Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12-18-2003 St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency Meeting Minutes REGULAR MEETING December 18, 2003 Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. McCurdy, Mr. Lounds, Mr. Trias, Ms. Hammer, Mr. Grande, Mr. Hearn, and Ms. Hensley. MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. Akins and Chairman Merritt. (Both Absent with Notice) OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Dennis Murphy, Community Development Director; Ms. Cyndi Snay, Development Review Planner III; Ms. Heather Young, Assistant County Attorney; and Ms. Dawn Gilmore, Administrative Secretary. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 1 CALL TO ORDER Chairman McCurdy called to order the meeting of the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency at 7:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMENTS / DISCLOSURES: Chairman McCurdy disclosed that his employer made a loan to the applicant for Agenda Item # 2 but was not going to recuse himself because it was not a conflict. Chairman McCurdy gave a brief presentation on the procedures and wh meeting. The Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency 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 information gathered at a public hearing, such as those we will hold tonight. The meeting will progress in the following manner: The Chair 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 Board. Members of the public will be allowed to present information regarding the request. The public portion of the meeting will be closed and the Board will discuss the request. Further public comment will not be accepted unless the Board has specific questions. The Board 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 Board members. The recommendation is then forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration and vote, usually within the next month. The Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency acts only in an advisory capacity for the Board of County Commissioners and actions taken are recommendations only. Interested parties will also have the opportunity to speak at a public hearing in front of the Board of County Commissioners who will ultimately have the final decision. No other announcements or discussion. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 2 AGENDA ITEM 1: MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 20, 2003: Ms. Hammer made a motion to approve as written. Motion seconded by Mr. Grande. Upon a vote, the motion was approved unanimously with a vote of 7-0. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 3 AGENDA ITEM 2: JOSEPH G. MILLER FILE NO. RZ-03-004 / PUD-03-003: Mr. David Kelly, presentingStaff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 2 was the application of JOSEPH G. MILLER, for a Change in Zoning from the AG-5 (Agricultural - 1 du/ 5 acres) Zoning District to the PUD (Planned Unit Development) Zoning District for the project known as Carlton Country Estates. He continued that the request was for a 151 acre land tract to allow the construction of a 24 lot subdivision with roads, drainage, and equestrian trails for property located on the East side of Ideal Holding Road, approximately .75 miles south of Okeechobee Road. Mr. Kelly explained that on April 3, 2003, the project was granted two variances by the Board of Adjustment. The first of these variances allowed for dead end streets longer than the 1000-foot maximum allowed by Section 7.01.03(E)(9) of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code. The second variance allowed less than 35% common open space in a Planned Unit Development as required in Section 7.01.03(I)(1). He continued that the proposed development is expected to generate fewer than 240 daily trips. He advised that Carlton and Okeechobee Roads have sufficient capacity to meet the demands of the project. Staff has determined that the proposed zoning designation and the Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development Plan are compatible with the existing and proposed uses in the area. This petition meets the Standards of Review as set forth in Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and is not in conflict with the goals, objectives, and policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends that you forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to the following conditions: 1. rezoning, the developer shall agree to payment of his fair share of the improvements to Carlton Road currently paid for by the MSBU. 2. Notice shall be given to all original buyers in Carlton Country Estates of the existence of the Aero Acres subdivision and its associated accessory uses. Mr. Hearn stated that he was very concerned about agriculture exemption abuse and wanted to termined. Mr. Kelly stated that it is determined through the MSBU documents that the applicant is negotiating. Ms. Hammer stated that since the runways from Aero Acres are so close was the applicant going to inform buyers about this at the time of the sale agreement or waiting until the closing. Mr. Kelly stated that he believed the applicant would notify buyers early on in the process. Mr. Grande questioned if the Board of the Adjustment had the authority to grant an open space variance for this project. Mr. Kelly stated that the Board of Adjustment continued their meeting when they received the application so that they could confer with the County legal staff about the authority to grant such a variance. Mr. Grande questioned if the applicant discussed connecting to Hammock Lane, or did they prefer having the restricted access. Mr. Kelly confirmed that they preferred the restricted access. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 4 Mr. Joseph Miller, 1102 North Rock Road, stated that he was the agent for this project. He continued that he did not feel Hammock Lane would want an increase in traffic on their streets, so he made the decision to have dead end streets. He stated that the main reason was that this would reduce traffic making it safer for any families with young children playing in the street. He advised that they are notifying potential buyers in advance about the airplane noise from Aero ith that type of noise. He also stated that they are planning on adding it to their deed restrictions in the future. He continued that other deed restrictions would be no mobile homes or commercial activity. He stated that there would not be any greenbelt exemptions on these properties because they are only about 4 1/2 acres. Mr. Lounds questioned if the common area would be the horse trails and center strip of land. He also questioned if there would be deed restrictions on the size of the homes. Mr. Miller stated that the deed restrictions were not complete yet, but that some of the proposed restrictions would be a minimum living area of 2400 square foot, garage doors would not face the road, there would have to be fencing, and no pole barns. Mr. Hearn questioned the price range of the homes. Mr. Miller stated they would range from approximately $129,000 to $149,000, per parcel. Ms. Hammer stated it was refreshing to see a developer wanting to do one unit to six acres, instead of five units to one acre. Mr. Miller stated that he felt it was needed in the area because people want country living and willing to pay their fair share to get it. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Ms. Ann Norvelle stated that she was the ranch manager for Mary Carlton Ranch and wanted to be sure that they also tell their perspective buyers about the noise from weaning the calves at their ranch. Mr. Miller stated that he would be sure to tell anyone considering buying that there is a ranch close by with the associated sounds. Mr. Randy Barry stated that he lives on Tranquility Drive in Aero Acres and that Mr. Miller did work with them to make sure that the disclosure of Aero Acres was in their covenant. Mr. Clyde Suite stated he lives at 18501 Tranquility Drive and he questioned the payback process associated with the MSBU. He continued that he was told that anyone who paid in full up front would not be receiving a payback. Mr. Kelly stated that he did not know anything about the terms of the MSBU and that he would have Mr. Miller check on it prior to the Board of County Commissioners meeting. Seeing no one else, Chairman McCurdyclosed the public hearing. Mr. Lounds stated that this project shows what can happen when a developer decides to think outside of the normal box. He continued that this is a great plan and it was refreshing to see a developer discuss the plan with the neighbors before bringing to them. 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 11.07.03, 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 P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 5 approval to the application of Joseph G. Miller for Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development approval for the project known as Carlton Country Estates, and for a Change in Zoning from the AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/acre) Zoning District to the PUD (Planned Unit Development Carlton Country Estates) Zoning District because of all of his previous statements and because this project is a prime example of good development of agricultural land and opens the area for development. Motion seconded by Mr. Hearn. Upon a roll call vote the motion was approved unanimously (with a vote of 7-0) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 6 AGENDA ITEM 3: PALMS AND TROPICAL TREES DEPOT FILE NO. RZ-03-044: Ms. Cyndi Snay, presentingStaff comments, stated that Agenda Item 3 is the application of Palms & Tropical Trees Depot for a change in zoning from the AG-1 zoning district to the IL (Industrial Light) zoning district for property located on the west side of Kings Highway, approximately 2,500 feet south of Angle Road, directly south of the existing Kraft Garden Nursery. She continued that the subject property is designated with an Industrial future land use designation. She stated that the surrounding properties to the north, south and east are designated with an Industrial future land use designation and the property to the west is designated with a RS (Residential Suburban) future land use designation. She also stated that the property located immediately to the south is currently being developed as an industrial park (Kings Crossing Industrial Park). Ms. Snay stated that the intended use for this rezoning is not expected to create significant additional demands on any of the public facilities in this area. Currently, Kings Highway has a right-of-way width of 50 feet. Staff stated that the ultimate right-of-way for Kings Highway is 130 feet. At the time of site plan review for the subject parcel additional right-of-way will be required to be dedicated to the County. Also, according to the most recent FDOT plans for the widening of Kings Highway, the majority of the roadway improvements are slated to occur on the west side of Kings Highway. Staff has reviewed this petition and determined that the proposed petition conforms to the Standards of review as set forth in the Land Development Code and is not in conflict with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends that you forward the mmissioners with a recommendation of approval. Mr. Hearn questioned if traffic studies were required to be done before any industrial light development is approved. Ms. Snay explained that it is required as part of the site planning process prior to development. Mr. Hearn questioned what the level of service on Kings Highway was. Mr. Dennis Murphy stated that he believed that it was a level of service C, but that the intersection at Angle Road and Kings Highway may be a problem area. Chairman McCurdy questioned when the widening of Kings Highway was expected. Mr. Murphy explained that there were no immediate funded plans. He continued that the State was doing a PD&E study and that the County was trying to obtain right of way as projects were submitted. He advised that some improvements would eventually be made but there were no immediate plans. Chairman McCurdy questioned if the petitioner or their agent was present. No one for the applicant was present. Mr. Hearn made a motion to continue the application of Palms and Tropical Trees Depot, Inc. to the January 15, 2004, Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible because the applicant was not there to represent the application. Motion seconded by Ms. Morgan. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 7 Upon a roll call vote the motion was approved unanimously (with a vote of 7-0) to continue the application of Palms and Tropical Trees Depot, Inc. to the January 15, 2004, Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 8 AGENDA ITEM 4: DRAFT ORDINANCE 04-001 ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES: Mr. Dennis Murphy stated that Agenda Item # 4 was to consider Draft Ordinance 04-001, which would propose to create a new section our Land Development Code whereby authority to grant administrative variances would be given to the Community Development Director when owing to special conditions, the literal enforcement of the dimensional provisions of the Land Development Code would impose a condition whereby greater harm to the existing natural environment would be caused than might otherwise be achieved through the granting of limited relief from any such minimum dimensional standard, subject to the standards and procedures set forth in this section. These amendments allow the County to grant relief from various setbacks when it can be demonstrated that doing so would provide for less environmental damage than if the rule in question were strictly applied. Mr. Murphy stated that it is the belief of the County that by creating a process where flexibility can be applied, we will wind up with better projects and impacts on the natural system will be minimized. It needs to be noted that in establishing this process, the Community Development Director is required to receive comment and recommendations from the following other departments before any final decision is rendered; Public Works Director, County Engineer, Building Official, Fire Marshal, Environmental Resource Manager, and any other appropriate County or State official relevant to the review of the application at hand. The maximum administrative variance that may be granted is 50% of the minimum requirements. Anything requested that is greater than this must be reviewed by either the Board of Adjustment or the Board of County Commissioners, as may otherwise be required. Staff recommends that you forward this matter to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Mr. Hearn questioned if there was an Environmental Review Board in St. Lucie County. Mr. Murphy stated that there was a Environmental Control Hearing Board that only reviews certain health related violations, not routine environmental resource issues. Mr. Lounds stated that he feels this ordinance removes some of the authority of the Board of Adjustment. He also questioned why if a developer is not negotiating are we trying to provide just pay the mitigation fees. Ms. Hammer questioned what would happen if the other departments reviewed the application and could not agree on the relief because of their objections. Mr. Murphy stated that the Community Development Director would have the final decision, but that decision would likely not be made in the positive to the applicant if other departments, particularly the resource related ones, objected. He continued that a safety mechanism could be added to the ordinance that allows it to be brought before the Board of County Commissioners or the Board of Adjustment for final Mr. Lounds stated that he is concerned about who defines what the limited relief is. Ms. Hammer stated that she felt this ordinance would help to cut through some of the red tape, but that she feels there should be a safety valve of some sort, like having a super majority. Mr. Grande stated that he felt these decisions should be made by elected officials, not the Community Development Director. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 9 Mr. Trias stated he did not understand why there was concern because the Board of Adjustment currently makes these decisions, they are not elected officials, but the elected officials appoint responsibility, not the Board of Adjustment. Chairman McCurdy stated that he does not feel that the elected officials are the only ones capable of making informed decisions. He continued that he feels staff would be providing a means for common sense, but not sure 50% is a good number. Mr. Hearn stated that he is concerned about this because he is not comfortable with the Board of Adjustment having the final say. He continued that he felt it should all be brought before the Board of County Commissioners. He also stated that he felt there should be some relief mechanism, but an Environmental Review Board or a body like them should provide it. Mr. Trias stated that he did not feel the current standards were clear enough for variances to be granted. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Mr. Bob Bangert stated that he felt St. Lucie County should join the other twenty-one (21) counties in Florida that have an Environmental Resource Regulation Department that allows for more public involvement in environmental protection matters. He stated that this ordinance questioned if Mr. Bangert was a member of the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Bangert confirmed that he was a member but that if anyone had a problem with their decision they could file an applicant can file an appeal through the Circuit Court. Mr. Craig Munt stated that he felt this ordinance was an erosion of what is mandated in the Land Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that he would not like to see this ordinance approved. Seeing no one else, Chairman McCurdyclosed the public hearing. Mr. Grande stated that the purpose of the ordinance that was written on page 3 was valid, but the method of implementation was not in the best interest of the County. He continued that this ordinance takes away from the responsibilities of the Board of Adjustment, who are appointed by the representatives of the people, and instead gives it to the Community Development Director. review process behind closed doors was wrong, so he would not support this ordinance. Mr. Lounds stated that he agreed in the public hearing process, but at times there needs to be some flexibility for Staff to keep the process moving. Mr. Trias stated that the reason they have appointed officials make technical decisions is because they are politically motivated. He stated that currently to get a variance the applicant needs to demonstrate a hardship, but this variance process could allow development without the actual hardship. He continued that the Community Development Director is not as political as the Board of County Commissioners, so in theory it is a good idea. However, he feels the implementation needs to be re-worded and re-presented to them. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 10 Ms. Hensley stated that she too is concerned and feels that it should be re-written and brought back to them for review at that time. Mr. Hearn stated that feels putting this kind of responsibility on one person, who is a County employee, is not taking it out of the political process. He also stated that taking the public hearing process out of it is wrong, so he could not support this ordinance as it is written. Mr. Lounds stated that he too is not comfortable with the language. Mr. Murphy stated that the standards of review listed in the ordinance are exactly as those that are found in the Board of Adjustments standards, just that the hardship requirement was removed because they are trying to preserve and protect the environment. Mr. Grande stated that he is concerned that no one from the public will know about any of these administrative variances, until after the fact. He questioned why the Board of County Commissioners would feel it is better to have the Community Development Director make this decision than the Board of Adjustment. He stated that he would not be able to support this has input when they make their recommendations to the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Trias made a motion to deny Draft Ordinance 04-001 because he feels that the Board of County Commissioners should have staff should work on this further, rewording it, and bringing it back to them for another review after the issues discussed have been addressed and then the Board of County Commissioners can make a final decision. Motion seconded by Mr. Grande. Upon a roll call vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 7-0) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of denial as it is currently written. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 11 AGENDA ITEM 5: DRAFT ORDINANCE 04-002 SEWAGE AND SEPTAGE: Mr. Dennis Murphy stated that Agenda Item # 4 was to consider Draft Ordinance 04-002, which age Treatment facilities in agricultural zoning districts. In sum, these regulations do not prevent a municipal authority from annexation of land and proceeding with the development of a sewage or septage treatment facility on that land, where the land wi designation, until the zoning and land use have been changed in accordance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, by the annexing municipality. These regulations simply require that that County be included as a consenting partner in the application of the conditional use permit. The reasoning behind this recommended change is that in order to avoid unnecessary multi- jurisdictional conflicts that can rise out of inadequate communication between two separate political entities, where one side can be played off against the other, consensus agreement to the appropriateness of the location and addressing any site development impacts would be required. Staff recommends that you forward Draft Ordinance 04-002 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Mr. Trias questioned how legal this ordinance was and stated he felt it was inappropriate. Mr. Hearn stated that he feels we need additional protection on processes that the municipalities go through when annexing properties. Mr. Lounds questioned if this ordinance was proposed to address any issues for future proposed water and sewer treatment plants. Mr. Murphy stated that he does believe so. Ms. Young stated that initially this ordinance would impact future annexed properties, not properties annexed in the past. She continued that it might be beneficial to add an effective date to the ordinance so that there is no confusion in the future. Mr. Grande stated that he believes that under section F, a property that has been annexed, but has this ordinance. Ms. Young confirmed that was correct. She explained that any properties that had already gone through the entire process would not be affected by this ordinance, not ones that have not completed the process. Mr. Hearn questioned if this ordinance would give St. Lucie County more say in what happens to land that used to be in the County, but now has been incorporated into the city. Mr. Murphy stated that it would as it relates to the potential development of a sewage or septage treatment facility. Mr. Grande stated that would be only until such time that the city changed the land use. Mr. Murphy confirmed that was correct. Mr. Hearn questioned if the County would have any say in the land use change, other than through the public hearing process. from now. residential area for a septic treatment plant. He stated that he is not sure about this ordinance and needs some more information. Mr. Trias stated that the County is trying to act as a city. He stated that the County in Broward and Miami-Dade Counties is demanding that all of the area that is being developed in an urban way be incorporated to the city. He continued that cities and counties should do different things P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 12 and the problem now is that St. Lucie County is trying to do the same thing that a city should do, s lawsuits and objections to perfectly reasonable and appropriate annexations in the cities. He stated that in the very near future the County would not be able to sustain the type of dysfunctional development that is going on. He continued that the sooner that realization happens the better off the community, citizens, and taxpayers are going to be. concerned about a municipality annexing so much property and not having the ability to service He continued that he is not sure this ordinance is the best way to do this, but it is a problem that needs to be addressed. He stated that the County, who is not a municipality, is competing with that it is inappropriate for the County to be behaving as if it were a city. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman McCurdyclosed the public hearing. Mr. Hearn stated that anyone living near one of these proposed properties would be concerned about the change of use anticipated. He continued that he would like to see a mechanism in place that would allow the County to have input on how land is going to be used that has been annexed, for the protection of the people who still live in the unincorporated area. Mr. Grande stated that phase, after the annexation occurs and the new use is incorporated into the municipalities Compr is to protect the citizens that are not protected by the municipal governments. He also stated that it does give a measure of protection during that interim period, without infringing on the rights of the municipality. Mr. Trias stated that the cities already have public processes that would allow for that kind of input already. He questioned why the County has to be involved then. Mr. Grande stated that presupposes that the residents that live outside of the city, but are directly impacted as neighbors would have access to the system of public input in the decision making process. Mr. Trias stated that in his experience they do typically come to the public hearings and provide input. Mr. Mr. Grande made a motion to approve Draft Ordinance 04-002 as it is in the best interests of both the municipalities and the unincorporated county. Motion seconded by Mr. Lounds. Mr. Hearn stated that he would vote yes for the ordinance but would like to make it clear that he feels there needs to be stronger language to protect people that are being affected by the annexation process and the use of the land adjoining their property. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 13 Upon a roll call vote the motion was approved with a vote of 5-1 (with Mr. Trias voting against) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 14 AGENDA ITEM 6: DRAFT ORDINANCE 04-003 CPUB, CONSERVATION-PUBLIC: Mr. Dennis Murphy stated that Agenda Item # 5 was to consider Draft Ordinance 04-003, which proposes to create a new zoning district to the known as CPUB (Conservation, Public). This zoning district will correspond to the newly created Conservation, Public, Future Land Use Category, which was created as part of recent amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The uses within this zoning district are limited to parks and other related conservation / habitat protection uses. This zoning designation would only be applied to properties that are in public ownership. Privately held property, even if it is open to public use, would not be a candidate site for the application of this zoning district. He continued that the purpose of this district is to provide and protect an environment suitable for the protection, preservation, or enhancement of public lands in the community, together with such other uses as may be compatible with the surroundings. Staff recommends that you forward Draft Ordinance 04-003 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman McCurdyclosed the public hearing. Mr. Hearn made a motion to continue Draft Ordinance 04-002 to the January 15, 2004, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. Motion seconded by Grande. Upon a roll call vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 7-0) and continued to the January 15, 2004, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 15 AGENDA ITEM 7: ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS: Mr. Dennis Murphy stated that Agenda Item # 7 was to consider certain area wide zoning reclassifications, consistent with recent amendments to the Future Land Use Maps of the ago, there were several area wide Future Land Use Map Adjustments made to reflect major changes in the community, including in particular the amount of lands being brought into public property ownership. As the Local Planning Agency is aware, we are now proposing to create a new zoning category of CPUB (Conservation, Public) for the purpose of more appropriately identifying public properties that are being set aside for conservation purposes. Staff recommends that you forward this matter to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman McCurdyclosed the public hearing. Mr. Hearn made a motion to continue this matter to the January 15, 2004, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. Motion seconded by Grande. Upon a roll call vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 7-0) and continued to the January 15, 2004, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 16 OTHER BUSINESS/DISCUSSION: Next scheduled meeting will be January 15, 2004. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted: _____________________________ Dawn Gilmore, Secretary P & Z / LPA Meeting December 18, 2003 Page 17