Martin County LPA approves rezoning of 0.82-acre Tequesta parcel despite public environmental concerns

The Martin County Local Planning Agency on Aug. 7 voted unanimously to rezone a 0.82-acre property at 18071 Southeast Country Club Drive from HR-2 (multiple-family residential) to RS-10 (high-density residential).

The move, requested by Cannae Properties LLC and presented by Jared Gaylord, attorney for the applicant, and John Sennett, principal planner in the Growth Management Department, changes only the zoning classification; it does not authorize any construction or lot split. "Staff recommends approving the request to rezone from HR-2, multiple family residential district, to RS-10, high density residential district," John Sennett said during the presentation.

The rezoning request was accompanied by a certificate of public facilities exemption because, as Sennett and other staff explained, a zoning action alone does not reserve or consume public-service capacity. "This is just a rezoning. It's not authorizing any development on the property. This qualifies for [a] certificate of public facilities exemption," Sennett said. Growth Management Director Paul Shilling reiterated that any future development proposal would trigger the ordinary public-facilities reservation and review process.

The site is approximately 850 feet north of the intersection of Southeast Country Club Drive and Southeast Little Club Way North in Tequesta and sits adjacent to the Little Club Condominium. The applicant said the property owner intends to enable a lot split and possible single-family use by moving to RS-10, which has a 40-foot minimum lot width versus HR-2's 100-foot requirement. Gaylord told the board the parcel survey shows a 160-foot lot width, and rezoning to RS-10 would allow configurations that create a separate lot for a home while retaining the existing cell-tower lease area.

RS-10 development standards cited in the staff report include a 4,500-square-foot minimum lot area, 40-foot minimum lot width, a maximum density of 10 units per acre, a 40-foot maximum height and a minimum of 50% open space; setbacks for a one-story structure were listed as 25 feet front, 10 feet rear and 5 feet side.

Several residents spoke during the public-comment portion, raising environmental and neighborhood concerns. Christine White asked whether an environmental study had been done after trees were cleared on the parcel: "They bulldozed all the trees down that the deer and protected turtles were living in … I would like to know if there was … an environmental study done," she said. D. D. McGill said earlier approvals for a cell tower had not been followed and argued the owner had "shown no regard for current law" and should not be granted further variances.

County staff responded to those concerns during and after public comment. Paul Shilling said county staff investigated the reported vegetation removal and concluded it involved invasive species removal and was related to compliance with the existing cell-tower approval. He told the LPA: "We investigated that and determined that that was invasive, and vegetation [removal] was conducted as part of also compliance being demonstrated with their current approval for the cell phone tower." Staff also noted that if protected species such as gopher tortoises are found on the property, a permit from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission would be required at the building-permit stage.

An intervener, identified in the record as Mr. Levine, asked whether the proceeding was strictly about zoning; Gaylord and staff confirmed the hearing was limited to the rezoning request and not to site-plan specifics such as traffic or exact building heights. The applicant and staff repeatedly emphasized that the hearing did not authorize vertical or horizontal construction.

After questions and public comment, a motion to approve the rezoning was made by Mr. Hartman and seconded by Dr. Brown. The LPA voted to approve the rezoning unanimously, 4-0. The board recorded no ex parte communications at the outset of the quasi-judicial hearing.

The approval updates the propertystatus to allow RS-10 zoning at this location; any subsequent proposals for construction, lot division or other development must return to county review for site-plan approval and public-facilities reservation as required by county regulations.