At the heart of the meeting was a proposal to amend the future land use map to accommodate a new mixed-use development that would transform a formerly commercial site into a neighborhood special district. This change would allow for increased residential density, with up to 15 dwelling units per acre compared to the current allowance of 10. The project, presented by the city’s development director, Jody Cougler, on behalf of HJA Design Studios LLC and MacArthur Summers PA, seeks to integrate residential, commercial, and recreational spaces.

Traffic implications of the project were a concern. According to a report by the city’s traffic consultant, the development is projected to generate 2,382 daily trips, although this represents a net reduction compared to the site’s previous commercial zoning. Nevertheless, community members expressed apprehension about the impact on local road networks and accessibility, particularly with the opening of a new Costco in the vicinity.

Another aspect of the proposal was the height of the proposed structures, which included two four-story buildings and one three-story building. Community residents, particularly those from the adjacent Willoughby community, voiced strong opposition to the height increase, citing a longstanding ordinance limiting building heights to 26 feet. Many residents argued that such tall buildings would alter the small-town charm of Stuart and negatively affect property values.

The board also heard from a representative of the applicant’s team, who emphasized their commitment to community integration through urban design techniques, community feedback incorporation, and long-term investment. They highlighted planned amenities such as green spaces, playgrounds, and pedestrian pathways, aiming to create a walkable, community-friendly environment. The developer assured that the project would provide approximately 100 to 120 new jobs with an average salary of $72,000, presenting it as a boon to local employment and economic growth.

Despite the presentation’s focus on community benefits, several residents remained unconvinced. Concerns about noise, visibility, and potential disruptions to the adjacent golf course community were voiced. The proposed buildings’ potential to overshadow existing residential areas and disrupt the community’s aesthetic was a repeated theme, with residents calling for adherence to previous height commitments.

The board’s discussion also touched on the absence of a formal staff recommendation for the project, which some members found concerning. Staff explained their hesitance to provide a recommendation, citing their late involvement and the project’s complexity. This uncertainty led to questions about setting a precedent for future projects and the potential implications of changing land use designations.

Amidst these discussions, one board member raised the importance of adhering to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process, which would require comprehensive review and approval for any future changes. This process, they argued, would provide a safeguard against unchecked density increases and ensure that community concerns are addressed throughout the development lifecycle.

Ultimately, the board voted on the land use amendment, passing it with a 4 to 1 vote. A subsequent motion regarding the project itself also passed, incorporating recommendations for further community engagement and aesthetic adjustments to better align with the coastal character of the area. The motion passed narrowly, with a vote of 3 to 2.