Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Meeting Minutes 03-25-2004 St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission Local Planning Agency SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES March 25, 2004 Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, Roger Poitras Annex 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Morgan, Mr. Lounds, Mr. Akins, Ms. Hammer, Mr. Hearn, Mr. Merritt, Ms. Hensley, and Chairman McCurdy. MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. Grande (Absent With Notice), Mr. Trias (Absent Without Notice). OTHERS PRESENT: 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. Heather Young, Assistant County Attorney; Ms. Katherine Mackenzie-Smith, Assistant County Attorney; Ms. Dawn Gilmore, Administrative Secretary. 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 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. 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. P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 1 of 14 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 Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 2 of 14 AGENDA ITEM 1: MEETING MINUTES February 19, 2004: Ms. Hammer made a motion to approve the meeting minutes. Motion seconded by Mr. Merritt. Upon a vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 7-0). P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 3of 14 AGENDA ITEM 2: Glassman Properties, LLC. File No. RZ-03-017/PUD-03-011: Mr. Hank Flores, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 2 was the Glassman Properties, LLC, application of 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 for 116 acres of property located at the Northwest corner of the intersection of Indrio Road and Johnston Road. He continued that the subject property surrounds the corner parcel and has a proposed density of 3.1 dwelling units per acre. Mr. Flores continued that the applicant, Glassman Properties, is proposing a residential development of 359 Single-Family Lots for the project known as Johnston Lakes - PUD. The subject property does not have any native upland habitat subject to preservation. The proposed planned development maintains 35% (39.45 acres) of the project area in total open space with 22.21 acres of lakes, 15.14 acres of landscaping, and 2.1 acres of recreational area. The remainder of the project consists of those areas designated for residential development (buildings, roadway, driveways, and sidewalks). proposed development project will create a situation where there will eventually be an unacceptable Level of Service for the roadway east of the intersection of Johnston and Indrio Roads. Improvements to this section will be required in the future. The developer has indicated that he will construct some infrastructure improvements in order to facilitate the project and he will be donating property for future right-of-way needs at this location. The main project entrance along Indrio Road may at some point require signalization with the provision of right and left turn lanes into the project concurrent with the completion of the initial site work. There is no set timetable for the availability of water and sewer service. Staff has determined that based solely on the standards of review as set forth in Section 11.06.03, the proposed zoning designation and the Preliminary Planned Unit Development site plan are compatible with the existing and proposed uses in the area and the petition meets the standards of review as set forth in the Land Development Code and is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff is recommending that this board forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners. Chairman McCurdy questioned if the unacceptable level of service was pre-existing or would become unacceptable because of this proposed project. Mr. Flores stated that it would become unacceptable because of this project. Chairman McCurdy questioned if trunk lines would be necessary for the applicant to develop the site. Mr. Flores stated that they could have a package plant on property, but could not have well or septic. Mr. Akins stated that there are already existing water and sewer problems with Holiday Pines in that area because of Portofino Shores and questioned what the source of this projects water would be. Mr. Flores stated that they are relying solely on the extension of the water and sewer lines. Ms. Hensley questioned if this plan was inconsistent with the proposed master plan for the area. Ms. Hammer questioned how long the AG-1 (Agricultural - 1 du/acre) zoning was on this property. Mr. Kelly stated that it was at least since 1990 and possibly even before that. Ms. Heather Young stated that she received an email from Mr. Grande with comments regarding this application that he would like to have on record. See his email attached as Exhibit A. Chairman McCurdy questioned if the applicant was present. Mr. Kieran Kilday, Kilday and Associates, stated that he was representing the petitioner. He stated that the property is already within the Urban Service Boundary in an area designated MXD-Low Intensity. He continued that this land use category permits residential development up to 5 units per acre in density. He stated that their proposed plan has an approximate density of 3 units per acre. He continued that originally utilities were going to be provided as part of their development agreement by extending the trunk lines. He advised that due to impact of Portofino Shores the County has negotiated with FPUA (Fort Pierce Utilities Authority) P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 4of 14 to provide the service through extending their lines. He stated that they would be entering into an agreement to pay for those extensions. He also stated that this project would generate approximately 3600 trips with some on Indrio Road and some on Johnston Road. He advised that they would be dedicating ultimate right-of-way and turn lanes at the primary entrance on Indrio Road. He stated that the proposed development would have 358 single-family units and access off of Indrio Road as well. Ms. Hammer questioned the lot size. Mr. Kilday stated that they are an average of 52x120. Mr. Hearn questioned if this request would be increasing the density. Mr. Kilday stated that under the Future Land Use it was below the allowed density of 5 units per acre because their plan averaged 3 units per acre. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Mr. Bob Bangert, Holiday Pines, stated that $270,000 was paid for the Charrette. He continued that changes to the Comprehensive Plan must be made in order for the proposed Master Plan to work. He stated that these projects should be required to have the proper infrastructure before they are approved. He continued that he is concerned about fire and police pro approved until the Comprehensive Plan is updated to incorporate the proposed changes of the Master Plan that was created out of the North County Charrette. Mr. Kevin Stinnette, Indian River Keeper, stated that he has been a part of the Comprehensive Plan Study Group. He stated that the North County Charrette has a good vision for how the area should be developed. He continued that the Board of County Commissioners directed Staff to make any changes necessary. He advised that the applicant, to accommodate the proposed changes, modified this plan but still is not consistent with the Greenways and Trails idea. He requested that they wait to vote on this request until everything is modified and the North County Master Plan is in place. Seeing no one else, Chairman McCurdy closed the public hearing. Ms. Hammer stated that she has a serious problem with changing the zoning from a maximum of 115 units to allow for 345 homes. She stated that the schools are in trouble without this proposed plan. She advised that they need 16 more in the next 20 years already. She continued that she attending the North County Charrette and heard the residents say that they did not want to increase densities in that area any more. Ms. Hensley requested that we be cautious with this request because they are currently at less than 1/2 the available facilities to meet the needs and this will only make it worse. Mr. Hearn stated that he feels the existing zoning is sufficient. He continued that he understands that the future land use allows for a higher density, but that he is not sure that the future is necessarily now and cannot support because of the results of the North County Charrette. He also stated that there was no obligation to grant future land use densities to an applicant, only the zoning density. He stated that he feels a development should pay for itself. Mr. Lounds questioned what the impact fees would be on this property. Mr. Flores stated that it would be approximately $6,500 per unit. Mr. Lounds stated that he feels this is that it should be moved on to the Board of County Commissioners for their decision. Mr. Akins stated that he did not feel this should be rushed through and it should wait until the finalized results of the North County Charrette. Statutes states that the Comprehensive Plan is basically the Constitution and should take precedent over the Land Development Code and that these requests should be consistent with that. She stated that North County Charrette results were not a law. She also stated that the a She stated that agriculture is not viable in that area any longer and that they are not going P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 5of 14 to the maximum density allowed under the Future Land Use. She asked that they a Mr. Merritt stated that after considering the testimony present 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 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 because it fits within the Urban Service Boundary and the Development Code. Motion seconded by Ms. Morgan. Upon a roll call vote the motion was approved with a vote of 4-3 (Mr. Akins, Mr. Hearn, and Ms. Hammer voting against) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 6of 14 AGENDA ITEM 3 Cutting Edge Self-Storage of Ft. Pierce, LLC. (Stephan Ross, Agent) File No. CU-03-018: Mr. Hank Flores, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 3 was the Stephan Ross application of , for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for household goods warehousing and storage mini-warehouses in the CG (Commercial, General) Zoning District for 424 acres of property located at the Southeast corner of the intersection of South U.S. Highway No. 1 and Sunshine Boulevard. Household goods warehousing and storage mini-warehouses are allowed as conditional uses in the CG Zoning District subject to the approval of the Board of County Commissioners. The proposed project consists of 90,607 square feet of space. A proposed office/copy center contains 3,000 square feet and the proposed mini-storage facility will contain 87,706 square feet in 5 buildings. On March 24, 2004, the Board of Adjustment approved the request of Mr. Ross for a variance from the Provisions of Section 7.04.01(A) of the Land Development Code to allow for the proposed buildings to have a front setback of 12 feet versus the required 25- foot front setback. The purpose of the variance was to allow the applicant to dedicate 13 feet from the front of the subject property to allow for the reconstruction of the deceleration lane into The Grove development. The current deceleration lane will be eliminated during the widening of South U.S. 1. Subsequent to the Board of Adjustment action, Richard Gallagher, representing Mr. Ross, proposed a redesign of the project which would allow for an additional 10 feet of front setback for a total front setback of 22 feet. 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. Chairman McCurdy questioned if the applicant was present. Mr. Al Brodeur, Thomas Lucido and Associates, stated that he was representing the petitioner and was available to answer any questions. Mr. Lounds asked that Mr. Brodeur address the deceleration lane problem for Palm Grove. Mr. Brodeur stated that the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) was not planning on having the deceleration lane there once the road is widened. He continued that the applicant has agreed to deed over his property to FDOT so that there would be enough space for them to have the deceleration lane. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Mr. Walter Elis stated that he was Vice President of the Grove Community and that the Board of Adjustment granted a variance. He continued that the applicant showed a plan for the facility that looks nice and that they are all in favor of this request. Mr. Lounds questioned if they were upset at all with this request. Mr. Elis stated that they are not against it at all and asked that it be approved. Mr. Richard Gallagher stated part of the project would allow a twenty-two foot setback for FDOT to have the deceleration lane. He also stated that this is a nice project. Ms. Hammer thanked the applicant for working with the residents in advance to coming to this public hearing. Mr. Jonathan Ferguson from Ruden McClosky stated that he was there representing a property owner at the entrance to the Grove. He stated that they have two issues with the project. He continued that the Board of Adjustment did not need to issue a variance when the applicant agreed to the deceleration lane because requesting a conditional use permit could have done that. He also stated there should be a condition added to this request to ensure that the area is dedicated. He advised that the applicant should also be P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 7of 14 required to provide a new plan that meets the requirements of the Architectural Standards Ordinance and shows the elevations for all four sides of the buildings prior to the Board of County Commissioners meeting. He stated that since this property is undeveloped -foot setback, especially since it is only an additional 3 feet. He stated that they are not totally opposed to the project but are concerned about these issues. Ms. Hammer questioned if the applicant would be willing to move the project back an additional three feet to maintain the required 25-foot setback. Mr. Al Brodeur stated that they received approval for the reduced setback requirement at the Board of Adjustment the day before. He continued that the reductions they have already made lost them 1150 square feet of space and that three more feet would cost them even more money. Mr. Lou Juliano stated that the applicant has been working with the homeowners in the Ms. Kit Lindberger stated that they would not have their deceleration lane but felt it might be that they want to build a strip mall even though strip malls are not flourishing in the area. Ms. Francis Felicia stated that this applicant has worked with them, shown them drawings, and been asking their input since the beginning. She continued that the one opposing resident is supposedly pl since he has never contacted them and is keeping his plans a secret. Chairman McCurdy closed the public hearing. Mr. Hearn 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 Stephan Ross, for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the operation of a household goods warehousing and storage mini-warehouse facility in the CG (Commercial, General) Zoning District including the variance that was gra Board of Adjustment meeting because it apparently is exactly what the community Motion seconded by Mr. Merritt. Chairman McCurdy stated that there was some discussion about the Architectural Standards and questioned if those standards would be reviewed prior to approval. Mr. Kelly confirmed that Staff would usually be sure they are met prior to permitting being allowed. He also stated that they could take a look at them prior to the Board of County Commissioners meeting. Mr. Al Brodeur stated that they did not have a problem with providing the elevations and having the standards reviewed prior to the Board meeting. 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 approval. P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 8of 14 AGENDA ITEM 4: NORTHWOOD L.L.C (DICKERSON-FLORIDA INC., AGENT) FILE NO. CU-03-013: Mr. Alan Bottorff, LBFH, Inc. stated that he represents Dickerson-Florida and Northwood L.L.C who are planning a proposed mine on Carlton Road. He stated that it has come to their attention that there is a lot of misinformation in the area about this project and some major public concern. He advised petition forward with that kind of a feeling from the public. He requested that their petition be postponed to the April 15, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting in order to give them an opportunity to meet with the public. He continued that they are planning on having an open house on April 7, 2004 from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. He stated that the location is tentatively going to be the Holiday Inn but that they have not finalized the location yet. He advised that this open house is designed for the public to be able to talk with the landowners, engineers, and mine operators so that they may address any questions or concerns they might have. He again requested that their petition be continued to the April 15, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting at 7:00 p.m. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Mr. Curtis Schirad stated that he was very upset over this application. He also stated that he did not feel their request for a continuance should be honored. He requested that the application be denied. He also stated that he felt there was no need for the applicant to have a workshop because they know the affects of a mine being near their properties already. He was very upset and asked that this request be denied. Ms. Alysia Sickles questioned when this petition would be before the Board of County Commissioners if their request to continue to the April 15, 2004 meeting is honored. Mr. Kelly stated that the next Board of County Commissioners meeting after the April 15, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission would be May 18, 2004. He also stated that notices would be sent out again showing the Board of County Commissioners meeting date and that the sign on the property would also be changed and another ad would be placed in the newspaper. Ms. Joan Schirad stated that she was not in favor of this request. She asked that the to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of denial. Ms. Stacy Brown stated that she did not want to have this application postponed; she requested it just be denied. Mr. Robby Norville also stated that he was not in favor of this request. He requested that the Planning and Zoning Commission deny this application for a conditional use permit. Mr. Jim Morgan stated that the Florida Rock mine was approved many years ago. He stated that they were only supposed to mine for ten years and they said after that time they would be building golf courses. He advised that they have never built any golf courses, are still mining, and actually just requested an extension of their mining hours. He asked that this petition be denied. Ms. Cheri Gannon stated that she had petitions signed by people living in the neighborhood who were against this request and asked they be submitted into record. Mr. Terry Hoxie stated that the residents already have issues with the existing Florida 500-foot notice to the property owners surrounding this property is sufficient. Ms. Debbie Schirad stated that they do not want another mine in their area and that they are not interested in hearing what the applicants have to say at their open house. P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 9of 14 request please stand. A large number of people in the audience stood up. Mr. Hearn questioned if the Planning and Zoning Commission were obligated to continue this petition since the applicant requested it. Ms. Young stated that there was no legal in the past. Mr. Hearn stated that he would prefer to hear this petition tonight. Mr. Akins stated that he did not feel it would be productive to hear this request tonight because the applicant has requested a continuance. Ms. Francis Dara asked that the request be denied especially since the area already needs road improvements and this request would only make the need greater. Mr. Hearn stated that he felt there was no need to continue this meeting. He stated that the applicant could still hold their open house after this meeting before their petition goes to the Board of County Commissioners. Mr. John Mullins stated that he would like to see the request for a continuance denied and that they hear this petition tonight and then recommend denial to the Board of County Commissioners. Ms. Jane Morgan stated that she did not feel this petition should be continued because no request. Seeing no one else, Chairman McCurdy closed the public hearing. request. Mr. Lounds made a motion to continue the application of Northwood L.L.C. to the April 15, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. Motion seconded by Mr. Merritt. After a roll call vote the motion was approved with a vote of 6-1 (with Mr. Hearn voting against) and continued to the April 15, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting at 7:00 p.m. P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 10of 14 AGENDA ITEM 5: ORDINANCE 04-006 RETAIL FIREWORKS: Ms. Mackenzie-Smith, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 5 was Draft Ordinance 04-006, which would amend the Land Development Code by creating Section 7.10.25 (originally numbered as Section 7.10.24) to regulate placement of firework retail stores. Sections 3.01.03(S) Commercial General and 3.03.03(T) Industrial Light and 3.01.03(U) Industrial Heavy Zoning Districts are amended to provide for fireworks retail stores as a conditional use subject to the following requirements. She stated that the fireworks stores shall be at least one thousand (1,000) feet from any other fireworks retail store, established gas station, school, public playground, public park, and residential zoning districts. Staff recommends that the Local Planning Agency forward Draft Ordinance 04-006 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Mr. Merritt questioned what the need was for this ordinance. Ms. Mackenzie-Smith stated that the Board of County Commissioners recommended creating an ordinance when the ordinance regarding firework sales in tents was presented to them. Mr. Merritt questioned if there had been any complaints regarding this. Ms. Mackenzie-Smith stated she was not aware of any complaints and that the fire district felt the proposed ordinance was acceptable. Mr. Merritt stated that he believed the thousand (1,000) feet requirement was unrealistic. on this until they have some idea if that is a requirement that anyone would be able to ure that a thousand feet was enough and questioned where this number came from. Mr. Merritt stated that he is a member of the American Pyrotechnics Association and that the only explosion documented was not in a retail establishment, it was in a manufacturing plant. Chairman McCurdy stated that he was not sure that this ordinance, as it is currently get more information. Mr. Akins stated that he agreed that there should not be any action on this tonight. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman McCurdy closed the public hearing. Mr. Hearn made a motion to continue Draft Ordinance 04-006 to the April 15, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. Motion seconded by Mr. Lounds. Upon a vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 7-0) and continued to the April 15, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 11of 14 AGENDA ITEM 6: ORDINANCE 04-007 BOARD ENFORCEMENT: Ms. Mackenzie-Smith, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 6 was proposed Ordinance 04-007 and would amend the Land Development Code by amending Section 11.13.03, Enforcement Procedures for Code Enforcement, in the St. Lucie County Land Development Code by providing for clarification of the enforcement procedures. She continued that under the proposed ordinance, enforcement of Land Development Code violations would be as set forth in Sections 1-2-19 through 1-2-27.5 of the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances and Complied Laws. Staff recommends that the Local Planning Agency forward proposed Ordinance 04-007 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Mr. Akins questioned if this request was to make the Code and Complied Laws and the Land Development Code consistent with one another. Ms. Mackenzie-Smith confirmed that was correct. Mr. Akins questioned if there was any criminal element to this proposed ordinance. Ms. Mackenzie Smith stated there was not a criminal element. Mr. Lounds questioned if this ordinance would dissolve the Code Enforcement Board. Ms. Mackenzie Smith stated that it would not. Mr. Lounds questioned what director was previously responsible for the enforcement of these issues. Ms. Mackenzie Smith stated that it was previously either the Public Works Director or the Community Development Director. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman McCurdy closed the public hearing. Mr. Merritt made a motion to approve Ordinance 04-007 and forward it to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Upon a vote the motion was unanimously approved (with a vote of 7-0) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 12of 14 AGENDA ITEM 7: ORDINANCE 04-016 STORAGE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS: Ms. Heather Young, presenting Staff comments, stated that Agenda Item # 7 was proposed Ordinance No. 04-016, which would amend the Land Development Code by creating Section 7.10.25 to establish height limitations for outside storage containers at warehouses and storage services-stockyards. She advised that an intermodal container is a type of container, which may be loaded on a ship, a train, or a tractor-trailer. She also stated that under the proposed ordinance, the containers could not be stacked in excess of sixteen (16) feet. She stated that the standard height of a container is eight (8) feet. She continued that the original draft ordinance was presented in their packages but for the purposes of clarification that ordinance had been revised to add a definition for only be permitted in the IH (Industrial, Heavy) Zoning Districts, pursuant to a conditional use permit for a warehouse and/or storage service. She continued that the height limitation remains at sixteen (16) feet. Staff recommends that the Local Planning Agency forward proposed Ordinance No. 04- 016 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Mr. Merritt questioned what the need for this ordinance was. Mr. Hearn questioned what was 15 feet for all containers. Mr. Hearn stated that the Port development was necessary for quality jobs with the least affect on the environment and would be a benefit to St. Lucie County. Mr. Lounds questioned if the packinghouses would be affected when they stack up their picking bins. Mr. Hearn stated that he believed they would be under the sixteen (16) foot limit. Mr. McCurdy stated that he did not believe this ordinance would affect packinghouses. Ms. Young stated that the Harbor Advisory Committee stated that the city allows for stacking of two containers high. He continued that he feels this ordinance should allow for that or else if the cargo port develops it could result in them not moving into St. Lucie County. Chairman McCurdy opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Chairman McCurdy closed the public hearing. Mr. Lounds made a motion to approve Ordinance 04-016, as amended in the supplement memo and draft ordinance, and forward to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Upon a roll call vote the motion was approved with a vote of 4-3 (with Ms. Morgan, Mr. Merritt, and Mr. McCurdy voting against) and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 13of 14 OTHER BUSINESS / DISCUSSION: The next scheduled meeting will be April 15, 2004. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting was adjourned at 10:25 P.M. Respectfully submitted: ____________________________________ Dawn V. Gilmore, Administrative Secretary P&Z / LPA Special Meeting March 25, 2004 Page 14of 14