Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12-20-2001 St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes REGULAR MEETING December 20, 2001 Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Merritt, Mr. McCurdy, Mr. Lounds, Mr. Hearn, Mr. Trias, Mr. Jones, Mr. Grande, Chairman Matthes MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. Akins (Absent Without Notice) OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Dennis Murphy, Interim Community Development Director; Mr. David Kelly, Planning Manager; Mr. Hank Flores, Planner III; Ms. Cyndi Snay, Planner III; Ms. Heather Young, Asst. Co. Attorney. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Matthes called to order the meeting of the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 1 ANNOUNCEMENTS meeting. For those of you who have not been here before, The Planning and Zoning Commission is an agency that makes recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners. The Staff will present a brief summary of the project and then make their recommendation. After which time, the Petitioner will be asked to come forward and state his/her case for the requested petition. At any time the Commission may stop and ask questions of the Petitioner or Staff. After that process is completed the Chairman will open the public hearing for anyone who wishes to speak for or against the petition. The purpose behind this hearing is to get input from the general public. If anyone has something to say, please feel free to come forward and state it. After everyone has gotten a chance to speak the Chairman will then close the public hearing. The Commission will deliberate and then make a decision regarding their recommendation, one way or the other. The decision that is made is typically read from a scripted set of statements that are given to the Commission. It may sound rehearsed but it really is not. There is one motion for and one motion against in the package, so that the Commission can make a motion either one way or the other so it is very clear in the records. Once again, I want to remind you that the Planning and Zoning Commission only acts in an advisory capacity for the 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 Board of County Commissioners. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 2 AGENDA ITEM 1: November 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Grande made a motion for approval. Motion seconded by Mr. McCurdy. Upon a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (with a vote of 8-0). P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 3 AGENDA ITEM 2: CPV CANA, LTD. - File No. RZ-01-015 Hank Flores, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Items #2 & #3 reference two separate petitions filed by CPV CANA, Ltd. These items were presented at the same time, however each item requires that they be opened separately and voted on separately. CPV CANA, Ltd. has filed petitions for a change in zoning from the IH (Industrial, Heavy) and U (Utilities) Zoning Districts to the U (Utilities) Zoning District and also for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the construction and operation of a 250 megawatt, gas powered, electric generation plant for the property located on the west side of Range Line Road, approximately 0.60 mile south of Glades Cut-Off Road. The general existing use surrounding the property is industrial; pasture land, and citrus groves. The applicant is seeking permission to construct a combined cycle electrical generating facility consisting of a combustion turbine providing approximately 175 megawatts of electrical power with a heat recovery steam generator providing a maximum of 75 megawatts of electrical power. The primary source of fuel for the proposed plant is natural gas. The applicant is proposing that sulfur fuel oil be used as a back-up fuel for up to 30 days, at full load, per year. Staff has reviewed these petitions and determined that they conform to the standards of review as set forth in the Land Development Code and are not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends that you forward these petitions to the Board of County Commissioners with recommendations of approval with the Conditional Use Permit subject to the three (3) limiting conditions. Chairman Matthes if there were any questions of Staff from the Commission. Seeing none, Chairman Matthes asked if the petitioner or representative was present. Mr. Richard V. Neill, Jr., attorney with Neill, Griffin, Jeffries, Fowler, Tierney and Neill in Fort Pierce and have been practicing law in Fort Pierce for 18 years came forward to represent the applicant. The project before the Commission tonight is a 250 megawatt, combined site power plant. The location is on Range Line Road, heading South of Glades Cut-Off. The basic applications that are before the Commission are for a rezoning. The property is currently zoned Utilities and Heavy Industrial and we are asking that the entire property be rezoned to Utilities only. The second aspect is the Conditional Use Permit because in order to construct a power generating facility in Utilities zoning, we have to have a conditional use permit. The final aspect is the site-plan approval. As the matter, this is an application that meets all the legal requirements and standards. He introduced the applicant, CPV CANA, Ltd., a fully owned subsidiary of Competitive Power Ventures, Inc., which is a dynamic young, company developing power plants in both the State of Florida and also outside of the state. He continued that CPV has a power project presently under construction in the LTC Ranch Industrial Park located in Port St. Lucie. CPV has proven experience in developing electrical generating facilities. The plant has made a contribution to the infrastructure of the community and the tax base as well. He also gave out copies of a letter from the City of Port St. Lucie to the Commission and pointed out that the last paragraph shows that they support the project and believe it will be an addition to the community. He also pointed out that Mr. Cooper also stated in the letter that CPV and Peter Podurgiel have proven to be very credible, responsive to their requests and have honored their commitments to the City of Port St. Lucie in a timely manner. Mr. Peter Podurgiel, Vice President of Development for Competitive Power Ventures, Inc. stated that he is also project manager for CPV CANA, Ltd. He stated that he recognizes that there have P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 4 been other power projects before the Commission and he will be brief in his presentation. Chairman Matthes opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Rog Kermany stated he lives four miles south of the project and is an Airpark resident. He continued that he is opposed to this petition because most of them have hangers and airplanes and he feels that adequate notice was not given and it is not needed since there are two other plants within 15-20 miles of this proposed site. He questioned if there was a real need for another plant and said it would be an eyesore because he has to pass it everyday on his way to work. He also said he feels it could create a flight hazard with planes flying at their lowest elevation for landing. He stated that his biggest concern would be the affect on Aero Acres and Treasure Coast Air Park. Mr. McCurdy asked the petitioner to show the directions of the runway and Mr. Kermany explained that the runways ran east and west. Mr. William Barga advised he was from Treasure Coast Air Park and lives 3.5 miles from the site. He stated he was worried about their property values decreasing and the emissions from the stacks. Mr. Tom Beck stated he is also from Treasure Coast Air Park and also lives within 3.5 miles of the site. He advised that his concerns are what the impact will be on the environment from the fallout of smoke emissions, what the quality of their water will be, the air quality and pollution levels and also his property values. He also questioned the flight hazards and marking any existing obstructions. If homeland security proposes a no fly zone, why put a plant this close? Ms. Concis Nerbert questioned what impact there will be on her neighborhood with the new lines, residue from the stacks, fuel oil and truck / railroad impact from crossing. She asked who makes the decisions on building a plant, the location, the size and who owns the property. Mr. Robert Rengald, Treasure Coast Airport stated that he objects to this petition because of its vicinity to residential areas because there are at least a hundred lots within 3.5 miles of the proposed site. He also questioned the emissions and air pollution, flight restrictions by the FAA. He stated he would like to have more information about the environmental impacts and the affect of the competing water uses with the Air Park. Mr. Tony Taggert, also an Air Park resident, stated he too had the same objections as the previous speakers. He asked how the neighbors to the north of the plant would be affected. He questioned if there was any real need for another plant in the area and how the pollution, dirt, noise and smells will affect them. Mr. Andy Basper, Aero Acres Air Park stated that his questions were regarding the pollution, debris fallout, power tower and distribution line and the fact that it will be directly in prevailing winds. Chairman Matthes requested that the secretary read into the records two letters that were received by the Board. Ms. Snay read in a letter from Mr. Vincent Brocklebank, 15342 Sky King Drive, Ft. Pierce Florida and the other from Mr. James Zboril, Core Communities, 1850 Fountainview Boulevard, P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 5 Port St. Lucie, Florida. Mr. Podurgiel stated that the FAA has determined that there is no hazard to navigational airspace and presented a letter to be entered into record. Mr. John Moyle, Moyle and Flannigan, read a letter from Core Communities regarding their comments in response to letters they received from residents of the surrounding airparks. He stated that proper notice was given and proper advertisement was done. This petition meets all county ordinances regarding noise and environment, is consistent with surrounding industries operating on site and the project is below national levels of ambience for clean air. He also stated that they would not be constructing any new power lines, they would utilize existing lines and that the industrial zoning and use of property has been in place for at least 15 years. He advised that the airpark came after that zoning designation was in place and therefore they were aware of the industrial park. He finished by stating that he would be happy to meet with Core Communities and citizens to discuss the project in detail. Mr. Grande asked if there was a time problem with the processing of this application. He wanted the applicant to meet with the surrounding property owners at the Treasure Coast Airpark and with the Core Communities Group prior to the Commission making a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. Then after the developers meet with the surrounding property owners and residents to then bring the petition back before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. Mr. Podurgiel stated that they would be happy to meet with the residents of the Treasure Coast Airpark and Core Communities regarding to discuss their concerns and issues but they would prefer to continue the process as there are some time commitments that have to be met. Mr. Kermanga stated that the FAA is not concerned with flight paths; they are only interested in what happens within the large airports. He continued to say that the FAA probably did not consider the Airport when they made their decision and that they were aware of the industrial use, but did not expect anything with such high pollution. Mr. Jones addressed the tower marking and lighting that is not required per the letter from the FAA and advised that could be a voluntary gesture. Mr. Merritt asked the petitioner to clarify the height of the stacks in relation to lines. Mr. Podurgiel stated that the tallest line is 130 feet and the structure is 40-50 feet above that stack. Mr. Lounds asked if that is the height of the pole or if included the additional 20-30 feet of static lines. Mr. Podurgiel stated that is the height of the structure, not the stand in between. Scott Glaubitz explained that the higher of taller two lines is 115 feet above natural grade elevation and the highest portion of the plant is 110 feet at natural grade and has a 50-60 foot height differential. Mr. Lounds questioned that if there would be 3.5 million gallons of water per day, what would the depth be. Mr. Podurgiel advised it would be 1300 feet deep. Mr. Lounds asked what the salinity levels are at that depth. Mr. Neal Collins, representing the applicant, stated the water would be brackish and advised that the levels at that depth were too high for agricultural use. The deep water well would be cased through the upper area at a depth of 1150 feet and an open hole another 50 feet down. He continued that the bolder zone (contained zone) is a confined area of 3,000 feet. Mr. Lounds asked if it was encased from top to bottom. Mr. Collins explained that it P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 6 is and there is no potential for escape. Mr. Lounds asked if the retention ponds would be located behind the west of the Florida Tire Recycling Facility. Mr. Podurgiel stated it was south of it. Mr. Lounds asked what the noise levels at 70 decibels would sound like. Mr. Eric Hood advised the sound in room is approximately 60-75 decibels. Mr. Lounds stated that theoretically the power plant would rise to 100 decibels and you could not hear from road. Mr. Hood explained that you would be able to hear from property lines and there lowest usage for the County would be at night. He also advised that residents are much further away from the facility. Chairman Matthes asked how they could determine that residents that are 0.60 miles away would not be able to hear it. Mr. Hood advised that there was no way to prove that they will not be able to hear the sound produced by the plant. He did state that the closest residence may be able to hear it if they concentrate and there is no traffic. Mr. Lounds asked how this plant compares to other similar plants in the area. Mr. Podurgiel advised that on a pollution basis, they are the cleanest. Mr. Lounds asked Mr. Podurgiel to compare their proposed facility to the Ft. Pierce Plant and any other facility that is of the same caliber as is being proposed before the Board. Mr. Podurgiel stated that it is tough to find a comparison based on appearance when compared to the one being proposed. The closest he could find would be the Pope County facility. Mr. Mike Anderson showed some graphics explaining the combustion of the facility. The nitrogen oxide / sulfur dioxid emission rates are reduced because of the production basis of pounds per gallons of water. He also stated that the CPV facility is unnoticeable in comparison with three other existing plants. Chairman Matthes asked how this would relate to everyday life in the area. Mr. Anderson advised that it poses no threat to the public welfare. Mr. Rengald stated that the graphs do not show how much the pounds/polluted air compares to anything else in the area. He also questioned what is being produced and what kind of health risks this could pose. Chairman Matthes asked what other type of facility could be put there without going through a zoning change. Mr. Kelly responded that any permitted use in the Industrial Heavy Zoning District would be placed on the site. Accessory uses and conditional uses were also possible. Mr. Grande asked Staff how many power plant presentations the Board had recently heard. Staff responded two presentations had been heard. He stated that each one offered something unique and each is the best. He asked Staff if they have conduced a survey to determine the best location for the orderly implementation of these types of uses, i.e., power plants, instead of each one. He stated he is thinking about cumulative impact scattered around and if we have looked at the total impact of the industry with regards to air emissions and pollution as well as the effect that these facilities will have on the ground water. Mr. Kelly stated that we have not pre-located areas for power plants and do not regulate the placement of these types of facilities within the County. He also stated that there are no cumulative impacts and applicants have to complete a cumulative impact analysis during the state permitting process. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 7 Mr. Kelly summarized the questions that had been raised by the public during the public hearing. Was the petition for the power plant properly noticed and advertised? Will the power plant facility utilize the existing power lines or will they construct new lines? Where does the power go when it is generated, does it stay in the area or is sold to other areas? What was previously planned for the proposed site? What type of facility is being proposed? What type of fuel will the plant utilize? What type of air emissions will be released from the facility? Will the facility affect the ground water that is currently being utilized by the Air Park? How will the well source and depth plus disposal of water be handled? Will the noise level from the plant effect any resident in the area? At what distance will the surrounding properties be able to hear the power plant? How will this facility affect the existing flight patterns for the Air Park? Will this be a flight hazard? Is there really a need for an additional power plant in St. Lucie County, especially in this area? What visual impact will occur from the construction of this power plant? Will it be landscaped along the roadways? How will this power plant affect the property values in the area? How high are the proposed stacks for this facility? Will the stack be lighted? Will there be increased traffic on Glades Cut-Off Road/Range Line Road from this facility, specifically truck and rail traffic? If we have another terrorist attack and homeland security closes the area around power plants, will the residents of the Air Park be grounded due to a no-fly zone? Mr. Podurgiel attempted to address the list of questions and stated that no new power lines were being built; they are tying into existing lines. He also stated that the plant is 3-4 miles north of the runway at the airpark and there are lights on the tower and that is okay with the FAA. He continued that US Precast owns the property and a concrete processing plant is what was previously planned. He stated that this plant is tremendously efficient because it is a combined Seeing no one else, Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Hearn stated that his concerns were the issues brought up by the public tonight and those addressed in the letters. He also stated that the cumulative effects are his main concern and questioned why we meet only the letter of the law for notice issue. He also questioned how many plants are too many; at what point will the quality of life be affected and how many power plants will this County be able to support. He stated he will be voting against the petition until the citizens and members of the Board can have more information. Chairman Matthes asked what the recommendation of Staff was. Mr. Flores advised that Staff recommends approval of the rezoning and approval of the conditional use with the 3 conditions listed in the Staff report. plants are built, the better off we are. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 8 Mr. Grande stated that he has no problem with the notification of those within 500 feet, but feels it would be a good idea to extend the area to all those within 1,000 to 2,000 feet, especially with the density of the developments. Mr. Lounds stated that after considering the testimony presented during the Public Hearing, including staff comments, and the Standards of Review as set forth in Section 11.06.03, St. Lucie County Land Development Code, I hereby move that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners grant approval to the application of CPV CANA, Ltd., for a Change in Zoning from the IH (Industrial, Heavy) and U (Utilities) Zoning Districts to the U (Utilities) Zoning District because the proposed zoning is compatible with the industrial uses in the area and the proposed power plant is not inconsistent with other uses, plus the proposed are is more beneficial to a power plant than being downtown due to the property being next to a power distribution line and safe sight pollution. Motion seconded by Mr. Jones. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed with a vote of 6-2 (with Mr. Grande and Mr. Hearn voting against) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 9 AGENDA ITEM 3: CPV CANA, LTD - File No. CU-01-007 Hank Flores, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Items #2 & #3 reference two separate petitions filed by CPV CANA, Ltd. These items were presented at the same time, however each item required that they be opened separately and voted on separately. Chairman Matthes opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Lounds asked if the lights were needed. Mr. Merritt stated that the lights must be on as a conditional use. Mr. Jones stated that for many years he lived near a tower with a blinking light, Mr. Merritt stated that after considering the testimony presented during the Public Hearing, including staff comments, and the Standards of Review as set forth in Section 11.07.03, St. Lucie County Land Development Code, I hereby move that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners grant approval to the application of CPV CANA, Ltd., for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the operation of a 250 megawatt electrical generating plant in the U (Utilities) Zoning District because the proposed use is placed properly compared to other approved power plants in the industrial area and it is a clean neighbor. Motion seconded by Mr. Lounds. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed with a vote of 6-2 (with Mr. Grande and Mr. Hearn voting against) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 10 AGENDA ITEM 4: Verizon Wireless (MasTec Wireless, Agent) File No. CU-01-009 Hank Flores, presented Staff comments, stating that Agenda Item # 4 was the Application of Verizon Wireless (MasTec Wireless, Agent) for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a 200 foot lattice communications tower in the AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/acre) Zoning District for property located at 8803 Indrio Road. Communications towers are allowed as conditional uses in the AG- 1 Zoning District subject to the approval of the Board of County Commissioners. On August 22, 2001, the St. Lucie County Board of Adjustment granted a variance to allow the construction of the communications tower within 750 feet of a habitable residential structure. The variance granted allowed the tower to be placed approximately 522 feet from this home, which is also the home of the owner of the subject property. St. Lucie County and has stated that the proposed tower location is the best possible location available that meets the requirements of the Land Development Code and also meets the requirements as mandated by their license with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Staff finds that this petition meets the standards of review as set forth in the Land Development Code and is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends that you forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to one condition: The proposed communications tower shall be constructed to a maximum height as determined by the FAA. Mr. Jerry Knight, representative for the petitioner, stated that they were requesting a Conditional Use Permit in the AG-1 (Agricultural 1 du/acre) Zoning District because towers are only allowed as a conditional use. He continued that he had already obtained a variance to allow the tower less than 750 feet from residences. He also stated that they did examine other locations and that this was the best location possible. As indicated by Staff, they received word from the FAA, which would only allow a maximum height for the telecommunication tower is 120 feet. Therefore, they are requesting a reduced height of 120 feet as permitted by the FAA. Originally 200-foot lattice was going to be used. They are modifying their request and reducing the height to a 120-foot monopole. He continued, that in summary, they would be going from 200-foot lattice to a 120-foot monopole as requested by the FAA. Chairman Matthes asked if there were any questions of staff or the petitioner. Mr. Grande asked if this was a self-supporting pole or would it have guy wires. Mr. Knight answered that it would be a self-supporting monopole tower. Mr. Hearn asked about the tower at nd Indrio Road and I-95. Mr. Knight stated that the 2 sheet provided tonight depicts other towers in the area. Ms. Kristine Alexander stated that the FHP (Florida Highway Patrol) tower that is located at the turnpike does not allow other antennas on it, due to the type of equipment. Mr. Hearn asked if it was correct that they could not co-locate. Ms. Alexander advised that is correct. Chairman Matthes opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Ed Becht stated that the idea behind the variance to move the tower closer residence and office was to minimize impact in the area. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 11 Mr. Lounds asked if it would be possible to look at agricultural end if in a grove or a landscape Land Development Code could only be granted by the Board of County Commissioners. Mr. Lounds questioned whether the tower was going into a functional grove. He also was concerned with any required landscaping issues impacting the grove and any waivers that may be granted. Mr. Becht stated that his client had already agreed to the required landscaping and would not be seeking an amendment from the Land Development Code requirement. Seeing no one else, Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Jones stated that after considering the testimony presented during the Public Hearing, including staff comments, and the Standards of Review as set forth in Section 11.07.03, St. Lucie County Land Development Code, I hereby move that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners grant approval to the application of Verizon Wireless (MasTec Wireless, Agent), for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a 120 foot lattice communications tower in the AG-1 (Agricultural 1 du/acre) Zoning District because it was a good use, it would not impact the surrounding area and additional tower and antennas are needed in the area. Motion seconded by Mr. Merritt. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously (with a vote of 8-0) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 12 AGENDA ITEM 5: Ordinance No. 02-002 Future Land Use Change Mr. Dennis Murphy, Interim Community Development Director, stated that Agenda Item #5 & #6 were the petitions of Lin Indrio, Inc. a Florida Corporation to amend the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, granting a change in Future Land Use designation from RE (Residential Estate) to RU (Residential Urban) and to amend the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan by extending the Urban Service Boundary of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan to encompass property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Indrio and Johnston Roads. Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission / Local Planning Agency defer any action, without prejudice, on these petitions, until the completion of, or in conjunction with, the planned local area planning studies for the Indrio/North County Planning Area and continue the hearing to a date certain. recommendation to continue the petition for follow up. Chairman Matthes opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Merritt asked if the studies will include any issues between the property owners and if the study will be ready as of the next meeting. Mr. Murphy advised it would not. Mr. Lounds questioned continuing this, if that is part of the concerns. Mr. McCurdy stated that this Ordinance should be continued to the next Planning and Zoning Meeting on January 17, 2002. Motion seconded by Mr. Jones Upon a roll call vote the motion passed with a vote of 8-0 to continue until January 17, 2002. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 13 AGENDA ITEM 6: Ordinance No. 02-003 Extension of the Urban Service Boundary Mr. Dennis Murphy, Interim Community Development Director, stated that Agenda Items #5 & #6 were the petitions of Lin Indrio, Inc. a Florida Corporation to amend the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, granting a change in Future Land Use designation from RE (Residential Estate) to RU (Residential Urban) and to amend the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan by extending the Urban Service Boundary of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan to encompass property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Indrio and Johnston Roads. Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission / Local Planning Agency defer any action, without prejudice, on these petitions, until the completion of, or in conjunction with, the planned local area planning studies for the Indrio/North County Planning Area and continue the hearing to a date certain. Chairman Matthes opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Lounds stated that this Ordinance should be continued to the next Planning and Zoning Meeting on January 17, 2002. Motion seconded by Hearn. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed with a vote of 8-0 to continue until January 17, 2002. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 14 AGENDA ITEM 7: Ordinance No. 02-004 Amending CN, Conditional Uses Dennis Murphy, Interim Community Development Director, stated that Agenda Item # 7 is the petition of Mr. William Morales to amend the St. Lucie County Land Development Code by amending Section 3.01.03(Q)(7), Commercial Neighborhood, Conditional Uses, to add a New Paragraph F that would provide for the Establishment and Operation of Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages as an Accessory Use to a Restaurant and/or Civic, Social and Fraternal Organization) as a Conditional Use. Mr. Merritt asked about the distance required for schools and churches. Mr. Murphy explained that is a state regulation. Mr., Hearn asked if was county policy to allow any citizen to be able to request a Land Development Code text change. Mr. Murphy explained that is correct and the petitioner is charged an application fee for the request. He continued that zoning text changes are usually initiated by the County, but over the years, a few people have come forward to request a zoning text change, in this manner. Road. This establishment would like to sell alcoholic beverages, excluding beer and wine, as an accessory use to their restaurant. He submitted an application for an alcohol beverage license and was told that the area in question was not designated with the appropriate zoning for the sale of alcoholic beverages. He further stated that before submitting his application, he discussed with Staff and the Board of County Commission members, his situation and the best method to alleviate the problem. In meeting with Staff, it was determined that a rezoning of the property was inappropriate as the property is located in the middle of other CN properties and therefore a would be an inconsistent method as it would be spot zoning. The other option discussed was a textual change to the Land Development Code to allow the sell of alcoholic beverages as a Conditional Use. This would have the same affect as allowing each application to be submitted and obtain approvals on own merit. The existing restaurant patrons have indicated that they would like to enjoy a drink with their meals. Over the past few years a number of businesses have opened but are never able to make a go of it. Mr. Morales stated that in his opinion that the ability to sell alcoholic beverages would improve the ability for an establishment to stay open in the existing location. Mr. Jones asked if this is the best way for the petitioner to obtain his goals. Mr. Kelly stated that situation for the applicant. Mr. Kelly stated that it is difficult to separate needs on a particular parcel to the fact that we are changing the allowable uses in all CN districts with the County. Then he can seek a conditional use permit through both boards. Chairman Matthes asked if this petition would set a precedent. Mr. Kelly stated that it would not. If approved, the conditional use would be available to all CN property. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board would still maintain control. To allow this change in CN zoning would have to have every establishment come before the Commission and the Board. Mr. Morales stated that the people could decide through notification, mail-outs, etc., whether or not the sale of alcoholic beverages is okay for their area. The conditional use provides the most P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 15 safety for the use and allows the Board to look at each case on an individual basis. Mr. Trias asked if the code distinguishes between distilled and un-distilled alcohol. Mr. Murphy stated that position is that the sale of hard liquor is more in keeping with a bar atmosphere and by regulating the type distilled -vs.- un-distilled alcohol, the bar environment is eliminated as a use that supports the neighborhood (CN District) and keeps the use in the more intense general commercial areas (CG District). Mr. Lounds questioned if the material found in the application in support of the text change was from Staff or was it submitted by the applicant. Mr. Murphy explained it was from the applicant and a copy of his application was attached to show this. Mr. Lounds asked what the difference between distilled and un-distilled alcohol was, because he feels that most people can get just as drunk on beer as whiskey. He also questioned if every application in CN, if they have a conditional use permit, would have to be approved by the Board and why staff is recommending denial, other than the fact that it is a blanket conditional use. Mr. Murphy explained there is no direction from Board of County Commissioners to change the policy. Further, a blanket change to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages would not be an acceptable use in the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) District. Mr. Merritt asked Staff if this use would be appropriate for the PNRD District. Mr. Murphy responded in the negative, due to the uses being set by those uses allowed within a zoning district and the use is not permitted in this area. Chairman Matthes opened the Public Hearing. taurant on the Turnpike/Feeder Road and that he was in favor of the zoning text change as it gives all applicants the opportunity to apply and stand on their own merit. He further stated that there are two establishments within the area, which are selling hard liquor. Mr. Grande asked if the two other establishments in the area have hard liquor. Mr. Trefelner stated that one is located in the same shopping plaza as Winn Dixie and the other establishment is Habits. He stated that the Habits establishment is located in the CN Zoning District and they are Seeing no one else, Chairman Matthes closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Lounds asked if we approve if any other establishment that wishes to serve alcoholic beverages would have to go before the Commission and the Board. Mr. Murphy advised that if this petition were approved then yes they would be going before both boards. Chairman Matthes asked if beer / wine are an accessory in the CN Zoning District. Mr. Murphy advised yes. Mr. Grande asked if they were to approve this change, would they create a situation that would make it difficult to approve some and not others because of a precedence being set. Ms. Young stated that if a petition meets the technical requirements of the code and there is no valid reason for denying a Conditional Use then the Board would have to recommend approval of the petition. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 16 Chairman Matthes asked what process must be gone through to obtain a liquor license. Mr. Murphy stated that Mr. Morales could probably explain that better. Mr. Morales stated that the ATF has a long application and a building inspector process and the parameters of church / schools must be reviewed. He continued that it is a $30,000 - $70,000 license. Chairman Matthes asked if the licenses are limited per year. Mr. Lounds asked if there is any chance that an applicant can be approved and then not serve food. Mr. Murphy advised that would revoke the conditional use permit. Mr. Hearn stated that he feels the CN Zoning protects neighborhoods of the undue effect of these businesses. It would not impact the quality of life, but his concern is that we have zoning districts that will allow them to do what they want. Not in the best interest of the residences to allow the selling of alcoholic beverages in the CN Zoning. He stated during the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, the Comp Plan Study Group, recommended a new process whereby a permitted. In his opinion, this petition is more suited for this procedure, but not an overall change to the Land Development Code. Mr. McCurdy stated that he agrees with Mr. Hearn and is sympathetic to the applicants needs, but feels this is not the proper way to handle this and that a special use condition or rezoning to CG may be a better approach. Mr. Grande stated he too agreed with Mr. McCurdy. Chairman Matthes stated that he has a problem with changing the zoning text to all of the CN distilled alcoholic beverages, if used properly. Mr. Morales stated that he would have a liquor license and food and asked if there were any special assistance or other opportunities available to help make this happen for him. Mr. Merritt stated that after considering the testimony presented during the Public Hearing, including staff comments, I hereby move that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners deny the application of Mr. William Morales for an amendment to Section 3.01.03(Q)(7) of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code to provide for the establishment and operation of Zoning District because alcohol sales do not protect the quality of life in single-family residential neighborhoods. Motion seconded by Mr. Grande. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed with a vote of 6-2 (Mr. Jones and Mr. Lounds voting against) Chairman Matthes stated that he would like Staff to explore other opportunities for the applicant. Mr. Lounds stated that Habits Zone was a previously zoned, zoning change with non-conforming use. Mr. Merritt asked Mr. Kelly if the proposed site would be eligible for a rezoning. Mr. Kelly stated that it is a long-standing policy of the county with shallow lots to not apply for CG zoning to remain consistent with Land Use dealings on corridor. P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 17 Next scheduled meeting will be January 17, 2002. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn made by _______ and seconded by _________. Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted: Approved by: _____________________________ _______________________________ Dawn Gilmore, Secretary Stefan Matthes, Chairman . P & Z Meeting December 20, 2001 Page 18