County approves mandatory rezoning of 4 56 South Ocean LLC to AR‑5A over split‑zoning objections

The Martin County Board of County Commissioners voted 3–2 to adopt a resolution rezoning 38 parcels owned by 4 56 South Ocean LLC, about 1,913.23 acres in Palm City, from older A‑1 (small farms) and A‑2 (agricultural) districts to AR‑5A (agricultural ranchette).

Brian Elam, principal planner with the Growth Management Department, told the board the request was a mandatory rezoning because the existing A‑2 zoning is inconsistent with the county’s agricultural ranchette future‑land‑use designation and recommended approval. ‘‘Staff recommends approval of the rezoning by 4 56 South Ocean LLC from A‑1 small farms district and A‑2 agricultural district to AR‑5A agricultural ranchette district,’’ Elam said.

The rezoning would implement the county’s Comprehensive Growth Management Plan by replacing obsolete category C zones (A‑1 and A‑2) with the category A AR‑5A district, which the county describes as allowing one unit per five acres. Elam’s presentation noted the AR‑5A zoning would reduce density compared with A‑1 (which allows one unit per two acres) and align the site’s zoning with neighboring properties already rezoned or developed at five‑acre minimums.

Bob Raines, an attorney with Gunster representing the applicant, said the request reflected historical intent and existing development patterns and asked the board to approve the AR‑5A designation. Taylor Panconian, a planner for Harte Howerton who presented on behalf of the applicant, told commissioners the AR‑5A zone ‘‘serves as an appropriate transect from the higher density properties within the urban service district to the more rural properties to the west.’’

Several commissioners questioned whether the site should retain split zoning. Commissioner Vargas pressed for retaining different standards on the eastern parcels, saying the split A‑1/A‑2 pattern may have been an intentional transition and recommending that ‘‘the eastern portion . . . the A‑1 parcels have AR‑5 and the A‑2 parcels AR‑10.’’ Vargas voted against the rezoning. Chair Hurd also dissented.

Commissioner Campey moved to accept staff’s recommendation; Commissioner Hetherington seconded. The motion passed 3–2. The record shows the Local Planning Agency had voted 4–0 to recommend approval to the board, and development review staff found the application compliant with applicable regulations.

Because the action implements a map amendment required by the county’s future‑land‑use designations, staff described it as a ‘‘mandatory rezoning’’ rather than a discretionary upzoning. The board did not attach additional special conditions to the resolution. The rezoning takes effect as provided in the adopted resolution.

Next steps cited by staff include recording the resolution and updating the county Zoning Atlas and administrative records.