Board directs staff to draft amendment to end new freestanding urban service districts, allows limited expansion of existing sites

Martin County commissioners on Jan. 28 gave staff direction to prepare a text amendment to the county’s comprehensive growth management plan to remove the option to create new freestanding urban service districts (FUSBs) for industrial uses, while allowing limited expansion of the four existing FUSBs under narrowly defined conditions.

Staff said the initiative responds to a 2023 commercial and industrial needs analysis showing the county has sufficient industrial land for the foreseeable future and that freestanding urban service districts can strain county resources and complicate planning when created without coordinated urban service boundaries.

County executive and planning staff explained the proposed amendment would be prospective — it would not retroactively impair existing applications or existing FUSBs — and could include language to allow modest expansions of contiguous, already‑designated FUSBs. During discussion commissioners asked staff to return with specific language options; several commissioners suggested limiting expansions to a percentage of an existing FUSB’s acreage rather than a flat acreage cap. The board coalesced around direction for staff to return with options that would (a) prohibit new freestanding urban service district designations, (b) grandfather existing pending applications, and (c) permit modest expansion of existing FUSBs with a recommended working cap of 10 percent of the existing district acreage.

Commissioners and staff debated how to define expansions that remain “contiguous” and how to prevent a repeated sequence of small expansions that could effectively enlarge a district substantially over time. Planning staff advised these points could be addressed in code definitions and in the ordinance language brought back to the board. Staff also said existing applications that predate any board action would continue to be processed under current rules and could be “grandfathered” where appropriate.

Commissioner discussion stressed balancing two goals: protecting county infrastructure and resources from unconstrained urban service expansions while preserving flexibility for existing property owners to consolidate and wisely manage their holdings. Commissioners asked staff to include options in the drafted amendment that would: define contiguity, allow a one‑time or cumulative limit on expansion (the board recommended a 10 percent cap as starting guidance), and explicitly protect current pending applications from retroactive changes.

The board voted unanimously to adopt the attached resolution initiating the text amendment process and directed staff to return with draft ordinance language and an analysis of options for controlling expansion scope and definitions.