Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation Agreement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board hears discussion of proposed phased annexation agreement with Ashley Capital
Summary
Representatives for Ashley Capital described plans for a new mixed industrial/commercial park on Kings Highway and requested an annexation agreement that would allow county approvals and phased annexations after construction; the planning board expressed general support and staff will report back to the city commission.
The Fort Pierce Planning Board on Monday heard a presentation and discussion about a proposed annexation agreement with Ashley Capital for a multi‑phase commercial and industrial development along Kings Highway.
Lee Dobins, attorney for the applicant, summarized the project background: Ashley Capital responded to a 2022 county RFP to develop county‑owned land in the DeSerta Research Park and entered an option agreement with St. Lucie County in 2024. Dobins said Ashley Capital seeks to complete county land‑development approvals, build the improvements under county permits and then be annexed into the city in phases after construction and issuance of county certificates of occupancy. He said the option agreement with the county contains a reverter clause tied to build‑out timeframes, and the applicant is seeking certainty that mid‑stream annexation would not require retroactive plan amendments or otherwise delay construction.
City staff and the applicant said an existing interlocal annexation agreement between the city, county, FPUA and DeSerta (originally adopted in 2010 and amended in January) already contemplates phased annexations along Kings Highway, and the proposed agreement before the board is intended to provide a mechanism so county approvals need not be reworked mid‑construction. Ashley Capital representatives Jill Marasa and Ryan Bloss described the company’s approach: a long‑term ownership model building Class A smaller‑bay commercial product (from roughly 4,000 square feet up to buildings in the 100,000–200,000 square‑foot range) targeted to manufacturing, aviation and trade clusters in the region.
Board members asked why the developer would not seek immediate annexation and proceed under city codes; applicants said the county‑option structure and the county’s requirement to complete approvals and close under county‑based conditions are necessary to secure the purchase and that the county’s reverter clause creates a build‑out timetable the developer must meet. City staff said the interlocal agreement and discussions to date made the phased annexation approach workable, and board members indicated general support for moving the draft agreement to the city commission for formal consideration and action.
No formal action was taken by the planning board at the hearing; staff said they will report the board’s comments to the city commission.
