HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Development Code Revisions Minutes 02-07-2006BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISIONS
FOR THE T.V.C. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Date: February 7, 2006 Convened: 1:30 p.m.
Tape: 1-2 Adjourned: 3:30 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Doug Coward, Chairman, Chris Craft, Paula A. Lewis, Frannie
Hutchinson, Joseph Smith
Others Present: Doug Anderson, County Administrator, Fan McIntyre, County Attorney,
Michael Brillhart, Strategy and Special Project Director, Millie Delgado-Feliciano,
Deputy Clerk
Ms. Marcela Campor, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council made opening remarks.
Mr. Bill Spikowski, representing Planning Associates, Inc., made a presentation.
Mr. Spikowski stated the Urban Service Boundary would not be changing, however the
mean does slightly inside and outside.
The zoning would remain the same until petitioned for change.
He advised those present there are two changes, 1) rezoning required 2) those that do not
require a change in zoning.
Not required:
a) expanding of agricultural activities
b) building a home on a lot
c) selling TDR credits
d) selling 90% of TDR credit and subdivide 10%
e) remaining into sub-lots
Would require:
a) building stores and apartments within the Urban Service Boundary (PRW zone)
b) subdividing a tract into lots at previous density levels -PCS
c) PTV zone- new Town and Village Concept
Mr. Spikowski reviewed the hand out regarding the LDR Overlay
Com. Coward commented on targeted industries and asked where they would be a
permitted use.
Mr. Spikowski stated they can go into avillage/town under the mixed use business
district definition page 59.
Com. Coward stated he wanted to make sure flexibility was present and stated there was
some confusion when speaking about "countryside". He asked it clearly be stated that
there will be a minimum of open space around the town and villages.
Mr. John Martin, Johnston Road property owner questioned the options for small parcel
property owners and would like for there to be a difference in the PUD process vs. the
PCS zone.
Mr. Tom Babcock, resident question the PCS zone and its reference to chapter 7 of the
development standards, page 57, "open space standards" 80% minimum open space,
20% developable would equate to 5 units per acre and stated they would not be able to
~~ ~~ ~~
achieve such density on well and septic. He questioned how a developer would have
clarity today s to what he would be able to develop in the future.
Mr. David Moran resident advised the Board there is presently a contract on 33 acres on
Indrio and Johnston Road and asked what exactly was a town center and it be or must it
be mixed uses and questioned where the flow system would go.
Mr. Scott Horton, Kolter Developers questioned who would be the appropriate entity to
discuss the utilities issue.
Mr. Bob Bangert, area resident, addressed the Board and commended them on moving
forward with the plan .
Mr. John Baker, property owner, requested clarification on what defines a "town".
Mr. Tom Babcock, stated as a developer he needed to have flexibility and he is pleased
with the wording on page 16, however he asked how it would be handled if there is only
developable land of 5 units per acre.
Mr. Spikowski stated the density needed to be met on the entire neighborhood.
Mr. Baker questions if he was required to provide 6 units per acre.
He was advised he would not be required (page 68).
Ms. Camblor stated they would not require 40% of open space.
Mr. Moran stated the flow way and the countryside needs additional work.
Mr. Martin stated the PUD is very broad and allows a lot more variety. The PCS is a
specialized district with minimum lot sizes, residential estate lots '/z acre the procedure
would be the same.
The Board thanked the Regional Planning Council and stated they looked forward to
continue working with them and staff on the TVC project.
The meeting was adjourned.
2