Planning and Zoning Board - Regular Meeting

Six. We need to call to order. And please call the roll.

Chair Norton.

Here.

Miss Miserino. Here. Mister Rosen. Here. Mister Reckinis.

Yes, ma'am.

Mister Webb? Here. Mister Prevot? Yes. Mister Spitarra? Here. And miss Fogarty is here.

Everyone's here, and we do have a quorum. Please stamp in the pledge.

We're over quorum.

I pledge pledge allegiance allegiance to to the the flag flag of of the The United United States States Of Of America. America and to your republic for which stands, one nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all.

Start with the approval of the minutes. I'll entertain a motion.

I make a motion we approve the minutes.

I'll second it.

We have a motion to second. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. The March 3 minutes are approved. Okay. Nothing on the consent agenda. Then we'll move into the public hearing. Item seven's non quasi judicial, seven a p two six dash zero two zero. And we have a presentation from staff.

Hello. Good evening, mister chairman, members of the board. Bethany Grubbs with the planning department. The item before you is a text amendment that city initiated. The city initiated text amendment is to update the driveway standards, add new definitions which support the new updated driveway standards, setbacks and landscape area requirements for driveways and front yards, and provide typical lot scenario figures to include in the code for visual aids.

The purpose is to establish minimum separation between primary and secondary driveways, formerly known as circular driveways, to put some context behind the terminology, connector segment and turnaround setbacks, landscape impervious area requirements, and updated definitions aligned with these proposed standards. Review of the city code showed inconsistent standards for residential driveways and vehicle parking, therefore requiring clarification with this text amendment. The planning and zoning department with neighborhood services and public works collaborated to align driveway definitions and standards. For context, planning and zoning code sets the standards for driveway requirements. Neighborhood Services is the enforcement authority for parking violations, and Public Works permits driveways.

So we all came together, reviewed the driveway section to clarify it. Current code section one fifty eight point two two two requires all driveways to be paved, while section one fifty eight two one seven allows residential driveways of concrete stone or wood creating inconsistencies. Staff review shows the need to replace the term circular driveway with primary and secondary driveway terminology and add clear setback expectations, setbacks between the two legs, we can call them. And this term circular driveway is replaced in clearer terms with primary driveway and secondary driveway, which are later defined in Chapter 153, the definition section of code. And in 2021, there was a text amendment that required circular or t turnaround areas for certain roadways located on collector or arterial roads for safety for ease of backing out into the roadway, that way it was safer, and graveled areas on certain residential lots in place of the concrete in those areas.

Amendments establish separation requirements between driveway setbacks and setbacks from home and property lines to preserve the landscape areas. Under the proposed amendment, what is underlined is a new definition to be presented into the code and adopted. Therefore, we are proposing driveway connector segment for single family residential, a segment of a driveway configuration that provides the internal connection between the primary driveway and the secondary driveway. The connector segment enables a continuous path within the site, including straight angled or curved connections. I did want to go back and mention this text amendment is specific only to residential properties and not commercial, industrial, etcetera.

Driveway entrance, single family residential, a paved access area that provides vehicular ingress or egress between a public or private right of way and the abutting property. The driveway entrance begins at the edge of pavement within the roadway and extends inward to the property line and must be paved surface constructed in accordance with the city's engineering standards. That's the section that receives the permit through the Public Works Department. It's the section that's paved abutting the right of way. Primary driveway for single family, the main access segment of a driveway configuration extending from the public or private right of way into the abutting property and leading to a designated parking area or garage space.

Driveway secondary single family residential, the auxiliary segment to a primary driveway intended to complete a long loop or connection or secondary ingress egress. Garage face. The garage face is the vertical plane created by the exterior wall of a garage or carport containing the primary vehicular access doors. This includes the original garage door on enclosed garages or the open facing structural wall of a carport. The garage face represents the point at which the driveway terminates and serves as the functional end of the vehicular access way to the structure.

And then we have under the defined term c, paved surface, ground covered with concrete asphalt, brick pavers, stamped concrete, or paving block that is constructed in accordance with the city's engineering standards of land development code. Minor tweaks to the definition are to clarify what a paved surface is and adding paver blocks as a paved surface, and then clarifying again the difference between secondary driveway entrances and they must be paved. And then we have primary and secondary driveways as defined in Section 153.1 may be constructed using pervious or impervious surface materials when designed as a clearly delineated and properly graded natural surface covered with rolled stone or loose gravel. All such materials must be fully contained by edging borders or other acceptable methods to prevent erosion and maintain the defined limits of the driveway. And the intent of this is so you have a contained area of rock that's not gonna wash out and not to be parking on the grass.

Secondary driveways may consist of unimproved surfaces, such as sod, and may be used solely as access ways to the side or rear of the property. These areas are not permitted for parking, and no self propelled motor vehicle may stop or park on unimproved grass areas located within the front yard. Currently, you're able to park your, say, RV or boats on the side and rear, and this is clarifying that. Here we did cleanup, removing the word circular and spelling out primary and secondary portions, but mostly this slide will depict that we set minimum separation distances between maintain the integrity of the intent of a circular driveway and keep more pervious area and landscaped areas with these setback requirements. The only change here is we removed wood as a type of driveway.

And the planning and zoning department staff finds the petition consistent with the intent and direction of the city's comprehensive plan and therefore recommends approval. The board has the following options, to make a motion to recommend approval to the city council, make a motion to recommend denial, and make a motion to table. And that concludes my presentation, and I'm here for any questions.

One second. Applicant and staff are the same? Correct. Okay. So we're going go ahead, Pete.

I'm wondering what about the swell in the piping under the swell?

The swell in the piping is located in the city's right of way. That is the area that is permitted through the Public Works Department, what we call the driveway entrance, that has to be paved of a hard surface, and it gets a permit and is reviewed for setbacks from culvert pipes and other setbacks that may be applicable.

So if you add the circular driveway, you have to put

There's no change to permitting. So if you add a driveway, you have to get the culvert crossing permitted through the public works department. And there's an application and a plot plan required.

Alright. Because I I mean, that that'll stop the

Understood.

So this is not having any impact on the stormwater flow, correct?

No. There's no proposed changes to driveway configurations in that respect.

Thank you. Any other questions for Good. Mr. Under Section 158

dash I'm sorry, period two twenty two, Driveway Services, commercial all driveways shall be paved service with concrete, asphalt, paver or comparable hard surfacing. What would be an example of a comparable hard surfacing? What's seems like it's

all open ended.

Well, there's a section also in this in the code that allows the engineering department to determine if a surface is considered impervious or pervious and up to their discretion. And, you know, there's always products coming out line out that are new and evolve such as TruGrid. So it leaves it a little open ended for the engineering department to review individually.

So that's sort of open for approval by by the Planning and Zoning Department?

It would not be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Public

Works, sorry, sorry, Public Works.

Public Works solely. The city engineer has the ability to make decisions.

Thank you for the clarification.

Mr. Chair, would that be considered rock?

Shell rock could be if it's confined. However, I don't believe the Public Works Department allows it in the apron portion. It has to be paver blocks, concrete. I don't even think asphalt.

Clive. Good evening, Chair and Board. Clyde Coffey, Public Works Department. So to answer your question, shell rock would not be approved, would not be a material that's approved within the right of way. The hard materials we do is asphalt, concrete, paver bricks. Those are the typical materials that we approve.

Okay. Well, help me understand. This. The actual where the driveway attaches to the road, what are your limits of footage? Is it 32? Is that what I'm reading there?

Is maximum waste.

We have standards set for those depending on the type of driveway it is, but there is a maximum and a minimum. The minimum is 10 foot in width.

Right, maximum.

And the maximum, I believe, is 32 feet in width. And then there's also setbacks that public works implements from culverts.

Okay. In other words, if you have two driveways, a circular driveway, that can't go past 32 foot?

So the primary one would be 32 feet and the secondary would be 18.

So there's a maximum payment with a 50 feet.

Okay. That's what I'm asking.

Any other questions? I have two questions. First of all, I can see this is a little bit more restrictive than current, if I understand this correctly. And if that's the case, are people grandfathered in if they currently have one?

Yes. It's more restrictive in the respect of required landscaping and yes they would be grandfathered in if they have an existing driveway that exists today. It is allowed to be at the width that it is and and also the location

Okay.

Which would not be in the easements. The easements are already rolled to not be paved in today. So so

yeah. Cool. I got one more question. I think I understand part of this, but I want to make sure I fully understand. What is the benefit to renaming it from circular driveway to primary and secondary?

Enforcement for city staff. It makes it easier for city staff to refer to the legs individually.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions? Only other thing I'll point out, Bethany, in code you do have exhibits that can show the public exactly what the new code is referencing. Correct?

Yes. In the exhibits, there are four, and each of them are a guideline when you apply for the separate type of permit for your type of driveway, whether it be a one single driveway, whether it be a T turnaround driveway, what was formerly a circular driveway, and a corner lot driveway. And it spells out where you have to have your landscape areas, and the separation between the legs of the driveways, and gives you a visual guideline with dimensions.

Great. Any other questions? Seeing none, thank you. Any members of the public wish to speak on this item? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and I'll call for a motion. Any discussion?

I'll make a motion to approve P26Dash020 City Of Port St. Lucie.

I second. We have

a motion to second. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Moving forward to 7B. And we'll open a public hearing. And we have a staff. Welcome back, Bethany.

Thank you. Bethany Gross with the Planning Department. The application before you is a comprehensive plan map amendment, a small scale, for Verano South, POD H. This is a request for a small scale land use map amendment to change the future land use designation from residential golf course to commercial general for 19.7 acres in the Verano Pod H development. The applicant is Kotler and Herring with the property owner being PSL Land Investments LLC, and the properties are generally located Southeast of Glades Cutoff Road, East Of Rangeline Road, and North of Crosstown Parkway.

The areas outlined in yellow are the subject of this request. The western portion is currently part of a larger parcel that will be plotted and dedicated to the city. So we're looking at just 10 acres of that site. And then over to the east side, you have a track that was platted into five commercial lots recently. And in the middle is the school site.

The land use is residential golf course currently surrounded by the Verano Golf Course community. And the proposed land use designation is general commercial CG. The PGA Village Verano DRI originally approved by City Council in 2003 established the Verano DRI in designated areas for RGC land use. Along with the section of commercial general land use, the DRI has since been amended multiple times, serving as the current regulating document. We have Site 1, which is approximately 9.7 acres and comprised of five parcels.

And then Site 2 is 10 acres located on the West side. The purpose of this request is to allow more intensive commercial uses than allowed under the RGC land use, consistent with the CG designation. Because CG zoning permits uses of greater intensity with those rather than the RGC designation, CG zoning is not compatible with the existing RGC land use classification, and that is the need for this amendment. Goal point 1.1 furthers and supports this comp plan change of the future land use element, which states that the city shall provide an appropriate mix of land uses to meet the needs of the current and future residents in a manner with developed concurrent with needed facilities and services. And also policy one point one point seven one of the future land use element, which states that the city shall review future land use map amendments based on the amount of land required to accommodate the anticipated growth and character of undeveloped land, compatibility with abutting and nearby uses and availability of water supply, public facilities and services, the need for job creation, capital investment and economic development to satisfy a deficiency of mix of uses on the land use map.

And policy 1.7.3, to encourage commercial and mixed uses nodes at or near arterial intersections and utilize urban design standards and techniques to beautify and enhance community appearance along major corridors. When reviewing a comprehensive plan map amendment, the site must be evaluated on the maximum that could be constructed within that land use change, and we must determine that adequate facilities exist. Based off of the land use map amendment, there's not expected to be an increase or decrease in demand of potable or wastewater services because the most intense uses are similar. And therefore, when you look at the most intense use allowed under both the land uses, the CRGC and CG, it is shopping center, therefore, is not anticipated to be a net change in traffic. The area is located in Flood Zone X, which is an area of minimal flood risk, and also in the Verano documents, adequate upland habitat has been preserved previously.

Therefore, 11.4 acres of surplus upland habitat and also the 22.86 acres was dated for conservation purposes meeting the preserve requirements of the DRI. When reviewing the traffic analysis, if we're looking at the average there is one slight change when you're looking at the RGC versus the CG. CG allows only a 40% coverage by buildings, while RGC allows for a 50%. So when you're looking at it in that regard, the traffic would be reduced three hundred and seventy eight PM peak hour trips a day because there is actually less lot coverage under CG than RGC. And with that staff's recommendation, we find the petitions consistent with the intent and direction of the city's comprehensive plan and recommend approval.

The board has the following options to recommend approval to the city council, motion to recommend approval to the City Council with conditions, motion to recommend denial to the City Council, or if you need further timetable the item to a future meeting. That concludes my presentation, and the applicant is here to answer any additional questions you may have.

Okay. Before we go to the applicant, any questions for staff yet?

I'd like to see the overhead shot on that, please.

Yes. Let's see here. Here's an aerial of the site Okay. The sites. They were originally one parcel and recently split to six.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Pete? Mr. Chair. Bethany, there was one statement in there that mentioned that Verano exceeded their requirement for preservation. Is that correct?

They did exceed their requirement for the preservation of which the lands are put under conservation, which every development is required to put aside 25%.

Okay. So they actually have conserved more than that. Correct? Just Let want

me just

go back and check the numbers before I speak.

So it says

11.4 acres of surplus, yes.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Thank

Exceeding what they're expected to do?

Yes.

Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you, Bethany. The applicant is here.

Good evening, Board. For the record, Pete Hoffweins with Cutler and Hearing, Land Planner for the project. Nice to be in front of you all again. This is for the Verano South Pod H Small Scale Future Land Use Amendment. I'll try not to be duplicative. Bethany always does a very thorough job. Again, the project team here were the land planners, Sean McKenzie, the traffic engineer, and PSL Land Investments, the owner. Bethany laid out what we're here for tonight. Essentially, have two sites, a 10 acre and a 9.7 acre site at our major intersections. These sites were always sort of contemplated when they put the DRI together for commercial uses.

And everything we're asking for tonight is sort of to bring the uses that were permitted and evaluated under the DRI under an alignment with a land use category and then subsequent PUD amendments for their commercial general uses in the zoning code. A history, if anybody's interested, I can always follow-up with questions. Here it just puts us in a little bit of context. You can see the pod H outlined in yellow are two sites for commercial there in red. Again, the first site on Crosstown and North South A, Sundance Boulevard as it's called now, and then the second site on Crosstown and Rangeline.

Again, this just shows the land use change in the context of the surrounding area. Same with the zoning. And I've seen this slide before. I did a slight update based on some discussion we had at the City Council meeting as it related to Pond G, which was a similar amendment. So you can see Verano's frontage here just over three and a half miles, and these are the these are the only three commercial sites we're going to have.

The first one over there all the way to the east is the one in Pod G, and then you can see the two there and the red stars for Pod H. The discussion that came up is we won't be adding and we can't add any more additional access from Crosstown. So limited access facility, the ones that are designated for the roadway now are the ones that are going to be there in perpetuity. Well, not in perpetuity, anything could change, but those are what staff adheres to based on the policy direction from the council. This was pointed out also last time, and I think Bethany picked a little bit of this up in her presentation.

This is from our DRI phasing schedule, and this shows what we are approved for maximum development potential. You can see if you add up those numbers, it comes to just over 900,000 square feet of retail service and office. What's important here is when I discussed bringing this into alignment with commercial uses is these were all evaluated and measured and anticipated to be under the shopping center classification from the Institute of Traffic Engineers. And so then that segues into what we have identified in the RGC land use. And you can see it allows for hotel, retail, conference center, recreation and maintenance facilities.

And then it's a little bit more limited than what was permitted under the shopping center IT. You can see it says I gotta get some glasses. I'm

getting older.

Community center, regional center, super shopping center, along with the outparcels, inline retail uses that you would commonly see at these sort of commercial sites. Again, we've gone through the consistency with staff and the comprehensive plan are in agreement. And I'm here to answer any questions. I have the pleasure of the Board.

Thank you. Any questions

of the applicant?

Just one thing I'm going to point back out. You said there's not going to be any access to these centers from Crosstown, they'll be from the side streets, correct?

Well, are designated access points along Crosstown and so

That are already there.

That are already there. So we're not adding anything. Those remain. There's one for Pod G, one for each of the pods and commercial sites in HCS.

Okay. Thank

you. Any other questions? Thank you. Any other questions for staff? Okay. This is a public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to speak on the item? Seeing none, close the public hearing. Any final comments? And we'll ask for a motion to discussion.

Everybody all at

once. I'll I'll move to approve p two six dash o two eight Verano South pod h small scale comprehensive plan amendment.

Motion, we need a second.

I'll second.

Motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Good luck. Thank you. Okay. Now we're moving on to the quasi judicial portion. Items 8A through 8E, I believe, are quasi judicial in nature. Our attorney will outline the procedures and provide for the swearing in. If anybody wants to speak on this item, you will have three minutes to speak on the item. If you do, please fill out one of the comment cards. Going to go by the comment cards that I received first. And Mr. Attorney, would you please outline the procedures.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good evening, everyone. We're here tonight for quasi judicial hearings. At a quasi judicial hearing, the Board acting like a judge applies existing policy and law to a set of facts to determine an outcome.

Notably, in quasi judicial hearings, the question is whether the application at issue complies with existing requirements, not whether the Board likes the project proposed in an application. Members of the Board must base their decision on competent substantial evidence presented at the hearing. Competent substantial evidence should be based in fact, be reliable and tend to prove a point such that a reasonable mind would accept it as sufficient to support the conclusion reached. Competent substantial evidence should not be speculative, hypothetical or conjecture. Instead, it must be relevant, material and within the purview of knowledge of the witness offering the testimony.

The Board is to consider the criteria set forth in the applicable code section and determine if an application meets those criteria. Accordingly, anyone who wishes to speak before the board or introduce evidence on a quasi judicial item should focus their testimony and evidence on how the proposal either meets or fails to meet the criteria of the code, rather than on general support or opposition. Section 32.8 of the city code establishes procedures for quasi judicial hearings within the city of Port St. Lucie. In each hearing, the Board must disclose any ex parte communications before final action on the matter and make written communications a part of the record before final action on the item.

For each item, first, city staff and the applicant will be able to make presentations. Next, the public may present testimony and evidence in support or opposition to the application. Then rebuttal and closing statements may be allowed, followed by deliberations and decision by the Board. Once a motion has been made by a member of the Board, the floor is closed to comments by the public. The board members may ask questions throughout the hearing, but no one has a right to address the board during deliberations. At this time, I'll ask the deputy clerk to swear in all persons wishing to offer testimony.

If you wish to speak on any of the items 8A through 8E, rise and be sworn in. Madam clerk.

Okay. If everyone can please raise your right hands. Do you swear or affirm that the statements made today will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Thank you.

Okay. Also, mister attorney, before we move forward, for any comments that we received via email, are also a matter of the record, correct?

Yes,

Mr. Chair. Those need to be made part of the record.

Okay. So anyone who is not here tonight and if we received one of your emails or online, we have read them as well, and they are part of the public record. Thank you. Okay. So we're gonna move on to item 8A. Before we do, any ex parte communications? None. None. None.

I've had none.

None. None. None. Okay. I'm going open the public hearing and have the planner. Hello again.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Bethany Grubbs. For the record, I have been sworn in and the official file has been provided to the clerk at least five days prior to this meeting. The application before you is a landscape modification for a project known as Lotus at Tradition. The application is to request and provide an enhanced landscaping via a berm in lieu of the required six foot architectural buffer wall on the eastern property line per section 154.12 of the code of ordinances.

The applicant is Lucido and Associates who represents the property owner, Madamey Palm Beach, and the property is located North of Southwest Tradition Parkway, South of Southwest Westcliff Lane, and East of the future Sundance Vista Boulevard. Immediately abutting the property is a development, a single family home development known as Brindley, and there a wall is required in the landscape buffer strip where multifamily development, which is lotus at tradition, abuts the property to the side, which is designated with PUD, planned unit development zoning, or single family uses per section 154.03 C five of the landscape code. Brinley is zoned PUD and is single family uses. The applicant is wishing to provide enhanced landscaping in lieu of the wall for the five fifty seven unit multifamily distributed across 29 buildings ranging in height from four stories to two stories. One thoughtful design consideration is the area on that property line, a budding single family, or the two story units, the lower units.

The proposed development of Butts, Brinley to the side. Typical code requires a 20 foot landscape buffer with a six foot architectural masonry wall. The applicant is proposing in lieu of such a 60 foot wide landscape buffer with a seven foot tall berm with plantings on top for the approximate 1,700 foot Eastern parcel property line adjacent to Brinley. One exhibit provided last week in your agenda package, which is not included in the presentation, is exhibit number six, the landscape berm planting schedule. And it will show that the landscaping atop the berm are oaks planted one every 30 linear feet with Ligustrum planted two foot on center across the entire length of the berm.

The subject property is located in the area outlined in gray, outlined in yellow in this slide, and you can see well, doesn't show developed to the, You do have Brindley, which is developed. And this is the subject request is to run the berm along this 1,700 foot length of property line on the side.

And what you're saying to the east is actually developed and there are homes?

There are homes. There's approximately 10 residential lots that abut this property, and they're open space tracked.

Thank you.

There you can see the homes that abut the property with our aerial map our our zoning map here. The area lined in red is where the berm would be placed in lieu of the six foot architectural wall. This is a cross section showing the 60 foot berm at a three to one slope with plantings on top. And again, exhibit six goes into more detail with the count quantity of the plantings on top.

But even though we don't have that, it meets code. Correct?

It it does meet code. However, they are keeping their perimeter landscaping that is code required. So this is essentially is above code. Great. It's a second landscape buffer above code with the extra plantings.

The board made there's a 10 foot strip that runs along the parking lot in the two story buildings that's planted at code, and then this is an additional planting on top of the entire buffer. If the board finds that the application is consistent with the criteria as listed in section 154.12 b of the city code, then the board may motion to approve, motion to approve with conditions, or motion to deny, or motion to table to or continue to a hearing at a further date. If the board recommends approval, staff does recommend the following because this is a phased project, a two phased project prior to the issuance of the first building permit for phase one. The berm located within phase one shall be installed, it with associated landscaping and inspected by the planning and zoning department. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for phase two, the corresponding segment of the berm shall be installed, plan it with associated landscaping and inspected by the planning and zoning department.

And that concludes my presentation. The applicant is available to answer any questions.

Bethany, just explain what you're asking that to be a condition of approval if we decide to approve?

Yes. Because it's a we don't know when phase two is going to be constructed, the landscaping may die.

So what you're asking, if we do make a motion to approve, this condition will be part of that motion, correct?

Yes. Thank you.

I have a question. I'm concerned the volume of building going on in this town, we have the infrastructure to handle it. Do we?

This is a DRI, the entitlements

scope of the hearing.

Yeah, Pete, this is just to cover the landscape issue. Building part is That the

will be a different application I'll later

ask that question then.

It's a great question but the scope of this is just a landscape modification waiver.

Right. Okay.

Any other questions for the planner? Joe? Sure.

Have one question. Yeah. Can you go back to that drawing of the berm?

Yeah, right there. So

the wall would be six feet high, but the top of the berm where the bottom of that that center oak tree is, that's seven feet high?

The oak tree should be planted at seven foot high to start. Yes.

The base of the tree is

at seven foot.

Gotcha. Okay. Thank you.

So in fact, the berm is higher than the wall?

Yes. Well, the berm is already higher at seven foot. Right. Mhmm.

Any other questions for us, planner? Just a couple other points, Bethany. There there are buffer zones between the the berm and the develop development to the east. Correct?

That's correct. Here along the parking areas for the two story townhomes, there's already a landscape strip there

Mhmm.

Which is the code required. This is adding a set of a wall within it. This is adding the berm and additional landscaping. And then you have an open space area for the Brindley subdivision. So you have this, a berm, open space, and then Brindley, and their required landscape buffer.

Okay. Thank you. Alright. You said the applicant is here? Yes. All right. Welcome back, Mr. Garrett.

Good evening, Chair, Planning and Zoning Board members, Ms. Hogarty. Steve Garrett with Lucidar and Associates representing the applicant, and I have been sworn in. Thank you, Mr. Grubbs, for a great presentation. Just a couple of points and not to duplicate anything that has already been provided. So at this time I'm going to sit down and just say, have any questions now? Just a couple points. Matamy is currently the property owner for both pieces, the Eastern Brindley subdivision, which is a single family residential subdivision that has been platted and is actively under construction currently. No residences no residents actually exist within it at this point in time or adjacent to the berm.

Madamey is also the property owner for the Lotus piece, the Western piece, which this landscape modification is for, And that will be a land sale from them to Lotus. We are the planners for both projects. Matamy has consistently planned their residential communities when they do abut something that is nonresidential. Case in point, the Tallaro neighborhood just south of The Shops at the Heart, we used a similar technique with landscape berm and landscaping adjacent to commercial. The commercial property did not have to put the commercial wall in.

So same concept here. A couple of things to point out, and I think you touched on it relative to the height of the berm. The wall is six foot as required. We're putting in a landscape berm of seven feet minimum height. It ranges in width from 60 to 70 feet across that entire shared boundary. And at the seven foot height, that's where the landscape, which would naturally occur at a zero foot, or the wall starting elevation begins. So we already gained a height plus the landscape along that. We have no objection to the condition as a progress status. The Brimley community and berm is actively under construction now. We anticipate the berm and the landscaping to be in place by July 1.

So well in advance of the multifamily or this project going under construction. And that was deliberate to get the added woe in time of the material and make sure that it's healthy and doing well prior to any construction on this site. Happy to answer any questions.

Any questions from the members of the board? Have a question. Rose?

Who maintains and is going to take care of the landscaping that it stays at that height that you're proposing?

Well, so, as noted, there's kind of two perimeter landscape requirements. On this site, the perimeter landscape of one tree every 30 feet and the hedge on the Lotus site will be maintained by Lotus. That's in that 10 foot landscape strip on this property. And then on the Brindley berm, that will be Matamie Homes in the Brindley subdivision, maintaining that material.

Anything else? Steve,

I think the berm with the landscaping looks a lot nicer than a wall. I'm just curious the wall would potentially cost more if you did that. I mean is this not only nicer, taller, more nature rather than a concrete wall? I'm just curious if it helps to save some dollars too.

Yes. It's not necessarily a cost savings. I mean, there are there's probably a lot of comparables between the two. I don't think it was part of the I think it's on the revised exhibit elevation. Mattamy is also putting in a fence on top of the berm as well, more so from a security property owner benefit. This just makes it's just good planning is how we approach it.

We have

clients that feel the same, right? The berm with landscape does a lot more to insulate the single family neighborhood from adjacent uses. We do it adjacent to the roadways as well on Westcliff and on Tradition Parkway.

Great. Thank you.

You're welcome. Eric,

just some clarity on your last comment. You said there will be a fence on top of the berm as well? Correct. How tall would that fence be?

It's six foot.

Thank you.

Sure, have a question.

Yes, go ahead, Joe.

You had mentioned that there were two different sections of this. One section will be maintained by Lotus, other section by Matamy. When that area, the second area is built out and Mattamy is out of there, will that then fall to the HOA?

Yes, it would. Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

Any other questions from members of the Board? Steve, just a couple of quick points. The code is using the wall is there obviously, I know for a reason, to protect the residents now and in the future. So just to point out, it seems like you're exceeding with the seven foot berm and the landscaping, which I think also in addition to the buffer zones you have, I think kind of complements and makes the area look a little better.

Yes, absolutely. Nothing here, either buffer width or height of the buffer itself is minimum. Walls are a good thing. If space is limited and you hit the minimum 10 foot or 20 foot buffer, you put a wall in, that's perfectly acceptable and meets code. In this case, it was more intent to increase the buffer width, create something a little bit better and stronger to insulate the single family neighborhood.

And those current buffer zones, so to speak, the 70 foot and the 60 foot, you don't intend to put anything on there, correct?

No. The berm occupies the entirety of that width.

Okay. And again, lastly, just to reiterate, you are okay with the condition should we move forward with approval?

Correct. The condition is to have the berm and landscaping in place prior to the phase one project of this, the LOTUS multifamily, and then by phase two. The reality is the entirety of that bermann landscape will be in place by July 1 this year, so in a few months. And so it's easily met. So no issues with it. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Any other questions? Alright, seeing none. This is a public hearing. Any members of the public wish to speak on this item? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. And we will entertain a motion and discussion.

I'll make a motion to approve Lotus of Tradition Landscape Modification project number P25-seventy.

With the staff conditions.

With conditions, correct.

Second.

Motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Good luck with that. Mr. Garrett. Okay. Eight b. Before we move forward, any members of the board have any ex parte communication? Left or right, Pete? No. No. No. No. No. No.

No. No. Okay.

We'll open the public hearing, and we have the planner. Staff presentation.

Good evening, chair, planning, zoning board members. My name is Cody Sisk, and I've been sworn in. The official file has been submitted at least five days before today's hearing. Madam Clerk, please enter that into the record. Today's application is a special exception used for Raw Athletics.

The owner the owner of the site is Peb PSL LLC and Banyan PSL LLC. The applicant is with Hayley Ward. Brad Curry is here for this. The location is at the Northwest Corner Of Northwest Enterprise Drive, and the request is for a special exception used to allow an enclosed assembly area over 3,000 square foot without an alcohol beverage license within the Warehouse Industrial Zoning District. This is an aerial, and it's located within that yellow boundary.

To the North is single family residential. To the South is warehouse. To the East is is vacant, and to the West is vacant. Then after that's I 95. The future land use to the North is open space conservation as well as to the West. The future land use for the South and the East are both light industrial, open space, recreational, and institutional. The zoning district to the North is single family residential. To the South is warehouse industrial. To the East is industrial, and to the West is general use, and then I 95 as well. This is a proposed layout for the uses within the building.

There are no changes to the exterior of the building, no changes to the site, no changes for access. Everything is just completely internal. The building has been existing. It's in pink is the area for the enclosed assembly area or the recreation. These are the areas of evaluation for the criteria of special exception uses. The current proposed use is meeting all of the criteria part of section 158.26 letters a through j. Again, there's no changes to the outside of the site. All the existing landscaping that's on-site will stay. Access will stay. Parking is existing will stay.

This is just an interior change. As a board, you have the following options. You may make a motion to recommend denial. You may make a motion to recommend tabling. You also may make a motion to recommend approval.

And the Planning and Zoning Department is recommending if there is a recommendation for approval to add this condition. And the condition reads, this special exception you shall be granted exclusively to the owners, the current owners of the property, Peb PSL LLC and Banyan PSL LLC collectively and shall be valid solely as it relates to the current tenant of the property, Ross Sports Supplement Company LLC and its subtenant, Ross Athletic Club LLC. The special exception you shall terminate automatically upon cessation of the approved business operation, namely use of the enclosed assembly space without an alcoholic beverage license for Raw Athletic Fitness Club. Any renting or subletting of the property aside from the current tenancy arrangements described above, change in tenant, change in ownership of the property or any of the above business entities or discontinuation of the approved use shall render this special exception null and void. And that concludes my presentation.

I'm here to answer any questions.

Any members of the board have a question for Cody? Have a question.

Cody, so can you explain, so it says request for special exception used to allow and close assembly area over 3,000 square feet without an alcohol beverage license for on premises consumption of alcohol beverages. So can what does that actually mean?

So our code separates the enclosed assembly for with alcohol and without alcohol.

Okay.

So we did it with without alcohol as the use. It used to be all in one enclosed Now assembly it's split up.

Got it. So we had to do

it without the alcohol beverage license.

Got it. Okay. Thank you.

Any other questions? All right. Thanks, Cody. The applicant is here. Yep.

Good evening. For the record, Brad Curry with Hayley Ward. Tonight, I'm representing the tenant of a building located out in St. Lucie West. Staff did an excellent job presenting the project, and I've really enjoyed working with them on this. This is a little bit of a unique facility. I think many of you are familiar with the building. And we knew that when T. C. Palm was moving out of it, I think we were all a little worried about what was going to happen to that significant building along I-ninety 5. And Raw has stepped in and really has a state of the art facility there. Don't know how many of you all have gone into that facility. They have a pretty substantial workout gym, 14,000 square feet. I'm a little bit of a gym buff myself when I go in there. I'm like, man, I should come over here.

They've got everything from gym related. There's the recovery rooms, that sort of thing. And in addition to that, they also store have their supplement part, they have the nutritional supplements, where they have a warehouse for them. So they bring in redistribution. And then they actually have a small little manufacturing space over there where they make T shirts. So it's pretty exciting to have a facility like that here in Port St. Lucie. So the request this before you deny is just for the special exception for the gym portion of this. The condition that Cody read out, and it was pretty specific because this is a pretty interesting use. And I think staff as a whole is wanting to make sure that it stays the way it is.

And if there are some changes, they want to be able to get back in there and make sure that whatever gets in whatever use replaces it is consistent and compatible with what's around there. So members of the representatives from the facility from Rawl are here tonight if you have any questions of them. And I'll be happy to answer any questions as well.

Thank you. Thank you, Brad. Pete's our expert on bodybuilding here. Any questions?

I'm the pickleball guy.

Brad, just one quick question. But any questions from

members

of I just want to ask quickly, just curious, are the supplements manufactured there or just distribute? They're

just they're brought in and then redistributed. There's a storage, a warehouse area. That's the majority of the building is warehouse

It for the is an impressive facility there.

Any other questions, members? Have

a question. I just can't so what's the reason for the special exception used to enclosed assembly? It's already a gym.

It is a proposed gym.

I see. So it's not compliant. We're moving into compliance. Is that correct?

It is a proposed JEM. Yes, sir.

Okay. Very good. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions, members of the Board?

Yeah, I have one.

What's the

hours of operation of this JEM?

I do not know that right off the top of my head. Margaret from the facility is here. I know that I've been there early in the morning, say around seven or eight, and then they go until seven or eight at night. I'm not sure exactly what time they open.

Margaret, you can answer that. Before you answer that, Margaret, have you been sworn in for the record?

Yes, I was.

Thank

you. 5AM to 11PM every day except for holidays. Special hours for that.

All right. And since you're there, Margaret, you can probably answer this. You're okay with the if we move forward with approval, you're okay with the conditions?

Yes.

Okay. Any other members of the Board? Okay. Seeing none, thank you. This is a public hearing. Any members of the public who should speak on this item? Okay. Seeing none, close the public hearing. And I will call for a motion to discussion. And if you do make a motion, please remember with the conditions.

I just wonder how does this maybe this is the real time for the conversation, but how does this come into being where this wasn't this is an assembly. I mean, obviously, people are assembling already, but we're just approving this now.

Jody?

So the the gym is existing today, but it has not been approved. So this is what this is here for for the enclosed assembly special exception use to make a motion to the city council.

To bring it into compliance?

Correct. To make sure that everything's valid. Okay.

To bring

things up.

Yeah. To true up.

They're they're bring it in compliance, candidly. Yeah. So that's that's the issue here. But they're they're not Cody? They're not doing anything that is adversely affecting the area or community, are they?

No. They're simply going in, and everything on-site is meeting the way it is.

K.

So nothing about operations currently are gonna change. This is just a formality, I assume. Correct.

Yep. K. Yep. Any members of the board wish to

I'll make a motion. You make a motion. Approve SLW Industrial Park raw athletic special exception use project p two five dash two zero five with conditions suggested by the planning and zoning department.

I'll second it. Okay. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Good luck. Okay. Moving on to eight c before we move forward. Eight c. Any members of the board have any ex parte communications? None. No. No. None.

I a

concerned citizen reached out to me about this project, and I had a conversation with her. And I'll submit it's via text message. So I'll submit to the planning and zoning department or legal, whoever it is I need to.

It it needs to be part of the record before final action is taken on the item. So it would need to be provided to the clerk as

The the text messages need to be provided?

In accordance in accord oh.

I thought ex parte just had to tell them what the ex parte was.

A verbal communication needs to disclose the identity of the person and the topic of the conversation, the substance of the communication. Written communications need to be provided themselves in accordance with section 32.8 e of Port St. Lucie Code of Ordinances.

Do I need to email screenshots of the text messages? Would that be sufficient?

That would be sufficient.

And who should he send it to? Pardon? Where should they be sent? To the clerk?

Madam clerk, would you be able to tell them where to send them? Because you're controlling directly. You can

give them your email address

And and we can move

before I need to can get this

over to

you in a matter of a couple minutes. And anything we can't take any action until you do that. But we can listen.

Okay.

Good evening. And Bridget Keene with the Planning and Zoning Department.

I'm sorry.

Can we

we have not talked about whether or not we had any discussions. Oh,

I'm sorry.

Yeah. I

have not.

I did not either.

I apologize. Thank you.

Oh, that's okay. And once again

Thank you. Any expertise on the end? Yes. All right. Thank you.

Okay. Once again, Bridget Keene with the Planning and Zoning Department. I have been sworn in. The official file was sent to the city clerk's office within five days of this meeting, and I am requesting that it be entered into the record. This application is Destination at Tradition. It's an MPUD amendment. It's amendment number one. The applicants are the Port St. Lucie Governmental Finance Corporation and Matavy Palm Beach LLC. Brad Curry with the Haley Board is the applicant, and the location is generally located.

It's West Of New Road that's going in in tradition. It's Destination Way. It's South Of Destination. It's East Of Marshall Parkway, and it's on the East Side Of Village Parkway. And it is a request to amend the MPUD. And here is the location. North

Of Marshall.

It's North Of Marshall, South Of Destination. Destination isn't constructed yet. It's the one that's shown in pink here. Okay. Again, this is the property that's an aerial. And then this is the future land use map. It is NCD, and again the zoning is MPUD. And then just give you a little background, this destination at tradition MPUD, it was approved in 2024. It's approximately two seventeen acres in size. It is approved for industrial use, office use, commercial use, as well as hotel and multifamily development.

The MPUD is divided into two development areas with approximately 31 acres designated as a business park, and then 80 acres are designated as mixed commercial. And this application is the first amendment and it will add two new uses to the mixed commercial area. One use is a post acute medical facility and the other is a veterinary hospital or clinic. It also adds the parking requirements for the post acute medical facility and the veterinary hospital. It updates the amount of non residential development in the MPUD by adding 54 hospital beds for the post acute care facility and it adds an additional 30,000 square feet of office use to accommodate the veterinary hospital.

The amendment also revises the minimum lot size and minimum width for parcels within the business park area, and it also updates the legal description as well as some other minor changes. The property was platted after the original MPUD was approved. And the MPUD does identify what a post acute medical facility is. It's identified as a physical hospital or health care center that provides rehabilitative and or specialized healthcare services to patients recovering from a serious illness, injury, surgery, complex medical condition, or acute care hospital say. Now we do have a site plan that's already been submitted for a post acute medical facility, and it's on 7.8 acres of property that is located at the Northwest corner of the intersection of Southwest Village and Destination Way.

And that is the location for the future project that they're calling Catalyst. And the subject property, it is located within the Southern Grove DRI, and is within a designated regional business center subdist district as depicted on map H, master plan for the Southern Grove DRI, and figure one dash four of the future land use element. Policy 1.228 identifies the requirements for a regional business center, and it does list all the uses, and one of those uses is medical uses as well as office uses. The proposed amendment adds additional medical and office facilities to the destination way of tradition MPUD for the post acute care facility and veterinary clinic, and these changes are consistent, as I mentioned, with the Business Regional Business Center subdistrict, and these uses are designed to meet the needs of the larger area. Site Plan Review Committee did recommend approval of the proposed MPUD amendment.

Planning and zoning department staff does find the request to be consistent with the direction, intent of the city's future land use map and policies in the comprehensive plan. We do recommend approval. And as mentioned, I don't have the slide, but you do have the option to recommend approval, recommend approval with conditions, recommend a denial, and then if you need more information, recommend a table. Happy to answer any questions. That completes my presentation. And the applicant is here to answer any questions.

Any members of the board have any questions for staff? See no applicant. Welcome back, Brad.

I haven't seen you guys in a while. It seems like we've got a lot on the agenda tonight. Good evening for the record. Brad Curry with Hayley Ward. Bridget did an excellent job presenting the project. This is a change in a couple of different a couple of new uses added to the MPD overall. We specifically represent the catalyst company that is proposed to do the acute care facility. I wanted to come up with a fancy definition of what that was, but I think Bridget did a pretty good job. Sort of like a hospital, except it's more of a recovery for people that are have had some sort of illness or surgery at the hospital. Something different. There's not any of those types of facilities around here that I'm aware of. And pretty excited about it coming to tradition. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have.

All right. Thank you. Any questions, members of the Board? Okay. Seeing none. Thank you, All right. This is the public hearing. Members of the public wish to speak on this item? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing and ask for a motion and discussion.

That was 8c?

We are an 8C, correct.

I make a motion that we pass P26005 Destination of Traditional Master Plan Unit.

Yeah, I'll second it.

We have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Good luck. We are on to 8D. Before we move on to 8D, we do have several comment cards on this item. If you wish to speak on the item, please fill out a comment card and I will call you to speak on the item as I have received them. You will have three minutes to speak and please remember to state your name and that you've been sworn in for the record. Before we do that, 8D, do we have any ex parte communication?

None. None.

None. None. None. None. None. Okay. We'll open the public hearing and ask for the presentation. Welcome back.

Good evening again. Bridget Keene with the Planning and Zoning Department. I have been sworn in. The official file was sent to the clerk's office within five days, and I am requesting it be entered into the record. This application is an amendment to the MPUD for tradition. Actually, you don't need to know the project number. Already have that. The owner of this property is Winding River Crosstown, LLC. Brad Curry with Haley Ward is the applicant. And the subject property, or the property that's the subject of this application, is approximately 9.48 acres that's located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Crosstown Parkway and Southwest Fair Green Drive.

And this amendment only amends that property. It does not do any other changes to the tradition MPUD. This is a subject property, and as you can see, it's off of West Of Interstate 95 in the tradition DRI right at Crosstown and Fair Green. Land use is NCD, new community development, and the zoning is MPUD, for the tradition MPUD. And to the north of this property is the convenience store, gas station, and self storage.

That's the Circle K that's on the East Side of Fair Green. And then to the South, it's the or kind of Southwest is the Heritage Oaks residential community. To the East is a single family residential community that's in regular Port St. Lucie. It's not in the tradition DRI.

And then to the West, kind of Northwest is the Verano, and it's two open space tracks, and then there's residential development in Verano. Now just for some background, the tradition MPUD, it's approximately 3,038 acres, and as I mentioned, it's located south across Towne Parkway, West Of 95, and then it's north and south of Tradition Parkway. The development plan does divide the project into major sub areas. So there's an area designated for residential, there's an area designated for mixed use, an area designated for village center, and then an area designated for town center. And each of these sub areas are divided into parcels for planning purposes, and each parcel is then designated for a certain use or a combination of uses.

I just want to give some background. The proposed property amendment pertains to 9.4 acres. It's of undeveloped land, and it's located at the Southwest corner, as I mentioned, of Crosstown Parkway and Southwest Fair Green Drive. It is legally described as a portion of Open Space Track 21 tradition plat number 18. Now it's important to just point out that on the plat Open Space Track 21 is the dedication reads that the Open Space Track is reserved for homes by Kennedy to LTD or second LTD that was the original developer of the Heritage Oaks, its successor and assigns and it is dedicated for open space or utility use or pedestrian access purposes and or future land use development.

So while it does say it's an open space tract, the dedication does say that it can be used for future land development.

And before you want, does that mean they're entitled to build homes Yes,

yes, homes or development. Right. And it was, and I'll show you as I go through the, it was previously phase six of the, phase c of the Heritage Oaks At Tradition. A conceptual site plan for phase three was submitted, or for phase c in 2006 for approximately 106 townhome units. That project was never built, and the 9.4 acres, I guess due to nonpayment of taxes, it did a sheet to St. Lucie County, and then it became, it fell under the, or it is now under the ownership of Winding River Crosstown LLC.

And they hold those entitlements?

I don't know what entitlements they hold because that's between them and the master developer.

The applicant here is here.

The applicant can answer that question of the tradition DRI. But this shows you right here. Here it is. This is phase, this was supposed to be phase six, phase C, I keep saying that, phase C of Heritage Oaks. The rest of Heritage Oaks was constructed but not phase c.

So now as I mentioned, each of the parcel each of the areas in the tradition MPUD are designated for a an area is designated for a certain use. This property is located in the area designated for mixed use, and the mixed use designation, it does allow retail, it allows office, residential, restaurants, including a drive through, it allows car wash, service station, self storage, daycare center, medical use, banks, recreation facility, and civic and cultural uses. And each mixed use area has to contain per our comprehensive plan a minimum of three uses, and one of those uses has to be residential. So with this 9.4 acres, it is identified as being a portion of Parcel 10 within the tradition MPUD concept plan, And as I mentioned for planning purposes, they designated all the land in there with certain parcel numbers. And this is what I'm talking about here.

These are all the different areas. This area here is all the residential. And then when you get over here, the mixed use, the hatch is the mixed use area. As you can see, this property is a portion right now of Parcel 10. The town center is located where like the Publix and all that is located over here.

So this application will remove the 9.4 acres from Parcel 10 and reclassify the 9.4 acres as Parcel 11A, and it then will designate Parcel 11A under the broader mixed use designation for retail office use. And to accomplish this change, the application amends Exhibit five of the MPUD document, It amends the MPUD concept plan and the MPUD conceptual land use plan to add the 9.4 acres as parcel 11A and to then designate it as retailoffice use. And this is the concept plan, and this is the updated or proposed concept plan, and in this area right here we now have 11A. Oh sorry, messed up. We now have 11A, and that's this over here, and over in this section, it identifies it for retail office use.

The subject property is located within the tradition DRI and within a designated mixed use subdistrict and that is depicted on map eight which is the tradition master plan and figure one dash three of the future land use element. And as I mentioned per policy one point two point two seven of the comprehensive plan, the mixed use areas can include commercial office uses, hospital and medical uses, restaurants, theaters, hotels, institutional uses, as well as public facilities, light industrial and other uses that to serve the larger, the needs of the larger area. Now one thing about each mixed use area, it does have to contain a minimum of three use three uses, and one of those uses does have to be residential. A minimum 30% of the use, a minimum of 30% of the acreage has to be residential and up to a maximum of 70%. This application, okay, and then as I mentioned, these are staff findings.

The MPUD does provide for a variety of uses under the mixed use sub area, and as I mentioned, that you have to maintain between 3070% residential. Right now with that mixed use area, it's currently 47% residential and this will reduce it to 44.93%. So it's really not going to have an effect on that aspect of the MPUD. And then under our code policy one point point seven three of the comprehensive plan, it does state that the city should encourage commercial and mixed use nodes at or near arterial intersection and utilize urban design standards and techniques to beautify and enhance community appearance along major corridors. Now given the proximity of the subject property, the residential development to the south and east, We are recommending, as the planning and zoning department, that if this change to the MPUD is made, the condition of approval is we would request that they have an installation of an architectural wall and enhanced landscaping along the eastern and southern boundaries of the property, and that is to provide a buffer to the existing residential that's in the Heritage Oaks, and then that is also on the East side.

Site Plan Review Committee did recommend approval of the proposed amendment at the 02/25/2026 Site review committee meeting. The planning and zoning department does find the request to be consistent with the direction and intent of the land development regulations and our comprehensive plan. But we are recommending a condition, and that would be that future development of the property shall include the installation of an architectural wall and enhanced landscaping along the eastern and southern boundaries of the property if there's a proposal for the property to be developed in the future. Again, you do have the ability to recommend approval, approval with comments, to table, or if you need more information, or recommendation for denial. That ends my presentation, and happy to answer any questions.

Members of the Board, Eric?

I just need to disclose the ex parte communication I disclosed on the prior agenda item actually pertain to this agenda item, and I have emailed the screenshots to you. Okay.

Russ, is that adequate?

Yeah. So my ex parte communication was with Julian Armstrong Armstrong, a concerned citizen, who reached out to me in regards to this agenda item. Is that sufficient?

Yep. Thank you, Mr. Roccanis. Yes, sir.

Thank you. Okay. Any other questions for

staff? Mr. Chu, so

with that condition then, we would never see that applicant coming back requesting to not do a wall, right? Like we had earlier tonight.

We should ask the applicant to make sure the applicant is Right,

yeah, right.

But I'm just

That is the intent. The intent is that we recognize that there is residential and that the best thing would be if this is going to change from a residential use to a retail office that we require them to have sufficient buffering between the uses.

And since this is mixed use, this is actually required in order to meet the needs of mixed use, right, or the requirements

of Well, the mixed use allows them a variety of uses. So you can have residential, you can have other uses. It just happens that this particular property is part of a larger residential parcel. They're not connected, but they're identified for planning purposes as residential within a mixed use.

And as part of the comprehensive plan, the city has targets for percentages of non residential use, right? Commercial, industrial, retail, right?

Right, right. Have an understanding of how much commercial is in the city versus how much And

where are we in general with the comprehensive plan with having non residential?

What is it at here?

Like five.

Yeah, I mean primarily a residential city.

Right, just for the public, I want to know what the numbers are so

that we Only can

about 7% commercial right

Yeah, now, we haven't calculated it within the past couple of months. But the last time we looked at it, it was about 5% commercial and about one point something percent industrial. And our recent planning and infrastructure study report that we did, did indicate that to be revenue neutral, it would be ideal if the city was 80% residential versus commercial and industrial. As Ms. Keene states, we're primarily a residential community at this time.

So we're a big difference from 80%, right? So we're at 93% is what you said. Okay. Thank you. Eric?

Just for clarification, this property is privately owned currently.

Yes.

And currently zoned for residential.

Right. It's currently in a mixed use area, but designated to be the residential component of that mixed use area, a portion of the residential component.

And there was something like, was it 300 townhomes that was planned for this?

106 was part of that phase.

Townhomes planned for this particular Yes.

But that Was the interview

I might have missed it. Was there any information on the influence or effect that this type of change will have on the traffic in that area?

Not at this time. We did not include a traffic analysis at this time. We will require the traffic analysis when they come in to develop. Develop the site.

So I guess we wouldn't want to speculate on what changing from a residential to a commercial zoning would do to the traffic in the area. Be more speculative than

Right. Would would wait once we know the exact use.

Sure. Two questions. With that last one, if the process is we approve it and then we do the traffic analysis, what happens if the traffic analysis comes back and it looks horrible? And it's going be way too Ultimately, much

I believe the city council would have discretion on that, correct?

Right. I mean, did not I mean, that's something the board believes we should be doing, I mean, can add that, you could table it, and we could provide you with the traffic analysis. But what we normally do with this change is only for 9.48 acres. We would then look with each improvement that comes in. So I mean we are working now with the tradition DRI.

I want to get ahead of myself, but it does include it's going to council April 13. That's the intent, and it does include requirements for improvements to that Fair Green Crosstown Parkway. So we are addressing that in the tradition DRI, and that would be of the master developer, and how the master developer then handles this entity within that project who wants to develop. That'll be between them who becomes responsible for that improvement. That improvement is identified in our tradition DRI.

Okay, appreciate And then my second question is when you're talking about these buffer walls, is there like a set definition for what that buffer wall is?

Yes. We have an arch we have requirements for architectural walls in our code. They have to be a minimum of six feet. They are they're designed to be an architectural wall and then with the landscape buffering around it.

Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Mr. Rankes?

Can you touch a little bit more on the improvements that you were mentioning around that intersection of the traffic?

What does that look

It's not associated with this project. It's associated with the tradition DRI. If public works wants to speak on it, they're here.

We can talk high level, but they're only proposed. That item is going to be a subject of future consideration by city council. But I think what staff is acknowledging is that we understand that that intersection needs to be improved. And the team has been working with the master developer to get a condition to get that improved into another project, the tradition DRI. That's not part of this This application. This application. So Clyde could talk to at a high level, but it's not conditioned yet. Right.

As part of this application. Right.

Correct.

Clyde?

Clyde Cuffy, Public Works. So yeah, as Mary said, that is on a discussion right now, and it will be presented at the April City Council meeting for the Tradition DRI. And the conditions that we've recommended right now is to increase the length as well as adding

an

additional westbound left turn lane from Crosstown to Fair Green and then adding an additional receiving lane on Fair Green as well. Right now there's only one southbound lane on Fair Green, but two turn lanes will require two receiving lanes.

All good. Thank you. Any other questions from the board members to the staff? Seeing none, applicant is here.

Evening. Good evening. For the record, Lee Dobbins with the Dean Meade Law Firm. And I want to thank staff for their hard work on this. Ms. Keene already covered a lot of what I was going to talk about. I don't have a presentation, but I just do want to cover a few items, answer some of your questions, and give some context. So as you know, this property is part of the tradition DRI and the tradition MPUD, which govern the development of the site and have been in place for a number of years. As Ms. Keane indicated, this at one time was going to be the final phase of Heritage Oaks.

And there was a 2006 application by Kennedy Homes for 106 townhomes on the site. The property has retained those entitlements for all that time. I don't know how familiar you are with the DRI and the matrix, but there's a matrix which lays out the entitlements for all the properties. Madamey is the master developer, kind of controls that and authorizes trading between certain types of uses pursuant to the matrix in the DRI. But this property has sat there with this 106 multifamily dwelling units for all this time.

The landowner currently pays an annual CDD assessment based on that 106 multifamily units. So under the existing entitlements for this property, the landowner could develop 106 multifamily units, so townhomes, apartments. And that would be what's called a buy right approval in the business. So that means they could basically come in, file for a site plan approval, and all they would need to do is make sure that they meet all the requirements for city code with respect to that site plan approval. So drainage, parking, buffering, landscaping, all of those things.

As long as the site plan met all those requirements, they would be entitled to receive their approvals and build 106 apartments, townhomes, whatever type of multifamily. However, the landlord or I'm sorry, the landowner understands that the city is not really looking for more residential at this time. There has been a large influx of residents into the city, and they understand that there's been a lot of pushback on new residential, and there's not a lot of appetite for new communities bringing in more residents and more impacts to the community. So instead of trying to push a rock uphill, they're interested in bringing what the city is looking for, which is more commercial, and converting the property to commercial use. So this property is part of the mixed use area, which allows that menu of uses that Ms.

Keene was showing. Right now, it's designated for residential, so it need to be have the designation in the MPUD changed to a commercial designation. But I want to make clear, they're not looking to do all those uses that are listed there. So like I saw, industrial and hospital, they're converting it to retail office, which is the same as the property next door where the the Circle K is located. So it's those kind of general commercial uses, they would not be looking to do industrial or anything.

So you're not looking to do a car wash or a service station?

Well, those types of things are allowed just as they are next door. They don't have users signed up currently, so we don't know exactly what those users would be, but it would allow those same mix of uses. So it could be service station, restaurants, retail strip center, there's a number of things that fall into that kind of commercial office retail category.

On the west side of those parcels, those are buffered with retention ponds now, right, correct?

I'm sorry, the

So the West Side Bridget, can you pull that? There

is a lake that wraps around the south side to the west side of this property. Right.

So yeah, so that's there's water buffering that those parcels from the residential that's existing, correct?

Correct. Except for a small strip there that was intended to be a road that would connect to this final phase, which was never Got

it. Thank you.

And we have no intention of opening. So you mentioned about Matamy controlling the matrix and uses. The landowner has been in touch with Madamey, and they are consenting to converting the 106 multifamily to a commercial use. But as a part of that, one of the things that Manamey would want would be for the landowner to take responsibility for doing improvements to the intersection, and they are amenable to doing that. They would want to do improvements at the intersection.

In addition, okay, we talked about the uses. So these are just the same office retail uses as Nextdoor. So basically that's it. We have our team here with us, Brad Currie with Haley Ward is also on this project and we have the Kites here who are the owners of the property. So if you have questions of us, we're available to answer those.

Members of the Board?

Mr. Chair. Pete. So if this stayed residential, there would be no proposed improvements to the intersection, correct?

No, this landowner would not be required to do that.

Okay. So if this was changed then the requirement would be that there is there are improvements made to intersection there.

That is a requirement of the master developer Madame and Madame would be putting that requirement

as

a condition to converting to the residential.

I'm sorry. Well converting to commercial.

Correct.

Great. Thank you. And Lee, what are those improvements look like specifically?

As a lawyer, I will not try to talk about traffic and Brad, you want

to talk to that? You want

to come up here and take that?

Evening again. Brad Curry with Hayley Ward. I believe staff answered that question. The exact improvements are not identified. I mean, that'll come before you guys as part of the tradition in PUD. I think additional changes that are DRI changes that are happening. But if you're familiar with the intersection, if you're taking a if you're going westbound on the Crosstown and you get to Fair Green, you take a left, there's actually two lanes there. One of them is striped and one is not. And so I know one of the improvements potentially is going to be to mill and resurface that to where there's dual lefts at that intersection. That will help the stacking on Crosstown.

In addition to that, as you make those dual lefts going south onto Fair Green, that will also have to be widened to accept the dual lefts as well. So I know there's probably more, but I know that was something that was discussed for sure. But that's going to be part of the tradition DRI that will come before the support.

I appreciate that. Thank you.

Pete? So Brad, I mean, think that's important for the public to understand is that those improvements are going to be required by MATAMI if this is I mean

By city and by Matamey, Right, yes

so Matamey is going to require that of the property owner, the developer

Yes, as part of negotiation, yes sir.

Right, okay.

So I just want to make sure that because I'm sure we're going get lots of questions about that. So the difference is if this becomes commercial, there's lots of improvements potentially required for the intersection. If it stays residential, there's really no

That's my understanding. Yes, sir.

Great, thank you.

I have a question. You're going, you said tradition DRI, some of those are negotiations that you're doing through the Community Development District, I assume?

With the master developer.

Master developer, And

the master developer is

Matamey. Matamey.

Okay.

I believe Seth has something to correct me on. Hear him whispering.

So if I could just clarify, and I don't want to get too far off scope so the attorney can reel me in. There's a separate application that the City Council will consider April 13. That's for the tradition DRI. And that's for the entire DRI. It's not just this area.

Within or as part of that consideration, the City Council is going to be revising some of the conditions and adding new conditions onto the master developer. One of those requirements the city council is going to consider asking the master developer to commit to making additional infrastructure improvements. One of those improvements that's being, will be discussed is going to be this intersection. Right. So the council will be negotiating with MADME as far as what's needed.

What the applicant is saying is that they're working with Matamy and Matamy is passing the requirement for this intersection through to them if it is a commercial parcel.

Got it.

If it's not a commercial parcel and this application dies, the requirement will still be on Matamy, less certain of a timeline.

Okay, thank

you. The, Joe, you had a question? So to clarify, that traffic improvement is going to happen either way, is that correct?

The Public Works Department is here. They have studied that intersection and identified improvements that are needed. Currently nobody is mandated to make those improvements. So that's what the team is working on actively at the direction of our leadership.

So city council is going to discuss that at the April meeting?

April 13, the tradition DRI will be before them for discussion.

Okay, great. Any other members have a question for the applicant? Just one question for staff. Bridget, the applicant did testify that it's a city preference to have commercial versus residential. Is that the case?

Well, I mean, the city has recognized a need for commercial property. I can't specify that this would be the city council's preference for this location. This application, after your recommendation, will go before them, and then they will have the opportunity to vote on that. So I can't speak as to whether there is a preference at this location. There is a recognition that more commercial is needed in the city.

In the city. Is less of a desire for residential, correct? Again,

I can't speak to that. I mean, there are residential projects that are going forward. It's just

That are

already entitled.

Right, right, correct. Correct.

But I think it's important what we talked about earlier is that the comprehensive plan really would like to have more

We have less commercial than what is really needed to serve our public, our residents. That's correct.

Great, thank you.

And to ease the burden on the public's tax.

I can't speak to that. Don't know, but okay.

I got

you. One last point. Bridget, this is not, this current piece of property is not open space, green space, parkland.

For some reason, when they did this back in whenever they planted it in 2006 or before then, they listed it as open space.

They called it.

And then they said you could have utilities, you could have pedestrian, and you could have future development. So probably if somebody tried to do that now, we'd kind of say, no, you have to identify what parcel is going to be. I think they were just trying to come up with what this could be in the future. But it's kind of odd to say open space and utility, and future development. It's an odd dedication of that many uses. They kind of don't go together. But yes, it was intended for future development. It was phase C of the heritage oaks.

Okay. Thank you.

Any other questions from members of the board? Okay, this is a public hearing. I do have cards in front of me. If you wish to speak, I'll call your name. I'm going to call two names at a time, so the second person would just come up behind the first. You do have three minutes to speak. Please do speak on the item. And the first name I have here, and please excuse me if I pronounce it incorrectly, but Bridget

and LeBronchik? She she left. Okay.

Robert Geddesen?

Yes. And

after Robert is Lisa Corrado? Corrado. Corrado.

So Mr. Chair, can I just make a comment? So I've been charged with timekeeping. So I get extra pay for tonight.

We're doubling his salary.

So just be mindful of the clock up We want to give everyone a full three minutes, but just be mindful.

Absolutely. Thank you very much. My name is Robert M. Gattison. I am a retired federal law enforcement officer with the Department of Treasury as well as Department of Homeland Security. I have been sworn. Of course, you understand that one of my major concerns is security for the residents. I live I don't know if the map has disappeared,

but over your backup.

Okay. My home is directly on the end facing the Heritage Section of that proposed land. I have a picture. I don't know if you all can see this, but this is directly behind my home. This is what I bought. Okay? I've been here for going on three years. I moved here three years. And I moved in this community because it is, in fact, a gated community. So security is very important to me.

So the proposed wall is a good idea for the property, for heritage hoax. Also, I heard earlier that a traffic survey has not even been done.

Is that correct? We're not going have a discussion.

Just

listen Okay. Well, I think before you could plan anything, you'd have to do a traffic survey. Okay. Furthermore, I don't know if you would consider the impact on the value of our property. See that little shiny house right there? That's my house. Okay? So I don't know what kind of impact this commercial property is going to have impact on our property in Heritage Oaks. And I mean, is it going to affect our property taxes? I don't know.

But I would just want the board to consider those things. The security, the traffic survey, the impact it's going to have on our property. And also, is it going to reduce our property values? I think it's very important to everybody that lives in Heritage Oaks. I'm good. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you. You. Ms. Corvado?

Yes. And

then after Ms. Corvado, Raymond McGinnis is it? Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Board, Ms. Fogarty. I appreciate the opportunity here. I have been sworn in. My name is Lisa Corvado, and I am a resident of the Heritage Oaks community. I too am, right at the end there, the only red home four, four homes in from that water buffer there. So this significantly impacts, my home and my quiet enjoyment. I wanna thank the two gentlemen for bringing up traffic studies and overall impact to the community here. I would ask the board to consider tabling this so that a traffic study could be done.

I don't know if that's an opportunity to have that done. I commute every morning to the East Side of Port St. Lucie Boulevard by way of Crosstown Parkway to take my son to Morningside Academy. The traffic that I incur just to get out of my development to turn on to Crosstown Parkway, I have to leave twenty minutes earlier just to make sure I can get my son to school on time. The lights are not timed correctly.

The density of the traffic already going and flowing through Village Parkway onto Crosstown, I'm very concerned that this commercial mixed use parcel is going to severely impact the quiet enjoyment and the overall feel of our master plan tradition community. I know that the city is saying that they'd love more commercial instead of residential. We're a portion of the city in tradition. We have a density situation there and a traffic situation there. So bringing a commercial development much like potentially some of the other neighboring commercial developments immediately surrounding that is a big concern.

Also, with a five year old son, I have a big security concern. So thank you for bringing up and acknowledging that there is a minimum six foot wall that buffer that must be going around with, landscape. I respectfully ask that potentially we can raise that six feet buffer to something a little bit larger than that. Also, if this actually becomes a commercial parcel, there's got to be lighting. I'd like the board to take into consideration the actual lighting that we would be looking at as a residential community.

I'm not looking forward to seeing my end of my roadway lit up like a Christmas tree. I understand that there are certain lighting requirements that commercial environments need to have. I'm a residential environment. Thank you.

Can please

wrap it up? Sorry.

Can please wrap You threw me three minutes. That's all

I have

to say.

Thank

you. Thank you.

Mr. McGinnis, you're up. Janet Edwards, you'd be next. Janet Edwards, Ms. Edwards, you'd be next.

I'm Ray McGinnis. Excuse me. Mr.

McGinnis, have you been sworn in? I

am sworn in.

Thank you.

My wife and I are have purchased our home about five years ago, which is across the lake and would be looking at the proposed development, we would prefer not to have the residential nature of the parcels changed. Presently, the single lane avail I'm going read this letter.

Think Go right ahead.

Better. Presently, the single lane available for traffic exiting Crosstown Parkway onto Southwest Fairgreen Drive is already inadequate due to vehicles backing up onto Crosstown Parkway's westbound lanes and blocking them while waiting to enter the turning lane. Another lane is needed now due to the danger that stopped traffic poses. Additionally, the two lanes comprising Southwest Fairgreen Drive will be inadequate to accommodate additional traffic safely. Additional lanes and paved berm space, bike lanes may be needed.

As Tradition Oaks as Tradition Heritage Oaks is a gated community, the proposed change will result in security concerns for us and the other community residents. Commercial retail use of these parcels will change the residential nature of our community adversely and likely negatively impact the value of our properties and for the above reasons we object to the proposed changes. Additionally, we request that any development of this land include a provision or condition that a raised bank or berm with adequate shrubbery such as along Crosstown Parkway and an architectural wall, which has been addressed, and I'm pleased to hear that's a requirement, to be built along the property line adjoining heritage oaks to mitigate security aesthetics and financial concerns. I've been as a resident here for the last five or six years, I've been really pleased with the community and the work that you folks are doing. And it's a beautiful community.