Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission postpones Keene Road rezoning after debate over site plan, traffic and 'Live Local' risks
Summary
The Board delayed a vote on a petition to rezone a 10‑acre Keene Road parcel from AG‑1 to light industrial after commissioners raised concerns about approving a blanket rezoning without a site plan, potential truck traffic on 10‑foot lanes, and eligibility for high‑density 'Live Local' uses.
The St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners voted to postpone consideration of a rezoning application for a 10‑acre Keene Road parcel, after an extended exchange among commissioners, planning staff and the applicant.
Planning staff described the proposal to amend zoning from AG‑1 (agricultural) to IL (industrial light). Planner Don Arellano told the board the parcel is within the Urban Services boundary, has access to water and sewer and is in the airport overlay. He also said staff received no specific development plans with the rezoning petition.
Commissioner Fowler said she was “not very eager to jump in and do a rezone without knowing what we're rezoning it to,” arguing the board should be able to plan for impacts and asked whether the rezoning meets comp‑plan standards. Commissioners and public‑works staff confirmed Keene Road currently has two 10‑foot travel lanes, which raised concern about potential semi‑truck traffic if industrial uses locate there.
Applicant Anya Knapinska said the family's intent was small warehousing and storage bays for small businesses, not large manufacturing, and that being rezoned would make development feasible with interested developers. Planning staff and commissioners discussed options including requiring a Planned Retail Workplace (PRW) or elevating a future site plan to a major site plan so the board could review impacts.
Outcome: after discussion and applicant input, Commissioner Townsend moved to postpone the rezoning to a date uncertain to allow the applicant to meet with an interested developer and staff to develop a site plan or clarify the intended use; the motion passed. The postponement preserves options to refile with a site plan or change the rezoning type at a later date.
Context: the board repeatedly cautioned against “blanket” rezonings without a concurrent site plan, noting permitted‑by‑right uses within the IL district could permit substantial development at staff level unless a site plan is elevated to a major review.
