All right. >> What are you? >> I'm sitting over here uh for a >> lease train. >> You want should we introduce you to the >> the >> uh good evening. This is um Thursday,
February 19th to 7:00 p.m. and it's time for the Martin County Local Planning Agency. Um like to introduce our our new assistant attorney for the county, Sebastian >> Fox. Um he'd be sitting in for a lease elder.
Um we have no minutes to approve. Um, so I think our first piece of new business is NPH-1 LDR2504 article 11 planned mixeduse village excavation standards. This is a request
by Gary Oakley uh and Stewart on behalf of Madame Palm Beach LLC for approval of amendment to division 6 site development standards article 11 planned mixeduse village land development regulation the Martin County code to add excavation
standards to projects in mixeduse village zoning districts exclusively. I think Mr. Sonat is going to do staff's presentation and then some members of the applicant will probably say something. >> Yes.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Mr. Chairman, I need to speak up. I spoke with the staff and I also spoke with Mr. Ike from >> Right. It's actually not Oh, it's not for this quasi judicial. So, I I would also say that I spoke with Ike Dumpler. >> All right. Okay. I just wanted to make
sure I don't. >> Excellent. Okay. There he is. >> Yep. >> Late as usual, >> but better late than >> never. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good evening,
members of the LPA. I'm John Senate, principal planner with Growth Management. A copy of my work history has been filed with the clerk. I am presenting the proposed text amendment to division 6, article 11 of
the land development regulations. Article 11 was approved in 2018 through the adoption of ordinance 1083. It regulates the Newfield project, formerly known as Pineland Prairie. New field encompasses just over 3,400 acres
in western Palm City as shown on this aerial south of the C23 canal. The proposed amendment adds excavation standards to division 6 site development standards article 11. The amendment proposes a maximum excavation depth of
40 ft. The bottom of excavations must be at least 30 ft above the confining unit of the upper floor and aquifer Hawthorne group. The material excavated below 15 ft will be restricted to sand. The proposed amendment establishes
setbacks of excavations from rights of way property lines and wells and septic systems. Excavations in the vicinity of wetlands would continue to be subject to divisions one and two of article 4 land development regulations. The proposed amendment contains sampling, reporting,
and monitoring requirements which are consistent with existing excavation and fill standards found in division 8 excavating, filling, and mining article 4 LDR. Staff recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amending article 11 plan
mixeduse village land development regulations, Martin County code. That concludes my presentation. >> Thank you, Mr. Senate. Are there any questions for staff? Yep. >> Mr. Senator, could you tell us what the
normal um you know not uh mixeduse village mining standards are? What's the maximum depth the mine can be dredged um for sand? >> So for a standard excavation in our article 3 zoning districts, that would
be 20 ft uh from control elevation. There are existing provisions in article 4 that would allow a mine to go to 40 ft, >> right? >> Um, and that has a similar restriction as far as uh the vertical separation between the confining unit
>> and the same number of test wells would have to be uh done as well. >> Yes, the geotechnical report and sampling requirements that are proposed in this amendment are consistent with the sampling and monitoring requirements that are applicable to mines currently.
The the decision before us is exclusively for new fields. It's not going to be applied to anybody else unless they get the same sort of exemptions on and and follow the same stipulations that are in the land development regulations. Correct.
>> Correct. This amendment is applicable only to article 11 which governs the new field project. >> And it's it's I think you know about setbacks as well as as total depth. Yes, this this amendment uh proposes setbacks from rights of way and property lines.
Uh those setbacks are are consistent with existing standards in in article 4. >> Thank you. Um for the applicant, who's speaking?
All of you at once or individually? >> Right. Good evening. I'm Kristen Spake. I'm council for the applicant at the Gunster Law Firm. Um, thank you for being here tonight and thank you to staff for their um, recommendation of approval after a careful analysis. So,
I'm joined here tonight by members of the Madame development team. You'll hear from James Fitzgerald of Madame. Also, Bob Higgins, our um, engineer expert and our traffic expert, Kevin Trapanier. Um I think it sounds like you all are very familiar with this so I will speed it up
but um as you know night Kiplinger had a unique vision for the new fields development and so to achieve that unique vision it's got a its own separate section within the land development regulations article 11 the planned mixeduse village article and
that um article applies solely to Newfield and I think um vice chair Moore you hit on that already which is the change that we're asking for today is in article 11 and that will be solely solely for Newfield. It won't be for just any other project anywhere to try
to um utilize. And so that's one important point and thank you for already bringing that up. And the second point we wanted to raise is one that staff has already made very clear, which is we have adapted language that's already been considered and vetted and adopted by the board of county
commissioners and um in the excavation fill and mining section of the code. And so there are safeguards that have been um carefully put into place for that. And you'll hear more about that from Mr. Higgins. You don't want to hear about that from me. So, if I may ask um for
James Fitzgerald of Madame to come up and just tell you a little bit about why this is something they want to have approved. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Do we do we need to hear all this? Can we just make a motion to approve it? >> You guys just want to approve it now? I'm sure we can get out of here. >> I I mean, if you want to make the
motion, I suppose you can, but we do need to make sure that there's no members of the public that want to be heard on this. I don't see anybody >> because my understanding is this is the same what we're doing for mining and we vetted the procedure for mining and it's
the same standards and we're holding them to that same level and it's good for if you went a half a mile away it'd still be good for that >> on another piece of property. So I mean I I'm not an engineer so you could blow smoke you know real fast and I wouldn't know whether you tell me the truth or
not but if it's the same standards I'll make a motion we approve it. Okay, we have a motion to approve staff's recommendation. >> I second. >> Thank you very much for being here. We have a motion. >> Mr. Chairman, could you just confirm no public comment? Just make the
>> Yeah. Okay. There is no public comment. There is no I I did I think mention that or Okay. Yes. Give the >> We see we see no members of the public wishing to speak to this item. I don't see any in the room. Thank you.
Um, we have a motion and a second. All in favor, please signify by saying I. I. >> Motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much. >> Thank you all very much. Good night, >> Mr. Chairman. Paul Schilling, growth management director for the record. So,
um, for March 5th, we have an couple agenda items. I was just trying to get your concurrence that we'll have attendance at that meeting. And I I do want to thank my staff for being um understanding in the the the kind of uh
outreach that we've done today and trying to make sure that we have a quorum. But my goal as a director is to have staff working on other things rather than that. So, if we could when I get a concurrence at the meeting, um, just
>> let us know if you're not going to attend that way, you know, and I don't want to I know the board is a volunteer board and we appreciate your time certainly, but um and I don't want to bother you all, >> but um >> um that's where I'm coming from,
>> right? I I I think Joan tried to call me earlier today, but I was in a meeting and so I did text her back. I don't know if she got the text or not. >> Thank you. If that's if that was directed at me. >> Oh, no. It's directed at those that are here and those that are will be here
hopefully next time. Uh >> I won't be here on the 5th. >> You will not be here. >> Thank you. >> But so you know the um the phone that don't call office. >> Okay. Right. >> So that's so Dr. Brown will not be here. Does
anyone else anticipate not being here? >> I'll be here. >> I'll be here. >> Thank you very much. We appreciate it. and Tom will be back. >> Shall we adjourn? I believe so. Y >> make a motion to adjourn. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Half the fifth and the next is the
19th, right?