Minutes from the January 8, 2024 meeting

Conditional Use - Mixed-Use Family Indoor Entertainment Center - 111 Orange Avenue

Mr. Freeman provided an overview of the application and answered questions from the Board on parking and preventing an arcade from coming in. He stated the staff initiated application is for a property located within the C-4 Zoning district which does not permit Arcade Amusement Centers and Amusement Arcades by right.  Mr. Freeman noted the City Commission did not want downtown proliferated with arcades, which are essentially gambling locations.  Mr. Freeman said staff recognized the differentiation between amusement arcades, which give prizes and cash, and family-based entertainment, which is aimed at younger children and families, which includes video games, skeeball, bowling games, simulated sports and ancillary eating facilities. Mr. Freeman explained the Florida State Statute supports ‘Family Amusement Centers’ and restricts the types of games and machines therein.  Mr. Freeman stated the City Commission directed staff to move forward with the Conditional Use to allow family amusement centers in order to increase foot traffic downtown.  Mr. Freeman said the Future Land Use is Central Business District (CBD), which supports a mix of uses and is typical in a downtown area, and the C-4 Zoning permits mixed use and indoor entertainment.  Mr. Freeman also noted that Family Entertainment Centers restricts gambling machines.

Mr. Kreisl asked how the Conditional Use is being defined.  Mr. Freeman explained a code change would be introduced that allows the use without a Conditional Use. He said this was spoken about at state level along with a lot of other changes.  Because the use is not listed in the code, the Conditional Use is needed specifically for this one location. Both the Planning Board and City Commission will need to narrow down the locations for Family Amusement Centers in the future.  Mr. Freeman stated the Conditional Use is tied to the property and the city will keep an eye out to make sure it does not turn into an arcade.  Mr. Freeman explained the Conditional Use will be mute once the existing definition in the code is amended, and a new definition is created and added to the use table. 

Steve Tarr, property owner, stated the City Commission discussed this at the February 5, 2024, meeting, and it is basically a housekeeping issue to allow Family Entertainment Centers in the city.  Mr. Tarr answered questions from the Board on parking.  He stated there is ample parking downtown and some parking spots in the lot next to his building will be set aside for the amusement center.  He recommends using the parking garage when spending at least three (3) hours at the entertainment center. 

Mr. Heaning asked about security in the building.  Mr. Tarr stated there is video surveillance around the building and having security in the building has not been discussed.  Mr. Tarr noted the Stuart Family Amusement Center location, owned by the prospective tenant, has never had to call the police.  

Carlos Soto, a member of the public, asked for the occupancy of the building.  Mr. Freeman stated the occupancy is set by the fire department and an inspection is needed for the building license.

Dave Strothmann, a member of the public, stated there was a Family Funplex where he lived in Colorado that was a great establishment with a bowling alley and laser tag.  He highlighted there was never any trouble and it was well lit. Mr. Strothmann said he would like to see something like this in Fort Pierce.

Site Plan (Development and Design Review) - Viva East - 5315 Edwards Road and 5496 Altman Road

This item was moved to 6c.

Mr. Altizer gave an overview of the application. The application is for a 206 unit rental community consisting of one, two, and three-bedroom duplexes. Viva West is the sister project to Viva East. Both communities will share access to amenities. The site plan leaves the 8.20-acre wetlands preserved, providing an additional 2.5 acres of upland ecosystems adjacent to the wetlands as a buffer, which will be preserved through a conservation easement.  The proposed development is located on a parcel with a Future Land Use of Medium Density Residential (RM) and a Zoning of Medium Density Residential(R-4). The proposed 206 units is far below the allotted 10 units per acre (397 units) allowed in the zoning district. The site area is approximately 39.70 acres.  Mr. Altizer answered questions from the Board on bus routes, conservation easements, and a school bus turn around.  

Charman Creyaufmiller stated he was concerned about the traffic flow at the round about.  He said the walk from Viva West to use the amenities at Viva East is an unimproved area and the developer should provide a path for pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Chairman Creyaufmiller was also concerned with the number of parking spaces needed for the amenity area, since most residents from Viva West will be driving to use the amenities.  He noted there is no connection to the property.  Chairman Creyaufmiller suggested making the architectural elements look better instead of being bland and plain.

Mr. Altizer explained that sidewalks will be put in on Jenkins Road and Edwards Road and there will be an additional 20 parking spaces in front of the community center.

Francarlos Rivera from TEG Developers, stated at the last Planning Board meeting that the Planning Board imposed a sidewalk at both Viva West and Viva East for cross connection.  He said the sidewalk is becoming complicated because of the infrastructure.required and substantial stormwater improvements. He noted the sidewalk will be ripped up by St. Lucie County, and they do not have the entire right-of-way for Jenkins Road.  Mr. Rivera said it will have to be a meandering path that will ultimately be changed.  He is looking for something that is not cost prohibitive as the cost of the sidewalks are substantial. Mr. Rivera explained that after the city approval process a separate review application with St. Lucie County is required to look into the Jenkins Road improvements.

Mr. Kreisl said the developer should not waste money building sidewalks that are going to impede the larger needs of the county and ultimately be ripped out. Mr. Kreisl said the crossing intersection is unsafe because there is no stop sign going north to south and there is no crosswalk.  At a minimum, there should be a 3-way stop with a crosswalk.  Mr. Kreisl said paying for an amenity that is a quarter mile away is an inherent problem due to the layout.  He stated, even with the road improvements, it is too far for residents to walk from Viva West to Viva East.  He said it is crucial to have ample parking spaces in the immediate plan because half the residents will drive to the amenities.

Mr. Rivera said he is open to adding parking, but it is substantial at Viva East. He highlighted 409 spaces are required, and they have 459 spaces and there are additional parking spaces near the amenities.  Mr. Rivera answered questions from the Board on the construction timeline between the two sites, charging stations, dumpster location, number of units in Viva West, maximum occupancy of amenity center, and other communities that share amenities.

Mr. Freeman stated that Viva West was approved by the City Commission, and they were given the option of a payment in lieu of adding another sidewalk after the right-of-way is established.

Board discussion ensued on installing sidewalks, payment in lieu of building sidewalks, adding sidewalks to property the developer does not own, and how to connect the two communities safely.




 

Site Plan (Development Review and Design Review) - Regatta Luxury Apartments - SE Corner of Graham Road and S. Jenkins Road and approximately 669 feet south of Graham Road
(2418-333-0004-000-0, 2418-333-0003-000-3, 2418-333-0002-000-6, 2418-333-0001-000-9)

This item was moved to 6d.

Mr. Gilmore gave an overview of the application and answered questions from the Board. The application is to construct a 312 unit multifamily luxury apartment development with a clubhouse, indoor gym, tot lot, barbeque and pool area, and associated site improvements. Mr. Gilmore explained the applicant is requesting approval for approximately 18 acres for a density of 17.33 dwelling units per acre. He said the developer is proposing to construct a sidewalk on their site, connecting to Samuel S. Gaines school to the south, then complete the off-site sidewalk connection gaps on the east side of Jenkins Road between the subject site and Okeechobee Road in exchange for an additional 2.33 units of density. Mr. Gilmore noted the proposed development qualifies for an Innovative Residential Development, which would provide for up to an additional 3 units of density.

Leslie Olson, Applicant Representative from District Planning Group, stated that the Comprehensive Plan Policy 1.19 allows the developer to request density for building infrastructure that is not required.  Ms. Olson said sidewalks will be added and are an investment for the community. The sidewalks will provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to retail hubs and jobs at Okeechobee and Jenkins Road. She noted the sidewalk connectivity will go all the way to Walgreens and Starbucks on Okeechobee Road. Ms. Olson answered questions from the Board on elevators, EV charging stations, townhouse type construction, and dedicated parking spaces.

Blaine Bergstresser of KMA Engineering, stated the code requires 1.9 dedicated parking spaces per unit, and they have 22 ADA parking spaces and parking on the west side of the clubhouse.  Mr. Bergstresser answered questions from the Board about whether the property would have a HOA community or rentals, dumpster location, bus stop location, and valet trash service.  Mr. Bergstresser noted the bus stop would be near the entrance and there would be a round about for the bus to turn around before the gates and there would be a dedicated right turn lane.  

Major Site Plan Amendment - Ocean Village Pickleball Amenity - 2400 S. Ocean Drive

This item was moved up to 6b.

A pickleball sound analysis final report for Ocean Village was handed out to each Planning Board member, as well as an ordinance from the city of Centennial, Colorado concerning pickleball and pickleball courts.

Ms. Carter recused herself from voting.

Mr. Gilmore gave an overview of the application and answered questions from the Board. The application is to construct a 9,900 square foot 5-court pickleball amenity for the Ocean Village residential development and associated site improvements. The courts will consist of asphalt surfacing with 12-foot-tall fencing, and surrounding buffer landscaping. The applicant submits that the courts are to be utilized by residents only, and additional paring is not required. If the courts are to be utilized by non-residents, then the consideration of an appropriate parking ratio should be applied.  Mr. Gilmore provided background on the site plan approval on September 7, 2021, for the clubhouse and racquet courts. Following sound studies by the Property Owner’s Association (POA), the decision was made to design five (5) pickleball courts in a different area in order to make every effort to minimize potential noise impacts on the closest residents. Mr. Gilmore stated that staff received several objections from residents which express concern over the type of noise and disturbance generated by activities generated by pickleball, along with obstruction of ocean views, flooding and location of courts. The City has initiated a comprehensive review of the existing noise ordinance through a consultant, who has been advised of the complaints and issues raised.

Chairman Creyaufmiller noted at the July 14, 2021, Planning Board meeting, there was considerable discussion regarding the parking for the clubhouse reconstruction and the possibility of pickleball courts. He stated the Planning Director at that time said the city did not have any authority on parking in a private community. Chairman Creyaufmiller asked staff if there are parking regulations that have to be complied with.  He also asked if the clubhouse was for the use of the residents only.  He stated parking is an issue with the restaurant being open to the public. Chairman Creyaufmiller asked if the community could support the financial burden.

Mr. Freeman stated that since pickleball courts are not a building but an activity, no parking ratio is allocated.  He said there is a condition of approval regarding the need for parking if the pickleball courts are extended to non-residents. Mr. Freeman said the argument is for internal users only.  The events encourage external users to use the location.  The internal users cannot regulate the external users. He said more information is needed from the applicant for a viable study.

Ms. Carter stated she lives in Ocean Village and parking for the community is not an issue because residents walk to places within the community.  Ms. Carter wanted to know how staff will maintain noise reduction and if the pickleball courts are the right amount of space from the current resident buildings. Ms. Carter stated the pickleball courts were approved by the homeowners' association.

Mr. Kreisl stated the Sound Analysis report is good on paper but is virtually unenforceable.  He said if you want to guarantee what is in the report, a study has to be done in a real world analysis. If the courts are not built the way they are supposed to operate, the courts will need to be shut down until the problems are fixed.

Ms. Clemons said she is concerned about putting the city in a bad place because there are no teeth in the sound study.  If the courts are built and the sound decibel is not met, the residents need to decide how to handle it, not the city.

Mr. Edwards asked how the sound magnifies with 10 games of pickleball on five (5) courts.

Leslei Olson, applicant representative from District Planning Group, stated the homeowners' association (HOA) approved the pickleball courts.

Steve DeBack, President, Ocean Village Property Owners Association, gave an overview of the Ocean Village community.  He said the gated community has 1,228 units with various amenities, including a golf course, swimming pools, bocce ball, shuffleboard courts, basketball, clubhouse, tiki bar, restaurant, beach bar, 3,500 feet of beachfront and six (6) pickleball courts.  Mr. DeBack said the site plan adds five (5) pickleball courts in two (2) separate locations.  He said a homeowner complained the noise from the pickleball courts would likely violate the City of Fort Pierce noise ordinance.  Mr. DeBack stated there have been three (3) studies with acoustical firms to ensure pickleball courts will be as quiet as possible and meet the City of Fort Pierce sound code.  He said there will be sound mitigation panels around the courts to bring the sound down to 50 decibels.  He noted the pickleball courts do not flood, and they are currently working with South Florida Water Management District to improve the outflow and reduce storm water flooding. He also mentioned the site plan includes an additional retention pond. Mr. DeBack highlighted that restoring the facility, fitness, and social opportunity are criteria for real estate buyers and competitive with other lifestyle communities. Mr. DeBack said parking is not a problem with the extra pickleball courts, and they currently have 24 bicycle racks and will add more if need be.  He stated public use is not allowed for any of the amenities except the restaurant or a private party that is initiated by an owner.

Dave Strothmann, member of the Board of Directors and on the pickleball committee, stated he had done extensive research on sound mitigation and sound studies for the pickleball construction committee by speaking to Bob Unitech, an engineer who specializes in sound mitigation for pickleball courts. He noted the city had approved eight (8) pickleball courts that were 26 feet from residential units and there was never a sound complaint. Mr. Strothmann passed around samples of the sound mitigation panels to the Board members.  Mr. Strothmann said a 2nd sound study was done while pickleball was being played.  He said they will be putting up a 12-foot fence with sound mitigation panels that directs sound to the ocean and not to the condos to the north.

Ms. Olson asked the people in the audience who were not in opposition to the pickleball courts to stand.  She said the majority of residents support the pickleball courts and that is why the HOA voted to approve the courts.  Ms. Olson noted eight (8) pickleball courts were approved, and they are down to five (5).  

Ms. Clemons asked if the minority of residents against the pickleball courts are located closer to the courts.  

Steve DeBack said he understands the sound concerns, and they are doing everything they can to make it work by using mitigation and landscaping.  Mr. DeBack said the old pickleball courts will go back to being tennis courts. 

Ms. Carter asked the minimum distance the pickleball courts can be built to the residences.  Ms. Olson stated there is no code requirement for the distance.

Dave Strothmann explained the history of the Ocean Village tennis courts. The alterations to the tennis courts and clubhouse were not popular, and the residences did not want to spend the money, and now they are the most popular.  He said the pickleball courts would do the same thing.

Steve DeBack said it is the fiduciary responsibility of the Board members not to waste the owners' money.  He highlighted the pickleball courts will increase the value of the units in the community and the pickleball courts are in demand.

Carlos Soto, Ocean Village resident, encouraged the Planning Board to approve the plan because, since the pickleball courts were taken away, the residences have to go to other cities to play.

Arlene Bauer, Ocean Village resident, stated she lived right next to the pickleball courts and the players were respectful and did not start playing before 8 AM, and they did not play at night.  She said she enjoyed watching the game and it is a great social activity.  She noted the building that is complaining is far away from the courts and parking is not needed.  She said the lawn blowers are much louder than the pickleball courts.

Kim Kitchen, Ocean Village resident, stated she made an investment in Ocean Village and she expects the Ocean Village Board members to keep the same quality of living and keep the values as strong as they can be.

Lara Carrie, Ocean Village resident, stated it is detrimental to the community not to have pickleball. She said she lives closest to the pickleball courts, and she cannot hear the pickleball sounds from inside her unit.  

Marshall Aykroyd, Ocean Village resident, stated he plays pickleball once a week.  He said it brings people from different spectrums together to socialize.

Susan Thew, Ocean Village resident, said a survey was sent to the residents of Ocean Village. The residents have been assessed and eight (8) courts were approved.  She said a lot of residences want it and have been informed.

Ken Scarola, Ocean Village resident, stated he loves pickleball, and he wants the project to move forward, but he does not want to waste the investment because of litigation.  He said he has been a professional engineer for 49 years, and he has concerns with the ordinance, concerning the height of the fences, sound study, and noise level with repetitive sounds. He said the issue is not about how many people want it or whether they don't want the pickleball courts.  The problem is the half million dollar investment in pickleball courts that don't meet the ordinance, and he does not want Ocean Village to be put in legal jeopardy.

Dick Pals, Ocean Village resident, stated people play pickleball every day at JC Park where there are public restrooms and parking, and he feels it is ridiculous to approve it in a contentious area that may not meet the city ordinance.  He highlighted that there is no guarantee of what will happen with the simulations compared to hearing the playing and cheering.

Steve Kitchen, an Ocean Village resident, stated the amenities at Ocean Village make it unique to other places. He said the amenities make the property more valuable and the residents have to invest and take chances to improve and grow the community.

Steve DeBack noted the pickleball sound is not louder whether there are 20 balls or one ball being played on five courts.  He said it was an impulse noise with a slightly elevated sound.  He said the values of the sound study is not the average but the expected loudest hits on the courts. He noted the sounds were measured on the property lines and most hits were at ambient level or below.

Mr. Kreisl said compliance testing is not a real world guarantee.  He said it only takes one person to measure 70 decibels at a certain time of day.  There still may be issues where the Fort Pierce Police and Code Enforcement  have to be called out.

Chairman Creyaufmiller asked if the funds were already assessed and why they are building a 12-foot fence instead of the sound study recommended 14-foot fence.  Mr. DeBack said they did not want to build a 14-foot fence with the wind coming off the ocean and the 12-foot fence would withstand the wind and sound mitigation.

Ms. Carter asked if the paddles and balls meet the sound ordinance.

Dave Strothmann said they could in the future mitigate the sound with certain paddles and balls.  He said they have already cut down to five (5) courts from eight (8) courts to have sound mitigated.

Ms. Clemons ended with saying the residences and the Ocean Village Board are putting the responsibility on the city and Ocean Village needs to maintain the pickleball courts based on the sound ordinance.