Planning Board Minutes
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FORT PIERCE CITY PLANNING BOARD HELD ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2025, IN FORT PIERCE CITY HALL, COMMISSION CHAMBERS, 100 NORTH US HIGHWAY 1, FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA.
1.
CALL TO ORDER
2.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3.
ROLL CALL
Mr. Edwards entered the meeting at 2:02 PM.
Mr. Edwards entered the meeting at 2:02 PM.
- Present:
- Clayton Johnson; Nichelle Clemons; Christopher Widing; Justine Carter; Alexander Edwards; Ryan Collins; Anton Kreisl, Chair
- Staff Present:
-
- Chris Suneson, Assistant Planning Director
- Vennis Gilmore, Senior Planner/Historic Preservation Planner
- Kerry Driver, Senior Planner
- Alicia Rosenthal, Planning and Development Organizer
- Attendees:
-
- Nicole Fogarty, St. Lucie County School Board Ex Officio Member
- Stephanie Heidt, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
4.
CONSIDERATION OF ABSENCES
All Planning Board members were in attendance.
All Planning Board members were in attendance.
5.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a.
Minutes from the September 8, 2025 meeting.
Motion was made by Nichelle Clemons, and seconded by Justine Carter to approve the minutes from the September 8, 2025 meeting.
- AYE:
- Christopher Widing, Justine Carter, Ryan Collins, Clayton Johnson, Nichelle Clemons, Chair Anton Kreisl
- Other:
- Alexander Edwards (ABSENT)
Passed
6.
NEW BUSINESS
a.
Comprehensive Plan EAR Outreach Presentation
Stephanie Heidt, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
Ms. Heidt, Deputy Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, presented an update on the Evaluation and Appraisal Review of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. She explained a comprehensive plan is a blueprint for guiding future development and growth while considering the community's needs and the environment. Ms. Heidt said the reason for a comprehensive plan is that hope is not a plan, and it is important for people to maintain a quality of life. She gave an overview of the elements included in the comprehensive plan and noted that all the elements work together. Ms. Heidt outlined the review process and highlighted that evaluating the plan is important because conditions do change and the plan is required to be updated every seven years. She stated local issues that need to be addressed, including highlighting a rational boundary, proper development of proper uses in the proper places, ensuring zoning and land use are consistent and right, cleaning up the city, and supporting small businesses. Ms. Heidt provided the public outreach schedule, which will conclude with a meeting with the youth council. She said a separate survey will be conducted with different questions to get the young people's input. She spoke about the importance of legislative consistency and noted the 2025 legislative change to Senate Bill 180, which prohibits the city from enacting more “restrictive or burdensome” comprehensive plan amendments, land development regulations or procedures related to development approvals from August 1, 2024, through October 1, 2027. Ms. Heidt said the senate bills are forever changing and evolving. She said the next step is updating the data and analysis, and the map series. She concluded that the transmittal hearing to the City Commission will be on January 29, 2026.
Stephanie Heidt, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
Ms. Heidt, Deputy Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, presented an update on the Evaluation and Appraisal Review of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. She explained a comprehensive plan is a blueprint for guiding future development and growth while considering the community's needs and the environment. Ms. Heidt said the reason for a comprehensive plan is that hope is not a plan, and it is important for people to maintain a quality of life. She gave an overview of the elements included in the comprehensive plan and noted that all the elements work together. Ms. Heidt outlined the review process and highlighted that evaluating the plan is important because conditions do change and the plan is required to be updated every seven years. She stated local issues that need to be addressed, including highlighting a rational boundary, proper development of proper uses in the proper places, ensuring zoning and land use are consistent and right, cleaning up the city, and supporting small businesses. Ms. Heidt provided the public outreach schedule, which will conclude with a meeting with the youth council. She said a separate survey will be conducted with different questions to get the young people's input. She spoke about the importance of legislative consistency and noted the 2025 legislative change to Senate Bill 180, which prohibits the city from enacting more “restrictive or burdensome” comprehensive plan amendments, land development regulations or procedures related to development approvals from August 1, 2024, through October 1, 2027. Ms. Heidt said the senate bills are forever changing and evolving. She said the next step is updating the data and analysis, and the map series. She concluded that the transmittal hearing to the City Commission will be on January 29, 2026.
b.
Housing Needs Assessment Presentation
Stephanie Heidt, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
Stephanie Heidt, Deputy Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, presented the Housing Needs Assessment and Implementation Plan for St. Lucie County from 2023-2024. She stated the survey noted a difficulty in affording housing costs in St. Lucie County due to mortgage interest rates, insurance, property taxes, development cost and supply and demand. Ms. Heidt noted that 42% of households in St. Lucie County have more than 30% of their income going to housing costs. She showed the increase in the median sale price and the increase in monthly rental costs for St. Lucie County from 2012 to 2022. Ms. Heidt noted the wages are not increasing at the same rate as housing costs are rising. She highlighted that in St. Lucie County 58% of the workforce are in industries with an average wage of less than $24 an hour. Ms. Heidt said that almost all essential workers, except registered nurses, are spending over 30% of their income on housing costs. Ms. Heidt explained how expensive housing impacts the community, and the community's health, due to not eating healthy foods. She showed different types of affordable housing, and she said it is a myth that affordable housing decreases property values. Ms Heidt said the aesthetics required actually increase property values and higher density can provide cost savings. She said there is improved educational advancement for children because they are not displaced, and vibrant communities and neighborhoods provide cohesion. Ms. Heidt also stated that another myth is that affordable housing increases crime. She said homeownership adds stability in the neighborhood, and it is easier to retain workers in jobs. Ms. Heidt reviewed the state and county housing programs and services, and she explained what the local government can and can't do. She said the city could advocate at higher levels to get more programs, continue investments in housing solutions and partner with private investors to invest in more mixed-income housing. Ms. Heidt concluded with the 2024 housing plan and the proposed housing plan strategies for Fort Pierce.
Ms. Heidt answered questions from the Board about additional dwelling units (ADU) being implemented into the comprehensive plan, and the deficit in lower-income housing units. Chair Kreisl asked Ms. Heidt to come back to the Planning Board with very specific recommendations regarding the city's zoning code. He said the city is lacking incentive programs, a streamlined process and a definition for ADUs.
Stephanie Heidt, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
Stephanie Heidt, Deputy Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, presented the Housing Needs Assessment and Implementation Plan for St. Lucie County from 2023-2024. She stated the survey noted a difficulty in affording housing costs in St. Lucie County due to mortgage interest rates, insurance, property taxes, development cost and supply and demand. Ms. Heidt noted that 42% of households in St. Lucie County have more than 30% of their income going to housing costs. She showed the increase in the median sale price and the increase in monthly rental costs for St. Lucie County from 2012 to 2022. Ms. Heidt noted the wages are not increasing at the same rate as housing costs are rising. She highlighted that in St. Lucie County 58% of the workforce are in industries with an average wage of less than $24 an hour. Ms. Heidt said that almost all essential workers, except registered nurses, are spending over 30% of their income on housing costs. Ms. Heidt explained how expensive housing impacts the community, and the community's health, due to not eating healthy foods. She showed different types of affordable housing, and she said it is a myth that affordable housing decreases property values. Ms Heidt said the aesthetics required actually increase property values and higher density can provide cost savings. She said there is improved educational advancement for children because they are not displaced, and vibrant communities and neighborhoods provide cohesion. Ms. Heidt also stated that another myth is that affordable housing increases crime. She said homeownership adds stability in the neighborhood, and it is easier to retain workers in jobs. Ms. Heidt reviewed the state and county housing programs and services, and she explained what the local government can and can't do. She said the city could advocate at higher levels to get more programs, continue investments in housing solutions and partner with private investors to invest in more mixed-income housing. Ms. Heidt concluded with the 2024 housing plan and the proposed housing plan strategies for Fort Pierce.
Ms. Heidt answered questions from the Board about additional dwelling units (ADU) being implemented into the comprehensive plan, and the deficit in lower-income housing units. Chair Kreisl asked Ms. Heidt to come back to the Planning Board with very specific recommendations regarding the city's zoning code. He said the city is lacking incentive programs, a streamlined process and a definition for ADUs.
c.
PZANN2025-00004
Annexation
Goose Development
Parcel ID: 2434-501-0004-000-5
Ms. Driver stated the annexation was initially presented at the September 8, 2025, Planning Board meeting. During the meeting, the applicant was advised to consider proposing a future land use and zoning compatible with the current St. Lucie County future land use and zoning. Ms. Driver stated the request is for a voluntary annexation of one (1) parcel of land, approximately 2.03 acres at or near the intersection of E. Market Avenue and S. US Highway 1 with a current taxable value of $34,991. She showed the existing and proposed future land use and zoning and said the proposed future land use is, GC, General Commercial and the proposed zoning is C-3, General Commercial. She said the future land use comparison chart shows an increase in residential units to 30 units per acre.
Chair Kreisl noted the application was tabled at the September 8, 2025, Planning Board meeting because the Planning Board had concerns about the future land use and the change in zoning to Planned Development not going through in the future. The Board also did not like the idea of residential units on US Highway 1.
Mr. Johnson asked the difference between a commercial or residential common zoning designation at the entrance of a community.
Sebastian Reina, applicant representative from the Keith Team, gave a presentation to the Board. He said they will be applying for a rezoning to Planned Development (PD) in the future, which will be mostly residential. The entrance on the annexed parcel will have some residential space and will be more compatible with parcels on US Highway 1. Mr. Reina said annexing the parcel will be closer to removing an enclave and is consistent with surrounding uses.
Ms. Carter stated she had concerns about the entrance being residential.
Annexation
Goose Development
Parcel ID: 2434-501-0004-000-5
Ms. Driver stated the annexation was initially presented at the September 8, 2025, Planning Board meeting. During the meeting, the applicant was advised to consider proposing a future land use and zoning compatible with the current St. Lucie County future land use and zoning. Ms. Driver stated the request is for a voluntary annexation of one (1) parcel of land, approximately 2.03 acres at or near the intersection of E. Market Avenue and S. US Highway 1 with a current taxable value of $34,991. She showed the existing and proposed future land use and zoning and said the proposed future land use is, GC, General Commercial and the proposed zoning is C-3, General Commercial. She said the future land use comparison chart shows an increase in residential units to 30 units per acre.
Chair Kreisl noted the application was tabled at the September 8, 2025, Planning Board meeting because the Planning Board had concerns about the future land use and the change in zoning to Planned Development not going through in the future. The Board also did not like the idea of residential units on US Highway 1.
Mr. Johnson asked the difference between a commercial or residential common zoning designation at the entrance of a community.
Sebastian Reina, applicant representative from the Keith Team, gave a presentation to the Board. He said they will be applying for a rezoning to Planned Development (PD) in the future, which will be mostly residential. The entrance on the annexed parcel will have some residential space and will be more compatible with parcels on US Highway 1. Mr. Reina said annexing the parcel will be closer to removing an enclave and is consistent with surrounding uses.
Ms. Carter stated she had concerns about the entrance being residential.
Motion was made by Ryan Collins, and seconded by Nichelle Clemons to forward the proposed annexation of Parcel ID: 2434-501-0005-000-4 for approval to the City Commission with the proposed city Future Land Use designation of General Commercial (GC) and zoning classification of General Commercial (C-3).
- AYE:
- Justine Carter, Alexander Edwards, Ryan Collins, Clayton Johnson, Nichelle Clemons, Christopher Widing, Chair Anton Kreisl
Passed
d.
PZANN2025-00005
Annexation - Skylark Drive
Parcel ID: 2427-702-0115-000-1
Mr. Gilmore stated the application is for an annexation of one (1) parcel into the city, with a city Future Land Use of RM, Medium-Density Residential, and a city zoning of R-4, Medium-Density Residential at or near 906 Skylark Drive. He said the applicant is requesting the annexation of the approximate 0.23 acres to develop a residential duplex. He stated the subject property has a St. Lucie County Future Land Use Designation of RH, Residential High, and a St. Lucie County Zoning designation of RM-11, Residential, Multiple-Family – 11/dwelling units. Mr. Gilmore stated the current taxable value of the property is approximately $45,540 and the annexation will help infill the existing enclave. He said the future land use comparison for maximum build out potential shows a decrease in one (1) residential unit.
No one spoke for or against the annexation.
Annexation - Skylark Drive
Parcel ID: 2427-702-0115-000-1
Mr. Gilmore stated the application is for an annexation of one (1) parcel into the city, with a city Future Land Use of RM, Medium-Density Residential, and a city zoning of R-4, Medium-Density Residential at or near 906 Skylark Drive. He said the applicant is requesting the annexation of the approximate 0.23 acres to develop a residential duplex. He stated the subject property has a St. Lucie County Future Land Use Designation of RH, Residential High, and a St. Lucie County Zoning designation of RM-11, Residential, Multiple-Family – 11/dwelling units. Mr. Gilmore stated the current taxable value of the property is approximately $45,540 and the annexation will help infill the existing enclave. He said the future land use comparison for maximum build out potential shows a decrease in one (1) residential unit.
No one spoke for or against the annexation.
Motion was made by Nichelle Clemons, and seconded by Justine Carter to forward a recommendation of approval of the annexation of Parcel ID: 2427-702-0115-000-1 to the City Commission.
- AYE:
- Alexander Edwards, Ryan Collins, Clayton Johnson, Nichelle Clemons, Christopher Widing, Justine Carter, Chair Anton Kreisl
Passed
e.
PD2024-00002
Final Planned Development (Updated Proposal)
Sunrise Lakes PD - Final Site Plan
Parcel ID: 2433-123-0001-000-1
Mr. Suneson stated the revised application is proposing a rezoning to a Final Planned Development (PD) of forty-eight (48) single-family residences on 11.54 acres (4.16 units per acre), at 3804 Sunrise Boulevard. The property is zoned R-1 (less than 4 units/acre) with a future land use of RL (6.5 units/acre). The site was recently annexed into the City of Ft. Pierce.
He said the site is bordered by single-family RS-3 zoning on the south and west. To the north is a cemetery and to the east is a Florida Department of Transportation building, both with industrial zoning. Mr. Suneson said the existing future land use is low density and will not change.
Mr. Suneson stated at the September 6, Planning Board meeting, the Board recommended disapproval of the Sunrise Lakes Final PD, by a vote of 6-1, by reason of lack of a school bus turn-a-round and stop within the development and the number of dwellings (50). The revised proposal includes a school bus turn-a-round and stop within the development, a sidewalk along the frontage of the property on Sunrise Boulevard to the intersection of Bell Ave, and a reduction in dwelling units to 48.
Blaine Bergstressor, applicant representative from KMA Engineering, showed the updated site plan with revisions. He said they are also adding parking spaces for parents at the bus stop location. Mr. Bergstressor read the purpose of a Planned Development from the city code. He said the project will have a variety of natural features and scenic areas, including ponds, a bioswale, and a walking path with a variety of trees. He noted 57 trees will be preserved, and 228 palms are being relocated elsewhere on the project. Mr. Bergstressor said all the lots are being pushed to the north to create a 36-foot buffer from the parcel to the south. He showed the improved amenities, including a dog park, tot lot, pool and clubhouse. He showed the new bus stop, and he explained the bus would come off of Sunrise Boulevard and make a loop into the development and exit on to Sunrise Boulevard. Mr. Bergstressor said they are protecting adjacent and existing development with a 20-foot drainage easement, a 16-foot increased landscape buffer and a15-foot rear yard setback. He noted there will be 51 feet between the closest house in the project and the southern property line. He showed the typical buffer and renderings of the landscape buffer, which includes 3 foot tall hedges, 12 foot tall understory trees and a variety of layered trees. Mr. Bergstressor said the added benefits to the community are 1,031 linear feet of additional sidewalk to Bell Avenue and 1,290 liner feet of 4-inch force main. He highlighted that other residences in the community can use the sidewalk and the school bus shelter can be utilized by children that don't live in the development.
Joe Scionti, owner and principal of Integrity 1st Construction Group, stated he is not a national builder and he does not build cheap homes. He stated he is giving the best a builder can give by providing a bus stop shelter, sidewalk, pool, and increased landscape buffer. He said he is going above and beyond. Mr. Scionti said the homes will have metal roofs, impact windows, and porcelain tile. Mr. Scionti said he has made all the concessions that were asked for, and he wants to provide a good project for the neighborhood. He noted the school board likes the bus stop location.
Ms. Fogarty, from the St. Lucie County School Board, said the turnaround radius for the bus needs to be 80 to 100 feet. She said she would need to see the appropriate turning radius, and she suggested that this be a condition of approval.
Mr. Suneson noted that two citizen letters regarding the project were received by the Planning department and given to the Planning Board members.
Ronna Perry, citizen, said she opposes the rezoning due to the number of dwelling units, threatened endangered species, inadequate infrastructure, drainage issues, traffic concerns, overcrowded schools and the project does not meet the character of the surrounding community.
Ms. Carter stated that the improvements are great, but density is a concern. She asked if the project would set a precedent for future land use.
Mr. Collins stated the density is high, but there are a lot of good improvements, and it is a good product.
Mr. Suneson noted that the future land use of the property allows for a density of up to 6.5 units per acre. The 4.16 units per acre proposed is relatively lower than what it could be.
Chair Kreisl said the concept of a Planned Development is the cost/benefit to the community. He noted the Board has been more demanding and makes sure the community is getting value. He said the applicant listened to what the Board said, and the community is getting a much better project than what was originally proposed.
Mr. Widing said the number of lots didn't really reduce. He said the bus stop location is safer, but he feels the three (3) parent parking spaces are a little snug. Mr. Widing said the sidewalk is a plus and it is a nice community.
Final Planned Development (Updated Proposal)
Sunrise Lakes PD - Final Site Plan
Parcel ID: 2433-123-0001-000-1
Mr. Suneson stated the revised application is proposing a rezoning to a Final Planned Development (PD) of forty-eight (48) single-family residences on 11.54 acres (4.16 units per acre), at 3804 Sunrise Boulevard. The property is zoned R-1 (less than 4 units/acre) with a future land use of RL (6.5 units/acre). The site was recently annexed into the City of Ft. Pierce.
He said the site is bordered by single-family RS-3 zoning on the south and west. To the north is a cemetery and to the east is a Florida Department of Transportation building, both with industrial zoning. Mr. Suneson said the existing future land use is low density and will not change.
Mr. Suneson stated at the September 6, Planning Board meeting, the Board recommended disapproval of the Sunrise Lakes Final PD, by a vote of 6-1, by reason of lack of a school bus turn-a-round and stop within the development and the number of dwellings (50). The revised proposal includes a school bus turn-a-round and stop within the development, a sidewalk along the frontage of the property on Sunrise Boulevard to the intersection of Bell Ave, and a reduction in dwelling units to 48.
Blaine Bergstressor, applicant representative from KMA Engineering, showed the updated site plan with revisions. He said they are also adding parking spaces for parents at the bus stop location. Mr. Bergstressor read the purpose of a Planned Development from the city code. He said the project will have a variety of natural features and scenic areas, including ponds, a bioswale, and a walking path with a variety of trees. He noted 57 trees will be preserved, and 228 palms are being relocated elsewhere on the project. Mr. Bergstressor said all the lots are being pushed to the north to create a 36-foot buffer from the parcel to the south. He showed the improved amenities, including a dog park, tot lot, pool and clubhouse. He showed the new bus stop, and he explained the bus would come off of Sunrise Boulevard and make a loop into the development and exit on to Sunrise Boulevard. Mr. Bergstressor said they are protecting adjacent and existing development with a 20-foot drainage easement, a 16-foot increased landscape buffer and a15-foot rear yard setback. He noted there will be 51 feet between the closest house in the project and the southern property line. He showed the typical buffer and renderings of the landscape buffer, which includes 3 foot tall hedges, 12 foot tall understory trees and a variety of layered trees. Mr. Bergstressor said the added benefits to the community are 1,031 linear feet of additional sidewalk to Bell Avenue and 1,290 liner feet of 4-inch force main. He highlighted that other residences in the community can use the sidewalk and the school bus shelter can be utilized by children that don't live in the development.
Joe Scionti, owner and principal of Integrity 1st Construction Group, stated he is not a national builder and he does not build cheap homes. He stated he is giving the best a builder can give by providing a bus stop shelter, sidewalk, pool, and increased landscape buffer. He said he is going above and beyond. Mr. Scionti said the homes will have metal roofs, impact windows, and porcelain tile. Mr. Scionti said he has made all the concessions that were asked for, and he wants to provide a good project for the neighborhood. He noted the school board likes the bus stop location.
Ms. Fogarty, from the St. Lucie County School Board, said the turnaround radius for the bus needs to be 80 to 100 feet. She said she would need to see the appropriate turning radius, and she suggested that this be a condition of approval.
Mr. Suneson noted that two citizen letters regarding the project were received by the Planning department and given to the Planning Board members.
Ronna Perry, citizen, said she opposes the rezoning due to the number of dwelling units, threatened endangered species, inadequate infrastructure, drainage issues, traffic concerns, overcrowded schools and the project does not meet the character of the surrounding community.
Ms. Carter stated that the improvements are great, but density is a concern. She asked if the project would set a precedent for future land use.
Mr. Collins stated the density is high, but there are a lot of good improvements, and it is a good product.
Mr. Suneson noted that the future land use of the property allows for a density of up to 6.5 units per acre. The 4.16 units per acre proposed is relatively lower than what it could be.
Chair Kreisl said the concept of a Planned Development is the cost/benefit to the community. He noted the Board has been more demanding and makes sure the community is getting value. He said the applicant listened to what the Board said, and the community is getting a much better project than what was originally proposed.
Mr. Widing said the number of lots didn't really reduce. He said the bus stop location is safer, but he feels the three (3) parent parking spaces are a little snug. Mr. Widing said the sidewalk is a plus and it is a nice community.
Motion was made by Nichelle Clemons, and seconded by Alexander Edwards to forward a recommendation of approval of the Final Planned Development for Sunrise Lakes Parcel ID: 2433-123-0001-000-1 to the City Commission subject to the following 13 conditions:
- All infrastructure, including the private lift station, force main along Sunrise Boulevard, school district sheltered bus stop, stormwater system, and sidewalk connecting the project to Bell Ave along Sunrise Boulevard, shall be completed prior to the issuance of first certificate of occupancy for a residential dwelling.
- A plat of the property shall be required prior to application for a building permit for a residential building.
- The minimum Open Space shall be maintained at a minimum of 23% of the Final PD site area.
- The development shall comply with the permitted density, intensity and residential lot and building heights as outlined within the approved Sunrise Lakes Development Agreement and Final PD site plan.
- A detailed stormwater and drainage plan and statement shall be submitted at the time of Building Permit.
- The existing drainage ditch on the south property line shall be regraded and a 20’ drainage easement shall be recorded over the ditch prior to completion of site work. The easement shall include maintenance responsibilities for the homeowner’s association and access for the City of Ft. Pierce and South Florida Water Management District.
- A masonry wall, minimum height of 6ft, shall be installed along the eastern property line as part of the landscape buffer to the industrial use, prior to the first certificate of occupancy for a residential dwelling.
- The Final PD Site Plan hereby approved shall be governed by all agreements, provisions and covenants which govern the use, maintenance, and continued protection of the planned development and any of its common open space or other shared areas. This shall include the binding of successors in title to any commitments concerning completion of the project and its maintenance and operation.
- A tree mitigation calculation shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a site clearing or vegetation removal permit.
- A landscape maintenance agreement shall be required prior to issuance of the final certificate of occupation.
- A revised final site plan, architectural elevations and landscaping plan shall be submitted for the proposed amenity center.
- All applicable state or federal permits shall be obtained before commencement of the development.
- The bus stop turning radius shall be approved by the St. Lucie County School Board.
- AYE:
- Ryan Collins, Clayton Johnson, Nichelle Clemons, Alexander Edwards, Chair Anton Kreisl
- NAY:
- Christopher Widing, Justine Carter
Passed
f.
PD2024-00007
Master Planned Development (Updated Proposal)
Pulte-Cornerstone PD
2721 S. Jenkins Road
Mr. Gilmore stated on August 11, 2025, the Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed Master Planned Development with fourteen (14) conditions. He said the applicant has since resubmitted and recommended amendments to the conditions and a new phasing plan with a new bus stop location. Mr. Gilmore said the application is for two (2) parcels of land to change the zoning classification from General Commercial (C-3) to Planned Development (PD) with an associated Master Development Plan. Mr. Gilmore said the site area is approximately 49.92 acres. The application proposes a 250-unit, fee-simple, single-family residential master planned development community. Mr. Gilmore said there will be a range of home sizes and designs, and amenities such as a linear park connecting the recreational area to a pocket park. He noted there will also be an additional buffer for the neighborhood from I-95 and at the southwest corner of the property a sculptural art installation is proposed. Mr. Gilmore said the project will be developed in two (2) phases. He discussed the Planning Board concerns from the August 11, 2025, meeting, and he showed the proposed master site plan phasing changes with the new bus stop location. Mr. Gilmore reviewed the PD benefits, traffic analysis, and landscaping.
Leslie Olson, principal of the District Planning Group, gave an update on the project process. She said the Planning Board recommended approval of the Master Planned Development with conditions at the August 11, 2025, Planning Board meeting. One of the conditions required design changes to the site plan to reflect the school bus stop’s location within Phase 1 of the new neighborhood. Ms. Olson explained that because the commercial property's access to the north is located so close to the intersection, the commercial property is not viable without access through their site. She said they need a full access intersection, and Pulte/Cornerstone would be providing that. Ms. Olson showed the new bus stop location and bus route in Phase I, which she said is also a requirement for the commercial property to the north. Ms. Olson said the school board said they wanted the bus stop moved caddy corner across the street where the amenity center would be, and the parents could park. She said the problem with the new location is it is located in Phase II.
Ms. Olson highlighted that the residential use is projected to generate roughly 88% less traffic than the previous future land use. She reviewed the site design, amenities and community features and noted the walking trails will not be going behind people's backyards.
Ms. Olson showed the new phasing plan, which incorporates the new school bus stop and parking area along with the commercial drive in Phase I.
Ms. Olson stated both she and Mr. Dobbins wanted to talk to the Board about amending the conditions of approval. She said they had communicated with staff but needed to discuss further with the Board. Ms. Olson stated they have concerns regarding conditions, 11, 12, 13 and 14. Mr. Lee Dobbins, attorney from Dean Mead Law Firm, spoke about alternate language for conditions 12 and 14.
Chair Kreisl asked Ms. Fogarty if the bus stop plan, turn radius, and length of travel distance were acceptable. Ms. Fogarty said yes, and she said she sent a comment to Mr. Gilmore that the school board would like the bus stop moved to the amenity center and the bus would utilize the shortest distance to turn in and turn out using the noted side street on the phasing plan.
Chair Kreisl asked staff if there were any initial concerns regarding the requested revised conditions. Mr. Suneson said they would discuss the conditions of approval after public comment.
Nicholas Gieseler, attorney for FP City Shops, representing Ken Simigran, principal of FP City Shops, and the northern commercial property, stated they are in support of the project. He said they have some questions about when in Phase I they will have access. Mr. Gieseler said they have an issue with the proposed revision to condition 14. He said Pulte/Cornerstone are proposing the revised access agreement would not be necessary until plat approval. He said it doesn't make sense to wait. He said he doesn't understand how a site plan can be approved until the access easement is moved, as the easement is currently going right through someone's kitchen. Mr. Gieseler concluded he would like the condition to be read as it was proposed by staff.
Mr. Suneson said the applicant has raised concerns with several conditions of approval that have been previously reviewed by the applicant's legal counsel, planning staff and the city's attorney. Staff's opinion is that conditions of approval should be worked out prior to review by the Board and be relatively unchanged as the project proceeds to the City Commission, except those conditions initiated by the Planning Board. Staff is open to discussion of the conditions if the Board would like to entertain it. Mr. Suneson promised the Board that future projects would not have this type of discussion because conditions of approval would be worked out, if any, prior to reaching the Planning Board, because that is the way things should be done.
Ms. Carter asked why the Board was not waiting for these conditions to be settled between the developers and the city.
Chair Kreisl asked staff if their preference would be the negotiations be settled at the staff level and not at the public hearing.
Mr. Suneson said yes, as a matter of doing day-to-day business, but in this particular instance, to keep the project moving forward during the review process, he feels a simple compromise could be achieved.
Ms. Clemons stated she is uncomfortable with the revised conditions because anything being reviewed today has not been reviewed by the city's legal department.
Mr. Collins asked what the Board was being asked to do and who they were being asked by. Mr. Collins asked if the Board was supposed to be part of the negotiations on the conditions of approval. Mr. Suneson said not normally. Mr. Dobbins said that is true, and he prefers that it be worked out so that they don't have to come back to the Planning Board for a third time.
Chair Kreisl said he shares Ms. Clemons' concerns, and he would only be willing to proceed with reviewing the conditions if a 15th condition was added that states any changes to the conditions today would need to be reviewed by the city's legal department. He said it would be a better idea to know that the conditions would be negotiated and agreed to prior to going to the Final PD, and if not, the process is to come back to the Planning Board.
Mr. Widing said there are too many moving parts, and he is uncomfortable going forward.
Chair Kreisl asked staff what the Board's options were. Mr. Suneson said either allow the deliberations or punt. Mr. Suneson stated that a lot of the items the applicant has brought up are rather minor.
Mr. Suneson said that condition #13 has been raised by the Planning Board as well as the City Commission and FDOT regarding the sound attenuation with proximity to I-95. He said he wants the applicant to have a relatively straightforward and direct understanding of how staff would like the condition to proceed. He said the condition is quite vague, so staff is offering an alternative, not for the Board's consideration, but for the applicant. Mr. Suneson said the following modification is that prior to plat approval, the applicant will conduct a highway noise study per the FDOT guidelines to determine what if any noise attenuation measures should be implemented to eliminate the noise in the subdivision. M. Suneson said staff also agrees with the northern property owner that condition #14 continues to be a condition of the final development plan approval.
Mr. Dobbins said the easement has to be fixed. He said it is not uncommon to have easements released after site plan approval. Pulte has to move the easement because it is going through a bunch of lots. Mr. Dobbins said with the easement that is there now, it states that the developer has to build the access road within 365 days after starting site work. He said they would like the easement release tied to plat approval. Mr. Dobbins said he cannot speak to condition #13 because he is not a sound engineer, and he has concerns about the sound study being time-consuming.
Chair Kreisl said he wants a set of conditions that are no longer in dispute, so the Board can move forward. He said the Board has no choice but to table this item for the next meeting.
Ms. Olson said she wants to know that they can move forward with the Final PD as they work out the conditions with staff.
Chair Kreisl said it is a possibility, but some details with the Master Planned Development need to be worked out first.
Master Planned Development (Updated Proposal)
Pulte-Cornerstone PD
2721 S. Jenkins Road
Mr. Gilmore stated on August 11, 2025, the Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed Master Planned Development with fourteen (14) conditions. He said the applicant has since resubmitted and recommended amendments to the conditions and a new phasing plan with a new bus stop location. Mr. Gilmore said the application is for two (2) parcels of land to change the zoning classification from General Commercial (C-3) to Planned Development (PD) with an associated Master Development Plan. Mr. Gilmore said the site area is approximately 49.92 acres. The application proposes a 250-unit, fee-simple, single-family residential master planned development community. Mr. Gilmore said there will be a range of home sizes and designs, and amenities such as a linear park connecting the recreational area to a pocket park. He noted there will also be an additional buffer for the neighborhood from I-95 and at the southwest corner of the property a sculptural art installation is proposed. Mr. Gilmore said the project will be developed in two (2) phases. He discussed the Planning Board concerns from the August 11, 2025, meeting, and he showed the proposed master site plan phasing changes with the new bus stop location. Mr. Gilmore reviewed the PD benefits, traffic analysis, and landscaping.
Leslie Olson, principal of the District Planning Group, gave an update on the project process. She said the Planning Board recommended approval of the Master Planned Development with conditions at the August 11, 2025, Planning Board meeting. One of the conditions required design changes to the site plan to reflect the school bus stop’s location within Phase 1 of the new neighborhood. Ms. Olson explained that because the commercial property's access to the north is located so close to the intersection, the commercial property is not viable without access through their site. She said they need a full access intersection, and Pulte/Cornerstone would be providing that. Ms. Olson showed the new bus stop location and bus route in Phase I, which she said is also a requirement for the commercial property to the north. Ms. Olson said the school board said they wanted the bus stop moved caddy corner across the street where the amenity center would be, and the parents could park. She said the problem with the new location is it is located in Phase II.
Ms. Olson highlighted that the residential use is projected to generate roughly 88% less traffic than the previous future land use. She reviewed the site design, amenities and community features and noted the walking trails will not be going behind people's backyards.
Ms. Olson showed the new phasing plan, which incorporates the new school bus stop and parking area along with the commercial drive in Phase I.
Ms. Olson stated both she and Mr. Dobbins wanted to talk to the Board about amending the conditions of approval. She said they had communicated with staff but needed to discuss further with the Board. Ms. Olson stated they have concerns regarding conditions, 11, 12, 13 and 14. Mr. Lee Dobbins, attorney from Dean Mead Law Firm, spoke about alternate language for conditions 12 and 14.
Chair Kreisl asked Ms. Fogarty if the bus stop plan, turn radius, and length of travel distance were acceptable. Ms. Fogarty said yes, and she said she sent a comment to Mr. Gilmore that the school board would like the bus stop moved to the amenity center and the bus would utilize the shortest distance to turn in and turn out using the noted side street on the phasing plan.
Chair Kreisl asked staff if there were any initial concerns regarding the requested revised conditions. Mr. Suneson said they would discuss the conditions of approval after public comment.
Nicholas Gieseler, attorney for FP City Shops, representing Ken Simigran, principal of FP City Shops, and the northern commercial property, stated they are in support of the project. He said they have some questions about when in Phase I they will have access. Mr. Gieseler said they have an issue with the proposed revision to condition 14. He said Pulte/Cornerstone are proposing the revised access agreement would not be necessary until plat approval. He said it doesn't make sense to wait. He said he doesn't understand how a site plan can be approved until the access easement is moved, as the easement is currently going right through someone's kitchen. Mr. Gieseler concluded he would like the condition to be read as it was proposed by staff.
Mr. Suneson said the applicant has raised concerns with several conditions of approval that have been previously reviewed by the applicant's legal counsel, planning staff and the city's attorney. Staff's opinion is that conditions of approval should be worked out prior to review by the Board and be relatively unchanged as the project proceeds to the City Commission, except those conditions initiated by the Planning Board. Staff is open to discussion of the conditions if the Board would like to entertain it. Mr. Suneson promised the Board that future projects would not have this type of discussion because conditions of approval would be worked out, if any, prior to reaching the Planning Board, because that is the way things should be done.
Ms. Carter asked why the Board was not waiting for these conditions to be settled between the developers and the city.
Chair Kreisl asked staff if their preference would be the negotiations be settled at the staff level and not at the public hearing.
Mr. Suneson said yes, as a matter of doing day-to-day business, but in this particular instance, to keep the project moving forward during the review process, he feels a simple compromise could be achieved.
Ms. Clemons stated she is uncomfortable with the revised conditions because anything being reviewed today has not been reviewed by the city's legal department.
Mr. Collins asked what the Board was being asked to do and who they were being asked by. Mr. Collins asked if the Board was supposed to be part of the negotiations on the conditions of approval. Mr. Suneson said not normally. Mr. Dobbins said that is true, and he prefers that it be worked out so that they don't have to come back to the Planning Board for a third time.
Chair Kreisl said he shares Ms. Clemons' concerns, and he would only be willing to proceed with reviewing the conditions if a 15th condition was added that states any changes to the conditions today would need to be reviewed by the city's legal department. He said it would be a better idea to know that the conditions would be negotiated and agreed to prior to going to the Final PD, and if not, the process is to come back to the Planning Board.
Mr. Widing said there are too many moving parts, and he is uncomfortable going forward.
Chair Kreisl asked staff what the Board's options were. Mr. Suneson said either allow the deliberations or punt. Mr. Suneson stated that a lot of the items the applicant has brought up are rather minor.
Mr. Suneson said that condition #13 has been raised by the Planning Board as well as the City Commission and FDOT regarding the sound attenuation with proximity to I-95. He said he wants the applicant to have a relatively straightforward and direct understanding of how staff would like the condition to proceed. He said the condition is quite vague, so staff is offering an alternative, not for the Board's consideration, but for the applicant. Mr. Suneson said the following modification is that prior to plat approval, the applicant will conduct a highway noise study per the FDOT guidelines to determine what if any noise attenuation measures should be implemented to eliminate the noise in the subdivision. M. Suneson said staff also agrees with the northern property owner that condition #14 continues to be a condition of the final development plan approval.
Mr. Dobbins said the easement has to be fixed. He said it is not uncommon to have easements released after site plan approval. Pulte has to move the easement because it is going through a bunch of lots. Mr. Dobbins said with the easement that is there now, it states that the developer has to build the access road within 365 days after starting site work. He said they would like the easement release tied to plat approval. Mr. Dobbins said he cannot speak to condition #13 because he is not a sound engineer, and he has concerns about the sound study being time-consuming.
Chair Kreisl said he wants a set of conditions that are no longer in dispute, so the Board can move forward. He said the Board has no choice but to table this item for the next meeting.
Ms. Olson said she wants to know that they can move forward with the Final PD as they work out the conditions with staff.
Chair Kreisl said it is a possibility, but some details with the Master Planned Development need to be worked out first.
Motion was made by Nichelle Clemons, and seconded by Christopher Widing to table the item for the November 10, 2025 Planning Board meeting.
- AYE:
- Clayton Johnson, Nichelle Clemons, Christopher Widing, Justine Carter, Alexander Edwards, Ryan Collins, Chair Anton Kreisl
Passed
g.
PZSITE2025-00006
Site Plan
Bev Smith Kia
5560 S. US Highway 1
Ms. Driver gave an overview of the application. She stated Bev Smith Kia is seeking approval to develop a new car showroom and dealership building. The property is in the C-3, General Commercial zoning district and has a future land use designation of RL, Low Density Residential. Ms. Driver said the building will be 40,791 square feet with 487 parking spaces, which includes 284 for car inventory. Ms. Driver showed the elevations and the landscape plan. She noted the trees required meet the requirements and the shrubs provided exceed the requirements.
Chair Kreisl asked if the architectural components align with the architectural guidelines for a car dealership. He stated the architecture on the west elevation, which is visible from US Highway 1, is flat.
Aaron Stanton, applicant representative from MBV Engineering, said the architecture is complying with Kia Standards and the city's architecture standards. He noted the building is 25 feet in height, not 45 feet. He said the building sits back from the frontage of US Highway 1 and there will be lots of hedging adjacent to US Highway 1.
Site Plan
Bev Smith Kia
5560 S. US Highway 1
Ms. Driver gave an overview of the application. She stated Bev Smith Kia is seeking approval to develop a new car showroom and dealership building. The property is in the C-3, General Commercial zoning district and has a future land use designation of RL, Low Density Residential. Ms. Driver said the building will be 40,791 square feet with 487 parking spaces, which includes 284 for car inventory. Ms. Driver showed the elevations and the landscape plan. She noted the trees required meet the requirements and the shrubs provided exceed the requirements.
Chair Kreisl asked if the architectural components align with the architectural guidelines for a car dealership. He stated the architecture on the west elevation, which is visible from US Highway 1, is flat.
Aaron Stanton, applicant representative from MBV Engineering, said the architecture is complying with Kia Standards and the city's architecture standards. He noted the building is 25 feet in height, not 45 feet. He said the building sits back from the frontage of US Highway 1 and there will be lots of hedging adjacent to US Highway 1.
Motion was made by Ryan Collins, and seconded by Christopher Widing to forward a recommendation of approval of the Bev Smith Kia Site Plan located at 5560 S. US Highway 1, with the following five (5) conditions.
1. Prior to the issuance of any site clearing and demolition permits, the applicant shall provide a Tree Mitigation Survey and coordinate with the City of Fort Pierce Arborist for the required mitigation of the City's regulated trees proposed to be removed as a result of its site development/construction activity.
a. All approved landscaping shall be installed, irrigated, and maintained in perpetuity in accordance with section 123-7 of the City Code of Ordinances, in order that it continues to present a healthy, neat, and orderly appearance free of refuse and debris, in conformity with the following requirements:
i. Vegetation required by this article shall be replaced with equivalent or better vegetation if it is not living. All trees for which credit is awarded, and which subsequently die shall be replaced by the same or greater number of living trees according to the standards established in this article.
ii. Maintenance shall include sufficient weeding, watering, fertilizing, pruning, mowing, edging, mulching and other horticultural practices to ensure that the landscaping continues to maintain a healthy, neat, and orderly appearance.
3. NSLRWCD permit will be required for outfall into Canal No. 17
4. Striping and wheel stops will be required if the Car Inventory Spaces are later converted to public parking
5. An updated Environmental Assessment Report is needed prior to DPCR submittal
- AYE:
- Nichelle Clemons, Christopher Widing, Justine Carter, Alexander Edwards, Ryan Collins, Clayton Johnson, Chair Anton Kreisl
Passed
h.
PZSITE2025-00017
Major Site Plan Amendment
Precast Specialties LLC
3898 Selvitz Road
Mr. Suneson gave an overview of the application. He stated the applicant is requesting consideration of a phased major site plan amendment. Phase 1 would include the construction of a batch plant. Phase 2 would include the expansion of an office /workshop with associated site improvements. Mr. Suneson said the site was originally annexed into the city limits in 2004 with an IH, Heavy Industrial zoning. A rezoning from IH, Industrial Heavy (St. Lucie County Classification) to 1-3. Heavy Industrial was granted in November 2016. He explained that the approved project set out to develop a 76,100 square foot precast concrete production facility in multiple phases, located on the 75-acre parcel, at 3798 Selvitz Road. He noted the concrete operation has been in business since 2017-2018. Mr. Suneson showed the timetable of development with a completion at the end of the year in 2030. He noted the expansion of the roadway will be in Phase 2 and the landscape plan shows a tremendous amount of vegetation buffering along the property line.
Ms. Clemons asked why there was no building on the timetable of development. Mr. Suneson said the office/workshop will be completed in Phase 2 and added to the timetable.
Mark Landsman, applicant representative from Haley Ward, stated the batch plant will reduce truck traffic since they will be manufacturing concrete on site. He noted the enhanced landscape will be added in Phase 1. In Phase 2, the water main is being extended, which will provide potable water to the location and will also be a public benefit to those able to connect to city sewer. Mr. Landsman said the neighbors will not be affected because they are governed by the Department of Environmental Protection. He noted the wash-down area in Phase 1 will meet the air quality conditions for the site. Mr. Landsman highlighted that white noise and restricted hours of operation have been initiated as conditions.
Dean Locke, owner of Precast, said the batch plant is more like a piece of equipment rather than a building. He explained they will be manufacturing structural products for construction, utility contractors and underground utility products.
Brad Currie, from Haley Ward, said the batch plan is in the extreme northwest industrial corner of the property and there will be a landscape buffer along the south property line. He noted that bringing concrete manufacturing on site instead of 10–12 trucks a day is a significant improvement for the community.
Ms. Clemons said dust was a big concern several years ago, and she wants Precast to maintain a clean environment and bring new jobs to the area.
Mr. Collins said it is a great site plan, and they went above and beyond.
Ms. Carter asked if they would be producing more air pollution with concrete manufacturing on site.
Chair Kreisl said this is an opportunity for Precast to go through the expansion and site plan approval process, which compels the applicant to add features to their site while going through the process of development. He highlighted the applicant can improve the site and the surrounding community.
Major Site Plan Amendment
Precast Specialties LLC
3898 Selvitz Road
Mr. Suneson gave an overview of the application. He stated the applicant is requesting consideration of a phased major site plan amendment. Phase 1 would include the construction of a batch plant. Phase 2 would include the expansion of an office /workshop with associated site improvements. Mr. Suneson said the site was originally annexed into the city limits in 2004 with an IH, Heavy Industrial zoning. A rezoning from IH, Industrial Heavy (St. Lucie County Classification) to 1-3. Heavy Industrial was granted in November 2016. He explained that the approved project set out to develop a 76,100 square foot precast concrete production facility in multiple phases, located on the 75-acre parcel, at 3798 Selvitz Road. He noted the concrete operation has been in business since 2017-2018. Mr. Suneson showed the timetable of development with a completion at the end of the year in 2030. He noted the expansion of the roadway will be in Phase 2 and the landscape plan shows a tremendous amount of vegetation buffering along the property line.
Ms. Clemons asked why there was no building on the timetable of development. Mr. Suneson said the office/workshop will be completed in Phase 2 and added to the timetable.
Mark Landsman, applicant representative from Haley Ward, stated the batch plant will reduce truck traffic since they will be manufacturing concrete on site. He noted the enhanced landscape will be added in Phase 1. In Phase 2, the water main is being extended, which will provide potable water to the location and will also be a public benefit to those able to connect to city sewer. Mr. Landsman said the neighbors will not be affected because they are governed by the Department of Environmental Protection. He noted the wash-down area in Phase 1 will meet the air quality conditions for the site. Mr. Landsman highlighted that white noise and restricted hours of operation have been initiated as conditions.
Dean Locke, owner of Precast, said the batch plant is more like a piece of equipment rather than a building. He explained they will be manufacturing structural products for construction, utility contractors and underground utility products.
Brad Currie, from Haley Ward, said the batch plan is in the extreme northwest industrial corner of the property and there will be a landscape buffer along the south property line. He noted that bringing concrete manufacturing on site instead of 10–12 trucks a day is a significant improvement for the community.
Ms. Clemons said dust was a big concern several years ago, and she wants Precast to maintain a clean environment and bring new jobs to the area.
Mr. Collins said it is a great site plan, and they went above and beyond.
Ms. Carter asked if they would be producing more air pollution with concrete manufacturing on site.
Chair Kreisl said this is an opportunity for Precast to go through the expansion and site plan approval process, which compels the applicant to add features to their site while going through the process of development. He highlighted the applicant can improve the site and the surrounding community.
Motion was made by Nichelle Clemons, and seconded by Christopher Widing to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Commission for the Precast Concrete Major Site Plan Amendment located at 3898 Selvitz Road with the following nine (9) conditions:
- The timetable of development shall be such:
-
PHASE 1 START BY DATE COMPLETE BY DATE Batch Plant January 2026 December 2027 Aggregate Bins/Wash Out January 2026 December 2027 Treatment Pond January 2026 December 2027 Dispatch Office/3 Parking Spaces January 2026 December 2027 Landscaping/Wall January 2026 December 2027 -
PHASE 2 START BY DATE COMPLETE BY DATE Parking Lots and Lighting January 2028 December 2030 Drainage Infrastructure January 2028 December 2030 Water Main Extension/Hydrant January 2028 December 2030 Grinder Station/Force Main January 2028 December 2030 Removal of Temporary Trailers January 2028 December 2030
-
- A full calculation and proposed tree mitigation shall be approved by the city arborist prior to commencement of Phase 1.
- The property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the trees through a landscape maintenance agreement. This responsibility includes the replacement of unhealthy and dead trees. The property owner shall submit to an on-site inspection of the planted/preserved vegetation 12 months after the issuance of the Phase 1 first certificate of occupancy. If it is determined that the planted vegetation is dead, diseased or otherwise not in compliance with provisions of this Code or the original approved tree mitigation plan, the property owner shall be provided notice and directed to correct any such deficiencies and replace all noncompliant materials within 60 days.
- No use shall exceed the applicable City of Fort Pierce standards for noise.
- The hours of operation of the facility shall be limited to: Monday – Friday between 6:30 a.m. to 8 p.m., Saturday – 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., Sunday – No operation. Quiet hours – 11p.m. to 7 a.m.
- The applicant shall implement the Heavy-Duty White Sound® Smart Reversing System alarm, or similar, to reduce, as far as practicable, the noise impact of reversing trucks and other equipment prior to completion of the Batch Plant within Phase 1.
- Prior to commencement of Phase 1, the applicant shall coordinate the approval of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan with the City Engineer. The Plan shall relate to the sequence of construction of the development site, including stripping and clearing; rough grading; construction of utilities, infrastructure, and buildings; and final grading and landscaping. Sequencing shall identify the expected date on which clearing will begin, the estimated duration of exposure of cleared areas, areas of clearing, installation of temporary erosion and sediment control measures, and establishment of permanent vegetation. All erosion and sediment control measures necessary to meet the objectives of the city code of ordinances shall be maintained and in place throughout all phases of construction and after completion of development of the site.
- All applicable State and Federal permits shall be obtained before commencement of the development.
- Add the addition of the office/workshop to Phase 2 timetable of development.
- AYE:
- Christopher Widing, Justine Carter, Alexander Edwards, Ryan Collins, Clayton Johnson, Nichelle Clemons, Chair Anton Kreisl
Passed
7.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
James Clasby, St. Lucie County Commissioner, thanked the Planning Board members for their service to the community and what they do for the city.
James Clasby, St. Lucie County Commissioner, thanked the Planning Board members for their service to the community and what they do for the city.
8.
BOARD COMMENTS
Mr. Johnson asked about creating overlay districts to determine what the city wants in White City, downtown, the beaches and Hibiscus Park. Mr. Suneson said density can be addressed in the comprehensive plan update. He suggested that board members reach out to Ms Heidt with their concerns. Mr. Suneson said overlay districts may not be the way to go. He suggested a zoning change to E1 or E2, which has 1 or 2 dwelling units per acre. Mr. Suneson encouraged the Board to look at the zoning district details to know what is viable.
Mr. Johnson asked how it works when the city takes over a road because of annexations. Mr. Suneson said there are questions that need to be asked by the Engineering and Public Works department to make sure the road is within the city and is up to city standards. Mr. Johnson said the city should be looking at the cost of servicing roadways before annexing property. Chair Kreisl said Ms. Heidt's presentation on the comprehensive plan update mentioned the cost of adding roads and services when annexing property.
Chair Kreisl said he was curious if overlay districts are created by staff or the community. He noted they may not be appropriate anymore because of the new state statutes. Mr. Suneson said Senate Bill 180 has legitimate concerns. He said cities cannot do anything more restrictive or burdensome than the code that was in place on August 1, 2024. He said overlay districts are more restrictive and have special requirements, which is an opportunity to get more from an applicant, like larger landscape buffers.
Mr. Johnson asked about creating overlay districts to determine what the city wants in White City, downtown, the beaches and Hibiscus Park. Mr. Suneson said density can be addressed in the comprehensive plan update. He suggested that board members reach out to Ms Heidt with their concerns. Mr. Suneson said overlay districts may not be the way to go. He suggested a zoning change to E1 or E2, which has 1 or 2 dwelling units per acre. Mr. Suneson encouraged the Board to look at the zoning district details to know what is viable.
Mr. Johnson asked how it works when the city takes over a road because of annexations. Mr. Suneson said there are questions that need to be asked by the Engineering and Public Works department to make sure the road is within the city and is up to city standards. Mr. Johnson said the city should be looking at the cost of servicing roadways before annexing property. Chair Kreisl said Ms. Heidt's presentation on the comprehensive plan update mentioned the cost of adding roads and services when annexing property.
Chair Kreisl said he was curious if overlay districts are created by staff or the community. He noted they may not be appropriate anymore because of the new state statutes. Mr. Suneson said Senate Bill 180 has legitimate concerns. He said cities cannot do anything more restrictive or burdensome than the code that was in place on August 1, 2024. He said overlay districts are more restrictive and have special requirements, which is an opportunity to get more from an applicant, like larger landscape buffers.
9.
ADJOURNMENT