Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01-04-2008 St. Lucie County Agricultural Development Steering Committee Minutes 1 2300 Virginia Avenue 2 Administration Building 3 Conference Room Number 3 4 January 4, 2008 5 9:00AM 6 7 A compact disc recording of this meeting, in its entirety, has been placed in the file along 8 with these minutes as part of the record. In the event of a conflict between the written 9 minutes and the compact disc, the compact disc shall control. 10 11 CALL TO ORDER 12 13 Mr. Ridgely called the meeting to order around 9:00 AM 14 15 Roll Call: 16 Committee Members, Staff and others present introduced themselves. 17 Agricultural Development Steering Committee Members 18 19 Dennis G. Corrick.................Chair, At Large Member 20 H. M. Ridgely III..................Vice - Chair, Indian River Citrus League 21 Diane Andrews.....................At Large Member 22 Peter Harrison.......................At Large Member 23 Robert J. Johnson.................Farm Credit of South Florida 24 Joseph G. Miller...................Commissioner Smith Appointee 25 Chuck Olson.........................Commissioner Coward Appointee 26 Gary Roberts........................At Large Member 27 Jim Russakis.........................Cattlemen’s Association 28 Matthew L. Wynne...............Owner of more than 160 Acres 29 Roland Yee...........................Commissioner Lewis Appointee 30 Pete Spyke............................Owner of less than 160 Acres 31 Ed Lounds............................Commissioner Grande Appointee 32 Committee Members Absent: 33 34 Ray Treacy...........................St. Lucie County Conservation Alliance 35 Chris Smith..........................Commissioner Craft Appointee 36 Staff Members Present 37 38 Mark Satterlee......................Growth Management Director 39 Robin Meyer.........................Assistant Growth Management Director 40 Beverlee Deans.....................Executive Assistant 41 Kristin Testsworth................Current Planning Manager 42 Peter Jones ...........................Planning Manager 43 Dawn Milone .......................Senior Staff Assistant 44 Michelle Hylton ...................Senior Staff Assistant 45 Others Present 46 Page 1 of 4 1 Liz Martin............................Administrative Aide to Commissioner Charles Grande 2 Lee Ann Lowry ...................Assistant County Administrator 3 Charles Grande.....................Commissioner, District Four 4 John Holt .............................St. Lucie County Conservation Alliance 5 Mr. Satterlee 6 discussed the resignation of Ray Treacy from the committee, and members 7 agreed that they would leave it to the Conservation Alliance to appoint another member Mr. Holt 8 since they are specifically mentioned in the resolution creating the committee. 9 said they would try to appoint someone. 10 REVIEW OF MINUTES FROM JANUARY 4, 2008 11 12 Mr. Russakis motioned Ms. Andrews 13 for approval of the minutes, it was seconded by, 14 and the motion carried unanimously. 15 Item 1: 16 Review and Compile List of Committee Priorities 17 Mr. Satterlee 18 mentioned that he sent an e-mail to the members asking for a list of each 19 person’s top five issues they wished to discuss among the committee, but as yet had only 20 received four responses. This item was continued to a later meeting. 21 Item 2: 22 Open Space Discussion A. 23 Review Current Land Development Code Language 24 Mr. Satterlee 25 prepared a PowerPoint presentation pertaining to current open space 26 policies in the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan), and open space criteria and definitions 27 from the Land Development Code (LDC). 28 Mr. Lounds 29 expressed concern over the language in the Comp Plan that guides toward 30 PUD “clustering” and he does not think it is conducive toward an agricultural Mr. Satterlee 31 development. stated that there was not a firm definition of “clustering” and 32 said that could be an issue for the committee to discuss. 33 Mr. Russakis 34 There was discussion to clarify Policy 1.1.2.3 Paragraph “b” believed that 35 the date the restriction placed on parcels of record after January 9, 1990 should only 36 restrict parcels owned after 2004 because that language was changed by an agricultural Mr. Ridgely 37 steering committee in 2004 of which he was a member. mentioned that prior Mr. Wynne 38 to the 2004 committee the LDC said 4, and the Comp Plan said 10. added 39 that yards were supposed to be included in open space requirements as per the same Mr. Russakis 40 committee. thinks that the committee should look for inaccuracies in [the 41 language] for clarity and validity. 42 Mr. Ridgely 43 pointed out that there has been a Comp Plan circulating within The County 44 since last February that did not include the last sentence of Policy 8.1.8.5 which was Mr. Satterlee 45 added in January of 2004. said that sentence is what seems to exclude 46 yards, but there is a lack of connection and a lack of clarity. Page 2 of 4 1 Mr. Harrison Mr. Lounds 2 addressed comments on clustering by clarifying that 3 Tallahassee only “encourages” clustering as stated in the Stipulated Settlement Ms. Andrews 4 Agreement. showed where there was an option for clustering or reducing 5 residential densities within the ag land use category. 6 Mr. Miller, Mr. Olson, Ms. Andrews 7 and wanted defined parameters of “entities 8 acceptable to St. Lucie County”. 9 Mr. Miller 10 spoke about the ag PUD committee from 2003-2004 believing that the 80% Comm. Grande 11 open space requirement included backyards, told the committee that was 12 not the case, though 45% can be privately owned, the yards are actually included in the 13 20% buildable area. He added that the ambiguity is what needs to be clarified because if 14 backyards are included, there is no difference between a standard PUD and an ag PUD. 15 Mr. Satterlee’s Mr. Russakis 16 Duringdiscussion, expressed concern over language that 17 did not include streets, drainage, and above ground utilities in common open space Mr. Lounds 18 requirements. suggested a stipulation for ag PUD’s could be made including 19 those things as part of common open space. 20 Mr. Satterlee 21 suggested forming a sub-committee to focus on the language and 22 recommended changes. 23 Mr. Russakis Mr. Wynne 24 & suggested a vote on whether or not to include yards as open 25 space to see if the committee was in agreement before clarifying definitions or anything 26 else presented by the Board. 27 Comm. Grande 28 clarified that there was never intent by the Board in 2003-2004 to 29 include yards, though there is no documentation stating it, nor is there any documentation 30 to support including yards. The concept as Comm. Grande believes the intent was to 31 distinguish ag PUD’s from standard PUD’s so that there are large sections of open space 32 whether they are private or common areas per DCA. 33 Mr. Wynne 34 There was discussion at length in determining the definition of “yard”. said 35 that the exclusion of yards is a way to force “clustering” and thinks the county should 36 give the land owners a choice or incentive to develop that way. 37 Mr. Johnson 38 stated if the county or state wishes to preserve a portion of the land they 39 should buy it from the land owners. 40 Mr. Russakis 41 asked that the county compares itself to other counties with ag PUD’s to 42 determine our latitude with DCA. 43 44 There was discussion about Hunter’s Run and Shinn Lakes, two ag PUD’s recently 45 approved by the Board case by case using special considerations. 46 Page 3 of 4 Mr. Russakis 1 There was further discussion whether or not to include yards in which Mr. Ridgely 2 suggested a vote again, and wanted clarification whether the committee was 3 referring to “yards” or “lots” before calling for a vote. 4 B. 5 Ag PUD Development Scenarios Mr. Jones 6 presented a graphic presentation with development concepts based on ag PUD 7 requirements. The general concern was on the “clustering” concept as presented in the 8 hypothetical site plans that contained ½ acre lots, and the affordability of 5 acre lots in 9 other concepts. 10 Mr. Jones 11 suggested the committee decide what the purpose open space should serve and 12 what the relationship will be with the development. 13 Mr. Spyke 14 said there seems to be confusion between “privately held open space”, a 15 “lot”, a “yard”, and a “developable area” and determining what applies to the percentage 16 of required open space that is not “common open space”. 17 Mr. Russakis 18 reiterated the need to decide as a committee to meet the April deadline for 19 the Board whether or not to include yards as open space, after which the committee can Commissioner Grande Mr. Russakis 20 work on the details. told the solution the Board is 21 looking for is a way to avoid having to review each ag PUD on a case by case basis. 22 Mr. Corrick 23 said the LDC should be clear enough that developers can look at it before 24 investing to know what they are allowed to do with their land, if the yard issue is decided, 25 the committee can then work to clearing up the LDC. 26 Mr. Russakis Mr. Miller 27 made a motion to include yards as open space (2:24:30). 28 seconded. 29 Mr. Ridgely, Mr. Spyke, Mr. Harrison 30 and wanted a definition of the word “yard” Mr. Jones 31 before a vote was made. defined a “yard” as the space between the lot line and 32 the buildable area. 33 Mr. Ridgely 34 suggested the inclusion of yards would take 10% away from the buildable Mr. Wynne 35 area from standard PUD’s. expanded on that comment saying the more 36 common open space outside of yards that is sacrificed, reduces the buildable area, 37 therefore the average lot size becomes smaller making the area more [urban], and makes Mr. Spyke 38 it more difficult to preserve native landscapes. stated he believes clustering is 39 a design issue, not a calculation issue. 40 Mr. Russakis 41 After discussion to clarify (2:49:20), restated his motion as to include Mr. Miller 42 yards as open space. repeated his second. The vote was unanimous in favor of 43 including yards. 44 The meeting was adjourned around 11:55AM 45 Page 4 of 4