Mhm. >> Mhm. >> I call this meeting to Now I'm going to call this meeting to order the Martin County LPA for December 18th. Oh, okay. Well, happy birthday. June 18th, 2026.
>> We're right on it. >> Can I get a motion to approve the minutes? I got a motion. Can I get a second? All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. We have presentations tonight. >> I want to make a motion. >> What's the motion? >> I want to change the order of our
presentations. I don't want to sit through this is not I'm not hard timing but I don't want to sit through Tobacco Free Florida. >> Well, you can What do you mean you don't want you don't hear on the dais? >> Let's just do the the important stuff first.
>> Do you have an objection young lady? >> No, sir. >> All right, so I will change I don't need a motion. I'll change it. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So Coastal Life Church rezoning it's quasi-judicial. Do you have any ex parte communication?
Do you have any ex parte communication? Do you have? >> No, sir. >> You have and I don't either. Where's my cheat sheet? >> Swearing in. Pardon me? >> Swear in the witness. >> Oh, yeah. >> Swear in the interveners. >> There are no interveners. Can I have all
the witnesses stand to be sworn in. >> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the evidence you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Okay. You're up, Mr. Elam. >> Thank you. All right, good evening. Thank you,
members of the LPA. For the record, I'm Brian Elam, a principal planner with the Growth Management Department. A copy of my work history is on file with the clerk. Uh tonight, I present an application for a mandatory rezoning of an approximate 43.9 acre property in Palm City.
This is a request by Cotler and Hearing and Coastal Life Church Corporation on behalf of Jesus House of Hope Corporation for a proposed amendment to the county zoning atlas consistent with the existing future land use. Included with this application is a request for a certificate of public
facilities exemption. The subject site is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Southwest Martin Highway and Southwest Martindale Drive, sorry, Martingale Drive, approximately a half a mile east of Interstate 95 in Palm City.
The current zoning on the property is A-2 agricultural district. It's a category C zoning district consistent with an agricultural future land use that limits residential density to one single-family residence per 20 gross 20-acre tract.
The existing future land use on the property is agricultural ranchette, which limits residential density to one single-family dwelling per five gross acres. The current A-2 zoning district is not consistent with the future land use. Therefore, this request to rezone is
considered mandatory. There are two standard category A zoning districts available to implement the agricultural ranch at land use policies of comprehensive growth management plan, which are AR5A, agricultural ranch
ranch at district. In addition to the standard zoning district, the PUD or planned unit development district is also available as an option. The PUD district offers more design flexibility to applicants for proposed projects. In exchange, the
district requires additional benefits to the county and more controls by the county. The applicant is requesting to rezone to AR5A agricultural ranch at zoning district. Here are the two straight zoning districts, AR5A and 10A development
standards and structure setbacks, which are essentially identical except for the minimum lot area or density one unit per five acres or one unit per 10 acres. All the setbacks are the same for all stories. Development review staff have found the
Jesus House of Hope Corporation rezoning application to comply with all applicable regulations in the comprehensive growth management plan as detailed in the staff report. And staff recommends approval of the rezoning request by Jesus House of Hope Corporation
from A2 agricultural district to AR5A agricultural ranch at district. And that concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Yellen? >> Joe? >> I have a question. Why is it that two not-for-profit tax exempt
facilities are looking to get residential zoning change? What What's the purpose of that? >> It's I wouldn't really call it a residential zoning. It's the only zoning available to which is consistent with the future land use.
>> Well, however, when they purchased this property, it was zoned agricultural. They purchased it that way. And if they're not going to be developing residences, I don't understand why we need ever need for the change. Do you want to say something, Mr. Elder? >> Mr. Chairman, may I
Madam Paul Schilling, Growth Management Director. So, the current land use on the property is agricultural ranch at. The primary use in that is agricultural with the residential component being ancillary and accessory.
Most of Palm City Farms is AR-5 ARA-2. But the reason we're here this evening is because this is a mandatory rezoning. There is a site plan that will come forward at some point in the future with the institutional use. Thus, the A-2 is not consistent with the
agricultural ranch at. It would be consistent with the agricultural land use, which is a minimum 20-acre lot. The proposed site plan will come in in the future. Not to this board, but it would be approved administratively. But there is a mandatory rezoning
required associated with a site plan application. Thus, the hearing this evening. And I think this >> Just just to add on to what Mr. Schilling said. So, our code right now, the current zoning is an old category C zoning district. Our code requires them
to rezone it if they're going to develop the property for an institutional use. They have to do a new rezone it. And the AR-5 is the only zoning category that fits with the land use. So, they're required to because they have an older category C zoning
district right now. >> When they purchased the property, they knew that that was the case. And so, going forward, I I don't understand why we have to change the zoning that allows one residential property to be out of 5 acres out there where it's supposed to
be done. I mean, this is supposed to be for their their purposes. It's not supposed to be a housing development. And this opens the door for that, in my opinion. >> Well, that they are consistent. There are a lot of permitted uses other than a single-family home in
>> AR 5A. >> And all of them, AR 5A, A2. Uh we are requiring them to do this because they want a site plan. They're not doing anything that isn't already permitted in the zoning district. >> Again, my my question is that just opens
up the door for okay, now we're going to go ahead and they decide that you know, they can't keep functioning or they move on and now we have a place to develop a a whole new development that's already zoned for residential development. When it was purchased, it was agricultural. And now you're asking us
to change it because it's mandatory for them to get a site plan. And that if they decide it doesn't work out or if they decide to change their plans or if they decide to you know, go ahead and start doing residential stuff, then where's the you know, how do we maintain this a second? >> Can they even build a single-family home
with this with this use right now? >> Yes. >> Uh yeah. Uh Paul Schelling for the record. Technically, uh there are provisions within the code that would allow for one single-family unit on this property without rezoning.
Um however, uh Article 10 is clear that if there is a site plan application >> Article 10 of the comp plan? >> Of the land development regulations. Uh and also I would point out that this is the only available district to to be consistent with the land use.
Uh which is 5-acre ranchette. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> That's I hope that answers your question, Joe. There's just no choice. They have to >> Okay. >> Why are we Why all of a sudden do we want a site plan? They've been out there on this property >> They haven't asked us for a site plan. At some point they'll come forward
forward with a site plan, but they can't even do that with that without having this mandatory rezoning done. So, you can always vote no when it's all said and done. Uh do you have a question? >> Um
what is the lot sizes of the industrial um proposal that's on the uh west side? >> Are you You're talking about Martin Commerce? >> Yeah, the Mar- Martin Commerce lots are what size? >> Well, it's not solidified yet because it's in review,
but um each of those The The Well, these here, this is an old one, but it's being replatted because it's a new owner. And so, the only reason they're replatting is because it was platted. They have no intention of selling any lots or
anything like that, but they have to because the fact that there's platted lots. But, they These were 5 acres, the old ones. >> 5 acres, okay. >> Yes, but um >> Some were bigger. >> The industrial uh >> May May I uh Mr. Moore?
The The Martingale Commons was an approval years ago. It was platted into 5-acre lots, and there are two 20-acre lots uh on the west side, I believe. The land use was changed to industrial. The current PUD uh that's under review,
actually the final site plan is the master plan has been approved. Uh but, those lots are no longer. They are being replatted. >> But, they were 5 acres. >> Yes, sir. >> 10 years ago. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Any other questions, Jim? >> No, that's it. >> Mr. Brown? >> No, sir. No question.
>> And I have none. Okay, does the applicant have a presentation? >> Yes. >> Will you just make the motion to approve? >> No, the applicant has to make a presentation. >> make the presentation she has to. >> They paid to do it. >> To preserve their record. >> I mean >> Also, to preserve their record.
[clears throat] >> Oh, yes. You to turn that in. >> Okay. Thank you. >> We should We should state that for the record. >> Excuse me. >> The applicant is >> Applicant, come to the minds. >> it. >> Are you turning Are you turning in your uh certificates
of mailing? >> Yes. Yes, it's the notice affidavit. >> Okay. Would you introduce yourself, please? >> Uh good evening. My name's Christina Lane with Cotler and Hearing. >> Okay. Christy, could you speak into the mic? >> Yes. Sorry. >> Cuz I can't hear you. >> No, that's okay. >> Sorry about that.
>> Oh, there it is. >> Can you hear me better? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> [clears throat] >> Uh my name's Christina Lane with Cotler and Hearing and I'm representing Coastal Life Church and the property owner Jesus House of Hope. Um first, I'd like to thank staff for their coordination and assistance throughout the review
process. Tonight, we are presenting a mandatory rezoning application that is required to bring the property zoning into consistency with the adopted agricultural ranchette future land use designation. >> Thank you. >> The existing Oops, sorry.
Represented here today is a team that has worked collaboratively with Martin County staff throughout the review process. Our team includes the property owner, Coastal Life Church, legal counsel, surveyors, and planning consultants who have worked together to ensure the application complies with all applicable county regulations and
comprehensive plan requirements. I'll invite James Pendleton to come and speak on behalf of Coastal Life Church shortly. The request before you is straightforward. The property currently carries an agricultural ranchette future land use designation, but retains an older A-2 zoning classification that
predates Martin County's comprehensive growth management plan. County regulations identify this inconsistency and require a mandatory rezoning to a compatible zoning district. Accordingly, we are requesting rezoning from A-2 to AR-5A. This is not a request for additional development
rights. This is a code-required action to align the zoning map with the county's adopted future land use map. The subject property consists of approximately 44 acres located on the southeast corner of Southwest Martin Highway and Southwest Martingale Drive, approximately 1/2 mile east of
Interstate 95. The site is situated within an area characterized by agricultural ranch and land uses and larger rural residential properties, while industrially designated properties exist to the west and the south. The existing A2 zoning district is a
legacy zoning classification established under Martin County's 1967 zoning code. While the zoning has remained unchanged, the property's future land use designation was established as agricultural ranch at under the county's comprehensive growth management plan. As noted in the staff report, this
creates an inconsistency between the zoning district and future land use designation that must be corrected through the mandatory rezoning process. The agricultural ranch at future land use category allows a density of one dwelling unit per 5 acres and establishes the policy framework for the
property. The current A2 zoning does not implement those adopted policies, which is why county code requires the rezoning application. The county's land development regulations identify only two standard zoning districts that are compatible with this future land use designation, AR5A and AR10A.
AR10A is not utilized in Martin County for this circumstance, making AR5A the appropriate zoning district to implement the adopted future land use policies. This is perhaps the most important slide of today's presentation. A place of worship is already a
permitted use within the existing A2 zoning district. However, because of the zone property zoning inconsistency, county regulations require it be resolved before future development approvals can proceed. Staff conducted a comprehensive review of the application and reached several important
conclusions, including that the proposed AR5A zoning district is consistent with the agricultural ranch at future land use designation and compatible with zoning development patterns. The request is consistent with the comprehensive growth management plan and land development regulations, and the
proposal implements the future land use assigned to the property. These findings directly support approval of the application. It has also been noted that this rezoning does not increase density or development intensity. No policy changes, exceptions, or comprehensive plan amendments are requested. This rezoning
simply aligns the zoning map with the future land use map already adopted by Martin County. This application is limited to correcting the zoning consistency issue and does not by itself create any additional impact on public infrastructure. As staff noted in the report, an amendment to the zoning atlas
does not authorize development and therefore does not generate increased demand for public facilities. The property remains subject to all future permitting and development review requirements. As shown on the screen, this application meets all criteria for a recommendation
of approval. It is consistent with the agricultural ranch at future land use designation, implements the growth comprehensive growth management plan and land development regulations, creates no increase in density or public facility impacts, and establishes consistency between the future land use map and
zoning atlas. We appreciate staff's thorough review, their recommendation of approval, and their continued coordination throughout this process. Thank you for your time and consideration this evening. We respectfully request your support of the AR5A mandatory rezoning application.
At this time, I'd like to invite James Pendleton to say a few words. >> So, I want to take a very quick moment. My name is James Pendleton. I'm the lead pastor at Coastal Life Church. Uh Coastal Life Church, we have been a church established in this community for almost 18 years. Just serving this
community and we are excited about our partnership with House of Hope and excited to come alongside and just along with them in the things that they do to also do what we do just to serve the families of Martin County in this community that we care about so much and
we've cared about over the last 18 years. And so I just want to say really quickly, thank you for considering our request and our application and thank you for serving our community. Thank you. >> Did Did someone else want to speak from the applicant? No?
Christie, could you come up in case anyone has a question? Mr. Brown, do you have a question? >> No, sir. >> Jim? >> No. >> Joe? >> No questions. >> No. >> Uh neither did I. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. Nice job. >> Thanks. Appreciate it. >> Can I get a motion?
>> I'll make a motion to approve staff's recommendation for AR5. >> Okay. Can I get a second? >> I second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I. >> I. >> I. Opposed? >> No. >> 4-1 with Ms. Nesam voting no.
Thank you. Okay. Come on up. >> [snorts] >> No more nicotine. >> I stopped. >> I stopped in '91. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Thanks, man. >> Rex is going to have to get some dip. >> All righty, good evening. Um Caitlin Strickland, I'm with the um Martin County Tobacco-Free Florida. Um I am here um on the on the behalf of Bureau of Tobacco-Free Florida. I'm here
to bring awareness to point-of-sale zoning policies. Um so in this presentation, we'll discuss how to how we can prevent tobacco use in our community, especially among young um among youth through a tobacco point-of-sale zoning policy.
Um the agenda I'm going to quickly go through is impacts of tobacco on our community, tobacco retailer landscape, tobacco point-of-sale zoning policies, preventing tobacco use with zoning policies and our resources. First, we are going to look at how
tobacco um impacts our communities' health. Um first, let's take a look at how tobacco impacts the health of our community members. Uh cigarette smoking is a leading cause of preventable preventable
death in the United States. It causes more than 490,000 deaths each year. That is nearly one in five deaths or 1,300 deaths every single day. For every person who dies because of smoking, at least 30 people live with a serious
smoking-related illness. That means more than 16 million Americans are living with a disease caused by smoking. Most people are aware about the connection between smoking and lung cancer. In fact, nine out of 10 lung cancer deaths are connected to smoking. In fact, more
women die from lung cancer each year than from breast cancer. If nobody smoked, one out of three deaths in the US would not happen. >> I don't think your microphone is on or you have to speak into it more. >> Is that working now? >> Yeah, now when you do that.
>> I'll move it a little closer. Next, we're going to talk about the negative economic impacts tobacco has on the members of our community. Someone who smokes a pack of cigarettes every day in Florida can spend more than $2,000 in 1 year and more than 10,000 in
5 years. Smokers pay 15 to 20% more of their monthly health insurance premium than non-smokers. For example, if a non-smoker pays $200 per month, a smoker can expect to pay $240 a month. >> [snorts] >> Using the same calculation as we did for a pack of cigarettes, smokers will pay
$24,000 more than a non-smoker in insurance premiums over the course of 50 years. When including health care, the cumulative cost of smoking a cigarette pack at per day over the course of several decades, income losses
and other expenses, the financial cost of smoking in Florida per smoker is roughly $54,000 annually. That's more than $2.6 million per smoker over a lifetime. In our community, we should work to prevent youth from trying and starting
to use tobacco and nicotine products so that youth don't suffer from the negative health effects and financial impacts we just talked about. Since out of since about nine out of 10 adult smokers tried their first cigarette by the age of 18, to create a tobacco-free
future, preventing initiatives among youth is vital. Youth are exposed to tobacco advertisements and tobacco products at or near retailers that sell tobacco. Exposure to retail advertising and having relatively easy access to tobacco
products are associated with using tobacco products. Reducing the number of tobacco advertisements and tobacco products our youth see could significantly affect the health of our youth. Various studies have shown that schools near fewer tobacco retailers have lower smoking rates among the their
students. According to the Florida Youth Tobacco Survey, 65.6% of youth saw tobacco advertisements the last time they visited a retail store in Martin County. Now that we understand how tobacco and nicotine products impact our health,
businesses, and our youth, let's take a look at tobacco retailers in our community. Within Martin County, there are a total of 315 tobacco retailers. To help put this number into perspective, we're going to compare it to the number of McDonald's we have in
our community. There are about nine McDonald's in Martin County. This means for every one McDonald's in Martin County, there are about 35 tobacco retailers. It may come as a surprise that there are more tobacco retailers than one of the most
popular fast food brands in our county. Are the tobacco so are the tobacco retailers in our community selling tobacco products to our youth? To answer this question, we'll look at data provided by the Food and Drug Administration and Department of Children and Families. These two
organizations complete inspections to see if tobacco retailers are selling tobacco products to our youth or minors. In theory, tobacco retailers would not sell any tobacco products to youth because they are under the legal the legal age to purchase tobacco products,
which is 21 years old. However, the FDA found that Martin County has a sale-to-minor rate of 13% and DCF found that Martin County has a sale-to-minor rate of 9%. Of the tobacco retailers in Martin
County, 206 of them are within 500 ft of another retailer, which is 65%. And 102 of them are within 1,000 ft of a school and or park, which is 32%. Next, we are going to discuss
point-of-sale zoning policies. Zoning is the categorization of how land can be used. When applying this to tobacco sales, this means counties, cities, and towns can create and adopt policies that control where tobacco products can be sold. These policies
would be called tobacco point-of-sale zoning policies. If a county, city, or town decides to create a tobacco point-of-sale zoning policy, they can regulate tobacco products in two ways. Local governments can regulate tobacco products by restricting the proximity of tobacco
retailers to youth populated areas such as schools, parks, and daycare facilities, or local governments can restrict the proximity of tobacco retailers to other tobacco retailers, which would limit the number of tobacco retailers there could be be in a given county, city, or town.
When a zoning policy is adopted, existing tobacco retailers will not be impacted. When the zoning policy takes effect, existing tobacco retailers would be exempted or grandfathered in. This exemption [snorts] can be permanent or time-limited through
However, all new tobacco retailers would need to follow the local government's zoning policy. Also, a local government can choose to include mobile tobacco shops in their zoning policy, which Martin County does not have any mobile mobile tobacco shops.
In Florida, there are a total of seven tobacco point-of-sale zoning policies. Most have been adopted in the past few years, and we hope to see this trend continue. On this slide are the seven counties that have adopted a point-of-sale zoning policy.
In Martin County, 67.4% of adults support the prohibiting the sales of tobacco in stores near schools. And 58.3% of adults support the prohibiting of sales of tobacco in stores near parks. Again, we can keep tobacco products away from the area our
youth frequent, such as schools and parks, by adopting a tobacco point of sale policy. Next is preventing tobacco use through zoning policies. Throughout this presentation, we've heard about the negative impacts of tobacco on our community, what our
tobacco real what our tobacco retailer landscape looks like, and what a tobacco point of sale zoning policy is. We're going to take a look at the impact a tobacco point of sale zoning policy can have. If our community chooses to adopt a tobacco point of C point of sale zoning policy, we may see two key
benefits. One, [snorts] keeping by keeping the tobacco retailers away from areas frequented by youth, we could reduce youth exposure to tobacco advertisements, and we could reduce and we could reduce youth access to tobacco products. A reduction in youth exposure
to tobacco advertisements and tobacco products is associated with lower smoking rates among youth and maintaining effectiveness of quit attempts. In other words, by adopting a tobacco POS zoning policy, we can prevent tobacco use in our community,
especially among our youth. These are the resources. We have a local um tobacco-free partnership um that meets um every quarter. Um if you'd like to get involved in keeping our community tobacco-free, you can join our partnership um specifically
our point of sale zoning subcommittee. If you're interested in quitting any type of tobacco, Tobacco Free Florida offers free tools and services to help you get started. We offer phone quit, group quit, and web quit. That concludes my presentation. Thank you for taking the time to listen.
>> Are there any questions? I do. Is is it is it really the best idea to uh to limit this to tobacco? Would it be more inclusive to use nicotine? >> Yeah, so we it's actually tobacco and
nicotine is what my program covers. >> But almost all of this is about tobacco and I think we're missing vaping. >> Correct. Yes, so we specifically focus on just tobacco and nicotine is in other products as well, but vaping is a
an epidemic that is on the rise and has been on the rise for the last several years. >> So why don't we label it more inclusively? >> That's a great question. I'm not I'm not 100% sure. This is a pre-curated presentation for me to present.
So but that is a great point and is something to to look into adding to it. >> And when we talk about zoning, I suppose we would probably have to grandfather those those bodegas that are already doing it. >> I believe so. Yes, correct.
>> Okay, Mr. Brown. >> As for the plan ahead, is it something going before the county commissioners or as far as the zoning? >> Yes, that would be that would be ideal. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Joe? >> No questions.
>> And I'll just make two comments. To show you how much things have changed, when I was in high school, the seniors had a smoking lounge in the back of the cafeteria where you would not get a jug slip when you
when you smoked. Second thing is the Supreme Court this week said that if you're under the age of 21, you can carry a loaded firearm. >> Yeah. >> So if you're 18, you can carry a loaded firearm, but you can't have a cigarette
or drink. Something is wrong there. Those are my two comments. Thank you. >> I mean that's >> school outlaw gum? >> Uh no. >> Yeah, so gum was was outlawed but cigarettes weren't.
>> College everybody smoked in the classroom for Christ's sake. >> Pipes. >> Go ahead. >> Uh Mr. Chairman, yes, thank you. Paul Schilling for the record. So, we did not have an early July meeting but we do have a couple agenda items for the July
16th meeting and then subsequent meetings. >> I will be there. >> Thank you. >> Will you be there? >> Oh, I wouldn't miss it, Tom. >> Will you be there? >> That's what he wants to hear so he knows he has a quorum. >> [laughter] >> I will be >> July July 16th? >> Yeah, yes.
>> Okay. >> Okay. >> [laughter] >> All right, is there any other business? >> Thank you. >> If not >> we're adjourned. >> Thank you, Tom. >> Thank you.