BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY

Transcription

1 6C BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY PLACEMENT: PUBLIC HEARINGS PRESET: 1:35 PM TITLE: QUASI JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ATLAS TO ADD A NOISE COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY AGENDA ITEM DATES: MEETING DATE: 9/11/2012 COMPLETED DATE: 8/30/2012 COUNTY ATTORNEY: 8/20/2012 ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR: 8/27/2012 REQUESTED BY: DEPARTMENT: PREPARED BY: Name: George Stokus, Airport Manager Name: Procedures: Quasi-Judicial Procedures EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Growth Management Clyde Dulin Senior Planner This is a public hearing to consider an amendment to the Zoning Atlas adding a Noise Compatibility Overlay to an ±11.44 acre area located along both sides of S.E. St. Lucie Boulevard, east of Willoughby Creek and west of the intersection of S.E. Golfwood Drive and S.E. St. Lucie Boulevard. APPROVAL: LEG ACA CA BACKGROUND/RELATED STRATEGIC GOAL: PDF Page 1 of 19

2 Please see the attached staff report for a brief history of the Martin County Airport (Witham Field) and the 2002 noise compatibility study. The noise compatibility study was updated in 2010, approved by the Board, and approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The 2010 update to the noise compatibility study and Chapter 333, Florida Statutes are the basis for the proposed changes to Article 3, Zoning Districts. The Noise Contour lines in the 2010 noise compatibility study are the basis for the proposed zoning atlas amendment. ISSUES: 1. Please see Section C of the attached staff report for a review of the following subject: A Zoning Atlas amendment showing a hatching pattern where the Noise Compatibility Overlay would be applicable. The proposed zoning atlas amendment is dependent upon the Board s action on the Article 3 text amendments and requires only one public hearing. Accordingly, no action on the zoning atlas amendment was required on August 21. The Local Planning Agency considered the proposed amendments on July 19, With some changes, the LPA voted 3-1 to recommend the text changes to Article 3, Zoning Districts. The LPA also voted 3-1 to recommend amending the zoning atlas with the proposed overlay. Please see the attached staff report for more detail. RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board adopt the attached resolution amending the zoning atlas. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS Direct staff on changes to the proposed zoning atlas. FISCAL IMPACT: RECOMMENDATION Staff time. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS Staff time. DOCUMENT(S) REQUIRING ACTION: Budget Transfer / Amendment Chair Letter Contract / Agreement Grant / Application Notice Ordinance X Resolution Other: PDF Page 2 of 19

3 ROUTING: _ ADM _ BLD _ CDD _ COM _ ENG _ FRD _ GMD _ GSD _ ITS _ LIB _ MCA _ MPO _ PRD _ USD X CA X ACA X LEG PDF Page 3 of 19

4 QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEDURES 1. Ex parte disclosures by County Commissioners. NOTE: Chairman asks: "Do any commissioners have ex parte disclosures that have not been previously filed with the Clerk?" NOTE: Commissioners use written disclosure forms to disclose communications they had prior to this public meeting with persons interested in this matter. Copies of the disclosure are forms available from the Clerk. 2. If applicable, verification by Applicant that return receipts for notices have been filed with the Clerk. 3. Request for identification of any Intervenors. (In order to be an Intervenor, a person must qualify to receive mailed notice of the subject application in accordance with Section 10.6.E, Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code (property owners within 300 feet of the project if it is inside the urban service boundary, and within 600 feet of the project if it is outside the urban service boundary). Any person who qualifies may choose to be an Intervenor. In addition, an Intervenor must file a form of intent with the County Administrator not less than 7 days prior to the Board meeting. No fee will be assessed on Intervenor. If the Intervenor is representing a group/association, he/she must file a letter on official letterhead signed by an authorized representative of the group/association, stating that he/she is authorized to speak for the group.) 4. *Administration of oath to all witnesses. 5. Staff introduction of application. 6. Questions for Staff from County Commissioners. 7. Applicant presentation. (Applicant is encouraged to keep presentation clear, concise and to the point, at a maximum of 45 minutes. Applicant s questions for staff are to be asked during Applicant s 45 minute presentation. Staff responses to questions will be at the conclusion of the Applicant s presentation. All dvd, cd or video cassette tapes must be submitted for review by the County Administrator by the Friday prior to the meeting.) 8. Questions for Applicant from County Commissioners, Intervenor, and Staff. 9. Intervenor presentations. (Intervenors are encouraged to keep presentation clear, concise and to the point, at a maximum of 45 minutes for all Intervenors collectively. Intervenors questions for staff are to be asked during Intervenors collective 45 minute presentation. Staff responses to questions will be at the conclusion of Intervenors presentation(s). All dvd, cd or video cassette tapes must be submitted for review by the County Administrator by the Friday prior to the meeting.) 10.Questions for Intervenor(s) from Board of County Commissioners, Applicant, Staff. 11.Public Comments. 12.Intervenor(s) rebuttal and/or final comments (maximum 20 minutes collectively). 13.Applicant rebuttal and/or final comments (maximum 20 minutes). 14.Staff Final Comments. 15.County Commissioners final questions, deliberation and decision. PDF Page 4 of 19

5 MARTIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REQUEST TO INTERVENE Date: Proposal/Project Name: Agenda Date: Agenda Item Number: An intervenor is a person who qualifies under the Land Development Regulations to receive mailed notice regarding the subject matter (property owners within 300 feet of the project if it is inside the urban service boundary, and within 600 feet of the project if it is outside the urban service boundary). Any person who qualifies may choose to be an Intervenor, or to just offer public comment. Someone who does not qualify to be an Intervenor, or could qualify, but chooses not to be one, will be allowed to speak briefly on his or her own behalf, either to present facts or to state opinions, during public comments on the application. It should be noted that being an Intervenor in a matter under consideration by the Board does not guarantee that the Intervenor can challenge or appeal the final decision in a judicial or administrative proceeding. Also, being an Intervenor here may not even be a prerequisite to filing a challenge or appeal of the final decision, depending upon what state laws or court rules require. Please complete the following information and return this form to the County Administrator at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing on the matter. No fee will be assessed. If requesting to intervene as a group, provide on group s letterhead, signed by an authorized representative of the group, stating the name of the group and the name of the individual who is authorized to speak for the group. Only one request needs to be submitted per each matter for which status as an Intervenor is sought, irrespective of the number of hearings to be held on the matter. All dvd, cd or video cassette tapes must be submitted for review by the County Administrator (or designee) by the Friday prior to the meeting. A Request to Intervene may be used only for the purpose of presenting evidence and testimony on a matter, and not merely to extend the time allowed to an individual to speak during public comments. (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) Name (individual or group representative): Group Name (if applicable): Address: City: Zip Code: Telephone: 1. Explain what interest(s) you, as an individual or group, believe will be impacted by the proposal. Examples of interests include health and safety, police and fire protection service systems, transportation facilities, and economic, environmental or natural resources. (Attach separate sheet, if more space is needed.) 2. State your position regarding the proposal. (Attach separate sheet, if more space is needed.) 3. State all facts you believe support your position. (Attach separate sheet, if more space is needed.) PDF Page 5 of 19

6 { MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA Comprehensive Planning Division Article 3, Division 2, Standard Zoning Districts Noise Compatibility Overlay Project 1. Amend Article 3 to create restrictions/regulations for properties impacted by air traffic and thus comply with Federal Aviation Administration grant requirements. Amend Article 3 to include school construction zones, consistent with Chapter 333, Florida Statutes. 2. Amend the Zoning Atlas to locate the Noise Compatibility Overlay. Staff Clyde Dulin, Senior Planner; George Stokus, Airport Director. Date of this Report August 22, 2012 A. Background History: With the onset of World War II patriotic private land owners offered their property to Martin County to build an airport. In October 1942 Martin County leased 900 acres to the federal government for use as a military training field. The Navy assumed operation of the airport and committed $10 million to construct and operate it. On July 1, 1947 the property was returned to Martin County. During the 1950 s and 1960 s Northrup Grumman leased the property, conducted flight-testing and began to manufacture various aircraft. 1 Also in 1947 the Whiticar Boat Works began operation. 2 Please see the attached 1958 aerial photograph which also shows what appears to be clearing for the Martin County Golf and Country Club. The layout of streets and the development pattern of this area began with the recordation of the Port Sewall Plat in Please see a reduced copy of the Plat and an excerpt from that Plat showing the same area in question today. However, most of the lots in that plat were not developed by Comparing the 1911 Plat to the zoning map one can see that entire blocks of the Port Sewell plat were included in what became an airport in the 1940s. The first zoning code and zoning map in Martin County was adopted in 1967 and the adoption of the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan occurred in Please see Figure 2, an excerpt from the Zoning Map. The zoning districts were assigned consistent with the public and private uses of the land at the airport, the golf course and the private property along St. Lucie Boulevard. The zoning districts assigned in 1967 may have been tailored to the lot sizes already established. Likewise, the future land use designations assigned in 1982 may have been chosen to fit the zoning districts already assigned in The Residential Estate Density future land use (maximum two units per acre) occurs on many of the 1 Martin County Airport web page 2 Whiticar Marine web page. 1 PDF Page 6 of 19

7 same areas where the WE-1 zoning district requires a minimum 30,000 square foot lot size. The Low Density Residential future land use (permits five units per acre) occurs on many of the same areas as the R-1C zoning district, requiring minimum 15,000 square foot lots. Adoption of the Future Land Use designations in 1982 also respected the existing development. See Figure 1 where a single parcel has the Waterfront Commercial future land use. See the single blue parcel at the end of the hatching pattern. It is the location of the Whiticar Boat Works. Recent History: Unlike the 1958 aerial photograph, many more homes are now located at the end of runway 12/30. In 2002 Martin County completed its first Compatibility Study for the airport. The study included two volumes of documentation: (1) a Noise Exposure Map and (2) a Noise Compatibility Program. One outcome of the Study was Voluntary Noise Abatement Procedures and a Nighttime Curfew which all pilots using the field are encouraged to follow. Also included in the Part 150 Study was the recommendation to purchase and insulate homes in the most noise impacted areas surrounding the airport. The program is known as the Home Acquisition Program (HAP) and is currently funded primarily by Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) grants. The HAP provides for the purchase and relocation of residences in noise impacted areas with the initial effort focused upon those within the DNL contours in the 2002 Noise Exposure Maps that were included in the Part 150 Study. 3 The DNL contours mentioned above are a measure of noise levels that average the Day and Night Levels. Please see the attached map showing Noise Exposure Contour Comparison. It shows the 65 decibel noise contour line in 2002, 2007 and Updates to the 2002 maps were completed in 2010, adopted by the Martin County Board of County Commissioners and accepted by the FAA. In addition to adopting updated noise contour lines in 2010 Martin County also adopted Table 3-2 Martin County Noise / Land Use Compatibility Guidelines as part of the Noise Compatibility Program. 4 Current Proposal A Noise Compatibility Overlay is now proposed to appear as a hatching pattern on top of the existing R- 1C and WE-1 zoning districts. Please see Figure 2. A change from these zoning districts to another district is not proposed. New or additional uses will not be permitted. There will be no change to the setbacks, minimum lot sizes, building height or open space requirements for the affected properties. The proposed overlay will thus have no change to the character of the larger area where the same zoning districts have been in place since The proposed amendment to the zoning regulations implement the guidelines of Table 3-2. The proposed Noise Compatibility Overlay is based upon the projected noise contour lines for 2015 that were generated in the 2010 study approved by the Board and the FAA. The proposed changes will be on ±11.5 acres along both sides of S.E. St. Lucie Boulevard south of the Martin County Airport and the Martin County Golf Course. The proposed zoning code text change will limit allowed uses to singlefamily residential development and establish minimum sound insulation requirements for properties in the Noise Compatibility Overlay. Please see the attached inter-office memorandum gmd2012m.306 dated April 19, It contains draft text that was presented to the Airport Noise Advisory Committee 3 Martin County Airport Web page 4 Martin County Airport/Witham Field Noise Exposure Map Update, September Presented to the Martin County Board of County Commissioners September 14, PDF Page 7 of 19

8 (ANAC). One paragraph from that memorandum was recommended for removal by the Airport Noise Advisory Committee. The paragraph is not included in the attached draft ordinance and staff has made other changes, including recommendations made by the Local Planning Agency. The proposed amendment to the zoning atlas will overlay a hatching pattern on the existing zoning districts that follows the 60 decibel noise exposure contour line. The proposed Noise Compatibility Overlay is represented by the hatching pattern on Figure 2. Failure to adopt zoning regulations would jeopardize the availability of future grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration. B. Amendment to the text of Article 3, Zoning Districts Article 3, Zoning Districts only regulates land in unincorporated Martin County. All of the descriptions of noise contour lines relative to geographic locations in this staff report refer to the unincorporated area of Martin County southeast of runway 12/30. The Noise Compatibility Overlay proposed herein has no applicability to the City of Stuart. The proposed text creates Section 3.33.A. within Article 3, Zoning Districts and identifies Zone A and Zone B of the Noise Compatibility Overlay. Please see the attached draft Ordinance. Zone A represents that area where the average Day/Night noise level (DNL) ranges between 65 and 70 decibels. Please see the attached Noise Compatibility Overlay Draft. A hatching pattern for Zone A is not proposed for addition to the Zoning Map at this time because the most recent noise study does not show it on any private property. A hatching pattern is not proposed for all of Zone B because the proposed regulations will not affect that portion of Zone B on the Airport and the Martin County Golf and Country Club. It is appropriate to note the noise contour lines shown on the draft Noise Compatibility Overlay are 2015 projections and differ from the noise contour lines mapped in 2002, 2007 and Please see the Noise Exposure Contour Comparison. A future update to the noise study could show the noise contour lines move again. If the noise contour lines do move again as a result of another noise study the zoning map will need to be amended. The proposed text describes Zone B as that area bounded by the 60 and 65 DNL lines. The 60 DNL line extends beyond the Martin County Golf and Country Club and across S.E. St. Lucie Boulevard. If, at some point in the future, the 65 DNL line extends beyond the Martin County Golf and Country Club it would be necessary to distinguish between Zone A and Zone B on private property. Sections 3.33.A.2. thru 4 provide guidance for the inclusion or exclusion of a parcel in Zone A or Zone B. Sections 3.33.A.5. thru 7. provide guidance for the inclusion or exclusion of a parcel in Zone B. Where only a small portion of a parcel is within the 60 DNL line it would not be necessary to include the entire parcel and potentially apply restrictions to habitable structures that are outside the line. Section 3.33.A.8. exempts development in the Martin County Airport and development governed by the PAF and PS zoning districts. Most of the Martin County Airport has the PAF or public airport facility district while the Martin County Golf and Country Club has the PS, Public Service zoning district. The Noise Compatibility Overlay will not apply to either public property. Section 3.33.B. limits the permitted uses to single-family residential units which make up the majority of structures within the proposed Zone B. The text proposed in the attached draft ordinance will effectively prohibit the other permitted uses shown in the attached excerpt from Table , LDR. It will not prohibit any existing use from continuing in perpetuity nor will it require additional insulation of existing homes to occur at a scheduled time. 3 PDF Page 8 of 19

9 Section 3.33.B.1 protects existing uses (and new uses constructed consistent with the overlay) regardless of future changes to the Noise Compatibility Overlay. Example, a bed and breakfast is constructed in 2013 on a parcel outside the hatched area of the Noise Compatibility Overlay. In 2020 an updated noise study requires the Noise Compatibility Overlay to be expanded to include the bed and breakfast parcel. The bed and breakfast use would be protected regardless of a future change to the Noise Compatibility Overlay. Documenting the dates permitted uses are established will be important to property owners. In addition to site built, single family structures modular homes constructed to meet the insulation requirements and accessory structures will be permitted. In fact, Section 3.33.C. uses the term habitable residential structures when discussing insulation requirements. Accessory structures such as garages, sheds and pools will be allowed as accessory uses and will not require insulation. FAA grants do not provide funding for insulating commercial structures. Therefore, the word residential has been added to exclude insulation requirements for the structures at the Whiticar Boat Works. Section 3.33.C.1. is included only because of the possibility of the 65 DBL noise contour line could move outside the Martin County Golf and Country Club and thus affect existing residences again. If that situation were to occur the language to address this will already be in the code. Only the zoning map would need to be amended. Sections 3.33.C.2., 3. and 4. would be directly applicable to the single family residential units in the hatched area showing the Noise Compatibility Overlay. Section 3.33.C. 1 and 2 require new construction and substantial improvements to existing structures include sound insulation described in Section 3.33.C.3. The term substantial improvements is currently defined in two other sections of the LDR. Article 8, Nonconformities and Article 4, Division 9, Stormwater Management and Flood Control both set the threshold for substantial improvements at 50 percent of the assessed value of a structure. Public comment has been submitted on this subject and the Airport Noise Advisory Committee discussed the subject at their July 19, 2012 meeting. Staff recommended the Local Planning Agency increase the percentage to increase the size and type of renovations a property owner may undertake prior to insulating at the higher standard. The Local Planning Agency recommended a 90 percent threshold and that number is reflected in the attached draft ordinance. Section 3.34., School Construction Zones is unrelated to the Noise Compatibility Overlay. This text is proposed in order to comply with Chapter (3), Florida Statutes. Please see the following excerpt from Florida Statutes: Such regulations shall prohibit the construction of an educational facility of a public or private school at either end of a runway of a publicly owned, public-use airport within an area which extends 5 miles in a direct line along the centerline of the runway, and which has a width measuring one-half the length of the runway. Exceptions approving construction of an educational facility within the delineated area shall only be granted when the political subdivision administering the zoning regulations makes specific findings detailing how the public policy reasons for allowing the construction outweigh health and safety concerns prohibiting such a location. Please also see the attached map titled School Construction Zones. It outlines in red the areas which extend 5 miles in a direct line along the centerline of the runways, and which has a width one-half the length of the runway. These documents were forwarded to the Martin County School District prior to the Local Planning Agency public hearing. School District staff recommended adding the word new to the proposed language so that it is clear existing schools are not affected. This change is also consistent 4 PDF Page 9 of 19

10 with Florida Statutes. Board of County Commissioner staff and the Local Planning Agency also recommend adding the word new to Section Though the text proposed for Section 3.34 may affect the ability of private education facilities to locate along the centerline of a runway and within 5 miles of the Martin County Airport, it will not affect the location of public or private educational facilities relative to private airports. The attached map of School Construction Zones is not proposed for addition to the zoning code nor does it require an amendment to the zoning map. C. Noise Compatibility Overlay amendment to the Zoning Map 1. The following excerpt from Section 3.2.E., LDR establishes standards for amendments to the zoning map. See the text highlighted in gray. It clearly provides the Board of County Commissioners the discretion to limit the maximum allowable development on any given parcel. The proposed overlay will limit the permitted uses for properties in the Noise Compatibility Overlay however, it will continue to provide development opportunities consistent with the CGMP. The Future Land Use Map of the CGMP establishes the optimum overall distribution of land uses. The CGMP also establishes a series of land use categories which provide, among other things, overall density and intensity limits. The Future Land Use Map shall not be construed to mean that every parcel is guaranteed the maximum density and intensity possible pursuant to the CGMP and these Land Development Regulations. All goals, objectives and policies of the CGMP shall be considered when a proposed rezoning is considered. The County shall have the discretion to decide that the development allowed on any given parcel of land shall be more limited than the maximum allowable under the assigned Future Land Use Category; provided, however, that the County shall approve some development that is consistent with the CGMP, and the decision is fairly debatable or is supported by substantial, competent evidence depending on the fundamental nature of the proceeding. If upon reviewing a proposed rezoning request the County determines that the Future Land Use designation of the CGMP is inappropriate, the County may deny such rezoning request and initiate an appropriate amendment to the CGMP. In the review of a proposed amendment to the Zoning Atlas, the Board of County Commissioners shall consider the following quoted excerpts from Article 3, Zoning Districts. The italic text is analysis provided by staff. a. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; and The existing zoning districts R-1C and WE-1 are consistent with the respective future land use designations Low Density Residential and Residential Estate Density. Please see Figure 1 and Figure 2. The proposed overlay will not allow new uses. It will permit the existing single-family residential uses permitted by the future land use designations. The proposed Overlay zoning text will permit the continuation of existing uses, currently established. It should be noted there is one other future land use designation in this area. A single parcel has the Commercial Waterfront future land use and the WE-1 zoning district. The WE-1 zoning district is not consistent with the Commercial Waterfront future land use designation. The proposed Noise Compatibility Overlay will not affect the uses permitted by the Commercial Waterfront future land use and the continued operation of the boatyard on the site. As proposed, Section 3.33.B.1. states: Nothing in Section 3.33., shall prohibit the continued use or enjoyment of a use legally established prior to adoption of the Noise Compatibility Overlay on XX, PDF Page 10 of 19

11 b. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all applicable provisions of the LDR; and The proposed amendment to the zoning map is being done concurrently with a proposed amendment to the text of Article 3, zoning districts. Neither amendment to the zoning map nor the zoning regulations will provide for new or additional uses that could conflict with the existing provisions of the LDR. c. Whether the proposed district amendment is compatible with the character of the existing land uses in the adjacent and surrounding area and the peculiar suitability of the property for the proposed zoning use; and Neither the amendment to the zoning map nor the zoning regulations will provide for new or additional uses that could conflict with the existing land uses in the adjacent and surrounding area. d. Whether and to what extent there are documented changed conditions in the area; and The area has been largely residential with specifically single-family residential units for approximately 100 years. The proposed Noise Compatibility Overlay will not change that pattern. A documented change to the area has been the purchase by Martin County of eight private properties with FAA grant funds. e. Whether and to what extent the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities; and The proposed change will limit potential uses to those uses already established, single-family residential uses. It will prevent more intense uses that will result in additional fire, police, utility or other services. The proposed Overlay will facilitate the continued provision of FAA grant funds for the acquisition of additional property and the insulation of existing homes and thus limit the impact from air traffic. f. Whether and to what extent the proposed amendment would result in a logical, timely and orderly development pattern which conserves the value of existing development and is an appropriate use of the County's resources; and The existing development pattern within the proposed Overlay is almost exclusively single-family residential and will be preserved as single-family residential. Facilitating additional grant funds will permit existing residences to be insulated from outside noise and require new construction or reconstruction of residences to be better insulated against noise. g. Consideration of the facts presented at the public hearings. On July 19, 2012 the Local Planning Agency considered the proposed Noise Compatibility Overlay regulations and the location of the proposed overlay on the zoning map where the regulations would be applicable. The Local Planning Agency voted 3-1 to recommend approval of amending the zoning map. 2. Amendments to the zoning map must be consistent with the Future Land Use Map an exhibit to the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan. Figure 1, Future Land Use Map Excerpt shows the 60 DNL noise contour occurring on five future land use designations. 6 PDF Page 11 of 19

12 General Institutional permits a variety of public services and facilities. Recreational permits active recreational uses such as a public golf course. Low Density Residential permits a maximum of five residential units per acre. Residential Estate Density permits a maximum of two residential units per acre. Commercial Waterfront permits either residential units or waterfront dependent uses such as marinas and boat building. As discussed above the Noise Compatibility Overlay will not be applicable to the public property with the PS and PAF zoning districts. These zoning districts correspond to the General Institutional and Recreational future land use designations on the Airport property and the Martin County Golf and Country Club. The proposed Noise Compatibility Overlay will continue to permit single family residential structures consistent with the R-1C and the WE-1 zoning districts and the Low Density Residential and Residential Estate Density future land use designations. As discussed above, the proposed Noise Compatibility Overlay will not affect the uses permitted by the Commercial Waterfront future land use. As proposed, Section 3.33.B.1. states: Nothing in Section 3.33., shall prohibit the continued use or enjoyment of a use legally established prior to adoption of the Noise Compatibility Overlay on XX, D. Conclusion Staff recommends approval of the proposed text to Article 3, Zoning Districts and the proposed Noise Compatibility Overlay. The proposed changes will not prohibit any activity currently occurring in the and it should satisfy FAA grant requirements so the voluntary noise abatement program can continue to assist property owners most affected by air traffic at the south end of Runway 12/30.. E. Attachments Draft Ordinance 1958 Aerial Photograph Port Sewell Plat, 1911 Excerpt of the 1911 Port Sewell Plat Figure 1, Future Land Use Map Excerpt Figure 2, Zoning Map Excerpt Figure 3, Aerial Photograph Noise Exposure Contour Comparision Table 3-2, Martin County Noise / Land Use Compatibility Guidelines. Excerpted from the Martin County Airport/Witham Field Noise Exposure Map Update, September Memorandum gmd2012m.306 Excerpt from Table , Article 3, Zoning Districts, Martin County Land Development Regulations. School Construction Zones Map Public Comment. Slide Presentation 7 PDF Page 12 of 19

13 Figure 2, Zoning Map Excerpt Noise Compatibility Overlay, Application N PAF PS Zone A of the Overlay Zone B of the Overlay R-1C St. Lucie Blvd. 70 DNL 2015 Projection Only hatching will be added to Zoning Map 65 DNL 2015 Projection 60 DNL 2015 Projection WE-1 St. Lucie River Indian St. Willoughby Creek PDF Page 13 of 19

14 Prepared By: Clyde Dulin Martin County Growth Management Department 2401 S.E. Monterey Road Stuart, FL [space above line provided for recording data] BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA RESOLUTION NUMBER 12-x.x A RESOLUTION OF MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA, REGARDING AN APPLICATION BY THE MARTIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO ADD A NOISE COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY TO THE ZONING ATLAS FOR A ACRE AREA LOCATED ALONG BOTH SIDES OF S.E. ST. LUCIE BOULEVARD, EAST OF WILLOUGHBY CREEK AND WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF S.E. GOLFWOOD DRIVE AND ST. LUCIE BOULEVARD. WHEREAS, this Board has made the following determinations of fact: 1. The Martin County Airport Director submitted an application to create a Noise Compatibility Zoning Overlay, for the property described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. 2. The Local Planning Agency heard the application at a public hearing on July 19, 2012 and recommended its approval to the Board of County Commissioners. 3. This Board has considered such recommendations. 4. Upon proper notice of hearing this Board held a public hearing on the application on September 11, At the public hearing, all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT: A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3.33., Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code, the Noise Compatibility Zoning Atlas Overlay is hereby added to the Martin County Zoning Atlas for the property described in Exhibit A attached hereto. B. This resolution shall be recorded in the public records of Martin County. A copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to the applicant(s) by the Growth Management Department subsequent to recording. PDF Page 14 of 19

15 DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: MARSHA EWING, CLERK BY: EDWARD V. CIAMPI, CHAIRMAN APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: KRISTA A. STOREY SENIOR ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY PDF Page 15 of 19

16 PDF Page 16 of 19

17 PDF Page 17 of 19

18 PDF Page 18 of 19

19 PDF Page 19 of 19