HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04-10-2009
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
1
SMART GROWTH ADVISORY AD HOC COMMITTEE
2
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
3
2300 Virginia Avenue
4
Growth Management Department
5
Conference Room One
6
April 10, 2009, 10:00 A.M.
7
8
9
There was an error in the audio recording of this meeting; voices are inaudible and the recording is
10
unusable for verification of discussion details. This written summary of the meeting shall serve as the
11
record of issues discussed.
12
CALL TO ORDER
13
Chairman Trias called the meeting to order at 10:10 A.M. It was acknowledged
14
that there was no quorum so no official action could be taken during the meeting.
15
16
ROLL CALL
17
Ramon Trias ................................. Chairman
18
Mary Chapman ............................. Vice-Chair
19
Sam Comer .................................. Committee Member
20
Patricia A. Ferrick ......................... Committee Member
21
Larry Storms ................................. Committee Member
22
23
MEMBER ABSENT:
24
Noreen S. Dreyer ......................... Committee Member
25
Michael Houston .......................... Committee Member
26
David Kelly ................................... Committee Member
27
Rick Reikenis ............................... Committee Member
28
Marty Sanders ............................. Committee Member
29
30
STAFF PRESENT
31
Kara Wood…………………………Planning Manager
32
Britton Wilson ……………………. Senior Planner
33
Heather Young…………………… Assistant County Attorney
34
35
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE
36
H.M. Ridgely
37
38
1.Review and approve minutes of the March 27, 2009 meetings.
39
40
Mr. Trias pointed out that the minutes cannot be approved without a quorum; the
41
Committee agreed that they would not discuss the minutes until a quorum is met.
42
43
2.Discussion items.
44
45
A. Review revised Smart Growth Draft Recommendations.
46
47
1 of 3
Mr. Trias called for discussion on the revised draft memorandum. Committee members
1
asked questions and made suggestions about the following items:
2
3
1. #17 under LDC in matrix (page 3) requiring all buildings to be elevated.
4
Discussion followed on whether or not this recommendation should be
5
limited to infill development. Committee agreed to edit language to
6
recommend “Consider land development regulations that …” so it was
7
clear this was not a mandate for every building.
8
2. #1d under Direction of Growth in detailed list (page 4) regarding
9
prohibition of development within floodways and floodplains. Suggestion
10
was made to provide parameters to clarify that this is not intended as
11
blanket prohibition. Recommendation made to make code language
12
consistent with other regulations. Committee agreed to add that, at a
13
minimum, state and federal regulations should be followed and
14
development in these areas should be “discouraged” rather than
15
“prohibited.”
16
3. Comment was made that appropriate professionals should be providing
17
necessary analysis and plans for development. Committee agreed to add
18
list of professions within #16 of LDC section of matrix (page 3).
19
4. #4d under Open Space and Parks (page 5) – intent of “accessible” should
20
be clarified. Discussion included question of whether this meant
21
handicapped accessibility or requirement that private yards cannot count.
22
Also raised was the problem that the term “open space” is too vague;
23
specific examples as provided in TVC code are more helpful. Committee
24
agreed to amend language to encourage parks as well as the preservation
25
of private open space. Committee also agreed to add introductory
26
sentence on page 1 of draft recommendations memo that TVC code, not
27
Element, can be referenced as a model for many of the included
28
recommendations, and that recommendations should not be read in
29
isolation of one another but understood as a package.
30
5. #13 under LDC in matrix (page 3) requiring sidewalks in all new
31
development. It was pointed out that in some areas a sidewalk may not be
32
appropriate, i.e. rural. Committee agree to change “sidewalks” to
33
“pedestrian paths.”
34
6. #6 under Comprehensive Plan in matrix (page 2) regarding land outside
35
USB. Concern was expressed over intent to have land “designated fringe
36
and exclusively agricultural …” and if this meant that the County would
37
amend the Future Land Use of the area. Committee agreed to change
38
“designated” to “identified as” to avoid this confusion.
39
7. #2c under Density and Urban Form in detailed list (page 4) regarding EAR
40
implementation of western lands study, use of “zoning” was questioned.
41
Committee agreed to omit “zoning,” change “zone” to “identify,” and add
42
that the result of the western lands study intended to provide a menu of
43
options for the future of agricultural lands.
44
45
B. Preparation for possible presentation at April Informal BOCC meeting.
46
2 of 3
1
th
Availability on the April 28 agenda was still tentative and confirmation from
2
Administration was pending. Suggested revisions to recommendations memo
3
would be included, as others that still needed Committee vote, in strikethrough
4
and underline. The recommendations would be presented to BOCC in draft form
5
as a work in progress.
6
7
3. Other Business
8
9
As Mr. Kelly was not present at the meeting, no update on suggested revisions to
10
current LDC were available, but could be discussed at next committee meeting
11
and referenced briefly at April Informal BOCC.
12
13
4. Next meeting date is Friday, April 24, 2009; presentation at BOCC Informal
14
meeting tentatively scheduled for April 28, 2009 at 1:30pm.
15
16
The meeting adjourned at 11:35 AM
17
3 of 3