HomeMy WebLinkAboutChurch, JohnBOARD OF COUNTY D V LOPMI NT
COORDINATOR
COMMISSION£RS J. GARY AMENT
January 16, 1987
Mr. and Mrs. John Church
1317 North Palmway
Lake Worth, Florida 33460
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Church:
Please be advised that on Wednesday, December 17, 1986, the Board
of County Commissioners granted your petition to amend the Future
Land Use Maps of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy
Plan from RL (Low Density Residential) to RM (Medium Density
Residential) located on the west side of Tamrind Drive,.
approximately 420' south of Banyan Road.
A copy of the recorded Ordinance No. 86-78 is enclosed for your
information.
Sincerely,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Jim Minix, Chairman
JM/dcm
Enclosure
HAVERT L. FENN, District No. I ® E. E. GREEN. 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 · Fort Pierce. FL 33482-5652 · Phone (305) 466-1100
Coordinator: Ext. 398 · Building: Ext. 344 · Planning: Ext. 316 · Zoning: Ext. 336 · Code Enforcement: Ext. 317
ORDINANCE NO. 86-78
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY
GR(~TH MANAGEMENT POLICY PLAN, ORDINANCE
NO. 86-01 BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION
OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF
TAMARIND DRIVE APPROXIMATELY 420 FEET SOUTH
OF BANYAN ROAD (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN)
FROM RL (L~ DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) TO RM (MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) MAKING FINDINGS; PROVIDING
FOR MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON THE OFFICIAL
ZONING MAP OF ST. LUCIE ~COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR
CONFLICT ING PROVIS IONS AND 'S EVERAB IL ITY; P_ROVIDING
FOR FILING WITH THE' DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND
THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE AND ADOPTION.
8003Zi
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie
COunty, Florida, has made the following determinations:
1. Mr. & Mrs. John Church 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)
to RM (Medium Density Residential) for the propert~ described
bet ow.
2. The St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency, after
holding a public hearing on December 9, 1986 of which due notice
was published at least seven (7) days prior to said hearing and
all -owners of property within five hundred feet (500') were
notified by mail of said hearing, has presented to the Board a
tie vote on whether to amend the future lan'd use classification
set forth in the St. Lucie County Growth Management Plan from RL
(Low Density. Residential) to RM (MediUm Density Residential) for
the property described below.
3. The Board held a publiC hearing on December 17, 1986,
after publishing a notice of such hearing in the Fort Pierce News
Tribune on December 9 and December 10, I986.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County
Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida:
A. ~ANGF. 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:
Revised Plat of Fort Pierce Shores, Unit 4,
Block 30., Lot 5. (OR 326-796).
(Located on the West Side of Tamar'[nd Drive,
approximately 420' South of Banyan ROad.)
owned by Mr. a Mrs. John Church, be, and the same is hereby
changed from RL (Low Density ReSidential) to RM (Medium Density
Resi denti al) .
B. FINDING OF CONSISTENCY.
This Board specifically determines that the approved
Change in future land use plan is consistent with the policies
and objectives contained in the St. Lucie County Growth
Management Policy Plan.
C. C_~ANGES TO ZONING MAP.
The St. Lucie County Community Development Director is
hereby authorized and directed to cause the changes to be made on
the Official Zoning Map of St. Lucie COunty, Florida, and to make
notation of reference to the date of adoption of this ordinance.
0526 r2505
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. ~...
If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held
or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such
~holding shall not affect 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 affect its applicability to any other
person, property or circumstances.
F. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE.
This ordinance shall be applicable as stated in
Paragraph A.
G. FILING WITH TBE 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, Tall.ahassee, Florida, 32304.
H. FILING WITH DEPART~NT OF CO~IUNITY AFFAIRS'.
The County Attorney shall send a certified copy of this
ordinance to the Department of Community Affairs, 2571 Executive.
Center Circle East, Tallahassee, Florida, 32301.
OR
.,0 5 2 6 506
A-I~A
~?
H ! RD
BLUE
?'ETITION OF MR, & MRS, JOHN CHURCH
TO CHANGE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION
FROM RL TO RM
55 /
BL ~LUE
RM ~REEN
~ETITION OF MRo & MRS° JOHN CHURCH
TO CHA~GE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION
P~OM RL TO RM
BOARD OF COUNTY CONNISSIONER
ST. LU~IE COUNTY~ FLORIDA
SPECIAL MEETING
Date: December 17, 1986 coqvened:
Tapes: #1 - #5 . adjourned:
7:02 p.m.
2:55 a.m.
Commissioners Present: Chairman 0im Minix, Vice Chairman
Krieger, Havert L. Fenn, 3udy Culpepper, R. Dale Trefelner
3ack
Others Present: Daniel McIntyre, County Attorney, 3. Gary Ament,
Community Deveiopment Coordinator, Gary Schindler, Planning
Administrator, Theresse du Bouchet, DePuty Clerk
OF MR. AND MRS, aOHN CHURCH FOR A CHANGE IN LAND
--'
Petitioner 30hn Church appeared before the Board
approval of the proposed change in land use.
to request
There appeared the following individuals who spoke in opposition
to the p~opOsed change in iand use citing the issue of "leap
frog" develoPment,': depreciation -of property value and traffic
impact: R~be~t Dudiey, and Mabel Fawsett.
Based on the opinion that the proposed change in land use is
consistent wSth the policies and objectives contained in the St.
Lucie County Srowth Management Policy Plan, it was moved by Com.
Trefelner, seconded by Com. Fenn, to adopt Ordinance No. 86-?8
amending the St. Lucie County Growt~h Management Policy Plan,
Ordinance No. 86-01 by changing the land use designation of the
property located along the west side of Tamarind Drive
approximateiy 420 feet south of BanyaR Road fro~ RL (low density
residential) to RM (mediUm density r~sidentiai) making findings;
providing !or making the necessary changes on the officiai zoning
map of St. Lucie County; and, upon roii caiI,-'-~iO~-unani'mously
carri,ed. '-
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
County Administrator
County Commission
Planning Administrator~
December ll, 1986
Retition of Mr. and Mrs. 3ohn C~urch to ament the
Future Land Use Maps of the St. Lucie County Growth
Management Rolicy Alan from RL (Low Density
Residential) to RM (Medium Density Residential)
On Wednesday, December 17, 1986, you will be asked to
review a petition on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Oohn Church, to amend
the Future Land Use Maps of the St. Lucie County Growth
Management Rd[iCy Alan from RL to AM, for property located along
Tamarind Drive on North Hutchinson Island. The petitioners are
proposing to construct a triplex on t~is property that lies
between two existing multi-family structures. This petition was
presented to the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency for
review on December 9, 1986, at which time, this Agency cast a
vote of 3 to 3 on this request. This tie vote forwards this
petition to you with neither a recommendation of approval or
denial.
As required und-er Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, County
Staff has transmitted this amendment request to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs for interagency review. In
comments received back from the Department, no specific reference
is made to this petition. On September 22~ 1986, the Treasure
Coast Regional Planning Council reported that this proposed
amendment did not conflict with any .regional plan or policy.
Attached for your review is a copy of the original staff
comments on this petition, transmitted to you on August 1, 1986,
and the most recent memorandum transmitted to the St. Lucie
County Local Planning Agency on December 2, 1986. By separate
memorandum, the County Attorney's Office will be providing for
your review a Draft Ordinance granting approval to this petition.
December 11, 1986
Page 2
Petition: 3ohn Church
If you have any questions on this petition, please let me
know.
GHS/DOM/mg
CHURCH2(83)
cc: County Attorney
Oohn Church
Commision Secretary
Press/Rublic
AGENDA - LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
TUESDAY
DECEMBER 9. 1986
7:00 P.M.
Petition of Mr. and Mrs. John Church 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:
Revised Plac of Fore Pierce Shorea, UniC 4, Block 30, Loc 5. (OR 326-796)
(Located on the west side of Tamrind Drive, approximately 420'
south of Banyan Road. )
Please note that all proceedings before the Local Planning
Agency are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to
appeal any action taken by the Local Planning Agency at this
meeting will ~eed to ensure that a verbatim record of the pro-
ceedings is made.
Prior to this public hearing, notice of the same was-sent to
all adjacent property owners. :
dcm
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBOECT:
MEMORANDUM
Local Planning Agency
Planning Administrator x~
December 2, 1986
Petition of Mr. and Mrs. Oohn Church to amend the
Future Land Use Maps of the St. Lucie County
Growth Management Policy Plan from R1 (Low
Density Residential) to RM (Medium Density
Residential) ~
On August 7, 1986, the St. Lucie County Board of County
Commissioners held a public hearing for the purpose of
authorizing the transmittal ofthis petition to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs as required under Chapter
163.J184',,.Florida Statute. As of this date, my office has not
received any return comments from theDepartment about this
petition. On September 22, 1986, the Treasure Coast RegionaI
Planning Council heId a hearing on the proposed petition, and
reported that-,the proposaI did not conflict with any adopted
Council plans or policies.
Attachedyou will find a copy of the original staff report
on this matter. County~staff has no objections to this petition
and recommmenOs its approval.
GMS/DOM/mg
CHURCHI(BJ)
cc: County Attorney
John ChUrch
Petition # 18
MEMOR A NDU M~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
County Administrator
County Commission
Planning Administrator
August 1, 1986
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
Petition of Mr. and Mrs° John Church to Amend the Future
Land Use Maps of-the St. Lucie County Growth Management
Policy Plan from RL (Residential, Low~ to RM (Residential,
Medium)
EXISTING GoN,'P.P.
West side of Tamarind Drive,
approximately 420 feet south of
Banyon Road.
RS-4 (Residential, Single
Family - 4 d.u./ac)
RL (Residential, Low)
PROPOSED G. N. P. P.:
RM (Residential, Medium)
PROPOSED USE:
The Petitioners propose, to
construct a Triplex on this
site.
PARCEL SIZE: ,
SURROUNDING ZONING:
.28 acres
RS-4 and H.I.R.D.
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
See comments.
FIRE PROTECTION:
No=th Beach Fi=e Station is
approximately 1 1/2 miles army.
~#ATER/SEtIER SERVICE:
On site septic and public
water*, if available.
COM#ENTS: On' 3uly 22, 1986, the St. Lucle County Local Planning
Agency held a public hearing on this petition..~ County Staff has
reviewed this petition and has de~ermlned it acceptable unde=
requirements of the St. Lucle County G~owth Management Polloy Plan,
the Hutchinson Island Resource Management Plan, and'the type and
character of the surrounding land development..
The subject prope=ty is app=oximately 10,000 squa=e feet in
a=ea. At maximum multi-family development, this lot could suppo=t
three (3) units. Based upon accepted t=ip gene=ation =ares, this
p=oJect would at its ultimate multi-family development gene=ate 19.5
t=ips/day, as opposed to 10.5 trips/day gene=ated by a detached
single-family home. Although this p=oposed petition may gene=ate a
highe= rate than that found with a single-family home, its cumulative
impact on the island's =oadway system, both local and prima=y, is
negligible. Undo= p=esent impact fee and development fee schedule:s,
this p=oject would be =equi=ed to pay $4,256.00 fo= road imp=ovements.
In =eviewing this petition, County Staff has looked
ca=efully at the su==ounding use of land in this a=ea. As the 8oard
is aware, most of the =esidential units found south of Royal Palm Way
inthis a=ea a=e single-family homes. The exceptions to this a=e found
along Royal Palm Way,Ocean D=ive, and Tama=ind Drive between Banyan
Road and Flamingo Bouleva=d. As indicated onthe attached existing
Land Use Map, the=e remain, only th=ee lots along this st=etch of
Tama=ind D=ive, including the subject lot, that have not yet been
developed. Given the type and condition of the existing uses along
this block, County Staff is'of the opinion that it is not p=actical to
assume that these inte=io= lots will o= should develop as single-
family-homes.
Du=ing the 3uly 23, 1~86 public hea=ing onthis petition,
conce=n was exp=essed about what app=oval of thi~ petition would do to
the development of the p=ope=ties ac=oss the street fromthis subject
block. As the 8oa=d is awa=e, these prope=ties a=e p=esently
designated RM (Residential, Medium) on the Land Use Maps of the St.
Lucte County G=owth Management Policy Plan and may be developed at any
tim:e, subject to app=op=iate app=ovals. In 1982, this Boa=d tu=ned
down a p=oposed site plan for two multt-sto=y towe=s along the ocean
inthis a=ea. Among the =easons cited fo=. this denial was the
incompatibility of high =ise development with the homes in this a=ea.
Staff is of the opinion that app=oval of this petition would not alte=
or ~eopa=dize this ppsitton. ~
In summa=y, County Staff finds that this petition is
acceptable undo= cu=rent policy and =egulations and =ecommends its.
app=oval. Staff would cite, fo= the =eeo=d, that this =ecommendtion
applies only to this specific petition and any other subsequent
amendment =equests a=e subject to detailed =eview and conside=ation
Chu=ch Petition
August 1, 1986
In making this dete=mination, County Staff has taken into
careful consideration the events of the past sere=al years in regard
to development on the coastal ba=:ie~ islands of St. Lucie County.
The subject p=ope~ty appears to have-no unique envi=onmental
characte=istics and is not in its natu=al state. Vegetation on this
site is p=imarily grasses with a few small palm t=ees. Intensive
u=ban type development in this a=ea makes this lot an unlikely
extensive wildlife habitat.
Chlu =ch Pet !t ton
August [~ ].986
prior to recommendation.
On 3uly 25, 1986, the St. Luc[e County Local Planning
Agency voted ?-0 to recommend 'denial of this petition.
CC.'
County Attorney
3ohn Church
Press/Public
A-,-^ 35 / 36--34--4 0
ATLANTIC OC
~ RL BLUE
" RR 6REEN
FTo PIERCE
INLET
i~ET[TION OF RR. & 'HRS. JOHN CHUROl
TO CHANGE FUTURE LAND USE CLASS[FICAT[Oti
FROR RL TO RR
LANTIC
OCEA
RS-~I BLUE
HIRD GREEN
FTo PIERC!
INLET
PETZTION OF F1R. & MRS. JOHN CHURCH
TO CHANGE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION
FROM RL TO Rr,1
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS
2571 EXECUTIVE CENTER CIRCLE, EAST · TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA
32399
BOB GRAH~u%4
Governor
November 12, 1986
TOM LEWIS, IR.
Secretary
The Honorable Havert L. Fenn
Chairman
St. Lucie County Board of
Commissioners
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Florida 33482-5652
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
ST. LUCIE CO., FL
Dear Commissioner Fenn:
Pursuant to section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, the Department
of Community Affairs has conducted a review of the proposed amend-
ments to the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan.
Our review indicated that the August 11, 1986, proposed plan
.... amendments were generally consistent with the statutory requirements
except as noted in the attached comments. The Department believes
the County should continue to monitor the cumulative impact of such
plan amendments to ensure the internal consistency of the adopted
Growth Management Policy Plan pursuant to s.163.3177(2), Florida
Statutes. Additional comments from the Treasure Coast Regional
Planning Council and the Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners have been attached for your review and possible use
during the comprehensive plan amendment, p~ocess. - ~=
Once the adoption process is complete, the Department
requests a copy of the amended comprehensive plan as required by
s.163.3187(3), Florida Statutes.
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT - HOUSING AND COMMUNITY I-)r~'FLOPMENT · RESOURCE PLANNIN~ ~i? MANAGEMENT
Mr. Havert L. Fenn
November 12, 1986
Page Two
Please contact Mr. Lenwood Herron at 904/487-4545-if we can
be of further assistance regarding these comments.
Sincerely,
,?'/... ~ / , .~, ,. 1..
Robert F. Kessler, ~Chief
Bureau of Local Resource
Planning
R~(/lhr
Enclosures
cc: Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
COMMENTS ON PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENTS
TO THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY PLAN
Petition %6
The petition of William Carpenter to amend the Future Land Use
map from low residential to medium residential appears to be
inconsistent with the residential development and agricultural
development policies of the Growth Management Policy Plan on
pages 29 and 33.
Petition
The petition of Laura Hancock to amend the Future Lan~ Use map
from medium residential to commercial general appears to be
inconsistent with the residential development policies of the
Growth Management Policy Plan on page 29.
Petition 98
The petition of Malcolm and Sylvia Collin's to amend the Future
Land Use map from medium residential to commercial general
appears to be inconsistent with the residential development
policies of the Growth Management Policy Plan on page 29.
Petition #10
The petition of Terrance Mack to amend the Future Land Use map
from low residential to commercial general appears to be
inconsistent with the commercial development policies of the
Growth Management Policy Plan on page 30.
Petition #12
The petition of Rose Baukmer to amend the Future Land Use map
from low residential and commercial general to light industrial
appears to be inconsistent with the residential development and
industrial development policies of the Growth Management Policy
Plan on pages 29 and 32. '
Petition #13
The petition of Potter and Cleghorn to amend the Future Land Use
map from low residential to commercial general appears to be
inconsistent with the residential development policies of the
Growth Management Policy Plan on page 29.
1
Petition $14
Local approval of the H. F. Martek, Jr., project should be
deferred until specific impact issues have been sufficiently
resolved under the Development of Regional Impact Process
pursuant to section 380.06, Florida Statutes. It should be noted
that this project-exceeds 80% of the 1,000 dwelling units thresh-
old[ for St. Lucie County. Therefore, the applicant should
contact the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Resource
Management for guidance on the DRI process.
Petition #17
The petition of the St. Lucie County Board of County
Commissioners to amend the Future Land Use map from light
industrial to medium residential appears to be inconsistent with
the residential development policies of the Growth Management
Policy Plan on page 29.
Petition #19
Local approval of the Mintonlet al project should be deferred
until specific impact issues have been sufficiently resolved
under the Development of Regional Impact process pursuant to
section 380.06, Florida Statutes. The applicant should contact
the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Resource Manage-
ment for guidance on the DRI process.
Petition #20
The petition' of Dorothy L. Foster to amend the Future Land Use
map from low--residential to--commercial general appears to be
inconsistent with the commercial development policies of the
Growth Management Policy Plan on page 30.
Petition #21
Local approval of the Strazzulla Brothers Company, Inc., and ,John
B. Culverhouse et al should be deferred until specific impact
issues have been sufficiently resolved under the Development of
Regional Impact process pursuant to section 380.06, Florida
Statutes..The applicant should contact the Department of
~ommunity Affairs, Bureau of Resource Management for guidance on
the DRI process.
2
st. lucio
September 23, 1986
~r. Ralph K. ~ook
Department of Community ^flairs
Bureau of Local Resource Plannin~
2571 Executive Center Circle, East
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Subject: Local ¢overnment Comprehensive Plan Oocuments
Dear Mr. Hook
and t. and Development Regulation ^ct, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes,'the
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council reviewed the amendments to the St.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning
Lucie County land use element at its regular meeting on September 22, 1986.
The following comments were approved by Council for transmittal to the
State Department of Community Affairs pursuant to Sections 163.3184(1)(c)
and (2), Florida Statutes, for consideration by the County prior to
adoption of the document.
Evaluation
The proposed amendments to the Land Use Element have been reviewed in
accordance with the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes,
Council's review procedures, and Council's adopted plans and policies. The
following comments are offered as a result of that r~view. ~
The proposed amendments are not in conflict or inconsistent with
adopted Council plans or policies. Proposals to convert large
tracts of agricultural lands to semi-urban uses (e.g., Item 20)
are of some concern, however, and should not be considered prior
to a comprehensive reevaluation of the County's goals and
objectives for the entire area (see attached letter).
Prior to the approval of the land use amendments, the proposed
changes should be tested aaainst the St. Lucie County
transportation model, to assure that the affected roadways can
accommodate the more intense land uses.
Council supports the efforts of St. Lucie County and the School
Board of St. Lucie County (see the attached letter) in ~mDroving
educational opportunities through the use of d~dications and
impact fees as discussed in the amendment request.
Mr. Ralph K. Hook
Page two
September 23, 1986
The property described by Item 1 is close to the sites of the
Treasure Coast SQuare Mall and the proposed Vista Plantation
development in Martin County. The ability of U.S. 1 to
accommodate additional traffic generated by Item 1 must be
ensured. Adequate right-of-way should be dedicated for future
expansion of the roadway network prior to the development of this
parcel.
Considering the proximity of Item 16 to the St. Lucie County
Airport, the current land use designation of Liaht Industrial may
be more appropriate than the proposed Residential land use
designation. Consideration should be given to plans for future
expansion of t~e airport facilities and increased levels of air
traffic, as well as noise and safety issues.
The property described by Item 18 contains many acres of
wetlands known as the Nor.them Savannas. Care should be taken
to minimize the impacts of any development on this
environmentally sensitive area.
The property dPscribed by Item 20 is located on the border of
Indian River County and is near the interface of the St. Johns
River Water Management District and South Florida Water
Management District. Since a development of such size in this
location may have far reaching impacts, it is recommended that
the land use amendment not be approved until both St. Lucie
County'~and Indian River County aqree that such an action would
not adversely affect the ability of ~ither county to realize
growth management and planning objectives. A primary concern is
the relationship, of the project with the existing
urban/agricultural boundary. Development of the property as
residential may create compatibility problems with existing
agricultural development. Prior to considering any change in
land use, the County should carefully consider its long range
plans for this area, provision of infrastructOre and services,~
and the impacts of residential development ~n agricultural
activities in the area. Additionally, a project of the size of
this proposal would be a DRI. Final consideration of the
proposed land use change should, perhaps, wait until a report
and recommendations can be developed that evaluate regional
issues.
Mr. Ralph K. Hook
Page three
September 23, 1986
If you need additional information or have any questions, please do not
hesitate to call me.
,Sincerely'~, il
-. ./..:/.. :.,
Daniel M. Cary
Executive Director
DMC:lg
....... Att achments
PROPOSED
ITEM ACRES
1 9.2
2 18.0
3 37.5
4 3.0
5 23.1
6 1.5
7 0.9
8 1.5
9 - 17.6
10 30.5
11 4.4
rAND USE AMENDMENTS FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY
CURRENT DESIGNATION PROPOSED DESIGNATION
12 O. 7'
13 278.O
14 32.5
15 37.5
16 52.5
17 0.3
18 760.0
19 2.5
20 5,643.0
Residential, Low Commercial,
Residential, Low Commercial,
Residential, Low Commercial,
Residential, Low Commercial,
Residential, Low Residential,
Residential, Medium Commercial,
Residential, Medium
Commercial, General
Residential, Low "-
Semi -U rb an
Residential, Low
Commercial, General
Residential, Low
Agricultural, Productive
Semi -Urban
Semi-U~ban
Industrial, Light
Residential, Low
Semi -Urb an
Residential, Low
Agricultural, Productive
General
General
General
General
Med i um
General
Commercial, General
Residential, Medium
Comm6~cial, T~urist
Residential, Low
Industrial, Light
Commercial, General
Residential, Low
Industrial, Light
IndUstrial, Light
Residential, Medium
Residential, Medium
Industrial, Light
Commercial, General
Semi-Urban
BOi~.~_~D OF CO UNTY COMMISSIC~ERS
1840 25th Street. Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Tel,~phone (305) 567-8000
September 9, 1986
Mr. Peter G. Merritt
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
620 South Dixie Highway
Stuart, FL 33495
RE:
Land Use Amendment for St. Lucie
County - Falcon Ridge
Dear Mr. Merritt:
Suncom Telephone: 424-1011
Indian River County staff has reviewed the petition of the
Strazzulla Brothers Company, Inc. and John B. Culverhouse etal to
amend the future land use maps of the St. ~-Lucie County Growth
Management Policy Plan from AG (Agricultural) to SU-(Semi-Urban)
for the above referenced project. At this time staff's comments
are as follows: ..
2)
i)
The proposed project land use designation (SU Semi-Urban at
one unit per acre) is not compatible with Indian River
County's Land Use Plan (Agriculture at one unit per five
acres). The existing parcels in the surrounding area are
currently in agricultural production. Until such time that
the necessary urban services become available and th~
surrounding area infills with urban development, staff
believes that this project would create "leap-frog" develop-
ment and would be ~temature.
Staff has concerns regarding traffic impacts to local roads
entering into Indian River County that could result as the
project develops to its maximum buildout.capacity.
Please be advised that the Board of County Commissioners has not
considered these comments, however, upon direction from the
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, staff will present this
issue to the Board for their deliberation.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment and hope that our
concerns can be addressed in the applicant's response. If you
have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact
me at 567-8000, ext. 247.
Sincerely,~
Art Challacombe
Chief, Environmental Planning
cc: Rober% Keating, AICP
Tommy Thomas
Jim Davis
Mike Orr
Mike Miller
Richard'Shearer
Stan Boling
WEDNESDAY
AGENDA - BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DECEMBER:17, 1986
7:00 P.M,
Petition of Mr. and Mrs. John Church 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:
Revised Plat of Fort Pierce Shores, Unit 4, Block 30, Lot 5. (OR 326-796)
(Located on the west side of Tamrind DriVe, approximately 420'
south of Banyan Road.)
Prior to this public hearing, notice of the same was sent to
all adjacent property owners.
If it becomes necessary, these public hearings may be
continued from time to time.
Please note that all proceedings before the Board of County
Commissioners are electronically recorded. Any person who
decides to appeal any action taken by the Board of County
Commissioners at this meeting will need a record of the
]proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a
verbatim record of the proceedings is made.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
/s/ Jim Minix, Chairman
REALTORe
LLOYD TAYLOR
GENERAL CONTRACTOR
406 South 5th Street, Fort Pierce, Florida 3345u
December I6, 1986
Telephone: (305) 464-8836
Board of CountyCommissioners
Saint Lucie County, Florida.
Honorable Board Member, s:
.We recommend that ~you approve the
and Rezoning Petition of Mr. and Mrs. John Church.
Sincerly yours
i lde ~ F,TaylOr
Mr. & Mrs. John Church
1317 N. Palm Way
Lake Worth, FI. 33460
F-P.Shores,U.4,Blk. 29,L.1
Hulda D. Tarby, et al.
3100 N. A-I-A, Apt. PA 6
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFIED
F-P-Shores,U.4,Blk.29,L.2
W.H. DeCamara
P.O. Box 224
Delray Bch., Fi. 33444
F.P-Shores,U.4,Blk. 29,L.3
Mission Groves, Inc.
1625 Mayflower Rd.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33450
Lots 4 Thru 8
Fl. Ocean View Dev., Inc.
c/o Liesl Erhart
Titurestr. 2/VII
D-8000Muenchen, 81, W. Germany
Lots 9 & 10
John F. Gaul
608 S. Ocean Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Lot i1
Lloyd & Clotilde Taylor
406 S. 5th St.
Ft. Pierce, Fl. 33450
Blk. 30,L.l&Pt.L.2&21&L.22
Diane M. Rau
742 St. Albans Dr.
Boca Raton, Fi. 3343'2
Blk.30,Pt.Lots 2&3&Lot 9
Jim G. Russakis
Rt. 5, Box 448
Ft. Pierce, FI. 33450
Blk.30,Pt.L~3&Lots 4 & 20
Mazon, Inc.
cio Theodore Zangari
290 Grafton Ave.
Newark, N.~. 07104
Lots 6 & 7
Joseph G. Miller
5500 Orange Ave. ~
Ft. Pierce, Fl% 33450
Lot 8
Giovanna Call
2446 12th St.
Veto BCh., Fi. 32960
Lot 10
Roberta J. Cain, et al.
911-2841 Richmond Rd.
Ottawa, Ont.,Can. K2B 6C5
Lot 11
Exanna p. Butcher
2301 Tamarind Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Lot 12
Michael P. Butkus
2302 Atlantic Bch. Blvd.
Ft. Pierce, FI. 33449
Lot 13
Robert & Charlene Paul
108 Yacht View Ln.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33450
Lot 14
Southeast Bank
3700 Broadway
Riviera Bch., FI. 33404
Lot 15
George Cochran, et al.
14721S.W. 83rd Ct.
Miami, Fi. 33158
Lot 16
John & Ruth Baker
24 E. Main St.
Rancocas, N.J. 08073
Blk.30,Lot 17
Robert & Barbara Dudley
2312 Atlantic Bch. Blvd.
F~. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Blk. 30, Lot 18
Joseph Morrow
47 Lafayette Pl. Apt. 1E
Greenwich, Ct. 06830
Blk. 30, Lot 19
J. Irvin Montgomery
2316 Atlantic Bch. Blvd.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Pt. Lot 21
Marian & Annette McMullian
2320 Atlantic Bch. Blvd.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
F.P.Shores,U. 1,Blk. 2,L.13&Pt.14
Dorothy M. Schub
2406 Atlantic Bch. Blvd.
F~. Pierce, Fi. 33449
F.P.Shores,U.1,Blk. 2,L.14&15
Clarence &Mary Hayes
2400 Atlantic Bch. Blvd.
Ft. Pierce, Fl. 33449
F;P.Shores,U.1,Blk. 2,L.28&29
Robert Wilcox, et al.
2115 S. 3rd. St.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33450
F.P.Shores,U.5,Blk. 4,Lot 15
Doris D. Tillman
2401 Atlantic Bch. Blvd.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
F.P.Shores,U.5,Blk. 28,L.1
Harry & Daren Lamb
2328 Oak Dr.
Ft. Pierce.
F-P-Shores,U.5,Blk. 28,Lot 2
David & Betty Batty
1320 Talbott Cir.
Avon Park, Fi. 33825
Blk. 28, Lot 2
Robert & Katherine Miller
2324 Oak Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Lot 4
Robert & Norma Boyd
2322 Oak Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fl. 33449
LOt5
Barbara Reyes
5 Spruce Rd.
Hyde Park, N.Y. 12538
Lots 6 Thru 9
Nilla Putnam
2400 S. Ocean Dr.
2320 Catamaran I
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Lot 10
Sun Bank - Miami
9600 Collins Ave.
Bal Harbour, Fl. 33154
Blk. 35, Lot 1
Joan Blum
2314 Oak Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Blk. 35, Lot 2
John & Josephine Crickett
15 Rosemary Rd.
Tewksbury, Ma. 01876
Blk. 35, Lot 3
David & Paula Alker
2310 Oak Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Lot 4
Charles & Leonie Kelley
2308 Oak Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Lot 5
John & Jean Pfeiffer
2306 Oak Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Lot 8
Cora L. Pearce
2313 Atlantic Bch. Blvd.
Ft. Pierce, Fl. 33449
Blk. 35, Lot 9
Shirley J. Duda
2311 Atlantic Bch. Blvd.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Blk. 35, Lot 10 Blk. 35, Lot 11
Joseph & Claire Morrow
Hedgerow Ln.
Greenwich, Ct. 06830
George & Susan Osborne
2307 Atlantic Bch. Blvd.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Lot 12
Joseph J. Morrow
47 Lafayette Pl., Apt. 1-E
Greenwich, Ct. 06830
Blk. 36, Lot 1
John & Camille Ashcraft
2313 Oak Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Blk. 36, Lot 2
John & Evelyn Franks
2754 Fort Island Dr.
Akron, Oh. 44313
Blk. 36, Lot 3
Otto R. Goercke
2309 Oak Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
Lot 4
Mary E. Rice
2307 Oak Dr.
Ft. Pierce, Fi. 33449
County Roads
St. Lucie County Admin. Bldg.
Road Right-of-Way,Rm. 208A
2300 Virginia Ave.
Ft. Pierce, FI. 33482
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSION(ERS
December 9, 1986
D V LOPM NT
-COORDINATOR
J. GARY AMENT
In compliance with the provisions of the St. Lucie County Zoning
Ordinance you are hereby advised that Mr. and Mrs. John Church
have petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to amend the
Future Land Use Classification of the St. Lucie County Growth
Management Policy Plan from RL (Low Density Residential Develop-
ment) to RM (Medium Density Residential Development) for the
following described property:
Revised Plat of Fort Pierce Shores, Unit 4, Block 30, Lot 5. (OR 326-796)
(Located on the west side of Tamrind Drive, approximately 420'
south of Banyan Road.)
The Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on
this petition at 7:00 P.M. on Wednesday, December 17, 1986, in
Room 101, St. Lucie County Administration 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. Any person who decides to appeal any action taken by
the BOard of County Commissioners at this meeting will need a
record of the proceedings, and for such purpose may need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. If it
becomes necessary, these public hearings may be continued from
time to time.
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 359.
Sincerely,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Jim Minix, Chairman
dcm
HAVERT L. FENN, District No. I · E. E. GREEN, 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 · Fort Pierce, FL 33482-5652 · Phone (305) 466-t t00
Coordinator: Ext. 398 · Building: Ext. 344 · Planning: Ext. 316 · Zoning: Ext. 336 · Code Enforcement: Ext. 317
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
MINUTES
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT=
BOARDMF2{BERS ABSENT=
OTHERS PRESENT=
Tapes: 1, 2, 3, 4
Chairman J. P. Terpening, Mabel
Fawsett, Jim Russakis, Patricia
King, 7. J. Sciturro (through
Fender petition, excused for
following petitions), Patrici~
Ferrick (absent for first petition,
Jode Groves, excused), Robert
Carman (absent for first pettion,
Jode G~oves, excused).
William Myers, Peggy Harris (both
excused absences).
Daniel McIntyre, County Attorney;
Dennis Murphy, Planner; Gary
Schindler, Planning Administrator;
Dolores Messer, Secretary.
DATE OF .HEARING: 12/9/86
CONVENED: 7:00 P.M.
ADJOURNED: 1:10 A.M.
Page:.l
PUBLIC HEARING:
Petition of Mr. ahd=Mrs. John Church to amend the Future Land Use
Maps of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from
RL (Low Density Residential) to RM (Medium Density Residential.)
Mr. John Church appeared before the Board representing his
petition. He explained that they are proposing to build a
triplex that would be compatible with surrounding property
useage. He further explained that the mutiple unit structures in
existence were built in 1972 or 1973, and when he bought the
property in 1980 (four years before the zoning change), this area
had already been established as a multi-unit section. He feels
that this request is consistent with the GMPP. He quoted staff
recommendation regarding his property having no unique
environmental characteristics that would be harmed by proposed
development. He said traffic impact would be negligible. Due to
surrounding land use, he did not feel it would be feasible to
propose a single family dwelling.
There was discussion as to whether the lots to the east are
buildable or not.
Mrs. Fawsett asked Staff regarding density of the parcel, and Mr.
Murphy replied that the parcel would support only one unit per
acre under the present land use and zoning classification.
Mr. Robert Dudley appeared before the Board, expressing his own
concerns and those of 40 others, regarding density growth and
possible traffic increase.
Mr. Terpening noted two letters of opposition for the record.
Mr. Church replied to adjoining residents concerns regarding the
door being opened for other changes in zoning and resulting over
populating of the area. He mentioned Mr. Taylor and Shirley Duda
had contacted him wishing to reverse their previous opposition.
Chairman Terpening closed the public portion of the hearing.
Staff said that comments had not been received from the Dept. of
Community Affairs. The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
found that this proposed amendment did not contravene any
regional policy or plan. County Staff finds that the proposed
land use for this particular lot will not adversely impact or
contravene any established development regulations on Hutchinson
id. For the reCord,, impact fees are mandatory not voluntary,
mate are luded. County Staff
TUESDAY
AGENDA - LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY DECEMBER 9, 1986
7:00 P.M.
Petition of Mr. and Mrs. John Church to amend the Future Land
Use Classification of the St. Lucie County Growth Mana§ement
Policy Plan from RL (Low Density Residential Development) to RM
(Medium Density Residential Development) for the following
described property:
Revised Plat of Fort Pierce Shores, Unit 4, Block 30, Lot 5. (OR 326-796)
(Located on the west side of Tamrind Drive, approximately 420'
south of Banyan Road.)
Please note that all proceedings before the Local Planning
Agency are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to
appeal any action taken by the Local Planning Agency at this
meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the pro-
ceedings is made.
Prior to this public hearing, notice of the same was sent to
all adjacent property owners.
dcm
PETITION
TO:
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
AND COU~TY;CO~IISSION ~~ -~ ~~
A PETITION TO DENY THE REZONING OF LOT 5, BLOCK 30, UNIT 4,
FT. PIERCE SHORES (TAMARIND DRIVE) FROM 4 UNITS PER ACRE TO
11 UNITS PER ACRE.
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS, HEREBY REQUEST THAT YOU DENY THE
PROPOSED REZONING, THUS PRESERVING THE EXISTING LIMIT OF RS-4
IN FT. PIERCE SHORES;,~.
?
PETITION
TO: LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY AND ~OUNTY COMMISSION
A PETI~%0N TO DENYzTHE REZONING OF LOT 5, BLOCK 30, UNIT 4, FT.
PIERCE SHORES (TAMARIND DRIVE) FROM 4 UNITS PER ACRE TO 11 UNITS._
PER ACRE.
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS, HEREBY REQUEST THAT YOU~ DENY THE
PROPOSED REZONING, THUS 'PRESERVING THE EXISTING LIMIT OF RS-4
(4 units per acre)! tN FT. P~I~.RCE SHORES.
~~ ~ · ,~- ~ .- .~~ ~.-~---
December O1, 1986
J.P. Terpening
Planning and Zoning Commission
St. Lucie County
c/o Board of County Commissioners
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Fla. '33482-5652-
Dear Mr. Terpeni'hg
or Whom it May Concern:
This letter serves to indicate our opposition to the
proposed change to th6' zoning plan of Fort Pierce Shores, '
unit 4, block 30, lot § (or 326-796) set out in your not-ice
~of November 17, 1986. Our authorized agent at the public
hearings to be held on December 09, 1986 (and subsequently)
will be Mr. BOb Dudley of 2312 Atlantic Beach B~vd.
Mr. Dudley is charged to represent us to this effect and
will read our.statement'into the minutes. Should Mr. Dudley
be-.unable to attend the public meeting(s), you may take-this
'letter as out official notice of opposition.
Yours sincerely,
Roberta J. Cain Alice Baird
co-owners of 2303 Tamarind Drive, Fort 'Pierce, Fla.
J-ira Baird
PETITION
TO:
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
AND
CO~T¥'-'CO~SS~'ON ~~ ~ ~~
A PETITION TO DENY THE REZONING OF LOT 5, BLOCK 30, UNIT 4,
FT. PIERCE SHORES (TAMARIND DRIVE) FROM 4 UNITS PER ACRE TO
11 UNITS PER ACRE.
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS; HEREBY REQUEST THAT YOU DENY THE
PROPOSED REZONING, THUS PRESERVING THE EXISTING LIMIT OF RS-4
)er:~acr,
IN FT. PIERCE SHORES.
PETITION
TO: LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY AND '~OUNTY COMMISSION
A PETIt%ON TO DENYzTHE REZONING OF LOT 5, BLOCK 30, UNIT 4, FT.
PIERCE SHORES (TAMARIND DRIVE) FROM 4~UNITS PER ACRE'TO 11 UNITS._
PER ACRE.
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS, HEREBY REQUEST THAT YOU:DENY THE
PROPOSED REZONING, THUS ~BESERVING THE EXISTING LIMIT OF RS-4
(4 units per acr~)~ IN FT. PIERCE SHORES.
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSION(ERS
November17, 1986
PMCNT
AMENT
In compliance with the provisions of Florida Statutes, you are
hereby advised that Mr. and Mrs. John Church have petitioned the
Local Planning Agency to amend the Future Land Use Classification
of the St. L'ucie County Growth Management Policy Plan from RL
(Low Density Residential Development) to RM (Medium Density Resi-
dential Development) for.~.~he~following described property:
Revised Pla~ of Fort P~erce Shores, Uni~ 4, Block 30, Lot 5. (OR 326-?96)
(Located on the west side of Tamrind Drive, approximately 420 '
south of Banyan Road.)
A public hearing on the petition will be held at 7:00 P.M. on
Tuesday, December 9, 1986, 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 Local Planning Agency
are electronically recorded. Any person ~ho decides to appeal
any action taken by the Local Planning A§ency at this meeting
will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may
need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made.
If you no longer own property adjacent to the above-described
parcel, please forward this notice to the new owner. If you have
any questions, additional information may be obtained by calling
Area Code 305, 466-1100, Extension 359. '
Sincerely,
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
J. P. Terpening, Chairman
dcm
NAVERT L. FENN, District No. I · E. E. GREEN. District No. 2 · JACK KRIEGER, District No. 3 · R. D/U.E TREFELN ER, District No. 4 · JIM MINIX, District No. 5
Coungt Administrator - 'Od[II>ON B. L~tlS
2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce. FL 33482-5652 ~· Phone (305) 466-t 100
Coordinator: Ext. 398 · Building: Ext. 344 · Planning: Ext. 316 · Zoning: [x~'. 336 · Code Enforcement: Ext. 3t7
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSION£RS
November 17, 1986
DCVCLOPM( NT
COORDINATOR
J. GARY AMENT
In compliance with the provisions of Florida Statutes, you are
hereby advised that Mr. and Mrs. John Church have petitioned the
Local Planning Agency 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 Resi-
dential Development) for.-the;:_foltowing described property:--
Revised Plat of Fort Pierce Shores, Unic 4, Block 30, LoC 5. (OR 326-796)
(Located on the west side of Tamrind Drive approximately 420 '
south of Banyan Road.) '
A public hearing on the petition will be held at 7:0D P.M. on
Tuesday, December 9, 1986, 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 Local Planning Agency
are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to appeal
any action taken by the Local~ Planning Agency at this meeting
will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may
need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made.
If you no longer own property adjacent to the above-described
parcel, please forward this notice to the new owner. If you have
any questions, additional information may be obtained by calling
Area Code 305, 466-1100, Extension 359. '
Sincerely,
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
J- P. Terpening, Chairman
dcm
NAVERT L. FENN District No. I · E. E. GREEN, District No. 2 · JACK KRIEGER, District No. 3 · R. D,~4.E TREFELNER, District No. 4 · JIM MINIX. D~strict No. 5
County Administrator - WELDON B. LEWIS
2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce, FL 33482-5652 · Phone (305) 466-1100
Coordinator: Ext. 398 · Building: Ext. 344 · Planning: Ext. 316 · Zoning: Ext. 336 · Code Enforcement: Ext. 317
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSION6RS
November 17, 1986
DC VC LOPM NT
COORDINATOR
J. GARY AMENT
In compliance with the provisions of Florida Statutes, you are
hereby advised that Mr. and Mrs. John Church have petitioned the
Local Planning' Agency 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 Resi-
dential Development) for the following described property:
Revised Plat of Fort Pierce Shores, Unit 4, Block 30, Lot 5. (OR 326-796)
(Located on the west side of Tamrind Drive, mpproximately 420 '
south of Banyan Road.)
A public hearing on the petition will be held at 7:00 P.M. on
Tuesday, December 9, 1986, in Room 101, St. Lucie County Admin-
istration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida.
All interested persons will be §iven an opportunity to be heard
at that time.
Please note that all proceedings before the Local Planning Agency
are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to appeal
any action taken by the Local Planning Agency at this meeting
will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may
need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made.
If you no longer own property adjacent to the above-described
parcel, please forward this notice to the new owner. If you have
any questions, additional information may be obtained by calling
Area Code 305, 466-1100, Extension 359.
Sincerely,
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
J. P. Terpening, Chairman
dcm
HAVERT L. FENN, District No. I · E. E. GREEN, District No. 2 · JACK KRIEGER, District No. 3 · R. D~LE TREFELNER, District No. 4 · JIM MINIX, District No. 5
County Administrator - WELDON B. LEWIS
2300 Virginia Avenue ® Fort Pierce, FL 33482-5652 · Phone (305) 466-1100
Coordinal'or: Ext. 398 · Building: Ext. 344 · Planning: Ext. 3t6 · Zoning: Ext. 336 · Code Enforcement: Ext. 3t 7
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
MEMORANDUM
To:
Counci 1 Members
AGE} A 7-G
From:
Dar e:
Subject:
Staff
September 22, 1986 Council Meeting
Local Governmen't Comprehensive Plan Review -
Amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Use
Element
Introduction
Pursuant to the provisions of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning
and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, the
Council must be provided an opportunity to review and comment on plan
amendments prior to their adoption. St. Lucie County has submitted
proposed land use amendments to the State Department of Community Affairs,
which in turn is seeking Council's comments.
Background.
St. Lucie County is considering 20 amendment~s to the :Future Land Use Map.
Locations of the properties under consideration are shown on the accom-
panying map, and the number of acres and proposed changes in land use
designations are summarized in the attached list.
The County is also considering text amenaments that would 1) add language
describing plans for new residential development to bear a portion of
educational costs through developer dedications and impact fees, 2) delete
the requirement for site development plans with all rezoning petitions, and
3) require a site development or concept plan for .proposals to amend the
Future Land Use Maps of the Growth Management Policy Plan (i.e., the
Comprehensive Plan ).
Evaluation
The proposea amendments to the Land Use Element have been reviewed in
accordance wi th the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes,
Council's review proceaures, and Council's adopted plans and policies. The
following cmnments are offered as a result of that review.
The proposed amendments are not in conflict or inconsistent with
adopted council plans or policies. Proposals to convert large
tracts of agricultural lands to $imi-urban uses (e.g., Item 20)
-'"'-7 ~ are of some concern, however, and should not be considered 'prior
to a comprehensi've re-evaluation of the county's goals and
I
objectives for the entire area.
Prior to the approval of the land use amendments, the proposed
changes should be tested against the St. Lucie County
transpor, tation model, to assure that the affected roadways can
acc'-~6mmodate the more intense land uses.
Council supports the efforts of St. 'Lucie County and the School
Board of St. Lucie County (see the attached letter) in improving
educational opportunities through the use of dedications and
impact fees as discussed in the amendment request.
The property described by ~j~li~..~s close to the sites of the
Treasure Coast Square Mall and the proposed Vista Plantation
development in Martin County. The ability of U.S. 1 'to
accommodate additional traffic gef~erated by Item 1 must be
ensure(~. Adequate right-of-way should be dedicateo for future
expansion of the roadway network prior to the development of this
parcel.
Considering the proximity of ~to the St. Lucie County
Airport, the current land use 6eslgnation of Light Industrial may
be more appropriate than the proposed residential land use
designation. Consideration should be given to plans for future
expansion of the airport facilities and increased levels of air
traffic, as well as noise and safety issues.
The property described by Item 18_ contains many acres of
wetlands known as the Northe6-nr Savannas. Care should be taken
to mir~imize the impacts of any ~ development on this
environme~tally sensitive area.
The property described by Item 20 is located on the border of
Indian River County and is near the interface of the St. Johns
River Water Management District and South Florida Water
Management District. Since a development of such size in this
location may'have far reaching impacts, it is recommended that
the land use amendment not be approved until both St. Lucie
Cou~ty and Indian River County agree that such an action would
not adversely affect the ability of either c6unty to realize
growth management and planning objectives. A primary concern is
the relationship of the project with the existing
uroan/agricultural boundary. Development of the property as
residential may create compatibility problems with existing
agricultural development. Prior to considering any change in
land use, the County should carefully consider its long range
plans for this area, provision of infrastructure and services,
and the impacts of residential development on agricultural
activities in the ~area. Additio~ally, a project of the size of
:his proposal would be a D.R.I. Final consideration of the
proposeo land use change should, perhaps, wait until a report
and reco~,)nendations can be developed that evaluate regional
issues.
Recommenuati on
Council should adopt the comments~ outlined above with respect to the Land
Use Element and approve their transmittal to the State Department of
Community Affairs in fulfillment of the requirements of Chapter 163,
Florida Statutes.
Attachments
3
r~
I
I
I °
I
September 3, 1986
Mr. Peter G. Merritt
Regional Planner
620 South Dixie Highway
P.O. Drawer 396
St,,mrt, FL 33495-0396
· Subject: Your
Plan.
letter dated 8-26-86--Local Goverrm~nt
mentioned
th case,
order for
th~ ammdm~nt to the Land Use Plan for Saint Luc'ie County
in your letter is the School Board Impact Fee. If this is .
let me assure you.that such a fee is vitally necessary in
t-he School Board to have the necessary funds to construct
new facilities. Currently, the population growth is exceeding the
County's ability to provide capital funds. Although the proposed
impact-fee will not solve the problem, it will be a great help.
Dr. George R. H~ ll, Superintendent, and the Board urges you and other
agencies to look with favor on the proposed an~ndment.
any assistance to you, please do not hesitate
If this office can3~-~
to contact me at/~5~-5031.
b
cc:
Dr. George Hill
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSION£RS
Via Federal Express
August 11, i986
Mr. Oames Murley, Director
'Division of Resource Planning and Management
Department of Community Affairs
2571 Executive Center Circle East
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Subject:
Transmittal of Proposed Amendment to the St. Lucie County
Growth Management Policy Plan
Dear Mr. Murley:
Enclosed you will' find, for review by the State Land Planning
Agency, ten copies of 22 proposed amendments to the St. Luc'ie County
Growth Management Policy Plan. The amendments are being transmitted
to you pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 163.3184 (3) Fl~orida
Statute.
On Thursday, 3une 24, 1986, the St. Lucie County Local Planning
Agency held a public hearing on Petitions Number 7, 12, and 17 of the
attached agenda. These hearings were held in accordance to statutory
requirements in effect prior to Ouly l, 198~. On August 7, 1~8~, the
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners certified that the
Local Planning Agency did in fact hold this heari'ng-
On Thursday, August 7, 1~86, the St. Lucie County Board of County
Commissioners held a public hearing pursuant to Chapter 1~3.3184 (15)
Florida Statute, for the purpose of transmitting the balanCe of the
attached agenda to the State Land Planning Agency for review. These
amendments are scheduled to be presented to the St. Lucie County Local
Planning Agency and Board of County Commissioners for final
disposition in December of 1~86. This will complete the second Plan
Amendment cycle for 1~8~, as permitted under Florida Statute and the
St. Lucie Count.y Board of County Commissioners amendment schedules-
If, in reviewing this material, you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Mr. Gary Schindler, Planning
HAVERT L. FENN. District No. I "J E. E. GREEN. District No. 2 · JACK KRIEGER, District No. 3 · R. DALE TREFELNER. District No. 4 ', JIM MINIX. District No. 5
County Administrotor - WELDON B. LEWIS
2300 Virginia Avenue · Fort Pierce, FL 33482-5652 · Phone (305) 466-1100 Ext. 201 & 202
Mr. ~urley
August 11, 1986
Administrator or Mr. Daniel S. Mc Intyre, County Attorney at 305-466-
llO0. I appreciate your Department's offer of timely consideration
of these petitions, as inOicated by legal counsel, Rhoda R. Glasco, in
her letter of Ouly 24, 1986 to our County Attorney. Any comments that
you propose to return should be received by St. Lucie County no later
than November 14, 1986, in order to meet the Oecember, 1~8~ hearing
dates. When correspondin9 with St. Lucie County, I would appreciate
it if you would please copy Mr. Schindler and Mr. Mc Intyre at this
same address. Thank you for your time and efforts-
Sincerely,
nix, Vice Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
3M/DOM/lg
cc:
County Administrator
County Attorney
Development Coordinator
.Planning ~dministrator
Ralph Hook
Retition Files
AGENDA - BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THURSDAY
AUGUST 7, 1986
5:30 P.M.
Petition of Mr. and Mrs. John Church 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:
Revised Plat of ~ort Pierce Shores, Unit 4, Block 30, Lot 5. (OR 326-796)
(Located on the West side of Tamrind Drive approximately 420' South
of Banyan Road)
Prior to this public hearing, notice of the same was sent
to all adjacent property owners.
If it becomes necessary, these public hearings may be continued
from time to time.
Please note that all proceedings before the Board of County
Commissioners are electronically recorded. Any person who decides
to appeal any action taken by the Board of County Commissioners
at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings and for such
purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
is made.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
/s/ Havert L. Fenn, Chairman
INTER-OFFICE ~ORANDU~
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TO: Board of County Commissioners
Weldon B. Lewis, County Administrator
FROM: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney
C. A. NO.: 86-373
DATE: July 29, 1986
SUBJECT: Revisions to Chapter 163.3184, Florida Statutes -
Adoption of Comprehensive Plan, or Element or
Portion thereof
At the recent regular session of the Florida Legislature,
Senate Bill 978, which amended several sections of the Local
Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation
Act (also. known as Chapter..163, Florida Statutes) was passed and
signed into law. One of the many amendments to this Act dealt
with the procedures to be followed for amending a Local
-Government's Comprehensive Plan. under the previous statute, the
board of county commissioners, only had to certify that the Local
Planning Agency held a public hearing on the proposed
comprehensive plan, element, or portion theseof prior to its
transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency for review, under
the new law, the board of county commissioners is required to
hold a public hearing on the proposed plan or plan amendment
prior to the transmitting of that plan or amendment to the State
Land Planning Agency for review.
On July 24, 1986, Rhoda P. G1asco, an attorney for the State
of Florida Department of Community Affairs opined that the County
must follow the procedu£es as amended by Chapter 86-191, Laws of
Florida, even though all of the petitions were filed before the
July 1, 1986, effective date. A copy of MS. Glasco's letter is
attached to this memorandum. Apparently, the Department of
Community Affairs is taking the position that the date of
advertising determines whether the new law applies.
In view of Ms. Glasco's July 24, 1986 opinion, I recommend
that the Board immediately schedule a transmittal hearing(s) so
-that the July amendments~may be transmitted to"the Department of
Community Affairs as soon as possible. Since the Board had no
meeting scheduled for July 29 (Fifth Tuesday), staff, after
discussions with the Board Chairman, scheduled the transmittal
hearing for Thursday August 7, 1986, at 5:30 p.m. By copy of
this memorandum to the County Administrator, I am requesting that
he place this item on the August 5, 1986 agenda for "after the
fact" permission to advertise.
The Development Coordinator and I will continue to review
the amendments to this act and hope to present to you in_the· near
future a summary report on what, if any, present county policies
or regulations must be amended. If you have any questions on
this matter please let me know.
DSM/sls
Copies To:
RespectfullY submitted,
Development Coordinator
Planning Administrator
Local Planning Agency
Land Use Amendment Petition Files
Press/Public
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
2571 EXECUTIVE CENTER CIRCLE, EAST ® TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301
July 24, 1986 - TOM LEWiS, JR.
BOB GRAHAM Secretary
GoYemo,
Mr. Daniel McIntyre ....
St. Lucie County Attorney
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Florida 33482
Dear Mr. McIntyre:
You requested over the telephone, an opinion as to whether
the procedures in section 163.3184 as amended by Chapter 86-191,
Laws of Florida, are applicable to your current local
comprehensive plan amendments. You stated that yqur notice for a
public hearing by the local planning agency was advertised on
July. 2, 1986, with hearings .scheduled on July 23rd and 24th.
It is my opinion that the County must follow the
procedures as amended by Chapter 86-191, Laws of 'Florida, and
effective July 1, 1986. Therefore, the local governing body will
be required to hold at least.._two public hearings, the~ first which
must be held at the transmittal stage (See Section 9, Chapter
86-191, Laws of Florida). The second public hearing must be.held
at the adoption stage.
As stated to you, the local planning agency must still
hold at least one public hearing with due notice pursuant to s.
163.3174(4)(a), prior to making a recommendation to the governing
body. There is no longer the requirement that the local"
governing body determine that the LPA held a public hearing with
due public notice prior to transmittal.
The Department will make every effort to expedite the
review and comment once the amendments are received. Should you
have any additional questions or concerns, please contact Dana
Minerva or me.
Rhod& P. Glasco
Attorney
cc: Margaret-Ray Kemper
Dana Minerva
R~lph Hook
Bob Kessler
~ERGEN~GE~E~I H, OU~GaNDCO~I~ ~EVE[OIH~ENTe RESOUR~ PLANNINGANDMANAGEMENT
· ~? k_~riCE OF CHANGE OF LAND USE
The St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners proposes to change the use of (and within the area shown in the map in this advertisement*
A public hearing on the nroDosal will be held on Thursday, August 7, 1986 at 5:30 P.M. at Room 101, St. Lucie County Administration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fl. Pierce, Florida.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ST. LUCIE CO. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
A.- PetitiOn of June R. Lentz. et at
B.- Petition of Hayslip Landscape
C.- Petition of Jode Groves, inc.
D.- Petition of Robert Fender, et al
E.- Petition of Win, E. Carpenter
F.- Petition of Laura B. Hancock
G.- Petition of Malcolm H Sylvia Collins
H.- Petition of Charles H Jeaoatte Btount
I,- Petition of K. Torrance Mock
J.- Petition of Ft. Pierce 30 West
K.- Petition of Rose E. Raumker
L.- Petition o! potter/Cleghom
tV ,-'Petition of H.F. Martek, Jr., loc.
N .- Petition of Minton Sun/Indlenoia Groves
O.- Petition of Thomas Zaydon
p.- Petition of Sd. of Coun~ Commissioners
Q.- Petition of John Church
R .- Petition of Bessie Minton. et al
S.- Petition of Dorothy L. Foster
T.* Petition of Strazzulla Bros. Co.
ST. LuCIE
COUNTY
If it becomes nece
Copies of the prop ....... -~ ,/' -~ -; A-onue Ft Pierce F or(da, during normal b' L ~ '~- o~ =--eat anv action taken by the Board of County Commis-
Pleasge note that' all proceedings before the Board OT..~oun~y. ~u,,,,,,i~,r,~ose ma-' need to ensure that a verbatJ~'m record of the proceedings is made.
uildin and Zoning'Diwslon, r~oom zul, zouu vlr~,,~,,...~..~_ .:. r-:-~;--~---rs are electronically recorded- Any person woo
All interested persons may appear and will be given an opportunity to be heard regarding the transmittal of these ~an Amendments at th~s time.
A. June R. Lentz, e~a:
From RL (Residential Low) to CG (Commercial General) located at the Northeast comer South
U.S, t and Lennard Road.
B. Hays p Landscape:
From RL (Residential Low to CG (Commercial Genera(); located along the North side of Saager
Road, Approximately 60~ ft. West of South U.S. 1~
C. Jode Groves, thC.:
From R L (Residential Low) to CG {Commercial General); locate~ at the Northwest corner of South
25th St. end West Midway Rd.
D Robert Fender, et el:
· From RL [Residential Low) to CG {Commercial General); located at the Sou~west corner of South
25th St. end West Midway Rd.
~ Wm. E, Carpenter
· From RL (Resident(at Low) to RM IResidentla Mediuml; located along the East side of Sunrise
Blvd.. aaProximately 1600 ft. South of Bell Avenue.
F. Laura B. Hancock: - · et the Northeast c~ter of
FFom RM (Residential Medium) to CG (Commercml General), located
South 25th St. and Edwards Road, - .... ' -
~· Malcolm/~' S~ta Collins:
From RM (Residential Medium) to CG {Commercial (~eneral); located along the North side of
wa~de Road, approximately 3~0 ft. East of South 2Sth St.
H · Charles Et Jeanette Blount: -
Frm~n CG (Commercial General ~o RM { Residential Mpdium); iesated atthe North~aat c~nr of
South 40th St. and Harvey Avenue.
I,' K. Termnce Motif:' -' .' '
From RL (Residentlal Low) to CT (Commercial Tounst): located at the No~-.~eest comer of Kings
Highway end Graham Road.
.~ · Ft. Pierce 30 West:
From SU (Semi-Urban) to RL (Residential Low(: located along the South side of Orange Avenue.
approximately ~/~ mite West of Rock Road.
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BOARD of COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
IS/Hevert g Fenn
Chaim~an,
K. Rose E. Baumker:
F~om RL (Residential Low) to CG {Commercial General): located along the North s~le of Orange
Avenue, approximately ~ mile East of Jenkins Road.
L. Potter/C eghorn: CG (Commercial General); located at the Northesst corner df Met'
From RL (Residential Low to
zger Road {Ave. E) and North 37th St.
~1~ H. F. Martek Jr., Inc.:
· From AG {Agricultural productive! to RL (Residential Low}; located along the No, th side of Angle
Road. between 1-95 and The Florida Turnpike·
Ii~ · M~nton Sun Inc./Indianoia Groves (No. 3) a Florida pertr~r~hig: -
From SU (Semi-Urban) to IL (Induatriat Light); located at the Northeast corn~ o~ Kings Highway
and Angle Road.
O · Thomas Zayden: ......... :---'-' H-hi)' Incited et the Nor~heeet comer of Kings Highway
and St. Lucia 81vd.
~. Board of County Commiseloners: · '
From IL (Industrial Light) to RM [Residential Medium); located along the Nmlh sma of St, Lucre
Blvd., between Cayuga end Navajo Avenues,
Q· John Church: . --- ~ ..... tial Medium)' located lin~ the West side of Tamr~d
From RL (Residential Low} to ~M ~n?_~,, .__~ ·
Drive, approximately 420 ft. South ot Uanyon
~r. om ~.'~b~n~led on the North by IndnO R~ad and No~
S· Oomth L Foster' , E~stsideofNorthU.S.
ny..._ .~: :.._, .~.,t ,~ ~G {Commercial General)' lecatod a~ng the
1, approximately 1400 ft. North of indrio Road. ~·
Strazzu la Bros. Co Inc. Et John B. Cuive~'hou .se, et, al.. .
T. From AG iAgficultural Pmducti~l to SU ISem~-Udlsnl,lOeb:ed W~t Of the 1~9~/Indr~O Road ffi
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSION£RS
DEVELOPMENT
COORDINATOR
J, GARY AMENT
July 29, 1986
In compliance with the provisions of the Florida Statutes, you are
hereby advised that Mr. and Mrs. John Church have petitioned the Board
of County Commissioners 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 pr.operty:
Revised Plat of ~ort Pierce Shores, Unit 4, Block 30, Lot 5. (OR 326-796)
(Located on the West side of Tamrind Drive approximately 420' South
of Banyan Road)
A public hearing on the petition will be held at 5:30 P.M. on Thursday,
August 7, 1986, in Room 101, St. Lucie County Administration 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 Commis-
sioners are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to appeal
any action taken by the Board of County Commissioners at this meeting
will need a record of the proCeedings and for such purpose may need
to ensure that a verbtim record of the proceedings is made.
If you no longer own property adjacent to the above described parcel,
please forward this notice to the new owner. If you have any ques-
t~ions, additional information may be obtained by calling Area Code
305, 466-1100, Extension 359.
Very truly yours,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUIqTY , FLORIDA
Havert L. Fenn, Chairman~
kj
HAVERT L. FENN District No ~ · E. E. GREEN, 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 33482-5652 · Phone (305) 466-1100
Coordinator: ExT. 3t6 · Building: Ext. 344 · Planning: Ext. 316 · Zoning: ExT. 336 · Code Enforcement: Ext, 317
LOC~L PLANNING AGENCY
ST o LUC'ri~ COUNTY, FLORIDA
MINUTES
Chairman J. J. Sciturro, Robert Carman, Mabel FawSett,
U. B. Wetherington,J. P- Terpening, Patricia Ferrick
and Patricia King
Peggy Harris and William Myers (Both excused absences)
~($): 't : :~ : 3 : 4
County Attorney Daniel McIntyre; Dennis Murphy,
Planner; and Karen Jones, Secretary.
~%~EOF~~ 7/23/86 p~ 1
PUBLIC HEARING:
#1. Petition of Mr. and Mrs. John Church to amend the Future Land
Use Maps of the St. Lucie County Growth Management Policy Plan
from RL (Residential, Low) to RM (Residential, Medium) for pro-
perty located on the West side of Tamrind Drive, approximately
420 feet South of Banyon Road.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The subject property is one of three undeveloped lots
of approximate equal size along a street dominated by
multiple family dwelling unis. The platted areas to the
west are approximately 60% developed as single family
homes. The property to the east is for the most part
vacant and under consideration by the State of Florida
for acquisition through the State's Save Our Coast
Program, although on the latest rankings, it was ranked
27 out of 37.
In evaluating this proposal, County Staff has carefully
taken into account the events of recent years in regard
to the Barrier Islands of St. Lucie County. The subject
property appears to have no unique environmental character-
istics and is not in its natural state. Intensive urban
development may be found to the immediate north and south
of this site. However, any development that takes place
on this site is subject to all applicable St. Lucie County
and State of Florida Environmental Regulations.
Traffic and transportation sytems have been a major concern
of both this County and the State of Florida for some
time. Based on the accepted trip generation rates used
in the development of the St. Lucie County Road Impact
Fee Ordinance, this proposed development will generate
19.5 trips per day, compared to 10.5 trips per day for
a single family home. County Staf-f is of the opinion
that although the proposed development may generate a
higher cumulative rate, its overall impact on the Island's
road network is inconsequential. Under present fee schedules,
the development, as proposed, will be required to pay
$4,256.00 in Road,Impact and Alternate Development Fees.
In summary, County Staff is of the opinion that the proposed
petition is consistent with the St. Lucie County Growth
Management Policy Plan, the Hutchinson Island Residential
District and the Hutchinson Island Resource Planning and
Management Plan. Based on the opinion and the particular
uses of land in this immediate area, we recommend approval
of this Petition. Staff would, at this time, go on record
as reporting that the recommendation of approval of this
Petition does not in any way guarantee favorable recommendation
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
JULY 23, 1986
Page 3
of Future Land Use Amendments on North and South Hutchinson
Island that may adversely impact the Island's environmental
or transportation network.
Mr. John Church, owner of the property, was present and stated he
was requesting this change because at the time he had purchased the
property it had been zoned 18 units per acre and since then the zoning
had been changed. He wished to construct a triplex and the property
surrounding his parcel was already multi-family. He did not believe
that building a triplex on his property would change anything; he
wanted it to fit into the neighborhood. At present he could only
construct a single family residence and that would not really fit
into the landscape that is already there.
Mr. A1 Lucci, real estate broker with Sunrise Realty, was present
on behalf of Ocean View Development, Inc. He stated they had no
opposition to Mr. Church's proposal and that the property his client
owned was directly across the street.
Mr. Robert Dudley, 2312 Atlantic Beach Blvd., spoke in opposition
of this petition, on behalf of 35 other people. He presented a petition
in opposition signed by these people. He spoke at length, stating
he and the others felt the roads were not sufficient for this type
of land use change and they wanted the area to remain single family
residential. He felt Mr. Church's request would open the door for
others to request the same, thus increasing the density in Ft. Pierce
Shores even more. Thsy were very concerned about the traffic hazards
along Tamrind Drive and if the Plan Amendment was granted, those
hazards would increase. They totally disagreed with Staff's recommenda-
tion for approval and felt it was inconsistent with the Growth Manage-
ment Policy Plan.
Mr. Sciturro read a letter of opposition from Norma and Robert Byrd
and one from Barbara Reyes Ricci.
There was no one else present to speak in favor or in opposition
to the petition.
Mr. Sciturro then closed the public portion of the hearing.
Mrs. Fawsett asked th~ County Attorney if She should refrain from
voting because she was a resident of North Beach. Mr. McIntyre said
he did not believe she was required to refrain from voting as she
did not live close the property in question; in fact he thought she
would be required to vote under the law, as he understood it.
Mrs. Fawsett stated that the apartments on either side of Mr. Church's
property were all built before density control went into effect and
that is why the density is so high on Tamrind. People across the
street from this parcel had wanted high rises but were denied because
of the street. She suggested that perhaps a'density of RM-8 instead
of RM-11 would be more appropriate.
Church stated he would be willing to accept' the lower density.
Mrs. Fawsett asked Mr. Dudley if his people would go along with that.
He stated they stood on their previous comments.
Mr. McIntyre interjected that the hearing was for a land use change
and not rezoning. They were discussing going from a low residential
to a medium residential. The issue in front of the. LPA was whether
the RM designation was consistent with the overall Comprehensive
Plan and whether the LPA would recommend approval or denial of the
petition.
Planner, Dennis Murphy, stated that to get'anything above one unit
on this parcel would require an amendment to the land use plan to
RM. Mr. Church only had one option for rezoning which was programmed
to follow hopefully in November and that would be to Hutchinson Island
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
JULY 23, 1986
Page 4
Residential Distrct. That district regulates the residential density
based on the land use plan. In no case, based on the lot size, and
assuming the land use is changed to RM, could there be more than
three units on the property.
Mr. Wetherington felt to open it up toa higher density would hurt
those single family residences in that area and he would prefer seeing
the Barrier Islands kept to as low a density as possible.
A motion was made by Mr. Wetherington to deny the petition. The
motion was seconded by Mrs. Fawsett and upon roll call the~ motion
was unanimously approved by the Agency.
Mr. Sciturro stated that the petition would be sent to the Board
of County Commissioners with a recommendation for denial.
Petition # 1
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Local Planning Agency
Planning Administrator
0uly 16, 1986
Petition of Mr. and Mrs. 3ohn Church to Amend the Future
Land Use Maps of the St. Lucie County Growth Management
Policy Plan from RL (Residential, Low) to RM (Residential,
Medium)
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
EXISTING. G.M.P-P-
PROPOSED G.N-P.P.:
PROPOSED USE:
PARCEL SIZE:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
FIRE PROTECTION:
WATER/SEWER SERVICE:
West side of Tamrind Drive,
approximately 420 feet south of
Banyon Road.
RS - 4 (Residential, Single
Family - 4 d.u./ac)
'RL (Re-sidential, Low)
RM (Residen'tial, Medium)
The Petitioners propose to
construct a Triplex on this
site.
.28 acres
RS-4 and H".I.R.D.
See comments.
North Beach Fire Station is
approximately 1 1/2 miles away.
On site septic and public
water, if available.
COMMENTS:
The subject property is one of three undeveloped lots of
approximately equal size along a street dominated by multiple family
dwelling units. The platted areas t the west are approximately 60%
developed as single family homes. The property to the east is for the
3uly 16, 1986
most part vacant and under consideration by the State of Florida for
acquisition through the State's Save Our Coast Rrogram, although on
the latest rankings, it was ranked 27 out of 3?. Attached for your
review is an existing Land Use Map around the subject property.
In evaluating this proposal, County Staff has carefully
~taken into account~the events of recent years in regard to the Barrier
lslands of St. Lucie County. The subject property appears to have no
unique environmental characteristics and is not in its natural state.
Intensive urban development may be found to the immediate north and
south of this site. However, any development that takes place on this
site is subject to all applicable St. Lucie County and State of
Florida Environmental Regulations.
Traffic and transportation systems have been a major
concern of both this County and the State of Florida for some time.
Based on the accepted trip generation rates used in the development of
the St. Lucie County Road Impact Fee Ordinance, this proposed
dvelopment will generate 19.5 trips per day, compared to 10.5 trips
per day for a single fmaily home. County Staff is of the opinion that
although the proposed development may generate a higher cumulative
r. ate, its overall impact on the Island's road network is
inconsequential. Under present fee schedules, the development, as
proposed, will be required'to pay $4,256.00 in Road Impact and
Alternate Development~Fees'
In s~mmary, County Staff is of the opinion that the
pro. posed petition is consistent with the St. Lucie County Growth
Management Rolicy Rlan, the HOtchinson Island Residential District,
and the Hutchinson Island Resource Rlanning ~nd Management Rlan.
Based on the opinion and the particular uses of i~nd in this immediate
area, we recommend approval of this Petition. Staff would, at this
time, go on record as reporting that the recommendation of approval of
this Retition ooes not in any way guarantee favorable recommendation
of Future Land Use Amendments on North and South Hutchinson Island
that may adversely impact the Island's environmental or transportation
network.
GMS/DJM/lg
CC:
County Attorney
Mr. and Mrs. John Church
2