Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03-18-2004 St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission Local Planning Agency REGULAR MEETING MINUTES March 18, 2004 Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Morgan, Mr. Lounds, Mr. Trias, Mr. Hearn, Mr. Merritt, Ms. Hensley, and Chairman Grande MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. McCurdy, Mr. Akins, and Ms. Hammer (all Absent with notice) OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Dennis Murphy, Community Development Director; Mr. Randy Stevenson, Assistant Community Development Director; Mr. David Kelly, Planning Manager; Mr. Hank Flores, Development Review Planner III; Ms. Cyndi Snay, Development Review Planner III; Ms. Diana Waite, Development Review Planner III; Ms. Heather Young, Assistant County Attorney; Ms. Dawn Gilmore, Administrative Secretary. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Grande 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: Ms. Morgan stated that she had discussions with the applicant, Mr. Carl Austin Powers, regarding Agenda Item # 3. Chairman Grande gave a brief presentation on the procedures and what to expect for 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. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 1 of 20 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 Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 2 of 20 AGENDA ITEM 1: GLASSMAN PROPERTIES, LLC FILE NO. RZ-03- 017/PUD-03-011: Mr. Hank Flores, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 3 was the application of Glassman Properties, LLC for a Change in Zoning from the AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/acre) Zoning District to the PUD (Planned Unit Development Johnston Lakes) Zoning District. Mr. Flores stated that this item was being requested to be continued to the March 25, 2004 Special Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. Mr. Grande questioned why this item was being continued. Mr. Kelly stated that since the North County Charrette results were just announced the night before they felt it would be necessary to allow some time for the applicant to review how their plan conforms to the suggestions that came out of the Charrette. Mr. Merritt questioned if this plan was in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Kelly confirmed that it was in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Merritt stated that there were no official results yet and the applicant would be sitting down with Staff during the week to go over the plan. Mr. Grande questioned if the future land use request was also being deferred. Mr. Kelly explained that the future land use change was not on this piece of property. Chairman Grande opened the public hearing. Mr. Kieran Kilday stated that he was representing the applicant. He stated that they started this process over seven months ago. He continued that this request is within the existing Urban Service Boundary. He advised that they are requesting a week to work with staff to access the preliminary results of the charrette to be sure their plan is consistent and to modify any design or layout issues if necessary. Seeing no one else, Chairman Grande closed the public hearing. Mr. Merritt made a motion to continue the application of Glassman Properties LLC to the March 25, 2004 Special Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. Motion seconded by Mr. Trias. Upon a roll call vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 6-0) and continued to the March 25, 2004 Special Meeting. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 3of 20 AGENDA ITEM 2: GLASSMAN REALTY, LTD. FILE NO. RZ-03-035: Mr. Hank Flores, presenting Staff comments stated that Agenda Item # 2 was the application of Glassman Realty, LTD., for a Change in Zoning from the AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/acre) Zoning District to the CG (Commercial, General) Zoning District. Mr. Flores stated that the applicant has requested that their petition be continued until the June 17, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. Chairman Grande opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman Grande closed the public hearing. Mr. Hearn made a motion to continue the application of Glassman Realty, LTD., until the June 17, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. Motion seconded by Mr. Trias. Upon a roll call vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 6-0) and continued to the June 17, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 4of 20 AGENDA ITEM 3: ST. LUCIE CITRUS MINE FILE NO. CU-03-017: Carl Austin Powers, Ms. Snay stated that Agenda Item # 3was the application of for a Major Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit to allow for a sand mining operation to be known as St. Lucie Citrus Mine in the AG-5 (Agricultural 1 du/5 acres) Zoning District. She stated that this item was continued from the February 19, 2004 meeting to allow the applicant time to meet with the surrounding neighbors and provide them with more information. She continued that this request was for a 152.08 acres parcel of land located on the east side of Ideal Holding Road, approximately 600 feet north of Mach One Drive. The purpose of the requested Conditional Use Permit is to allow a Sand Mining Operation on the subject property. This use would be authorized under the provisions of Section 3.01.03(C)(7)(i), Mining and quarrying of nonmetallic minerals, except fuels. Ms. Snay stated the subject property is surrounded by AG-2.5 (Agricultural 1 du/2.5 acres) zoning and land use to the north and northeast and AG-5 (Agricultural 1 du/5 acres) zoning and land use to the south, east and west. The existing uses in this area are agriculture in nature with row crops and cattle to the north, south, east and west and residential to the northeast (Hidden Acres) and southwest (Aero Acres a private airstrip community). She continued that in addition to the Major Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit, the applicant is processing a Mining Permit. This request is for three lakes (Phase I lake 11.04 acres in size; Phase II lake 10.30 acres in size; and Phase III lake 11.79 acres) in addition a 30-acre dewatering settling basin will be utilized for this site. Each lake is approximately 2,100 feet long, 200 feet wide and 20 feet deep. The petitioners have indicted that by the end of 2010 they will complete the mining operation. Upon completion of the mining operation, the petitioners have indicated that they will be proposing to develop the property as a residential development with a water-ski venue. Ms. Snay stated that the proposed conditional use is not expected to adversely impact the surrounding properties. The developers have incorporated a number of safeguards to offset noise, air contaminants and vibrations impacting the nearby properties. There will indicated that no blasting will occur on this site. a perimeter berm around the site at the 100-year, 3-day storm event elevation to prevent operation for this facility will be from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm, Monday through Friday. Staff finds that this petition meets the standards of review as set forth in Section 11.07.03 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 six limiting conditions found in the staff report. Chairman Grande opened the public hearing. Mr. Carl Austin Powers stated that he was the applicant and was requesting the mining permit to allow for excavation for a future ski lake community. He advised that he met with the homeowners in Aero Acres and surrounding neighborhoods to answer any questions. Ms. Tracey Powers read their letter to Aero Acres into the record. The letter Mr. Hearn questioned what the average size of the lots would be. Mr. Powers stated they are planning on having 19 or 20 five acre lots. Mr. Powers stated that it would be too much to keep on site. y explained that the request does meet the criteria for the Land Development Code, Comprehensive Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and Mining Permit. Mr. Grande questioned if the applicant could do the digging at an accelerated pace. Mr. Powers stated that if we allowed 80 trucks, which is 160 trips, he could probably get it P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 5of 20 done in two years or so. Mr. Grande stated that would not be possible because of condition # 5 in the staff report. Mr. Jeff Gowans stated that he was the Aero Acres Homeowners Association President and that on March 3, 2004 they met with the applicant. He stated that after that meeting they were still concerned about the traffic, noise, dust, damage to Ideal Holding Road, and their property values. He stated that he feels this request is inconsistent with the surrounding residential areas. He asked that any residents from Aero Acres and Hidden Acres that are opposed to this request please stand up. Several residents stood up to show Mr. Rick Dixon stated that he has concerns about the noise. He stated that in the past bigger than the grove irrigation pumps. He also stated that there should be some sort of noise study done as well as some tests to ensure their well water purity. Ms. Nancy Tinsley, a resident of Hidden Acres, stated that she was not notified of this r she was told that having a mine in the area would depreciate her property values by at least 5 %. Mr. Randy Barry stated that after meeting with the applicant the residents still had many questions that were unanswered. He stated that the applicant stated that the lakes would be filling themselves because of the seepage. He advised that was not correct information. He requested that the Planning and Zoning Commission deny this Mr. Paul Frishkorn stated that he is part of Carlton Country Estates and was there to support his neighbors in Hidden Acres and Aero Acres. He stated that it is a beautiful rural area and this type of use should not be permitted in that area. Mr. Chris Ponstolt stated that he is a friend of Mr. Powers and knows that his dream is to live in a ski lake community. He stated that Mr. Powers is planning on building a quality community where the lakes will be pristine and that he plans on buying and living there when the community is built. He also stated that he knows it will be inconvenient for a while but the end result would be worth it. He questioned how the residents of an airport community have concerns about dust when their airplanes are moving dust around the area as well. He stated that this type of community would be better than having an orange grove that has pesticides being sprayed on a regular basis. Ms. Hensley stated that discussions about the proposed future plans of the site were not pertinent to this hearing because this request is only about the conditional use permit for the mining operation. Mr. Clyde Suit, 18501 Tranquility Base Lane, stated that their canals run into Header Canal and questioned if the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) or the North St. Lucie County Water Control District (NSLCWCD) would permit this request. Ms. Snay stated that SFWMD would permit the excavation but that the applicant would also need permits from the NSLWCD as part of the construction permits. Mr. Gary Basham, Culpepper and Terpening, stated that there would not be any outfall into the canals so there would not be any required NSLCWCD permits required. He continued that their water would be kept on site and that dewatering pumps would be used. He stated that those pumps would be either kept underground or have a device placed on them to reduce any noise. He also stated that their geo-technical report shows that the water would be entering the lakes naturally. Mr. Hearn stated that he is familiar with the sounds from these types of operations and that it was not plesant. He stated that he is very concerned and questioned if the applicant would be willing to limit his operation to only two years. Mr. Powers stated that he would be willing to do that, but would need an increase in the truck trips in order to finish in that amount of time. Mr. Dave LeGates stated that his major concern is the amount of dust that will be generated from this project. He also stated that they paid for Ideal Holding Road to be paved and they are not looking for an increase of trucks on that road. He questioned who would be buying all of the dirt that is being excavated off the property. He also questioned what would happen to this project if they were not finished in six years and if they would be allowed an extension. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 6of 20 Mr. Carl Andrews stated that he is very concerned about their water supply especially since there is a pond close to the C-24 canal. Ms. Ann Norville, Mary Carlton Ranch, stated that they own most of the land west of this project and are concerned that their property value will be reduced. She stated that they are opposed to this project. Seeing no one else, Chairman Grande closed the public hearing. Mr. Lounds stated that having a ski lake community would be a unique project but it is in the wrong place. He stated that he could not vote for this project since it is in a rural residentially developed area. Mr. Grande questioned if the applicant could have submitted a request for the PUD (Planned Unit Development) with an IX area to allow for the extraction. Ms. Snay stated that would not be allowed and in order to mine on the property a Conditional Use and Mining Permit were the only ways possible to do this. Ms. Hensley questioned if it were possible for this applicant to submit his PUD (Planned Unit Development) at the same time as the conditional use permit so they could be sure of how the property would be developed. Ms. Snay stated that he could submit the request showing the lakes, but that the PUD (Planned Unit Development) could not be approved until after the conditional use permit were approved. Ms. Morgan stated that a ski lake community is very unique and would bring people to St. Lucie County but has concerns about the mining portion of the project. She stated that the project name is even consistent with being a mining operation and not a ski lake community so that concerns her. Mr. Murphy stated that the main issue with this project is that if the applicant needs to remove more than 100 cubic yards of material (which is only about five truckloads), that a conditional use permit is required. Mr. Grande stated that if they could approve a PUD (Planned Unit Development) with a condition that allows for the conditional use permit then he may consider voting for this. Mr. Lounds stated that he feels six years is too long a time period. Mr. Hearn questioned how much of a performance bond would be required on this project. Mr. Murphy stated that the Engineering Department establishes that. 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 Board of County Commissioners deny the application of Carl Austin Powers, St. Lucie Citrus, for a Major Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit to allow a sand mining operation in the AG-5 (Agricultural - 1 du/ 5 acres) Zoning District because it adversely affects too many people living in the area. Motion seconded by Mr. Lounds. Upon a roll call vote the motion was passed with a vote of 4-2 (with Mr. Hearn and Ms. Morgan voting against) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of denial. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 7of 20 AGENDA ITEM 4: PATRICIA GRIFFIN LOWE FILE NO. CU-04-002: Ms. Cyndi Snay, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 4 was the Patricia Griffin Lowe application of for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a riding school within the AR-1 (Agricultural, Residential 1 du/acre) Zoning District, for property located at 7001 Gullotti Place. The subject property is 1.25 acres in size and designated with a Residential Estate (RE) land use on the future land use map. The applicant is proposing to operate a riding school as an accessory use to a single- family residence. Within the AR-1 zoning district a riding school would be permitted under the riding stable classification, but the use must undergo Conditional Use Permit review and approval. Section 3.01.03(E) of the St. Lucie County Land Development Regulations, states that the purpose of the AR-1 Zoning District is to provide and protect an environment suitable for single-family swellings at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per gross acres, together with such other uses as may be necessary for and compatible with very low density rural residential surroundings. The surrounding area has a rural residential/agricultural character with a number of conforming and nonconforming horse stables, which have been developed under the AR-1 Zoning District guidelines. The property located to the north of the subject property was purchased by the County as part of the Savannas Scrub preserve, and is designated for conservation and limited public use. The property to the north of the subject property is located within the I (Institutional) zoning district and CPUB (Conservation, Public) future land use designation and the properties to the south, east and west are is located within the AR-1 (Agricultural, Residential 1 du/acre) zoning district. And RE (Residential Estate) Future Land Use designation. The proposed conditional use permit is not anticipated to create adverse impacts on the natural environment. The proposed riding stable and riding school must comply with all local, state and federal regulations concerning its development and operation. Staff has reviewed this petition and determined that it conforms to the standards of review as set forth in 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 two conditions of approval: All operations of the riding school must occur on the subject property. No offsite 1. teaching may occur within the Savannahs State Preserve. No horse may be permitted to be housed within 100 feet of any property line as 2. required in Section 7.10.03 of the Land Development Code. Chairman Grande questioned if the applicant was present. Ms. Patricia Griffin Lowe stated that she was the applicant and teaches horsemanship and horse riding safety. She continued that she owns three horses and teaches for the enjoyment, as well as the income. She advised that she has a riding ring and a training field on her property for the classes. Mr. Lounds questioned if the applicant would have barns to house the horses. Ms. Griffin Lowe stated that she would not be housing the horses on the property; they would be corralled or free range. She also stated that she would not have any barns or stables on the property, just the horses. Mr. Grande questioned if the applicant would have signage for the school. Ms. Snay advised that signage would not be permitted. Chairman Grande opened the public hearing. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 8of 20 parking would not be a problem. He continued that Guilotti Place is actually a 60-foot easement and the applicant has closed off access to the easement at her property line. He stated that he was concerned with the possibility of the public parking on his property since he is next to the applicant. Seeing no one else, Chairman Grande closed the public hearing. Ms. Griffin Lowe stated that anyone coming to her home would be parking on her property. She continued that she does have a gate for entering the property. Mr. Hearn questioned if the applicant had a designated parking area. Ms. Snay confirmed that the applicant did illustrate a parking area on her plan that is not near any homes. Mr. Grande questioned if they could add a condition to the request with regards to customer parking. Ms. Snay confirmed that would be considered a reasonable condition to add to the request. Mr. Merritt stated that people closing off accesses to easements is a problem throughout the county and should be addressed. He also stated that he feels this applicant should be required to open her easement, since it is an easement. Mr. Lounds stated 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 Patricia Griffin Lowe for a Conditional Use Permit to allow riding stables and riding schools as an accessory use to the single-family residential structure in the AR-1 (Agricultural, Residential - 1 du/acre) Zoning District because I think it would be something she it, but I think one of the conditions that I would like to see placed with it is that the County work with Ms. Lowe and the other neighbors to correct the use of the fence problems on the easement, as well as the conditions listed in the staff report and staff presentation. Motion seconded by Mr. Hearn. Upon a roll call vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 6-0) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 9of 20 AGENDA ITEM 5: TRAVIS E. MURPHY FILE NO. RZ-04-003: Ms. Cyndi Snay, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 5 was the Travis E. Murphy, Jr. application of , for a Change in Zoning from the CN (Commercial Neighborhood) Zoning District and RS-3 (Residential, Single-family 3 du/acre) Zoning District to the CO (Commercial Office) Zoning District, for a 1.52 acre parcel of land located at 1313 West Midway Road, immediately east of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and White City Park. The purpose of the requested change in zoning is to allow for the continued operation of a general office building on the subject property. The subject property was originally zoned B (Business), which allowed commercial office uses, when the County underwent the Comprehensive Plan and Rezoning efforts in 1980, the subject property was changed to CN (Commercial Neighborhood) zoning, which made the existing office building a nonconforming use of record. In 1992, the Building Department issued a zoning compliance letter that allowed a general office use to be located within the subject property. Section 3.01.03(R) of the Land Development Code does not permit general office uses within the CN (Commercial Neighborhood) Zoning District. In order to rectify the nonconforming status of the subject property it was recommended that the applicant apply for a rezoning of the property from the CN (Commercial Neighborhood) Zoning District to the CO (Commercial Office) Zoning District. The subject property is located in an area with a split zoning designation: CN (Commercial Neighborhood) and RS-3 (Residential, Single-family 3 du/acre). Neither, the CN (Commercial Neighborhood) or RS-3 (Residential, Single-family 3 du/acre) zoning districts permit office uses as permitted, accessory or conditional uses. As the (Commercial Office) zoning. Staff is of the opinion that the southern 115 feet is not appropriate for straight CO (Commercial Office) zoning. Upon future redevelopment of the site, Staff would like to see the applicant submit for review and approval a PNRD (Planned Nonresidential Development) Plan and rezoning with specific uses identified in order to determine the compatibility of those uses with the interior residential development, that exists to the south of the abandoned easement. The proposed change in zoning would result in an orderly and logical development pattern for the surrounding area. The surrounding parcels of property are designated for residential uses with a maximum density of 3 du/acre and with commercial and office uses adjacent to Midway Road. As the CN (Commercial Neighborhood) uses allow for such things as limited retail and service uses that support surrounding residential properties, it is acceptable within the existing development pattern. The uses allowed within the proposed CO (Commercial Office) Zoning District are not anticipated to negatively impact the surrounding area of those properties located within the CN (Commercial Neighborhood) zoning district. The introduction of the CO (Commercial Office) uses within the area south of the existing abandoned alley may not be appropriate as this will be introducing nonresidential uses in an established residential area. Staff has reviewed this petition and determined that it conforms to the standards of review as set forth in 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 to rezone only that portion of the site located within the existing CN (Commercial Neighborhood) zoning district (the northern 135 feet of the subject property) from CN (Commercial Neighborhood) to CO (Commercial Office) and deny the request to rezone that portion of the site located within the RS-3 (Residential, Single-family 3 du/acre) zoning district (the southern 115 feet of the subject parcel) from RS-3 (Residential, Single-family 3 du/acre) to CO (Commercial Office) as rezoning this area may introduce incompatible uses within the residential area and more through analysis of impacts would be required. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 10of 20 Mr. Hearn questioned if it was legal to deny approve another portion of the request. Mr. Kelly explained that it had been done in the past, as long as the portion of approval was part of the original advertised area. Mr. Grande questioned if the split approval would accommodate the applicants needs. Ms. Snay explained that she did review this with the applicant in advance and he did agree to the recommendation. Chairman Grande questioned if the applicant was present. Mr. Buff Searcy stated that he was there representing the applicant, Travis Murphy. He explained that the primary reason for the request was to bring the front portion of the property into conformity. He advised that their long-term goal was to develop office buildings on both parcels, but they would be willing to wait until that time to request the back portion of the parcel to be rezoned. He confirmed that they had discussed this with Staff and that they were in agreement. He also stated that at that time they would be submitting a PNRD (Planned Non-Residential Development) and would also meet with the neighbors in advance for their review and comments. Mr. Hearn questioned what the current use was on the property and why it was non- conforming. Ms. Snay confirmed that it is currently an office building and that when the Business zoning was on the parcel in the past it was conforming. However, when the county instituted the new zoning districts and designated this parcel as CN (Commercial, Neighborhood) it became non-conforming. She continued that the applicant requested to do something new in the existing building and could not since it was a non-conforming use. Mr. Lounds stated that there would be some traffic issues to consider in the future if the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family 3 du/acre) portion was requested to be changed. Mr. Searcy stated that they would take that into consideration in the future, but for now, they are not requesting that portion to be rezoned. Chairman Grande opened the public hearing. Ms. Krista Story, 1305 W. 1st Street, stated that their parcels are across W. 1st Street from the portion of the subject property that is currently zoned RS-3 (Residential, Single- Family - 3 du/acre). She stated that they recognize there is an existing office use on the portion of the property that fronts Midway Road and are not objecting to that. She continued that they would actually prefer that portion be rezoned to CO (Commercial, Office) zoning because it would allow some retail uses. She stated they do object to the rezoning of the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre) portion of the property to CO because the intrusion of a commercial use into their residential neighborhood is not rated compliance with the Standards of Review that govern rezoning as set forth in Section 11.06.03 of the Land Development Code. st Mr. Franklin Lofton, 1313 W. 1 Street, stated that he objected to this request because he feels the advertising for this petition was wrong and that Mr. Murphy should have to have this total request denied and reapply with only the CN (Commercial, Neighborhood) portion of the property. Ms. Valerie Slack stated that the mailing that was sent out to the property owners was not correct either. Ms. Snay stated that the advertising and the mailing were correct based on description that included the entire property, not just the CN portion. She advised that we were required to include the entire property in the mailed notices and the advertising. She stated that the applicant has since verbally corrected his request to only include the CN portion of the property, not the RS-3 portion. Mr. Herb Beach, 1012 Sager Avenue, stated that he was a member of the White City Improvement Club and was there on his own. He continued that he feels the applicant should be required to withdraw his current application and reapply with the correct P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 11of 20 request. He also stated that the Staff report says that Port St. Lucie provides utilities but they are actually provided by FPUA. He continued that he does not have an objection to changing the CN portion of the property, but was very against changing the RS-3 portion. Mr. Buff Searcy stated that he was officially withdrawing their request for the RS-3 portion of the property to be rezoned and would provide a corrected legal description for only the CN portion of the property. Mr. Grande questioned if that would be allowed. Ms. Snay confirmed that was allowable and that the legal description would be amended for future mailings and advertising. Chairman Grande closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Hearn stated 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 Travis E. Murphy, Jr. for a Change in Zoning from the CN (Commercial, Neighborhood) Zoning District to the CO (Commercial, Office) Zoning District based on the fact that they removed the request to rezone the RS-3 (Residential, Single-Family - 3 du/acre) because it seems like the compatible thing to do in that district. Motion seconded by Ms. Morgan Upon a roll call vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 6-0) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 12of 20 AGENDA ITEM 6: CHERYL AND MARK GRIFFIN FILE NO. CU-04-003: Mr. Hank Flores, presenting staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 6 was the Cheryl and Mark Griffin, application of for a Conditional Use Permit to allow Landscaping & Horticultural Services (Commercial Plant Nursery) in the AR-1 (Agricultural, Residential 1 du/acre) Zoning District for 4.27 acres of property located at 9290 Orange Avenue. Landscaping and Horticultural Services are allowed as conditional uses in the AR-1 Zoning District subject to the approval of the Board of County Commissioners. The applicants currently live and must continue to live on the subject site if the conditional use permit is approved. Provided that the proposed conditional use is done in accordance with applicable laws and best management practices, this activity is not anticipated to have any negative effects upon any adjacent lands or interests. 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 three limiting conditions. 1.The applicants must continue to live on the subject property in order to allow the conditional use permit to remain in effect. 2.The applicant must retain a minimum 20-foot buffer along all property lines so as to not encroach on adjacent properties. 3.The removal of any native vegetation shall require a Vegetation Removal Permit issued by the Environmental Resources Division. Mr. Hearn questioned if a 20-foot buffer would be required on this project since it is a commercial use. Ms. Young confirmed that would be correct since this is a commercial business. Mr. Hearn stated that the Land Development Code requires that an 8-foot fence also be required since it is a commercial business that adjoins or abuts a residential use. Ms. Young confirmed that would be correct, unless the applicant receives signed waivers from the neighbors stating it is not necessary for them. Chairman Grande questioned if the applicant was present. Mr. Mark Griffin stated that he was the applicant. He stated that there is a neighbor to the west of their property but north and South of the property there was not anyone. Ms. Young questioned if the applicant would have any non-residential structures on the property. Mr. Griffin stated that they would not. Ms. Young confirmed that the 8-foot fence would not be a requirement then. Ms. Cheryl Griffin stated that they did not realize that they would need a conditional use permit since there would not be any public entering the property on a regular basis. She stated that they would be growing trees and shrubs to sell at flea markets. She also stated that they have had discussions with the neighbors about their proposed business and had no objections. Chairman Grande opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman Grande closed the public hearing. Mr. Lounds questioned if they could add a condition requiring the applicant to provide signed, notarized letters from their neighbors waiving the fence requirement prior to the Board of County Commissioners Meeting. 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 P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 13of 20 County Commissioners grant approval to the application of Cheryl and Mark Griffin for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the operation of a Landscaping and Horticultural Service Business in the AR-1 (Agricultural, Residential - 1 du/acre) Zoning District because I think it will help develop income in the western neighbors to put into the file before it goes before the Board of County Commissioners a waiver for the 8 foot fence restrictions allowed under this zoning, including the conditions listed in the Staff report. Motion seconded by Mr. Hearn. Upon a roll call vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 6-0) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 14of 20 AGENDA ITEM 7: ROBERT RIGEL FILE NO. CU-04-002: Ms. Snay stated that Agenda Item # 7 was the application of Robert Rigel for a Conditional Use Permit and Major Site Plan approval to allow the construction of a 47,270 square foot mini-warehouse and self-storage facility, 2,550 square foot Managers Apartment and Office and 3,750 square feet of general office space, to be known as Hutchinson Island Storage and Office Complex, in the CG (Commercial, General) Zoning District for a 10 acre parcel of land located at 9751 South ocean Drive. The surrounding properties are designated with a RU (Residential Urban) future land use designation and HIRD (Hutchinson Island Residential District) Zoning District to the north, south and east and CPUB (Conservation Public) future land use designation and I (Institutional) zoning district to the west and RM (Residential Medium) future land use designation and HIRD (Hutchinson Island Residential District) Zoning District to the east. On August 19, 2003, through Resolution 03-179, the Board of County Commissioners approved a shoreline variance form the Indian River Lagoon to allow the construction of a mini-warehouse facility within 25-feet of the Indian River Lagoon. The applicant redesigned this project is a manner that has kept the actual buildings outside of the required 50-foot buffer area, the drive-area does encroach 10-feet into the 50-foot buffer area, but maintains a 40 foot buffer from the lagoon. Section 7.09.04(E) requires an 8-foot high wall or wooden fence to be constructed when a nonresidential use abuts a residential use. The properties to the north, south and east are all designated as residential uses, therefore a wall or wooden fence would be required. The applicant has requested a waiver from this requirement as allowed in Section 7.09.04(E). As part of the submittal package staff did receive two letters one from the Princess Condominium Association and the other from Nettles Island, Inc. indicating their support for the waiver request. There is a significant amount of vegetation along the located on the property to the north and therefore compatible with the waiver request. There are a number of mobile homes located directly north of the subject property; in addition, the Nettles Island Storage Compound abuts the subject property. Staff would recommend that the required wooden fence or wall and additional landscaping buffer be installed only on that portion of the site directly abutting the existing residential units. The proposed project is not expected to adversely impact the surrounding properties. The proposed site is located within an area zoned for commercial businesses. The properties located to the north, south and east of the subject property are developed as a variety of single-family and multifamily uses with accessory uses. The Indian River Lagoon and St. Lucie County Mosquito Impoundment is located to the west of the subject property. The proposed project is not expected to create significant additional demands on any public facilities in this area. According to the ITE trip generation manuals, a mini- warehouse facility development would produce 2.5 trips per 1000 square feet of gross floor area and the general office area would produce 11.01 trips per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Based upon this ratio, the 47,270 square feet of warehouse would only produce 118 daily trips and the 4,500 square feet of general office space would only produce 50 daily vehicular trips. Therefore, the entire Hutchinson Island Storage and Office Complex will produce a total of 168 daily vehicular trips. According to the Spring 2003 traffic counts for St. Lucie County, South State Road A-1- A north of Nettles Island is designed for a LOS capacity of 18,900 trips per day. Currently, this roadway segment has an AADT of 7,700 trips with an additional 584 trips committed, plus an additional 24 trips for the proposed Nettles Island, VNI Realty for a total of 8,308 committed trips, leaving 10,592 trips available on the segment of South State Road A-1-A, north of the Nettles Island Community. In addition, the segment of State Road A-1-A, south of Nettles Island has a LOS capacity of 18,900 trips per day. Currently, this roadway segment has an AADT of 8,500 trips with an additional 584 trips committed for a total of 9,084 trips on the roadway segment, leaving 9,816 trips available P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 15of 20 for this roadway segment. This proposal results in minimal demands on the existing transportation network. The proposed project is not anticipated to create adverse impacts on the natural environment. The applicant has designed the project to minimize impacts to the Mangrove Swamp area and the Indian River Lagoon. The proposed lot is currently being utilized as a dead storage facility for boats, recreational vehicles and automobiles. The proposed development will have minimal impact on the natural vegetation in the area as it was previously cleared. There are a few trees located on the site, which the applicant has worked into the site design. In addition, as indicated on the site plan, the applicant is proposing to enhance the vegetation along the Indian River Lagoon, adjacent to the Mangrove area. Staff finds that this petition meets the standards of review as set forth in Section 11.07.03 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: Prior to the issuance of any building permits for the proposed structure or 1. buildings on this site, all exotic vegetation found on the site shall be removed. Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed 2. mini warehouse facility, the applicant shall construct an eight (8) foot high opaque fence with a landscaped hedge along both sides of the fence, along the southern property line, adjacent to the area containing residential units. The approvals under this petition are only for the warehouse facility and 3. office complex, all other development will require future site plan review and approval. Mr. Merritt questioned if under the CG (Commercial, General) zoning there was a maximum of three acres of warehouse storage. Ms. Snay stated that she was not aware of any minimum or maximum of acreage for that type of use in our Land Development Code. Chairman Grande questioned if the applicant was present. Mr. Roger Baber stated that he represented the applicant and agreed with the Staff report and would be happy to answer any questions. Chairman Grande opened the public hearing. Mr. Raymond Byra, 9650 S. Ocean Drive, directly across from the proposed site, and was also a member of the Board of Directors of the Princess Condominium Association. He stated that they had forwarded correspondence to the Commissioners and have sent in a waiver for the fencing requirement on the north side of the proposed property. He continued that their only concerns had been reviewed and addressed with Mr. Rigel directly. He stated that their board would like to have this project limited to the hours of 7 am to 7 pm, six days a week. Mr. Lounds questioned if there were any limits on the lighting on this property. Ms. Snay confirmed that the project would be allowed to have on-site saturation only. Mr. Lounds questioned if the applicant would be agreeable to not having their business open on Sundays. Mr. Baber stated that it would be up to the needs of the people using the facility. Mr. Rigel stated that he believed the hours of 7 am to 7 pm were acceptable and that there would be an on-site manager. He advised that they would like to have the opportunity to open a unit for a customer should an emergency situation arise. Mr. Lounds stated that most storage units have key codes on their gates. Chairman Grande closed the public hearing. Mr. Trias stated after considering the testimony presented in the Public Hearing, P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 16of 20 including Staff comments, and the Standards of Reviews 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 Robert Rigel for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the operation of a 6,300 square foot mini warehouse and self storage and a 3,500 square foot office complex in the CG (Commercial, General) Zoning District because it is compatible with the area and meets all of the Standards of Review, including the conditions listed in the Staff report and the additional condition of limiting the hours of operation from 7 am to 7 pm, 7 days a week. Motion seconded by Mr. Merritt. Upon a roll call vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 6-0) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 17of 20 AGENDA ITEM 8: HOME DYNAMICS CORPORATION FILE NO. PA-03-005: Ms. Diana Waite, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 8 was the Home Dynamics Corporation application of for a Change in Future Land Use classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential High 15 du/ac) for a 35.4-acre site located at the southwest corner of the th intersection of South 25 Street and Edwards Road. The applicant is requesting a change in future land use classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban 5 du/ac) to RH (Residential High 15 du/ac) for a 35.4-acre site located at the southwest th corner of the intersection of South 25 Street and Edwards Road. The entire site is within the Urban Service Area. Approval of the proposed change to RH would allow up to 15 dwelling units per acre or 531 total dwelling units and limited neighborhood commercial, office and institutional uses. The stated purpose of the requested future land use classification change for high quality residential townhomes and condominiums in close proximity to ial) and RM-5 (Residential Multiple-Family 5 du/ac) zoning classification to a Planned Unit Development. On February 19, 2004, the proposed amendment was presented before the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency (LPA). At the hearing, staff presented its report between 9 and 15 dwelling units per acre were appropriate and could be supported at this location. Staff further commented that these densities could be difficult to achieve given all other constraints placed on properties such as this. Following a public hearing on this petition the LPA voted 7 to 1to continue this petition to the March 18, 2004 public hearing to allow the applicant time to provide a conceptual development plan for the subject lands. The Commission asked that a plan be developed demonstrating that densities greater than 9 dwelling units per acre could be achieved. The development team presented a concept plan that placed a combination of single family and multi family product on the site at a density of approximately 10.5 per acre. The concept plan left very little room for uses other than residential units, parking and drainage. residential land development of superior quality through the encouragement of flexibility anticipated by the PUD process. At this time, staff continues to believe that densities in this range are appropriate at this location; however, we are unable to support the development concept provided. We understand that further plans are being developed. As of this date, those plans have not been presented for review. The proposed future land use amendment is a preliminary development order and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property but allows the developer to seek development of the property for multiple-family uses. Staff analysis of this petition generally supports the requested change to RH. Staff would possible to achieve the maximum density of 15 du/ac on this parcel. Staff would also note that if approved, this would be one of the very limited numbers of parcels on the mainland of unincorporated St. Lucie County with an RH designation. The land use decision to be made by this Commission is whether the current commercial designation or a residential designation is more appropriate. If you collectively believe that the residential designation is the more appropriate choice, you have some latitude in your recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. You may recommend the residential land use with a lower density. These include RU (Residential, Urban with a P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 18of 20 maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre) and RM (Residential, Medium with a maximum of 9 dwelling units per acre). Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Staff also finds the proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Policy Plan. Staff recommends that this petition be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval and that the petition be transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review. Chairman Grande questioned if the applicant was present. Mr. Mark Matthes, Thomas Lucido & Associations, stated that he was the applicants representative. He advised that he and Mr. Delphino were there to answer any questions the RH (Residential High) land use. However, there is not any in between land use available to request. He continued that they hope to time the submittal of the PUD (Planned Unit Development) so that the Board of County Commissioners hears this request and the PUD concurrently. He advised that he was there to answer any questions they might have. th Mr. Grande stated that the corner of 25 Street and Edwards Road was good for a commercial business, but feels the applicant should be able to develop the rest of the property for residential at the RU land use density. Chairman Grande opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman Grande closed the public hearing. Mr. Hearn stated that after considering the testimony presented during the public hearing, including Staff comments, I hereby move that the Local Planning Agency of St. Lucie County recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners deny the application of Home Dynamics Corporation, for a Change in Future Land Use Classification from COM (Commercial) and RU (Residential Urban) to RH (Residential High) because it is, in my opinion, too dense a zoning for that particular intersection and is not compatible with the surrounding uses and they have no guarantee that any particular type of plan is going to be developed on that property. Motion seconded by Mr. Merritt. 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 denial. P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 19of 20 OTHER BUSINESS / DISCUSSION: There will be a special meeting on March 25, 2004. The next scheduled meeting will be April 15, 2004. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting was adjourned at 11:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted: ____________________________________ Dawn V. Gilmore, Administrative Secretary P&Z / LPA Regular Meeting March 18, 2004 Page 20of 20