The most contentious topic at the meeting was the discussion surrounding the “rural lifestyle” future land use designation. This designation is designed to guide the development of rural communities while preserving open spaces. Proposed amendments aimed to limit the expansion of this designation, sparking considerable debate among board members and participants.

The existing language of the rural lifestyle designation allows for the clustering of units, which results in higher densities under specific conditions, such as proximity to the primary urban service district. It also mandates that for every two acres developed, one acre must be preserved under a perpetual easement. However, concerns were raised about the implications of limiting clustering, with one individual expressing that such limitations could lead to the development of “20-acre ranchets,” considered an undesirable form of sprawl. They emphasized the importance of maintaining ecological integrity, particularly due to the area’s proximity to Alipata, a natural region.

Adding to the debate, Morris Krady from Cedar Associates supported a proposed amendment allowing for changes to agricultural lands adjacent to existing projects. This was framed as necessary for potential expansion, though Krady acknowledged the need for balance, stressing that any application would undergo review by the LPA and county commission.

The proposed amendments included paragraphs C and D, which allowed for certain expansions under review. Debate ensued over these inclusions, with some members advocating for the amendments to aid development, while others emphasized the need to prioritize conservation of natural landscapes. Clarification was sought on whether the motion limited expansions, which it did. Despite dissent from one member who opposed the overall direction of the amendments, the motion passed with a 3-1 vote, highlighting a divide within the agency about balancing development with environmental conservation.

Beyond the rural lifestyle designation, the meeting also addressed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 24-25 related to the Coral Gardens vacuum station. Amy Offenbach from the Martin County Growth Management Department detailed the amendment, which proposed changing the future land use designation of a 4.2-acre property from institutional recreational to institutional general. This change was intended to facilitate the construction of a vacuum-based sewer system for approximately 638 homes in the Coral Gardens community. Offenbach emphasized that the amendment complied with state statutes and the county’s comprehensive growth management plan, particularly in discouraging urban sprawl. The board unanimously approved the staff’s recommendation to designate the property as institutional general.

Following this, a zoning change request for the same property was presented as a quasi-judicial matter. The request aimed to modify the zoning from public recreation to public service (PS1), aligning with the new institutional general land use designation. PS1 zoning allows for fewer and less intense uses than PS2.

The meeting also included discussion on Comprehensive Plan Amendment 24-26, which sought to modify the rural lifestyle text without altering future land use map amendments. Initiated by the Board of County Commissioners, the amendment aimed to revise requirements for properties designated as rural lifestyle, specifically regarding adjacency to urban service districts. Clyde Dulan explained that the changes would allow properties adjacent to the primary urban service district to qualify for rural lifestyle designation while eliminating references to secondary or freestanding urban service districts.

The proposed changes were expected to affect properties around the Gateway freestanding urban service district. Dulan noted that many surrounding properties were agricultural and less than 1,000 acres, making them ineligible for rural lifestyle designation. Existing properties adjacent to the primary urban service district would still qualify under the new regulations. The board unanimously approved the staff’s recommendations for both the zoning and comprehensive plan amendments.

The proposed amendments to the rural lifestyle designation reflect ongoing efforts to manage land use in a way that balances growth with the need to protect natural resources.