e e e e e e e e e e
e e e e e okay I'm going to call this meeting to order of the local planning agency February 20th can I get a motion to approve the
minutes please I'd like to make a motion to approve the minutes of January 16th and can I get a second a second all in favor I I any opposed passes unanimously okay next thing that is up
is the try Bay Ranch PUD Zone zoning Master hope I have a pair of glasses finally site plan C1 1675 and it's quasi
judicial chairman I have no excommunication um excommunication expar communication so I get you Mr Brown terman I have I have met with a representative of this development this uh planning okay I have
no exp parte communication you have met with them lot times okay and I have spoken to staff and I have met with the applicate okay uh it's all yours Mr El we we need we s in the W wear in
yes that's why that's why you're there that's why I'm here I got a checklist please raise your right hand do you swear or affirm that the evidence you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth okay Mr
El thank you members of the LPA for the record Brian elen principal planner with the growth Management Department copy of my work history is on file with the clerk this is a request by WGI Incorporated on behalf of CBR investors
LLC for approval of a planned unit development zoning agreement for the chansy bay Ranch project including a master final site plan for a nine lot single family subdivision and Associated infrastructure with a resulting density of 049 units per acre included with this
application is a request for a certificate of public facilities reservation the approximately 18.2 Acre Site is generally located on the west side of Southwest Connor Highway south of 1015 Southwest Connor
Highway this property here approximately 6 mil north of Southwest caner Highway in okachobee the undeveloped land borders a canal on its west side and Southwest Connor's highway on its East Side I'm sorry Mr did you
say in okachobee yes yes no no it's on Lake okach it's on Lake okao but you didn't mean we were talking about something that's in OKO it's at the westernmost edge of unincorporated Martin County okay at The
Rim canal uh this here is Lake okobe okay the rim canal and this is about as far west as as we're ever going to get uh there's a single family home to the north of the property and due south
is cropland the property is outside the urban service Services district and will use well in septic the existing zoning District on the property is r2a rural estate density district with a rural density underlying
future land use single family detached dwellings are permitted use in the r2a zoning District the following tables show the structure setbacks and development standards of the existing r2a rural estate density zoning District the
bottom row in red shows the setbacks and development uh criteria for the proposed planned unit development zoning agreement setbacks proposed meet or exceed standard zoning requirements the proposal has met the
minimum lot area of 2 Acres exceeds the minimum lot width and is meeting the maximum residential density allowed the minimum open space is exceeded by 25% the proposed maximum Building height of 40 ft is permitted by the comp plan but not permitted in re 2A zoning
District I think I messed up and skipped an important slide here so the rural density future land use pursuant to policy 4.13a 5.1 excuse me of the Martin County
comprehensive growth management plan lands with rural density shall be developed at a density of no more than one unit per two gross Acres all rural development shall have a maximum Building height of 40 ft and maintain at
least 50% of the gross land area as open space so that's from the comp plan the applicant is seeking rezoning approval to a plan unit development to allow the maximum Building height of 40 ft permitted in the comprehensive growth management plan as a condition of the
Pud agreement the owner shall make a one-time public benefits contribution to the county in the amount of $6,000 for use by Martin County fire rescue to purchase one uh fire preemption device here's a view of the first page
of the master finnal site plan showing the two showing the nine 2 acre lots you can see the geometry of the lots are different due to the varying distances from the East and West property lines and the requirement of each lot to be two
acres I wish this be a little bit better closeup second sheet shows the Lots enlarged the distances for driveway aprons is defined by F dot at 660 ft minimum uh which is what is shown on these plans actually it's shown on the
construction plans but this represents uh the 660 ft between each driveway apron the storm water design includes a large continuous dry retention area along the entire property along the canal with extensions toward the roadway and is
designed to retain runoff from a for a 100-year 3-day storm event the storm water design includes an emergency outfall structure to protect the perimeter burm in the event storm water runoff becomes too high and excess water will be discharged into the rim Canal
which is the legal positive outfall for this project this is a conceptual uh elevation drawing of a development that could be done on here kind of demonstrating that the increased height uh May provide a a view
of lake Oobi this is not a proposal just a a demonstration of what could be so development review have found the CBR investors LLC application to comply
with all applicable regulations and the comprehensive growth management plan is detailed in the staff report staff recommends approval of the CBR investors LLC application to adopt a resolution approving resoning from r2a rural estate District to plan unit
development and approve the chansy bay Ranch PUD zoning agreement including the master and final site plan and that concludes the presentation be happy to answer any questions Mr Brown do you have any questions of the no
sir go ahead can you can you talk a little bit about the distinction between rural estate density and rural land use category and what the height restrictions um on those two categories are I mean you said that in rural land
use we have a 40t maximum amount or vertical elevation in rural estate what what is the maximum allowable height well rural density allows 40 ft that was essentially straight from the
code and 50% open space that those are the requirements for Rural density are is that your question no or you talking about my question is about the um zoning category
rural oh Ral estate which is what it's zoned at currently that's correct yes it only allows 30 ft 30 not 35 right so this table shows this is the uh development criteria and structure setbacks
for the only zoning the only straight category a zoning District that's available for Rural density is r2a and you can see it's the top row here in Black this is the development criteria for for it so it only allows 30
ft in the straight zoning so the Pud is the only option available in terms of a zoning District to allow what's allowed in the comp plan which is 40 ft MH can you um uh tell us a little bit
about what the uh setback requirements from a canal side development would be in rural estate density 30 ft 30 ft and um and these this proposed
development if it was on a an active shoreline what would be the setback requirements for that well that would depend on yeah Pete Walden Deputy growth management director that would depend on the shoreline protection Zone that thing but that this
is west of the spillways and the locks so there is no Shoreline protection Zone on these canals I've never heard that there was a distinction between the locks yes that's that's where the shoreline protection Zone ends okay Lo the locks at fix fips
Park is where the it's no longer Ester in waters it's fresh waterer canals from that point West and that there's no Shoreline protection zone out there Leo kovi is an inland you know huge body of water that you know thousands of people have been killed
because of s in that in that water body this is not only like okoba this is on the ring Canal let him ask his questions this is on the ring Canal which is and there is an massive Dyke which is why we're we're going up in vertical elevation but the ring canal and this is
also on sewer and and well water correct that's correct it's on sewer and well water no well it's septic tank okay on a canal that is connected to Lake hobi anything else to no I just wanted
to to get that Clarity and I and I cor the the information on the San Shoreline protection zone is is surprising to me but I mean Lake okobe I think poses a huge risk understood I'm just stating the uh
current code mhm Rick do you have any questions uh um I got some points to make that well why don't you save the points till we have all the okay information okay you have anything no
and I don't either who's up for the applicant hi good evening Matthew Barnes senior project manager with WGI here on behalf of the applicant um I believe do I need to give out the affidavits of notification yes yes do I give that thank
you then do I Advance the slides or uh unless you want to come up with like a I can do it for you okay sure I can do it if you go ahead all right of course staff did a great job with explaining you know what the application
is so I'll I'll be fairly brief in my remarks but I just wanted to go go over a few things this is an aerial that actually will maybe better illustrate how far west it is you know that so as Brian pointed out it is on the Far Western end of the of the property of of
the of the county you Indian town is in the lower right hand corner of this of this image and it's it is on the rim Canal of Lake okobi um it's a very long and and skinny property of course as you can see it's about a mile long uh a little more than a mile long and it varies in width from
75 ft at its narrow to 224 ft at the at the widest Parts uh it is 18.2 acres and you can see actually to to your point uh um Jim that the there is actually dry
land property between our property line and then actually the edge of the of the rim Canal there's in some places it's over 100 ft between our property and where the rim Canal is uh in addition to the setbacks that we have on our property from from the rear property
line the surrounding uses as as Brian said are agriculture on the on the on the west I'm sorry on the East and then to the north there is some single family residential that's already developed there um this is what you see when you drive along Connor's Highway uh and you look off to the to the West which is
basically you know um the the the Dyke of the of the lake in in the background which is the whole reason that we're doing the Pud is to get the um the 10 ft of height that um is not permitted in the r2a district but is allowed by the the current future land use uh category
for the property so we have a a request for master and final site plan which is it is a buite density we're not seeking to increase density um it's re 2A and Rural density is you know one unit per two
acres and that's what we're building um so there's nine 2 acre lots on on the 18 Acres we also have a PUD agreement which is what rezones the property to to PUD and it formalizes the development agreement and the required public benefits for the project which I'll get
into in in a minute um importantly that it does not as I mentioned it does not we're not requesting a land use change we're not increasing the density we're not changing the land use um and we're not decreasing the minimum lot size we're not taking nine lots and smooshing
them to one side of the property and on half acre lots and and leaving other parts differently um so the only reason the Pud is allowed or is is uh required is for to achieve views of Lake Oobi as I
saw you saw on the slide um at at the 30 foot maximum height all you would see is the side of the Dyke but if we can get that if we can get up to 40 ft which again is allowed by the future land use category that would allow us to be able to see over the top of the Dyke and down into the to the surface of the
lake um but as I mentioned before we're not requesting a land use change um and then we're not increasing density um and we're not asking to decrease the minimum lot size in fact we're exceeding the uh some of the minimum zoning requirements such as open
space side setbacks and the minimum Frontage for for each lot so public benefit number one that we're we're profer in and and it's it's the only public benefit I'll say that's in the Pud agreement second one you'll see in a moment uh but we are uh profer
um as part of the project to buy one preemption fire signal preemption device for the for for the fire department um at a cost of $6,000 as it was said in the staff report which controls traffic signals for First Responders um this is a quote um from a recent um article um
from the division chief of operations in the county that you know gaining 10 to 12 seconds on average per light is tremendous when responding to an incident as you know second save lives so whether it be a cardiac arrest stroke or structure fire this is essential for us to save that time it can shave
minutes while we're responding to that um it is um you know far away from the nearest fire station is Indiantown um there are only three signals between Indiantown and this property so um we believe the one the one fire preemption
device is proportional to to the request the second public benefit which isn't a stated public benefit I'll say in the Pud agreement but I think it's it's a design element of the project that goes above and beyond the code minimum so there is a benefit to the public um
which is the standard storm water design um is to hold back the 25e 3-day storm event and then you discharge into your legal positive outfall which for this project is the rim Canal um the Project's been designed to retain the 100-year three-day storm event so the
the biggest storm event that you can model uh and it's all of it will be retained on site with zero discharge into the public water system um there's a lot of projects that have public benefits that treat storm water before discharging it and they filter it and
all this we're just absolutely not discharging into the into the rim Canal so that I argue is a benefit to the public it does require larger dry retention areas than would otherwise be required um so approximately double the size and that's those the blue areas you
see on the property is what would be the DED detention so what is the site plan right I've kind of talked about it and this is sort of a a colored version of the site plan um again nine nine homes each on
two acre lots minimum 75% open space which is again consistent with the rural density feature land use designation no increase in density no decrease in the minimum size this is like a closer just to give you an idea again we're not here getting this is site plan approval but
each house will come in for its own building permit you don't these houses won't necessarily be built exactly where I'm showing them on this diagram but it's just to give you an idea of what it would look like the houses you see are approximately 3,000 to 3,300 foot
footprint you know that's just to give you an idea of the size of what you're looking at um so yeah each each lot would have its own driveway onto Connor's Highway there's landscaping and the side yards and the rear that are in the dry detention areas in a conservation buffer and then each house
would also plant of course because it's on the highway it's up to each homeowner to build and plant whatever Landscaping they want to between their house and the and the highway so here's like the middle lots and here's like the northern sorry the southernmost Lots as
well uh with regard to trees there's currently 158 trees on the site um we are preserving 109 of them which is about 70% and we're proposing to remove 49 uh 29 of the 49 that we're proposing to remove are because they're in poor
health um they have insect damage or they were damaged by the recent hurricane in in October of this past year but having said that we are actually proposing to add 466 new trees to the site and that's just the trees that are in the sides and the rear yards
that doesn't include whatever trees the homeowner May plant in their own front yard so the the end number will be even more than that so that's a net of 4 over 400 trees to the site um so this is um what what we're really here for right is is to seek the
height um uh the additional height that is consistent with the land use the rural density land use designation um that's on the policy right there policy 4.13a point5 parentheses 1 all rural development shall have a maximum
Building height of 40 ft um we would propose you know on that conceptual elevation that Brian showed and this is the same one just kind of zoomed into the to the larger view uh if we had a mean roof height of 38 ft with our roof deck there um that's that blue line you
see on the screen here where you can see that um the actual elevation of the water in Lake okachobee is like about 20 ft below the height of the Dyke right so if you were just to be able to just barely see right at the height of the Dyke
you're not going to be able to see down into the where the the level of the lake is you need to be slightly higher than that to have an angle down into that so you actually see the water which is what we're seeking with the um with the extra with the 10 ft in height from 30 to
40 um you just heard from staff you know that they've reviewed it they find it complies with the ldrs um and they're recommending approval of it because it is consistent with the um guidelines and standards both of the LD and the comprehensive plan so um having said
that I'm here to answer any questions we have design professionals from the team here as well Rick you have any questions Jarett nope the um the the easement is Army Corps of Engineers
controlled the EAS around the ring Canal uh yeah that's uh State of Florida owns that land and um yeah I think the Army Corps of Engineers is who maintain they managed the ring can yeah um and so you are
using that as as your uh drainage buffer as well or are you not is that is all of your dry detention going to be on site or are you including some of that easement no we've we've designed it we by law we could discharge into the into the room Canal that's our legal positive
outfall but we've overdesigned it to hold back water from the 100-year 3-day storm event so there will never be an instance uh unless there's a storm that's the 500e storm where there is an emergency outflow into the rim Canal but that's only if if the system reaches
above that flood stage and and are all of your first floors blow out walls and or is there going to be living space on the first floor well the the conceptual elevation you saw showed that it's anticipated
that the first level if with the extra height would be uninhabitable it would be the garages so that you would have two floors above that of habitable with the roof on top of that but is is that part of the Pud plan to have those non-habitable first
floors it's so again we we're not approving what I'll call like site plans for each home right we're not designing each home so that level of specificity is not you know in the Pud agement nor the construction plans and and all of
your septic drainage fields are on the the east side of of these structures right yeah they'll be they'll be I'll say east of the Dred attention right they'll have to be there's a certain spacing you have to meet from your your
well water and your and your San and your septic system so they'll be on probably opposite sides of the lot yeah okay thank you Howard any questions no sir I live on a canal and we have a well and sep everything you're talking about so
that top I'm not going to call it a floor because it isn't that roof is not going to be living space per se it's going to be more or less like a a porch so that you can well I hope it's a little bigger
than the widows walk but it's got nothing to do like he's going to talk well again we're not designing there's no design criteria in the Pud for the houses discussing that typical like Brian said that that is just a typical
layout to show what it could be so we're allow the Pud is requesting a a height a roof height of 40 ft and that's but that's peak of roof correct that is part of the the ask of the Pud correct just
the height would be a maximum of 40 ft top of the roof peak of roof well no our our height is defined in our ldrs it depends on what kind of roof so if it were the kind of roof shown there then it would be the mean of the
roof okay so from sopit to mean of roof with a pitch angle of whatever could be 50 ft tall it could it could be higher than 40 yes but that's how we measure height that's how it's defined in the code so if you had a flat roof then it
would be measured something different depends how much you want to get into well well well well when I met with the applicant I was told it was not going to be living space but if it's going to be
living space that's going to change my vote there's no restriction in the Pud that says you can't have living space just on the record okay so we don't know what I excuse me let the applicant speak please I'll bring up
I think it's on the screen right the just you couldn't have living space up there by you it wouldn't meet the minimum you couldn't have a a third level up there if you have what you see on the screen here that would have to be just a roof deck
um so I mean I I I don't know how else to say it other than you you could have well then why don't we put into the Pud language to that effect no can we we can add conditions um for the building the for the houses in the PUD
language right now the houses aren't contemplated in the Pud so but that can certainly be added as part of the negotiation if the parties would like but it would might certainly recommend that yes well okay so that would be one of my recommendation that would be my
recommendation for this I'm not going to try to design the language Miss Elder because I don't want to screw it up I'm sure you people will do just fine but what is your concern my concern is I do not not want to
have a a third floor which will be living space why because it's it's supposed to be 30 ft not 40 and we accommodate for 40 so that the people will have a view they can have it outside they can look at things they can
have a drink up there whatever but not have a bedroom up there that's my concern so that would be one of my that would be my condition for moving forward with
this um is there any other questions for the applicant thank you seeing none thank you do we have any public comment seeing none back to the
board any discussion on the board's part I I think there's a lot of of good reasons for having you know maximum height um in in the rural the state density um category and that is so that
the rest of the world doesn't have to see your house um I I am uncomfortable with with not making a uh a restriction in a PUD agreement which is exactly that it's a negotiated agreement with the
builder um to to have a a maximum elevation and and we're hearing that 40 ft may not actually mean 40 ft and uh and I'm pretty uncomfortable with that I'm also not happy about putting septic and
uh and Wells even further away from uh from from the urban service boundary but that is what it is well that is completely within our code correct yeah yeah and it's done all the time so yes I
agree wish it didn't happen but it does so not our job to do something else does anybody else have any other comments yeah I got a comment you know there's the law here and and and the way it's written there's also the spirit of the
law and and if my memory serves me right the reason that limit is in there is for is is to make sure that you're not obstructing your neighbor's view you're not obstructing your either side
neighbor's view well if you pull up that aial again there are no neighbors I mean you're not going to bother this going to 40 ft is not going to bother any neighbor anybody else anyway and as far as you know seeing it from the road um if you've not driven
down that road you can start at the County Line and go all the way South you can see all those homes they're there so what what's what's the difference and if people are going to build out there I don't think they're going to build a shack I think they're going to build a nice home and and it's going to be high
enough that they can see the lake between and between this development and Port Mya I think there's about 22 or three something like that vacant
Lots so when you look at the potential of setting a precedent there's not much left to do and if you put them if everybody went to 40 ft there and you could see over the lake and you're going to add a you know if it gets higher and you can see over the lake that does make
the houses worth more which does increase our tax base and as far as putting a bedroom up there I I I don't have a I mean I don't understand it you've got your concerns
but I don't understand well I I I I understand what you understand and I understand your concerns but the the thing is the spirit of the law the spirit of the law is let's protect their neighbors let's protect the people around it but when you look where this is you don't have to worry about any
neighbors but the code says 30 feet so we're raising it to 40t and the reason I was given by the applicant who's not here tonight was they were going to want to put
a Terrace of some sort up there and that was fine with me and I specifically asked at the at at that meeting are you doing anything else are you putting a bedroom are you putting any other living space the answer was no
so this condition should not bother anything they wanted to do so that's why I'm putting it in and because it it's PUD agreement it's supposed to be 30 ft let's make it 40 ft but let's not let's
not make another floor out of it because we could have made it 60 ft and nobody would have really there's no neighbors to Really Care what's there so I can it we yeah obviously the
maximum height in the county is 40 so you can't can't do 60 but um 40 ft uh by definition of the code it depends on the roof you have like we're not asking for anything special with regards to to the height other than being able to go from 30 to 40 we're not asking
to for a different definition of height so we would just ask that we be allowed to build to the 40 ft per the definition of height that's in the code right um that that's our well I will support this motion with my condition are you passing the gavl to make the motion no I'm not
making a motion I will support this motion with that condition otherwise I would not support the motion the condition was to add language to the p d agreement that limits anything on the floor third floor to non-living
space so it would be like a PO it would be more eloquent than what I just said but like a porch or a lookout or something like that not a bedroom well we can't really yeah it' be the fourth floor because if you look at it would be the fourth floor there's two living floor yeah okay sorry yeah I mean top
floor is there Prohibition in the Pud agreement about the bottom floor not being habitable there is no condition in the PD agreement for any of the houses three or four it depends how yeah exactly and I'm not saying we should do anything on the ground floor really
squishy yeah I'm not saying we should do anything on the ground floor uh but uh that's if anybody else has a another suggestion or take a motion no I'd move to deny the the
applicant's request okay do I have a second seeing no second it fails can I get a mo is there a motion for approval with my condition even if you want to vote against a motion let's get a motion so it goes to
the commission otherwise it goes to the commission with no no recommendation I'll make I'll make a motion we approve it as it is okay is there a second I second go ahead okay there is a second okay any other discussion on the
motion see none all in favor I I I I'm opposed I'm opposed 32 passes thank you okay next up comprehensive plan Amendment 2303
Sunrise Grove fum thank M lless you ready or are you going to do it CDE good evening I'm Samantha L lady with the growth Management Department um nice to meet you Mr Brown and Mr Eno
good job thank you okay this is CPA 23- 03 Sunrise Grove it's a future land use map Amendment application it's a request by Martin triangle property
LLC prop it's a proposed future land use map to change 205 Acres of agricultural ranette to the ACTC future L use designation little bit of background um this amendment is related to the ACTC future land use designated nation that
was created in 2010 on 1,717 Acres um it has no developed acreage at this time but it does have one approved PUD within 7.66 acre within an 7.66 acre
area a little bit more background application material submitted included a survey showing the existed existing acreage as 1,734 acres in instead of 1,717 the application the applicant has
indicated that this may be an oversight adding 205 Acres with this future land use map Amendment will result in a total of 1,939 Acres this is the existing future land
use no yes it is sorry and you can see it's outlined in red here and this is the proposed futur L use the compatibility within the ACTC it is compatible with ACTC to the west of the property it's compatible with the I
95 intersection to the East and the proposed Flom is less compatible with 31 Acres on the Southeast side of the property and it's that right there with is which is AGR Chet there's a separate text Amendment CPA
2304 to add 205 acres to the freestanding urban service District ACTC is a freestanding urban service District so that would be added into that are we doing both these together or separately they're going to be separate and section
2.1 of the um of the staff report shows that one out of four criteria that staff must consider to recommend approval for the future land use map Amendment have been met in section 2.2 urban sprawl 10 out
of the 13 criteria indicate this amendment discourages the proliferation of sprawl section 2.2.1 proliferation of sprawl seven out of eight criteria indicate this amendment discourages the proliferation of
sprawl and I wanted to show you this um this graphic here here this is the attec freestanding urban service District this is the subject property this is a recently um added
freestanding Urban surface District that's with within proximity you have your 7js freestanding urban service district and of course you have your secondary urban service District here and you have your Newfield addition to
the primary urban service District that allows for a million square fet of industrial two two 2 million 2 million I'm sorry the companion text Amendment um is requesting to change the name of the
future land use designation as ACTC to Sunrise Grove and staff recommendation um for CPA 2303 is for a motion to recommend approval of CPA 2303 Sunrise
Grove and that concludes my presentation I will take any questions any questions for staff Mr Brown any questions yes I I'm just maybe probably simple but a tech what what is I mean what does that stand for is just a name of it is a name
and it's a cross between Agricultural and Technical technical it sounded really cool sort of if I can add a little bit more to answer your question Mr Brown uh we're
going to get into it in the next uh presentation but the existing future land use designation which is being sought for this property requires a split between non-residential or industrial type of development and some
portion of it must be uh Agriculture and open space so it was intended to provide for High-Tech and that they worked with agricultural activity okay that was the original intent back in 2010 and and the
it was designed and does in fact have a requirement of both being on the property okay thank you all right you have any questions yeah just just a point of clarification um in the staff report uh
you the it was said that that you met or at least one of the four anti- uh sprawl measures were met when I counted it was um all four didn't meet the
standard talking about the criteria for land change yeah uh if I may Mr Moyer you're referring to the four criteria staff must consider for a future land use map Amendment uh the one that I believe that was met is that there have been future land use map amendments in
the surrounding area yeah I think I think the the I think that that was said um but I think that actually this this criteria has not been met I I counted four and I don't I don't I mean because
it is clear that there have been future landuse amendments in this area I can't quibble with that but um but I I do I you I am very concerned that this increasing number of
freestanding urban service districts is by definition sprawl anything else to no uh if I'm not mistaken this will be the commission is in the process of
changing to not have these free standing urban service districts they've asked you to staff to come back with something this will be was in the hopper since 2013 2023 and so while I agree with you Jim
we have a lot of that this was in the hopper under current regulation since 2023 and it does from what they say meet the definitions um so I have a a little bit
different outcut I just wanted to say that this is not something new this is not something that came up after the commission decided that they want to have new language this is something that's been hanging around for quite a while and I just want to make sure we
all understand that this is not anything new this is nothing new and we're just adding two well this property that's adjacent immediately adjacent to it owned by the same people it in and of itself that wouldn't mean much if there
was if it had come in after the commission votes something else but I just want to make it quite clear this is not being this is not trying to sneak in under the wire oh no I I've been opposed to freestanding urban service district for a long
time and I was not I was not in favor of agtech when it started well I was just a child at the time all right Mr C okay I do have the notice of uh to surrounding Property Owners
within 2500 ft of the property and also uh for the March 11th uh County Commission date and um for the benefit of the new board members um I'm going to go in a little more detail about this land use category but for the record my name is Morris C I'm senior partner with
theone Associates um I was a county staff member from 1982 to to 1990 and I've been working um with theone Associates in land planning uh since that time so for the past 43 years uh working in Martin County almost
exclusively as a land planner and um I'm here on behalf of Sunrise Grove LLC and Martin triangle property LLC the triangle property is the property that we're adding and sunrise Grove is the owner of the agtech land use category and and they're uh they're they're these
are llc's created by Ashley Capital which is a an industrial investment firm and I do have representatives from Ashley Capital here tonight um but I want to give you some background on first of all just the the surrounding land uses a little more detail um this
is the agtech land use category it was a a citrus farm for years for decades and it fell to The Greening and Canker and other things and um but you can see the entire site is impacted there is no no Wetland or any type of Environmental restriction it is goes all the way up to
the county line This is Cobblestone PUD it's been called Fox Club I think there's another name for it now but that's the golf course and this is Stuart West um it's also I don't think it's a PUD though there are two acre lots this is Citrus Boulevard that
starts from Martin Highway and connects to uh Becker Road in St Lucy County this is Newfield and if you go out there today you'll see some development here that is the first phase of Newfield and they've started started construction um of their residential component and their
their Main Street component their mixed use area um this is the Poma industrial that we talked about and but I want to you know the whole thing about agtec started in 2010 when we were at into a recession and and and everything's about
location and there's not many um areas in Martin County along the I95 Corridor where you can put employment centers or create economic opportunities and and and this is adjacent to a vast area to the north called city of Port St Lucy
and it's directly adjacent to their um their jobs Corridor this was a this was an employment um jobs Corridor that St Lucy County undertook during the recession and and it's a lot more developed than even what this aerial shows um and they have been successful
and so so ACTC kind of plays into that we you know we understand that that there's you know when there's one group of industrial developers there's going to be more and and and this whole design was was contingent on obtaining Water and Sewer from the city of Port St
Lucy and that's that's a requirement that the agtec land use and the the previous property owner paid 2 million dollars to reserve capacity to to obtain that water and sewer from the city of Port St Lucy and Ashley Capital has been working with uh the city of Port St Lucy
to actually construct those um utility lines and bring them into act Tech as part of their um or service agreement in addition there's also a requirement to construct a road a road connection that will service these two industrial parks
so so you have to recognize that this is not standing out west it is adjacent to a developing area to the north and it's an opportunity for Martin County to to get some of that tax revenue and generate some economic opportunities within their property um we are not
changing the intent of the a land use category everything that you see in italics here except for the crossed out and underlined stuff is what we're changing but the italics represents the current language in the County's comprehensive plan and and the intent of the ACTC land use was to allow the
continuation of permitted economically viable agriculture support the development of targeted businesses tax base and employment opportunities and facilitate environmental enhancement through the protection of common open space or the restoration of natural
systems while protecting and enhancing the Martin grade scen at Corridor those are built into the existing comprehensive plan language we're not changing any of that uh the sunrise all we're changing is the name from ACTC to Sunrise shall apply solely to this
parcel which we're increasing it to 1939 acres by correcting a a a survey error and also um by adding the 25 acres and so that that's that doesn't change the intent of the original land use doesn't change
um and and and essentially this is the the the land use category and this is the property that we're adding and I think this is the U Samantha went over this pretty well but this is the the the residential development Stuart West and
Cobblestone um and this is this property is in two pieces there's a parcel here that's very thin that's more or less not usable will probably be um you know added to the adjacent uh property make it usable but there is some some prage
here um along you can see it better here along the I95 that would like to absorb and make part of the agtec land use category so this this property was purchased with that intent but you can see 50 acres or more uh consist of an
existing Lake that was constructed during the construction of I95 to provide fuel for the for the interchange um and so most of this property to at at the lake and south of the lake is not usable so what we're really trying to
capture um is enclosing the ACTC so that we can we can um obtain some Frontage along L 95 and uh and and and more or less create the economic opportunities that that has been started in the city of Port St Lucy but there is no residential development allowed on this
property um the the the only thing we're changing is again is the name from agtec to Sunrise Grove um we're adding the 205 Acres that the triangle parcel which is along the front edge of I95 um by doing that we're able to increase the minimum
open space or the common open space agricultural area within the agtech land use by 122 Acres So So currently we're required to have 817 Acres of the um total property in common open space and
agricultural areas and that doesn't include areas that are in an industrial park it doesn't incl include the landscape areas those are common open space and we'll get into more of that in a moment and we're also adding 100 acres to the development parcel and we're adding vehicle manufacturing sales and
service and and and the one thing we're not doing is we're not increasing the maximum allowable non-agricultural Urban Development so even though we're adding 205 Acres we're not increasing what we're currently entitled to build and
that's represented in in the policy SEC subsection 1 C so it allows us to build up to 5 million square ft of targeted employment uses you can read it there yourself um and and and now with the addition of the 205 Acres we can spread that same entitlement over a greater
area we're not increasing that amount of of Urban Development let's call it the and the reason we're adding vehicle manufacturing sales and service this is this again subsection 91 these are the uses permitted within attec um and you can see they're all targeted
employment uses and vehicle manufacturing sales and services too and it's becoming even more important as a potential use given the um advancement in electric uh vehicles um technology so we're trying to capture that as a Target
industry and and adding vehicle manufacturing sales and service will allow to us to um to entertain some of those types of Industries so what we are doing is we increasing again we increasing that maximum Development Area 100 acres so we
can spread that 5 million square ft over over um 900 or over 1,000 Acres instead of 900 Acres which reduces the intensity of the development area and it increases the open space within the development area and usually that's the landscape
areas around the buildings and parking lots so we're also increasing the common open space agricultural area by 122 acres and again we're require to have 817 acres in the existing um 1717 Acres
of common open space agricultural areas that's areas that that could be um Lakes retention areas storm water treatment areas and agricultural areas but for it's all open space um and then we're increasing that to 939 Acres
of the total 1939 Acres that will be now composed of agtech if this is approved so we're we're bumping that up to 48.4% of the total site and that will enable us to make to ensure that we meet 50% open space overall which is the which is
the requirement for agricultural land use so we'll be exceeding the 50% open space overall by adding that 205 acres and and allocating an additional 122 Acres of that as open space so the proposed text Amendment
does not decrease the strict performance standards within the comprehensive plan when ACTC was developed the county wanted to make sure that they just weren't approving another industrial park we created three pages of of performance standards that doesn't apply to any other industrial project in
Martin County and some of these examples the only thing we're changing in these performance policies is the name but but they're they they key elements of the land use and and of the of any future development on the property so there it's required you can only uh we're only
providing land for targeted employment uses we we have to provide storm water quality in excess of Martin County and South Florida water managment District standards we have to use native vegetation and zeroscape techniques including uh limiting the amount of turf
within the Development Area we're required to incorporate design and development standards from leadership and energy and environmental design and the Florida BR Green Building Council uh we're required to make them to to help facilitate take the county to um to to
enhance and protect the Martin grade Scenic Corridor and if you've been out there you I'm sure you know what I'm talking about along 714 all the way out to Lake okachobee um and of course we're still maintaining the strict uh requirement of the 40 ft of height there and there's no change there's other
performance standards in there but we're not changing any of the performance standard we're only changing the name within those within those categories the proposed text Amendment and the land use Amendment for that fact is not create additional traffic impacts it does not create additional impacts on public
facilities and services it does not create additional environmental impacts in fact it's going to en enhance the environment and we did not remove or reduce any adopted performance standard the only purpose of this is to add the 205 acres and I can read page after page
of policies within the comprehensive plan and the chapter 4 future land use element that that that supports and Industrial Development um and Economic Opportunity in Martin County um there's and I won't read them for B please don't read them yeah these are all these are
all policies within the the comprehensive plan that encourage Industries and we're meeting and checking every one of these boxes with this application um and and even in the in uh there's again that's the future land use element and the economic
element it goes even further um it it it it actually and let me go back back one see it actually says that the the county will consider this priority during the review of plan amendments and that that that's talking about child prioritize
the land planning of sites with high visibility and close access to major transportation corridors for development as employment uses and this is one of the few interchanges and one of the few areas along I95 in Martin County that can support Industrial Development The
Bridge Road will probably never have any Industrial Development at that intersection and and uh the intersection at caner highway is built out um the intersection High Meadows is not available for any type of development so we're trying to encourage Economic
Development and opportunity on a parcel lend that's been impacted for decades by Agriculture and they cannot be restored to agricultural purposes that's adjacent to economic activity in Port St loucy that we're hoping to bleed into Economic Opportunity in Martin County and I think
for that reason uh back in June of 2022 uh the County Commission after a presentation by the uh Business Development board identified this parcel uh including 7js Martin Commerce Park and sunrise Grove Commerce Park which is
the property we're talking about as the most viable areas in Martin County to support Economic Development opportunities so we're trying to um to fulfill that that that goal and um Ashley Capital has has the track record
uh to do that they've they've shown it in other areas throughout the nation committed to Quality they have a long-standing reputation as a top uh as the nation's top privately held Investment Company a proven track record um and they're embrace the opportunity
to to provide highways jobs and to um create capital investment in Martin County and enhance and maintain Martin County's green infrastructure which is part of the agtech land use requirements um again that's the property real briefly on the land use we
believe it meets two um I know staff just believes it meets the one but we believe growth in the area in terms of development of vacant land Redevelopment also support the request and that's evident by the development in Port St Lucy it may not be in Martin County but
certainly we're looking to get to absorb some of that economic activity in Martin County and that does um affect um the the area that wasn't there when this was adopted in 2010 it's taken 15 years for that to come to become ripe and and and
now with Ashley Capital behind it we have an opportunity to fulfill the goal of ACTC and according to the and I agree with staff's analysis of the urban sprawl indicators um the proposed amendment speaks 10 of the 13 applicable
indicators that discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl and the proposed amendment meets seven of the eight indicators um that are determined to discourage the proliferation of of urban sprawl so um regarding the the
last thing I had was the survey era um and I wasn't involved in the original 2010 survey but we had gcy um update the survey and what they discovered was there was 17 Acres uh that were part of the actual land use
designation that was not counted because it was a Perpetual drainage easement and and so we added that back and that's how we got to 1734 and when you add the 205 Acres you get to 1939 so that's an accurate representation of the ACTC land
use and the error that I'm talking about was this drainage easement that occurs along uh this boundary which is the rest area it's a Perpetual drainage easement it's it's part of the ACT land use it's part of the ownership of of of this
property so it should be included the ACT Tech landage we can't ever use it cuz it's perpetual drainage easement but it is it is part and that's how we got to um the 7 1734 acres under the existing and then
we want to add 205 acres to that and with that I'll be glad to answer any this is the most I've ever heard you speak at one time I'm trying to get it all out I'm trying to talk slow but that I'm not too good at that and you probably don't want me to talk too slow Rick anything
Morris when um this this property does not include the express oriented piece of property on the note of of 95 and 714 that's this piece here and you know actually it's pretty wet I don't know what they're going to do with that in the future but we don't they don't
actually doesn't own it and we're not involved with that property owner Howard no questions I have no questions do you have anything you want to add Mr Reigns okay any public comments
seeing none back to the board what's the pleasure of the board El leise yes do do I have to excuse myself I lease that property you lease the property which one the all
of yes that yes even I knew so you can declare your um conflict and then we'll get the form be filed with the clerk um yeah okay does anyone want to make a motion I can't make a motion no you
can't no well um I don't know if I roar it it right but I make a motion that we approve uh the name change for well you you're making a motion that we the name change is going to come next this is a motion to change the future land use on
this sliver of property to agtech because the name hasn't changed yet so that's the motion right now okay can I get a second I'll second okay any discussion on the motion see none all in favor I
oppos that passes 31 with Mr Moore opposed and Mr Hartman recusing himself okay next comprehensive plan Amendment 244
sunrise Grove Martin triangle Properties LLC text Amendment Miss LEL love lady oh get that it's only been what 15 years yeah I thought at some point I need I
can't even remember my kid's name I can't remember my own name most the time okay this is CPA 2304 Sunrise Grove and this is the text Amendment that's com opinion to the um CPA that you just
voted on and this is a request by Martin triangle property LLC and sunrise grow Commerce Center LLC it's a site specific text Amendment to the ACT Tech policies in 14 13 A9 in policy 1413
A10 it's a request to change the name from act Tech to CZ Grove um for the freestanding urban service district and the future land un and add 205 acres to the urban service District in figure
4-2 and add the Peron used to the ACT Tech policies specifically 14389 add vehicle manufacturing sales I'm going to bre BL through this kind of quick because it's yes please do okay so I can
skip this page We'll add a 100 acres available for non-agricultural development targeted employment uses 105 acres to Common open space and no increase of intensity of allowable uses and this is the existing figure 4-2
urban service district and you can see um this agtec property recently got added to figure 4-2 even though it's was a freestanding urban service District before and this
would add this would be the 205 Acres added to Fig 4-2 again you've seen this graphic a couple times and this shows the policy adding changing the name and vehicle man
vehicle manufacturing sales and services added and this in uh the policy 4389 this is a table from one of the polic for 14 1399 and this table is included in the policy and this show
shows you the non-agricultural development and targeted industry uses going from 900 to 1,000 and 87 um from to 939 for a total of
1939 and staff recommend recommendation is for a motion to approve recommend approval of CPA 2304 Sunrise gross text any questions for Sam sorry I hope that wasn't too fast but it was a lot was redundant seeing
none uh uh does he need to recuse himself again before we go further so you does he need to say anything you can say that you're recusing yourself you said it ago but you could say to again in this public hearing I really don't think I need to but what just so it's on
the record for this public hearing you can but I mean just just because I've got at least I don't have I don't own it I don't I'm not going to make any money off it but we don't know that since you have like an interest in the property is better to recuse yourself from it at leas is an interest so you have an interest and um since I'm not able to
evaluate like if there's any financial gain in the Buns of caution it's better for you to just recuse yourself that's what I've been told okay so but I can't I I can still talk but I just can't vote oh yes
Point tell anyways okay go no well I my presentation obviously included the text Amendment I'll be glad to answer any questions we're in agreement with staff recommend any questions for Mr Cady well he doesn't even want to answer them he sits down Sor no
no okay is there any public comment come on up and you have to fill out a card afterwards oh you did all right I neglected to bring your P didn't bring can I do it after yeah you do it afterwards thank you my name is Mike
Glenn I'm a uh voter here Martin County um I've been listening I like to listen before I talk sometimes doesn't always happen um what would be the agricultural use on this property we don't answer
questions sir so you got three minutes to talk answer questions not right now okay so I'm speculating to myself what the agricultural use would be on the property of a former agricultural property um and as a guy that takes
three lights to get onto caner Highway on cero road at 5:00 coming home from work I I I kind of dispute the economic benefit of approving everything that comes before the County Commission you
guys are the precursor to that so anytime you guys can help Stave off unbridled and what is unneeded in my opinion as a citizen here uh doesn't
benefit me changes my quality of life I appreciate it and I also appreciate recusing yourself from voting on something that you're involved in the process of it as good transparency so
thank you thank you um that's all thank you thank you uh one other comment anytime you encourage native trees is great cuz all the bulldozing has been removing our n
native habitat and when we go in with the fancy shiny batone look of non-native plants we provide no habitat for our native right Critters thank you thank
you Mr Cady do you want to for my benefit also speak about what agricultural benefit there will be on that property well I you know one of the things they were considering um early on was some type of um fuel you know some
type of of eucalyptus or or some type of plant that would create the potential for fuel production that was the plan when King Ranch owned it right right so I'm not I'm again I'm not marketing it so but that was that's an example of some type
of a tech use you know because it would be it include some type of processing facility okay I I by the way I toured the one out in Indiantown that they're using now for charcoal it is an amazing site something like that it's an amazing
site okay back to the board it's not and it's just not that for on 900 Acres with the egg today what you can do with egg Hydroponics shrimp farm fish farm uh high-intensity grazing there's all kinds all kinds of stuff I just wanted to know
if they had a plan and apparently they do not have that plan yet but I do have a question that that brings up that if you are doing agriculture in an enclosed process is that any longer considered open
space no I wouldn't call it open I wouldn't but it's agriculture well this is where we are it is what it is is there any other questions for anyone or do we have any discussion
between us if not can I get a motion I'm not in favor so well you don't have to make a motion Mr Brown will you make a motion one way or the other okay well I hope I got this right I I keep that we approve for the uh Sunrise Tech uh name
change and yeah so the text amendment to approve the recommend approval of the text Amendment recommend approve of the text amendment to for the main change can I get a second a second okay all in favor I opposed I am opposed
31 with Mr Moore opposing and Mr Hartman recusing himself thank you Mr chairman may I yes you may of course you may it's we wouldn't have a meeting without you thank you uh just while I have you all here this evening I'd like to just
inform you that we do have scheduled agenda items for March 6 March 20 and March 30 you mean April 3rd I'm sorry April 3rd yes I will not be here for the March
20th but I will be here for the third okay I think I'm here for all three okay thank you I don't believe I'll be here for April 3rd you getting this Rebecca okay I got such a poor life I'll probably be here for all of
[Laughter] them is there anything else see plan on being on here for all three thank you sir can I make a motion to journ now well I I I you know technically we don't really need a
motion to adjourn good okay so we're just going to be adjourned