Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBrown, J P & P R Winbush· July 15, 1988 DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR L. Craig for James P. Bowman Pennington R. Winbush O. Box 2549 West Palm Beach, FL 33402 Dear Mr. Craig: letter is to confirm that on June 22, 1988 the St. Lucie Board of County commissioners denied the petition of James Bowman and Pennington R. Winbush, Trustees, for a change in use from SU (semi Urban) to X (Interchange) for property ~ated on the north side of State Road 70 (Okeechobee Road), · oximately 670 ft. east of Coolidge Road. of recorded Resolution No. 88-196 is enclosed for your format ion. OF cOUNTY COMMISSIONERS LUCIE cOUNTY, FLORIDA Krieger ,-- chairman :losure FENN, District No. 1 e JUDY CULPEI~ER, District No. 2 · JACK KRIEGER, District No. 3 ® R. DALE TREFELNER. District No. 4 · JIM MIN~X, District No. 5 County AOrninistraror - WELDON B. LEWIS · 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce, FL 34982-5652 e Phone (407) 466-I t O0 Ext. 398 ® Building: Ext. 344 · Planning: EXt. 3t6 · Zoning: Ext. 344 · Code Enforcement: Ext. 294 RESOLUTION NO. 88-196 FILE NO.: PA-8?-031 A RESOLUTION DENYING A PROPOSED CHANGE IN THE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made the following determinations: 1. James P. Bowman and Pennington Winbush presented a petition for a change in land use from SU (Semi Urban) to X (Interchange) for the property described as follows: (See Attached Exhibit A) 24 The St. Lucie County Local Planning_ Age-n-cy, held a_ public hearing on the.petition, after publishing notice at. least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing and has recommended that the Board .deny the hereinafter described request for change in land use classification from SU (Semi Urban) to X (Interchange) for the property described above~ 3. On JUne 22, 1988, this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Fort Pierce News Tribune on June 16, 1988. 4. The proposed land use change would be inconsistent with surrounding single family/low density residential character and the Policies #13, #16, #17, #23, #25, #26, #27 and #53 of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan. ~0~ EXHIBIT "A" Lot ii of the Southeast quarter of MODEL LAND COMPANY'S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, as .per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page !0, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying West of the West right-of-way line of the Sunshine State Parkway; less the South 69.40 feet of the East 161.24 feet thereof. AND the West 515 feet of Lot 14 of the Southeast Qua~er of MODEL LAND COMPANY'S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 EaSt as per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page 10, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying North of the North right-of-way line of State Roa~ ND. 70. AND that portion of Lot 10 of the Southeast Quarter of MODEL LAND COMPANY'S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, as per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page 10, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying West of the West right-of-way line of the Sunshine State Parkway; less the South 69.40 feet thereof. SU CT RL BLUE RED PURPLE PETITION OF JAM£S P. BOWMAN AND PENNINGTON WIN~USH BY AGENT: STEVEN L, CRAIG FOR A CHANGE I'N THE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION FROM SU TO × AR-1 CT AG I RED BLUE BROWN PURPLE 25-55- PETITION OF JAMES P. BQWMAN AND PENNING~ON WIN~USH BY AGENT: STEVEN L, CRAIG FOR A CHANGE IN THE LAND USE [iLASSIFtCATION FROM SU TO X BOARD OF COUNTY COMNIS§IONERS ST_. LUCIE COUNTYz. FLORIDA SPECIAL MEETING Date: June 22, 1988 Tape: #1 - #3 convened: 7:08 p.m. adjourned: ll:.50 p.m. Commissioners Present: Chairman Jack Krieger; Vice-Chairman Havert L. Fenn; Oim Minlx; Judy Culpepper; R. Dale Trefelner. Others Present: Daniel McIntyre, County Attorney; Terry Virta, Community Development Director; Dennis Murphy, Rlanning Administrator; Walter Smith, Sheriff's Office; Oane C. Marsh, Deputy Clerk The purpose of this meeting is to hold public hearings for the following petitions for a Change in Land Use and Change in Zoning. Rroof of publication was presented for each, of the following petitions. 2. 3AMES p__~. BOWMAN AND PENNINGTON WINBUSH Reference was made to memorandum from Pianning Administrator, addressed to the Board,.dated June i6, 1988, subject ,,Petition of James P. Bowman and Pennington, Winbush, for a Change in Land Use from SU (Semi-Urban) to X (Interchange Development)" The petitioners propose to develop an office warehouse park on this site. The following people were-present to address this issue: Steven Craig, Agent for petitioner; Marta Zimmery, on behalf of the petitioner; Charles Pallas and Louis Forget. It was moved by Com. Minix, seconded by Com. Fenn,. to accept staff recommendation to deny Ordinance No. 88-62, an- ~rdi~ance amending the St. Lucie County Growth Management R'olicy Rlan, Ordinance No. 86-01, by changing the land use designation of the property located on the North side of State Road 70 (Okeechobee Road), 672' East of Coolidge Road (more particularly described herein) from SU (Semi-Urban) to X (Interchange); making fihdings; providing for making the necessary changes on the St. Lucie County ZOning Atlas; providing for conflicting provisions and severability; providing for filing with the Department of State and Department of Community Affairs and for ac effective date'and adoption; for.reasons of inconsistency with the general land use policies of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Rolicy Plan and surroundingrresidential uses; and, upon roll call, the vote was as follows: Aye: Coms. Minix, Fenn, Krieger; Nay: Coms~ Trefelner, CUlpepper; therefore, the motion carried by~a three to two ......... WATER 206 S. SIXTH STREET * P. O. BOX 3191  GAS SEWER FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 33450 - PHONE (305) 464-5600 June 21; 1988 Mr. Steven L. Craig P. O. Box 2549 West Palm Beach, Florida 33402 SUBJECT: Wa~er & Wastewater Availability - 12 Acres We.s~ of Turnpike on North side of Okeechebee Road Dear Mr. Craig: In response to our various conversations concerning water and wastewater service to the subject project site, it is best to address the following subjects individually: WATER: Water service is presently available on Okeechobee Road just east of Kings Highway. In order to supply water service to the project site, it would be necessary to extend the existing main west to the subject property (see attached map). ® WASTEWATER: To provide wastewater service to the project site would require a pumping station (lift station) at the property. The lift station would connect to a pressurized sewer main (force main) which would need to be extended west from its present terminus on Okeechobee Road (see attached map). SCgEDULE OF CHARGES: Expense for construction of facilities would be borne by the developer. Ail construction is expected to be in conformance with utilities Authority specifications, and upon completion of construction will be turned over to the utilities Authority for operation and maintenance. In addition to these expenditures, there are additional charges levied by the utilities Authority based upon the number of dwelling units served. I have attached a copy of our rate structure as it exists today. Payment of the appropriate fees and charges will be required, at a minimum, at the time of request of service. Page 2 Letter to Mr. Steven L. Craig June 21, 1988 If you have any further questions concerning the issues of water and wastewater, please do not hesitate to contact this office at 464-5600, extension 423. Very truly yours, David A. Mellert Sanitary Engineer I DAM: cm At t achment s WASTEWATER SUPPLY AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this 21st day of March , 1988 by and between the FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTH--ORITY (hereinafter referred to as "Authority,,) and FORT PIERCE JAI ALAI, INC. and Ko TERRANCE MOCK, TRUSTEE (hereinafter referred to collectively as "Company,,). The complex name is to be PETERS AND GRAHAM ROAD SERVICE AREA (hereinafter referred to as the "Complex,,). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Authority is the governing body authorized to enter into agreements relating to the use of wastewater supply of the City of Fort Pierce, and WHEREAS, FORT PIERCE JAI ALAI, INC. (hereinafter referred to as "JAI ALAI,'), the owner of Fort Pierce Jai Alai Fronton, desires to bring wastewater service to its facility located on the real property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof, and WHEREAS, K. TERRANCE MOCK, as Trustee, and owners of other property in the wastewater supply area desire to participate in the cost and benefits of installation of said wastewater system, said Participants (along with a legal description of each participant,s property) being identified on Exhibit "B" at~ached hereto and made a part hereof (hereinafter referred to as "Participants,,), and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the parties to this Agreement that the Participants shall be third party beneficiaries of any and all rights granted to the Company herein, and waste~tP~erAS~~A~_I_c°n~emp~TM immediate utilization of the and ~=~ ~u service r2~e Fort Pierce Jai Atai Pronton, WHEREAS, the Participants do not anticipate immediate use of futurethe wastewaterdate, andSystembut anticipate the use of same at some WHEREAS, the Authority has determined it to be to its best ~od~et~e and betterment to extend wastewater facilities to the NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged it is mutually agreed as follows: , 1. The Authority agrees to participate in the cost of construction of the "Project,,. As used herein the term "Project- shall mean: , (1) the construction of wastewater facilities (as determined by the aut~hority) which meet the minimum standards and requirements established by the Authority to provide adequate service to the Complex alone, plus (2) any over sizing and/or additional facilities being necessary by the Authority to provide service to present and/or future customers not associated with the Complex. 2. Based upon a reView of cost estimates submitted by the Company's consulting engineer, the Authority,s contribution to the total construction costs of the Project shall be the cost of the over sizing and/or additional facilities required to adequately service the Project and shall be an amount equal to Twenty Three Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Three and 20/100 Dollars ($23,523.20). Said funds shall be placed in a special construction account (hereinafter referred to as "Special Construction Account"). 3. The Authority has determined the facilities required to serve the entire Project (Complex requirements plus over sizing requirements) shall be one thousand four hundred seventy three feet (1,473 feet) of eight inch (8") PVC gravity sewer main, six thousand six hundred five feet (6,605 feet) of six inch (6") PVC force main, one (1) eight-foot (8 feet) diameter lift station as described in more detail under plans prepared by Cuipepper and Turpening and approved by the Authority. 4. Biddable plans and specifications in conformance with established Authority standards and requirements, and all necessary easements, will be provided for the Project by the Company. At that time, the Authority will put the Project out to bid. The Company reserves the right to negotiate a contract for the installation of facilities in lieu of a formal bid. The Authority will provide inspection of construction, certification of the Project the preparation of as-built drawings at no cost to Company. 5. The Company shall have the right to review all bids submitted relative to the acquisition of material and the installation of material. In the event the Company, in its sole judgment, determines the prices or costs specified in said bids to be unreasonable or not properly reflective of competitive prices for said materials and/or work, and shall so indicate its determination to the Authority, then, at the Company's request, the Authority shall reject said bids, and at the request of the Company, shall proceed to advertise and receive new bids for said materials and/or services. 6o The Company shall provide funds to cover the entire costs of construction for the Project by depositing cash with the Authority in an amount equal to the amount listed in paragraph 4 above (final accepted bid price for the Project) less the Authority's contribution in the Special Construction Account. Such funding shall be made by the Company prior to or concurrent with the corresponding commitment for the purchase of material and/or services entered into between the Authority and the designated contractor. 7. In addition to providing said funds to the Authority in the manner described hereinabove in paragraph 4, the Company shall provide funds for any additional and/or unanticipated expenses incurred during the construction of the Project. 8. The Authority agrees to deposit said Project construction cash funds in a special construction account in a financial institution of the Company,s choice located within the city limits of Fort Pierce, Florida. If the Company has no preference, the Authority will make the selection. The Authority will be entitled to draw upon said account as required in order to fund individual contractor draws provided that each of said draws by the Authority upon said account shall be accompanied by a certificate from the Authorit's en ' th ........... Y glneer which certifies that L~= uontrac~or is entitled to a certain draw as a result of a 2 corresponding of the contract having been completed. As said certificates are issued by the Authority's engineer, copies of same shall be furnished to the Company. 9. The Authority agrees to obtain the highest interest rates available on said Project construction cash funds consistent with applicable laws, rules and regulations pertaining to the investment procedures of the Authority; and interest thus earned shall be accumulated and retained in said account and shall enure to the benefit of the Project, in that said accumulated interest shall be available to support a portion of the cost of subsequent phases of the Project. 10. For purposes of this contract, the Company's duly authorized agent is STEVEN L. CRAIG, Esquire, c/o Wood, Cobb, Murphy & Craig, Fifth Floor, Comeau Building, 319 Clematis Street West Palm Beach, Florida 33401. ' 11. The Project shall be considered completed upon the issuance of the certification of completion by the Authority,s engineer. In the event tha~ there shall be any funds remaining in the Special Construction Account, which exceed the final, total construction costs of the Project, said funds, together with interest, shall be returned to the Company within thirty (30) days from the date that the Project is completed. 12. In addition to the construction costs described in the paragraphs hereinabove, the Company and each Participant described hereinabove will pay the customary and the current Wastewater Capital Improvement Charges in effect at the time actual connections are made to the complex facilities. If any portion of the Wastewater Capital Improvement Charge should include some amount for construction, said construction amount shall be deducted from the Wastewater Capital Improvement Charge. Since the Company and the Participants have paid for the installation of the wastewater facilities, the Authority hereby assures the Company and each Participant that sufficient wastewater capacity will be available to the Company and Participants at such time as they may desire to make connections to the wastewater facilities. Sufficient wastewater capacity is agreed to mean sufficient force main and treatment capacity. The Company and each participant, at the time tha~ they connect to the wastewater facilities, shall be responsible for the cost of the upgrading of any pumps and electrical controls for said pumps (in their system or any tributary system) required to be upgraded because of said connection. Should the Complex, or any portion thereof, be annexed into the City within five (5) years from the date of payment of the Capital Improvement Charges, the Authority will refund to the Company or the affected Participant the difference between the in-city rate and the out-of-town rate on a pro rata basis - 1st year 100%; 2nd year 80%; 3rd year 60%; 4th year 40% and 5th year 20%. 13. The Company and each Participant shall be required to execute an agreement that its property shall be annexed into the city limits of Fort Pierce if and when its property becomes contiguous to the city limits. 14. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto, the Participants and their respective successors and assigns. 15. The Authority agrees that anyone who participates in the cost of the installation of the wastewater facilities contemplated herein (whether or not listed in Exhibit "B") shall be entitled to all of the benefits and rights of participants in this Agreement upon proof to the Authority of their participation in the cost of the installation of said wastewater facilities. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. ? nes~s~ ~-itness FORT/~ERCE JAI ALAI, INC. Pres ident - K. TERRANCE MOCK, Truste~ APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS UTILITIES AUTHORITY ATTORNEY C1TY CLERK CiTY AI';TD. RNEY CITY OF FORT PIERCE I~YOR WTLLIg/vt R. Dg2qNg/q~R EXHIBIT A SCHEDULE A Attached to Deed from WJA Realty Limited Partnership to City National Bank of Miami, Truc:ce TRACT A: . The South 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 13, Township 35 South,.Range 39 East, Excepting therefrom the right of way for Kings Highway and also excepting therefrom the f611owing described property, to-wit: From the SW corner of said South 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 run East 25 feet to the East right of way of Kings Highway for the Point of Beginning; thence continue East 333.4 feet; thence North 243.0 feet; thence West 333.4'feet to the East right of way of Kings Highway; thence South along the said East right of way 243 feet to the Point of Beginning, as delineated on a survey dated March 24, 1972, prepared by A. G. Weatherington and Associates, Inc.; Florida Certificate No. 1859. TRACT Bt The North 1/2 of the N-W 1/4 of the SW 1/4 Less the South 150 fee~ of the North 300 feet of the East 247 feet, 'more or less, of the West 272 feet, more or less, and LESS the West 134 feet of the East 218 feet of the South !65 feet of the North 337 feet and LESS the East 264 fee= of the West 536.4 feet of the North 334.41 feet; ALSO LESS AND EXCEPTING the right of way for Kings Highway (State Road 607), all lying and being in Section 13, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, as delineated on a survey dated March 24, 1972, prepared by A. G. W~--ATHERINGTON and Associates, Inc., Florida Certificate NOo 1859. TRACT C: The West 134 feet of the East 21B feet of the South 165 feet of the North 337 feet of the North 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of FloridaoSeCti°n i3, Township 35 South, Range 39 East~ St. Lucie County, FILED/-::D ~ECORDED° ._-ti.l: COU.~:Ty. FLA.' :.:.~Q::.: ... ~..?~:-~. '?9 J~ 17 Pkl 3'0~ RESOLUTION NO. U.A. 87-3 A RESOLUTION FIXING AND ESTABLISHING RATES AND CHARGES FOR T~E SERVICES AND FACILITIES FURNISHED BY T~E WATER SYSTEM AND THE WASTEWATER SYSTEM OF THE FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY, FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE NO. F-399 OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, SUPERCEDING AND RESCINDING THOSE RATES, FEES AND CFa~RGES FOR THE SERVICES AND FACILITIES FURNISHED BY THE WATER SYSTEM AND THE WASTEWATER SYSTEM SET FORTH IN RESOLUTION NO. UA. 80-4, 81-22, UA 82-14, UA 82-18, UA 83-i3, AND UA 85-2 OF TEE FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. W~EREA~, the FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY was created and established by Ordinance No. F-399 enacted by the City Commission of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida, and approved by a majority vote of the qualified electors of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida, in a referendum election held in said City on May 30, 1972; and WHEREAS, Section 8(6) of said Ordinance No. F-399 ~rants to said Fort Pierce Utilities Authority the power and duty to-f~ix rates to be charged for gas, electricity, water, sanitary sewer (wast~water system) and other utility services sold and services rendered by said Authority, NOW, T~!EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA: SECTION I. WATER SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE: The schedule of rates, fees and other charges to be imposed for the services and facilities furnished by the water system of the FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY, Fort Pierce, Florida, shall be subject to revision from time to time as may be necessary. The schedule thereof, which shall be applicable to all water service within the territory served by the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority with the exception of certain authorized contracts, shall be as follows: A. MONTHLy RATE: The minimum monthly rates and the quanti- ties of water included in the minimum will be determined by the serving water meter size as indicated below: READINESs TO SERVE CSL4RGE MINIMUM BILLS 3/4" water meter or smaller $ 6..05 1" water meter 13 70 1-1/2" water meter ' 2" water meter 27.40 42.70 3" water meter 87.30 4" water meter 129.40 6" water meter -259.75 8" water meter 427.00 10" water meter 596.00 GALLONS iNCLUDED IN MINIMUM 3,000 6,000 !2,000 i8,000 38,000 52,000 105,000 180,000 240,000 All additional water usage in excess of the minimum quantities shown above wilt be charged on the basis of monthly metered water usage at the race of $0.95 per 1,000 gallons. B. OUTSIDE CITer LIMITS: Outside City rates shall be one and one-quarter times the in-City rates. C. UTILIT"f TAX: A 10% utility tax shall be levied on the total charge for water delivered within the City limits. D. INSTALLATION CHARGES: The charges for water service installation for consumers located both within and without the City limits shall be as follows: 5/8x3/4 Inch Meter and Service $ 260.00 1 Inch Meter and Service 350.00 1-1/2 Inch Meter and Service 900.00 2 Inch Meter and Service 1,175.00 Greater than 2 Inch Meter and Service Actual Cost Vnere service lines have been installed at the expense of the developer of a subdivision, as required in Chapter 25 of the Code of Ordinances, the charge for me[er-on!y installation shall be made as follows: 5/8x3/4 Inch Meter and Service $ 100.00 1' Inch Meter and Service 145.00 1s1/2 Inch Meter and Service 575.00 2 Inch Meter and Service 730.00 Greater than 2 Inch Meter and Service Actual Cost E. WATER DELIVERED THROU~ FIRE EYDRANT METERS: ~nere water is delivered through a fire hydrant meter on a temporary basis, the ~' applicant shall agree that such service may be discontinued by the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority a: any time for emergency usage of the fire hydrant without any liability of the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority whatsoever for such discontinuance of supply. The charges for temporary water service delivered through a fire hydrant meter shall be as follows: First: Second: Third: Fourth: A service charge of $50.00 Rates as applicable under Readiness to Serve Charge and the Additional Usage Charge. The Outside City Charge Shall be one and one-quarter times the Inside City Charge. A charge of $25.00 each time a meter is moved. All removal of meters shall be done by the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority forces and if removed by other than Fort Pierce Utilities Authority forces, a penalty charge of $I00 shall be incurred by the party so doing. F. CEARGES FOR UNMETERED FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE: This will include service to private hydrants, sprinkler systems, hose cabinets, standpipes, or any other device used exclusively for fire protection. The annual charge for unmetered private fire protection shall be: Service Diameter Inches Annual Amount 3 $ 62.00 4 86.00 6 I73.00 8 297. O0 !0 396.0D -2- The charges for fire protection services outside the Ci~y limits shall be one and one-quarter times the above (in-City) charge. a. CHARGES FOR CHANGE OF LOCATION OR SIZE OF SERVICE OR METER: Applicants desiring a change in the location or arrangement of service or the meter, whether it involves a change in size or not, must bear all cost of labor, materials, equipment, and overhead necessary to effect the desired change. Where an increase in size of service or meter is required, the applicant shall bear all costs of labor, materials, equipment, and overhead, up to and including the meter, reduced by an allowance for the existing meter trade-in value as set forth hereinafter. Meter trade-in values shall be computed on a five-year basis and shall include the cost of the meter only. No meter trade-in allowance shall be granted for meters installed for more than five years. Allowance for meter trade-in value (All Meters): Years in Service Percent of Current New Meter Value 0-1 83% 1-2 6 7% 2-3 50% 3-4 33% 4-5 t7% E. MINIMUM CONDITIONS FOR SERVICES: The Fort Pierce Utilities Authori:y reserves the right to establish the minimum conditions under which a service may be installed. Io SCHEDULE OF WATER CAPITAL I~fPROVEMEh~ CHARGES: Description · Residential With 5/8x3/4 inch meter, & apartments, e°ndominiums, mobile homes & trailer parks Motel - Motel Residential with larger than 3/4y~5/8 inch meter, commercial, industrial & other establishments-per meter size: 5/8 x 3/4 inch 1 inch i-1/2 inch 2 inch 3 inch 4 inch 6 inch 8 inch 10 inch inside City Rate- Water Outside City Rate - Water $ 350 per $ 437.50 per dweli ing dwe I 1 ing mni~* unit* 210 per unit 262.50 per unit 350 437.50 625 781.25 1,250 1,562.50 2,500 3,125.00 5,000 6,250.00 10,000 12,500.00 20,000 25,000.00 ~0,000 50,000.00 60,000 75,000. 00 -3- Description Inside Ci:v Rate - Water Fire protection only (Fire Hydrants & stand- pipes, not metered) OUtS~ '~ ClZv Rate . _~Wat er inch 500 625.00 inch 750 938.50 inch 1,000 1,250.00 inch 1,500 1,875.00 inch 2,000 2,500.00 *Dwelling unit shall be defined as a single unit providing complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and ~anitation. SECTION II. WASTEWATER (SEWER) SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE The schedule of rates, fees and other charges to be imposed for the services and facilities furnished by the wastewater (sewer) service system of the FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY, Fort Pierce, Florida, shall be subject to revision from time to time as may be necessary. The schedule thereof, which shall be applicable to all wastewater (sewer) service within the territory served by the FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY, shall be as follows: A. MONTHLY RATE: Readiness to Serve Charge (Minimum Monthly Bill): Each accoun: shall be charged the following amounts according to the size of water meter for such account: Size of Water Meter Readiness to Serve Charge (Minimum Bill) 3/4" meter or smaller $ 3.60 !" meter 9.00 1-I/2" meter 18.00 2" meter 28.80 3" me,er 57.60 4" meter 90.00 6" meter 180.00 8" meter 288.00 10" meter 414.00 B. USAGE: All wastewater service will be charged on the basis of monthly metered waner usage at the rate of: $ 1.73, per 1,000 Gallons C. MAX!MIIM CHARGE RESIDENTIAL: The maximum monthly wastewater charge for individually metered single family residen:ial customers in any month shall not exceed an amount computed as the readiness to serve charge plus the usage charge, up to and including 10,000 gallons of required monthly service. Any meter serving more than one single family residential unit shall be billed monthly based on actual wa~er usage, -4- D. MAXIMUM CHARG~E NON-RESIDENTIAL: Wastewater disposal service charges are based on quantity of wastewater discharged to the Fort Fierce Utilities Authority System. If all water entering an establishment will not be discharged to the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority Wastewater System, a separate water meter may be installed on the water line which discharges to the wastewater system. Such meters shall be installed and maintained at the expense of the user, and the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority shall, at all times, have access to such meters for the purpose of inspecting, testing, repairing, replacing, or reading such meters. Where no provision is made to meter the wastewater and water discharged to the wastewater system, wastewater charges shall be based on the total metered water use at the premises served. E. OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS: Outside City rates shall be one and one-quarter times the in-city rates. F. SURCHARGE FOR STRONG WASTE: To the above rates and charges, there shall be an added surcharge of .1% for each ppm of suspended solids in excess of 300 ppm and/or grease in excess of 100 ppm, and .125% for each ppm of 5-day 40~C, B0D in excess of 250 ppm, all as determined by the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority from samples and tests made of the customer's sewage. The Fort Pierce Utilities Authority may require customers discharging such strong wastes into the system to construct control manholes to facilitate observation and sampling. Customers discharging more than 2% of the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority's daily sewage flow may be required to construct special holding tanks so as to release quantity at an even rate over a 24-hour period, or discharge at off-peak hours as dete~"mined by the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority. G. OTHER FACILITIES: Any facility us{rig the Wastewater System, not included in the above categories, $~ail be charged an amount to be determined by the Director of Utilities or his authorized~ representative of the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority. This charge will be billed monthly. E. SCHEDULE OF WASTEWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT CHARGES: Description Residential with 5/8x3/4 inch meter, & apartments, condominiums, mobile homes & trailer parks Inside City Rate - Water Outside City Rate - Water $ 550 per $ 687.50 per dwelling dwelling unit* unit* Hotel - Motel 330 per unit 4!2.50 per. unit -5- D~escript ion Inside City Rate - Water Outside Czty Rate - Water Residential with larger than 3/4x5/8 inch meter, commercial, industrial & other establishments-per meter size: 5/8 x 3/4 inch 550 687.50 1 inch 937 1,171.25 1-1/2 inch 1,875 2,343.75 2 inch 3,750 4,687.50 3 inch 7,500 9,375.00 4 inch 15,000 18,750.00 6 inch 30,000 37,500.00 8 inch 60,000 75,000.00 10 inch 90,000 112,500.00 *Dwelling unit shall be defined as a single unit providing complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. I. SEWER SERVICE INSTALLATION CHARGES: Where no lateral exists from the sewer main to the property line, costs of installation of the sewer service will be actual costs incurred by the Fort Pierce Utiities Authority. EXCEPTION: Any property assessed for sewer service during past sewer assessment programs shall be exempt from paying the lateral installation charge. Capital Improve- ment Charges shall still be required. SECTION III. The monies collected from the Capital Improve- menu Charges provided for in Sections I and II of this Reso!utiou, shall be deposited in the Utilities Revenue Fund and shall be used for capital projects and improvements or retiring on, tending debt service. SECTION IV. The General Government of the City of Fo~t " Pierce, Florida, shall be exempt from all established Capital Improvement Charges. SECTION V. Upon adoption of this Resolution, and effective date thereof, the rates, fees and other charges hereinabove set forth in Section I and II of this Resolution shall be fixed and established as an Order of the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority and shall supercede and rescind those rates, fees and charges set forth in Resolution U.A. 80-4, Resolution U.A. 81-22, Resolution U.A. 82-I4, Resolution U.A. 82-18, Resolution U.A. 83-13, and Resolution U.A. 85-2. SECTION VI. This resolution shall be and become effective March 2, !987. This the l?th day of March, A.D. 1987. ./Secretary [ ~ ×.f~ irman APPROV~D.,f~S T.O FOP~ ~,z~--:CORR.ECTNESS ~¥: [-f'~z-z,,'.2>,.'/,.':/? ~" j2u..,e..-,-;~.y/- Fort Pierce Utilities Authority Attorney COMMISSISN REVIEW: J~NZ 22, 19IS AGENDA ITEM: FILE NO.: PA-S7-031 ORDINANCE NO.: #S~-&2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: County Administrator County Commission Planning Administrator June 16, 1988 Petition of James p. Bowman and Penningtonf WinbUsh, for a Change in Land Use from SU (Semi2 Urban) to X (Interchange Development) On Wednesday, June 22, 1988 ou wi . petition on behalf Of James p ~-Y i! be asked to review ~ a cnanae in ~=~ ..-~ ~ . ~owman an~ Pennin~ ........ ~ _ __ ~ . ~,,~ u~ from gu to v =__ . ~uuli wlnDush fo~ north siGe of State R~=~ ~n .... ~_.zor proper~y located .... / ~ ,u %uKeechobee Road/ a ......... ~ un? feet east of Coolidge-Road. The petitioners propose' ~uazma~e±Yto develop670an office warehouse park on this site. This petition was presented to the Planning Agency on ~anuary 7, 1988. At St. Lucie County Local that the Board of qounty Commissioners that hearing, the Local Planning Agency voted five (5) to one (1) vote to recommend that it not be transmitted to the Florida deny this petition and Department of Community Affairs for the required agency review-in accordance wit~ Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. On January 14, 1988, this Board voted to forward this petition- to the Department of Community Affairs for further review. On April 25, 1988,, review comments were returned to St. Lucie County in regard to this petition. This particular item was found by the Department of Community Affairs not to conform with the internal consistency requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statues. It was also determined by the Department of Community Affairs that the proposed change in land use was inconsistent with the adopted land use policies of St. Lucie County Specific policies in conflict are #13, #16 , ' #53. , #17 #23, #25, #26, #27, and Comments received from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council indicated that the proposed amendment was inconsistent with the existing andi proposed low density development in this area. This amendment is inconsistent with Council policy which states that new development should be compatible with and complementary to surrounding land uses. Treasure Coast Regional June 16, 1988 Page 2 Petition: Bowman and Winbush File: PA-8?-031 Planning Council also noted that this change in land use woulid create an isolated industrial pocket in a residential area. County staff stands by its original recommendations of January 1988, and at this time recommends that this Board deny this requested change in land~ use. Staff is still of the opinion that the proposed amendment is inconsistent with the general land use policies of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan and surrounding residential uses. Attached for your revie~ is a copy of our original staff report and the minutes of the previous meetings on this issue. Consistent with Board policy,~ attached you will find a copy of Draft Ordinance #88-62, whic~ would grant approval to this requested change in land use. If you have any questions on this matter, please let me know. CONCURRENCE: DTerry L. Vir-~a c~~ evelopment/Director ~Dani.el S. McIn~yr~- uoun~y Attor~y iii DJM/DBS/meg Attachment BOWMAN6(Dg) cc: County Attorney Steven L. Craig Commission Secretary Press/Public WEDNE~ .~; AGENDA - BOARD OF C©UNTY COteuMiSSiONERS ,JUNE 22~' · 1988 7:00 P.N. ?el ~tion of James P. Bower'an and Pennington Winbush, by Agent: Steven L. Craig, ~o amend the Future Land Use Classifica- tion of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan fro~ SU (Semi-Urban) to X (Interchange) for the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION) (Location: On the north side of Okeechobee Road Coolidge Road} , 672 ft. east of Please no~e that all proceedings before the Board of County Commissmoners are electronically recorded, tf a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter consmdered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings, and that, 'for such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.Upon the request of any party to the proceedmng, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportuhiry to cross-exam:ne any individual testifying during a hearmng upon request. Prior to this public hearing, notice of the same was sent to all adjacent property owners May 31, 1988. Legal notice was published in the News Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation in St. Lucie County, on June 16, 1988. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUC!E COUNTY, FLORIDA /s/ Jack Krieger, Chairman FILE NO. PA-87-031 EXHIBIT "A" Lot !I of the Southeast quarter of MODEL LAND COMPANY'S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, as · per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page 10~ of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying West of the West right-of-way line of the Sunshine State Parkway; less the South 69.40 feet of the East 161.24 feet thereof. AND the West 515 feet of Lot 14 of the Southeast Quarter of MODEL LAND COMPA/~Y,S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East as per plat Of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page 10, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying North of the North right-of-way line of State Road No. 70. AND that portion Of Lot !0 of the Southeast Quarter of MODEL LAND COMPANY,S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, as per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page 10, of the'Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying West of the West right-of-way line of the Sunshine State Parkway; less the South 69.40 feet thereof. Agenda Item: File Number: MEMORANDUM PA-87-031 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Local Planning Agency Planning Administrator December 31, 1987 Petition of James p. Bowman and Pennington Winbush, by Agent Steven L. Craig, to Amend the Future Land 'Use Maps of the St Lucie County .Growth Management Policy.Plan from SU (Semi-Urban) to X Interchange Development) LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: EXISTING GMPP: PROPOSED GMPP: PARCEL SIZE: 'PROPOSED USE: SURROUNDING ZONING: SURROUNDING LAND USE: FIRE~EMS PROTECTION: WATER/SEWER SERVICE: On the north side of State Road 70 (Okeechobee Road) 672' east of Coolidge Road. ' AR-1 (Agricultural Residential du/ac) SU (Semi-Urban) X (Interchange Development) 12.78 acres To develop an office warehouse park AR-l, AG and I Surrounding lands are used for low density, single family development. Ft. Pierce Central Fire Station is located approximately 4.75 miles away. No public facilities currently available. See comments December 31 1987 Page 2 Petition: Bowman, J.,Pennington, W. File No.: PA-87-031 STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: In reviewing this application for proposed amendment to. the Growth Management Policy Plan, the Local Plannin~ Agency shall consider and make the following determinations: Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie Growth Management Policy Plan; The proposed amendment is not consistent with the industrial development policies of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan. Specific County poiicies in conflict are #45 #47 #48 #50, #52, #53 and #57. ' ' ' Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is consistent with existing and proposed land uses in this area; The proposed amendment is inconsistent with existing and proposed low density residential development in this area. Whether there have been-changed conditions that require an amendment; To the best of information, including ~hat supplied by the~ petitioner, we' are unaware of any changed conditions in this area to warrant consideration for this change in land use. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether or the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities; See Comments December 31 Page 3 · 1987 Petition: Bowman, J./Pennington, W. File No.: PA-87-031 o Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in an orderly and logical development pattern, specifically identifying any negative effects on such pattern; The proposed change in land use would not result in an orderly or logical development. Presently there are many single family homes in this area. This change in land use would create a isolated industrial pocket and provide an unwarranted intrusion of industrial _land use in a residential ares. COMMENTS: The petitioners, James p. Bowman and Pennington Winbush, propose to change the land use and zoning on property located west of the Florida Turnpike, along the north side of Okeechobee Road to permit the development of a 12.7 acre industrial/warehouse-complex. The submitted development scheme indicates a total of 159,000 square feet of warehouse space with some limited showroom space included. The concept plan indicates one driveway access point onto Okeechobee Road, with the possibility of two additional access points as a part of outparcel development. There is no indication of the relationship of these driveways to the intersection of Gordy Road and Okeechobee Road located somewhere in this area. County staff has reviewed this proposed amendment and found it not to be within any area of Critical State Concern, found it not to qualify as a small area or emergency plan amendment under Chapter 380.3187, Florida Statutes and is not proposed for adoption under a Joint Planning Agreement pursuant to Chapter 163.3171~ Florida Statutes. County staff has reviewed this proposed petition for consistency with the industrial/interchange development Doiicies of the ~ Growth Management Policy Plan, and at this time must report this petition as inconsistent with those policies. This determination is based in_part upon concern over the limited area of frontage onto Okeechobee Road, the property's only access point~ and the potential negative impacts that industrial development, no matter the zoning designation, would have on the surrounding residential character of the area. Other concerns are as cited in Review Standard #1 above. December 31, 1987 Page 4 Petition: Bowman, J-/Pen~ington W File No.: PA-87-031 Roadways immediately in front of the site are estimated to be operating within acceptable levels. However, serious operational problems exist along Okeechobee Road from the Florida Turnpike bridges to the 1-95 interchange. The recent opening of 1-95, south of Stuart, will prQvide some short term relief for this area, but long term improvements must be completed before traffic volumes build back up once again. The Department of Transportation currently has programmed improvements in FY 88-89 to Okeechobee Road in this area. However, recent information indicate that this time table may be delayed as right-of-way acquisition has not yet been completed. The subject property is not located within the planned service area of the Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority. There has been no information provided by the petitioner to support the statement in this petition application that this area will be served by Ft. Pierce Utilities. Referring to Review Standard #4 above, given the location of this property as outside of the currently accepted urban service area, staff feels that approval of this petition would result in a net increase in -cost to the public for the provision of water/wastewater services, roadway capacities and other service needs. This proposed amendment represents, in our opinion, an application for an incompatible land use in an otherwise homogenous environment. Under the requirements of Rule 9J-11, Florida Aclministrative Code, %he State of Florida now requires a recommendation from this Agency as well as staff, Pmior to the-Boar~ of County Commissioners consideration on whether or not to tTansmit this petition for furth%r agency review. Consistent with County Policy, staff would recommend that the Local Planning Agency support the transmittal of this petition to the State of Florida for further Agency review and comment. Preliminary staff recommendation is for denial of this petition. Final staff recommendation wilt be withheld pending receipt and review of these Agency comments.~ DJM/DS/mg Attachment BOWMAN2(B-JUN)88 cc: County Attorney Steven L. Craig SAMPLE MOTION: MOTION TO TRANSMIT: AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, AND THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET IN SECTION 5.3.300, ST. LUCIE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THAT THE PETITION OF JAMES P.BOWMAN & PENNINGTON WINBUSH FOR A CHANGE IN.LANDUSE FROM SU (SEMI- URBAN) TO X (INTERCHANGE), BE TRANSMITTED TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR FURTHER REVIEW AND EVALUATION UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 380, FLORIDA/ STATUTES. MOTION TO DENY TRANSMITTAL: AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, AND THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET IN SECTION 5.3.300, ST. LUCIE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE ST. LUC!E COUNTY LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THAT THE PETITION OF JAMES p. BOWMAN & PENNINGTON WINBUSH FOR A CHANGE IN LAND USE FROM SU (SEMI- URBAN) TO X (INTERCHANGE), NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR FURTHER REVIEW AND EVALUATION UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 380, FLORIDA STATUTES; BECAUSE ..... SU RL BLUE RED PURPLE 2,5-55-59 PETITION OF JAMES P, BOWMAN AND PENNINGTON WINBUBH BY AGENT: 'ST~\,/EN L. CRAIG FOR A CHANGE tN THE L~ND USE CLASSIFICATION FROM SU TO X AR. L R~- it C T BL U£ AG BROWN ~ PURPLE \ \ 25-55--59 PETITION OF JAMES P, BOWMAN AND PENNINGTON WINBUSH BY AGENT: STEVEN L. CRAI$ ;ROM~c~' TO ~ Steven L. C,-aig 319 Clematis St. Fifth Floor, Com.eau Bldo. West Palm 8ch. , FL 33401 A OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFIED James P. Bo~an (TR) PenningEon R. Winbush (TR P.O. Sex 8426 Nerthweed StaTe West Palm Beach, FL 33407 George N. & Barbara S. Jones 2?40 Coeiidge Rd. Ft. Pierce, ~ 34945-3133 Charles W. & Dorothy L. Pallas 2790 Coolidge ~i. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-3233 3, 24 8a~oara Jo Pflster Barbara KLm Pfister ~620 Ok~echobee Pd. r-h. Pmerce, ~ 34965-2723 4, 5 lorent~no N. Jr. & [~lita C. Arriola 2215 Nebraska Ay., Ste 3A Pt. Pierce, FL 34950-4867 Lois & Edwin Keim 2888 Coolidge P~i. Pt. Pierce, FL 34945-3133 7 Jon W. Pa?fish P.O. Box 3091 Pt. Pierce, FL 34948-3091 William & J~ne~ PoLnton 8026 Okeechobee Pd Ft. Pierce, FL ~349~.5-9688 9 P.O. Box 125 '-~ Jupiter, ~ 33468-0125 10 ~o=eph.Lne Hood 8101 Okeechobee Bi. Ft. Pierce, ~ 34945=9689 11 Ira & CorL~ne M. Levy 8021 ~eecnobee Pt. Pierce, FL 34945-9689 12 John C. & ~en Forget 3001 Orange Av. Pt. Pierce, FL 34947-1545 .... = & J~n H. Forger .... Box 2 81 Pt. Pierce, ~ 34954-0251 14 Phillis J. & }%eianie Forget 2709 S. 28th St. Pt. Pierce, E~ 36981-6009 ~yl.e Forget 3075 C~rdy ~i P~ Pierce, · Ju~l ~qd 7 ..... P.O. ~x iS ,~ ...... ~, .F~ ~ ,~.~,..,_ -(/ 20, 21, 22 C. L. Lafevers Jr. Berlin Inv. Inc. P.O. Box 1002 Veto Beach, FL 32961-1002 23 Henry p. Vachon P.O. Box 126 Butler, TN 37640-0126 16, 19, 25 Tu~r-PJf~e Authority P.O. Box 8008 F~. ,Lauder~tale, 3310 State of FLorida Road Dept. Road Right-of-Way 780 S.~4. 24th Street Ft. Lauderda!e, FL 33315 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ----S-~. SPECIA MEETIN~ Da;e:_ Sanuary 14, 19B8 convened: 1:38 P.m. adjourned: 3:80 P.m. Commissiocers Present: Chairman Jack naver[ L. F-cnn (as noted), Jim Minix, -~lPeOoer Krieger, Vice-Chairman R. Dale Trefelner, Judy Othwrs Present: Weldon Lewis, County Administrator; Krista l~C:ey, AssiStant County Attorney; Terry Hess, Planning & Zoning '~irec~or; Dennis Murphy, Planning Administrator; Walter Smith, Deou[y Sheriff,s Office; Oane C. Marsh, Deputy Clerk PLANNING _ COM?REHENSIYE ~LA~ - LAND USE AMENDMENT~ me P~Jrpose of this Publico Bear/no is to consider those Proposed Land Use AmenDments to thee St. LOcie County Policy Pland and whether ith Growth Management r= ey should be forwaroed to the Florida ~-zartmen~ of Community Affairs, in accordance wi~n the reouirements of Chapter 16~, Florida Statutes. Assistant County Attorney Krista Storey advised that until the Board acosta the new Comprehensive Plan, staff recommends that ~ne 8narc transmit all petitions to the Department of Community Al°airs for their COmments. These Petitions will be returned to [~e 8nard at a later date for their final determination. %iici of Puolicatioc was furnished for all o~ the Petitions. 9'. JAMES__ __P' __BOWMAN_ __AND PEN~INGTON WINBUSH ~d ~he_F~ture Land Use Maps of the St L ' ~en:__~?z~oy Plan from SU (Semi-u .... ; _ u~e. County Growth':' ;: .... : --mzlmlnary reoommend~{~ ~:/.,0 X (Interchanoe) °°mm ndea that this 8card ~;ardW~Dth~°~OtY._ P~lzoy, st _w .... e ~ ' ~ ~OrlOa Oepartmentaffof Community Affairs this petition requesting a c~ange ia Land Use from SU to x including all commen~s presented at the LPA hearing of January ~, 1988. ~"~' = t. C~aig, representing petit~ ...... '. .g~on Wznbush, a~ ..... ~u~rs James H. Bn~,~ ..... De~ltion. Mr P~' ~zuu requestinn f~_~.~ , ~ .... o,, ~uu ~reviousl,, 2~-~t~g ars0 advised tha~ :L~ ..... ~u~z of this -; ' o , they intend * ...... Y gory ava~labl~ o, th~2 back for a pNRn _~ __ ~W ~zunoraw the renu~ ~: - ~ ~u .... ~a~r aov~sed they had t~u~ LI, and come ocjectZons since the LPA hearings, ~ ....... ~ uwo letters of from Bank Vachon and Charles PaLlas.~ar the Record.A letter of objection from Louis C. Forget was Presented -: ~as moved by Com. Minix, seconded ny Com. =cnn, tha: this oe:ition ne forwarded :o th~ Florida Department of Community Af'~airs for comments; ano, upon roll call, motion carried ~J~animous~y. SPECIAL MEETING LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY LARGE AREA PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSMITTAL HEARING MINUTES BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: J. P. Terpening, Mabel Fawsett, Robert Carman, Patricia King, Jim Russakis, and Jo Ann Allen. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Harris - excused, illness; Patricia Ferr!ck - excusea, conflict; and Joseph Sciturro - excused, conflict. OTHERS PRESENT: Krista Storey, Assistant County Attorney; Dennis g. Hurphy, Planning Administrator; Terry Hess, Planning and Soning Director; Donna Scanlon° Assistant Planner; and Dolores Messe~, Secretary. PRESS ATTENDANCE: None. TAPES: 1, 2, 3, and 4 DATE OF HEARING: JANUARY 7, 1988 TIME: 7:00 P.M. INVOCATION: The Invocation was given by Mrs. Mabel Fawsett. PUBLIC HEARING: Petition of James P. Bowman and Pennin~ton Winbush, by Agent Steven L. Craig, to amend the funure l~nd use maps of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from SU (Semi Urban) ~o X (Interchange Development) for property located on the north side of State Road 70 (Okeechobee Road), 672 ft east of Coolidge Road. · Mr. Steven Craig presented the petition. The owners have entered zn[o a join~ venture agreement with M. Lynwood Bishop¥' Jr. to develop nhe property. Mr. Bishop is currently preparing to develop a 240 acre industrial park at the interchange of t-95 and Indian Town Road in Palm Beach County. Regarding negative Staff findings, Mr. Craig said that water and sewer are available just on the other side of the tdrnpike. He had discussions with FPUA an~ would provide services to the site providing the developer pay for installation. Mr. Craig said that the industrial de- velopment will be a planned development. Other ~taff concerns can be addressed at the time of site plan review. He also felt than the location of the subject property is not suitable for residential development. He felt there will be requirements for possible road improvements to facilitate the development of this particular project. Regarding Staff's coraments concerning the development may have a net increase in the~cost of water and wastewater services and roadway capacities, he felt those objec- nzons are satisfied by obtaining water and wastewater services from the City of Ft. Pierce and by whatever requirements are made for improvzng 'the roadways. He°feels the property is valuable and has high visibility to the interstate Mr. George Jones fei~ that the turnpike provides a logical boun- dary for industry to stop heading west. The Kings Highway corri- dor zs a natural area for this type development. He did not agree to moving zndustrial interests into what is now residential and rural areas. Mr. Loums Forge~ felt that there are not enough details available as ~o the intention for development of the subject property and agreed that Kings Highway would be the best boundary line for this type development. Mr. Charles Pallas felt that Interchange oriented development is ~oo 1.ieerat and i~ not consistent with other surrounding land uses. He felt that it would be a mistake to allow any use other than residential Ior this area. tie also pointed out that no ~rsfflc accesses he turnpike from the west side. The Toll Plaza · s on the east s~de. He also agreed tha~ Kings Highway or the Lurnpzke should b~ the boundary for this type development. '<~'. i~ob l{hoden (lid not feel [.his type of development would ad- vat,ce the County and the subject area's land use should be left a:~ ~-esidentJ. al use. Re~a~{ngu ~= Staff comments, Mr. Murphy said that surrounding land uses are SU to the north and south. In Staff's opinion the request is for an inappropriate application of nonresidential land use in the subject area. The concerns cited in the Staff report dealt with the property being outside the defined urban service area of Ft. Pierce Utilities. Staff also expressed concern regarding any kind of intense commercial or non- ~esidential development west of the turnpike for access reasons. It ms a two-lane road; however, the State does intend to expand it to a four-lane road from Gordy Road east to the turnpike entrances sometime within the next five years. The request would represent an unwarrnnted intrusion into a residential area. Staff recommended that the LPA forward a recommendation to transmit, but with a recommendation of denial. Mr. Crazg said that for the other Interchanges along 1-95, the X designation is on both the east and west sides of 1-95. Details of the proposed development would be addressed at the time the zoning issue is addressed. Regarding road capacity, the location ~s right next to two interstates, meaning that only a shor~ d~-snance would have to be traveled to access those interstates. Cha.]rman Terpening closed the public portion of the hearing. Mrs. Fawsett said she felt tha~ the area should remain residen- u~al, that the residents, way of living should not be intruded upon. Mr. Carman s~ated that he agreed that the boundary between indus- trial and residential development should remain as the turnpike. ~'~. Terpenin~ said he could not see the sub3ect property being u~]~zed as residential due t~ the noise factor. After considering the testimony presented during the public hear- ~ng, including staff comments, and the Standards of Review as set out in Section 5.3.300, ~t. Lucie Coumty Zoning Ordinance Mr Russakis~ made a motion that the St. Lucie County Local Planning' ' ~ency recommend to the Board of County Commissioners, that the petition of James p. Bowman and Pennington Winbush for a change in land use from SU (Semi Urban) to X (Interchange), not be transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review and evaluation under the requirements of Chapter t63, Florid~ Statutes considermng adjacent residential land uses and Staff comments. Mrs. King seconded the mo~ion, and upon roll cali, Mr. Carman, Mrs. Fawsett, Mrs. King, Mrs. Allen and Mr. [~ussakis voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Terpening vot~ed against ~he motion. This resulted in five votes in favor of and one vote against the motion. Chairman~e~pening~ informed the agent for [he petitioner that the petition will be forwarded to the Board of County Co~missioners ~';~t~ a recommendation not to transmit. STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS 2740 I]OB MARTINEZ CE N TER VI E W DRIVE T A / L AH A SSI E, FLORIDA 32399 THOMAs G. PELHAM Se~retar~ nprll 18, 1988 Mr. Jack Krieger, Chairman St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 33482-5652 Dear Mr. Krieger: Pursuant to section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, the Department of Community Affairs has reviewed the proposed amendments to the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan. Our review indicated that the proposed amendments are generally consistent with the requirements of section 163.3177, Florida Statutes, which was in effect prior to ©ctober i985. ~mendmen~ 87-03.1, however, did not conform to the internal_ "~ consistency requirements of 163.3177, F.S., as it appeared to be inconsistent with adopted land use policy numbers 13, 16, 17, 23, 25, 26, 27 and 53; Amendment 87-032 appeared inconsistent with adopted ~ ~ ~ ~o=icy numbers 46 48 58 ~ - , , a .... 59. Comments from the Treasure Coast Regicnat Planning Ccuncil (witk atta~kmenns) are enclosed for your consideration. In response to County staff's request for guidance as to considering amendment 87-029 as a Development of Reglonal Impact (DRI), a copy of the amendment and the staff request has been forwarded to Mr. Alto Thomas, Co~muni%y Program Administrator, of the Deparnment of Community Affairs' DR£ review section. He will contact Mr. Hess or Mr. Murphy to provide clarification and addinicnal information to them. If we can be of further assistance, please contact Ms. Susa:: Williams at {904) 487-4545. Sincerely, Divisio~ of ~source-Planning and Management WP/swr Enclosures CC: Mr. Terry L. }{ess, Planning & Zoning Director Mr. Daniel Mc!ntyre, County Attorney Mr. Alto Thomas, Community Program Administrator Department of Community Affairs Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council st. lucle recj onal plar ning council Mar~h II, lgad The Honorable Jack Krieger Chairman, St. Lucie County 2300 Vir§inia Avenue Fort Pierce, Fi. 33450 Subject: St. Lucie County Local Government Comprehensive Plan Documents Dear Chairman Krieger: Council staff nas completeo its review of t~e St. Lucie County proposed comprehensive plan m:endments in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Sections 162.3184(1)(c) and ~2), Florida Statutes, and has prepared comments for Council consideration. These comments will be presenteo to Council at its next regular meeting on March 18, 1988. You are invited to at:end the meeting and address the Council if you wis~. Enclosed are s:aff's recommendeo commen:s and :he agenda for the meeting. Following the meeting the code, ts, as finally approved by Council, will be forwarded =o the State Department of Con~unity Affairs for transmittal to Y°Urdocumeng°Verningts. body for consideration before_ final -adoption of the If you Wo~uld like to discuss the staff report or Council procedures for plan review, please do no: hesitate to call me. _Sincerely, '~j Peter-G. Merri Regional Planner PGM:dt Enclosure cc: Terry Hess Dennis Murphy Da:liel Mclntyre 32.~8 s, ~u. martin downs blvd. s~im 205 · p.o. bo~ 15~9 palm dl~, florida 33490 ~hon¢ ~r 305 ~ kar~n L rr~,ro.~ cflc~rman b~omas g ~nn~, JlJ J-m'~ min~z dani~ rn. (an? TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL 2. 3. 4. 5. e Vt 9. !0. i1. 12. 13. AGENDA Friday, March 18, 1988 - 9:30 a.m. Howard Johnson's Motor Lodge U.S. Highway One, Stuart Roll Call Agenda Minutes MacArthur Foundation Presentation Project Reviews a. ICR Log b. 201 Facilities Plan Update for the Glades Region of Palm Beach County, Florida--Revised February 1988 Local Government Comprehensive Plan Reviews a. City of West Palm Beach - Land Use Amendment b. Town-of Greenacres City - Land Use Amendment c. City of Port St. Lucie - Land Use Amendments d. St. Lucie County - Land Use Amendments e. Letter Regarding Changes to Local Government Comprehensive Plans Florida Department of Transportation - Five-Year Work Program Financial Statement Public Comment Staff Comment Chairman,s Comments Council Comment Adjournment NOTE: It is requested that the audience not smoke during the meeting. In order for all members of the audience to follow Council deliberations, the audience is asked to please refrain from conversing during the meeting. Item 6 7 8 9 10 Acres 39.4 Curren: Land Use Desi.~ation Semi-Urban (< u/a) Proposed Land Use Designation Corm~ercial General (2.5 a) and Low Den. Res. {0-5 u/a) 2 3 4 20.0 38.5 70.9 20.5 Semi -Urban Semi -Urban Semi -Urban Semi -Urban General. Commercial Industrial Light Commercial General (16~ a) and Industrial Light Industrial Light 29.6 ~.7 18.8 12.8 192.6 9.9 bow Den. Res. (0-5 u/a) Low Den. Res. Low Den. Res. (0-5 u/a) Semi -Urban Agri cu ltu ra l Medium Den. Res. Medium Den. Res. (0-1i u/al Interchange Devel opmen t Medium Den. Res. (0-11 u/a) Interchange Development Industrial Heavy Commercial General 2 Evaluation The proposed amendment has been reviewed in accordance wi th the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, Council's review procedures, and Council's Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan. The following conm~ent is offered as a result of ,that review. Items 4, 6, 7, and 8 Based on the information provided, the proposed amendments do no~ appear to be in conflict or inconsistent with the policies contained in the Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan. It is noted that Virginia Avenue is operating below its capacity for an acceptable level of service. The potential transportation impacts to Virginia Avenue should be considered prior to approval of developments associated.with Items 6, 7, and 8. .I. tems 1~ 2, 3, and 5 Based on the information provided and discussions with County planners, these properties do not lie within the County's current planned Urban Service Area. Until such a time as when St. Lucie County expands the .boundaries of its Urban Service Area to include these parcels, approval of the proposed develol~ent on these parcels would not be consistent, with Council olic. Council's policy is intended to assure that a full range o~ urbYan services are provided to new develop~nts and to assure that State, regional, and local goverr~nt growth management objectives are met in a timely and efficient manner. Furthermore, this policy is intended to-Prevent uPban sprawl, leap frog development which, due to lts,~location, ~ould increase .'the cost Of service provision to the~public. Council po-licy encourages infill and maximizing the use of existing urban facili ties and infrastructure. Indian River County planners have also expressed concernsI over ~roposed developments in the Indrio Road corridor {i.e., Items 1-3) in relation to the provision of urban services (Exhibit Al. Item 9 This item represents a proposal to change the land use designation from Semi-urban to Interchange-oriented development to develop an office warehouse park on 12.8 acres located along the west side of the Florida Turnpike at its intersection with O~eechobee 'Road. St. Lucie County planners have indicated that the proposed amendment is inconsistent with existing and proposed low density residential oevelopment in this area. At present there are many single family homes near this parcel. The proposed change in land use would create an isolated industrial pocket in a resiaential area. Approval of Item 9 would not be consistent with Council policy which states that new development should be compatible with and complementary to surrounding land uses. Item 10 This proposal is to change the land use from Agricultural -~o Inous~trial Heavy on 192.6 acres located along the west side of Rangeline Road, just south of its intersection with Glades Cut-off Road. This property lies well outside the County's planned Urban Service Area. St. Lucie County planners have indicated that approval of the proposed change in land use would crea~e unnecessary demands on very limited public facilities in this area. Access to this site is via a single, two-lane roadway. No public water or wastewater services are available in this area. Furthermore, in order to reduce emergency response times to this area, it would be necessary for new facilities to be constructed. The Shin Road Fire Station is approximately 13 miles away. For simila,r ~'easons to those presented in the discussion of ~1, 2,..3, and 5, approval of I~em 10 woul~-~ ~ ....... Ite.m.s bouncl) policy which states that new development shall only occur within areas where necessary urban services and faciliti O~' ' will e ~st concur ' - es exist . . ~ rent ~qth develop~nC. Addi~ionall . other land uses without d~nstrated need for such conversion is a problem. Finally, Council no,es that the propert~ associated with i~ 10 is located only about four miles fr~ the site of The Reserve Development of Regional I~act {DRI). Treasure Coast Regional Planning Counci 1 is currently wai ting for suppl ~n tal info, rich fr~ the applicant of this DRI. B~ause nu~rous issues concerning this DRI are unresolv~ (e.g., ~ow traffic impacts wil~ be mitigated), Council suggests Chat the St. Lucie County Board of County C~issioners ~y want to defer n on the proposed -~n~-, ......... a y action -~ --.~-,~u until ~ne gouncy can consldeP ~'~ ~-~ Impacts related to The Reserve DRI. Such info~ion will be included within a fully sufffcient ~plication for Develop~n~ Approval and the assess~n[ report which C~ncil will adopt and transmit to Lucie County upon co~letion of the DRI proj~t review. Item 11 This 9.9-acre parcel is located about 490 feet north of the Martin CounCy line on the west side of Highway A-1-A. The propo, sal is to change the land use from Medium Density Residential to Co~nercial General to allow the construction of a mini-warehouse faci 1 i ry. Baseo on information provided by a nearby homeowners associati6~ (Exhibit B) and discussions wi th the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, the proposea development would require filling certain wet] ands vegetated wi th white mangroves and coragrass. Any alteration, degradation, or destruction of wetlands associated with the proposed development would not be consistent with Council policy protecting the functions and values of wetlands and deepwater habitat. Other concerns of the homeowners expressed in Exhibit B are primarily related to local rather than regional issues and should be considered by St. Lucie County. ' Recommendation -Council should adopt the comment outlined above and approve its transmittal to the State Department of Community Affairs in fulfillment of the requirements of Chapter 103, Florida Statutes. A ttac hmen ts St. Lucie County Proposed Land Use Amendments 8 1 AVE 7 ,~,OKEE. RD. ~O I 95 11 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMI,~IONERS 1840 25th Street. Veto Beach. Florida 32~o0 EXHIBIT A February 18, 1988 Peter G. Merritt Regional Planner TCRPC P. O. Box 1529 Palm City, Florida Dear Mr. Merritt: 33490 Per your letter of February 1, 1988 requesting comments on St. Lucie County's proposed January 1988 Land Use Plan Amendments, i am transmittinq Indian River County staff's review comments. These have not been approved by -the Board of County Commissioners, so the comments represent only the staff position. Of .the eleven proposed land use amendments, only five are located such as to potentially affect Indian River County. These are: 2. 3. 4. 5. Kelly Tractor Kioshi Groves Martin Naftel Indrio Groves Indrio Estates This letter will address in depth any impacts that these proposed land use amendments may have upon Lndian River County. Regarding the Kioshi Groves and Kelly Tractor Petitions. These proposed amendments are located approximately 5 miles and 6 miles respectively from Indian River County. Because of the distances involved, we believe that ~hmse proposed amendments will not have any negative impact upon Indian River County. Therefore, staff has no objection to these petitions. The Martin Nafte! Petition, the Indrio Groves Petition, and the Indrio Estates Petition are located within an area known~s the Indrio Road Corridor. Because of their location, these proposed land use amendments will affect India~ River County. ~owever, after reviewing each of these proposed amendments, staff feels that individually they will not have a negative impact upon Indian River County. Therefore, staff has no objection to these petitions. Peter G. Merritt Page 2 February 18, 1988 Although we have no objections to dments, we do have some concerns within the Indrio Road Corridor. an area along Indrio Road roughly line to the north, the airport to and U.S. 1 on the east. In my.d/sc Lucie County Planning Adm/nistratc c°mprehenslve Plan revision substantial Urban development. Re be permitted up to a 1/~it of $ D.I sewer service being provided. Regarding St. Lucie County,s pro den?it/es, staff has one' ues Lucle County "to- - q tion servic ~ pose the · _ ..e area? St~ =- Indrlo Ro Permitted wi~;- q~ ~ ~Oncerned th, densities. ~uny w~l a~so expe; If you have any qUestions about any in this letter, Please feel free to c~ Very truly, G. M. SChindler Chief, Long Range Ptanning cc: Robert M. Keating, AICP TM 88-519 lO EXHIBIT B Date: February 9, ]988 To: STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF C0.~UNITy AFFAZRS . 2571E-xecutive Center, Circle East, Tallahassee, Flo~. From: The Undersigned Property Owners Re: PeTition of William Schulman, Trustee (copy attached and bit.l,,)~ ~o the St. Lucie County Plannin§ and Zoning St. Lucie Board of County Commissioners ~o change the land [FileCatJ°nNo.°f 8710253cer~in property located on Hutchinson Island the undersi=ne_E d property owners, hereby express our stron~es~ useto ~he above referenced from RMPet~t~°nto CG (~he "$chulman Petit/on-) for a ch classi£~cation "Schutman of the property described on F~h Schuiman Petition (theProDertv-~._ ~ . BACK~ROUND: TH~ SCHULMAN PROP~ ~ ~AC~T ~ID~ ~ USE: isThe Schul~ l~d.Pr°pe~Ylt is a parcel of approxima~e]~___.~ submer_ed i~ located om Aqua Ra Drive ~dg'91has acreS,no dire~ Sta~e Road A-]-A. ~e Schu~ Petitionpl~ "toStates a desire to c~qgen proved 66-~t condo~i~ si~e ~-storage f re~a~. ,, Aqua Ra Drive i~ a n~ov, aC ~s ~~,_ sec~ionlY ~ mile~_long.l_ 1-A.~ca~ed ~i~ely~h ~ereV~' of l-l-t,dead-~d~qua RaS~ee~. ~Drive_fo~iS a ~ou~Of Aqua ~e ~o s~ loca~ed on either side ~ ~ve a~ ~he poin~ where Aqua Ra A-l-A, these businessf~mproper~iesA_l_A, f~a: on A-l-A, ~d the public's AqUaofRa~rive ~s a_~esid~i~ s~ee:~Aqua~thRa 'W~'nd~ Esza~es, a ~Y46 dupl~s~ehomes.on ~ehomesno~ side of Drive~_ f~ cons=~cted on a series of C~e-sacs on side of 'Aqua Ra D~ve. River Wa=ch co~ist ~ ~ur yo~ conv~ce_~d Due =o ~e lo~Cion of ~e--Sc~..~pe~ ~d Drive~ ~e Sch~. '~ope~s ~y ~--of ~e residen~ Aqua Ra D~ve ~d '~o~d be deve=e~ =o resid~=i~ use, ~e classifica. is c~rent!y ~ effec~ ~d ~a~ ~s ~ effect purchased our homes. ... WE OPPOSE ~ $~ P~ON FOR ~ FOLLOT~ REASONS: · ].. Since the Sch~ Pro er ~d ~s ~ Close ~.~_ _ P ~ abuts some o~ t - ~ .... . _ . ~ope~y for ~-s=or ...... c~=~ences ~ener~ ....... ~ ~=- ~e aqua Ra Drive res/d-- - ~c a s=~=ic~~ ~fneo una~ ~e~ pro~i~ of ~e ~-~] ~ =nc~s. SO~: ~We are Per, itu velf~e. Indeed, ~e !~-:~ to_our neighborhood, ~eo--~ .... or other of A-I-A ~d ~--'- ~ ca~on of the Schu!m~ ~ .... ~_ P~r~azin~ o~ ~ ....... ~ua in our neizhborh~.~ ..~ ''TP~r~Y) so far from ..... ~u snel:er from obse~4~- iJ~' '~f~. p~ov=ue :he sort of nightTi 4. Use of ~e Sc~l~ p~ . use of_~e' property' for work .... ~per~ for ~-s=ora~e will :. ~:. ~-=ceu~C on Hutchinson Isled. ~ ' . 5. ~e p~oposed ~d use '~ o~ ~he ~. Ia order ~o enlarge ~e P~posed ~ec~ ~e ~a~le Prooert~., ' - Pe:itioner is present!r s~e~n& :oc°~erci~ use of.the , reverse the Department v:ronmen:~ Re~lation s deni~ of a.reques: :o fi~ 1.5 %o 2.0 acres lands. ~e D.E.R.,s basis~ for de~& this request is :h~ per~en: 1-5 :o 2.0 acres of white man&rove ~d cor8grass marsh that now (a) habi:a: for birds ~d 3uveni~e fishes~ (b) de:r~:~ ~%eri~ necess suppor: hi.er :topic levels of co~erc~aliy ~d recrea:ionally v~uabl ~d invertebrates, ~d (c) P~ifi~:ion for upl~d ~noff, sedimen: u stabi[i~:ion~ [See copy of le::er dated October 24, ]987~ from D.E petitioner first S~tes ~a: ~e ~ic~y i~re u stora&e ~ renters of ~ch s -~ . then ~us~Uies t~ ...... ~ce~ ~ ~z ....... q enz u~e o~ over the causeways Co ~~d ~-sto~ge. ~e Petitioner~zlc~Y~treduce~ve ways: such use ~ eider &~e~te ~ ~ccep~ble lev~ of con our stree:~ or it ~ not ~i~ic~) reduce Ca~eway t~fic. 7. ~e prope~7 ~ .orsen ~e c~o~c . ........ --~/re~ s~ce on ~ ~he heist of our ~ou~s~ --~c~ux~ vac~cy Problem ~ ~e area. ~o~ season~ we have: If CO~erci~ vac~cies one ~e s~etch nor~ of '~e .Jens~ ~u~eway~ where..~e located. . ' 12 CONCLUSION: The foregozng factors lead u~-to believe ~ha~ ~b~e--many-ewj-]s from granting the Sch~m~ Petition c~o~ outweigh ~v-negl~gible benefit tha~ may res~ from the proposed cn~ge. Y~e proposed~usiness_zone would pro far ~nto ~ e~s~ng residenti~.~ea, a compi~:e deportee from the wxth ~reverslble negative resets. The proposed use-~ do noting to e~ce the ~eau~ .of-Hutc~son detract~g. ~luence. -'~l~d~r ~-~s · · ~v~ro~n~__bu~, :~ather, son --Isled from ~l-ad~sed-d-v~-~-- .~ -, _ ~ards, the Schul~ Petition shoed be denied. We respec~vl reques~--~our support ~d assist~ce in t~s ma~er ~d ~h~ you ~or your time ~d_~onsidera_ tion in rev~ew!ng our conce~s. - = ' '' ' ' (S~.atures of the P~operty owners have bee~ ~oved from tb~s docume.t for presentation purposes.) :- SOUTHEJ%ST FLORIDA DISTRICT ~ BRANCH OFF]CE October 14, 1987 STATE OF FLORIDA £XH]B~T DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION ATTACHMENT TO WiLLiam Schu iaaa c/o Harold Melviile 3!1 South Second Street For: P. ierce, Florida 33450 Dear ,%r-. MelvilLe: DF - SC. Lucia County Per~iK No: 5601095728 Tais office has completed :he review of your reguesc co The ~odificacion includes :he foIlowimE: ~odify cbc referee:ed permi: Fill an additional 1.5 - 1.0 acres of ~clands :o provide additional upland. ........ develo~en=. ~'micigaciom,-four (4)-me, culver:s ~uld-be placed-~hr~ugh. existing be~ :o provide ~di:io~l ~nmec:io~s from ~oumd~m~ south. Also, :~ (2) addicio~ ~lverta ~u~ ~ imstall~ The proposed. ~dificaciom i~ ~ecced C co~ni:y Co ~ f~lle~ (.5 acres~ ia a par: of ~:igacioa require4 by ~he peri:.. ~e~e-~:-laads Present juvenile fishes. ~ese ~etlanda contribute, decrf:al ~cerial aecasaa~. :o suppor: higher :rophic levels of co~rcialiy ~d recreacio~ll7 valuable fish invercebraces. Fur:her, :Mesa ~ciands provide PUrification for upian~ runuff, sediment uptake and stabilize:ion. The ~provemenc of waker ~aliey aK~ibu:abtg. Co ~he ProPo'se~mi:igacion.i~ expected :o compensate for ~he. values los~ by :he propo~ fi/liar. Consequently, in accordance with Sec:[o~ ~3-9~(2)-uE :he Florida S~acuc~., :he Department {s unable to ~dify chis pe~ic as proposed an~ :he request for modification is denie~. Promc~ng Fl,~'~:te ~nd Your i4 cie County 5601095728 J$~: J=bl!6 .Sca¢uces. The Pe¢£¢i ..... ~' - hearing pursuant ro See:ion 120.57, Fl : .:.~on. muse comply with :he re-u£- .,~ .... rl~ea pursuant Co Ru)o ~? ,~ ~.=~.enrs o: ¥iorida Adm/nis:ra: : iorida 32301-8241 P :~.u~men~ai ReguLation ac 2600 ~- '~- ~,:ce o: Genera provisions w' ' e:z:~ons ~ich are no '~ . . :a~r ~Cone Road, ' ex~zna:ion of ~ ...... ar~men~ on ail is proposed findin-- -= = 7'~"==ses an~ submi, .-~ .... · , . sues :nvolv E~ve affec=e~ PerSons or ~ar=ies or -~ --~=u ~=s ~es of pro~ :heir counsel an opportuni:7' a: a convert and place, ~o presea: :o :he agen~ or heari~E officer ~i::en or oral opPosi:ion :o :he agency's action or refusal ~o ac:, or a ~i::en challenging :he grounds upo~ ~ich inaccion~ pursuant Co'Sec=ion I'1~57C.1)agent7 has chosen =o Jus:if7 i=~ ac:i~ '"Fl°ri4a S:a:uce~i"'~e de si~ned_ ~o fo~lace.agen acc~ . · ' ~ reques:.{or hemrin{ "fchin ~hi{ :i~ period shill cona:i~u~e ~a~ver of ~y righ: ~ch ~rsou ~y ~ave :o reques: a hearing ~ ~c:ion Florida - SincereKy, CC: USACOE, Hiami and Jacksonville (rich dra~fngs) Chris Bove, $c- -Lucie-Count~ Planning and Zoning <~i:h dra~in~s) James David, Sc. Lu¢ie County ~osquito-Con:roi District SC. Lucie Coun:7.Propert7 Appraise~ Reese ~eesler, Busaen Engineering C~oup 15 STATE OF FLOP4DA DEPAFITMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FIEGULATION M~rch 9, 1988 Mr. Peter Merritt Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Post Office Box 1529 Palm.City, Florida 34990 Re: Land Use Change for William Schulman gutchinson Island, St. Lucte County Dear Peter: As we recently discussed, our Department has been involved with Mr. Schulman,s property regarding t. he issuance of a wet/and fill perm/t. . On Ju/y 3, 1986, we issued a perm/t to Mr. $ Placement of fill over a--ro-~----.__ ; - chu _l_~an for the · ~ ~u & aure80Z ~~S. A cO of ~~as ~rmt~ for ~i~ '~~ ~e ex,sting ~ng. - _ , ing ~d ~ose ~l~ds pro~s~ for Mr. Schulmafl,s modification recluest was denied (a copy of the ~ denial letter is also enclose~), PrOm$~:ing an Adm/nistrative gearing which is scheduled for April 7th and 8th. I hope this is of some benefit to you. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. JAJ: gk Sincere iy, 16 17 ~T. ca£1£ £~IJIt'TY RL PURPLE 7 FOR ~ CNA~GE iN THE =~ND USE CLASs~CAT!ON C~ A~ £ BLUE BROWN PURPLE 25-35--39 lO PETITION OF JAMES p, BOWMAN AND P£NNINGTON WINBUSH BY AGENT: STE'VEN L, CRAIG =OR .& CHANGE ZN -~= ,AN~) US5 ,.~ '- - .... ' ':LaqS JCAT, ON ~Otl c,, TO ~ Steven L. Craig 319 Clematis St. Fifth Floor, Comeau Bldg. Nest Palm Bch., FL 33401 A OTHER PROPERTy OWNERS NOTIFIED James p. Bowman Pennlngton R. Winbush (TR) P.O. Box 8426 Northwood State West Palm Beach, FL 33407 George R. & Barbara S. Jones 2740 Coolidge Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-3133 Charles W. & DoroThy L. Pallas 2790 Coolidge Pd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-3133 4, 5 Florentino N. Jr. & Loiita C. Arriola 2215 Nebraska Av., Ste 3A Ft. Pierce, FL 34950-4867 Lois & Edwin Keim 2888 Coolidge Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-3133 3, 24 Barbara Jo Pfis Barbara Kim Pfis 7620 Okeechobee Ft. Pierce, ~L 3~ 7 Jon W. Parrish P.O. Box 3091 Ft. Pierce, FL 34 R~illi~m & Janet PoLnt~on 8026 Okeechobee Rd Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-9688 9 ~O. & ~rhse V. ~b~nn P.O. Bo~'' 125 JupiTer, FL 33468-0125 !0 Josephine Hood 8101 Okeechobee pd Pt. Pierce, Fh 34 ii ~=~ & CorLnne M. Le-v-v 8021 Okeechobee Rd. Ft. Pierce, EL. 34945-9689 12 John C. & G~zen ~ ~ =o~get 3001 Orange Ay. Ft. Pierce, FL 34947-1545 13, i8 Lou~s & Joar~ H. P.O. Box 28t Ft. Pierce, ~m 3495.4. 14 Phillip ~. & Meiamie Forget 2?09 S. 28th St. -~. Pierce, }_~= 34981-6009 15 Louis & Gayle Forget 3075 Gordy Rd Pt. Pierce, FL 34945-2716 1i Jua~n ~md gu~nm~a C~no P.O. Box 15 Ellen~on, ~ ~ ~z22 20, 21, 22 C. L. Lafevers Jr. Berlin Inv. Inc. P.O. Box 1002 Vero Beach, FL 32961-1002 23 Henry p. Vachon P.O. Box 126 Butler, TN 37640-0126 16, 19, 25 Turnpike Authority P.O. Box 8008 Ft. Lauderdaie, ~ StaTe of FLorida Road Dept. Road Right-of-Nay 780 S.W. 24th Street Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33315 ORDINANCE NO.: 88-62 FILE NO.: PA-87-031 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 86-01 BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE ROAD (OKEECHOBEE ROAD), 672' EAST.OF COOLIDGE ROAD (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) FROM SU (SEMI - URBAN) TO X (INTERCHANGE); MAKING FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY ZONING' ATLAS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND ADOPTION. 70 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made the following determinations: 1. James p. Bowman and Pennington Winbus.h, presented a petition to amend the future land use classification set forth in the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from SU (Semi - Urban) to X (Interchange) for the property described below. 2. The St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency, after holding a public hearing on January 7, 1988, of which due notice -was published at least seven (7) days prior to said hearing and al~ owners .of property within five hundred (500') feet were NOtified by mail of said hearing, has recommended that the Board amend the future land use classification set forth in the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from SU (Semi - Urban) to X (Interchange) for the property described below. 3. The Board held a public hearing on June 22, 1988 after publishing notice of such hearing in the Ft. Pierce News Tribune on June 16, 1988. ' NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: Ao CI~%NGE IN FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION. The future land use classification set forth in the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan for that property described as follows: See Attached Exhibit A owned by James p. Bowman and Pennington winbush, be, and the same is hereby changed from SU (Semi - Urban) to X (Interchange). B. FINDING OF CONSiSTENC~f. This Board specifically determines that the approved change in the future land use plan is consistent with the Managementpolicies and Policy objectives Plan. contained in the St. Lucie County Growth C. CHANGES TO ZONING ATLAS. The St. Lucie County Community Development Director is hereby authorized and directed to cause the changes to be made in the St. Lucie County Zoning Atlas. D. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS. Special acts of the Florida Legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, County Ordinances and County Resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby superseded by this ordinance to the extent of such conflict. E. SEVERABILiTY. _ tf any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such hblding shall not effect the remaining portions of this ordinance. If this ordinance or any provision thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstances, such holding shall not effect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstances. F. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE. This ordinance shall be applicable throughout the unincorporated area of St. Lucie County. G. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. The Clerk be and hereby is directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this ordinance to the Bureau of Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Flor/da, 32304. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITy AFFAIRS. The County Attorney shall send a certified copy of ordinance to the Department of Community Affairs, 2571 Exe Center Circle East, Tallahassee, Florida, 32301. I. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect upon receipt of offici acknowledgment from the Office of Secretary of State that thi ordinance has been filed in that office. J- ADOPTION. After motion and second the vote on this ordinance was as follows: , ATTEST: Chairman Jack Krieger XX Vice-Chairman Havert Fenn XX Commissioner R. Dale Trefelner XX Commissioner Judy Culpepper XX Commissioner Jim Minix XX PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 22nd day of June, 1988. BOARD OF COUNTy COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA CLER~ BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: COUN EXHIBIT "A" Lot 11 of the Southeast quarter of MODEL LAND COMPANY'S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, as per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page t0, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying West of the West right-of-way line of the Sunshine State Parkway; less the South 69.40 feet of the East 161.24 feet thereof. AND the West 515 feet of Lot 14 of the Southeast Quarter of MODEL ~\ND COMPANY,S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East as per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page 10, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying North of the North right-of-way line of State Road No. 70. AND that portion of Lot i0 of the Southeast Quarter of MODEL LAND COMPANY'S SUBDIVISION in'Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, as per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page 10, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying West of the West right-of-way line of the Sunshine State Parkway; less the South 69.40 feet thereof. OF Ci' :ANGE IN LAND ................. ~,¢r th,, ( Ommer i Of COUnty Commi8~o, is and roco~-- ~. .ministration ti, ihhng 2')dO ~r mt :¢es~ed Parhes on ~he PrOpOsed Land Use Plan Amendments -, r~anmng Agency c,~.:.j n~.h. th3~ aH procee,]mgs before the Board of Count~ Commissioners are electronically recorded. If a d - br ~he Boarc - -.. -,u.u~ ~Pa~ment ot Cot~muni[y A of County Commissioners w~ll ~ospect [o uny ma~ter considered at such u.: ur,)':,~edings, and [ha~ for such purpose, he may m~ed t(} ensure that a verbatim record of the -,; ..... ~ u~',,JM w jb ~, ...... · - . appealls to b h~-~ ,, If~Jng uurl~ a h ' e ~.,uHI IR. A I ¢ --o~u. U O~ The ar( ..... ~ earing upon reques~ Y party h) The proceodi-~ ...:,, ~ the request of any .... mado r~,," ~.~u amendments .~ -,_ ~ "u wJn ~e granted an nnn~. ( [o Tne_proceed~n ~uss )uts '~ ~'.veiopment. [h,l,J ...... .~ (~owlh Manaoemen, p~:_ ~. mine ny 'Utere~ted p,~,s~.~ _ ""'U .au ZOmng D,visiun,~oo~'~,,~g are available for nu~u If ~t becomes ~. _~"~ may apPear and will be ~; .... '" .... ~wV.gnieAv "~ ~"v~wm theSt. --, ~ssary, these pub c hearj~- ~,---.an opPoriunity to be h ...... en ua, Ft. Pmrce. Florida. durina ,~Ms may De con tifltJod f ..... - uaro at that time ·um ~lme ~o time. ST. LUCi BOARD ~SI Jack Krieger CHAIRMAN FLC INDRIO GROVE UMrTED PARTNERSHIP F¢om SU (Sem~ Urban) to CG {Commercjaf General) and RE [Eow Densiry Res~den dal): Located on ~he south aide of IndrioRoad a fee~ ~est of the Emerson Avenue and Indrio Road intersectmm INDRIO ESTATES ~ED PARTNERSHIP From SU [Semi Urban) to CG (Commercial General): Located at the ~n Taylor Dei~ Road and No~h King~ H~hwey. southees~ COrner of the in[er~ct~n of Indrio Road and No~h MARTIN NA~AL, RONALD AND NATAL~ BEC KER, ~ND PATRON MYE~ From S U ( Sem~ Urban) to IL (Indultr~l LighU: Located on the east side of Turnpike Feeder Road, 1/2 mile ~uth of Indrio Road. K~SHi GROVES 'rcm AG IAgricultural) to CG (Commercml General) and IL (industrial Light): Located on the ~uthe/st comer of' TRACTO~ CG~PANY ' St. Luc~ Bc ulevard aaa :~omRLScoAsTU(Low(Sem~Dens~AS~TEs,U~anJResMentiGi)t° I[ {IndustrialLTD.to RMLight): Located on the West side of Turnpike Feeder Road, apProximatMY3/4 roue no~h of Orant TEVEN°ad' lyingLbe~eenc~A~ Jenkins and HartmanfMediumRoads. Densi~ Residenha0: Located on the east ~de of Swlln Road. 1~ feet ~uth romA~l~R L { Lop[ACi~ ~ Den~ty Residential) to X {/ntercha age): Located ~n the southeast Corner of the in[emect~n of No~h Kinga Highway and m R L i LOWRoad.Den~ty Res~ential} to RM (Medium Den~ Re~iden~ialj: Located on the eas~ side of Jenkins Road. approxima: om Su ISemi Urba I ..... PENNIN TON WIN n,,~untercna ~,., BUSH n~.~. ~ocated on the no~h HULMAN, TRU~ -- u. me West side of Ran~ Line Road. apProximately 3/5 mile ~uJh o(the ' "~oen~mlJ to CG (Commerc~l Genera[): located ~ feet no~h of the Matin Coun~fine on the~ wJst~' side of ~ NEWS TRIBUNE P.o flax 6.9 STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ST LUCiE Before the undersigned authoritypersonall a ear James J. McMillen or Kathleen K. LeClair, ~hoPot~ oathd says that he/she is publisher, publisher's secretary of the N~ws Tribune, a daily newspaper published at Fort Pierce in St. Lucie County, Florida; that the attached copy of the advertis,ement, being a no t i c e m the ~- · matter of Cnan~.e ~-n La'r~"0~'~ ..... " was published in said newspaper in the issues of ......... .................. 0../.~.0/.SS Affiant further says that the said News Tribune is a newspa er published at Fort Pierce. in said'St. Lucie County, ¥1orida and that the sai~newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said St. Lueie County Florida each das and has be~n entered as second class mail ma in s.a. id St. Lucie County Florida for ........ pubhcatiorl of the attach'ed copy ~f ad~e~Ur~U~,u_n_e y, ea,r,.nex. ~.pr.e. ceding the fir[i nas neither paid nor nromise~ ..... ,,,~.m: anu alIlall[ lur[ner sa rebate comrnissi ~' 7_~,,Y person, drm or eom ~- ..... y_,s_, that h.e · , . . on or refund for the ur o . ..o(...,,, ,*,,v mscount ~u?ca. tmn i.n the said newsr~ar>er. P p se of secunng tb~s adverffsement fa;: ~orn to aha subscribed befor~me This ~/.'~ .7. t..h .... day of/.;..~'L~, e' ,~ L,,, /~'- - AD/./1988 // ' .......... ?/% ,.- J ' .-- ':-~/./ ;./". . z;" ~'"~'¢'"*'*^~ 'r~,~, · ~, .2~'.i,~, .-, ~ ...... ,..'..../.¢.%.,/ ¢-: ,,. - . ..... .-... (SEAL) ...... "--'"'--" ''~ ........... L ~:,. ~:,~. Not.ary Public._ ' -. ~- WEDNESDA~ AGENDA - BOARD OF .COUNTY COMMISSIONERS JUNE 22, 1988 7:00 P.M. Petition of James P. Bowman and Pennington Winbush, by Agent: Steven L. Craig; to amend the Future Land Use Classifica- tion of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from SU (Semi-Urban) to X (Interchange) for the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION) (Location: On the north side of Okeechobee Road 672 ft Coolidge Road) · - east of Please note that all proceedings before the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered au such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings, and that, for such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in,. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity tO cross-examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. Prior to this public hearing, notice of the same was sent to all adjacent property owners May 31, 1988. Legal notice was published in the News Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation in St. Lucie County, on June 16, 1988. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA /s/ Jack Krieger, Chairman FILE NO. PA-87-031 EXHIBIT "A" Lot 11 of the Southeast quarter of MODEL LAND COMPANY,S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 SOUth, Range 39 East, .per Plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying the West right-of-way line of the Sunshine State Pa~ the South 69.40 feet of the East 161.24 feet thereof. ~ West 515 feet of Lot 14 of the Southeast Quarter of COMPANY,S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 East as per plat of said Subdivision on file in PI~ Page 10, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, lying North of the North right-of-way line of State AND that portion of Lot 10 of the Southeast Quarter of LAND COMPANY,S SUBDIVISION in Se ' Range 39 East. as ~ -~-~ - ctlon 23, Townshi · ~ ~u~~ of s ' . . . P 35 S Book 2, Page 10, of the ~,~:- ~ld s.ubdlvlslon on fi · ~xc ~ecoros of St. Lucie Florida, lying West of theWest right-of-way l~ne Sunshine State Parkway; less ~- ' of · =ne South 69.40 feet th. as BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION£RS DCVCLOPM£NT DIRCCTOR May 26, 1988 Mr. David Flinchum Stanley Latman Associates 2000 Lombard St. West Palm Beach, FL 33407 Dear Mr. Flinchum: As per your telephone request, enclosed please find a copy of the letter dated April 18 1988 from the Department Of Community Affairs. ' If you have any questions about this matter, please feel free to contact the current planning section of this office. Sincerely, Donna B. Scanlon Assistant Planner Enclosure DS/meg HAVER7 _. FENN Distric~ No ~ · JUDY CULPEPPER District No 2 e JACK KRIEGEF~ Distnct No 3 ~ R DALE 'FREFELNER District r~o 4 e JIM MINX D~stnct No 5 County Administrator WELDON B. LEWIS 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce FL 34982-5652 ® Phone (407) 466-~ 100 Director: Ext 398 e Building: Ext. 344 ~ Planning: Ext 3!6 e Zon rig; Ext. 344 e Code Enforcement: Ext 294 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS 2740 BOB MARTINEZ CE NTERVI EW DRIVE TALL AHA SSEE, FLORIDA 32399 THOMAS G. PELHAM Se~Te.~ry April 18, 1988 Mr. Jack Krieger, Chairman St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 33482-5652 Dear Mr. Krieger: Pursuant to section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, the Department of Community Affairs has reviewed the proposed amendments to the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan. Our review indicated that the proposed amendments are generally consistent with the requirements of-Section 163.3177, Florida Statutes, which was in effect prior to October 1985. Amendment 87-031, however, did not conform to the internal consistency requirements of 163.3177, FoS., as it appeared to be inconsistent with adopted land use policy numbers 13, 16, 17, 23~ 25, 26, 27 and 53; Amendment 87-032 appeared inconsistent with adopted policy numbers 46, 48, 58 and 59. Comments from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (with atta=hments) are enclosed for your consideration. In response to County staff's request for guidance as to considering amendment 87-029 as a Development of Regional Impact (DR!), a copy of the amendment and the staff request has been forwarded to Mr. Alto Thomas, Community Program Administrator, of the Department of Community Affairs' DRi review section. He will contact Mr. Hess or Mr. Murphy to provide clarification and additional information to them. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ~ RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT Mr. Jack Krieger April 18, 1988 Page Two If we can be of further assisnance, please contact Ms. Susa,~ Williams at (904) 487-4545. ~. WP/swr Sincerely, Enclosures cc: Mr. Terry L. Hess, Planning & Zoning Director Mr. Daniel McIntyre, County Attorney Mr. Alto Thomas, Co~nunity Program Administrator Department of Community Affairs Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council ~3H~~- N±0393~- 10S XI ~HB3IO 8ddV SOY08 S~3d April 18, 1988 STANLEY/WANTMAN, INC. ENGINEERING · SURVEYING PLANNING · MANAGEMENT Ms. Sue Williams Bureau of Local Planning Division of Resource Planning and Management Department of Community Affairs 2740 Centerview Drive Tallahassee, Florida 32399 RE: Dear Sue: JAMES P. BOWMAN AND PENNINGTON WINBUSH PETITIOF ~nM COMPREHI s T. L U C: I want you to kn, few weeks and di Amendment reques final St. Lucie e time over the past Comprehensive Plan few days before the background infor ~ S~b i reviewing the fi ~ ' ~-~/ ~ ,,~, ocal Planning Department staff n he r quested for di ' ~) /~ ~) p/an is often --- )UD/1C nearing process, in tn~s case such a suggestion was illZ~-i~' The petition as originally submitted to St. Lucie County listed the X - Interchange Plan Amendment, proposed zoning as IL - Industrial and included the client's quickly prepared site plan for an office warehouse park. In response to both staff and Dub!lc hearing comments, the petition was modified to only the Comprehensive Plan land use request and presented before the County Commission on January 14th, 1988. Unfortunately by then the staff reports were complete and their recommendations finalized. I can understand the lack of support given to the original petition and my client will be the first to admit the conceptual site plan he was requested to prepare and submit needed considerably more thought and attention to design consider- ations. My concern in going through the staff comments and the supportive package forwarded to your office for review, is that many of these items of concern can be adequateley accommodated and addressed later as part of the local rezoning and site plan review process. I would prefer that the amendment request to change the SU (Semi-Urban) residential to X (Interchange) designation be looked at on a land use policy level and that the merits of the X (Interchange) not be compounded with general comments concerning the incompatibil- ity of unrestricted industrial uses or specific site plan shortcomings based upon the previous conceptual layout. LOMBARD CENTER · 2000 LOMBARD STREET · WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33407 · (305)842-7444 MEMBER OF THE STANLEY CONSULTANTS GROUP--75 YEARS OF SERVICE AS I!NTERNATIONAL CONSULTANTS IN ENGINEERING, ARCHITECTURE, PLANNING, AND MANAGEMENT Ms. Sue Williams April 18, 1988 Page 2 I am convinced the parcel's proximity to the intersection of the Florida Turnpike and Okeechobee Road (State Road 70) has increasingly diminished its desirability for continued residential uses. Such a point is evident by the fact both northeast and southeast corners are designated X (Interchange), the southwest corner is the D.O.T. construction office compound with our northwesterly corner the only quadrant remaining in a residential classificatiofi. While ! recognize the usage of natural barriers, 'i.e.., canals and major roadways, as likely transition points for land use classifications, the noise level due to the elevated overpass and the proximity to this busy interchange leave the quality of the residential environment questionable. I sincerely believe that a low intensity warehouse type usage with buffering and land use limitations incorporated as part of the local rezoning/site plan approval process, would provide a much more compatible, transitionary land use from the Turnpike corridor for those residences to the west. While I can appreciate the current St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy of encouraging interchange classifications only between the Turnpike and 1-95 intersections of Okeechobee Road, one must realize that an industrial type use cannot compete with the extremely high costs of prime retail/touris~ trade land uses currently found between these two points. No where else in Florida do the Turnpike and 1-95 corridors connect so closely together and as such the amount of crossover traffic and subsequent premium for commercial land values are not realistic for industrial zoning requests. Land uses like trucking, warehouse and manufacturing cannot compete with gas stations, motel and fast food chains for the available land area between these two interchanges. Our request is to recognize this predicament and allow our petition to be considered adjacent to this key interchange, but outside of the intensive commercialized area. The type of uses we are requesting do not required the high visibility to I-g5 and the Turnpike traffic yet are obviously dependent upon accessibility to these primary transportation routes for both local and long range hauling. In response to staff comments about our parcel not being within the urban service area for water and sewer service, please be advised that we have confirmed with Joe Vandergrift, Ft. Pierce Utilities, our agreement to extend these services from their present terminus as part of this project development approval. We sincerely feel that given the opportunity to work with the local planning staff, we can adequately address many of the concerns that arose during the project's initial reivew and can affectively incorporate the implementation strategies and land use development policies found within St. Lucie County's Growth Management Plan. Ms. Sue Williams April 18, 1988 Page 3 Thank you for taking the time to consider our position and would appreciate if you or Dennis Murphy have any questions to please feel free to contact me. , Sincere]v, ~ David Flinchum, ASLA Director of Planning DF:sm cc: Dennis Murphy, Planning Administrator, St. Lucie County Steve Craig, Wood, Cobb, Murphy and Craig. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONeRS May 31, 1988 DCVCLOPM6NT DIR6CTOR In compliance with the provisions of the Florida Statutes, you are hereby advised that James p. Bowman and Pennington Winbush, by Agent: Steven L. Craig, has petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to amend the Future Land Use Classification of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from SU (Semi- Urban) to X (Interchange) for the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION). (Location: On the north side of Okeechobee Road 672 ft. east of Coolidge Road) · A public hearing on t~e petition will be held at 7:00 P-.M. on Wednesday, June 22, 1988, in Room 101, St. Lucie County Admin- istration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce Florida. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at that time. ' Please note that all proceedings before the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, are electronically recorded. If a person decidss to appeal any decision made by the Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of the Proceedings, and that, for such purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be SWorn in. Any party to the Proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross- examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. If you no longer own Property adjacent to the above-described parcel, please forward this notice to' the new owner. If you shOuld have any questions, additional information may be obtained by calling Area Code 407, 466-1100, Extension 344/41 Sincerely, . BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, ~LORIDA Jack Krieger, Chairman FILE NO. PA-87-031 HAVERT L. FENN. District No. JUDY CULPEPPER. District No. 2 JACK KRIEGER. District No. 3 · R. DALE TREFELNER, District No. 4 · JIM MINIX, District No. 5 County Administrator - WELDON D. LEWIs 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce. FL 34982-5652 · Phone (407) 466-1100 Director: Ext. 398 · Building: Ext. 344 · Planning: Ext. 316 · Zoning: Ext. 344 · Code Enforcement: Ext. 294 EXHIBIT "A" Lot 11 of the Southeast quarter of MODEL LAND COMPANY'S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, as -'per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page 10, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying West of the West right-of-way line of the Sunshine State Parkway; less the South 69.40 feet of the East 161.24 feet thereof. AND the West 515 feet of Lot 14 of the Southeast Quarter of MODEL LAND COMPANY,S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East as per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page 10, of the Public Records of St. Lu¢ie County, Florida, lying North of the North right-of-way line of State Road No. 70. AND that portion of Lot 10 of the Southeast Quarter of MODEL LAND COMPANY,S SUBDIVISION in Section 23, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, as per plat of said subdivision on file in Plat Book 2, Page 10, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, lying West of the West right-of-way line of the Sunshine State Parkway; less the South 69.40 feet thereof. STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS :2740 CENTERVIEW DRIYE · TAI LAHASSEE FLORIDA 32399 80!3 MARTINEZ Governor THOMAS G. PELHAM Secretary April 18, 1988 Mr. Jack Krieger, Chairman St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 334'82-5652 Dear Mr. Krieger: Pursuant to section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, the Department of Community Affair.s has reviewed the proposed amendments to the St. LUcie County Growth Management Policy Plan. Our review indicated that the proposed amendments are generally consisten~ with the requirements of section 163.3177, Florida Statutes, Which was in effect prior to October 1985. Amendment 87-031, however, did not conform to the internal consistency requirements of 163.3177, F.S., as it appeared to be inconsistent with ad~pted land use policy numbers 13, 16, 17, 23, 25, 26, 27 and 53; ~mendment 87-032 appeared inconsistent with adopted policy numbers 46, 48, 58 and 59. Comments from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (with atta-hments) are enclosed for your consideration. In response to County considering amendmeht 87-02staff's9 as a request for guidance as to , Development of Regional Impact (DR!} a copy of the amendment and the staff request has been forwarded to Mr. Alto Thomas, Community Program Administrator, of the ~epartment of Community Affairs' DRI review section. He will contact Mr. Hess or Mr. Murphy to provide clarification and additional information to them. EMEI~G ENC¥ MANAGEMENT_ o HOUSI,NG AND COMMUNITY DEV~LOPA41_:N[ . RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMEN'T coundi March 11, 1988 Time Honorable Jack Krieger Chairman, St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, FL 33450 Subject: St. Lucie County Local Government Comprehensive Plan Documents Dear Chairman Krieger: Council staff has completea its review of the St. Lucie County proposed comprehensive plan amendments in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Sections 163.3184(1)(c) and (2), Florida Statutes, and has prepared comments for Council consideration'. These comments will be presented to Council at its next regular meeting on March 18, 1988. You are invited to attend the meeting and address the Council if you wish. Enclosed are staff's recommendeU comments and the agenda for the meeting. Following the meeting the comments, as finally approved by Council, will be forwarded Co the State Department of Community Affairs for transmittal to your governing body for consideration before final adoption of the documents. If you would like to discuss the staff report or Council procedures for plan review, please do not hesitate to call me. F~.'~~rr~i~t~incerely' Regional Planner PGM:dt Enclosure cc: Terry Hess Dennis Murphy OmHel McIntyre COMMUNITY DEVELOPf~£i: ~ LOC~E co. FL_ '_.~. 3228 s.w. mc~tin downs bbd. suite 205 · p.o. box 1529 palm city, Itorida 3349O phone (3O5) 286-3313 karen L marcus mc~nas g. kenny, m secmb:v'y/b~ TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL AGENDA Friday, March 18, 1988 - 9:30 a.m. Howard Johnson's Motor Lodge U.S. Highway One, Stuart 2. 3. 4. 5. ®. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Roll Call Agenda Minutes MacArthur Foundation Presentation Project Reviews a. ICR Log b. 201 Facilities Plan Update for the Glades Region of Palm Beach County, Florida--Revised February 1988 Local Government Comprehensive Plan Reviews a. City of West Palm Beach - Land Use Amendment b. To~-m of Greenacres City - Land Use Amendment c. City of Port St. Lucie - Land Use Amendments d. St. Lucie County - Land Use Amendments Letter Regarding Changes to Local Government Comprehensive Plans Florida Department of Transportation - Five-Year Work Program Financial Statement Public Comment Staff Comment Chairman's Comments Council Comment Adjournment NOTE: It is requested that the audience not smoke during the meeting. In order for all members of the audience to follow Council deliberations, the audience is asked to please refrain from conversing during the meeting. ! tern 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Acres Current Land Use Designation 39.4 Semi-Urban (< u/a) 20.0 Semi -Urban 38.5 Semi -Urban 70.9 Semi -Urban 20.5 29.6 40.7 18.8 12.8 192.6 9.9 Semi -Urban bow Den. Res. (0-5 u/a) Low Den. Res. Low Den. Res. (0-5 u/a) Semi -Urban Agri cu 1 tufa 1 Medium Oen. Res. Proposed Land Use Designation Conmmrcial General ~(2.5 a) and Low Den. Res. (0-5 u/a) General Commercial Industrial Light Commercial General (l~r-a) and Industrial Light Industrial Light Medium Den. Res. (0-11 u/~ Interchange Development Medium Den. Res. (0-11 u/a) Interchange Development Industrial Heavy Comercial General Eval uati on The proposed amendment has been reviewed in accordance wi th the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, Council's review procedures, and Council's Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan. The following comment is offered as a result of that review. Irons 4, 6, 7, and 8 Based on the information provided, the proposed amendments do n6~ appear to be in conflict or inconsistent with the policies contained in the Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan. It is noted that Virginia Avenue is operating below its capacity -.- for an acceptable level of service. The potential transportation impacts to Virginia Avenue should be considered prior to approval of developments associated with Items 5, 7, and 8. Items I, 2, 3, and 5 Based on the information provided and discussions wi th County planners, these properties do not lie within the County's current planned Urban Service Area. Until such a time as when St. Lucie County expands the '.boundaries of its Urban Service Area to include these parcels, approval of the proposed development on these parcels would not be consistent with Council policy. Council"s policy is intended to assure that a full range of urban services are provided to new developments and to assure that State, regional, and local government growth management objectives are met in a timely and efficient manner. Furthermore, this policy is intended to prevent urban sprawl, leap frog development which, due to its location, would increase the cost of service provision to the public. Council policy encourages infill and maximizing the use of existing urban facilities and infrastructure. Indian River County planners have also expressed concerns over proposed developments in the Indrio Road corridor (i.e., Items 1-3) in relation to the provision of urban services (E~ibit Al. Item 9 This item represents a proposal to change the land use designation from Semi-urban to Interchange-oriented development to develop an office warehouse park on 12.8 acres located along the west side of the Florida Turnpike at its intersection with Okeechobee Road. St. Lucie County planners have indicated that the proposed amendment is inconsistent wi th existing and proposed 3 low density residential development in this area. At present there are many single family homes near this parcel. The proposed change in land use would create an ~isolated industrial pocket in a residential area. Approval of Item 9 would not be consistent with Council policy which states that new development should be compatible with and complementary to surrounding land uses. I tern 10 This proposal is to change the land use from Agricultural Industrial Heavy on 192.6 acres located along the west side of Rangeline Road, just south of its intersection wi th Glades Cut-off Road. This property lies well outside the County's planned Urban Service Area. St. Lucie County planners have indicated that approval of the proposed change in land use would create unnecessary demands on very limited public facilities in this area. Access to this site is via a single, two-lane roadway. No public water or wastewater services are available in this area. Furthermore, in order to reduce emergency response times to this area, it would be necessary for new facilities to be constructed. The Shin Road Fire Station is approximately 13 mi 1 es away. For similar reasons to those presented in the discussion of Items 1, 2, 3, and 5, approval of Item 10 would not be consistent with Council policy which states that new development shall only occur within areas where necessary_ urban services and facilities exist or will exist concurrent with development. Additionally, State and regional plans recognize that loss of' agricultural lands to .other land uses without demonstrated need for such conversion is a problem. Finally, Council notes that the property associated with Item 10 is located only about four miles from the site of The Reserve Development of Regional Impact (DRI). Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council is currently waiting for supplemental information from the applicant of this ORI. Because numerous issues concerning this OR! are unresolved (e.g., how traffic impacts will be mitigated), Council suggests that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners may want to defer any action on the proposed anendment until the County can consider all the necessary information and potential impacts related to The Reserve OR!. Such information will be included within a fully suff (ci en t Appl i cati on for Oevel opmen t Approval and the assessment report which Council will adopt and transmit to St. Lucie County upon completion of the OR! project review. 4 [te~ 11 This 9.9-acre parcel is located about 4gO feet north of the Martin County line on the west side of Highway A-[-A. The proposal is to change the land use from Medium Density Residential to Commercial General to allow the construction of a mi nj-warehouse faci 1 i ry. Based on information provided by a nearby homeowners associatib~6 (Exhibit B) and discussions wi th the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, the proposed development would require filling certain wetlands vegetated wi th white mangroves and coragrass. Any alteration, degradation, or destruction of wetlands associated with the proposed development would not be consistent wi th Council policy protecting the functions and values of wetlands and deepwater habitat. Other concerns of the homeowners expressed in Exhibit B are primarily related to local rather than regional issues, and should be considered by St. Lucie County. Rec oar~en da ti on Council should adopt the comment outlined above and approve its transmittal to the State Department of Community Affairs in fulfillment of the requirements 'of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Attachments t St. Lucie County Proposed Land Use Amendments 8 1 6 1 JOHN,-iON 2 5 ~D AVE )RIO, RD. 6 7' 1 " -ill s6a D oF COUNTY CO mS O ERS I840 25th Street. Veto Beach, Florida 32960 EXHIBIT A Tei~none: (~5) February 18, 1988 Peter G. Merritt Regional Planner TCRPC P. O. Box 1529 Palm City, Florida 33490 FEB 2 i@BB Dear Mr. Merritt= Sun~orn Tet~or~: 224-1011 Per your letter of February 1, 1988 requesting comments on St. Lucie County's proposed January 1988 ~and Use Plan Amendments, I am transmitting Indian River County staff's review comments. These have not been approved by the Board of County Commissioners, so the comments represent only the staff position. Of the eleven proposed land use amendments, only five are located such as to potentially affect Indian River County. These are= me 2. 3. 4. 5. Kelly Tractor Kioshi Groves Martin Naftel Indrio Groves Indrio Estates This letter will address in depth any impacts t~t these proposed land use amendments may have upon Indian River County. Regarding the Kioshi Groves and Kelly Tractor Petitions. These proposed amendments are located approximately 5 miles and 6 miles respectively from Indian River County· Because of the distances involved, we believe that th~se proposed amendments will not have any negative impact upon Indian River County. Therefore, staff has no objection to these petitions. The Martin Naftel Petition, the Indrio Groves Petition, and the Indrio Estates Petition are located within an area known~s the Indrio ~Road Corridor· Because of their location, these proposed land use amendments will affect Indian River County. ~owever, after reviewing each of these proposed amendments, staff ~feels that they will not have a negative impact upon Ind/an River County. Therefore, staff has no objection to e * · these p tit/.ons Peter G. Merritt Page 2 February 18, 1988 Although we have no objections to the proposed-land use amen- ~ments, we do have some concerns about the level of development within the Indrio Road Corridor. The Indrio Road Corridor is an area along Indrio Road roughly encompassed by the County line to the north, the airport to the south, 1-95 on the west, and U.S. 1 on the east. In my discussions with Mr. Murphy, St. Lucie county Planning Administrator, he informed me .~t~.at the comprehensive plan revision (9-J-5) proposes this area for substantial urban development. Residential development would be permitted up to a limit of 5 D.U./acre. without water or sewer service being provided. Regarding St. Lucie Counpy's proposed increase in development densities, staff has one question and one concern. Does St. Lucie County propose the Indrio Road Corridor to be an urban service area~ Staff is concerned that, if higher densities are permitted within the Indrio Road corridor, the adjacent areas of Indian River County will also experience pressure for higher densities. If you have any questions about any of the comments presented .in this letter, please feel free to contact me. Very truly, G. M. Schindler Chief, Long Range Ptanning /gj cc: Robert M. Keating, AICP TM 88-519 10 ~EXHIBIT B Date: To: From: The Undersigned Property Owners STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS 257! Executive Center, Circle East, Tallahassee, Flo~~;.~T .Re: Petition of William Schutman, Trustee. (copy attached and labelled "Exhi- bit..I"), to the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commisgm~%n and r~he St. Lucie Board of County Commissioners to change the land use classifi- cation of certain property located on Hutchinson Island from RM to [File No. 87-025] We, the undersigned property owners, hereby express our strongest opposition to the above referenced petition (the "Schulman Petition") for a change in land use classification from RM to C~ of the property described on Exhibit A to the Schulman Petition (the "Schulman Propers'"). BACKGROUND: THE SCh"JLMAN PROPERT~ AND ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL LAND USE: The Schulman Property is a parcel of approximately 9.91 acres, some of which is submerged land. It is located on Aqua Ra Drive and has no direct access State Road A-I-A. The Schulman Peti~i0n s=~tes a desire to change from an ap-~ proved 66-unit condominium site plan '"~o mini-s~orage warehouse and 'limited Aqua Ra Drive is a narrow, a~ ~imes winding, dead-end s~reet.and is appr~ima~e- ly ½ mile long. Located entirely west.of A-l-A, Aqua Ra Drive_forms a "T" in,er- section wi~h A-1-A. Air. hough r. here are ~wo small re,ail areas'("strip cen~ers") located on~ either side of Aqua Ra Drive a~ the point where Aqua Ra Drive meets A-I-A, these business properties front om A-l-A, and the public's chief access to them is directly from A-1-A. Aqua Ra_Drive is a residential, sr~reet, ~i~h.'~indmill Estates~ a community of ~6 duplex homes.on r. he north side of Aqua Ra Drive, and River'Watch, a comm-~- ~y of single family homes constructed on a series of cul-de-sacs on ~he sou~h. side of 'Aqua Ra Drive. River Watch consists ~f ~$ home sites, 13 of which now contain .homes, ~ of which axe occupied. A marked copy 'of an aerial graph, labelled ."Exhibit Tv~is a~mched'for your-convenience-and review. Due ~o ~he location of :~he--Schulman.Proper~ and .-~he configuration'of Aqua Ra Drive, ~he Schulman.-Proper~y-~s ~e=~-~y pai~.~o£ .~he residen~i~l-comm~a~y of ~_ Aqua Ra D~ve ~d -~o~d be de~ ~ resid~ use, ~e class~i~ion ~ is c~en~ly ~ effect ~d ~ ~ ~ effec~ wh~ we select~ ~$ ~ ~d purc~s~ our homes. -,. 11 ~E OPPOSE THE SCHU/,NAN PE~ON FOR THE FOLLOk'IND REASONS: ]. Since ~he Schulman Proper~y abuts some of the homes on ~qua Ra Drive and is in close, visible proxim/ty to ~he residences genera_lly, ~e use o~ ~e Sch~m~ ~ope~y ~or ~-scorage or o~er co~erci~ uses Es. ~com~cible with ~e adjoin~g resid~i~ use ~d~ cause a si~ific~t deCl~e ~ p~ perry values of. ~e Aqua Ra Drive resid~ces. N0~: We ~e ~rticula~ly con- cerne~ that ~e- proxi~y* of ~e Sch~- P~pe~ ~o ~s~g homes ~d home si~es has no~ be~ cl~ly reve~ a~ ~e hearings held ~o date because none of ~he s/~e pl~4 or ~p~ ~res~.~_~ose:~e~gs:.depi~~e-~v~.-~ac~:~ Prop~.*Pl~se~see~ibi~I1~ch~'o~c~e.depie~on.::~.. 2. Since all ~rafffic. must pass the Schulman..P~6percy:An order ~o reach our homes,--the.-~ropo~ed-use'~aoutd~crea~e--an amusigh~.ly~view.~ gues~s;--z~d._-~sp~ive ~roper~~:.-going?~o -Jaomes~n Aqua- Ra' ~D. riv~ ---..- thereby, depreciating-the value of our:neighborhood genera]_ly~-' 3- Use of the Schulman Proper~y for mini-storage or other commercial uses w~_ll attract burglars ~o our neighborhood, jeopardi=ing our safe~y and wel£are. Indeed, the location o~ the Schulman Property, so far from the trafffic of A-1-A ~nd back in our neighborhood, will provide the sor~ of nighttime isola- tion and shel~er from observation ~hat criminals prefer. 4. Use o£ the Schul~a~ Property for mini-storage will degenerate use of the' property ~or work areas, repair and other businesses, possibly even sites for flea markets, causing general degradation of our neighborhood and setting an unwise and undesirable precedent on Hutchinson Island. $. The proposed land use 'will adversely affect the fragile environment of '~he area. In order to enlarge ~he proposed commercial use of the Schulman Property, the petitioner i.s presengly seeking to reverse the Departmen~ o£ Eh-' vironmental Regulacion's denial of a request to frill 1.$ to 2.0 acres of we~- lands. The D.E.R.'s basis for denying chis request is ~he permanent loss 1.5 to 2.0 acres of white mangrove and cordgrass marsh thaC now provides (a) habitat for birds and juvenile fishes, (b) d~e~ri~al material necessary. support higher trophic levels of commercially and recrea~ionally valuable ffish and invertebrates, and (c) puri£ica~ion for upland runoff, sediment uptake and stabilization. [See copy of le~er dated October 1~, ]987, from D.E.R. William Schulman, labelled "Exhibi~ III" and attached hereto.] 6. The petitioner ~irst s~ates ~ha~ the typically in~requen~ use o£ mini- storage by renters o£ such spaces will minimize traf£ic on Aqua R~ Drive and then justifies this use on ~he ground ~ba~°i~ would significantly reduce traffic over the causeways ~o mainland mini-storage. The pe~i~ioner canno~ have it both ways: such use will either generate an unacceptable level o£ congestion on our street, or i~ w~l] not significanr, ly reduce causeway ~raf~ic. 7- The creation of additional commercial/rev~ail space on ~he Scbn~w~- Proper~y ~ worsen the chronic commercial vacancy problem in the area. Yoday, in the height of .our ~ourist season, we ha~e:~$ commercial vacancies in the one .mile s~re~ch north- o£ -the .Jense~ C$.useway~ where..the S~hulman-*~per~y.-is located. 12 CONCLUSION: The foregoing-factors lead-~as-:zo from grin=in§ the Sch~m~ Pe=i=ion c~o~ outweigh ~y--neg~gible benefi~ may rest= ~rom ~he proposed .c~ge. The-'.proposed.~u~ess_=zone.wo~d projecm far ~=o ~ e~s=~g' residen~i~.~ea, .a complete deportee from ~e pres~:, wi~h ~reversible negative 'resets.' ~e._proposed ~he ~eau~ .of.-Hu~c~son-.-~t~.~r ~&~s-.~vi~o~--bu~., :~a~er, ~ -be~ de~rac~i~g-~l.uence. Our..--~-~aze_'and_:coun~y 2overnmen~$, have.- wisely: ser~.s~fe~ua~ds- '~o son- --islad from iLl-advised -dev~lop~e~-~--and~~-in- acc~rdance~i~h: ~uards, ~he Schulman Petition should be 'denied. We respectfully; ~eques~--your support and assistance in this matter and thank you for your tine afld.~c, onsidera- tion in reviewing our concerns. (Signatures of the property owners have been removed from this document for presentation purposes.) 13 souTHEAST FLORIDA DISTRICT BRANCH OF~C£ October 14, 1987 ~/£ t £iam Schu [man c/o Harold Me[v££[e 311 $ou=h Second Street Fort P. ierce, Florida 33&50 DF - Sr... Luc[e County ~e rm:i.t No: 5601095728 Dear Hr. ~elv'L.I. Le: This office has completed the revie~ of your request to modify the referenced pe.--ait. The ~4ificaciou includes the fo/lo~n~: · ~[l ~ addi:~o~l 1.~ - 2.0 acres of ~t/ands to provide additional uplands ........... develo~eat. - ~'mitiEacioa', ..four (4)- ne~ culverts ~ou l~-be .placed .throu~.~~ .. exiscin& be~ co provide ~ditio~l co~ections from ~ouud~t 12 co the south. Also, c~ (2) additio~l ~[vetts ~uld ~ i~called to supple~n: '~he previousl7 pe~tted ~ ~scalled ~vert ~ich connects ~ou~c llA ~d . llS. ' .... " ~e proposed ~diEicatioa is ~ec=ed co result ~ the pe~nen: [oss or-'il'5 to 2.0 acres of ~i=e ~n~rove (~un~lar~a race, sa) ~ co=4srass (S~artina al:e~iflo~a) ~rsh. ~is ~rsh is connected :o Class [[ wace=~ of :~e Indian Eiver (Aquatic Prese~e A-10) v~a ~ open water i~oun~ac and ~squi~o ditching. Tn[ce ~n~oves ~o ~ ~il~ed ~e ~cure crees, ~ - ~ feec in he~&h:. ~e cordsrass comuni:y ~o be f[~led (.3 acres) is a parc of ~:i&ac~oa requir~ by :he juvenile fishes, ~ese ~eC~auds coacr~buce-~cr~cal maceria~ aecessa~..:o suppor: - hi&her cruphic ~eve~s of co~rciaLLy ~ recrea:ioaaL~y valuab-:e fish ~d.-. ~avertebraces. Further, these ~c~ands provide purLficacion [or vpLaed runoff, sedi~nc uptake and scabL~izac~ua. ~e ~prov~en: of ~ce= quality ac:~bucab[~. ~o the prop~sed:m~:~&a:~an.~s ~c expecc~ ~o compensate for Che' yacks losC by the propo~.,~[lin&. Coasequenc Ly, ~n accordaace ~ch Secc~ou ~3.9~(2)-of Che Florida Statutes., Deparmenc ~s u~b[e co ~di~ chis pem~c as proposed and :he request ~or ~di[~cac~oa ~s den~ed. and Your QuarTer LEe 14 Sc. Lucie County 5601095728 This letter constitutes final agency action unless a person subs:ancia~ly a~'~ecced :he ac:ion requests an admin£sCraCive hearing pu=suanc =o Sec=~oa 110.57, F~or~da Sca=utes. ~e pe:~cio~ ~sc be ~i~ed ~=hin fourteen (la) ~s fr~ receipc of lecher. The petition muse comply v~ch the requir~encs of F~orida ~niscracive ~uie 28-5.201. and be filed pursuant =o Rule ~7-1B3.155(i) in the Office of General Counsel of =he DePa==menc of Env[ro~ea~ai Regulation ac 2600 Bi,ir S~ae ~oad, ~'llahassee, Florida 32301-82&1. Peri=ions ~ich are ao= filed' in accucdance ~=h =he above prov{sioas ~[1 ~o~ be accep=ed by =he Department. If a fo~l proceedia~ pursuanc =o Section 120.57(1) is requested, at such fo~l hearin~ all par=les sha[~ have an oppor=uaicy ~o respond, ~o presen= evidence and ar~men~ o~ ali issues involved, ~o co,duc=, cross ex--ina=ion of ~=nes~es ~d submi= rebu==al evidence, ~ submi= proposed findings of fac=s and orders, ~o file excep=ioas =o any order or hearing officer's rec~ended order, and ~o be represenced by counsel. If ~ info,al proceedinE is requested, che aEency ~1, in accordance w~=h i=s ~les of procedure, ~ive= affec=ed persons or par=ies or Cheir counse~ an oppor=uni=y, ac a coavenien= cime and place, =o presenc ~o Che a{en~ or he,tinE off,car ~i==en or oral evidence in upposicion =o =he agency's ac:ion or =efusa~ ~o ~=, or a ~=cen sca=~en= challenE.inE~ =he grounds upon which =he a{ency has chosen ~o jus=if~ irs aC=ion or' designed ~o fo~ace.a~en~.ac~ion. -,-Accordingly, ~he-Depa~en:'s- f~ action aa' a resul~ of a hea~ns ~ be diffe~en: f~om che posiciou c~en ~ i~ ~ chis Therefore, a~ person who ma~ wish ~o coaces~ ~he Dependent's ul~ce pe~iC~ns' ~, deczSion ms~ pec:ic%.on fo~ ~ar~ ~chin che fourteen ~ per~od described above.. FailPre co f~le a ~equesc.fo~ ~ea~in~ ~hin ~his ci~ period shai~ consci:n~e ~aiver 0f ~y ~i~hC ~ch person ~ have ~o req~s~ a hearin~ '~d~ Sec:ion 120.57, F Lo,ida $CaCu~es. Since~e~, JSB: ~b/i6 cc: USACOE, ~iami and Jacksonville (wi:h dra~{nss) Chris Bore, S:.:Lucie"Counc~.-Planning and Zoning James Oav£d, Sc. Lm-c~e-'Councy Mosqui:o-ConcroL Oiscric: Sc. Lucie County.Proper:7 Appraiser Reese Kess£er, Bussen En~ineerinK G~oup 15 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION SOUTHEAST FLORIDA D~TRIOT /#___~---~,.~"~,%\ BRANC~ oFiqoE · M~nh 9, 1988. Mr. Peter Merritt Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Post Office Box 1529 Palm City,. :Florida 34990 Re: Land Use Change for William Schulman Bu~cb/nson Island, St. Lucie County Dear Peter: As we recently discussed, our Department has been involved with Mr. Schulman's property regarding ~.he issuance of a wetland fill permit, On July 3, 1986, we issued a pecm~t to Mr. Schulman for ~he placement of fill over approximately 1.5 acres of wetlands. recently, Mr. Schnlman has requested a modifica~ion of ~his pe~m~L~ to fill another I .5 to 2 acres of weY. lands. A copy of his la~es~ wetland fill plan is enclosed, which indica~es ~he existing wetlands permit=ed for filling and ~hose wetlands proposed for filling. Mr. Schulman's modifica=ion reques= was denied (a copy Of ~he denial letter is also enclosed), prom~ing an Admin£s~ra~ive Bearing which is scheduled for April 7th and 8th. I hope th£s is of some benefi2 ~o you. Should you have any questions, please do no~ hesi~a2e to call. JA~: ~k Sincerely, l~Ivironmen~al planage r Enclosures 16 ~7 INI~!AR1 RIY£R SI; I,.t!£1£ ~DUIITY STANLEY/WANTMAN, INC. ENGINEERING · SURVEYING PLANNING · MANAGEMENT February 22, 1988 Mr. Dennis Murphy Community Development Division St. Lucie County Administration Building 2300 Virginia Avenue Ft. Pierce, FL 33482-5652 RE: JAMES P. BOWMAN AND PENNINGTON WINBUSH FROM SU (SEMI-URBAN) TO X (INTERCHANGE): LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF S.R. 70 OKEECHOBEE ROAD, 672 FEET EAST OF COOLIDGE ROAD Dear Dennis: I would appreciate your forwarding me a copy of your staff report and any related correspondence sent to the Department of Community Affairs as it may relate to the above Comprehensive Plan Amendment. I spoke with Donna Scanlon last week about sending a package for my reference, so please check as she may have already forwarded one to our office. Thank you for your assistance. Si n c e r ~//~ David Flinchum, ASLA Director of Planning DF/pn cc: Steve Craig LOMBARD CENTER · 2000 LOMBARD STREET · WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33407 · (305)842-7444 MEMBER OF THE STANLEY CONSULTANTS GROUP--75 YEARS OF SERVICE AS INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANTS IN ENGINEERING, ARCHITECTURE, PLANNING, AND MANAGEMENT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR J. GARY AMENT February 19, 1988 Mr. David Slingchum Stanley/Wantman Associates 2000 Lombard Street West Palm, FL 33407 Dear Mr. Slingchum, As per your telephone request, enclosed please find a copy of the~~smittal letter an~~ report for the petition of James P< --~fB°wmah and Pennington ~lnous~. If you have any questions about this matter, please feel free to contact this office. Sincerely, Donna B. Scanlon Assistant Planner Enc. DS/ds HAVERT t. FENN. District No. 1 · JUDY CULPEPPER, District No. 2 · JACK KRIEGER, District No. 3 ® R. DALE TREFELNER, District No. 4 · JIM MiNIX, District No. 5 County Administrator - WELDON B. LEWIS 2300 Virginia Avenue e Fort Pierce, FL 33482-5652 · Phone (305) 466-1100 Director: Ext. 398 · Building: Ext. 344 · Planning: Ext. 316 e Zoning: Ext, 336 · Code Enforcement: Ext. 317 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION£RS DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR J. GARY AMENT February 5, 1988 Mr. Gary Schindler Chief - Comprehensive Planning Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Subject: Proposed Amendments to the St. Lucie County Growth ManaDement Policy Plan Dear Gary: Enclosed, please find copies of the proposed Land Use Map Amendments that are currently under review during our SprinD Plan Amendment Cycle. I believe that the are self explanatory, but if you have any questions, please let us know. Dennis J. P 1 anni nD dministra~ ~r DJM/meD PLANAM1 ( B22 ) cc: Petition file. s HAVERT L FF_NN, District No. I · JUDY CULPFPPER, District No, 2 ® JACK KRtEGER, District No. 3 ® R. DALE TREF~'LNER, District No. 4 · JIM MINIX, District No. 5 Coun~ Administrator - WELDON B, LE~IS 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce, FL 33482-5652 ® Phone (305) 466-I100 Director: Ext. 398 e Building: Ext, 344 · Planning: Ext. 316 ® Zoning: Ext. 336 ® Cade Enforcement: Ext. 317 January 26, 1988 council The Honorable Jack Krieger Chairman, St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, FL 33450 Subject: St. Lucie County Local Government Comprehensive Plan Documents Dear Mr. Krieger: This is to. notify you that the Regional Planning Council has received a request from the State Department of Community Affairs {DCA) for comments on the following comprehensive planning document: St. Lucie County Land Use Amendments (January 21, 1988 Transmittal to DCA) Council staff will review the document in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. It is anticipated that the report and recommended comments will be presented to Council at its meeting on February 19, 1988. Prior to the Council meeting, the meeting agenda, report, and ~ecomme. nded comments of the staff will be transmitted to you. You or any represe, nta- tire of your local government are invited to attend the meeting and will be afforded an opportunity to address the Council. Following the Council meeting the adopted comments will be transmitted to DCA. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Peter G. Merritt Regional P1 anner PGM:! g cc; L. Hess Daniel McIntyre :~228 s.w. martin doum$ blvd. suite 205 - p.o. box 1529 palm ~, florida :~S490 phone (~OS) 286-3313 kol'en t. MOXCUS thomas g. kenr~ ~/treas~,~r jim min~x vice dmimmn daniel m. :an/ ~ die.mr BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION£RS January 21, 1988 Mr. Ralph K. Hook Bureau of Local Planning Department of Community Affairs 2740 Centerview Drive Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Subject: Transmittal of Spring 1988 Proposed Amendments to the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan Dear Mr. Hook: Enclosed please find ten (10) copies of the eleven (il) proposed Land Use Amendments to the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan, scheduled for final review in June of 1988~ On Thursday, January 14, 1988, the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners, after holding a public hearing on each petition, voted unanimously to forward each of these petitions to the Department of Community Development for further review in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. As cited in the staff reports for each of these petitions, none of these proposed changes are related to a Development of Regional Impact submission; none are considered to be a small area amendment under the requirements of Chapter 163.3187(t)(c), Florida Statutes; none are considered to be emergency plan amendments; none are proposed for adoption under a joint planning agreement pursuant to Chapter 163, 3171 Florida statutes; and none are located within any designated Area of Critical State Concern. If during your review ~of these proposed amendments, you have any questions about them, please do not hesitate to contact our Office of Community Development for assistance. Specific individuals in that office to contact would be Mr. Terry L. Hess, Planning and Zoning Director or Mr. Dennis J. Murphy, Planning Administrator. When your Agency returns its review comments to St. Lucie County, I would appreciate it if you would also include copies to Mr. Hess and Mr. Daniel McIntyre, County Attorney as well. HAVER.~ L FENN Dtsm~ No. ~ e JUDY CULPEPP[R. D~s~r.c NO 2 · JACK KRIEGE,~, D~smc r4o 3 ¢, R. DALE TREFELNER D~s~ict No 4 ® JiM ~.JNIX. D sir,ct Nc 5 Coun~AOrn~mstra~o, 'L4."LDO~ [; L-t-WiS 230C v,rgima Avenue e Fort P~e FL 5~482 5652 e Phone ($05) 406-'~ 100 Ext. 201 & 202 January 21, 1988 Page 2 Subject: Spring 1988 Plan Amendments We appreciate the time you will be spending on these petitions, and look forward to receiving your input on these requests. S i~ere ! y, . J .// Krieger >~hairman, Board of County Commissioners JK/DJM/meg TRANSl(B-JUN)88b cc: County Administrator County Attorney Planning & Zoning Director Petition Files ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR J. GARY AMENT THURSDAY JANUARY 16, 1987 1:30 P..M. Notice is hereby given that, James P. Bowman & Pennington Winbush, by agent Steven L. CraiG has petitioned the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners for a change in land use classification, on the following described property, from SU (Semi-Urban) to X (Interchange). See Attached Legal (Located on North side of Okeechobee Road, 672 feet east of Coolidge Road) A public hearing will be held on Thursday, January 14, 1988, at 1:30 P,M., in Room 101, St. Lucie County Administration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Ft. Pierce, Florida, before the the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners to review the proposed change and determine whether to transmit this petition for further review in accordance with Chapter 380, Florida Statues. At this hearing all interested parties will be given an opportunity to be heard. Please note that all proceedings before the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded. If a person decides to appeal any action taken by the Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at this hearing, he will need a record of the proceedings, and that for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes he testimony and evidence upon which he appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. Additional information on this requested change in land use is available in the St. Lucie County Community Development Office, Building and Zoning Division, Room 201, St. Lucie County Administration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Ft. Pierce, Florida, during normal business hours. FILE NO.: PA-87-031 BOWMAN3(B-JUN)88 HAVERT L. F£NN District No. 1 · JUDY CULPEPPER, District No. 2 ® JACK KRIEG£R, District No. 3 ® R. DALE TREFELNER, District No. 4 · JIM MINIX, District No. 5 Couni7 Administrator - WELDON B. LEWIS 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce, FL 33482-5652 ® Phone (305) 466-1100 Director: Ext. 398 e Building: Ext. 344 ® Planning: Ext. 3t6 e Zoning: Ext. 336 ® Code Enforcement: Ext. 317 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY~ FLORIDA SPECIAL MEETING Date: January 14, 1988 Tape: #1 convened: 1:38 p.m. adjourned: 3:00 p.m. Commissioners Present: Chairman Jack Havert L. Fenn (as noted), Jim Minix, Culpepper Krieger, Vice-Chairman R. Dale Trefelner, Judy Others Present: Weldon Lewis, County Administrator; Krista Storey, Assistant County Attorney; Terry Hess, Planning & Zoning Director; Dennis Murphy, Rlanning Administrator; Walter Smith, Deputy Sheriff's Office; Jane C. Marsh, Deputy Clerk PLANNING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - LAND USE AMENDMENTS The purpose of this Public Hearing is to consider those Proposed Land Use Amendments to the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Pland and whether they should be forwarded to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Assistant County Attorney Krista Storey advised that until the Board adopts the new Comprehensive Plan, staff recommends that the Board transmit all petitions to the Department of Community Affairs for their comments. These petitions will be returned to the Board at a later date for their final determination. Proof of publication was furnished for:all of the petitions. 9. JAMES P. BOWMAN AND PENNINGTON WINBUSH To amend the Future Land Use Maps of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from SU (Semi-Urban) to X (Interchange). Staff's preliminary recommendation on this petition is for denial; however, consistent with County policy, staff recommended that this Board forward to the Florida Department of Community Affairs this petition requesting a change in Land Use from SU to X, including all comments presented at the LRA hearing of January 7, 1988. Steven L. Craig, representing petitioners 3ames P. Bowman and Rennington Winbush, appeared requesting transmittal of this petition. Mr. Craig also advised that the petitioners had previously applied for a zoning classification of Light Industrial, because that was the only category available at that time; and, they intend to withdraw the request for LI, and come Oack for a PNRD. Staff advised they had received two letters of objections since the LPA hearings, from Hank Vachon and Charles Pallas. A letter of objection from Louis C. Forget was presented for the Record. It was moved by Com. Minix, seconded by Com. Fenn, that this petition be forwarded to the Florida Department' of Community Affairs for comments; and, upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. ,~ SPECIAL MEETING LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY LARGE AREA PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSMITTAL HEARING MINUTES BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: j. p. Terpening, Mabel Fawsett, Robert Carman, Patricia King, Jim Russakis, and Jo Ann Allen. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Harris - excused, illness; Patricia Ferrick - excused, conflict; and Joseph Sciturro - excused, conflict. OTHERS PRESENT: Krista Storey, Assistant County Attorney; Dennis j. Murphy, Planning Administrator; Terry Hess, Planning and Zoning Director; Donna Scanlon, Assistant Planner; and Dolores Messer, Secretary. PRESS ATTENDANCE: None. TAPES: 1, 2, 3, and 4 DATE OF HEARING: JANUARY 7, 1988 TIME: 7:00 P.M. INVOCATION: The Invocation was given by Mrs. Mabel Fawsett. PUBLIC HEARING: Petition of James P. Bowman and Pennington Winbush, 'by Agent Steven L. Craig, to amend the future land use maps of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from SU (Semi Urban) to X (Interchange Development) for property located on the north side of State Road 70 (Okeechobee~Road), 672 ft. east of Coolidge Road. Mr. Steven Craig presented the petition. The owners have entered into a joint venture agreement with M. Lynwood Bishop~' Jr. to develop the property. Mr. Bishop is currently preparing to develop a 240 acre industrial park at the interchange of 1-95 and Indian Town Road in Palm Beach County. Regarding negative Staff findings, Mr. Craig said that water and sewer are available just on the other side of the tdrnpike. He had discussions with FPUA and would provide services to the site providing the developer pay for installation. Mr. Craig said that the industrial de- velopment will be a planned development. Other staff concerns can be addressed at the time of site plan review. He also felt that the location of the subject property is not suitable for residential development. He felt there will be requirements for possible road improvements to facilitate the development of this particular project. Regarding Staff's comments concerning the development may have a net increase in the cost of water and wastewater services and roadway capacities, he felt those objec- tions are satisfied by obtaining water and wastewater services from the City of Ft. Pierce and by whatever requirements are made for improving the roadways. He feels the property is valuable and has high visibility to the interstate . Mr. George Jones felt that the turnpike provides a logical boun- dary for industry to stop heading west. The Kings Highway corri- dor is a natural area for this type development. He did not agree to moving industrial interests into what is now residential and rural areas. Mr. Louis Forget felt that there are not enough details available as to the intention for development of the subject property and agreed that Kings Highway would be the best boundary line for this type development. Mr. Charles Pallas felt that Interchange oriented development is too liberal and is not consistent with other surrounding land uses. He felt that it would be a mistake to all'ow any use other than residential for this area. He also pointed out that no traffic accesses the turnpike from the west side. The Toll Plaza is on the east side. He also agreed that Kings Highway or the turnpike should be the boundary for this type development. Mr. Bob Rhoden did not feel this type of development would ad- vance the County and the subject area'S land use should be left as residential use. Re§arding Staff comments, Mr. Murphy said that surrounding land uses are SU to the north and south. In Staff's opinion the request is for an inappropriate application of nonresidential land use in the subject area. The concerns cited in the Staff report dealt with the ~property being outside the defined urban service area of Ft. Pierce Utilities. Staff also expressed concern regarding any kind of intense commercial or non- residential development west of the turnpike for access reasons. It is a two-lane road; however, the State does intend to expand it to a four-lane road from Gordy Road east to the turnpike entrances sometime within the next five years. The request would represent an unwarranted intrusion into a residential area. Staff recommended that the LPA forward a recommendation to transmit, but with a recommendation of denial. Mr. Craig said that for the other Interchanges along 1-95, the X designation is on both the east and west sides of i-95. Details of the proposed development would be addressed at the time the zoning issue is addressed. Regarding road capacity, the location is right next to two interstates, meaning that only a short distance would have to be traveled to access those interstates. Chairman Terpening closed the public portion of the hearing. Mrs. Fawsett said she felt that the area should remain residen- tial, that the residents' way of living should not be intruded upon. Mr. Carman stated that he agreed that the boundary between indus- trial and residential development should remain as the turnpike. Mr. Terpening said he could not see the subject property being utilized as residential due to the noise factor. After considering the testimony presented during the public hear- ing, including staff comments, and the Standards of Review as set out in Section 5.3.300, St. Lucie County Zoning Ordinance~ Mr. Russakis made a motion that the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency recommend to the Board of County Commissioners, that the petition of James P. Bowman and Pennington Winbush for a change in land use from SU (Semi Urban) to X (Interchange), not be transmitted to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for further review and evaluation under the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes considering adjacent residential land uses and Staff comments. Mrs. King seconded the motion, and upon roll call, Mr. Carman, Mrs. Fawsett, Mrs. Kin§, Mrs° Allen and Mr. Russakis voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Terpenin§ voted against the motion. This resulted in five votes in favor of and one vote against the motion. Chairman Terpening informed the agent for the petitioner that the petition will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with ~a recommendation not to transmit. Agenda Item: File Number: PA-87-031 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Local Planning Agency Planning Administrator December 31, 1987 Petition of James P. Bowman and Pennington Winbush, by Agent Steven L. Craig, to Amend the Future Land Use Maps of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from SU (Semi-Urban) to X (Interchange Development) LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: EXISTING GMPP: PROPOSED GMPP: PARCEL SIZE: PROPOSED USE: SURROUNDING ZONING: SURROUNDING LAND USE: FIRE/EMS PROTECTION: WATER/SEWER SERVICE: On the north side of State Road 70 (Okeechobee Road), 672' east of Coolidge Road. AR-1 (Agricultural, Residential - 1 du/ac) SU (Semi-Urban) X (Interchange Development) 12.78 acres To develop an office warehouse park AR-l, AG and I Surrounding lands are used for low density, single family development. Ft. Pierce Central Fire Station is located approximately 4.75 miles away. No public facilities currently available. See comments December 31, 1987 Page 2 Petition: Bowman, J./Pennington, W. File No.: PA-87-031 STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: In reviewing this application for proposed amendment to the Growth Management Policy Plan, the Local Planning Agency shall consider and make the following determinations: Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie Growth Management Policy Plan; The proposed amendment is not consistent with the industrial development policies of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan. Specific County policies in conflict are #45, #47, #48, #50, #52, #53 and #57. Whether and the extent to .which the proposed amendment is consistent with existing and proposed land uses in this area; The proposed amendment is inconsistent with existing and proposed low density residential development in this area. Whether there have been changed conditions that require an amendment; To the best of information, including that supplied by the petitioner, we are unaware of any changed conditions in this area to warrant consideration for this change in land use. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether or the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities; See Comments December 31, 1987 Page 3 Petition: Bowman, J./Pennington, W. File No.: PA-87-031 Se Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in an orderly and logical development pattern, specifically identifying any negative effects on such pattern; The proposed change in land use would not result in an orderly or logical development. Presently there are many s~ngle family homes in this area. This change in land use would create a isolated industrial pocket and provide an unwarranted intrusion of industrial land use in a residential area. COMMENTS: The petitioners, James P. Bowman and Pennington Winbush, propose to change the land use and zoning on property located west of the Florida Turnpike, along the north side of Okeechobee Road to permit the development of a 12.7 acre industrial/warehouse complex. The submitted development scheme indicates a total of 159,000 square feet of warehouse space with some limited showroom space included. The concept plan indicates one driveway access point onto Okeechobee Road, with the possibility of two additional access points as a part of outparcel development. There isno indication of the relationship of these driveways to the intersection of Gordy Road and Okeechobee Road located somewhere in this area. County staff has reviewed this proposed amendment and found it not to be within any area of Critical State Concern, found it not to qualify as a small area or emergency plan amendment under Chapter 380.3187, Florida Statutes and is not proposed for adoption under a Joint Planning Agreement pursuant to Chapter 163.3171, Florida Statutes. County staff has reviewed this proposed petition for consistency with the industrial/interchange development policies of the Growth Management Policy Plan, and at this time must report this petition as inconsistent with those policies. This determination is based in part upon concern over the limited area of frontage onto Okeechobee Road, the property's only access point, and the potential negative impacts that industrial development, no matter the zoning designation, would have on the surrounding residential character of the area. Other concerns are as cited in Review Standard #1 above. December 31, 1987 Page 4 Petition: Bowman, J./Pennington, W. File No.: PA-87-031 Roadways immediately in front of the site are estimated to be operating within acceptable levels. However, serious operational problems exist along Okeechobee Road from the Florida Turnpike bridges to the 1-95 interchange. The recent opening of 1-95, south of Stuart, will provide some short term relief for this area, but long term improvements must be completed before traffic volumes build back up once again. The Department of Transportation currently has programmed improvements in FY 88-89 to Okeechobse Road in this area. However, recent information indicate that this time table may be delayed as right-of-way acquisition has not yet been completed. The subject property is not located within the planned service area of the Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority. There has been no information provided by the petitioner to support the statement in this petition application that this area will be served by Ft. Pierce Utilities. Referring to Review Standard #4 above, given the location of this property as outside of the currently accepted urban service area, staff feels that approval of this petition would result in a net increase in cost to the public for the provision of water/wastewater services, roadway capacities and other service needs. This proposed amendment represents, in our opinion, an application for an incompatible land use in an otherwise homogenous environment. Under the requirements of Rule 9J-11, Florida Administrative Code, the State of Florida now requires a recommendation from this Agency as well as staff, prior to the Board of County Commissioners consideration on whether or not to transmit this petition for further agency review. Consistent with County Policy, staff would recommend that the Local Planning Agency support the transmittal of this petition to the State of Florida for further Agency review and comment. Preliminary staff recommendation is for denial of this petition. Final staff recommendation will be withheld pending receipt and review of these Agency comments. DJM/DS/mg Attachment BOWMAN2(B-JUN)88 cc: County Attorney Steven L. Craig SAMPLE MOTION: MOTION TO TRANSMIT: AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, AND THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET IN SECTION 5.3.300, ST. LUCIE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THAT THE PETITION OF JAMES P.BOWMAN & PENNINGTON WINBUSH FOR A CHANGE IN LAND USE FROM SU (SEMI- URBAN) TO X (INTERCHANGE), BE TRANSMITTED TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR FURTHER REVIEW AND EVALUATION UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 380, FLORIDA STATUTES. MOTION TO DENY TRANSMITTAL: AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, AND THE STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET IN SECTION 5.3.300, ST. LUCIE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THAT THE PETITION OF JAMES P. BOWMAN & PENNINGTON WINBUSH FOR A CHANGE IN LAND USE FROM SU (SEMI- URBAN) TO X (INTERCHANGE), NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR FURTHER REVIEW AND EVALUATION UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 380, FLORIDA STATUTES; BECAUSE ..... SU CT RL BLUE RED P UR PLE 23-35-39 PETITION OF JAMES P. BOWMAN AND PENNINGTON WINBUSH BY AGENT: STEVEN L. CRAIG FOR A CHANGE IN THE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION FROM SU TO X AR-1 C1~ AG I RED BLUE BROWN PURPLE 23-35 39 PETITIO~ OF JAMES P, BOWMAN AND PENNINGTON WINBUSH BY AGENT: STEVEN L, CRAIG FOR A CHANGE IN THE LAND USE [CLASSIFICATION FROM SU TO X Steven L. Craig 319 Clematis St. Fifth Floor, Comeau Bldg. West Palm Bch., FL 33401 A James P. Bowman (TR) Pennington R. Winbush (TR) P.O. Box 8426 Northwood State West Palm Beach, FL 33407 OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFIED 1 George R. & Barbara S. Jones 2740 Coolidge Rd. Pt. Pierce, FL 34945-3!33 2 Charles W. & Dorothy L. Pallas 2790 Coolidge Rd. Pt. Pierce, FL 34945-3133 3, 24 Barbara Jo Pfis~er Barbara Klm Pfister (ROS) 7620 Okeechobee Rd. ~t. Pierce, FL 34945-2725 4, 5 Florentino N. Jr. & Lolita C. Arriola 2215 Nebraska Av., Ste 3A Ft. Pierce, FL 34950-4867 Lois & Edwin Keim 2888 Coolidge Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-3133 7 Jon W. Parrish P.O. Box 3091 Ft. Pierce, FL 34948-3091 William & Janet Pointon 8026 Okeechobee Rd Pt. Pierce, FL 34945-9688 9 R~D. & Da~i~ V. ~ P.O. Box 125 Jupiter, FL 33468-0125 10 Josephine Hood 8101 Okeechobee Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-9689 11 Ira & Corinne M. Levy 8021 Okeechobee Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-9689 12 John C. & ~wen Forget 3001 Orange Ay. Ft. Pierce, FL 34947-1545 13, 18 Louis & Joan H. Forget P.O. BOx 281 Ft. Pierce, FL 34954-0281 14 Phillip J. & Melanie Forget 2709 S. 28th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 34981-6009 15 Louis & Gayle Forget 3075 Gordy Rd Pt. Pierce, FL 34945-2716 17 Juan and Juanita Cano P.O. BOx 15 Ellenton, FL 34222-0015 ~R PROPEI~fY OWNERS NOTIFIED 20, 21, 22 C. L. Lafevers Jr. Berlin Inv. Inc. P.O. Box 1002 VeroBeach, FL 32961-1002 23 Hem_ryP. Vachon P.O. Box 126 Butler, TN 37640-0126 16, 19, 25 Turnpike Authority P.O. Box 8008 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 3310 State of FLorida Road Dept. Road Right-of-Way 780 S.W. 24th Street Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33315 PROPF~r"~Y OWNERS IN PETITIONED ARE~- Steven L. Craig 319 Clematis St. Fifth Floor, Com:ea~u Bldg. West Palm Bch., FL 33401 A James P. Bowman (TR) Pennington R. Winbush (TR) P.O. Box 8426 Northwood State West Palm Beach, FL 33407 George R. & Barbara S. Jones 2740 Coolidge Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-3133 OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFIED 2 Cbarles W. & Dorothy L. Pallas 2790 Coolidge Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-3133 3, 24 Barbara Jo Pfister Barbara Klm Pfister (ROS) 7620 Okeechobee Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-2725 4, 5 Florentino N. Jr. & Lolita C. Arriola 2215 Nebraska Ay., Ste 3A Ft. Pierce, FL 34950-4867 6 Lois & Edwin Keim 2888 C~lidge Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-3133 7 Jon W. Parrish P.O. Box 3091 Ft. Pierce, FL 34948-3091 8 William & Janet Pointon 8026 Okeechobee Rd Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-9688 9 ~c~ard D. & Denise-V. Nnb~n~n P.O. Box 125 Jupiter, FL 33468-0125 10 Josephine Hood 8101 Okeechobee Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-9689 11 Ira & Corinne M. Levy 8021 Okeechobee Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-9689 12 John C. & 6k~en Forget 3001 Orange Ay, Ft. Pierce, FL 34947-1545 13, 18 Louis & Joan H. Forget P.O. Box 281 Ft. Pierce, FL 34954-0281 14 Phillip J. & Melanie Forget 2709 S. 28th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 34981-6009 15 Louis & Gayle Forget 3075 GordyRd Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-2716 17 Juan and Juanita Cano P.O. Box 15 Ellenton, FL 34222-0015 Cr.~.~R PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFIED 20, 21, 22 C. L. Lafevers Jr. Berlin Inv. Inc. P.O. Box 1002 VeroBeach, FL 32961-1002 23 Henry P. Vachon P.O. Box 126 Butler, TN 37640-0126 16, 19, 25 Turnpike Authority P.O. Box 8008 Ft. La~erdale, FL 3310 State of FLorida Road Dept. Road Right-of-Way 780 S.W. 24th Street Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33315