HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04-17-2008
1 St. Lucie County
2 Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency
rd
3 Commission Chambers, 3 Floor, Roger Poitras Annex
4 April 17, 2008 Regular Meeting
5 6:00 P.M.
6
7
A compact disc recording of this meeting, in its entirety, has been placed in the file along with these
8
minutes as part of the record. In the event of a conflict between the written minutes and the compact disc,
9
the compact disc shall control.
10
11
1. CALL TO ORDER
12
13 Chairman Caron called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
14
A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
15
16
B. ROLL CALL
17
18
19 Susan Caron..........................Chairman
20 Vice Chairman Mundt...........Board Member
21 Brad Culverhouse..................Board Member
22 Pamela Hammer....................Board Member
23 Edward Lounds.....................Board Member
24 Stephanie Morgan.................Board Member
25 Craig Mundt..........................Board Member
26 Britt Reynolds.......................Board Member
27 Barry Schrader......................Board Member
28 Kathryn Hensley...................Ex-Officio
29
MEMBERS ABSENT
30
31
32 Consuela Smith.....................Board Member
33
34 Ms. Caron noted, for the record, that she would like Ms. Smith’s absence
35 be excused as she requested at the March 20, 2008.
36
OTHERS PRESENT
37
38
39 Robin Meyer.........................Assistant Growth Management Dept. Director
40 Heather Young......................Assistant County Attorney
41 Kara Wood ...........................Planning Manager
42 Leslie Olson..........................Planner
43 Tom Christopher...................Public Safety Office
44 Greg Bunting.........................Public Safety Office
45
46
47
1
C. ANNOUNCEMENTS
1
2 Ms. Hammer stated that she did not receive the site plan for the
3 conditional use permit application. When it comes to the item, Ms.
4 Hammer is going to request that it be continued to the next meeting. Mr.
5 Culverhouse stated that he was of the belief that the supporting
6 documentation and the testimony given tonight will be enough to make a
7 decision. The consensus of the Board was to hear the item tonight.
8
9 Ms. Hammer stated that she would like the record to show that it would be
10 the first time that this Board will be hearing and acting on a conditional
11 use permit application without an attached site plan.
12
D. DISCLOSURES
13
14 Mr. Culverhouse advised that he spoke to the representative of the Mellon
15 Patch. Ms. Caron advised that she has spoken to surrounding property
16 owners, driven by and spoke to the owner of the Mellon Patch. Mr.
17 Mundt advised that he spoke to the owner of the Mellon Patch. Mr.
18 Reynolds advised that he drove by the Mellon.
19
2. MINUTES
20
21 Review the minutes from the March 20, 2008 regular meeting, for approval.
22
Mr. Culverhouse motioned approval of the minutes;
23
24
Ms. Schrader seconded.
25
26
27 Ms. Hammer advised that she will be voting no to approve the minutes since she
28 was not at last month’s meeting.
29
The motion carried 7-1 with Ms. Hammer dissenting.
30
31
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
32
33
1. Indrio Groves, LLC: TVC 06-019
34
35 Petition of Indrio Groves, LLC for a preliminary site plan approval and
36 amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas from the AG-1 (Agricultural – 1
37 du/ac) Zoning District to the PCS (Planned Country Subdivision) Zoning
38 District for a project known as West Indrio Groves.
39
40 Kara Wood presented this item and explained that the subject parcel is
41 approximately 78.4 acres and located west of Johnston Road, 2 miles
42 north of Indrio Road and 1 mile east of I-95. The purpose of the rezoning
43 is to allow the parcel to be subdivided into 78 single-family lots, with a
44 minimum size of one-half acre, clustered to allow additional open space.
45
2
1 Staff is recommending that this Board forward this application to the
2 Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval.
3
4 Albert Jacob with Houston Cuozzo Group, representing the applicant,
5 gave a brief presentation to the Board and displayed a site plan.
6
7 Ms. Caron opened the public hearing. No one from the public spoke and
8 the public hearing was closed.
9
10 Mr. Lounds expressed his concern with drainage issues that are unique to
11 this area and who will be responsible to maintain the storm water.
12
13 Noreen Dryer, Esq., with Ruden McClosky, representing the applicant,
14 addressed Mr. Lounds’ concerns and stated that the drainage reports have
15 been submitted to the County and they have been reviewed by staff. Ms.
16 Dryer went on to explain that there will be a homeowners association
17 which will be responsible for the maintenance of the storm water floways.
18
19 Mr. Lounds also commented that he feels it important that the agricultural
20 activities that will be going on in the surrounding areas should be clearly
21 noted to potential homeowners.
22
23 Mr. Culverhouse suggested having a disclaimer of some type with
24 reference to Mr. Lounds’ comment.
25
26 Ms. Hammer commented that the homeowner association documents be
27 provided to potential homeowners at the time a contract is signed rather
28 than at the time of closing.
29
30 Ms. Hammer then pointed out numerous errors on the site plan and she
31 went over the errors with the applicant prior to the meeting.
32
33 Ms. Hammer noted that she had several questions on Kimley-Horn’s
34 reports. Since there was no representative from Kimley-Horn, she will
35 advise staff of her questions and/or concerns so they can be addressed
36 prior to the Board of County Commissioner meeting.
37
38 Ms. Hammer also expressed her concern with the soil in the area with
39 reference to septic tanks.
40
Mr. Culverhouse motioned that this Board forward a
41
recommendation of approval to the St. Lucie County Board of County
42
Commissioners on the application of Indrio Groves, LLC because it
43
meets the requirements of the TVC and the goals of the
44
Comprehensive Plan, but with the further conditions and concerns
45
3
regarding soil and environmental impacts, and that the continuation
1
of agricultural activity be contained in the homeowner documents.
2
3
Ms. Hammer asked Mr. Culverhouse if he would agree to add that all
4
corrections to maps, etc. be made and that homeowner documents
5
should be given to potential homeowners at the time of contract and
6
not at the time of closing.
7
8
Mr. Culverhouse was in agreement.
9
10
Ms. Caron advised that Ms. Hammer will be giving her questions that
11
she was unable to have answered this evening to staff to have
12
addressed prior to Board of County Commissioner meeting.
13
14
Ms. Morgan seconded.
15
16
17 Roll Call
18 Mr. Schrader – yes
19 Mr. Reynolds – yes
20 Mr. Lounds - yes
21 Vice Chairman Mundt – yes
22 Ms. Morgan - yes
23 Mr. Culverhouse – yes
24 Ms. Hammer – yes
25 Chairman Caron – yes
26
The motion carried unanimously.
27
28
2. St. Lucie County Attorney’s Office: Ordinance No. 08-012
29
30 Petition of St. Lucie County to adopt Ordinance No. 08-012 amending the
31 Land Development Code Emergency Services Communications, which
32 would provide for a regulation that buildings and structures support
33 adequate radio coverage for emergency services communications.
34
35 Katherine Mackenzie-Smith presented this item explaining that the intent
36 of this proposed ordinance is to require new buildings to support adequate
37 radio coverage for emergency/rescue personnel. The proposed ordinance
38 would not include single-family homes, but new buildings and buildings
39 that are renovating over 50% of their square footage would be required to
40 comply with the ordinance.
41
42 Mr. Culverhouse stated that he does not have a problem with the goal of
43 the proposed ordinance, but he does have a problem with the ordinance
44 itself. He feels the ordinance is very vague and there are no “measurable
45 objectives.”
46
4
1 Tom Christopher, with St. Lucie County Public Safety and Emergency
2 Management, addressed the Board. Mr. Christopher explained that the
3 proposed ordinance is a model ordinance that they have taken from other
4 counties in Florida. The ordinance will be given to each builder when
5 they submit their building permit application. Once the building is
6 constructed a test would be done to ascertain what signal loss there is.
7 The remediation for that may be as simple as a bi-directional antenna on
8 the roof of the building and/or conduit to be run in the interior of the
9 building.
10
11 Greg Bunting, also with St. Lucie County Public Safety and Emergency
12 Services Department, addressed the Board. Routine testing will be done
13 by the fire marshall at no cost to the building owner. There will not be an
14 additional cost to the permit applications.
15
16 Mr. Lounds requested that staff go back and expand the Purpose section
17 and the General section and evaluate the comments brought up tonight and
18 bring this ordinance back once it has been strengthened. He feels there
19 should not be a height limit and make sure that it is clear the ordinance is
20 targeting single-story commercial buildings (big box buildings).
21
22 Ms. Caron opened the public hearing. The following members of the
23 public spoke: Deborah Agnello expressed her frustration that if the
24 building owner will not be absorbing the cost, it will be the taxpayer. Ms.
25 Agnello also questioned why satellite phones are not being used. No one
26 else from the public spoke and the public hearing was closed.
27
28 Ms. Caron explained that what was being discussed with regards to no
29 charge is the testing by the fire marshall. Any other requirements to
30 comply with the proposed ordinance will be borne by the developer and/or
31 building owner.
32
33 Mr. Christopher addressed the Board and explained that satellite phones
34 are used at the command post, which is located outside. Satellite phones
35 are not optimum for the day-to-day use.
36
37 Staff advised that based on tonight’s comments, staff is withdrawing this
38 item and will come back when it is ready and it will be readvertised at that
39 time.
40
3. Growth Management Director: Diamond Sands, Lot 7; RZ
41
220081422; Diamond Sands, Lot 8, RZ 220081421; and Herman’s Bay
42
Beach Park Rezoning, RZ 220081224
43
44 Petition of the Growth Management Director to amend the Official Zoning
45 Atlas to change the zoning on three parcels of land. These parcels of land
5
1 were not rezoned to their appropriate zoning districts at the time of a 2004
2 land swap between St. Lucie County and the Diamond Sands subdivision.
3
4 Ms. Caron noted that these will require separate motions, but staff will
5 provide an overall view of the applications. Public hearings will be
6 opened for individually.
7
8 This item was presented by Leslie Olson and a Power Point Presentation
9 was displayed. Ms. Olson explained that these rezonings have been
10 initiated by the Growth Management Department because they were not
11 rezoned to their appropriate zoning districts at the time of a 2004 land
12 swap between St. Lucie County and the Diamond Sands subdivision. The
13 subject parcels are lots 7 and 8 of Diamond Sands and Herman’s Bay
14 Beach Park located on the east side of South Ocean Drive on South
15 Hutchinson Island. Staff is recommending approval of these rezonings.
16
17 Ms. Caron opened the public hearing for Diamond Sands Lot 7. No one
18 from the public spoke and the public hearing was closed.
19
Mr. Mundt motioned that this Board forward a recommendation that
20
the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners approve the
21
rezoning application of Diamond Sands Lot 7 because the proposed
22
zoning designation is compatible with the existing and proposed uses
23
of the area.
24
25
Ms. Hammer seconded.
26
27
28 Roll Call
29 Mr. Schrader – yes
30 Mr. Reynolds – yes
31 Ms. Morgan – yes
32 Mr. Culverhouse – yes
33 Mr. Mundt – yes
34 Mr. Lounds – yes
35 Ms. Hammer – yes
36 Chairman Caron – yes
37
The motion carried unanimously.
38
39
40 Ms. Caron opened the public hearing for Diamond Sands Lot 8. No one
41 from the public spoke and the public hearing was closed.
42
Mr. Mundt motioned that this Board forward a recommendation that
43
the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners approve the
44
rezoning application of Diamond Sands Lot 8 because the proposed
45
6
zoning designation is compatible with the existing and proposed uses
1
in the area.
2
3
Ms. Hammer seconded.
4
5
6 Roll Call
7 Mr. Reynolds – yes
8 Ms. Morgan – yes
9 Mr. Schrader – yes
10 Mr. Culverhouse – yes
11 Mr. Lounds – yes
12 Ms. Hammer – yes
13 Vice Chairman Mundt – yes
14 Chairman Caron – yes
15
The motion carried unanimously.
16
17
18 Ms. Caron opened the public hearing for Herman’s Bay rezoning. No one
19 from the public spoke and the public hearing was closed.
20
Mr. Mundt motioned that this Board forwarded a recommendation
21
that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners approve
22
the Herman’s Bay rezoning application because the proposed zoning
23
designation is compatible with the existing and proposed uses of the
24
area.
25
26
Ms. Hammer seconded.
27
28
29 Roll Call
30 Mr. Schrader - yes
31 Mr. Reynolds – yes
32 Ms. Morgan – yes
33 Mr. Lounds – yes
34 Mr. Culverhouse – yes
35 Ms. Hammer – yes
36 Vice Chairman Mundt – yes
37 Chairman Caron – yes
38
The motion carried unanimously.
39
40
41 The Board took a break at 7:55 p.m. and reconvened at 8:06 p.m.
42
3. The Mellon Patch Inn: CU 320081432
43
44 Petition of The Mellon Patch Inn for a Conditional Use Permit for a four-
45 room tourist court with limited special events in the HIRD (Hutchinson
46 Island Residential Zoning District).
7
1
2 Robin Meyer introduced Leslie Olson to the Board and apologized for not
3 introducing her before her previous presentation.
4 Mr. Meyer pointed out that site plans are not a requirement of conditional
5 use permits, but agreed that they are important to have when reviewing
6 applications such as this one.
7
8 Ms. Hammer questioned the parking site plan that was purportedly
9 submitted to the County. Board members received a copy of the parking
10 site plan this evening. Mr. Meyer confirmed that staff did receive the
11 parking site plan, but it was not made part of the Board’s packet. He
12 apologized for that, but since they had no feed-back from staff whether the
13 plan would work or not they did not include the plan in Board members’
14 packet.
15
16 Leslie Olson presented the item, displayed a Power Point Presentation and
17 explained that the subject property is located at 2601 North A1A, North
18 Hutchinson Island and operates as a bed and breakfast.
19
20 In addition, Ms. Olson went on to explain that the Conditional Use Permit
21 was revoked by the Board of County Commissioners on November 6,
22 2007 effective May 5, 2008 as a result of complaints by neighboring
23 residents with regards to parking issues and noise.
24
25 A new Conditional Use Permit was applied for by the owner of the Mellon
26 Patch Inn for a 4-room tourist court with limited special events such as
27 small family functions, a proposed 12-car parking lot, all events ending by
28 9:00 pm, no outdoor lighting and compliance with St. Lucie County’s
29 noise ordinance. The application does not, however, address the concerns
30 expressed by the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners in a
31 letter sent by Mr. Satterlee such as the distribution of alcohol at special
32 events, it does not limit the number of special events per year or per
33 month, it does not define what, if any, music would be allowed and when
34 it would end and it does not address the suggestion by Mr. Satterlee that
35 all special events should be conducted off-site. Staff must base its
36 recommendation on the application submitted. Therefore, staff is
37 recommending denial.
38
39 However, due to the long history of this parcel and the previous
40 conditional use, staff has applied the standards of review to an alternate
41 scenario. Ms. Olson pointed out that staff can support the low-intensity
42 lodging use of a bed and breakfast with an accessory use of renting rooms.
43 A tourist court with special events, staff feels, is a more intensive,
44 commercial use for the residential area.
45
8
1 Ms. Olson recommends the following conditions of approval should the
2 Board desire to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the
3 Mellon Patch Inn. Ms. Olson did, however, advise that these conditions of
4 approval are extremely conservative and that the Board can suggest
5 changes and/or modifications as they see fit.
6
7 Ms. Olson’s suggested conditions of approval are as follows:
8
9 No more than 20 persons at any event;
10 2 events per month only;
11 No amplified outdoor music permitted and must meet the constraints of
12 the SLC noise ordinance;
13 All events ending by 8:00 pm with all guests not staying at the inn off the
14 property by 8:30 pm;
15 No alcoholic permitted at any event; and
16 Code enforcement will be notified of all scheduled events one week prior
17 to the event and can enter the premises at any time.
18
19 Ms. Cathy Townsend, applicant and owner, submitted a packet to each
20 Board member. Ms. Townsend explained that she purchased the business
21 in 2005 and was advised by the previous owners that they ran the business
22 as a commercial lodging establishment and held several community
23 functions there. Before purchasing the business, she consulted with the
24 County to verify that this business was allowed and requested the
25 County’s position in writing. She received a letter from Assistant County
26 Administrator, Faye Outlaw approving the use. The letter did, however,
27 outline some concerns the County had with the proposed use.
28
29 Ms. Townsend went on to explain some of the functions that have been
30 held there since 2005. She has purchased additional plants and trees to
31 increase the buffer between her and the residential neighbor to the
32 southeast. An additional strip of land was purchased to further increase
33 the buffer between her business and neighboring residences.
34
35 Ms. Townsend went on to explain that on June 22, 2007 Commissioner
36 Craft, herself and surrounding neighbors met to discuss complaints and
37 define boundaries. There was to be a 6-month trial period. At the end of
38 the 6-month trial period a public hearing was held and when neighbors
39 were asked if there were any problems, they stated no. No violations were
40 given during that trial period.
41
42 Ms. Townsend is requesting approval of her conditional use permit with
43 some of the conditions agreed upon during that 6-month trial period as
44 follows:
45
9
1 Less than 40 guests and the use of a small home stereo be considered
2 business as usual (a non-special event) with no limitations with a special
3 event to be defined as more than 40 guests and anything with music;
4
5 Approval to host at least 2 special events a month ending at 8pm with
6 guests off the property by 8:30 pm;
7
8 Ms. Townsend went on to explain that she has no problems with “spot-
9 checks” by Code Enforcement and they are welcome on her property at
10 any time. However, she questioned what other business is subjected to
11 that? She often has a Sheriff’s Deputy on duty at her special events.
12 Ms. Townsend advised that the firehouse in the area has a fire truck with
13 sirens blaring more often than she has special events. In addition, Pepper
14 Park, directly adjacent to her property, has loud music from cars and boom
15 boxes blaring and several people have been arrested as the result of
16 inappropriate conduct at the park.
17
18 With reference to a complaint of a kayak business being run from her site,
19 Ms. Townsend confirmed that it was not her business, but it was an
20 amenity offered to the island residents and most enjoyed it. When she was
21 advised by the County that the business could not be operated from her
22 property, it was ended immediately.
23
24 Full-size, sealed site plans were distributed to Board members by Ms.
25 Townsend.
26
27 There were questions and answers between Board members and Ms.
28 Townsend. Ms. Townsend reiterated that she does not want to be
29 restricted from having special events. She is in agreement with having
30 events end by 8:00 p.m., but cannot survive financially with no special
31 events. Ms. Townsend explained that when the inn is host to special
32 events, they increase the business to local businesses. For special events
33 and functions she uses local florists, local caterers and Publix
34 supermarkets for cakes, etc. Pavers would be used for “green parking.”
35 Discussions were on-going with reference to the issue of inadequate
36 parking. Ms. Townsend explained that at the time of reserving a function,
37 the customer is told of the limited parking and guests carpool to the
38 property. Ms. Townsend also offers shuttle bus services to guests staying
39 at the inn for events that are held off-site.
40
41 Discussions turned to the issue of alcohol. Mr. Meyer explained that the
42 alcohol limitation came as a result of some of the complaints received with
43 reference to guests at the inn consuming alcohol which led to unruly
44 behavior, littering, etc. Mr. Meyer confirmed that serving alcohol is
45 prohibited within 1500 feet from a public park. Ms. Townsend explained
46 that she does not serve alcohol, but guests do bring alcohol to her
10
1 establishment for their functions (wine may be brought in by a bride and
2 groom, punch may be brought in for a bridal and/or baby shower, etc.).
3
4 Ms. Caron opened the public hearing.
5
6 The following members of the public spoke in favor of the proposed
7 conditional use permit: Anita Prentice, James Dadds, Lisa Fosnot, Art
8 Hasting, Michael Howard, Paul Settle, Mary Settle, Nancy Headkey, Jean
9 Downing, and Jacqueline Goodwin.
10
11 Eric Zeiss, engineer on the project, addressed the Board and advised that
12 the County Engineer advised him that changes to an ordinance were being
13 proposed to allow for grass parking.
14
15 The following members of the public spoke in opposition of the proposed
16 conditional use permit: Pat Spradling (citing she would rather see it a
17 quiet bed and breakfast operation – a tourist court would add to the
18 commercial feel of the area and property values would further decrease),
19 Neil Millett (citing the business operating as it has been is too commercial
20 for the surrounding area), Dickie Brooks (citing she would rather see it a
21 quiet bed and breakfast such that operated previously to Ms. Townsend’s
22 ownership – she personally saw loud parties being held at the Mellon
23 Patch), Jan Tobias (stated she worked for the previous owners, and the
24 business was run as a quiet bed and breakfast – no loud parties or special
25 events were held there), Floyd Grigsby (citing he would rather see it as a
26 quiet bed and breakfast as it was run by the previous owners – there were
27 no parties and special events under the previous ownership), Royce
28 Northcott (citing that prior to purchasing her home, she and her husband
29 went to the County to view the Conditional Use Permit issued for the
30 subject property – it was clearly not being abided by).
31
32 Mr. Culverhouse then commented that he feels that when the County
33 approved the use in 1992-1993, they approved a commercial lodging
34 establishment since a bed and breakfast was not even included as a
35 permitted use during that time period. Ms. Townsend came to the County
36 and asked whether she was permitted to operate this business, the
37 County’s reply was yes. And now the County is trying to revoke those
38 rights. However, he does understand the surrounding property owner’s
39 concerns and respects their property rights.
40
41 No one else from the public spoke and the public hearing was closed.
42
43 Mr. Lounds commented on the changing dynamics of the County and
44 especially the change of North Beach since the 1960’s. North Beach will
45 not survive if there are no businesses and/or positive change. Mr. Lounds
46 suggested that North Beach residents should urge the Sheriff’s department
11
1 to patrol Pepper Park more frequently. Mr. Lounds went on to suggest
2 that alcohol should be permitted, Code Enforcement should not be advised
3 a week prior to an event and/or allow spot-checks, the ending of an event
4 at sundown or at dark (but 8:00 p.m. is very early).
5
6 Mr. Mundt commented that an asset would be lost if the Mellon Patch was
7 not permitted to continue to operate. Ms. Townsend has proven that she
8 can operate with limitations. Mr. Mundt commented on how property
9 values would be devalued if the property was to go into foreclosure. If
10 this Conditional Use Permit was granted, the County would have the right
11 to revoke it if there were continual violations.
12
13 Ms. Hammer expressed her displeasure with allowing 40 people at a
14 function and the serving of alcohol.
15
16 Discussions turned to parking issues. Mr. Meyer confirmed that there are
17 currently 4 parking stalls on the site. A site plan has been submitted that
18 provides for additional parking (which has not yet been approved), a code
19 needs to be changed to allow for grass parking, etc. Ms. Olson explained
20 that requiring a Major Site Plan be submitted, as she has suggested, and
21 subsequent approval by the County would take care of the parking issues.
22
Mr. Lounds motioned that this Board forward a recommendation that
23
the BCC approve the application of the Mellon Patch Inn with the
24
conditions of Option 3 as restated (i.e., events to end at 8:30 p.m. with
25
guests off the premises at 9:00 p.m., no requirement that Code
26
Enforcement needs to be advised one week prior to an event and no
27
“spot-checks” by Code Enforcement, no “special events” 40 guests
28
will be considered business as usual, allow guests of the inn to provide
29
alcohol at their events) with the condition that Ms. Townsend
30
understands that she needs to conform to these conditions and that
31
any other conditions that the St. Lucie County Board of County
32
Commissioners may have. (Board members discussed this motion in
33
terms of Option 3 as displayed on Ms. Olson’s power point
34
presentation as follows “strike #6, 7, 8 and 2 and change #1 to 40.”)
35
36
Mr. Reynolds seconded.
37
38
39 Roll Call
40 Mr. Schrader – yes
41 Ms. Morgan –yes
42 Ms. Hammer - no stating she objects to the increase to 40 guests at any
43 time and objects to events to end at 8:30 p.m. and to alcohol being served
44 Mr. Culverhouse – no
45 Vice Chairman Mundt – yes
46 Mr. Reynolds – yes
12
1 Mr. Lounds – yes
2 Chairman Caron – yes with the understanding that the alcohol would not
3 be served by the inn (which is how she understood the motion to read)
4
The motion carried 6-2 with Ms. Hammer and Mr. Culverhouse
5
dissenting.
6
7
4. OTHER BUSINESS
8
9 None.
10
5. ADJOURN
11
12 There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:40 p.m.
13