The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBittan, B AOF COUNI'Y D V£LOPM£NT COORDINATOR J. GARY AMENT November 5, 1984 B. A. Bittan, Jr. :P. O. Box 3445 Fort Pierce, Florida 33448 Dear Mr. Bittan: This letter is to confirm that on Tuesday, October 23, 1984, the Board of County Commissioners granted your petition to amend the future land use classification of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from RL (low density residential development) to RM (medium density residential development) for property located on the west side of South 25th Street, between Edwards Road and Virginia Avenue. Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 84-169 adopted by the Board. Very truly yours, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA R. Dale Trefelner, Chairman lc Enc~ H'AYERT L DDNN. District No, 1 · E. E. GREEN, District No. 2 · MALIRICE SNYDER. District No. 3 · R. DALE TREFELNEI~ Distnct No. 4· BILL PALMER.D',str,c? NO 5 County Administrotor - WELDON B. LEW~S 2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce, FL 33450 · Phone (305) 466-1100 Coordinator: Ext. 316 · Building: Ext. 344 · PLanning: Ext. 316 · Zoning: EXt. 336 · Code Enforcement: Ext. 317 RESOLUTION NO. 84-169 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF THE GROWTH ~G~ POLICY PLAN WHE~, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made the following determinations: 1. Economys and Duncan by agent B. A. Bittan and TBG Taurus · Equities, Inc. by agent Joseph J. DeRoss, Jr. presented a petition to amend the future land use classification set forth in the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from RL (low density residential development) to RM (medium density residential development) for the property described below. 2. The St. Lucie County Planning and zoning Commission, after holding the public hearing of which due notice was published at least thirty (30) days prior to said hearing and all owners of property within three hundred feet (300') 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 Plan from RL (low density residential development) to RM (medium density residential development) for the property described below. 3. The Board held a public hearing on October 23, 1984 after publishing a notice of said hea~ing in the Fort Pierce News Tribune on September 21, 1984. NOW, T~E~O~, BE IT ~SOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: A. The future land use classification set forth in the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan for that property described as follows: The Northeast one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 20, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, LESS AND EXCEPTING all rights-of-way for public roads and drainage canals. and The Southeast one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 20, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, LESS AND EXCEPTING public roads and LESS the following parcels: Begin 242.5 feet East of the Northwest corner of the Southeast one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 20, Township 35 South, Range 40 East; thence run East 217.5 feet; thence run South 235 feet; thence run West 435 feet; thence run North 10 feet; thence run East 217.5 feet; thence run North 225 feet to point of beginning. Begin at the Northwest corner of the Southeast one-quarter of the Northeast one- quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 20, Township 35 South, Range 40 East; thence run East 242.5 feet; thence run South 225 feet; thence run West 242.5 feet; thence run North 225 feet to point of beginning. and Begin at the Northwest corner of the Southeast one-quarter of the Northeast one- quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 20, ~Township 35 South, Range 40 East; thence run East 242.5 feet; thene run South 225 feet; thence run West 242.5 feet; thence run North 225 feet to point of beginning. (Located on the west side of South 25th Street, between Edwards Road and Virginia Avenue.) owned by Economys and Duncan by agent B. A. Bittan and TBG Taurus Equities, Inc. by agent joSeph J- DeRoss, Jr., be, and the same is hereby, changed from RL (Iow density residential development) to RM (medium density residential development). B. The St. Lucie County Development Coordinator is hereby authorized and directed to cause the changes to be made in the Growth Management Policy Plan. After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows: Chairman R. Dale Trefelner Aye Vice-Chairman Havert L. Fenn Aye Commissioner Maurice D. Snyder Aye Commissioner E. E. Green Aye Commissioner William B. Palmer Aye p~F.D AND DULY ADOPTED this 23rd day of October, 1984. BO~ OF CO~ CO~ISSIONE~ ST. LUCIE CO~, FLORIDA By · , - Chairman ATTEST: 6'78054 I T25 FILE2 ROGER :~i . ST. LUCtL S". ~.., !": 446 ~ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OCTOBER 23, 1984 44 & 1530 PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNING - EcoNoMYS & DUNCAN Moved by Com. Fenn, seconded by Com Green to adopt Res. 84-169 authorizing amending future land use classification of St. Lucie County GMPP from RL (low density residential dev.) to RM (medium density residential dev.) for property located on the west side of S. 25th St. between Edwards Rd. and Virginia Ave. Upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. N 20-35' 4O EDWARDS ROAD tT!O~ OF EUGENE AND ANTHONY BY AGENT B~ A. BITTAN . A~D PETITION OF TBG TAURUS EQUITIES, !NC. BY AGENT JOSEPH J. DEROSS JR. FOR CHANGE N LAND USE CLASSIFICATION ~ROM RL TO RM. !CONOMYS N EDWARDS ROAD (DF EUGENE AND BY AGENT B , BI [TAN A~ ON OF TBG TAI]~US Ei AGENT JOSEPH J. FOR CH~AN,6~ IN LANI) USE CLASS E C ONOMY S INC. JR. F~ROM RL TO RM, I~F~L p~OPE'~ L~w October 22, 1984 SOUTH S~cO~I~ ST~sx T£L£pi..iON £ (305) 46 I-I$00 Board of County Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 33450 Gentlemen: anuar 18, 1984, my clients, Mr. and Mrs. Anthony On J ~'Y ~- ~- ~--~ne Duncan, contracted to sell_a Economys and ~r. an~ ~r~[~[iis~stin, of approximately 16½ acres parcel of land - Y---,~- ~ ~,= ~hrow development to Joseph Ji . 25th .Street oppo~= ~?~ -_-2 ..... ~.i~i~~on a plan on South .._ . ~ . '~ wa~ ~~---~- -= .... _ -tee. The ¢on~ract DeRoss, Jr.,_as t~? ......... ~^~ b-' ,,our Board by July 19, 1984 amen~ent an~ rezonlng ~e~ng 9a~.u=~= ~ to permit the purchasers to construct 11 residential condominium units per acre on s~bject property. The buyer's attorney was to prepare all attena all hearings and process the applications with the sellers simply cooperating throughout the proceedings. The petitions were file~ showing Joseph J. DeRoss, Jr. as agent for TBG Taurus Equities, Inc. who was to be the developer, and B. A. Bittan, Jr. for Economys and Duncan, the owners. Mr. DeRoss and the developers sought a~ extension to September 15, 1984, since they were unable for several reasons to obtain the plan amendment and rezoning within the initial six-month period. That was given to them gratuitously by my client. On September 27 Mr. DeRoss requested the return of the earnest money deposit on the contract dated January 18, 1984, since the parties were unable to reach an agreement for an additional exten- sion of time to close. I attach to this letter a copy of my letter to Mr. DeRoss dated October 1, 1'984, with his signature at the bottom acknowledging receipt of the return of the deposit and the fact that the contract was ~ no further force and-effect as of October 1, 1984. I give you this factual information because I believe it is essential for not only your Board but also the interested adjoining property owners to know that the original proposed developer who · was not local, is no longer involved, and that the owners of the property who both reside locally and have for many years are con- tinuing the application for land use amendment and rezoning from low density residential to medi~,~um density residential, and wish Board of County Commissioners Page Two October 22, 1984 to assure all concerned that a quality development will be placed on this property if the applications which are berg heard today are granted by this Board. Furthermore, during our research this last three weeks, since becoming the sole proponents of the two applications before you, we have learned that there are drainage problems in the South 27th, 28th and 29th Street area which could be greatly a~ewiated by an easement for drainage purposes over the westernmost portion of Mr. and Mrs. Economys' south 900 feet down to canal No. 9. Mr.-and Mrs. Econ~s wish for me to advise that they would be willing to give such an easement should their applications be granted today to as much as 30 feet in width over the westernmost purtion of the south 900 feet described in their applications. This could be done at this time or at site plan approval time when other requirements of the county will have to be addressed in order to obtain a site plan to construct the desired improvements on the subject property. Very truly yours, B. A. Bittan, Jr. BABJR:mg Enclosure We hereby concur in the statements made above by our attorney and will abide by the commitment with respect to the easement mentioned above should our applications be granted today. Anthony Economys Julia Economys Pont October 1, 1994 TE:LKPHONK(305) Joseph J. DeRoss, Jr., Esq., as Trustee 133 South Second Street Fort Pierce, Florida 334§0 Re: DeRoss contract with Economys and Duncan Dear Mr. DeRoss: Thank yOru for yomr letter of 27 in which you the return of the $5,0'00 de.po.sit Mr. ~coDmmys was holding on the above contract, which expire4 on September 15, 1984, since a second extension could not be negotiated. Enclosed is Mr. Economys' check for the sum of $5,000 made payable to you as trustee, the acceptance of w~ich we shall construe as a release of each party to the other for any claims which might have arisen out of the contract entere~ into on January 18, 1984, between and my above-mentio~ed clients. Sincerely yours, B. A. Bitt&n, Jr. BABJR: mg Enclosure cc Mr. and Mrs. ~Anthony Economys I hereby acknowledge receipt of the above-mentioned $5,000 check and acknowledge that the January'IS, 1984, contract is of no further force and effect. October__ I ., 1984 IO'rH FLOOR COMEAU BUILDING P. O, BOX 2439 WEST PALl,4 BEACH, FLORIDA 3340~' (305) es9-3700 wEST eALM BEACH OFFICE HARK M. BRADFIELD LISA J. CAI~PBELI~ DAVID A, DANIELSON ANNE HAI,,41LTON FORD DAVID J, GLATTHORN ROBERT D. M~LILEY ~TE~HEN C, McALILEY October 22, 1984 LAW OFFICES BRENNAN, McAIILE¥, HAYSKAR, McAliLEY ~: ~JEffErSON PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION 519 ~ sis sOUTH INDIAN RIVER DRIVE P. O. BOX 3779 FORT pIERCE, FLORIDA 33448 PLEASE RE;PLY TO: (305) 461-2310 Fort Pierce FORT PIERCE OFFICE JOHN t. BRENNAN THAD H. CARLTON (1906-1965) ROBERt J. GORMAN STEPHEN G. HAYSKAR BRADFORD L. ~ EFFERSON ROBERT V. SCHWERER JAMES T. WALKER Board of County Cc~missioners St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, FL 33450 RE: Petiti6n of Econc~ys, Duncan, and TBG Taurus Equities, Inc. for rezoning and amendment of future land use classification on parcel located in S20,' T35S, R40E,' St. Lucie County, Florida Dear C~ssion Members: I have been retained to represent several property c~ners who oppose these petitions. Their property is located .on 28th .Street and consists of a single- family residence. Because of out of town oc~mitments that ca._~ot ]:~ rescheduled, I am unable to personally appear before you this date, but have taken the liberty of submitting this letter and would 'ask that it be read in the record when this matter is discussed at the October '23, 1984 public hearing. As the file will reflect, the property up for rezoning and plan amendman% is located on the west side of South 25th Street between Edwards Road and Virginia Avenue. It is presently zoned RS-4 and has a RL Future Land Use classification. These zoning restrictions would not have been imposed on this property under the recently adopted Cc~prehensive Zoning ordinance unless its use was more compatible with the surrounding low density single family hc~es that presently exist in the im~ate area. Additior~l. ly, argLm~_nts to the effect r~ one today would build a single family hc~e or residential development off South 25th Street simply defies reality when all we have to do is look at the existing hcmes south of this area and especially the new construction, both existing and proposed, in the area between Edw-~rds Road all the way to the Port St. Lucie city limits. With this in mind, let me first say that although my clients believe this property is best suited .for single family homes, they are :not totally opposed to all medi~ density development. Rather, I believe they would be the first to admit a well planned madium density project with units that are actually ~wned by the people living in th~m, and which is designed to have the least adverse impact on the low density residential surroundings would be an acceptable develo~xaent alternative. Unfortunately, and with all due respect to the c~ners Page Two October 22, 1984 of this property, the present petitions, if grantedl would allow carte blanc/~, e develops., t up ~ 11 u~~b~e~~aslt'~"~'~a-at type of develo~t woui tions under site plan approval. These limitations, however, while they are generally sufficient to insure proper planning under minimum standards, are not in the least able to assure my clients or their neighbors similarly situated that the residential q~3_~litY of their neighborhood would not be destroyed by a develop- n~_nt that, although meets minimum site plan requ/mements, drastically changes the character of the neighborhood and beccmes a detriment rather than an asset. When this matter was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission on August 23, 1984, there were many unanswered questions of major concern. Although a potential .developer was present and suhnitted detailed plans and drawings of a proposed development, this particular developer, I h~-9~ be~n im~oImed, is no longer interested in the projeCt at the .present time. No doubt the owners of this property will endeavor to carry out the ssme general sch~ne of development for their property, any representations to this effect are still just representa- tions, even with the best intentions, and ~re not ~3_srantees to my clients or their neighbors. From a planning aspect ~ .also frcm the standpoint of my clients and their neighbors, the best cc~prcmise for any mediun density development should the Cc~nission feel it is appropriate for this property, would be to have it zoned PLD with compatible density limitations. As you are aware, PUD zoning will answer all concerns both frc~a the public and the Board of County Cc~a~issioners and, at the same time, ~rantee up front that a particular type of medi~ density development which may be cc~patible with the surrounding neighborhood will, in fact, be buil~ rather than premised, If the owners of this property or a potential developer were truly concerned about preserving the type of quality of this neighborhood that presently exists, it would be a min~ burden for them to withdraw the present petitions and resuhnit them on the basis of PUD' zoning. Absent this t~pe of cc~nitment, the present petitions should be denied. cc: ,3'. '~Gar~ $IJ2 Devolo[:amnt Coordinator Mr. & Mrs. Robert W. Schwerer BRENNAN, MCALi'LEY, HAYSKAR, MCALILEY & JEFFERSON pROFFSSIONAL ASSOCIATION Margaret W. Kimmel 800 N.W. Fork Rd. #5-11 Stuart, FL 33494 (305) 464-82-20 The St. I. ucie County Board of County Commissioners 230~ Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 33450 Dear Chairman Trefelner: As owner of the five acres that most closely adjoins the property under consideration, I wish to express that I am exceedingly opposed to this petition. Allow me if you will to explain my reasons for opposition: The request if permitted will greatly deviate from the present character of the neighborhood which is presently single family residences. This too radical of a depar- ture substantially increases the density of the area. 3~ Traffic, which is already a serious problem on Twenty- fift~ Street between Virginia Ave. and Midway Road, particularly during the peak traffic times, would not be able to accomodate the increase. The number of condominium residents in approximately 150 units using Twenty-fifth Street as a main transportation route along with the present condition will cause traffic complications that a simple traffic light at Cortez and Twenty-fifth could not begin to remidy. The average length of time the original condominium owner occupies a unit is far less than that for a single family residence. Thus, creating an environment in- vi ting rental dwellin§s - an even farther departure from the planned land use recently approved by the Board of County Commissioners. As I have previously stated, both my family and I have maintained a long standing commitment to preserving the interest of this property as the enclosed pictures will demonstrate. The property has been in my family for approximately thrity years. It is a shame if the integrity as well as the natural state of this area is not considered. Again, let me say that there are a very large number of neighboring residents who are deeply concerned and definitely opposed to this request. We all ask that you deny this petition for re~oning. Sincerely, ~ ' ~mmel Margaret W. Kimmel 800 N.W. Fork Stuart, Fl. 33494 (305) 464-8220 The St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 33450 Dear Chairman Trefelner: As owner of the five acres that most closely adjoins the property under consideration, I wish to express that I am exceedingly opposed to this petition. Allow me if you will to explain my reasons for opposition: 1. The request if permitted will greatly deviate, from the present character of the neighborhood which is presently single family residences. This too radical of a depar- ture substantially increases the density of the area. Traffic, which is already a serious probleu fiftI3 Street between Virginia Ave. and Mid~ particularly during the peak traffic times be able to accomodate the increase. The nt condominium residents in approximately 150 Twenty-fifth Street as a main transportati¢ along with the present condition will cause complications that a simple traffic light Twenty-fifth could not begin to remidy. on Twenty- ~y Road, would not ~ber of ~nits using route traffic Cortez and The average length of time the original condominium owner occupies a unit is far less than that for a single family residence Thus, creating an environment in- ' re viting rental dwellings - an even farther ~epartu from the planned land use recently approved by the Board of County Commissioners. As I have previously stated-, both my family and I have maintained a long standing commitme~nt to preserving the interest of this property as the enclosed pictures will demonstrate. The pr.operty has been in my family for approximately thrity years. It is a shame if the integrity as well as the natural state of this area is not consJaereo, Again, let me say that there are a very large number of neighboring residents who are deeply concerned and definitely opposed to this request. We all ask that you deny this petition for reioning. Sincerely, , / .~ /-) M~rg~'ret W. Kimmel -L~w October 22, 1984 of county Commissioners lia Avenue Pierce, Florida 33450 Gentlemen: _ 4. mv clients, Mr. and Mrs. Anthony .... ~__sjOn January 18, 198 ._ ~ __ ,-, ~n- contracted to sell. a mys _a.nd ~r ~.~.a~ ~rrs~h~g~~ ~;~;g' of ap. pro~x~__mat_~ltYtlo6~j s o : _ r. as trustee. The ....... Board b,, July 19, 19~ Ss' J ~d rezoning being grantea by yuU~.de;ti ~ ndominium .dment a - --- ~ ~onstruct 11 real al co )ermit the purcnasei'~ ~u ~ , per acre on subject property. The buyer s attorney was to re all applications, attend all hearings and process the cations with the sellers simply cooperating throughout the S. The petitions were filed showing Joseph J. DeRoss, Jr. as for TBG Taurus Equities, Inc. who was to be the developer, and Bittan, Jr. for Economys and Duncan, the owners. Mr. DeROSS and the developers sought an extension to .September 15, since they were unable for several reasons to obtain the plan :nt and rezoning within the initial six-month period. That given to them gratuitously by my client. On September 27 Mr. DeROSS requested the return of the earnest ey deposit on the contract dated January 18, 1984, since the · ties were unable to reach an agreement for an additional exten- )n of time to close. I attach to this letter a copy of my letter Mr. DeROSS dated October 1, 1984, with his signature at the ttom acknowledging receipt of the return of the .deposit and the :t that the contract wasof no further force and-effect as of tober 1, 1984. · ' · . 1 information because. I believe it. . is. I glv_e you.th__l~s..f,a.c~u~a card but also the lnt_er, est~ed__a_d_].o..~ln~lng ~ential ~or no~ on~3 ~¥._~_B~ 4~4nal proposed ~perty own.ers.t_°.k_n~nt~;~i~l;;~,~and %.hat_t__h.e..o.w~n=e~r~Sa~fe tcho~- ~S not local, is nu .. ~ .... ~., ~a have ~or ;'~o~ertv who both resxue_'uu?~t~ i~i amendment and rezoning zr~m ~ ~ · -- · ' ~or £anu ~-~ · · ' n ~nuing the appl~.ca.t~.on _ · densit residential, and w~s w density resiaent~al to medium Y ~o Board of county commissioners 22 , 1984 when on re all concerned that a quality development will be placed his property if the applications which are being heard today granted by this Board. Furthermore, during our research this last three weeks, since the sole proponents of the two applications before you, learned that there are drainage problems in the South 27th, 29th Street area which could be greatly aIleviated by an for drainage purposes over the westernmost portion of Mrs. Economys'south 900 feet dOWn to canal No. 9. Mr. and wish for me to advise that they would be willing to ~ch an easement should their applications be granted today .ch as 30 feet in width over the westernmost portion of [th 900 feet described in their applications- ~is could be done at this time or at site plan approval time ~ther requirements of the county will have to be addressed in to obtain a site plan to construct the desired improvements subject property. Very truly yours, B. A. Bittan, Jr. BABJR:mg Enclosure - -torne" .ur in the statements made above Dy our a~. ~ ~ hereby conc ......... ct to the easement and will abide by the comml~__~=_=+ions be granted today. me~{ioned above should our appa~ Anthony Economys Julia Economys ~w October 1, 1984 Re: j. DeRoss, Jr., Esq., Trustee South Second Street Pierce, Florida 33450 DeRoss contract with Economys and Duncan Mr. DeRoSs: Thank you for your letter of September 27 in which you ested the return of the $5,000 deposit Mr. Economys was on the above contract, which expired on September 15, , since a second extension could not be negotiated. Enclosed is Mr. Economys' check for the sum of $5,000 payable to you as trustee, the acceptance-of which we shall true as a release of each party to the other for any claims might have arisen out of the contract entered into on 18, 1984, between yourself and my above-mentioned clients. Sincerely yours, B. A. Bittan, Jr. ~losure Mr. and Mrs. Anthony Economys I hereby acknowledge receipt of the above-mentioned $5,000 check and acknowledge that the January' 18, 198.4, contract is of ,n0 further force and effect. October_ [ , 1984 WE.~T pAL MEAU BUILDING FLORIDA 33402 65g-3700 ,FFICE IELL N McALILEY LAW OFFICES BRENNAN, MCALILE¥, HAYSKAR, McALILEY ~ ~JEFFER$ON PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION 519 ~ 515 sOUTH INDIAN RIVER DR~VE P. O. BOX 3779 FORT pIERCE, FLORIDA 33448 pLEASE REPLY TO: (305) 461-2310 Fort Pierce FORT pIERCE OFFICE jOHN T. BRENNAN THAD H. CARLTON (1906-1965) ROB ERT J- GoRMAN STEPHEN G. HAYSKAR BRADFORD l. JEFFERSON RC[]ERT V, SCHWERER JAMES T. WALKER October 22, 1984 Board of County C~m~ssioners Lucie Co%Lnty Avenue FL 33450 RE: Petition of Econc~ys, Duncan, and TBGTaurusEquities, Inc. for rezoning ar~ ~a~rf~-n~ of future land use classification on parcel located in S20,' T35S, R40E, St. LucieCounty, Florida Dear Cc~ssion Members: been retained to represent several property owners who oppose these Their property is located on 28th Street and consists of a single- .. cannot be rescheduled, a~£v appear ~u~= 3' ' unable to person this letter and would ~sk that it be read in the record when this is discussed at the October 23, 1984 public hearing. file will reflect, the property up for rezoning and plan smendment is on the west side of South 25th Street between Edwards Road and Virginia It is presently zoned RS-4 and has a RL Future Land Use classification- would not have been imposed on this property under the zoning restrictions . · Ordinance unless its use was more cc~pa~le =Snnf~d Cc~Drehenslve ZoD_%ng ...... ~--~ ~_hat oresent!¥ exist in the surroun0ang ,uw ~ .... ~ - the effect no one today would im~tiate ~rea. ktaitionallY, arguments a single family hc~e or residential development off South 25th Street defies reality when all we have to do is look at the existing hc~es south area and especially the new construction, both existing and proposed, in area between Edwards Road all the way to the Port St. Lucie city limits- this in mind, let me first say that although my clients believe this is best suited for single f~mily hcmes, they are not totally opposed all m~dium density develo~ent. Rather, I believe they would be the first admit a well planned madium densitY project with units that are actually by the people living in th~, and which is designed to have the least impact on the low density residential surroundings would be an acceptable alternative- Unfortunately, and with all due respect to the owners Page T~o October 22, 1984 of ' the present petitions, if granted~ would allow carte blanche up to 11 units per acre with no safeguazds or guarantees as to what develo~r~nt would b~ buile o~ this property, except fOrswhi~y,n°nm~l limita-are ..... royal These limitationS._, ho~.ev._er__, are not site plan ~P~. ' ~ ~lanning under get, rally sufficient %o tonsure proper F neighbors s~larly situated that in the leaSt able to aSsure m~ clients or their quality of their neighborhood would not be destroyed by a develop- ' lan requirements, drastically changes the residential meet, ~d ~s a detriment rather the character of t~e nelg When this matter was presented to the Planning and ~Zoning Cc~amission on August 23, 1984, there were many unanswered questions of major concern. Although developer was present and sut~itted detailed plans and drawings of · this parti~dlar developer, I have beem ~ofOzmed, is no ..... ~^ oresent time No doubt lon er interest .e. _d_ . in ?%e . .p_ _r_o .] ecu ~L .~J~ s~e g~eral . ir ropem~, ~u ~ r . ._ not an:e~ for the P . - · - - ~ ntent~ons, and. ~re guar tions, even wroth the pest ~L~' their neighbors. ' aspect and also frcm the standpoint of my clients and their p. lannin~ it is appropriate for this property, w°uld be t° ._b~_.v.e~ i~- z°ned the best compose for any medi~ density development should the ~ss~on fee ....... :~: As ~ou are aware, PUD zonzng w~ll ~UD ~th compatible denszty zmmm~u~ .... Board of County Ccramissioners all concerns both frcm the public and the at the same time, ~antee up front tb~t a particular type of medit%~ development which may be compatible with the surrotmdS-ng neighborhood in fact, be buil~ rather, than prc~ised. owners of this property or a potential d~eloper were truly concerned preserving the type of quality of this neighborhood that presently exists, be a minimum burden for th~ to withdraw, the present petitions and them on the basis of PUD' zoning. Absent this type of cc~mitment, present petitions should be denied. J...Gary Ament, SLC Develolu~ent Coordinator Mr. & Mrs. Robert W. Schwerer BRENNAN, MCALiLEY, HAYSKAIR, MCALILEY & JEFFERSON PRO~FFS $ lO MAL ASSOCIATION AGENDA - BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TUESDAY OCTOBER 23, 1984 9:00 A. M. petition of Ecdnomys and Duncan by a§ent B. A. Bit_tan land TBG Taurus Equities, Inc. by agent Joseph J- D~Ro~s, to amend the future land use classi'fication of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from RL {low densit7 residential development) to RM (medium .density: residential idevelopment) for the following described property: of the ~t~ of the ~ of SectSon 20, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, AND EMcEPT~qG ail rights-of-waY fo~ ~b]ic roa~s ~'n~ drainage, canals. o of the NE¼ of the S~i of Section 20, Township 35 South, Ram~e 40 ~t, AND ExcEpTING ~ablic roa~s ar~ LESS ~h'e follc~ing ~cel~s: parcel 1: Begin 242.'5 feet ~a~t of the ~ cor~-r of the ~ of the ~ of the ~ of Sect3on 20, T~P 35 South, Range 40 Ernst; %hen~e run East 217-5 feet; %hen~e ton South 235 feet; thence run %~est 435 feat; thence ~ North 10 feet; thenc~ run East 217-5 f~et; ther~e run North 225 feet to point of beginning- parcel 2: Begin at th~ NW oornar of %he ~ of the NE~ of ~ ~ of 20, ~P 35 ~, ~ 40 ~t; ~e ~ ~t 242.5 f~t~ and (Locateo on the west si4e of South 25th street, between Rou4 an0 Mirgi~ia Avenue-) ~rio~ to this publiC hearing, notice of the same was sent to all a4jacent property owners. N 20-35 4O --EDHARDS ROAD PETITION OF EUGENE BUT ~ND ANTHONY ECON6I,~¥S BY AGENT B, A, AND PETITION OF TBG TAURUS EQUITIES, INC, BY AGENT JOSEPH J, DEROSS JR,. FOR CHANGE IN LAND USE CLASSIFICATION FROM RE TO N 20-35-40 EDWARDS ROAD PETITION OF EUGENE DUNCAN AND ANTHONY ECONO~WS BY AGENT B, A, BITTAN AND PETITION-OF TBG TAURUS EQUITIES, INC, BY AGENT JOSEPH J, DEROSS JR, FOR CHANGE IN LAND USE CLASSIFICATION FROM RL To RM, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION£RS DCVCLOPMCNT COORDINATOR J. GARY AMENT September 18, 1984 The Planning and zoning Commission recommended to the Board of County Commissioners approval of the petition of Economys and Duncan by agent B. A. Bittan and TBG Taurus Equities, Inc. by agent Joseph J- DeRoss, Jr. to amend the future land use classi- fication of the St. Lucie County Growth Managment Policy Plan from RL (low density residential development) to RM (medium density residential development) for the following described property: (See attached legal) The Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on this petition at 9:00 A.M. on Tuesday, Octobter 23, 1984, in Room 101, St. Lucie County Administration Building, 2300 VirDinia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. This notice is being sent to all adjacent property owners. If you should have any questions, additional information may be obtained by calling Area Code 305, 466-1100, Extension 331. Very truly yours, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Maurice Snyder, Chairman lc Attachement HAVERT L FENN, District No. t · E. E. GREEN, District No. 2County· MAURICEAdministratorSNYDER,_ WELDoNDistrict NO.B. LEWIS3 · R. DALE TREFELNER, District No. 4 · BiLL pALMER~ Disn'ict No. 5 · Planning: Ext. 3t6 · Zoning: Ext. 336 · Code Enfo_r~ent. Ext 317 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, FL 33450 · Phone (305) 466-1100 Coordinaton EXt. 3 t6 · Building: EXt. 344 · l ........ --- ~in 2.42.'5 feet East of t~e 1~ corner of the ~ of the ~ of the ~ of ~t~on 20, ~P 35 South, l~a~ge 40 E~-t; thence run F~ast 217.5 feet; thence run 5outh 235 feet; thence r~q ~ 435 ~ ~eet; ~ run ~o:~h 10 feet; thence run F~st 217.5 jeet; thence run North 225 feet to point of .~eg~- parcel 2: ~eg~ at th= ~a~ corner of t~e ~ of the ~ of ~ ~ ~ 225 ~t; ~e ~ ~ 242.5 ~ 225 f~t ~ ~t of ~~' ~' 242.5 ~; u~:~ .... . (LoC~te'~ o~ the westl s~e of South 25~h Street, betwee~ E~war~s Eugene D~ncan and AnEhony ECOnom~. s c/o B. A. Bit%an 201 S. 2nd St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 .~ Taul-ds Equities, Inc. ~/o Joseph J. D~Ross Jr. 133 South 2nd Street Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Eugene Duncan 4808 Sunset Blvd. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 A Parcel I Parcel 2 Anthony Econcmys P. O. Box 1507 Ft. Pierce, FL 33454 MaloolmC. Collins 2591SouthU.S. 1 Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Paul H. Melzer P, O. Box 1042 Ft. Pierce, FL 33454 Parcel 3 Parcel 4 Parcel 5 William C. Reeves (TR) P. O. Box 4056 Ft. Pierce, FL 33454 Sue Ethe~ Hayes P. O. Box 421 Ft. Pier'ce, FL 33454 Margaret W. Kin~el 800NWForkRd. 5-11 Stuart, FL 33494 Parcel 6 W. R. ~cCain P. O. BOx 456 Ft. Pierce, FL 33454 Parcel 9 George Lam 2601BrantleyRd. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Parcel 7 Theodore Atos 2406 Holiday Ct. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Hancock S/D, Blkl, L-15,16,19, 20 & 23 Carl Carraway 2805 S. 25thSt. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Stones Throw, LTD c/o Wolfe Bldg. Oorp~ 450 Australian Av. S. Ste 700 W. Palm Bch., FL 33401 L-14,17,18,21,22 Dewey D. Coble RD 2 Brunstetter Rd. Warren, Ohio 44481 Blk 2, Lot 15 Lots 16 & 19 Lots 20,21,22,23 Earl Swartz 2711. South 26th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Robert Ritten 1210 Harh~an Road Ft. 'Pierce, FL 33450 W. B. Jones c/o Jones Grocery Store Montezuma, GA 31063 W 100' Lots 17 & 18 Raymond L. Spivey Jr. 2714 S. 27th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Lot 14 Catherine R. Todd 1702 South 31 Street Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 PAGE I OF ~ Merr±weather Perk, Blk 2, Lot 17 & pt L-18 Gary I. Hazellief 2707 S. 27thStreet Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Pt L-iS & L-~9 J. Mack Heafner 1125 South 7th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Pt L-21 & L-20 ~-22 & P~ L-2 , r~ =-z3 W~iliamE~ Gahn William Benjamin 2711 South 27 St. 2704 Brantley Road Ft. piercei FL 33450 Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 L-23 & 24 Pt L-11 & all .L-12 Pt L-11 &'L-10 Daniel J. Kurek 2710 S. 28th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Albert G. Jutras 2708 S. 28 St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Johns. Tierney III 2706 S. 28thSt. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Blk 4, L-1 & pt L--2 Pt L-2, L-3 & Pt L-4 Pt. L-4 & Lot 5 T~ A. Crowell 2701BrantleyRd. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Ronald M. Crawford 2705 BrantleyRoad Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Frank D. Vanater 2709 Brantley Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 L-6 & PtL-7 Rober~ W. Schwerer 2705 Placid Avenue Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Pt L-7 Robert J. Catenaci P. O. Drawer F Beach Haven, NJ 08008 Pt L-7, L-8 & Pt L-9 Ronald E. Collins P. O. Box 485 Ft. Pierce, FL 33454 Pt L-9, L-10, Pt L-11 Pt L-11 & L-12 L-13 thru-18, &PtL-19 David G~_bhons 2812 S. 28th St. Ft. Pierce', FL 33450 L. F. Myers 2816 S. 28 St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Peter M. Leaming, Inc. 118 Palmetto Ln. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Pt L-19 & Pt L-20 & Pt L-21 Phillip G. Guettler 2700 Wildwood Ia. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Parcel 1 1 Jessie A. Mixon P. O. Box 3371 Ft. Pierce, FL 33454 Pt L-19 ,PtL-21 ,Pt L-22, Pt of L-23, Lot 24 Paul Jacquin&.Son, Inc. P. O. Box 4229 Ft. Pierce, FL 33454 Parcel 1 2 Thomas W. Arseneau 2401.Cortez Blvd. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Parcel 1 0 George F. Miller 5100 Bayvi~w Dr. Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33308 Hancock S/D, Blk 1, Lots 6 & 9, 10 & 13 Jack Benjamin 2706 S. 26 St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 PAGE 2 OF ~ LOt 7 John E. Harris Jr. 1004 South '8th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 ...... ~ik 2, ~dk~"~-~6-& 9"& s -~illiam ~. wright 2706 South 27th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Lot 7 ..... Bruce T. Cuthbert 2601 Cortez Blvd. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Lot 10 & pt Lot 13 Shirley J. Reeley Rt..7, Box 745 Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 P.t Lot 7 & L-8 & pt L-9 Richard J. Osterrieder 2704 South 28 St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Lots 11 & 12 Pt L-9 .& all L-10 & pt Lot 11 John S. Tierney III 2706. S. 28 St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Merriweather.Pk, Blk 2, Lot 6 & pt Lot 7 Charles A. Perry 2702 S. 28th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Lot 13 & pt. Lot 14 Rosa B. Abbott 2703 S. 27th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Pt L-14 & ali L-15 & pt Lot 16 Stephen F. Jorgensen 2705~ S. 27th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Pt L-14 & all L-15 & pt Lot 16 Kenneth L. Delevante Jr. 2705 S. 28 St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Pt Lo't 16 & all L-17 ~2-Tq~.S. 27 st. ~z ~ ,-7--F~ ~3~450 Pt Lot' 16 & all Lot 17, & pt '.Lot 18 Vivian I. Wilson 27-7 S. 28 St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Blk 1, Lot 13 & pt L-14 James D. Dewitt. 2703 S. 28th St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Pt L-18 & all L-19 Philip J. Forget 2709 S. 28 St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Lot 20 & pt L-21 Pt L-21 & lot 22 Block 3, Lot 1 & pt L-2 Lawrence J. Taylor 2711 S. 28 St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Charles O. Treat 2806 iBrantly Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 William B. Jones c/o Jones ~rocery Montezuma, GA 31063 Pt L-2 & Lot 3 James D. Davis 2805 Brantly Rd. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Lot 13 & pt Lot 14 JosePhine Langdon 2805 S. 28 St. Ft. Pierce, FL 33450 Pt L-14, all L-15 & pt Lot.16 James O. Sharp 2809 S. 28 St. Ft..Pierce, FL 33450 PAGE 30F~ STATE oF FLORiD St. LUcie County, Fiorido COUNTY OF ST' L~CIE Forf pi~rce. Week Before ~e ~ . . News . Pub' · KLe · ~a Pier~ · _Tribun~ . ~ishe~ .' C/am ~PPe~ed the mo~ ~-~ent, bein~ ~, ~nat the ~cer of - ~co- ~- a...~i~Zon ~ uCrached ............... · ......... ~ ..... ~ .......... ................ ?/~/s4 iSSUes of ...... Affian~ , ' ............................ . r~ me is a : ~ .e ~r - · tbepos. - ada; ~Sad~ertio~aI ~ebat ~e~ , ~ peaod ~ c )tfic~ ;~ NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County Commissioners in and for St. Lucie County, Florida, will at 9:00 A.M. on Tuesday, October 23, 1984, in Room 101, St. Lucie County Adminis- tration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida hold a public hearing on: Petition of Economys and Duncan by agent B. A. Bittan and TBG Taurus Equities, Inc. by agent Joseph J. DeRoss, Jr. to amend the future land use classification of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from RL (low density residential development) to RM (medium density residential development) for the following described property: (See attached legal) All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at this time. If it becomes necessary, these public hearings may be continued from time to time. Dated this 18th day of September, 1984. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA /s/Maurice Snyder, Chairman PUBLISH: g~_~~_ o~ "~84. BOARD OF CouNTY cOMMISSIONERS DATE OF MEETING / ' TIME: 9:00 A.M. ROOM 101, SLC ADM BLDG T~e ~ .of t~ ~ of the ~ of ~-on 20, ~~P 35 Sc~th, ~ 40 .F_~s~, ~ ~ ~~t~l rights-of-~eY for ~i¢ ro~s ~8 &air~je, carels. ~ of the NEb of the S~i of Section 20, Tc~n~P 35 South, Range 40 East, AND Exes public roaas ar~ LESS the follc~ing parcels: Begin 242.'5 £eet East of t~e 1~4 ~ of the ~ of tl~ ~ of the ~ of ~on 20, Tom~b/~ 'P 35 South, Ran9e 40 East; ~ run 217.5 fe~t; thence run South 235 feet; thence run %~_st 435 feet; ~ run North 10 feet; thence run East 217-5 ~eet; thence run North 225 fe~t to point of Begin at t~2 N~ coz~e~ of the ~ ~ ~ 225 f~t~ .~ 225 f~ ~ ~t of ~ at ~e~ ~ of ~ ~ ~t 242.5 {~t; -. (LoCated on the west! side of South 25th Street, between Edwards Road a~ Vir~i~ Avenue. ) PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 23, 1984 PUBLIC HEARING: Petition of Economys and Duncan by agent B. A. Bittan and TBG Taurus Equities, Inc. by agent Joseph Jo DeRoss, Jr. to amend the future land use classification of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from RL (low density residential development) to RM (medium density residential development) for property located on the west side of South 25th Street, between Edwards Road and Virginia Avenue. Mr. Jack Scott appeared to represent TBG Taurus Equities, Inc. and presented detailed drawings of the proposed development. Joseph DeRoss, attorney for TBG Taurus, also appeared in their behalf and gave a brief account of Mr. j. William Gall, Regional Property Manager, and his involvement in the area. This group is interested in progress in this area, Mr. De Ross said, they are not out-of-town developer~ they are interested in the future of Ft. Pierce and St. Lucie County. B. A. Bittan, attorney for Anthony Economys and Eugene Duncan, stated this would be a very nice development with units for sale, not for rent. Site Plan approval must be met and it will be an asset to the area. He requested time for rebuttal later in the meeting. Willie McCain stated he and his wife own Pareel 6 to the south across the street from this property. He said he has no objections to the petition. Dan Kurek appeared in opposition to the petition and presented a petition with fifty-five signatures. He asked for a show of hands in opposition and more than that number were present at the meeting. He said he has lived in Ft. Pierce for fifteen years and their neighbor- hood is very nice and improving. Twenty-fifth Street is heavily traveled and is a traffic problem now. With Stone's Throw and this project there will be an additional 450 to 760 people on Twenty-fifth Street. He said he is not against development, but he does not feel this area should be medium density, it should remain 5 units per acre. Margaret Kimmel spoke against the petition stating she lives in a condo now and she was looking forward to building a home on her property. Mr. Peter Leaming said he purchased his home there to be in a quiet area, he had moved there from Port St. Lucie where bongo drums can be heard late at night. He said he is opposed to any change in land use or zoning. David Jones, who said he also represents his father, said if this Board does not think there are traffic problems there, try to get out of a side street onto 25th Street at 8:00 in the mornin§. Mr. Peter Kelly said he looked for a suitable place to live for seven months and the way things look, he will have to relocate again if this is approved. Mr. DeRoss said there are not many single family family homes on 25th Street, it needs to be four laned. Cortez is a problem and four laning 25th would help. Rezoning this property will not decrease the surrounding property value, it will increase it. Mr. Bittan said when change comes people usually do not like it. When he lived on Trinidad he was the only lawyer on the Street and when the fire tower went in every body was opposed and came to see him about it It did not turn out to be a problem, no one even thinks about it being there now. The same thing happened on Grandview where he lives now, he said. They wanted to put in low income housing and everyone was upset, but as it turned out, some very nice people moved in there. Another example is the project across from the Indian River Presbyterian Church, when they came in on trucks, every one was up in arms, then they faced them with stone and landscaped the area and it looks very nice now. Mr. Bittan said the point he was trying to make is usually the concern is worse than reality. How many people would buy a lot on 25th Street and build a house. The requested land use and zoning is appropriate for this area. Mrs. Fawsett said she realized we have to have progress, but the traffic on 25th Street is terrible now. Stones Throw was not required to have turn lanes, if this is approved, they will not be required to have them either. This project will add 180 units, 270 more cars to the traffic already there. If a person lives on Cortez, that runs east and west, they have to go out the other way to get to work in the mornings now. She said she did not think the County should have to widen roads for the developers. If these developers want to widen the roads, that is different. We just don't have money in the County to widen roads, she said;and she was very much against this petition. Mr. Carman said considering all the conditions that will be put on this property and the way St. Lucie County is growing, he felt it is a good proje~ He made a motion that the petition be approved. The motion was seconded by Mrs. King and upon vote approved with Mr. Carman, Mrs. King, Mr. Ralph Wetherington and Mr. Terpening voting in favor of the petition. Mr. Sciturr~ Mr. U. B. Wetherington and Mrs. Fawsett voted against approval of the petiti~ To: From: Date: Subject: Planning and zoning Commission County Planner August 21, 1984 August 23, 1984, Regular Meeting 7. ~QonomYs.and,Duncan'*'(RL.'t°'RM) EXISTING LAND USE: Primarily vacant.- one single family dwelling unit presently exists on site. FUTURE LAND USE: CURRENT ZONING: RL - low density residential RS-4 - Residential, single family, 4 dwelling units per acre RM-11 requested in Petition %5 Comments: The site is across 25th Street'from an exiSting multi- family project. If this Petition and Petition %8 are granted, specific planning concerns will be addressed during site plan review. BETITION We, the undersigned, would like to object to the proposed change in the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan. The proposal will change the future land use classification from RL (low density residential - single family dwelling) to RM (medium density residential - multi-family dwelling)- This change is not consistent with the development of the immediate adjoining properties'and we strongly oppose this change. We hope that the Planning and zoning Committee will accept this petition and take note of the residents feelings in this matter. Property Description: The Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 20, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, less and excepting the East 25 feet and also the following described parcel: Begin 242.5 feet East of Northwest corner of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 20, Township 35 South, Range 40 East; Thence run East 217.5 feet; Thence run South 235 feet; Thence run West 435 feet; Thence run North 10 feet; Thence run East 217.5 feet; Thence run North 225 feet to the point of beginning. Address Name PETITION We, the undersigned, would like to object to the proposed change in the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan. The p~oposal will change the future land use classification from RL (low density residential'- single family dwelling) to RM (medium density residential - multi-family dwelling)- This change is not consistent with the development of the immediate adjoining properties and we strongly oppose this change. We hope that the Planning and zoning Committee will accept this petition and take note of the residents feelings in this matter. Property Description: The Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 20, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, less and excepting the East 25 feet and also leSs the following described parcel: Begin 242.5 feet East of the Northwest corner of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 20, Township 35 South, Range 40 East; Thence run East 217.5 feet; Thence run South 235 feet; Thence run West 435 feet; Thence run North 10 feet; Thence run East 217.5 feet; Thence run North 225 feet to the point of beginning° Signature Name Address