure that each of these requirements is met and that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
establishing the RLSA Overlay Zone within St. Lucie County is consistent with affecting State
statutes.
JUNE 8. 2006 - PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP
Representatives of Family Lands Remembered LLC presented information on the proposed
land development regulations (Exhibit B) for the Overlay Zone at a Planning and Zoning
Commission workshop on June 8th. Commission members identified several revisions to this
document that have been incorporated into the attached Exhibit B.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the proposed Land
Development Regulations affecting the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay Zone and
adopt Ordinance No. 06-030 at its second reading public hearing on August 14, 2006.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A (Overlay Zone Map)
Exhibit B (Proposed Land Development Regulations)
Exhibit C (Rural Land Stewardship Terms and Abbreviations)
June 29, 2006 P & Z Commission report
~
.....
c:
~
o
Ü
CD
.(3
~
.....J
~
en
cn
"ens
S:::::CÞ~
CO I;. ns
.J<_
- ~
CO Q. CÞ
'-.- >
~.co
D::cn
,,'E<
CPftSrn
cn~.J
OCÞD::
Q.- -
Of/)
'-
n.
EXHIBIT A
z~
~J
~I
II
~'l
It)
o
o
N
r.ri
...
ûí
:;¡
C)
~
't:I
~
«I
Q.
~
Q.
Q.
«I
:æ
~
.D ~
~ I: .$
I 'I::
~ ~
I
c: !
i ] ;;
~
.. "
3 3
JIIj......:)
Æ¡unD:;) HqD<pIUI~O
Ghib}'T B
.~
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
4.05.00 ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY ZONE
4.05~01. PURPOSE and INTENT
The intent of the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay Zone is to protect and
conserve natural resources and retain and promote agriculture by promoting sustainable
mixed-use development as an alternative to low-density single use development, and
provide a system of compensation to private property owners for the elimination of certain
land uses in order to protect and conserve natural and cultural resources, Open Space and
agriculture in exchange for transferable Credits that can be used to entitle such sustainable
development. The strategies herein are based on the principles of Rorida's Rural Land
Stewardship Act, pursuant to Florida Rural Land Stewardship Statute § 163.3177(11)(d),
F.S. The RLSA Overlay Zone shall include innovative and incentive based tools, techniques
and strategies that are not dependent on a regulatory approach, but will complement
existing local, regional, state and federal regulatory programs. This Section is intended to
recognize the unique characteristics of certain lands within unincorporated St. Lucie County
and to protect and conserve agricultural lands, to promote agriculture within Stewardship
Sending Areas (SSAs), and to direct incompatible uses away from wetlands. It is further
designed to discourage urban sprawl though the RLSA program, and to ensure
development within the RLSA that includes a functional mix of land uses and promotes
economic diversification within Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRAs). The regulations and
definitions in this Section shall apply only within the RLSA Overlay Zone.
~
4.05.02 Specific Definitions Applicable to the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA)
Overlay Zone
As used in the RLSA Overlay Zone, the terms set forth below shall have the following
meanings to the exclusion of any meanings ascribed to such terms in Section 2.00.00:
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. A dwelling unit that is supplemental and subordinate
to a primary dwelling on the same premises, limited to 900 square feet.
ADEQUATE AFFORDABLE OR WORKFORCE HOUSING. Adequate affordable or
workforce housing within a Town or Village shall be demonstrated through an analysis
applying the standards under Rule 9J-2.048, F.A.C., even if the Town or Village is not a
Development of Regional Impact.
AGRICULTURE INDEX. A measurement system that establishes a value for existing
agriculture activities where all land use layers above agriculture are removed through
approval of an SSA by the SOCC and recordation of a Stewardship Easement
Agreement.
ALLEY-LOADED UNIT. A unit by which vehicular access is obtained from an alley
behind the principal structure rather than from the frontage street.
BLOCK FACE. The building facades on one side of a building street frontage.
BOCC. The Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County.
'-'
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
\...-
BUILDING HEIGHT. Refers to the vertical extent of a building. Building height is
measured in Stories or, for purposes of calculating Minimum Building Height and the
Building Height to Street Width Ratio, in feet.
BUILDING HEIGHT TO STREET WIDTH RATIO. The height of the building measured
in feet divided by the width of the street measured in feet. The street width is the
distance from front of curb to front of curb. Maximum building setbacks shall not vary
more than five (5) feet from an adjacent building.
BUILD-TO LINE. Establishing the minimum and maximum setback of the primary
building's front setback by measuring the distance between a property boundary and a
building.
CENTRALIZED WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM: A wastewater collection and
treatment system that consists of collection sewers and a centralized treatment facility.
Centralized systems are used to collect and treat wastewater from entire communities.
CENTRALIZED WATER SYSTEM: A potable water system consisting of a water
supply, a water treatment facility and distribution piping to multiple users. Centralized
systems are used to provide water to either a portion of a community or an entire
community.
~
CIVIC AND INSmUTlONAL USES. Uses or structures for ancVor used by established
organizations or foundations dedicated to public service or cultural activities including
the arts, education, government and religion.
CLASSIFICATION. The systematic grouping of shared characteristics based on the
analyses of Natural Resource Index factors resulting in classified areas of Habitat
Stewardship Areas (HSA), Hydrologic Stewardship Areas (HYSA) and Water Retention
Areas (WRA) as depicted on the St. Lucie County Rural Land Stewardship Area OVerlay
Map (RLSA Figure 1).
COMPACT RURAL DEVELOPMENT (CRD). A form of SRA development that provides
flexibility with respect to the mix of uses and design standards. A CRD may include, but
is not required to have permanent residential housing and the services and facilities that
support permanent residents. An example of a CRD without permanent residential
housing is an ecotourism CRD that would have a unique set of uses and support
services different from a traditional residential village. It may contain transient lodging
facilities and services appropriate to eco-tourists, but may not provide for the range of
services necessary to support permanent residents.
CONSERVE. To use carefully or sparingly, avoiding waste.
CONTEXT ZONES. Areas that establish the uses, density and intensity of use and
other characteristics within a Town, Village or Hamlet. Context zones specify permitted
land uses, FARs, building height, setbacks, and other regulating elements.
~
-2-
~
~
\..,...
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
CULTURAL HERITAGE. Designation as cultural heritage shall apply to lands that have
been recognized as being culturally significant to St. Lucie County for fifty years or more,
historically significant structures, facilities and locations as identified by the State Historic
Preservation Officer, the National Register of Historic Places, or the BOCC.
DECENTRALIZED WASTEWATER SYSTEM: Onsite and/or cluster wastewater
systems used to treat and disperse or discharge small volumes of wastewater, generally
from dwellings and businesses that are located relatively close together. Decentralized
systems in a particular management area or jurisdiction are managed by a common
management entity.
DECENTRALIZED WATER SYSTEM: Onsite and/or cluster potable water system
consisting of a water supply, a water treatment facility and distribution of small volumes
though piping to users that are located relatively close together. Decentralized systems
in a particular management area or jurisdiction are managed by a common management
entity.
DENSITY, GROSS. The number of residential dwelling units per gross acre of land
within the development.
DENSITY, NET. The number of residential dwelling units per Net Residential Acre of
land within the development.
ECo- TOURISM. The practice of touring natural habitats and support facilities thereof in
a manner meant to minimize ecological impact.
ELIGIBLE SENDING AREA. All lands within the RLSA Overlay Zone.
ELIGIBLE RECEIVING AREA. Only those lands within the RLSA Overlay Zone
designated as "Open" and having an NRI of 1.4 or below.
EXISTING AGRICULTURE ACTIVITY INDEX. The index comprising the Agriculture
Index Factor. The index value is based on the intent of conserving agriculture in St.
Lucie County.
FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR). A method of measuring intensity through the number of
square feet of building divided by the number of square feet of land. FAR can determine
the amount of non-residential building that can be constructed and therefore may be a
better indicator of future requirements for infrastructure.
GROSS ACREAGE. Within a Town, Village, Hamlet or CRD, the Gross Acreage
includes only that area of development within the SRA that requires the consumption of
Stewardship Credits.
HSA - HABITAT STEWARDSHIP AREA. Privately owned lands delineated on the
RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1), which consist of areas with natural characteristics
that make them preferred habitat for listed species.
-3-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6116106
\.
HAMLET. A form of SRA development that are small rural residential areas with
primarily single-family housing and a limited range of convenience-oriented services.
Hamlets serve as a more sustainable alternative to traditional five (5) acre lot rural
subdivisions currently allowed by the underlying zoning.
HysA - HYDROLOGIC STEWARDSHIP AREA. Privately owned lands delineated on
the RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1), which primarily include privately owned
wetlands. HYSAs form the primary wetland Hydrologic systems in the RLSA Overlay
Zone.
INTENSITY. See Floor Area Ratio.
lANDMARK BUilDING. A prominent civic, institutional or other building or structure
that creates a significant community feature, focal point, or terminating vista.
LAND USE/LAND COVER INDICES. One of the indices comprising the Natural
Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned. For purposes of assigning values,
land use and land cover codes are grouped according to native, hydric, special habitat
designation, and moderate to high species value.
lDC. The St. Lucie County Land Development Code.
'-'
LISTED SPECIES HABITAT INDICES. One of the indices comprising the Natural
Resource Index Value, with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for
listed species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as
established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species
with land cover identified as preferred or tolerated habitat for that species. Usted species
include all federal and state listed species, federal wading bird rookeries, and state
wading bird foraging.
LIVE-WORK. A building in single ownership that provides limited commercial space and
a dwelling unit with separate entrances. The operator of the commercial use may reside
in the dwelling unit, or either the commercial space or the dwelling unit may be leased or
rented.
NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX (NRI or INDEX). A measurement system that
establishes the relative natural resource value of each area of land by objectively
measuring characteristics of land and assigning an index factor based on each
characteristic. The sum of these factors is the Index value for the land. The
characteristics measured are: Land Use/Land Cover, Soils/Surface Water, Usted
Species, and RLSA Overlay designation.
NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX MAP (INDEX MAP). The Rural Land Stewardship Area
Natural Resource Index Map (RLSA Figure 3) graphically illustrates the Index as existent
at time of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan amendment which established the RLSA
Overlay Zone.
'-'
-4-
~
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
NATURAL RESOURCE INDEX VALUE (INDEX VALUE). The sum of the values
assigned to each area, derived through the calculation of the values assigned to each of
the characteristics included in the Index.
NET RESIDENTIAL ACRE. The number of acres within the boundary of a development
excluding areas devoted to Open Space, stormwater retention areas, wetlands,
recreational space, parks and non-residential development.
NEIGHBORHOOD EDGE. A Context Zone that includes the least intensity and diversity
within a Town, Village or Hamlet. The zone may be predominantly single-family
residential and recreational uses. The Neighborhood Edge may be used to provide a
transition to adjoining land uses.
NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL A Context Zone that creates community diversity with
the inclusion of a mix of single and multi-family housing, neighborhood scale goods and
services, schools, parks and other recreational uses, and Open Space.
OPEN. Privately owned lands delineated on the Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay
Map (RLSA Figure 1), the majority of which have a Natural Resource Index Value of 1.4
or less, and are typically suitable for development.
~
OPEN SPACE. Any parcel or area of land or water that is set aside, open and
unobstructed to the sky, and designated or reserved for public or private use or
enjoyment. Open Space includes active and passive recreational areas such as parks,
playgrounds, ball fields, golf courses, lakes, waterways, lagoons, reservoirs, flood plains,
nature trails, buffers, native vegetation preserves, landscape areas, public and private
conservation lands, agricultural areas (not including structures), easements for
underground utilities, and water retention and management areas. Buildings shall not be
counted as part of any Open Space calculation. Vehicular use surface areas of streets,
alleys, driveways, and off- street parking and loading areas shall not be counted as part
of any Open Space calculation.
P ATHW A Y. A defined corridor for the primary use of non-motorized travel.
POST-SECONDARY INSTITUTION ANCILLARY USES. Any use or facility owned by a
public or private post-secondary instiMion.
PUBLIC BENEFIT USES. Public benefit uses include public and private schools (pre-K-
12); public or private post-secondary institutions; Post Secondary Institution Ancillary
Uses; Adequate Affordable or Workforce Housing; cultural facilities; future transportation
corridors including transit; community parks exceeding the minimum requirement of two
hundred (200) square feet per dwelling unit; regional parks; agricultural, environmental
or natural resource research centers; and governmental facilities or similar community
service uses as determined by the BOCC in its approval of an 8RA application.
PRELIMINARY sRA CREDIT AGREEMENT MEMORANDUM. A memorandum that
states that an 8RA Applicant and the County shall enter into a Preliminary 8RA Credit
Agreement for those Stewardship Credits needed to develop that portion of an 8RA that
is the subject of a Preliminary Development Agreement with the Florida Department of
'-'
-5-
'-'
\.,.
'-"
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
Community Affairs for purposes of the Development of Regional Impact program. Such
memorandum shall contain the same information as required for an SRA Credit
Agreement Memorandum.
RLsA OVERLAY MAP. The map entitled ·St. Lucie County Rural Land Stewardship
Area Overlay Map,· which identifies those areas classified as HYSA, HSA, WRA, and
Open (RLSA Figure 1).
RLSA OVERLAY ZONE. St. Lucie County Rural Land Stewardship Area OVerlay Zone.
The area generally depicted on the Future Land Use Map and specifically depicted on
the Official Zoning Atlas Map as the Rural Land Stewardship Area OVerlay.
SENDING AREA LAND USE LAYER (LAYER). Permitted and conditional land uses
within the underlying zoning that are of a similar type or Intensity and that are grouped
together in the same column on the St. Lucie County Rural Land Stewardship Area
Overlay Sending Area Land Use Layer Matrix (RLSA Figure 4).
SENDING AREA LAND USE LAYER MATRIX (MATRIX). The tabulation of the
permitted and conditional land uses within the underlying zoning set forth in Section
4.05.07.B.6 with each Sending Area Land Use Layer displayed as a single column
(RLSA Figure 4).
SOILS/SURFACE WATER INDICES. One of the indices comprising the Natural
Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon soil types classified
using the Natural Soils Landscape Positions (NSLP) categories.
SPECIAL USE DISTRICT. An area for certain uses that cannot be incorporated into one
(1) of the Context Zones. Special Use Districts provide for the inclusion of unique uses
and development standards not otherwise defined in a Context Zone.
SRA APPLICATION. An application submitted to the County, reviewed by staff and
subject to approval by the BOCC, to designate a Stewardship Receiving Area.
SRA CREDIT AGREEMENT. An Agreement required by the County between the
County and a landowner petitioning to have all or a portion of land owned within the
RLSA Overlay Zone designated as an SRA and who will utilize Credits to develop land
within the SRA.
SRA CREDIT AGREEMENT MEMORANDUM. A memorandum that states that an SRA
Applicant and the County shall enter into an SRA Credit Agreement.
SRA - STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA. A designated area within the RLSA Overlay
Zone that has been approved by the BOCC for the development of a Town, Village,
Hamlet or CRD and that requires the consumption of Stewardship Credits.
SSA APPLICATION. An application submitted to the County, reviewed by staff and
subject to approval by the BOCC, to designate a Stewardship Sending Area.
SSA CREDIT AGREEMENT. An agreement required by the County between the
County and any landowner petitioning to have all or a portion of land owned within the
-6-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
\.,.
RLSA OVertay Zone designated as an SSA and who is to obtain SSA Credits for the land
so designated. SSA Credit Agreements entered into by and between a landowner and
the County that include restoration credits shall reference the plans and specifications
for the restoration activity upon which the restoration credits are based.
SSA - STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA. A designated area within the RLSA OVerlay
Zone that has been approved for the generation of Stewardship Credits in exchange for
the elimination of one (1) or more Sending Area Land Use Layers.
STEWARDSHIP CREDIT (CREDIT). A transferable unit of measure generated by an
SSA and consumed by an SRA. Seven (7) Credits are required in exchange for the
development of one (1) acre of land in an SRA as provided in Section 4.05.07.B.
STEWARDSHIP CREDIT DATABASE. A database maintained by the County that
keeps track of all of the Credit transactions (creation of Credits through SSA designation
and the use of Credits through SRA designation) approved by the County.
STEW ARDsHIP CREDIT SYSTEM. A system that creates incentives to protect and
preserve natural resources, cultural and historical areas, and agricultural areas in
exchange for the use of Stewardship Credits to entitle development. The greater the
natural resource, agricultural, historical or cultural value of the area being preserved, the
greater the number of Stewardship Credits can be generated. Credits are generated
through the designation of SSAs and consumed through the designation of 8RAs.
Credits may also be created and held for future transfer.
~
STEWARDSHIP CREDIT USE AND RECONCILIATION APPLICATION. An application
required to be submitted by an Applicant as part of an 8RA Application Package in order
to track the transfer of Credits from SSA(s) to SRA(s).
STEW ARDSHIP CREDIT WORKSHEET. An analytical tool that describes the
Stewardship Credit calculation process including the Natural Resource Index, Agriculture
Index and Sending Area Land Use Layer components shown as RLSA Figure 2 .
STEWARDSHIP EASEMENT AGREEMENT. An agreement that is required to be
prepared and submitted by an applicant for an SSA. Such an agreement is required for
all SSA Applications. The agreement shall impose a restrictive covenant or grant a
perpetual restrictive easement that shall be recorded for each SSA, shall run with the
land and shall be in favor of St. Lucie County and one (1) or more of the following:
Florida DEP, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, SFWMD, or a
recognized land trust. The Stewardship Easement Agreement shall identify the specific
land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such
measures, including performance standards and annual monitoring requirements.
STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY CLASSIFICATION. One (1) of the indices comprising the
Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon the
classification of the land on the RLSA OVertay Map (RLSA Figure 1) as Hydrologic
Stewardship Area (HYSA), Habitat Stewardship Area (H8A), or Water Retention Area
(WRA).
'-'
- 7-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
STORY. That portion of a building included between a floor which is calculated as part of
the building's habitable floor area and the floor or roof next above it.
TARGETED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS (TCI): Targeted Capital Improvements (TCI)
can be defined as investments in capital facilities including, but not necessarily limited to,
roads, stormwater management, utilities, public safety facilities, libraries, and schools
located in SRAs. Such investments are sized to meet the needs of the SRA
communities.
\...
TOWN. Towns are a form of SRA and are the largest and most diverse form of SRA,
with a full range of housing types and mix of uses. Towns have high level services and
infrastructure which support development that is sustainable, mixed use, walkable, and
provides a balance of land uses to reduce automobile trips and increase livability. Towns
are comprised of several neighborhoods that have individual identity and character.
TOWN CENTER. A Context Zone that is intended to provide a wide range of uses,
including daily goods and services, culture and entertainment, and residential uses
within a Town. The Town Center is an extension of the Town Core, however the density
and intensity are less as the Town Center serves as a transition to surrounding
neighborhoods.
TOWN CORE. A Context Zone within a Town. The Town Core is the most dense and
diverse Context Zone with a full range of uses. The Town Core is the most active area
within the Town with uses mixed vertically and horizontally.
UNDERLYING ZONING. The allowable uses, density, intensity and other land
development regulations assigned to land within the RLSA Overlay Zone by the St.
Lucie County Land Development Code in effect prior to the adoption of the RLSA
Overlay Zone and prior to SSA and/or SRA approval.
VILLAGE. Villages are a form of SRA and are primarily residential communities with a
diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the
particular village. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include
a mixed-use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support
services and facilities.
VILLAGE CENTER. A Context Zone within a Village that is intended to provide a wide
range of uses including daily goods and services, culture and entertainment, and
residential uses within a Village.
WRA - WATER RETENTION AREA. Privately owned lands delineated on the RLSA
Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1), that serve to function as water retention and conveyance
areas or other water storage areas and that provide surface water quality and other
natural resource value. WRA's may continue to function for agricultural uses; surface
water retention, detention, treatment and/or conveyance; habitat and passive
recreational uses.
\....
-8-
~
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6116106
4.05.03. ESTABLISHMENT OF RLSA OVERLAY ZONE
In order to implement the RLSA Overlay Zone Regulations, a RLSA Overlay Zone, to be
designated as "RLSAO- on the official zoning atlas, is hereby established.
A. The lands included in the RLSA Overlay Zone and to which the RLSA Overlay Zone
Regulations apply are depicted by the St. Lucie County Rural Land Stewardship Area
Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1) in the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan.
S. Within the RLSA Overlay Zone, lands may be designated to implement the
Stewardship Credit system as follows:
\...
1. Establishment of SSA designations. A RLSA OVeriay Zone classification to be
known as SSAs, and to be designated on the official zoning atlas by the
symbol -RLSA-SSA #_-, is hereby established. This Overlay Zone
classification will be used for those lands within the RLSA Overiay Zone that
are designated by the Board of County Commissioners (SOCC) as SSAs. The
approval of this designation shall be governed by the procedures as
prescribed in the RLSA Overlay Zone Regulations.
2. Establishment of SRA designations. A RLSA Overlay Zone classification to be
known as SRAs, and to be designated on the official zoning atlas by the
symbol-RLSA-SRA #_-, is hereby established. This Overlay Zone
classification will be used for those lands within the RLSA Overlay Zone that
are designated by the SOCC as SRAs. The approval of this designation shall
be governed by the procedures as prescribed in the RLSA Overlay Zone
Regulations.
4.05.04. LAND USES ALLOWED IN THE RLSA OVERLAY ZONE
Permitted land uses allowed within the RLSA Overlay Zone are of two (2) types: those
allowed by the underlying zoning prior to designation of SSAs and SRAs; and those uses
provided for in SSAs and SRAs after designation. The underlying permitted uses within the
RLSA Overlay Zone are defined in the underlying zoning. Lands that are in the RLSA
Overlay Zone but that have not been designated as an SSA or SRA, maintain the same
underlying zoning and conditional use rights, including uses and densities and intensities of
use, until such zoning and conditional use rights are changed pursuant to the St. Lucie
County Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay and the provisions of this Section..
4.05.05. STEWARDSHIP CREDITS
A. Establishment of a Stewardship Credit Database. The County Administrator or
designee shall cause to be developed a Stewardship Credit Database to track the
generation (by SSAs) and consumption (by SRAs) of Stewardship Credits within the
RLSA Overlay Zone. The database shall be in an electronic form that can be linked
to the RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1) and can readily produce reports that will
afford convenient access to the data by the public. The database shall be updatednupon approval of an SSA or SRA Application Package.
~
-9-
Section 4.05.05
St. Lucie County RLSA LDRs
FCDG 5118 EDITS TO WORKING DRAFT 512106
~
B. Density and Use. Except as provided herein, there shall be no change to the
underlying density and permitted uses of land within the RLSA Overlay Zone, as set
forth in the underlying zoning. No part of the Stewardship Credit System shall be
Imposed upon a property owner without that owner's written consent. The underlying
zoning will remain in effect for all land not subject to the creation, transfer or receipt
of Stewardship Credits. The establishment of the Overlay does not by itself alter the
uses or density or intensity of use for underlying land uses within the Overlay.
\...
c. Creation of Stewardship Credits. Stewardship Credits (Credits) may be
created from any lands within the RLSA OVerlay Zone from which one (1) or more
Sending Area Land Use Layers are removed. These lands will be identified as SSAs.
All privately owned lands within the RLSA OVerlay Zone are eligible for designation
as an SSA. The creation of the RSLA Overlay and the inclusion of property within it
includes the right to create the Stewardship Credits through the SSA application
process and using the formulas established through the OVerlay Map (RLSA Figure
1), the Credit Worksheet (RLSA Figure 2), the Natural Resource Index Map (Figure
3), and the Stewardship Sending Area Matrix (ALSA Figure 4). An approved SSA
Application creates the Stewardship Credits, which become effective once the
Stewardship Easement Agreement is recorded in the public records of St. Lucie
County. Stewardship Credits may be transferred from any approved SSA to an
entity or indMdual, to an eligible receiving area, or applied to an SRA, subject to
compliance with all applicable provisions of these policies. Upon petition by the
property owner seeking an SSA designation, and approval by Ordinance by the
BOCC, land becomes designated as an SSA. For each SSA, an SSA Credit
Agreement shall be executed that identifies those land uses that have been
removed. Once land is designated as an SSA and Credits are granted to the owner,
no increase in density or uses that are inconsistent with the SSA Credit Agreement
shall be allowed on such property. Once a land use layer has been removed from an
SSA through a recorded Stewardship Easement Agreement, those uses are
permanently eliminated, and those layers removed cannot be thereafter
reestablished.
D. Transfer of Stewardship Credits. Credits can be transferred only to lands
within the RLSA OVerlay Zone that meet suitability criteria in Section 4.05.08.A.1.
Stewardship Credits may be transferred to another entity, to an eligible receiving
area, or applied to an SRA. The procedures for the establishment and transfer of
Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein. Stewardship Credits will be
exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a
per acre basis.
E. Allocation of Stewardship Credits. Stewardship Credits generated from one (1)
SSA may be allocated to one or more SRAs, and an SRA may receive Stewardship
Credits generated from one or more SSAs.
'-"
- 10-
~
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULA TIONS6/12106
4.05.06. LANDS WITHIN THE RLSA OVERLAY ZONE PRIOR TO SsA OR SRA
DESIGNATION
All lands within the RLSA Overlay Zone have been delineated on the ALSA Overlay Map
(ALSA Figure 1). Unless and until designated as an SSA or SRA, lands within the ALSA
Overlay Zone shall remain subject to the underlying zoning.
A. Underlying zoning and permitted uses. The underlying zoning and permitted
uses shall apply until lands within the ALSA Overlay Zone are voluntarily designated
as an SSA or SRA.
B. Density and Intensity. No increase in density or intensity within the ALSA
Overlay Zone is permitted beyond the underlying zoning except in areas designated
as SRAs. Within SRAs, density and intensity may only be increased through the
provisions of the Stewardship Credit System outlined in Section 4.05.08.
4.05.07. SSA DESIGNATION
Lands within the ALSA Overlay Zone may be designated as an SSA pursuant to the
requirements of this section:
A. Lands Within the RLSA Overlay Zone that may be designated as an SSA.
Any privately owned land within the RLSA Overlay Zone may be designated as an
SSA.
~
1. At a minimum, Aesidential uses (layer 1) as listed in the St. Lucie County
RLSA Sending Area Land Use Layer Matrix (ALSA Figure 4) shall be
eliminated as permitted land uses within an SSA
2. During permitting to serve new uses within an SRA, additions or
modifications to WRAs may be required, including but not limited to
changes to control elevations, discharge rates, storm water pre-treatment,
grading, excavation or fill. Such additions and modifications shall be
allowed subject to review and approval by the SFWMD. Such additions
and modifications to WRAs shall be designed to ensure that there is no
net loss of habitat function within the WRAs unless there is compensating
mitigation or restoration in other areas of the RLSA Overlay Zone that will
provide comparable habitat function.
B. SSA Credit Generation - Stewardship Credit System. Stewardship Credits
(Credits) are created from any lands within the RLSA Overlay Zone from which one
(1) or more Sending Area Land Use Layers are removed and that are subsequently
designated as SSAs by the SOCC.
1. Matrix Calculation. The number of Credits generated through designation as
an SSA is established in a matrix calculation as follows:
Stewardship Index Factor Value X Acreage X Base Value = # of Stewardship Credits
'-
A methodology has been adopted in the Comprehensive Plan for the
calculation of Credits based upon: 1) the Natural Resource Index Value of the
- 11 -
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/12/06
~
land being designated as an SSA, and 2) the number of Sending Area Land
Use Layers being eliminated. Incentive Credits are also established to
encourage the protection and conservation of agriculture activities, the
restoration of environmentally significant lands, and the protection of cultural
heritage.
\...
2. Agricultural Incentive Credits. If an applicant protects and conserves
agriculture activities by designating agriculture lands as an SSA, Agriculture
Stewardship Credits shall be granted in a Stewardship Sending Area. Although
the Stewardship Credit Agreement will require maintenance of the lands within
an approved SSA, it is not possible to require that the lands always be used
for agricultural purposes. To provide additional incentives for SSA lands to
continue in agricultural production, if those lands continue thereafter in
agricultural production for fifteen (15) years after designation as an SSA, an
additional .5 Credits/acre shall be granted upon further SSA application review
and BOCC approval. These Credits are eligible after every period of fifteen
(15) years following designation as an SSA.
3. Cultural Heritage Incentive Credits. Priority is given to protecting and
conserving lands that are of historical value to St. Lucie County. Designation
as cultural heritage shall apply to lands that have been recognized as being
culturally significant to St. Lucie County for fifty (50) years or more, historically
significant structures, facilities and locations as identified by the State Historic
Preservation Officer, the National Register of Historic Places, or the BOCC.
Any SSA application that includes supporting data and analysis, and requests
Cultural Heritage Credits, shall be reviewed by the St. Lucie County Historical
Commission for recommendation to the BOCC. All contributing structures,
facilities and locations shall be mapped and tabulated in acres. Cultural
heritage preservation approved by the BOCC in an SSA shall be granted .5
Credits per acre.
4. Restoration Incentive Credits. If the applicant asserts that the land being
designated as an SSA has restoration potential, including but not limited to
conversion of citrus grove to pasture having habitat value, creation of
upland/wetland habitat, or enhanced wildlife corridors or habitat function, or as
part of a designated Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Program (CERP)
project, an evaluation of the restoration potential of the land being designated
shall be prepared by a qualified environmental consultant on behalf of the
applicant and submitted as part of the SSA Designation Application Package.
Restoration Stewardship Credits shall be applied to an SSA subject to the
following regulations:
'-'
a. Lands designated "Restoration" shall be restricted in accordance with the
Stewardship Credit Agreement and shall be maintained in their existing
condition until such time as restoration activities occur as determined by
the agency with jurisdiction for the restoration work. Upon completion of
restoration, the land shall be managed in accordance with the applicable
restoration permit conditions and/or the recorded Stewardship Easement
Agreement.
- 12-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/12/06
'-'
b. If the applicant agrees to complete the restoration improvements and the
eligibility criteria below are satisfied, three (3) Credits shall be generated
for each acre of land.
c. Stewardship Credits shall be authorized at the time of SSA designation
and are awarded when the restoration work has been completed if the
restoration is meeting established performance standards. Credits shall
be proposed and justified by applicant and approved by BOCC at the time
of public hearing.
d. One (1) or more of the following eligibility criteria shall be used in
evaluating a request for Restoration Stewardship Credits:
i. Land could be converted or restored (i.e. from a grove to pasture
having habitat value);
ii. Documentation of state or federal listed species utilizing the land
or a contiguous parcel. Such lands do not have to be under
common ownership with the lands proposed to be restored.
iii. Uplands or wetlands that could be restored and managed to
provide habitat for specific listed species.
~
iv.
Lands within foraging distance from a wading bird rookery or other
listed bird species colony, where restoration and proper
management could increase foraging opportunities.
v. Lands where restoration would Improve environments for
recreation and eco-tourism activities.
vi. Lands within a designated Comprehensive Everglades
Restoration Program (CERP) project.
5. Indices and Values. A set of Index Factors has been established as part of
the Stewardship Credit Worksheet (RLSA Figure 2).
a. Natural Resource Indices.
Land Cover/Land Use Indices
Soils/Surface Water Indices
Listed Species Indices
RLSA Overlay Characteristic Indices (HSA, HYSA, WRA)
b. Agriculture Index.
Existing Agriculture Activity (removal of layers 1, 2 and 3)
c. Index Values. During the RLSA Overlay study, based upon data and
analysis, all lands within the RLSA Overlay Zone were assigned a value for
each Index.
'-'
- 13-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6112/06
\...
d. Index Map. A Natural Resource Index Map (RLSA Figure 3) adopted as a
part of the RLSA Overlay, indicates the Natural Resource Stewardship Index
Value for all land within the RLSA Overlay Zone. Credits from any lands
designated as SSAs shall be based upon the Natural Resource Index values
in effect at the time of designation. At the time of designation, the Natural
Resource Index Assessment required in Section 4.05.07.C.3 shall document
any necessary adjustments to the index values reflected on the Index Map
(RLSA Figure 3). Any change in the characteristics of land due to alteration of
the land prior to the designation of an SSA that either increases or decreases
any Index Value shall result in a corresponding adjustment in the Credit
value. .
~
6. Sending Area Land Use Layers to be Eliminated. A set of Sending Area
Land Use Layers has been established as part of the Stewardship Credit
Worksheet (RLSA Figure 2) and adopted as the St. Lucie County Rural Land
Stewardship Area Sending Area Land Use Layer Matrix (RLSA Figure 4) set
forth below. Each Layer incorporates the permitted or conditional uses allowed
under the underlying zoning. Each Layer listed below has an established Credit
value (percentage of a base Credit) developed during the RLSA Overlay Study.
At the time of SSA application, a landowner proposing to have land designated
as an SSA shall determine how many of the Sending Area Land Use Layers
are to be removed from the proposed SSA. A Sending Area Land Use Layer
can only be removed in its entirety (all associated activitieslland use are
removed), and Layers shall be removed sequentially and cumulatively in the
order listed below.
Sending Area Land Use Layers.
1 - Residential Land Uses
2 - General and Conditional uses
3 - Earth Mining and Processing Uses
4 - Agriculture - Group 1 Uses
5 - Agriculture - Group 2 Uses
6 - Restoration and Natural Resource Uses
~
- 14-
~
~
'-'
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/12/06
St. Lucie County Rural Land Stewardship Area
Sending Area Land Use Layer Matrix
Note: Groupings of Land Uses permitted in accordance with Policy 1.10 of the RLSA Overlay in
the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan
Reslclenlill Land GenerIII EIrIh IIInIng end Agrlcufture Agriculture RestorIIion and
Use Conditional Use ProcessIng Ute Group 1 Use Group 2 UN Natural ReIource
Layer L.Iyer L.Iyer L.Iyer Layer Ute Layer
Single-family Aircraft storage and Mi1Ing and quarry of Agricultural AgricufIural Wildlife management,
detached dwelling equipment nonmetallic minerals, production - crops, production - plant and wildlife
with guest house maintenance except fuels citrus, landscape Ranching, livestock conservancies,
1 urit per 5 acres nursery raising & animai refuges and
specialties, pasture, sanctuaries
sod and grazing
MOOUe homes Airports and flying, SirVe-family Agricultural services Cuhural, educationai FIShing, lulling &
1 unR per 5 acres landing, and take.off detached dwelling andforeco-lourism trapping
fields unit or mobile home, uses and support
for on·site security facilities, and their
purposes related modes of
transporting
participants, viewers,
or patrons; tour
operations, such as,
but not limited to
airboats, swamp
buggies, horse and
similar modes of
lion
Family day care Industriai wastewater Agricuhurallabor Excavation Incidental Hunüng Cabins
homes disposal housing to Agricultural
Operations
Family residential Manufacturing Farm products Single-family Water management,
homes as defined in warehousing and detached dwelling groundwater
IheLDC storage unR or mobile home, recharge
11J'1it œr 500 acres
Retail trade ForestJy Riding Stables Restoration,
mitigation
Sewage disposal Research facilities, Kennels Water supply, well
noncommercial fields
Retail trade and T elecomlTllllication BoaIdwaiks, nature
wholesale trade - towers trails
sLtJordinate to the
primary authorized
use or activity
Mobiie food vendors Outdoor shooting
ranges, providing site
plan approvai is
obtained
Off-lOad vehicle Aquaculture
parks, except go-cart
raceway operation or
rentals
- 15-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/12/06
'-"
c. SSA Application Package. An application to designate lands(s) within the
RLSA Overlay Zone as an SSA shall be filed pursuant to the regulations of this
Section. An SSA Application Package shall include the following:
1. SSA Application. A landowner or his/her agent, hereafter -applicant, - shall
submit an application for the designation of SSA for lands within the RLSA
Overlay Zone to the County Administrator or his designee, on an approved
application form. The application shall be accompanied by the documentation
as required by this Section, including a completed Stewardship Credit
Worksheet (RLSA Figure 2) that reflects the pertinent information requested
below.
2. Application Fee. An application fee shall accompany the application.
3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. The applicant shall prepare and
submit as part of the SSA Application a report entitled Natural Resource
Index Assessment that documents the Natural Resource Index Value scores.
The Assessment shall include a summary analysis that quantifies the number
of acres by Index Values, the permitted land uses being removed, and the
resulting number of Credits being generated. The Assessment shall:
a. Verify that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA
Overlay Designation are still valid through recent aerial photography
or satellite imagery, agency-approved mapping, or other
documentation, as verified by field inspections.
b. If this Assessment establishes that the Index Value scores
assigned during the RLSA Overlay Study are no longer valid, the
Assessment shall document the Index Value scores of the land as of
the date of the SSA Designation Application.
c. Quantify the acreage of agriculturallancls, by type, being protected
and conserved;
'-'
d. Quantify the acreage of non-agricultural acreage, by type, being
protected and conserved;
e. Quantify the acreage of all lands by type within the proposed SSA
that have an Index Value greater than 1.4.
4. Support Documentation. In addition, the following support documentation
shall be provided for each SSA being designated:
a. Legal description, including sketch or survey;
b. Acreage calculations, e.g., acres of HYSAs, HSAs, and WRAs,
etc., being put into the SSA;
c. RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1) delineating the area of the
RLSA Overlay Zone being designated as an SSA;
'--
- 16-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/12/06
'-"
d. Aerial photograph(s) at a suitable scale, delineating the area being
designated as an SSA;
e. Natural Resource Index Map of area being designated as an SSA;
f. FOOT Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System
(FLUCFCS) map(s) at a suitable scale delineating the area being
designated as an SSA on an aerial photograph;
g. Listed species occurrence map(s) from United States Fish and
Wildlife Service, Florida Fish Wildlife Conservation Commission,
and Florida Natural Areas Inventory, delineating the area being
designated as an SSA;
h. United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources
Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) Soils map(s) delineating the
area being designated as an SSA;
i. Documentation to support a change in the related Natural
Resource Index Value scores, if appropriate; and
j. Calculations that quantify the number of acres by Index Values,
the sending area land use layers being removed, and the resulting
number of Credits being generated.
k. If applicable, the number of Credits to be granted for Agricultural
Incentive Credits. If previously designated as an SSA evidence
that since being designated as an SSA, the subject property has
continued in agricultural production for fifteen (15) years.
I. If applicable, the number of Credits to be granted for Cultural
Heritage Incentive Credits, together with the following information:
(1) A legal description of lands to be designated for Cultural
Heritage (i.e. as an archeological or historical site by an
archeologist or historian);
(2) A map depicting the land being designated as an SSA,
with the lands to be designated as a cultural heritage site;
(3) . The number of Incentive Credits to be granted for the
lands designated a cultural heritage site;
(4) An Archeological and/or Historical Analysis and Report,
which shall include a written evaluation of the area or site
consistent with the requirements of Chapter 1A-46, F.A.C.,
adopted by the State Historic Preservation Officer;.
m. If applicable, the number of Credits to be granted for Restoration
Incentive Credits, together with the following information:
(1) A legal description of lands to be designated for restoration;
~
'-'
- 17-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/12/06
'-"
(2) A map at a suitable scale depicting the land being designated
as SSA, with the lands to be designated for restoration for which
the applicant has committed to complete the restoration identified
as Restoration Incentive (-R 1-);
(3) The number of Incentive Credits to be granted for the lands
designated "R I";
(4) A Restoration Analysis and Report, which shall include a
written evaluation of the restoration area's existing
ecologicaVhabitat value and the necessary restoration efforts
required to reestablish original conditions; enhance the
functionality of wetlands or wildlife habitat; remove exotics so as to
enhance the continued viability of native vegetation and wetlands
or otherwise; and
(5) A Restoration Plan that addresses, at a minimum, the
following elements:
(a) Restoration goals or species potentially affected;
(b) Description of the work to be performed;
(c) Identification of the entity responsible for performing
the work;
\w
(d) Work Schedule;
(e) Success Criteria; and
(f) Annual management, maintenance and monitoring.
5. SSA Credit Agreement. Any landowner petitioning to have all or a portion
of land owned within the RLSA Overlay Zone designated as an SSA and who
is to obtain SSA Credits for the land so designated shall enter into an SSA
Credit Agreement with the County. SSA Credit Agreements entered into by
and between a landowner and the County shall contain the following
applicable criteria:
a. The number of acres, and a legal description of all lands subject to
the SSA Credit Agreement;
b. A map or plan of the land subject to the agreement that depicts
any lands designated HYSAs, HSAs, or WRAs and the acreage of
lands so designated;
c. A narrative description of all land uses that shall be removed from
the land upon approval of the SSA Credit Agreement;
d. Calculations that support the total number of SSA Credits that
result from the Natural Resource Index Assessment;
\...
- 18-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/12/06
\.r
e. A copy of the Stewardship Easement Agreement applicable to the
land, which shall be granted in perpetuity and shall be recorded within
one-hundred and twenty 120 days following approval of the SSA
Credit Agreement;
f. Land management measures that will be undertaken and the party
responsible for such measures, including performance standards and
annual monitoring requirements;
g. Provisions requiring that, upon designation of land as an SSA, the
. owner shall not seek or request, and the County shall not grant or
approve, any increase in density or any inconsistent uses beyond
those specified in the SSA Credit Agreement on the land, including
the permanent removal of land use layers; and
h. Provisions regarding and ensuring the enforceability of the SSA
Credit Agreement.
6. Public Hearing for SSA Credit Agreement. The SSA Credit Agreement
shall be approved by an Ordinance of the BOCC after an advertised public
hearing by majority vote. The hearing on the SSA Credit Agreement may be
concurrent with the hearing on an SSA Application Package.
7. Stewardship Easement Agreement. The applicant shall prepare and
submit a Stewardship Easement Agreement including the following:
a. The Stewardship Easement Agreement shall impose a restrictive
covenant or grant a perpetual restrictive easement that shall be
recorded for each SSA, shall run with the land and shall be in favor of
St. Lucie County and one (1) or more of the following: Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Florida Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services (DOACS), South RoridaWater
Management District (SFWMD), or a recognized land trust.
b. The Stewardship Easement Agreement shall identify the specific
land management measures that will be undertaken and the party
responsible for such measures, including performance standards and
annual monitoring requirements.
c. In the event that the land being designated as an SSA is being
transferred to a conservation or governmental entity by fee simple
title, the deed shall reference the Stewardship Easement Agreement.
D. SSA Review Process.
1. Pre-application Conference with County Staff. Prior to the submission of
an application for SSA designation, the applicant shall attend a pre-
application conference with the County Administrator or his designee and
other county staff, agencies, and officials involved in the review and
processing of such applications and related materials. If an SRA designation
application is to be filed concurrent with an SSA application, only one (1) pre-
'-"
\.,.
- 19-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/12/06
'--
application conference shall be required. This pre-application conference
should address, but not be limited to, such matters as:
a. Conformity of the proposed SSA with the gòals, objectives, and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan;
b. Review of the Stewardship Credit Worksheet (RLSA Figure 2) and
Natural Resource Index Assessment for the property;
c. Identification of the recognized entity to be named in the restrictive
covenant or perpetual restrictive easement, and;
d. Identification of the proposed land management measures that will
be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures, including
performance standards and annual monitoring requirements.
2. Application Package Submittal and Processing Fees. The required
number of copies of each SSA Application and the associated processing fee
shall be submitted to the County Administrator or his designee. The contents
of said application package shall be in accordance with Section 4.05.07.C.
3. Application Deemed Complete and Sufficient for Review. Within ten (10)
days of receipt of the SSA Application, the County Administrator or his
designee shall notify the applicant in writing that the application is complete
and sufficient for agency review or specify additiona1 information needed to
find the application to be complete and sufficient. If required, the applicant
shall submit additional information. Within ten (10) days of receipt of the
additional information, the County Administrator or his designee shall review
it and notify the applicant in writing that the application is complete and
sufficient, or request further information needed to clarify the additional
information or to answer new questions raised by, or directly related to, the
additional information. The County may request additional information no
more than twice, unless the applicant waives this limitation.
4. Review by County Reviewing Agencies: Once the SSA application is
deemed complete and sufficient, the County Administrator or his designee
will distribute it to specific County staff for their review.
. 5. Designation Report. Within twenty (20) days from the receipt of a
complete and sufficient application, county staff shall prepare a written report
containing their review findings and a recommendation of approval, approval
with conditions or denial. This timeframe may be extended upon written
agreement by the applicant.
E. SSA Approval Process.
1. Review by Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC). The EAC shall
review any proposed Ordinance to designate lands within the RLSA Overlay
Zone as an SSA. The EAC shall forward its recommendation to the BOCC.
2. Public Hearing Before BOCC. The BOCC shall hold an advertised public
hearing on the proposed Ordinance to approve an SSA Application, SSA
\...
'-"
-20 -
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/12/06
~
Credit Agreement and Stewardship Easement Agreement. Notice of the
Board's intention to consider the Ordinance shall be given at least ten (10)
days prior to said hearing by publication in a newspaper of general circulation
in the County. A copy of such notice shall be kept available for public
inspection during regular business hours of the Office of Clerk to the SOCC.
The notice shall state the date, time and place of the hearing, the title of the
proposed Ordinance, and the place or places within the County where the
proposed Ordinance and the SSA Application Package may be inspected by
the public. The notice shall provide a general description and a map or sketch
of the affected land and shall advise that interested parties may appear at the
hearing and be heard with respect to the proposed Ordinance. The BOCC
shall review the staff report and recommendations, oral and written
submissions from the public received at the hearing and, if it finds that all
requirements for designation have been met, shall, by Ordinance, approve
the application. If the BOCC finds that one (1) or more of the requirements for
designation have not been met, it shall either deny the application or approve
it with conditions mandating compliance with all unmet requirements.
Approval of such Ordinance shall require a majority vote by the SOCC.
3. Legal Description. Following the BOCC's approval of the SSA Application
and SSA Credit Agreement, a legal description of the land designated SSA,
the SSA credits granted, and the executed Stewardship Easement
Agreement applicable to such lands (as prepared by the SSA Applicant and
reviewed and approved by St. Lucie County staff), shall be provided to the St.
Lucie County Property Appraiser and the SSA Applicant. The Stewardship
Easement Agreement shall be recorded within one hundred and twenty (120)
days by the applicant in the public records of St. Lucie County.
4. Update the RLSA Overlay Map (RSLA Figure 1) and Official Zoning Atlas.
The Official Zoning Atlas shall then be updated to reflect the designation of
the SSA. Sufficient information shall be included on the updated zoning maps
so as to direct interested parties to the appropriate public records associated
with the designation, including but not limited to Ordinance number and SSA
Designation Application number. After the approval of any SSA, and during
the County's next regular Future Land Use Map amendment process, the
County will delineate the boundaries of each approved SSA on the Future
Land Use Map and the RLSA OVerlay Map (RLSA Figure 1) with the symbol
"RLSA-SSA #_."
F. SSA Amendments. St. Lucie County shall consider an amendment to an
approved SSA in the same manner described in this Section for the designation of
an SSA. Under no circumstances shall Sending Area Land Use Layers, once
removed as part of an SSA designation, be added back to the SSA. At the pre-
application conference on a proposed amendment, the County Administrator or
designee may grant a waiver to any portion of an SSA Application Package for which
the required infonnation has not materially changed since SSA designation or is not
relevant to the requested amendment.
~
~.
-21-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/12/06
\.,.
4.05.08. sRA DESIGNATION
~
Lands within the RLSA Overlay Zone may be designated as an SRA pursuant to the
requirements of this section.
A. Lands Within the RLSA Overlay Zone that may be designated as an sRA.
Any privately owned land within the RLSA Overlay Zone that meets the suitability
criteria may be designated as an SRA, except land delineated on the RLSA Overlay
Map (RLSA Figure 1) as HYSA, HSA, or designated as an SSA. WRAs may be
located within the boundaries of an SRA and may be incorporated into an SRA
Master Plan to provide water management functions for properties within such SRA,
as pennitted by SFWMD, and may also be used for Open Space, habitat and
passive recreation.
1. Suitability Criteria. Land within the RLSA Overlay Zone must meet the
following suitability criteria in order to be eligible for designation as an SRA:
a. The land must be designated on the RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA
Figure 1) as "Open-.
b. An SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate the
planned development.
c. Residential, retail, office, manufacturing, light industrial, hotel,
group housing, transient housing, Civic and Institutional, active
recreation, governmental, and community service uses within an SRA
shall not be located on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index
value of greater than 1.4.
d. Lands or parcels that are greater than one (1) acre and have an
Index Value greater than 1.4 shall be retained as Open Space and
maintained in a predominantly natural vegetated or agricultural state.
e. Open Space shall comprise thirty-five (35) percent of the Gross
Acreage of a Town, Village or those CRDs exceeding one hundred
(100) acres.
f. Open Space on lands within an SRA that exceeds the required
thirty-five (35) percent Open Space shall not consume Stewardship
Credits.
g. If an HSA or WRA is contiguous to an SRA as delineated in the
RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1) and designed to be available to
the public for passive recreation, its acreage shall count toward the
required thirty-five (35) percent Open Space. When located adjacent
to or included in an SRA, acreage within a WRA may be counted as
Open Space so long as the same percentage of the WRA is not relied
upon to generate Stewardship Credits for development within the
SRA.
\....
·22 -
~
~
\.r
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
h. An SRA may be contiguous to an HYSA or HSA as delineated in
the RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1), but shall not encroach into
such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in Policy 4.11 of
the St. Lucie County Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay in the
Comprehensive Plan. An SRA may be contiguous to, or encompass a
WRA.
i. The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector or
arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer
that has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed
development in accordance with Policy 4.12 of the St. Lucie County
Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay in the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Transfer and Use of Stewardship Credits. Stewardship Credits may be
transferred and used for residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a
per acre basis pursuant to these requirements:
1. Transfer of Credits. The transfer or use of Stewardship Credits shall only
be in a manner as provided for herein. Stewardship Credits may be
transferred from any approved SSA to an entity or individual, to an eligible
receiving area, or applied to an SRA, subject to compliance with all applicable
provisions of these policies.
2. Stewardship Credit Use. Stewardship Credits shall create development
entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis at a rate of seven (7) Stewardship
Credits per gross acre. Lands within an SRA greater than one (1) acre, with
Index Values of greater than 1.4, shall be retained as agricultural land or
Open Space and maintained in a predominantly natural, vegetated state. Any
such lands within an SRA exceeding the required thirty-five (35) percent shall
not consume Stewardship Credits.
3. Public Benefit Uses. The acreage within an SRA devoted to a Public
Benefit Use shall not consume Stewardship Credits and shall not count
toward the maximum acreage limits of an SRA.
4. Mixed Land Use Entitlements. In order to promote sustainable, mixed use
development and provide the necessary support facilities and services to
residents of rural areas, an SRA shall be allowed the full range of uses
permitted by the Mixed Use Development (MXD) land use category of the
Future Land Use Element, as modified by Policy 4.6 and RLSA Figure 5 in
the St. Lucie County Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay of the
Comprehensive Plan. Depending on the size, scale, and character of an
SRA, it shall be designed to include an appropriate mix of retail, offICe,
manufacturing, light industrial, recreational, Civic and Institutional, community
service and governmental uses, in addition to residential uses.
C. Forms of SRA developments. Only the following four (4) forms of development
are permitted within an SRA designated within the RLSA Overlay Zone. Each
requires a functional and integrated mix of uses in accordance with Policies 4.6.1,
4.6.2, 4.6.3 and 4.6.4 of the St. Lucie County RLSA Overlay, including RLSA Figure
5, of the Comprehensive Plan.
-23 -
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
1. Towns. Towns are the largest and most diverse form of SRA. Towns shall be
not less than one thousand (1.000) acres or more than five thousand (5.000)
acres in Gross Acreage and shall be designed to provide for a broad range of
residential and nonresidential uses in accordance with the required
Stewardship Receiving Area Characteristics Chart (RLSA Figure 5) of the
Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay of the Comprehensive Plan. See LDC
Section 4.05.08.1.2 for Town design criteria.
2. Villaaes. Villages shall provide a diversity of housing types and mix of uses
appropriate to the scale and character of the particular Village. Villages shall
be not less than one hundred (100) acres or more than one thousand (1000)
acres in Gross Acreage and shall comply with the required Stewardship
Receiving Area Charaçteristics Chart (RLSA Figure 5) in the Rural Land
Stewardship Area Overlay of the Comprehensive Plan. See Section
4.05.08.1.3 for Village design criteria.
'-'
3. Hamlets. Hamlets are small rural residential areas with primarily single-family
housing and limited range of convenience-oriented services. Hamlets shall be
not less than forty (40) or more then one hundred (100) acres in Gross
Acreage and shall comply with the Stewardship Receiving Area
Characteristics Chart (RLSA Figure 5) in the Rural Land Stewardship Area
Overlay of the Comprehensive Plan. To maintain a proportion of Hamlets to
Villages and Towns, not more than three (3) Hamlets, in combination with
CRDs of one hundred (100) acres or less in Gross Acreage.+ may be
approved as SRAs prior to the approval of a Village or Town, and thereafter
not more than three (3) additional Hamlets, in combination with CRDs of one
hundred (100) acres or less in Gross Acreage, may be approved for each
subsequent Village or Town. See Section 4.05.08.1.4 for Hamlet design
criteria.
\.-
4. ComDact Rural DeveloDments (CRDs), Compact Rural Development (CRD)
is a form of SRA that shall support and further St. Lucie County's valued
attributes and characteristics as defined in the preamble to the
Comprehensive Plan. CRDs provide flexibility with respect to the mix of uses
and design standards, but shall otherwise comply with the standards of a
Hamlet or Village, depending on the size. A CRD may include, but is not
required to have permanent residential housing and the services and facilities
that support permanent residents. An example of a CRD is an aco-tourism
village or research facility that would have a unique set of uses and support
services different from a traditional residential village. It could contain
transient lodging facilities and services appropriate to eco-tourists or
researchers, but may not provide for the range of services that are necessary
to support permanent residents. Except as described above, a CRD shall
conform to the characteristics of a Village or Hamlet as set forth in RLSA
Figure 5 based on the size of the CRD. As residential units are not a required
use, those goods and services that support residents such as retail, office,
civic. governmental and institutional uses shall also not be required, however
for any CRD that does include permanent residential housing, the
proportionate support services shall be provided in accordance with RLSA
Figure 5. To maintain a proportion of CRDs of one hundred (100) acres or
less in Gross Acreage to Villages and Towns. not more than three (3) CRDs
-24 -
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
\.."
of one hundred (100) acres or less in Gross Acreage, in combination with
Hamlets, may be approved as SRAs prior to the approval of a Village or
Town, and thereafter not more than three (3) additional CRDs of one hundred
(100) acres or less in Gross Acreage, in combination with Hamlets, may be
approved for each subsequent Village or Town.
5. Proportion of Hamlets and CRDs to Villages and Towns. In order to maintain
the correct proportion of Hamlets and CRDs of one hundred (100) acres or less
in Gross Acreage to the number of Villages and Towns approved as SRAs, not
more than five (5) Hamlets or CRDs of one hundred (100) acres of less in Gross
Acreage may be approved prior to the approval of a Village or Town. In order to
maintain that same proportion thereafter, not more than fIVe (5) Hamlets or
CRDs of one hundred (100) acres or less in Gross Acreage may be approved
for each subsequent Village or Town approved.
6. Development of Regional Impact (DR I). SRAs are permitted as all or part of a
DRI subject to the provisions of § 380.06, F.S. and the RLSA Overlay Zone
Regulations.
a. An SRA Application Package may be submitted simultaneously
with a Preliminary Development Agreement (PDA) application that
occurs prior to a DRI Application for Development Approval (ADA). In
such an application, the form of SRA development shall be
determined by the characteristics of the DRI project, as described in
the PDA.
'-"
b. The DRI may encompass more than a single SRA Designation
Application. It is the intent of this Section to allow for the future
designations of SRAs within a DRI as demonstrated by the DRI
phasing schedule.
c. A DRI applicant is required to demonstrate that:
(1) The applicant has the necessary Stewardship Credits to
entitle the DRI as part of subsequent SRA Designation
Applications, or
(2) The applicant owns or has a contract with an owner of
enough land that would qualify as SSAs to entitle the DRI as
part of subsequent SRA Designation Applications, or has the
ability to obtain the necessary Stewardship Credits to entitle
the DRI as part of subsequent SRA Designation Applications.
7. Affordable Housing Component within an SRA. An SRA that includes
residential housing shall provide Adequate Affordable or Workforce Housing,
including very low-, low- and moderate-Income housing for the development
anticipated in the SRA. Adequate Affordable or Workforce Housing shall be
determined on the basis of an analysis applying the standards under Rule 9J-
2.048, F.A.C., regardless of whether the development within the SRA is
required to undergo DRI review pursuant to section 380.06, Florida Statutes.
\...
-25-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
8.
Land Uses within an SRA. Allowed, conditional and prohibited uses within a
Town, Village, Hamlet or CRD shall be specified in the SRA Plan.
D. SRA Application Package. An SRA Application Package to support a request
to designate land(s) within the RLSA OVerlay Zone as an SRA shaJl be filed pursuant
to the regulations of the RLSA OVerlay Zone Regulations. The SRA Application
Package shall include the following:
\.-
\.,.
1. SRA Application. A landowner or hislher agent, hereafter "applicant,·
shall submit an application for the designation of an SRA within the RLSA
Overlay Zone to the County Administrator or his designee, on an approved
application form. The application shall include:
a. The legal description of, or descriptive reference to, the SRA to
which the Stewardship Credits are being transferred;
b. Total number of acres within the proposed SRA;
c. Number of acres within the SRA designated ·public use· that do
not require the redemption of Stewardship Credits in order to be
entitled (i.e., that do not consume Credits);
d. Number of acres of "excess" Open Space within the SRA that do
not require the consumption of Credits;
e. Number of acres of WRAs adjacent to the SRA but not included in
the SRA designation;
f. Number of acres within the SRA that consume Credits;
g. The number of Stewardship Credits required for the SRA and
documentation that the applicant has acquired or has a contractual
right to acquire those Stewardship Credits;
h. A specific reference to one (1) or more approved or pending SSA
Designation Applications from which the Stewardship Credits are
being obtained. Copies of the reference documents, e.g., SSA
Stewardship Credit Agreement, etc., shall be provided, including:
(1) SSA application number;
(2) SSA Designation Ordinance (or Ordinance Number);
(3) SSA Credit Agreement (Stewardship Credit Agreement);
(4) Stewardship Credits Database Report.
i. A summary table in a form provided by St. Lucie County that
identifies the exchange of all Stewardship Credits that involve the
SRA and all of the associated SSAs from which the Stewardship
Credits are being obtained.
2. Application Fee. An application fee shall accompany the application.
\.,.
-26-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6116106
~
3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. An assessment that documents the
Natural Resource Index Value scores shall be prepared and submitted as
part of the SRA Application. The Assessment shall include an analysis that
quantifies the number of acres by Index Values. The Assessment shall:
a. Identify any lands within the proposed SRA that have an Index
Value greater than 1.4;
b. Verify that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA
Overlay Study are still valid through recent aerial photography or
satellite imagery or agency-approved mapping, or other
documentation, as verified by field inspections.
c. If the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Overlay Study
are no longer valid, document the current Index Value scores of the
land.
d. Quantify the acreage of agricultural lands, by type, being
converted;
e. Quantify the acreage of non-agricultural acreage, by type, being
converted;
f. Quantify the acreage of any lands by type within the proposed
SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.4;
'-'
g. Demonstrate compliance with suitability criteria contained in
Section 4.05.08.A.1.
4. Natural Resource Index Assessment Support Documentation.
Documentation to support the Natural Resource Index Assessment shall be
provided for each SRA being designated to include:
a. Legal Description, including sketch or survey;
b. Acreage calculations of lands being put into the SRA, including
acreage calculations of WRAs (if any) within SRA boundary but not
included in SRA designation;
c. RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1) delineating the area of the
RLSA Overlay Zone being designated as an SRA;
d. Aerial photograph delineating the area being designated as an
SRA;
e. Natural Resource Index Map of area being designated as an SRA;
f. Documentation to support a change in the related Natural
Resource Index Value(s), if appropriate.
5. A cultural resources assessment survey, addressing on-site
archaeological and historic resources, which has been found sufficient by the
~
-27-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
'-'
State Historic Preservation Officer pursuant to Chapter 1 A-46, Florida
Administrative Code.
'-'
6. SRA Plan and Master Plan. An SRA Plan and Master Plan shall be
prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application
Package. The SRA Plan and Master Plan shall be consistent with the
requirements of Section 4.05.08.G.
7. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report. An Impact Assessment
Report shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA
Application Package. The SRA Impact Assessment Report shall address the
requirements of Section 4.05.08.J.
8. SRA Economic Assessment Report. An Economic Assessment Report
shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA
Application Package. The SRA Economic Assessment Report shall address
the requirements of Section 4.05.08.K.
9. SRA Credit Agreement.
a. Any applicant for designation of an SRA shall enter into an SRA
Credit Agreement with the County.
b. The SRA Credit Agreement shall contain the following information:
(1) The number of SSA Credits the applicant for an 8RA
designation is utilizing and which shall be applied to the SRA
land in order to carry out the plan of development on the
acreage proposed in the SRA Plan.
(2) A legal description of the SRA land and the number of
acres;
'-'
(3) The SRA master plan depicting the land uses and
identifying the number of residential dwelling units, gross
leaseable area of retail, office and other non-residential square
footage and other land uses depicted on the master plan;
(4) A description of the Credits that are needed to entitle the
SRA land and the anticipated source of said Credits;
(5) The applicanfs acknowledgement that development of
8RA land may not commence until the applicant has recorded
an 8RA Credit Agreement Memorandum in the Official
Records of the St. Lucie County; and
(6) The applicanfs commitments, if any, regarding
conservation, or any other restriction on development on any
lands, including wetlands, within the SRA, as may be depicted
on the SRA master plan for special treatment.
c. The SRA Credit Agreement shall be effective on the latest of the
following dates:
-28-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16106
~
(1) The date that the County approves the SRA Application;
(2) The date that documentation of the applicant's acquisition
of the Stewardship Credits to be utilized for the SRA is
determined by the County to be sufficient, such sufficiency
shall be determined within five (5) working days after the·
receipt of documentation of the acquisition of the Stewardship
Credits to be utilized.
d. If the development provided for within an SRA constitutes, or will
constitute, a development of regional impact (·DRI·) pursuant to §
380.06 and 380.0651, F.S., and if the applicant has obtained a
preliminary development agreement ePDA·) from the Florida
Department of Community Affairs for a portion of the SRA land, the
applicant may request the County to enter into a Preliminary SRA
Credit Agreement for those Stewardship Credits needed in order to
develop the PDA authorized development. Commencement of the
PDA authorized development may not proceed until the applicant has
recorded a Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum. The
Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement and Preliminary SRA Credit
Agreement Memorandum shall include the same information and
documentation as is required for an SRA Credit Agreement and an
SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum.
E. SRA Review Process.
1. Pre-Application Conference with County Staff: Prior to the submission of
an application for SRA designation, the applicant shall attend a pre-
application conference with the County Administrator or his designee and
other county staff, agencies, and officials involved in the review and
processing of such applications and related materials. If an SRA application
will be filed concurrent with an SSA application, only one (1) pre-application
conference shall be required. This pre-application conference should
address, but not be limited to, such matters as:
a. Conformity of the proposed SRA with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan;
b. Consideration of suitability criteria described in Section
4.05.08.A.1. and other standards of this Section;
c. SRA master plan compliance with all applicable policies of the
RLSA Overlay Zone Regulations, and demonstration that
incompatible land uses are directed away from HYSAs, HSAs, WRAs,
and Conservation Lands;
d. Confirmation in the manner prescribed herein that the applicant
has acquired or will acquire sufficient Stewardship Credits to create
the type of SRA (whether Town, Village, Hamlet or CRD) in the
amount of acres requested In the SRA application, and;
~
'-'
-29-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6116/06
\...
e. Consideration of impacts, including environmental and public
facility impacts.
2. Application Package Submittal and Processing Fees. The required
number of copies of each SRA Application and the associated processing fee
shall be submitted to the County Administrator or his designee. The contents
of said application package shall be in accordance with Section 4.0S.08.D.
3. Application Deemed Complete and Sufficient for Review. Within ten (10)
days of receipt of the SRA Application, the County Administrator or his
designee shall notify the applicant in writing that the application is deemed
complete and sufficient for agency review or specify the additional information
needed to find the application complete and sufficient. If required, the
applicant shall submit additional information. Within ten (10) days of receipt of
the additional information, the County Administrator or his designee shall
review it and notify the applicant in writing that the application is complete
and sufficient, or request further information needed to clarify the additional
information or to answer new questions raised by, or directly related to, the
additional information. The County may request additional information no
more than twice, unless the applicant waives this limitation.
4. Review by County Reviewing Agencies: Once the SRA application is
deemed complete and sufficient, the County Administrator or his designee
will distribute it to specific County review staff.
5. Staff Report. Within twenty (20) days from the receipt of a complete and
sufficient application, County staff shall prepare a written report containing
their review findings and a recommendation of approval, approval with
conditions or denial. This timeframe may be extended upon agreement of
County staff and the applicant.
F. sRA Approval Process.
1. Public Hearings Required. The BOCC shall review the staff report and
recommendations and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning
Commission/Local Planning Agency. The BOCC shall by Ordinance
approve, deny, or approve with conditions the SRA Application Package in
accordance with the following provisions:
'-'
a. Review by Environmental Advisory Council (EAC). The EAC shall
review any proposed Ordinance to designate lands within the RLSA
Overlay Zone as an SRA. The EAC shall forward its recommendation
to the Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency and
the BOCC.
~
b. Public Hearing Before the Planning and Zoning Commission/Local
Planning Agency, Recommendation to BOCC. The Planning and
Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency shall hold one (1)
advertised public hearing on the proposed Ordinance to designate an
SRA. A notice of the public hearing before the Planning and Zoning
Commission/Local Planning Agency on the proposed Ordinance shall
include a general description and a map or sketch and shall be
·30-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the County at least
ten (10) days in advance of the public hearing.
c. Prior to the designation of an SRA by the BOCC, the County shall
provide the Aorida Department of Community Affairs a period of thirty
(30) days to review the proposed receiving area for consistency with
the RLSA Overlay and to provide comments to the County.
d. Public Hearing Before the BOCC. The BOCC shall hold one
(1) advertised public hearing on the proposed Ordinance to designate
an SRA. A public notice, which shall include a general description and
a map or sketch, shall be given to the citizens of St. Lucie County by
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the County at least
ten (10) days prior to the hearing of the BOCC. The advertised public
notice of the proposed Ordinance shall, in addition, contain the date,
time and place of the hearing, the title of the proposed Ordinance and
the place within the County where such proposed Ordinance may be
inspected by the public. The notice shall also advise that interested
parties may appear at the hearing and be heard with respect to the
proposed Ordinance. The BOCC shall review the staff report and
recommendations, the recommendations of the EAC and the Planning
and Zoning CommissionILocal Planning Agency, any report and
recommendations from the Department of Community Affairs, and
oral and written submissions from the public received at the hearing.
If the BOCC finds that all requirements for SRA designation have
been met, it shall, by Ordinance, approve the application. If the
BOCC finds that one (1) or more of the requirements for designation
have not been met, it shall either deny the application, or approve it
with conditions mandating compliance with all unmet requirements.
Approval of such Ordinance shall require a majority vote by the
BOCC.
~
2. Following the effective date of the approval of the SRA, the adopted
Ordinance, including the SRA Plan and Master Plan, shall become the official
development approval for the SRA. In addition to the requirement for BOCC
approval of an SRA Application Package, the SRA shall be subject to other
applicable regulations in the LDC, including but not limited to subdivision and
site plan approval, however, no further review or approval of the SRA under
this Section shall be required except for an amendment requested by the
applicant or a successor in interest.
3. Update Stewardship Credits Database. Following the effective date of the
approval of the SRA, the County shall update the Stewardship Credits
Database used to track both SSA Credits generated and SRA Credits
consumed.
\.
4. Update the Official Zoning Atlas and the RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA Figure
1). Following the effective date of the approval of the SRA, the County shall
update the Official Zoning Atlas to reflect the designation of the SRA with the
symbol "RLSA-SRA #_." Sufficient information shall be included on the
updated maps so as to direct interested parties to the appropriate public
records associated with the designation, e.g., Ordinance number, SRA
- 31-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
Designation Application number, etc. After the approval of any SRA, and
during the County's next regular Future Land Use Map amendment process,
as a ministerial act and for information purposes only, the County will
delineate the boundaries of the approved SRA on the Future Land Use Map
and on the RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1) and amend the Capital
Improvements Element and TraffIC Circulation Element to reflect any public
facilities needed to serve the approved SRA.
5. Conditional SRA Designation. If, at the time of the approval of the
SRA Application Package by the BOCC, the applicant has not acquired the
number of Stewardship Credits needed to entitle the 8RA, then the SRA
designation shall be conditional. The applicant shall have ninety (90) days
from the date of the conditional approval to provide documentation of the
acquisition of the required number of Stewardship Credits. Upon
presentation of such documentation by the applicant, the County
Administration shall provide written acknowledgement to the applicant that
the condition has been satisfied. If the applicant does not provide such
documentation within ninety (90) days, the conditional SRA designation shall
be null and void.
6. SRA Amendments. Amendments to the 8RA shall be considered in
the same manner as described in this Section for the establishment of an
SRA, except as follows.
a. Waiver of Required SRA Application Package Component(s). At
the pre-application conference on a proposed SRA amendment, the
County Administrator or designee may grant a waiver to any portion of
the SRA Application Package for which the required information has
not materially changed since SRA designation or is not relevant to the
requested amendment. The County Administrator or designee shall
determine what application components and associated
documentation are required in order to review the amendment
request.
b. Approval of Minor Changes by County Administrator or Designee.
The County Administrator shall be authorized to approve minor
changes and refinements to an SRA Master Plan or SRA Plan upon
written request of the applicant. Minor changes and refinements shall
be reviewed by appropriate County staff to ensure that said changes
and refinements are otherwise in compliance with all applicable
County ordinances and regulations prior to the County Administrator
or designee's consideration for approval. The following limitations
shall apply to such requests:
(1) The minor change or refinement shall be consistent with
the general intent of the RLSA Overlay, the ALSA Overlay
Zone Regulations, and the SRA Plan's amendment provisions.
(2) The minor change or refinement shall be compatible with
contiguous land uses and shall not create detrimental impacts
to abutting land uses, water management facilities, and
conservation areas within or external to the SRA.
\..
'-'
- 32-
\.,.
'-'
\.....
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULA TION8, 6/16/06
(3) Minor changes or refinements, include but are not limited
to:
(a) Reconfiguration of lakes, ponds, canals, or other
water management facilities where such changes are
consistent with the criteria of the SFWMD and St. Lucie
County;
(b) Internal realignment of rights-of-way, other than a
relocation of access points to the SRA itself, where
water management facilities, preservation areas, or
required easements are not adversely affected;
(c) Reconfiguration of parcels when there is no
encroachment into the preservation areas or lands with
an Index Value of 1.4 or higher; and
(d) Any other changes authorized by the BOCC in the
Ordinance designating the SRA and approving the
SRA Plan and Master Plan, provided they do not
materially change the character of the SRA.
c. Relationship to Subdivision or Site Development Approval.
Approval by the County Administrator or designee of a minor change
or refinement may occur independently from, and prior to, any
application for subdivision or site plan approval. However, approval of
the minor change shall not constitute authorization for development or
implementation of the minor change or refinement without obtaining
all other necessary County permits and approvals.
.
G. SRA Plan and sRA Master Plan. Data supporting the SRA designation and
describing the SRA application shall be in the form of an SRA Plan that shall consist
of the information listed below, unless determined by the County Administrator or
designee at the pre-application conference to be unnecessary to describe the
development strategy. The SRA Master Plan will demonstrate that the SRA complies
with all applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and the RLSA Overlay Zone and is
designed so that incompatible land uses are directed away from lands identified as
HYSAs, HSAs, and Conservation Lands as designated on the ALSA Overlay Map
(RLSA Figure 1).
1. The SRA Plan and 8RA Master Plan shall be prepared by an urban
planner who possesses an AICP certification, together with a qualified
environmental consultant and at least one (1) of the following:
a. A professional engineer (P.E.) with expertise in the area of civil
engineering licensed by the State of Aorida; or
b
A registered landScape architect licensed by the State of Aorida.
2. SRA Master Plan Content. At a minimum, the master plan shall include the
following elements:
-33-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
a. The title of the project and name of the developer;
b. Scale, date, north arrow;
c. Boundaries of the subject property, HSAs, HYSAs, and WRAs
located within or adjacent to the SRA, all existing roadways within and
adjacent to the site, watercourses, and other important physical
features within and adjoining the proposed development;
d. Identification of all Context Zones within the SRA, conservation!
preservation areas, lakes andlor other water management facilities,
the location and function of all areas proposed for dedication or to be
reserved for community andlor public use, and areas proposed for
recreational uses; and
.,-,
e. The location of all proposed major internal rights of way. 3. The 8RA Plan
shall identify, locate and quantify the full range of uses, including accessory
uses that provide the mix of services to, and are supportive of, the residential
population of an SRA, and shall include, as applicable, the following:
a. Title page to include name of project;
b. Index/table of contents;
c. Ust of exhibits with exhibit date shown;
d. Statement of compliance with the RSLA Overlay and the RLSA
Overlay Zone Regulations;
e. General location map showing the location of the site within the
boundaries of the RLSA Overlay Map (RLSA Figure 1) and in relation
to other designated SRAs and such external facilities as highways;
1. Property ownership and general description of site (including
statement of unified ownership);
g. Description of project development;
h. Legal description of the SRA boundary, and for any WRAs
encompassed by the SRA;
i. The overall acreage of the SRA that requires the consumption of
Stewardship Credits and proposed gross density for the SRA;
j. Identification of all proposed land uses within each Context Zone or
increment describing: acreage; proposed number of dwelling units;
proposed density and percentage of the total development
represented by each type of use;
k. Design standards for each Context Zone within the SRA. Design
standards shall be consistent with the Design Criteria contained in
Section 4.05.08.1.;
'-'
-34-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
I. Identification of inclusion of very-low, low and moderate income
housing within the proposed SRA;
m. The proposed schedule of development, and the sequence of
phasing or incremental development within the 8RA, if applicable;
n. A Natural Resource Index Assessment as required in Section
4.05.08.0.3.;
o. The location and nature of all existing or proposed public facilities
(or sites), such as schools, parks, and fire stations;
p. Typical cross sections for all arterial, collector, and local streets,
public or private, within the proposed SRA;
q. Development commitments for all infrastructure; and
r. SRA Plan amendment provisions.
~
H. DRI Master Plan. If applicable, the proposed DRI master plan, or PDA, shall be
included as part of the SRA Application Package. The DRI master plan shall identify
the location of the SRA being designated, and any previously designated SRAs
within the DRI.
I. Design Criteria. Criteria are hereby established to guide the design and
development of SRAs. The size and base density of each form of SRA shall be
consistent with the standards set forth below. The base residential density is
calculated by dividing the total number of residential units in an SRA by the acreage
therein that is entitled through Stewardship Credits. The base residential density
does not restrict net residential density of parcels within an SRA. The location, size
and density of each SRA will be determined on an individual basis, subject to the
regulations below, during the SRA designation review and approval process.
1. BRA Characteristics. All SRAs shall be consistent with the characteristics
identified on the St. Lucie County RLSA Overlay SRA Characteristics
Chart (RLSA Figure 5) and the design criteria in this Section.
St. Lucie County RLSA Overlay Zone SRA Characteristics Chart
Typical Town Village Hamlet Compact Rural Development
Characteristics
1,OQO-5,OOO acres 100-1,000 acres 40-100 acres 100 Acres or less Greater than 100 Acres
~.5 DUs per gross 1-2 DUs per gross 12-2 DUs per gross 12-2 DUs per gross -2 DUs per gross
re re cre(1) rell)
\..,..
- 35-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
\..
Typical
Characteristics
Town
Village
Hamlet
CQmPMrtRu~IDeve~ßMmt
.~.
e Family and "ngJe family and
hed mulli..family imhed nUIi-familyl1l
in. 25 SFIDU - Max.
SFIDU of
ghborhood Goods
Services in ViDage
nte~s)
in. 10 SFIDU - Max.
SFJDU of
enience Goods
Services
.... ratio or
ntenlity (IIIn) - (If
usee are
ncluded)
ater and
aslewater
paces
pen Space Minirrun
% of SRA;
arks & =c Green 5 ~1ooo
ighborhoods . ation
. e RecreationlGolf bllC Green Spaces
. in Neighborhoods
5 acresI1000
alion
ublic Green Spaces
. in Neighborhoods
\-..
-36-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
Typical
Characteristics
Town
Village
Hamlet
Compact Rural Development
ransportatlon
*Those CRDs that include single or multi-family residential uses shall include proportionate
support services.
(1) If CRD includes permanent residential units, the density specified applies. (Pursuant to
Section 4.05.08.1.5.a, permanent residential units are optional in CRD's.)
\.... (2) Schools to be determined in conjunction with School Board based on size of SRA and
expected student population.
2. Town Design Criteria.
a. General design criteria.
The master plan for a Town shall:
· Include clearly defined neighborhoods with each having its own identity and
character and providing focal points in the form of neighborhood-scale retail,
office, civic uses, schools, parks or other public places.
.
· Foster an urban, pedestrian-oriented environment in a mixed-use Town
Center by co-locating residential, retail, office, civic and other uses in the
Town Center; creating aesthetically pleasing spatial relationships between
streets, sidewalks and building facades; providing for shared and alternative
parking in the Town Center; and locating higher-density residential areas
proximate to the Town Center.
Promote internal capture of shopping and business trips by facilitating walk-to
shopping and employment, maximizing bicycle and pedestrian mobility;
providing a connected pathway, bikeway and multi-use trail system; and
reserving adequate sites for transit stops and shelters for construction when
transit service becomes available to the Town.
~
-37-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16106
\.,
·
Achieve connectivity through an interconnected network of roads and streets
and block designs in each context zone, as established in the RLSA LDRs, to
provide multiple pathways allowing for trip dispersion and reduced trip
lengths.
· Include a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for non-
residential uses in the Town.
· Provide for a range of housing types and price levels to accommodate
diverse ages and incomes, including adequate housing for the Town's very
low-, low- and moderate-income households that is reasonably accessible to
the Town's places of employment.
· Integrate Open Space in neighborhoods throughout the Town through such
features as town greens and squares, greenways, multi-use trails, community
parks, neighborhood parks and tot lots.
· Include in each phase of development for the Town a reasonable balance of
residential and non-residential uses, reflecting market trends and projections
for absorption, in order to ensure a land use balance at build-out that is
consistent with RLSA Figure 5.
~
Towns shall have at least one (1) community park with a minimum size of two
hundred (200) square feet per dwelling unit in the Town. Towns shall also have
parks or public green spaces within all neighborhoods. .
Town Plans shall be coordinated with the St:Lucie County School Board to provide
for the appropriate range of schools, as applicable. To the extent possible, schools
and parks shall be located adjacent to each other and be sized and located to
enable children to walk or bicycle to them. In coordination with the St. Lucie County
School District, the Town's master plan shall identify a "Safe Route to Schools and
Parks" through a system of sidewalks, pathways and trails.
b. Context Zones.
Context Zones are intended to guide the location of uses and their intensity
and diversity within a Town, and provide for the transition of uses back to the
surrounding rural environment. A Town shall include the following Context
Zones and may include additional Context Zones as approved by the BOCC
in the SRA Plan and Master Plan:
~
i. Town Core. The Town Core shall be the civic center of a
Town. It is the most dense and diverse zone, with a full range
of uses within walking distance. The Core shall be a primary
pedestrian zone with buildings positioned near the right-of-
way, sidewalks shall be shaded through streetscape planting,
awnings and other architectural elements. Entrances to
structures in the Town Core should reinforce the pedestrian
scale. Parking shall be provided on street and in the rear of
buildings within lots or parking structures. Signage shall be
-38-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
'-'
pedestrian scale and designed to compliment the building
architecture. The following design criteria shall apply within the
Town Core. Civic or institutional buildings shall be subject to
specific design standards set forth in the SRA Plan and
approved by the BOCC that address the perspective of these
buildings' creating focal points, tenninating vistas and
significant community landmarks.
a) Uses - commercial, retail, office, civic, institutional,
light industrial and manufacturing, essential services,
residential, live-work, parks and accessory uses. Such
uses may occur in shared use buildings or single use
buildings.
b) The intensity of non-residential development shall
be consistent with the characteristics identified on the
St. Lucie County RLSA Overlay SRA Characteristics
Chart (RLSA Figure 5) herein. More specific intensity
standards may be established during the SRA
designation review and approval process.
c) The density of transient lodging uses shall not
exceed twenty-six (26) dwelling units per Town Core
gross acre.
d) The maximum building height shall be five (5)
stories. The minimum building height shall be two (2)
stories and may additionally include parapet walls or
other architectural features.
e) There shall be no minimum lot size.
t) The maximum block perimeter shall be two
thousand five hundred (2500) linear feet.
g) The minimum building setbacklbuild-to line from all
property boundaries shall be zero (0) feet. The
maximum front building setback shall be ten (10) feet,
unless otherwise established in these regulations.
Maximum building setbacks shall not vary more than
five (5) feet from an adjacent building. Buildings
should be sited at the edge of the sidewalk (front
and/or side boundary) and be oriented to the street.
The build-to line from the front and side boundaries
may be increased in order to create public spaces such
as plazas and courtyards.
h) Overhead encroachments such as awnings,
balconies, arcades and the like, shall maintain a clear
distance of nine (9) feet above the sidewalk and fifteen
(15) feet above the street.
~
'-"
-39-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6116/06
~
i) Seating for outdoor dining shall be permitted to
encroach into the public sidewalks and shall leave a
minimum six (6) foot clear pedestrian way between the
outdoor dining and the streetscape planting area.
j) Buildings within the Town Core shall be made
compatible through similar massing, volume, frontage,
scale and architectural features.
\...
k) The majority of parking spaces shall be provided
off-street in the rear of buildings, or along the side
(secondary streets), organized into a series of small
bays separated by landscape islands or diamonds of
varied sizes. Parking is prohibited in front of buildings,
except within the right-of-way. Parking structures
fronting on a street shall either include ground floor
retail or have a minimum ten (10) foot wide landscaped
area at grade and include façade treatments. The
amount of required parking shall be demonstrated
through a shared parking analysis submitted with an
SRA designation application. Parking shall be
determined utilizing the modal splits and parking
demands for various uses recognized by ITE, ULI or
other sources or studies. The analysis shall
demonstrate the number of parking spaces available to
more than one use or function, recognizing the
required parking will vary depending on the multiple
functions or uses in close proximity which are unlikely
to require the spaces at the same time. The shared
parking analysis methodology will be determined and
agreed upon by the County Transportation staff and
the applicant during the pre-application meeting. The
shared parking analysis shall use the maximum square
footage of uses proposed by the SRA Plan.
I) Streets shall adhere to the cross sections contained
in the SRA Plan. At a minimum all proposed streets
with the exception of alleys shall include sidewalks on
both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-way.
Pedestrian passages or walkway connections within or
between buildings on a block may be permitted. A
streetscape area with a minimum planter size five (5)
feet in width and eight (8) feet in length located
between the back of curb and the sidewalk shall be
provided. In these areas, sidewalk protection such as
root barriers, continuous tree pits, and/or structural
soils shall be provided. Streets shall maintain a
minimum average building height to street width ratio of
1: 1, excluding landmark buildings.
\...
-40-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
'--'
m) Landscaping minimums within the Town Core shall
be met by providing landscaping within parking lots as
described, and by providing a streetscape area
between the sidewalk and curb with a minimum planter
size five (5) feet in width and eight (8) feet in length,
with trees spaced no greaterthan forty (40) feet 00-
center or as otherwise allowed. The street tree pattern
may be interrupted by architectural elements such as
arcades and columns.
n) General signage standards.
i) Signage design shall be carefully integrated
with site and building design to create a unified
appearance for the total property.
ii) Creativity in the design of signs is
encouraged in order to emphasize the unique
character of the SRA.
iii) Signs shall comply with a signage plan
included in the SRA Plan.
~.
ii. Town Center. The Town Center shall provide a wide range
of uses including daily goods and services, culture and
entertainment, within walking distance. Uke the Town Core,
the Town Center is the primary pedestrian zone, designed at
human scale to support the walking environment. It is the
"Main Streer area of the Town. Buildings shall be positioned
near the right-of-way line, wide sidewalks shall be shaded by
street trees and architectural elements. Entrances to
structures in the Town Center should reinforce the pedestrian
scale. Civic or institutional buildings shall be subject to
specific design standards that address these buildings I
creating focal points, terminating vistas, and significant
community landmarks and that are set forth in the SRA Plan
and approved by the BOCC. The following design criteria
shall apply within the Town Center:
a) Commercial, retail, office, civic, institutional, light
industrial and manufacturing, essential services, parks,
residential, live-work, and schools and accessory uses
shall be permitted. These uses may occur in shared
use buildings or single use buildings.
b) The intensity and density of development shall be
consistent with the characteristics identified on the St.
Lucie County RLSA Overlay SRA Characteristics Chart
(RLSA Figure 5) herein. More specific intensity
standards may be established during the SRA
designation review and approval process.
\....
-41-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULA TION8, 6/16/06
~
c) The maximum building height shall be four (4)
stories. The minimum building height shall be two (2)
stories and may additionally include parapet walls or
other architectural features..
\...
d) The minimum lot area shall be one thousand
(1,000) square feet.
e) The maximum block perimeter shall be two
thousand fIVe hundred (2500) linear feet.
f) The minimum building setbacklbuild-to line from all
property boundaries shall be zero (0) feet. The
maximum front building setback shall be ten (10) feet,
unless otherwise established in these regulations.
Maximum building setbacks shall not vary more than
five (5) feet from an adjacent building. Buildings
should be sited at the edge of the sidewalk (front
and/or side street boundary) and be oriented to the
street. The build-to line from the front and side
boundaries may be increased in order to create public
spaces such as plazas and courtyards.
g) Overhead encroachments such as awnings,
balconies, arcades and the like, must maintain a clear
distance of nine (9) feet above the sidewalk and fifteen
(15) feet above the street.
h) Seating for outdoor dining shall be permitted to
encroach the public sidewalks and shall leave a
minimum six (6) foot clear pedestrian way between the
outdoor dining and the streetscape planting area.
i) Buildings within the Town Center shall be made
compatible through similar massing, volume, frontage,
scale and architectural features.
j) Streets shall adhere to the cross sections contained
in the 8RA Plan. At a minimum all proposed streets
with the exception of alleys must include sidewalks on
both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-way, and
a streetscape area with a minimum planter size five (5)
feet in width and eight (8) feet in length located
between the back of curb and the sidewalk. Streets
shall maintain a minimum average building height to
street width ratio of 1:1, excluding landmark buildings.
k) Parking space requirements and design are the
same as in the Town Core.
~
I) 8ignage requirements are the same as in the Town
Core.
-42-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
\...
iii. Neighborhood General. Neighborhood General is
predominantly residential with a mix of single and multi-family
housing. Neighborhood scale goods and services, schools,
parks and Open Space diversify the neighborhoods. The
interconnected street pattern is maintained through the
Neighborhood General to disperse traffic. Sidewalks and
streetscape support the pedestrian environment. The following
design criteria shall apply within Neighborhood General:
a) Residential, neighborhood scale goods and
services, live-work, civic, institutional, parks, schools
and accessory uses, including an accessory dwelling
unit for single-family residential use, shall be permitted.
b) The maximum allowable building height shall be
three and a half (3.5) stories.
c) The maximum block perimeter shall be three
thousand five hundred (3500) linear feet, except that a
larger block perimeter shall be allowed where an alley
or pathway provides through access, or the block
includes water bodies or public facilities.
d) The SRA Plan shall set forth the development
standards for all allowable types of single-family
residential development, which shall, at a minimum,
adhere to the following:
i) The minimum lot area shall be one
thousand (1,000) square feet.
ii) Landscaping shall include a minimum of
sixty (60) square feet of shrub planting
per lot, on lots that are three thousand
(3,000) square feet or less in area;
eighty (80) square feet on lots that are
greater than three thousand (3,000)
square feet but less than five thousand
(5,000) square feet in area; and one
hundred (100) square feet for lots five
thousand (5,000) square feet or larger in
area or as otherwise allowed. Plantings
shall be in identified planting areas,
raised planters, or planter boxes in the
front of the dwelling, with, at a minimum,
turf grass for the remainder of the
property.
iii) Required off-street parking for single-
family dwelling units shall be permitted
at the front, side or rear of the lot.
'-"
\.,..
-43-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL lAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
'-"
e) Multi-family residential uses shall adhere to the
following:
i) Maximum building width of two hundred
seventy-five (275) feet and minimum building
width of eighteen (18) feet.
ii) Twenty (20) foot minimum building
separation required and not more than then
(10) con~utive townhome units.
iii) The minimum building front and side
setbacklbuild-to lines from all property
boundaries shall be zero (0) feet for primary
structures. Rear yard setbacks shall be a
minimum of ten (10) feet for the primary
structure and fIVe (5) feet for any accessory
structures.
\.-
iv) Porches, stoops, chimneys, bays,
canopies, balconies and overhangs may
encroach into the front and side yards a
maximum of five (5) feet.
v) The majority of parking spaces shall be
provided oft-street in the rear of buildings or
along side (secondary) streets. Parking areas
shall be organized into a series of small bays
separated by landscape islands or diamonds of
varied sizes. Parking lots shall be accessed
from alleys, service lanes or secondary streets.
On-street parking spaces within the limits of the
front property line, as projected into the right-of-
way, shall count toward the required number of
parking spaces.
vi) A minimum of one hundred (100) square
feet of shrub planting shall be required for each
two thousand (2,000) square feet of building
footprint, and one tree shall be required for
each four thousand (4,000) square feet of lot
area, inclusive of street trees, with such
plantings in planting areas, raised planters, or
planter boxes in the front of the building and a
minimum of turf grass for the remainder of the
property.
1) Non-residential uses shall adhere to the fOllowing:
i) All such uses shall be located at
intersection corners unless the entire block face
and cross-street block face consist of non-
'-'
- 44-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
\.
residential uses or the block face is adjoining
the Town Core or Town Center. These uses
shall not be permitted at mld- block locations If
a residential unit is adjacent to either side;
ii) If the non-residential use is a restaurant,
grocery store, or convenience store, it shall be
located on an alley loaded site;
jji) The use shall have a minimum lot area of
not less than the size of the smallest adjacent
lot.
Iv) The minimum front and side building
setbacklbuild-to line shall be zero (0) feet. If
located adjacent to an existing structure, the
minimum side setback shall be equal to the
setback of the adjacent property. The minimum
rear setback shall be ten (10) feet from the rear
property boundary for the principal structure and
five (5) feet from the rear property boundary for
any accessory structures.
v) Parking space requirements and design
are the same as in the Town Core, with on-
street parking provided only along the lot's street
frontage. No off-street parking shall be permitted
between the front facade and the front property
line. No off-street parking shall be permitted
between the side facade and the street side
property line for corner lots. All off-street parking
shall be screened from the street and adjacent
property by wall, fence and/or landscaping.
vi) Landscaping shall include a minimum of
one hundred (100) square feet of shrub planting
per two thousand (2,000) square feet of building
footprint, and one (1) tree per four thousand
(4,000) square feet of lot area, inclusive of street
trees. Plantings shall be in planting areas, raised
planters, or planter boxes in the front of the
building. Minimum of turf grass for the remainder
of the property.
g) Signage requirements shall be the same as in
Town Center.
h) At a minimum all proposed streets must include
sidewalks on both sides of the street, parallel to the
right-of-way, and a five (5) feet streetscape area
between the back of curb and the sidewalk.
\.-
~
- 45-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
, \.,.
iv. Neighborhood Edge (optional). Neighborhood Edge is
predominantly a single-family residential neighborhood. This
zone has the least intensity and diversity within the Town. The
mix of uses is limited. Residential lots are larger and more
Open Space is evident. The Neighborhood Edge may be used
to provide a transition to adjoining land uses. The following
standards shall apply with the Neighborhood Edge:
a) The permitted uses within the Neighborhood Edge
are residential, schools, parks, Open Space, golf
courses, and accessory uses.
\.
b) Building heights shall not exceed two (2) stories.
c) Lots shall have a minimum area of five thousand
(5000) square feet with lot dimensions and setbacks to
be further defined with the SRA Plan.
d) The perimeter of each block may not exceed five
thousand (5000) linear feet, unless an alley or pathway
provides through access, or the block includes water
bodies or public facilities.
e) Landscaping shall include a minimum of one
hundred (100) square feet of planting per lot, and a
minimum of turf grass for the remainder of the property.
g) Streets shall adhere to the cross sections
contained in the SRA Plan. At a minimum all proposed
streets with the exception of alleys must include a
sidewalk or multi-use path on one (1) side of the street
with a five (5) foot streetscape area between the edge
of curb and the pathway.
h) Required off-street parking for single-family dwelling
units shall be permitted at the front, side or rear of the
lot.
v. Special Use District (optional). The Special Use District
is intended to provide for uses and development
standards not otherwise provided for within the
Context Zones. Special Use Districts would be
primarily single use districts, such as universities,
medical parks and resorts that require unique
development standards to ensure compatibility with
surrounding neighborhoods. The location of Special
Use Districts shall be illustrated on the SRA Master
Plan, and uses and development standards shall be
defined in detail within the SRA development
application for review by St. Lucie County staff.
\.,..
- 46-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
\.,..
3. Village Design Criteria.
a. General design criteria.
The master plan for a Village shall:
· Include clearly defined neighborhoods with each having its own identity and
character and providing focal points in the form of neighborhood-scale retail,
office and civic uses in addition to schools, parks and other public places.
· Foster an urban, pedestrian-oriented environment by co-locating residential,
retail, office, civic and other uses in a Village Center; creating aesthetically
pleasing spatial relationships between streets, sidewalks and building
facades providing for shared and alternative parking in the Village Center;
and locating higher-density residential areas proximate to the Village Center.
· Promote internal capture of shopping and business trips by facilitating walk-to
shopping and employment, maximizing bicycle and pedestrian mobility;
providing a connected pathway, bikeway and multi-use trail system; and
reserving adequate sites for transit stops and shelters for construction when
transit service becomes available to the Village.
· Achieve connectivity through an interconnected network of roads and streets
and block designs in each context zone, as established in the RLSA LDRs, to
provide multiple pathways allowing for trip dispersion and reduced trip
lengths.
\.,.
Include a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for non-
residential uses in the Village.
· Provide for a range of housing types and price levels to accommodate
diverse ages and incomes, including adequate housing for the Village's very
low-, low- and moderate-income households that is reasonably accessible to
the Village's places of employment.
.
· Integrate Open Space in neighborhoods throughout the Village through such
features as village greens and squares, greenways, multi-use trails,
community parks, neighborhood parks and tot lots.
'-'
· Include in each phase of development for the Village a reasonable balance of
residential and non-residential uses, reflecting market trends and projections
for absorption, in order to ensure a land use balance at build-out that is
consistent with RLSA Rgure 5.
Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within all neighborhoods.
Village Plans shall be coordinated with the St. Lucie County School
Board to provide for the appropriate range of schools, as applicable, in
accordance with the size of the Village. To the extent possible, schools and
parks shall be located adjacent to each other and be sized and located to
enable children to walk or bicycle to them. In coordination with the St. Lucie
-47-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
County SChool District, the Village's master plan shall identify a "Safe Route
to Schools and Parks· through a system of sidewalks, pathways and trails.
b. Context Zones.
i. General.
a) Villages shall be designed to include a minimum
of two (2) Context Zones: Village Center and
Neighborhood General. A Village may include
additional Context Zones as approved by the BOCC in
the SRA Plan and Master Plan.
b) Each Zone shall blend into the other without the
requirements of buffers.
c) Villages may include the Context Zone of
Neighborhood Edge.
d) Villages may include Special Use Districts to
accommodate uses that require use specific design
standards not otherwise provided for within the Context
Zones.
......
e) The SRA Master Plan shall designate the location
of each Context Zone and each Special Use District.
The village center shall be designated in one (1)
location. Neighborhood General, Neighborhood Edge
and Special Use District may be designated in multiple
locations.
f) Context Zones are intended to guide the location
of uses and their intensity and diversity within a Village,
and provide for the transition of uses back to the
surrounding rural environment.
ii. Village Center.
a) The allowable uses within a village center are
commercial, retail, office, civic, institutional, essential
services, parks, residential, live-work, and schools and
accessory uses.
b) Uses may occur in shared use buildings or single
use buildings.
c) The intensity and density of development shall be
consistent with the characteristics identified on the St.
Lucie County RLSA Overlay SRA Characteristics Chart
(RL8A Figure 5) herein. More specific intensity
standards may be established during the 8RA
designation review and approval process.
\w.
- 48-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
\..
d) Maximum building height: Four (4) Stories,
excluding roofs and architectural features.
e) Minimum lot area: There shall be no minimum lot
size.
\...
f) Block Perimeter: Two thousand five hundred
(2,500) linear feet maximum.
g) The minimum building setbacklbuild-to line from
all property boundaries shall be zero (0) feet unless
otherwise noted herein. Buildings should be sited at
the edge of the sidewalk (front and/or side street
boundary) and be oriented to the street. The build-to
line from the front and side boundaries may be
increased in order to create public spaces such as
plazas and courtyards.
h) Overhead encroachments such as awnings,
balconies, arcades and the like, must maintain a clear
distance of nine (9) feet above the sidewalk and fifteen
(15) feet above the street.
i) Seating for outdoor dining shall be permitted to
encroach the public sidewalks and shall leave a
minimum six (6) foot clear pedestrian way between the
outdoor dining and the streetscape planting area.
j) Civic or Institutional Uses shall be subject to
specific design standards that address the perspective
of these buildings' creating focal points, terminating
vistas, and significant community landmarks and that
are set forth in the SRA Application Package and
approved by the BOCC.
k) Buildings within the Village Center shall be made
compatible through similar massing, volume, frontage,
scale and architectural features.
I) At a minimum all proposed streets with the
exception of alleys shall include sidewalks or multi-use
path on one (1) side of the street, parallel to the right-
of-way, and a streetscape area with a minimum planter
size five (5) feet in width and eight (8) feet in length
located between the back of curb and the sidewalk.
Streets shall maintain a minimum average building
height to street width ratio of 1 :1, excluding landmark
buildings.
m) General parking criteria
i) On- street parking spaces within the limits
\... of the front property line, as projected into the
- 49-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
right-of-way, shall count towards the required
number of parking spaces.
iI) The majority of parking spaces shall be
provided off- street in the rear of buildings, or
along the side (secondary streets). Parking is
prohibited in front of buildings.
iii) Parking areas shall be organized into a
series of small bays separated by landscape
islands or diamonds of varied sizes.
iv) Parking lots shall be accessed from
alleys, service lanes or secondary streets.
n) The majority of parking spaces shall be provided
off- street in the rear of buildings, or along the side
(secondary streets), organized into a series of small
bays delineated by landscape islands of varied sized.
An average spacing between landscape islands shall
be ten (10) spaces. Parking is prohibited in front of
buildings, except within the right-of-way. Parking lots
shall be accessed from alleys, service lanes or
secondary streets. Parking structures fronting on a
street shall include ground floor retail or shall have a
minimum ten (10) feet wide landscaped area at grade
and include façade treatments. The amount of required
parking shall be demonstrated through a shared
parking analysis submitted with an SRA Application
Package. Parking shall be determined utilizing the
modal splits and parking demands for various uses
recognized by ITE, ULI or other sources or studies.
The analysis shall demonstrate the number of parking
spaces available to more than one use or function,
recognizing the required parking will vary depending on
the multiple functions or uses in close proximity which
are unlikely to require the spaces at the same time.
0) Landscaping minimums within the village center
shall be met by providing landscaping within parking
lots as described, and by providing a streetscape area
between the sidewalk and curb with a minimum planter
size five (5) feet in width and eight (8) feet in length. In
these areas, sidewalk protection such as root barriers,
continuous tree pits, and/or structural soils shall be
provided. Trees shall be spaced no more than forty
(40) feet on-center. The street tree pattern may be
interrupted by architectural elements such as arcades
and columns.
'-"
\...-
p) Signage standards within the village center shall
comply with those provided in the Town Center.
-50-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
iii. Neighborhood General. Design standards for the
Neighborhood General within a Village shall be the same as
defined within a Town.
~
iv. Neighborhood Edge (optional). Design standards for the
Neighborhood Edge within a Village shall be the same as
defined within a Town.
v. Special Use District (optional). The Special Use District is
intended to provide for uses and development standards not
otherwise provided for within the Context Zones. Uses and
development standards shall be defined in detail within the
SRA Application Package and be approved by the SOCC.
4. Hamlet Design Criteria.
a. General. Hamlets are small rural residential areas with primarily
single-family housing and limited range of convenience-oriented
services. Hamlets shall be not less than forty (40) or more then
one hundred (100) acres in Gross Acreage and shall comply with
the Stewardship Receiving Area Characteristics Chart (RLSA
Figure 5). Hamlets shall include convenience retail and other
uses, in a ratio as provided in RLSA Figure 5. Design criteria for
Hamlets shall be created and adopted within the RLSA LDRS. To
maintain a proportion of Hamlets to Villages and Towns, not more
than three (3) Hamlets, in combination with CRDs of one hundred
(100) acres or less in Gross Acreage, may be approved as SRAs
prior to the approval of a Village or Town, and thereafter not more
than three (3) additional Hamlets, in combination with CRDs of
one hundred (100) acres or less in Gross Acreage, may be
approved for each subsequent Village or Town.
b. Open Spaces and parks. At a minimum, Hamlets shall provide a
public green equal to a minimum of .5 acresl1000 population.
c. Context Zones. Context Zones are intended to guide the location
of uses and their intensity and diversity within a Hamlet, and
provide for the transition back to the surrounding rural
environment.
i. Neighborhood General. Neighborhood General is
predominately residential with a mix of single and multi-family
housing. Neighborhood scale goods and services, schools,
parks and Open Space diversify the neighborhoods. The street
grid is maintained through the Neighborhood General to
disperse traffic. Sidewalks and streetscape support the
pedestrian environment. The design criteria applicable within
Neighborhood General are as follows:
a) Uses -residential, neighborhood scale goods and
services, civic, institutional, parks and schools.
\.,.
- 51 -
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
'-'
b) Building height - Three (3) Stories
c) Block Perimeter: Three thousand five hundred
(3500) linear feet maximum. The maximum may be
greater if an alley or pathway provides through access,
or the block includes water bodies or public facilities.
d) For single-family residential uses:
i) Minimum lot area: One thousand 1,000
square feet.
ii) Setbacks and encroachments to be defined
in the SRA development Document.
iii) Required off-street parking for single-family
dwelling units shall be permitted at the front,
side or rear of the lot.
e) For multi-family residential uses:
i) Maximum building width of two hundred
seventy-five (275) feet and minimum building
width of eighteen (18) feet.
ii) Twenty (20) foot minimum building
separation required and not more than ten (10)
consecutive townhome units.
~
iii) Front and side building setbacklbuild-to line
shall be a minimum of zero (0) feet for primary
structures. Rear yard setbacks shall be a
minimum twenty (20) feet for the primary
structure and five (5) feet for any accessory
structures.
iv) Encroachments: Porches, stoops,
chimneys, bays canopies, balconies and
overhangs may encroach into the front yard five
(5) feet. These same elements may encroach
five (5) feet Into side yards.
v) The majority of parking spaces shall be
provided off-street in the rear of buildings, or
along side (secondary) streets. Parking areas
shall be organized into a series of small bays
separated by landscape Islands or diamonds of
varied sizes. On-street parking spaces within
the limits of the front property line, as projected
into the right-of-way, shall count towards the
required number of parking spaces.
\...
-52-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
vi) Landscaping- Minimum of one hundred
(100) square feet of shrub planting per two
thousand (2,000) square feet of building
footprint, and one (1) tree per four thousand
(4,000) square feet of lot area, inclusive of
street trees. Plantings shall be in planting
areas, raised planters, or planter boxes in the
front of the building. Minimum of turf grass for
the remainder of the property.
f) Non-residential uses:
i) Location: at intersection comer. Mid- block
locations are not allowed.
ii) Maximum square footage per use is five
thousand (5,000).
iii) Maximum square footage per location is
twenty thousand (20,000).
iv) Minimum lot area: No less than the
minimum lot area of the smallest adjacent lot.
v) The minimum front and side building
setback shall be zero (0) feet. If located
adjacent to an existing structure, the minimum
front and side setback shall be equal to the
setback of the adjacent property. The
minimum rear setback shall be twenty (20) feet
for the primary structure and five (5) feet from
the rear property boundary for any accessory
structures.
\w.
vi) On-street parking may be provided along
the lot street frontage. All off-street parking
shall be screened from the street and adjacent
property by a wall, fence or landscaping .
vii) Landscaping. Minimum of one hundred
(100) square feet of shrub planting per two
thousand (2,000) square feet of building
footprint, and on tree per four thousand (4,000)
square feet of lot area, inclusive of street trees.
Plantings shall be in planting areas, raised
planters, or planter boxes in the front of the
building or as otherwise allowed. Minimum of
turf grass for the remainder of the property.
viii) Signage within Neighborhood General
shall comply with the standards provided in the
Town Neighborhood General.
~
-53-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
\.,-
ix) At a minimum all proposed streets with the
exception of alleys must include a sidewalk on
both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-
way, and a five (5) foot streetscape area
between the back of curb and the sidewalk.
~
ii. Neighborhood Edge. Neighborhood Edge is predominately
a single-family residential neighborhood. This zone has the
least intensity and diversity. The mix of uses is limited.
Residential lots are larger and more Open Space is evident.
The Neighborhood Edge may be used to provide a transition
to adjoining rural land uses.
a) Uses - residential, parks, golf courses, schools,
agriculture
b) Building height - Two (2) Stories
c) Minimum lot area five thousand (5000) square feet
d) Setbacks to be further defined within the SRA Plan
e) Block Perimeter: Five thousand (5000) linear feet
maximum. The maximum may be greater if an alley or
pathway provides through access, or the block includes
water bodies or public facilities.
f) Landscaping. Minimum of one hundred (100)
square feet of shrub planting per lot. Minimum of turf
grass for the remainder of the property.
g) Required off-street parking for single-family
dwelling units shall be permitted at the front, side or
rear of the lot.
h) Streets. At a minimum all proposed streets with the
exception of alleys must include a sidewalk or multi-
use path on one (1) side of the street with a five (5) foot
streetscape area between the edge of curb and the
pathway.
~
-54-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT AEGULA TIONS, 6/16106
\.,.
5. Compact Rural Development Design Criteria.
a. General. Compact Aural Development (CAD) is a form of SRA
that shall support and further St. Lucie County's valued attributes and
characteristics as defined in the preamble to the Comprehensive
Plan. CRDs provide flexibility with respect to the mix of uses and
design standards, but shall otherwise comply with the standards of a
Hamlet or Village, depending on the size. A CAD may include, but is
not required to have permanent residential housing and the services
and facilities that support permanent residents. An example of a CRD
is an eco-tourlsm village or research facility that would have a unique
set of uses and support services different from a traditional residential
village. It could contain transient lodging facilities and services
appropriate to eco-tourlsts or researchers, but may not provide for the
range of services that are necessary to support permanent residents.
Except as described above, a CAD shall conform to the
characteristics of a Village or Hamlet as set forth in ALSA Figure 5
based on the size of the CAD. As residential units are not a required
use, those goods and services that support residents such as retail,
office, civic, governmental and institutional uses shall also not be
required, however for any CAD that does include permanent
residential housing, the proportionate support services shall be
provided in accordance with ALSA Figure 5. To maintain a proportion
of CRDs of one hundred (100) acres or less in Gross Acreage to
Villages and Towns, not more than three (3) CADs of one hundred
(100) acres or less in Gross Acreage, in combination with Hamlets,
may be approved as SRAs prior to the approval of a Village or Town,
and thereafter not more than three (3) additional CADs of one
hundred (100) acres or less in Gross Acreage, in combination with
Hamlets, may be approved for each subsequent Village or Town.
6. Buffer Required. Each SRA must include an edge area to provide a
transition from the SRA to adjacent land uses. The edge area shall be
designed to be compatible with the character of the adjoining property, based
upon site specific conditions. The edge area of an SRA shall be an average
one hundred (100) feet in width and may include Open Space; landscape
buffers; forested or reforested areas; compatible agricultural uses; roads or
multi-modal transportation facilities; active or passive recreational areas;
connections to present or planned regional greenways or trails; habitat
restoration; stormwater management lakes, ponds or flow-ways; and similar
uses unless otherwise prohibited by Policy 4.9 of the St. Lucie County Aural
Land Stewardship Area Overlay.
7. Infrastructure Aequired. An SRA shall have adequate infrastructure
available to serve the proposed development, or such infrastructure must be
provided concurrently with the demand as identified in Chapter 5 of the St.
Lucie County LDC. The level of infrastructure required will depend on the
type of development, accepted civil engineering practices, and the
requirements of this Section.
"~
\.
-55-
Centralized or decentralized community water and
wastewater utilities are required in Towns, Villages, Hamlets, and
those CRDs exceeding one hundred (100) acres in size in Gross
Acreage. Centralized or decentralized community water and
wastewater utilities shall be constructed, owned, operated and
maintained by a private utility service, the developer, a Community/. /;....¡ ,-I t:
Development District, independent special district, Fl Pierce S J
Utilities Authority, ~i~ Utilily SY:Hems Depaffinent, St. ¿;, çrc
Lucie County Utilities or another governmental entity or a ~ A
combination of the above. This Section shall not prohibit 7rr- - ~
innovative alternative water and wastewater treatment systems 1 (/ ¡ì
such as decentralized community treatment systems provided that ¡(}rJ .PJ
they meet all applicable regulatory criteria. Central water and ,()~
wastewater services shall not be provided beyond the RLSA / ~ .6/1
boundary except as authorized by the Comprehensive Plan. /v (
fÞ~/
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
~
a. The capacity of infrastructure serving the SRA must
be demonstrated during the SRA designation process in
accordance with the provisions in Chapter 5 of the St. Lucie
County LDC in effect at the time of SRA designation.
b. Infrastructure to be analyzed will include facilities
for transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water,
stormwater management, solid waste, schools, and parks and
recreation.
c.
~
d.
Although water, sewer and other utilities may run
through areas outside the RLSA boundary, or as part of a regional
system, no connection to such services outside the RLSA Overlay
is allowed unless those properties are also included in the RLSA
boundary except as authorized by the Comprehensive Plan.
e. Although no restrictions shall be placed on adjacent
lands not within the RLSA boundary, the County shall, within two
(2) years of the adoption of the RI,.SA Overlay, establish additional
incentives for property outside any SRA boundary, to provide
buffers, greenways and other separations to any established SRA.
1. Individual potable water supply wells and septic
systems to be used for construction and/or sale trailers and model
homes only, are permitted on an interim basis within Towns,
Villages or CRDs greater than one hundred (100) acres up to a
maximum of ten thousand (10,000) gallons per day until services
from a centralizeelldecentralized community system are available.
Individual wells and septic tanks shall also be allowed for isolated
guard house anellor comfort stations on a trail system or golf
course up to 2,000 gallons per day.
g. Individual potable water supply wells and septic
systems are permitted in Hamlets or CRDs of one hundred (100)
acres or less in Gross Acreage.
~
- 56-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
\...
h. As it is the goal of Rural Land Stewardship to
protect and conserve natural resources and agriculture, applicants
are encouraged to utilize environmentally-friendly infrastructure
techniques ("green design/technology").
8. Requests for Deviations from the LDC. The SRA Plan may provide for
nonprocedural deviations from the LDC, provided that all of the following
requirements are satisfied:
a. The deviation(s) are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,
including the RLSA Overlay;
b. The deviation(s) further the RLSA Overlay Zone Regulations and
are consistent with the specific Design Criteria from which Section
4.05.08.1. expressly prohibits deviation; and
c. The applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the BOCC .
that the proposed deviation(s) further enhance the tools, techniques
and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and
development strategies, . pursuant to Florida Rural Land Stewardship
statute, § 163.3177 (11)(d), F.S., and Rule 9J-5.006(5)(L), F.A.C.
J. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessments. Impact assessments are intended
to identify methods to be utilized to meet the SRA generated impacts on public
facilities and to evaluate the self-sufficiency of the proposed SRA with respect to
these public facilities. Information provided within these assessments may also
indicate the degree to which the SRA is consistent with the fiscal neutrality
requirements of Section 4.05.08.K. The Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report
shall address:
\...,
1. Transportation. A transportation impact assessment meeting the
requirements of Section 11.02.09 of the LDC or its successor regulation or
procedure, shall be prepared by the applicant as component of the Public
Facilities Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA
Application Package.
a. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required
above, the transportation impact assessment shall address, to the
extent applicable, the following issues:
(1) Impacts to the level of service of impacted roadways and
intersections, comparing the proposed SRA to the impacts of
conventional underlying zoning development;
(2) Effect(s) of new roadway facilities planned as part of the
SRA Master Plan on the surrounding transportation system;
(3) Impacts to agricultural transportation issues, especially
the farm-ta-market movement of agricultural products.
(4) Connection of SRAs with the rest of the RLSA using rural
design and rural road corridors.
'-"
-57-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6116/06
~
(5) Mitigation for transportation impacts that would cause a
transportation facility to operate below the adopted level of
service standard. Mitigation measures may include facility
improvements by the developer or other authorized entity;
level-of-service monitoring; approved Transportation Demand
Management practices; proportionate fair-share payments
pursuant to the "Model Ordinance for Proportionate Fair-Share
Mitigation of Development Impacts on Transportation
Corridors" (dated Feb. 14,2006), adopted pursuant to section
163.3180(16)(a), Florida Statutes, for all projects except multi-
use ORis which qualify for the proportionate fair-share
payment provisions of section 163.3180(12), Aorida Statutes;
or any other mitigation measure approved by the SOCC.
b. The transportation impact assessment shall also consider public
transportation (transit) and bicycle and pedestrian issues to the extent
applicable.
c. No SRA shall be approved unless the transportation impact
assessment required by this Section demonstrates that the capacity of
County/State collector or arterial road(s) serving the SRA to. be
adequate to serve the intended SRA uses in accordance with Chapter
5 of the LDC in effect at the time of SRA designation.
2. Potable Water. A potable water assessment shall be prepared by the
applicant as a component of the Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report
that is submitted as part of an SRA Application Package. The assessment
shall specify how the applicant will meet the adopted level of service standard
for potable water. In addition, the potable water assessment shall consider, to
the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products, if any, generated by the
proposed treatment process. The applicant shall identify the sources of water
proposed for potable water supply.
3. Wastewater. A wastewater assessment shall be prepared by the applicant
as a component of the Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report that is
submitted as part of an SRA Application Package. The assessment shall
specify how the applicant will meet the adopted level of service standard for
wastewater treatment. In addition, the wastewater assessment shall
specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products
generated by the proposed treatment process.
4. Solid waste. A solid waste assessment shall be prepared by the applicant
as a component of the Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report that is
submitted as part of an SRA Application Package. The assessment shall
specify how the applicant will meet the adopted level of service standard for
solid waste. In addition, the assessment shall identify the means and
methods for handling, transporting and disposal of all solid waste generated
including but not limited to the collection, handling and disposal of recyclables
and horticultural waste products. The applicant shall identify the location and
remaining disposal capacity available at the disposal site.
'-"
~
-58-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6116106
\.
5. Stormwater Management. A stormwater management impact assessment
shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of the Public Facilities
Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as a part of an SRA Application
Package. The stormwater management impact assessment shall specify how
the applicant will meet the adopted level of service standard for stormwater
and shall also provide the following information:
a. An exhibit showing the boundary of the proposed SRA including
the following information:
i. The location of any WRA adjacent to an SRA;
ii. A generalized representation of the existing stormwater flow
pattems across the site including thelocation(s) of discharge
from the site to the downstream receiving waters;
iii. The land uses of adjoining properties and, if applicable, the
locations of stormwater discharge into the site of the proposed
SRA from the adjoining properties.
b. A narrative component to the report including the following
information:
\...
i. The name of the receiving water or, if applicable, HYSA or
WRA to which the stormwater discharge from the site will
ultimately outfall;
ii. The peak allowable discharge rate (in cfs I acre) allowed for
the SRA per St. Lucie County regulations;
iii. If applicable, a description of the provisions to be made to
accept stormwater flows from surrounding properties into,
around, or through the constructed surface water management
system of the proposed development;
iv. The types of stormwater detention areas to be constructed
as part of the surface water management system of the
proposed development and water quality treatment to be
provided prior to discharge of the runoff from the site; and
v. If a WRA has been incorporated into the stormwater
management system of an SRA, the report shall demonstrate
compliance with provisions of Section 4.05.07.A.2.
6. Parks and Recreation. A parks and recreation assessment shall be
prepared by the applicant as a component of the Public Facilities
Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA
Application Package. The assessment shall specify how the applicant
will meet the adopted level of service standard for parks and
recreation. In addition, the assessment shall describe the parks and
recreational facilities that will be provided on-site; which shall be open
to the public and/or dedicated to the County; and for those parks or
\...
- 59-
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
facilities not dedicated to the County, the entity responsible for
operating and maintaining such parks or facilities.
Public Schools. A public schools assessment shall be prepared by
the applicant as a component of the Public Facilities Impact
Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Application
Package. The assessment shall specify how the applicant will meet
the adopted level of service standard for public schools, based on the
generally applicable pupil generation rates adopted by the St. Lucie
County School Board. In addition, the assessment shall specify
whether any needed school facilities or sites will be dedicated or
otherwise provided on-site, and the method for financing any needed
school facilities or sites.
Irrigation. An irrigation assessment shall be prepared by the applicant
as a component of the Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report
that is submitted as part of an SRA Application Package. The
assessment shall specify the demand for non-potable watersupply for
irrigation, the source(s) for non-potable water supply for irrigation, the
general location of any existing or proposed on-site non-potable water
supply wells, the entity responsible for operating and maintaining on-
site non-potable water supply for irrigation, the availability of
reclaimed water for purposes of irrigation, and water conservation
methods or devices incorporated into the SRA Plan or Master Plan.
K. SRA Economic Assessment. An Economic Assessment meeting the
requirements of this Section shall be prepared and submitted as part of the SRA
Application Package. The fiscal analysis shall consider the following public
facilities and services: transportation, potable water, irrigation water, wastewater,
stormwater management, solid waste, parks and recreation, law enforcement,
emergency medical services, fire, and schools. Development phasing and
funding mechanisms shall address any adverse impacts to adopted minimum
levels of service pursuant to the Chapter 6 of the LOC.
.\....
\...
7.
8.
1. Demonstration of Fiscal Neutrality. In addition to meeting the Concurrency
Management System requirements at the time of final local development
orders, approved development within each SRA must demonstrate that, as a
whole, it will be fiscally neutral or positive to St. Lucie County, at the end of
the first ten (10) years of development, and every five (5) years thereafter,
and at the horizon year (build-out). This demonstration will be made for each
independent unit of government responsible for the services listed below,
using one of the following methodologies:
a. St. Lucie County Fiscal Impact Model. The fiscal impact model
officially adopted and maintained by St. Lucie County.
b. Alternative Fiscal Impact Model. If St. Lucie County has not
adopted a fiscal impact model as Indicated above, the applicant may
develop an alternative fiscal impact model using a methodology
approved by 51. Lucie County. The model methodology will be
consistent with the Rscal Impact Analysis Model ("FlAM") developed
by the State of Florida. The BOCC may grant exceptions to this policy
- 60-
\w
\.,-
\.,.
~
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16106
of fiscal neutrality to accommodate very low-, low-, and moderate-
income housing.
2. An Ordinance which approves an SRA Application Package shall include
a finding by the BOCC that the SRA will be fiscally neutral or positive to St.
Lucie County. It shall further provide for:1) the monitoring of fiscal neutrality
at the end of the first ten (10) years of development, and every five (5) years
thereafter, and at the horizon year (build-out); 2) modification of the project or
other remedial measures in the event a negative fiscal impact is identified
during monitoring; and 3) the authorization of the specific techniques that will
be utilized to support fiscal self-sufficiency such as Community Development
Districts, Independent Special Districts, private partnership agreements, and
public-private developer or interlocal agreements. Development phasing and
funding mechanisms under a final development order shall address any
adverse impacts to adopted minimum levels of service standards adopted in
the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code. An
enforceable developer agreement shall be required to ensure that public
facilities provided by the developer are completed in accordance with Florida
law. Such a developer agreement may authorize the developer to assign any
obligation for construction, operation or maintenance of a public facility to a
Community Development District, Independent Special District or other unit of
local government.
- 61 -
\...-
\.....
\.....
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 6/16/06
APPENDIX
The following forms are hereby adopted to implement the provisions of this Section:
1.
2.
SSA Application.
SRA Application.
- 62-
Exhibit C
~
. ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP GOAL. OBJECTIVE AND POLICIES
TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
BOCC: St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
CEDS: Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council's Comprehensive Economic Development
Strategy
CRD: Compact Rural Development
FlAM: Fiscal Impact Analysis Model
FLUM: St. Lucie County Future land Use Map
F:S.: Florida Statutes
~
HSA: Habitat Stewardship Area
HYSA: Hydrologic Stewardship Area
LDRs: St. Lucie County land Development Regulations
NRI:. Natural Resource Index
RLSA: Rural Land Stewardship Area
SFWMD: South Florida Water Management District
SRA: Stewardship Receiving Area
SSA: Stewardship Sending Area
TCI: Targeted Capital Improvement
TDM: Transportation Demand Management
WRA: Water Retention Area
\...
~.._-...'---
~
ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY ZONE
TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AICP: American Institute of Certified Planners'
BOCC: St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
CERP: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Program
CRD: Compact Rural Development
DEP: Florida Department of Environmental Protection
DOACS: Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
DRI: Development of Regional Impact
DRI ADA: Development of Regional Impact Application for Development Approval
EAC: St. Lucie County Environmental Advisory Committee
~ F.A.C.: Florida Administrative Code
FAR: Floor Area Ratio
FlAM: Fiscal Impact Analysis Model
FOOT FLUCFCS: Florida Department of Transportation Florida Land Use Cover and Forms
Classification System
F.S.: Florida Statutes
HSA: Habitat StewardShip Area
HYSA: Hydrologic Stewardship Area
ITE: Institute of Transportation Engineers
LDC: St. Lucie County Land Development Code
LDRs: St. Lucie County Land Development Regulations
MXD: Mixed Use Development
NSLP: Natu~al Soils Landscape Positions
~
_.~-------.......--
.~'..~~'" -.-.-
, ",
~ St Lucie County RLS Overlay Zone Terms and Abbreviations
Page 2 of 2
NRI: Natural Resource Index
'-"..
\...
-----~
PDA: Preliminary Development Agreement from the Florida Department of Community Affairs
R I: Restoratipn Incentive
RLSA: Rural Land Stewardship Area
" SFWMD: South Florida Water Management District
SRA: Stewardship Receiving Area
SSA: Stewardship Sending Area
TCI: Targeted Capital Improvement
TDM: Transportation Demand Management
UU: Urban Land Institute
UP A: Units Per Acre
USDA-NRCS Soils Maps: United States Department of Agriculture-Na~ural Resources
Co,",servation Service Soils maps(s)
WRA: Water Retention Area
-
',- '--'~"---"-
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
NOTICE OF INTENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie
County, Florida, will consider County Ordinance No. 06-030 to amend the St. Lucie County Land
Development Code by creating regulations governing the St. Lucie County Rural Land Stewardship
Overlay Zone. A public hearing will be held before the St. Lucie County Board of County
Commissioners on Tuesday, the 11th of July, 2006 at 6:00 pm., or as soon thereafter as the matter may
be heard in the St. Lucie County Commission Chambers at the St. Lucie County Administration
Building Annex, Third Floor, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Matters affecting your
personal and property rights may be heard and acted upon. All interested persons are invited to
attend and be heard. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be heard.
Copies of the proposed ordinance may be obtained from the County Attorney's Office, St.
Lucie County Administration Building Annex, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida, 34982.
Amendments to the Ordinance may be made at the public hearing.
If any person decides to appeal any decision made with respect to any matter considered at the
meetings or hearings of any board, committee, commission, agency, council or advisory group, that
person will need a record of the proceedings and that, for such purpose, may need to ensure that a
verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record should include the testimony and evidence
upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceedings, 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.
Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend the public hearing should contact
the St. Lucie County Community Services Director at (772) 462-1777 or T DD. (772) 462-1428, at least
forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting.
The title of this Ordinance is:
ORDINANCE NO. 2006-030
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
BY CREATING SECTION 4.05.00 (ST. LUCIE COUNTY RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP
AREA OVERLAY ZONE); CREATING SECTION 4.05.01 (PURPOSE AND INTENT);
CREATING SECTION 4.05.02 (SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE TO THE RURAL
LAND STEWARDSHIP AREA (RLSA) OVERLY ZONE); CREATING SECTION 4.05.03
(ESTABLISHMENT OF RLSA OVERLAY ZONE); CREATING SECTION 4.05.04 (LAND
USES ALLOWED IN THE RLSA OVERLAY ZONE); CREATING SECTION 4.05.05
(STEWARDSHIP CREDITS); CREATING SECTION 4.05.06 (LANDS WITHIN THE RLSA
OVERLAY ZONE PRIOR TO SSA OR SRA DESIGNATION); CREATING SECTION
4.05.07 (SSA DESIGNATION); CREATING SECTION 4.05.08 (SRA DESIGNATION);
CREATING SECTION; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS,
SEVERABILITY AND APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION AND CODIFICATION AND
AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THIS NOTICE EXECUTED and dated this 3rd day of July, 2006.
Submitted by:
Daniel S. McIntyre
County Attorney
PUBLISH DATE:
July 4,2006
Planning and Zoning Commission Review:
06/29/06
File Number PA-05-006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM:
Michael Brillhart, Strategy and Special Projects Director
DATE:
June 21,2006
SUBJECT:
Review of proposed Land Development Regulations that will apply to
property generally located within the proposed Rural Land Stewardship
Area (RLSA) Overlay Zone
BACKGROUND
In July of 2001, the State of Florida made revisions to its Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA)
legislation (F.S. 163.3177 11(d)). These revisions to this State land management initiative were
made to promote sustainability and protection of natural resources for eligible rural land in
excess of 10,000 acres.
A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is being proposed for St. Lucie County that incorporates
these requirements through the creation of an RLSA Overlay Zone on the County's Future Land
Use Map (FLUM). The land within the Overlay Zone includes the Adams Ranch property
representing approximately 16,464 acres and the Cloud Grove DRI representing over 6,000
acres (see Exhibit A). The proposed Plan Amendment will include the creation of an RLSA land
use designation of the FLUM. The County Commission transmitted the RLSA Comprehensive
Plan Amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs on October 11, 2005.
This Plan Amendment also identifies Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA) that will be protected
from future development through the transfer of development credits and Stewardship
Receiving Areas (SRA) where development rights credits can be transferred to. Future
development of the SSA (+ 12,000 acres of the Adams Ranch) and the SRA (+ 5,000 acres of
Cloud Grove) will be guided and implemented through the Overlay Zone land development
regulations. Approximately 4,400 acres of Adams Ranch within the Overlay Zone may be
eligible to serve as either an SSA or an SRA due to its low Natural Resource Index (NRI) value.
The proposed regulations, as shown in Exhibit B and referenced in Section 4.05.00 - Rural
Land Stewardship Area Overlay Zone of the Land Development Code, will be used to
implement land use and development activities within this Overlay Zone. These regulations will
be presented to the Board of County Commissioners for adoption through Ordinance No. 06-
030. They will specifically identify the types and scale of development activities relevant to
June 21, 2006
Page 2
Subject: RLSA Amendment
File No.: PA-05-006
Land Development Regulations
properties within the SSA and SRA locations. Transfer of development credits criteria and
conveyance requirements are also contained therein.
COMMENTS
State implementation standards for the RLSA program including criteria for the proposed rural
SSA and SRA, as stipulated in F.S. 163.3177 11 (d), include:
a. the requirement for compatibility with surrounding uses
b. receiving area designed to meet 25 year population projections
c. a Natural Resource Index (NRI) value used in calculating and measuring environmental
habitat credits for the sending area
d. the provision for adequate water and sewer services for the RLSA boundary
e. the development of acceptable design standards for roadways within the RLSA to ensure
the separation between the rural and urban service area boundaries
f. the requirement for mixed use development within the proposed receiving area development
reflective of a rural town, village or hamlet settlement pattern
The applicant is working with County staff and the State Department of Community Affairs to
ensure that each of these requirements is met and that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
establishing the RLSA Overlay Zone within S1. Lucie County is consistent with affecting State
statutes. The Plan Amendment and its adopting Ordinance No. 06-031 will be presented to the
Board of County Commissioners on July 11, 2006. On that date, the Board will also review the
first reading of Ordinance No. 06-030 adopting the RLSA land development regulations. The
second reading of this Ordinance is scheduled to take place on August 14, 2006.
JUNE 8. 2006 - PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP
Representatives of Family Lands Remembered LLC presented information on the proposed
land development regulations (Exhibit B) for the Overlay Zone at a Planning and Zoning
Commission workshop on June 8th. Commission members identified several revisions to this
document that have been incorporated into the "redline" version attached.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval to the Board
of County Commissioners for the proposed Land Development Regulations affecting the Rural
Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay Zone.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A (Overlay Zone Map)
Exhibit B (Proposed Land Development Regulations)
Staff comments
EAC comments
NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ST LUCIE COUNTY
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
NOTICE OF INTENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of St.
Lucie County, Florida, will review proposed County Ordinance No. 06-030 which
provides for certain amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code to
establish regulations for the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) overlay.
A public hearing for the proposed amendments will be held before the
Planning and Zoning Commission, at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
on June 29, 2006, County Commission Chambers, St. Lucie County
Administration Building Annex, Third Floor, 2300 Virginia A venue, Fort Pierce,
Florida. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be
considered. The County Growth Management Department's Planning Division should
receive written comments to the Board of County Commissioners at least 3 days prior to
the scheduled hearing.
(insert map)
County policy strongly encourages your input and comment at public hearing of
this matter before the Planning and Zoning Commission, rather than by contact outside
of the scheduled public hearing. We encourage you to speak at this hearing, or provide
written comments for the record.
Copies of the proposed amendments may be obtained from the St. Lucie County
Growth Management Director's Office, St. Lucie County Administration Building, 2300
Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida, 34982, and are also available for viewing during
regular business hours (8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.) in the office of the Clerk of the Board of
County Commissioners, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Administration Building Annex, 2300
Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982. Amendments to the proposed
amendments may be made at the public hearing.
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 the meetings or hearings, 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
proceedings, 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 Central Services Director at (772) 462-1441 TDD (772)
462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting.
If you no longer own property adjacent to the above-referenced parcel, please
forward this notice to the new owner. Please call (772) 462-2822 if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
ST. LUCIE COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Bill Hearn, Chairman
THIS NOTICE EXECUTED and dated this 1ih day of June, 2006
PUBLISH DATE:
June 15, 2006
PUBLISHER:
TYPE AD:
PROOF TO:
The Tribune
Legal Ad
St. Lucie County Growth Management Department
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Florida 34982