BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY

6H BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY PLACEMENT: PUBLIC HEARINGS PRESET: TITLE: LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER TRANSMITTAL OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK, A FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT AGENDA ITEM DATES: MEETING DATE: 4/19/2016 COMPLETED DATE: 4/7/2016 COUNTY ATTORNEY: 3/28/2016 ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR: 4/4/2016 REQUESTED BY: DEPARTMENT: PREPARED BY: Name: Deborah Drum Growth Management Richard Lawton Name: Ecosystem Manager Procedures: None EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Planner II A request for the Board of County Commissioners to consider transmittal of Comprehensive Plan Amendment 16-8, Maggy s Hammock Park, a Future Land Use Map amendment. APPROVAL: LEG ACA CA BACKGROUND/RELATED STRATEGIC GOAL: 807692bc 1 of 62

In accordance with Sections 163.3174(4)(a) and 163.3184(3)(c)1 and (11), Florida Statutes, all Plan amendments require three public hearings. In accordance with Section 163.3174(4)(a), the first public hearing for this Plan amendment was conducted before the Local Planning Agency on January 21, 2016. At the second hearing, held in accordance with Section 163.3184(3) and (11), the Board of County Commissioners determines whether to transmit or not transmit plan amendments as part of a set of amendments. Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes requires state, regional and local reviewing agencies to provide comments to the County. The state and regional reviewing agencies are required to review the amendment to ascertain if there are any impacts to important state resources and facilities. The state and regional reviewing agencies are required to provide their comments, if any, to Martin County within 30 days of the agency receipt of the amendments. If comments are received regarding impact to state resources and facilities, they must be addressed prior to adoption of the ordinance. Failure to successfully address impacts to state resources and facilities may form the basis for a challenge to the amendment after adoption. Pursuant to Section 163.3184(3)(c)1 and (11), Florida Statutes, Martin County must hold the adoption public hearing within 180 days after the receipt of those comments. If Martin County fails to hold an adoption public hearing, the amendment shall be deemed withdrawn unless extended by agreement and notice to the State Land Planning Agency and any affected party that provided comments on the amendment. If approved within 180 days, Martin County has ten days to send the amendment adoption package to the State Land Planning Agency. The State Land Planning Agency has five days to find the amendment adoption package complete. If an affected party challenges the adoption of a plan amendment, the petition must be filed within 30 days of the adoption date of the amendment. If the State Land Planning Agency challenges the adoption of a plan amendment, the petition must be filed within 30 days of the completeness determination by the State Land Planning Agency. Decisions approving or rejecting proposed amendments constitute legislative actions because they involve the policy making function of the BCC. They are different from rezoning and site plan decisions which are quasi-judicial actions involving the application of general rules of policy to specific situations. If approval of a Comprehensive Plan amendment is challenged by an affected person, the approval will be sustained if it complies with Florida Statutes regarding (1) procedural requirements (e.g. proper notice, public hearing), and (2) substantive requirements (e.g. adequate data and analysis, internal consistency). The fairly debatable standard is applicable to the review and requires judicial approval of a BCC approval if reasonable persons could differ as to the propriety of the decision. For example, if a petitioner were to claim that an amendment adopted a provision that was not consistent with an existing provision of the Comprehensive Plan, the court would strike down the amendment only if the court found no reasonable person would think that the two provisions are consistent. If approval of a Comprehensive Plan amendment is challenged by the State Land Planning Agency, the process for the administrative review will be as provided in Section 163.3184(5) F.S. Challenges to a denial of a Comprehensive Plan amendment have an even more difficult burden. Since the Comprehensive Plan is already in place, the County does not have to meet the statutory, procedural or substantive requirements in order to deny an amendment. Thus, challengers ordinarily seek a remedy based on constitutional claims or some other basis. ISSUES: 807692bc 2 of 62

A separate Board item has been created for each of the Plan amendments. Each Plan amendment will be considered separately by the Board pursuant to legislative public hearing procedures. At the conclusion of the presentation of a given Plan amendment, the Board will be asked to either approve, approve with changes, deny or continue the proposed Plan amendment to a future date. In order to ensure that all amendments follow the same schedule and are consistent with each other, the actions of the Board on a date other than the final hearing date should be limited to the taking of a straw vote on whether to transmit or adopt the amendment and to continue the item to a future date so that it may be consolidated with other items to be transmitted or adopted as part of a single submission. However, should the Board decide on any hearing dates not to transmit or adopt a particular amendment, such item may simply be denied and no further action is needed. A sample motion for approval would be: I move approval of CPA 16-8, Maggy s Hammock Park, future land use map amendment, and for this item to be continued to April 20, 2016, so that it can be consolidated with all other approved amendments into a single submission. A sample motion for denial would be: I move denial of CPA 16-8, Maggy s Hammock Park, future land use map amendment. At the end of the final day of review, the Board will be able to transmit or adopt the list of approved amendments, either individually or as a group, without further public input or Board deliberation, as the Board deems appropriate. LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW: This is a legislative matter. Legislative decisions are those in which the local government formulates policy rather than applying specific rules to a particular situation. A local government s approval or denial of an issue in its legislative capacity is typically subject to a fairly debatable standard of review. Fairly debatable means that the government s action must be upheld if reasonable minds could differ as to the propriety of the decision reached. Decisions subject to the fairly debatable standard of review need only be rationally related to a legitimate public purpose, such as the health, safety, and welfare of the public, to be valid. Given this broad discretion, only decisions that are arbitrary and capricious or illegal are subject to serious legal challenge. RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECOMMENDATION Move that the Board approve a land use change from Estate Density 2UPA to Institutional Recreational and to transmit the amendment to the Department of Economic Opportunity. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Move that the Board deny the amendment. 2. Move that that staff provide additional information and continue the item to a future date. FISCAL IMPACT: RECOMMENDATION 807692bc 3 of 62

Staff time. Funding Source County Funds Non-County Funds Authorization Subtotal Project Total ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS Staff time. DOCUMENT(S) REQUIRING ACTION: Budget Transfer / Amendment Chair Letter Contract / Agreement Grant / Application Notice Ordinance Resolution Other: ROUTING: _ ADM _ BLD _ CDD _ COM _ ENG _ FRD _ GMD _ GSD _ ITS _ LIB _ MCA _ MPO _ PRD _ USD X CA X ACA X LEG 807692bc 4 of 62

PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURES The following legislative procedure should be used for all Future Land Use Map amendments and all amendments to the text of the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan: 1. Open legislative public hearing. 2. If applicable, verify that the applicant has filed the return receipts with the Clerk. 3. Staff presentation of the Plan amendment. 4. Applicant presentation. 5. Public comment. 6. Board of County Commissioners deliberation/decision on whether to transmit the Plan amendment. 5 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST NUMBER: CPA 16-8, Maggy's Hammock Park APPLICANT: Martin County Board of County Commissioners REPRESENTED BY: Deborah Drum Martin County Ecosystem Restoration & Management Manager PLANNER-IN-CHARGE: Richard Lawton Planner II DATE: October 7, 2014 ORIGINAL MEETING REVISION DATE DATE LPA MEETING: January 21, 2016 December 30, 2015 BCC TRANSMITTAL HEARING April 19, 2016 March 21, 2016 TRANSMITTAL TO DEO: ADOPTION HEARING: FINAL TRANSMITTAL TO DEO: LPA RECOMMENDATION: BCC TRANSMITTAL HEARING: BCC FINAL ACTION: Date January 21, 2016 April 19, 2016 The LPA voted 3-0 to recommend approval of a land use change to Recreational. The LPA also voted 3-0 to recommend approval of the zoning change to PR. SITE LOCATION: Maggy s Hammock Park is located on the west side of SE Kubin Avenue, in Rocky Point. (See attached Location Map for location of parcels.) APPLICANT REQUEST: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Estate Density 2UPA to Institutional Recreational. And a concurrent request to change the zoning from R-1B (Single-family Residential) and RE-1/2A (Residential Estate) to PR (Public Recreation). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed future land use change from Estate Density 2UPA to Institutional Recreational on the subject site. Staff also recommends approval of the requested zoning change from R-1B and RE-1/2A to PR. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The application is for a Future Land Use Map change from Estate Density 2UPA to Institutional Recreational, and a concurrent request to change the zoning from R-1B (Single-family Page 1 of 19 6 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK Residential) and RE-1/2A (Residential Estate) to PR (Public Recreation) on a 21.7-acre property located on the west side of SE Kubin Avenue in Rocky Point. Maggy s Hammock Park is centrally located park that has been enjoyed by Rocky Point residents for many years. The park consists mostly of open-space and walking trails. In 2000 the County purchased the adjoining 6.3-acres to the north, and in 2006 the County purchased an adjoining 0.5-acre parcel to the south. The property is surrounded on all sides by residential neighborhoods and is intended as park land for residents of Rocky Point and Martin County. The site provides public open space and recreational area in an urban environment. The property was purchased with public funds for a recreational area for local residents. Policy 4.13A.11., CGMP, provides the guidelines for the correct land use for lands purchased for a public purpose. The proposed Institutional Recreational land use allows activity-based and resource-based recreational uses that can include recreational facilities and access improvements. Comprehensive Growth Management Plan, Policy 4.13A.11., states that lands acquired for a public purpose must have its land use changed to an appropriate Institutional land use designation. The existing zoning designations R-1B (Single-family Residential) and RE-1/2A (Residential Estate) are the residential districts originally assigned to the property. The R-1B (Single-family Residential) is a Category B zoning district, and the RE-1/2A (Residential Estate) is the current zoning district to implement the Estate Density land use. Staff recommends approval of a land use change on the site from Estate Density 2UPA to Institutional Recreational. The PR (Public Recreation) is the only current zoning district that implements the proposed Institutional Recreational land use. Staff recommends approval of the change from R-1B and RE-1/2A to PR. APPLICATION HISTORY: October 7, 2014 The Board of County Commissioners initiated the Comprehensive Plan Amendment by Resolution 14-10.6. January 21, 2016 - The LPA voted 3-0 to recommend approval of a land use change from Estate Density 2UPA to Institutional Recreational. The LPA also voted 3-0 to recommend approval of the zoning change from R-1B and RE-1/2A to PR. 1. PROJECT/SITE SUMMARY 1.1. Physical/Site Summary The parcel is within the following: Planning District: Salerno/SR76 Corridor. Adjacent Planning District: Stuart. Commission District: District 4. Taxing District: District 4 Municipal Service Taxing Unit. Page 2 of 19 7 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK 1.2 Major Roadways The subject property is located on the west side of SE Kubin Avenue, in Rocky Point. Kubin Avenue is a minor collector that connects to SE Horseshoe Point Road; a major collector that is the primary access road into Rocky Point. 1.3. Current Amendment Requests CPA 16-1 Palm Bluff: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Rural Density to Commercial Limited on a 3.57-acre parcel located on the south side of Martin Hwy. in Palm City. CPA 16-2 Kanner 5601: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Commercial General to Low Density Residential on 21-2-acres located on SW Kanner Highway east of SW Linden Street. CPA 16-3 Bridgewater Preserve: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Agricultural Ranchette to Rural Density Residential on 215-acres located west of SE Island Way and east of JD Park. CPA 16-4 Sunshine Carnations: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Agricultural to Low Density Residential on 9.8-acres located on the east side of Berry Ave. in Palm City. CPA 16-5 DeMartini: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Commercial Limited to Commercial General on 2.07-acres located at the intersection of US-1 and Cove Road. CPA 16-6 Seacoast Bank: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Commercial Limited to Commercial General on 0.33-acres located at the intersection of US-1 and Cove Road. CPA 16-7 Legg LUA: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Rural Density to Commercial General on 8.5-acres located on Martin Hwy., and east of SW 30th Ave., in Palm City. CPA 16-9 Oxbow: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Low Density and Recreational to Institutional Conservation on 7.7-acres located along the south fork of the St. Lucie River, north of Salerno Road. CPA 16-10 Danforth: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Estate Density to Institutional Conservation on 24-acres located south of Martin Hwy., at Mapp Road, in Palm City. CPA 16-11 DOT Property: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Agricultural Ranchette to Institutional Recreational on 305-acres located south of I-95 in western Martin County. Page 3 of 19 8 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK CPA 16-12 Datillio: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Rural Density to Institutional Conservation on 57.4-acres located south of Bridge Road and west of Powerline Avenue. CPA 16-13 Bob Graham Beach: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Estate Density and Medium Density to Institutional Recreational on a 2.4-acres located on Hutchinson Island. CPA 16-14 Legg II LUA: A request for a Future Land Use Map change from Rural Density to Commercial General on 1.75-acres located south of Martin Hwy., on the west side of SW 30th Ave., in Palm City. 1.4. Past Changes in Future Land Use Designations CPA 97-16a, Rocky Point: A change from Estate Density Residential to Institutional Recreation on 23.9 acres located at the northeast tip of Rocky Point. CPA 04-14, Sandsprit Addition: A change on 1.4 acres from Estate Density 2UPA to Institutional Recreation on property located on SE St. Lucie Boulevard. 1.5. Adjacent Future Land Use North: Estate Density 2UPA. South: Estate Density 2UPA. East: Low Density Residential. West: Estate Density 2UPA and Low Density Residential. 1.6. Environmental Considerations 1.6.1. Wetlands, soils and hydrology The Soil Survey of the Martin County Area, published by the United States Department of Agriculture (1978), lists the soil types on the subject property as follows: #6, Paola sand, is an excessively drained soil found on the coastal ridge and in isolated knolls. The water table is below a depth of 72 inches throughout the year. The soil is not suited to cultivated crops and is only fairly suited to grazing. #7, St. Lucie Sand. This deep, nearly level to sloping sandy soil is excessively drained. It is located on dry coastal ridges and on isolated knolls in the flatwoods. Slopes are generally uniform and range from 0 to 8 percent. The available water capacity is very low and permeability is rapid. Natural fertility and the content or organic matter are very low. The water table is below a depth of 72 inches. Irrigation water moves through the soil rapidly, and little is retained for plant use. #14, Satellite Variant sand is deep, nearly level sandy soil is moderately well drained. It is on slightly elevated ridges and knolls in the flatwoods. Slopes are smooth to convex and range from 0 to 2 percent. The water table is at a depth of 40 to 60 inches for a 6 to 9 month period in most Page 4 of 19 9 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK years. It recedes below a depth of 60 inches for 2 to 4 months in drier seasons. Permeability is very rapid and the water capacity, natural fertility and content of organic matter are very low. Table 9-4, Chapter 9, Conservation and Open Space, CGMP, does not list any of the soil types found on the site as a soil type associated with wetland areas. The Composite Wetlands Map indicates some potential for isolated wetlands on the site. Only an environmental survey of the site could determine positively if wetlands occur on site. Martin County CGMP policies 9.1G. do not allow negative impacts to wetlands. 1.6.2. Wellfield protection The following is a description of the presence of existing wellfields proximate to the site and applicable wellfield protection measures. A preliminary investigation indicates that there are no public wells associated with Martin County Utilities near the subject property. Any new development near a public well must conform to the Martin County Wellfield Protection Ordinance and Groundwater Protection Ordinance before receiving development approval. 1.7. Adjacent Existing Uses Below is a summary of the existing adjacent land uses in the general vicinity of the subject property: NORTH: A parcel of private undeveloped land. SOUTH: The residential lots of Roni McKenzie development. EAST: WEST: The residential lots of The Reef development and Seascape Condos. The residential lots of Rocky Pines, St. Lucie Inlet, and Terrace Park developments. 2. ANALYSIS The applicant must provide justification for the proposed amendment. The justification should examine specific changes occurring in the vicinity of the subject property, including changes in local utilities availability; thoroughfare structure; demographics; and surrounding land uses and zoning. Additionally, the existing physical characteristics of the parcel and any shifts in the local composition of the area's commercial, industrial, and/or residential character should be considered. The applicant should focus this justification on a specific, detailed analysis of the area, bearing in mind the future land use amendment approval criteria outlined in Section 1.11 of the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan, Martin County Code. The Staff analysis is based on an evaluation of the amendment application materials, applicable Comprehensive Growth Management Plan policies and other relevant information. 2.1. Criteria for a Future Land Use Amendment (Section 1-11 CGMP) Four criteria in the Martin County Comprehensive Growth Management Plan provide the basis for recommendations for future land use changes. In evaluating each future land use amendment, staff is directed by the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan (pages 1-8) to assume that the 1982 and thus 1990 Future Land Use Maps, as amended, are an accurate representation of the Board of County Commissioners and thus the community's intent for the future of Martin County. Staff can recommend approval if any one of the four criteria are met. Page 5 of 19 10 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK Staff must recommend denial if none of the criteria is met. An evaluation of these four criteria for this future land use request follows: 1. That past changes in land use designations in the general area make the proposed use logical and consistent with these uses and there is adequate availability of public services; or Past changes do not reflect a change to the area that would justify the proposed change to make it logical or consistent with the general area. Criteria number one has not been met. 2. That the growth in the area, in terms of development of vacant land, redevelopment and availability of public services, has altered the character of the area such that the proposed request is now reasonable and consistent with area land use characteristics; or The surrounding area has developed consistent with the FLUM. Development of the surrounding area alone is not sufficient to find that the character of the area has changed. Criteria number 2 has not been met. 3. That the proposed change would correct what would otherwise appear to be an inappropriately assigned land use designation; or The property was purchased with public funds for a recreational area for local residents. Policy 4.13A.11., CGMP, provides the guidelines for the correct land use for lands purchased for a public purpose. The proposed changes would correct what would otherwise appear to be an inappropriately assigned land use designation. Criteria number 3 has been met. 4. That the proposed change would meet a necessary public service need which enhances the health, safety, or general welfare of County residents. The site provides necessary recreational area for the surrounding communities. The site provides public open space in an urban environment. Criteria number four has been met. 2.2. Urban Sprawl Florida Statute 163.3177(3)(a)9. states that any amendment to the future land use element shall discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl and provides thirteen indicators to judge whether a future land use amendment discourages the proliferation of urban sprawl. Urban sprawl is defined as a development pattern characterized by low density, automobiledependent development with either a single use or multiple uses that are not functionally related, requiring the extension of public facilities and services in an inefficient manner, and failing to provide a clear separation between urban and rural uses. Florida Statute provides an additional eight criteria, of which four must be met, in order to judge whether an amendment can be determined to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. An evaluation of the thirteen indicators for urban sprawl and a determination on the eight criteria for this future land use request follows: (I) Promotes, allows, or designates for development substantial areas of the jurisdiction to develop as low-intensity, low-density, or single-use development or uses. No. The site is designated park land for residents of Rocky Point and Martin County. No nonrecreation development will be allowed on the site. Page 6 of 19 11 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK (II) Promotes, allows, or designates significant amounts of urban development to occur in rural areas at substantial distances from existing urban areas while not using undeveloped lands that are available and suitable for development. No. The site is located within the Primary Urban Service Area and is intended as park land for residents of Rocky Point and Martin County. (III) Promotes, allows, or designates urban development in radial, strip, isolated, or ribbon patterns generally emanating from existing urban developments. No. The site is proposed for recreation and no non-recreation development will be allowed on the site. (IV) Fails to adequately protect and conserve natural resources, such as wetlands, floodplains, native vegetation, environmentally sensitive areas, natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas, lakes, rivers, shorelines, beaches, bays, estuarine systems, and other significant natural systems. No. The site has been specifically identified for recreation and no non-recreation development will be allowed on the site. (V) Fails to adequately protect adjacent agricultural areas and activities, including silviculture, active agricultural and silvicultural activities, passive agricultural activities, and dormant, unique, and prime farmlands and soils. No. There is no agriculture, silviculture, or farmland in the immediate area. (VI) Fails to maximize use of existing public facilities and services. No. The parcel is located within the Primary Urban Service District where public facilities and services are planned for anticipated growth patterns. Any activity on the property would access existing public facilities and services. (VII) Fails to maximize use of future public facilities and services. No. The parcel is located within the Primary Urban Service District where public facilities and services are planned for anticipated growth patterns. Any activity on the site would access existing public facilities and services. (VIII) Allows for land use patterns or timing which disproportionately increase the cost in time, money, and energy of providing and maintaining facilities and services, including roads, potable water, sanitary sewer, stormwater management, law enforcement, education, health care, fire and emergency response, and general government. No. The subject parcel is an urban area located within the Primary Urban Service District where public services are already in place. (IX) Fails to provide a clear separation between rural and urban uses. The subject parcel is located within the Primary Urban Service District which separates rural and urban uses. (X) Discourages or inhibits infill development or the redevelopment of existing neighborhoods and communities. Page 7 of 19 12 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK No. The site is designated park land for residents of Rocky Point and Martin County. The subject parcel is an urban area and provides needed open space for local residents. (XI) Fails to encourage a functional mix of uses. No. The proposed land use provides needed open space and protects environmentally sensitive land. (XII) Results in poor accessibility among linked or related land uses. No. The parcel is located along a collector road. The proposed land use changes will not change the accessibility among existing land uses. (XIII) Results in the loss of significant amounts of functional open space. No. The site is designated park land for residents of Rocky Point and Martin County. The recreational designation is functional open space. 2.2.1. Proliferation of Urban Sprawl In order for the application to be determined to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl, the amendment must incorporate development patterns or urban form that achieve four or more of the following: (I) Directs or locates economic growth and associated land development to geographic areas of the community in a manner that does not have an adverse impact on and protects natural resources and ecosystems. The site is identified as park land for local residents. The recreational designation is intended to protect natural resources and ecosystems. This criterion has been met. (II) Promotes the efficient and cost-effective provision or extension of public infrastructure and services. The parcel is located within the Primary Urban Service District where public infrastructure and services are already in place. The site would access existing public facilities and services. This criterion has been met. (III) Promotes walkable and connected communities and provides for compact development and a mix of uses at densities and intensities that will support a range of housing choices and a multimodal transportation system, including pedestrian, bicycle, and transit, if available. The parcel is located central to existing developments that provide a mix of densities and intensities. No change in the existing mix is contemplated by this proposal. This criterion has been met. (IV) Promotes conservation of water and energy. No development of the site is proposed. The proposal is leave the property as a recreational area. This criterion has been met. (V) Preserves agricultural areas and activities, including silviculture, and dormant, unique, and prime farmlands and soils. Not applicable. There is no agriculture, silviculture, or farmland in the immediate area. Page 8 of 19 13 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK (VI) Preserves open space and natural lands and provides for public open space and recreation needs. The recreation designation is functional open space. The site will provide recreational opportunities to local residents. This criterion has been met. (VII) Creates a balance of land uses based upon demands of residential population for the nonresidential needs of an area. The recreation designation provides for public open space and fulfills the need for recreation area for the local community. This criterion has been met. (VIII) Provides uses, densities, and intensities of use and urban form that would remediate an existing or planned development pattern in the vicinity that constitutes sprawl or if it provides for an innovative development pattern such as transit-oriented developments or new towns as defined in s. 163.3164. Not applicable. The site is identified as park land for local residents. 2.3 General Land Use Issues The request is for a Future Land Use Map change from Estate Density 2UPA to Institutional Recreational. Comprehensive Growth Management Plan, Policy 4.13A.11., states that lands acquired for public purpose must have its land use changed to the appropriate Institutional land use designation. The existing Estate Density 2UPA land use designation is a residential district that allows densities up to two units per acre. The CGMP assigns Estate Densities to selected areas near existing estate development that share similar characteristics with existing residential estates and to areas in the urban service districts that require density limitations because of unique problems of urban services. The Comprehensive Growth Management Plan provides the below policies for the existing Estate Density 2UPA and Medium Density and the proposed Institutional Recreational land uses: Estate Density 2UPA Land Use: Policy 4.13A.7.(2) Residential Estate densities ( two units per acre). Residential Estate densities are primarily assigned to established, stable residential areas with a density up to two units per gross acre in the Primary Urban Service District. These areas are generally on the fringe of the PUSD and lack accessibility to a full complement of urban services. The CGMP also assigns estate densities to selected areas near existing estate development that share similar characteristics with existing residential estates and to areas in the urban service districts that require density limitations because of unique problems of urban services. In reviewing specific densities, the aim shall be to preserve the stability and integrity of established residential development and provide equitable treatment to lands sharing similar characteristics. Landscaping, screening, buffering and similar design techniques shall be used to assure a smooth transition between residential structure types and densities. Existing agricultural uses in this land use designation shall be allowed to continue in a nonconforming status. Institutional Recreational Land Use: Policy 4.13A.11. Institutional development. The FLUM contains three separate land use categories for institutional development. Recreational, Public Conservation and General Page 9 of 19 14 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK Institutional categories allow for varying degrees of use and development. Institutional land shall be owned by public agencies or nonprofit service providers, except for investor-owner public water and sewer systems, private cemeteries and private hospitals existing as of October 26, 1993. In addition, privately owned land subject to perpetual easements as provided under Objective 4.5F may be designated Institutional Public Conservation. (1) (2) (3) Recreational. Recreational lands are designed for activity-based and resource-based recreational uses and typically contain recreational facilities and substantial access improvements. Lands assigned to the Recreational category may be developed only as public recreation areas or used for temporary storage of dredged spoil material resulting from the construction, reconstruction or maintenance of recreation facilities. Examples include Langford Park in Jensen Beach, Pendarvis Cove Park in Palm City and J.V. Reed Park in Hobe Sound. Lands acquired by the County for Recreational uses shall be reclassified to the Institutional-Recreation land use designation during the next plan amendment cycle. The minimum open space shall be 40 percent, maximum building coverage shall be 45 percent and maximum building height shall be 40 feet. Public Conservation. The Public Conservation category recognizes publicly owned areas designed for conservation uses. In addition, privately owned land subject to perpetual easements as provided under Objective 4.5F may be designated Institutional Public Conservation. Only development compatible with conservation and passive recreation uses shall be permitted in the Public Conservation category. This may include access, parking and other facilities that enable the management of the resource and the public's enjoyment of it. Conservation areas include the DuPuis Preserve in south Martin County and the Savannas in north Martin County. Environmentally sensitive lands acquired by the County shall be reclassified to the Institutional-Conservation land use designation during the next plan amendment cycle. General Institutional. The General Institutional category accommodates public and notfor-profit facilities such as schools, government buildings, civic centers, prisons, major stormwater facilities, fire and emergency operation centers, public cemeteries, hospitals, publicly owned water and sewer systems, dredge spoil management sites and airports. Investor-owned regional public water and sewer systems and private cemeteries may be allowed in General Institutional. Lands acquired by the County for General Institutional uses shall be reclassified to the Institutional-General land use designation during the next plan amendment cycle, as will lands or property rights acquired by the Florida Inland Navigation District as future dredge spoil management sites. Although Institutional use is reserved for the uses cited above, this shall not prohibit forprofit medical offices and other ancillary facilities owned by a nonprofit hospital as long as they are part of a PUD. The impervious area covered by buildings and required parking for such medical offices shall not include more than 12 percent of the site. Public and/or private development of airport property owned or managed by the County shall be subject to an Airport Zoning District or Planned Unit Development (Airport) zoning district developed to implement this policy. It shall apply only to airports owned or managed by the County. Privatized government operations shall be allowed in Institutional land use when the land is publicly owned and the private entity is acting under contract with the government that would normally provide the service. All Institutional development must meet all suitability and compatibility standards in the CGMP. Minimum open space requirement shall be 40 percent, maximum building height shall be 40 feet and maximum building coverage shall be 45 percent. Page 10 of 19 15 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK 2.5. Capital Facilities Impact (i.e. Concurrency Management) Policy 4.1B.2. of the Future Land Use Element states: All requests for amendments to the FLUMs shall include a general analysis of (1) the availability and adequacy of public facilities and (2) the level of services required for public facilities in the proposed land uses. This analysis shall address, at a minimum, the availability of category A and category C service facilities as defined in the Capital Improvements Element. No amendment shall be approved unless present or planned public facilities and services will be capable of meeting the adopted LOS standards of this Plan for the proposed land uses. Policy 4.1B.2. Analysis of availability of public facilities, of the Future Land Use Element states, All requests for amendments to the FLUMs shall include a general analysis of (1) the availability and adequacy of public facilities and (2) the level of services [LOS] required for public facilities in the proposed land uses. This analysis shall address, at a minimum, the availability of category A and category C service facilities as defined in the Capital Improvements Element. No amendment shall be approved unless present or planned public facilities and services will be capable of meeting the adopted LOS standards of this Plan for the proposed land uses. The Capital Improvements Element, or other relevant plan provisions, and the FLUMs may be amended concurrently to satisfy this criterion. The intent of this provision is to ensure that the elements of the CGMP remain internally consistent. 2.5.1. Mandatory Facilities 2.5.1.1. Water/Sewer Facilities The Level of Service standard for nonresidential water service is 0.1 gallons per sq. ft. The Level of Service for nonresidential wastewater service is 0.1 gallons per sq. ft. If needed, the parcel would be provided water and sewer service by Martin County Utilities. According to a memo from the Utilities Department dated July 21, 2015, the Martin County Consolidated Water System has 18.8 million gallons per day of plant capacity. The maximum day flow in the past 12 months was 13.011 MGD. Projects With Service Agreements have reserved: 0.468 MGD. Martin County Utilities has 5.321 MGD available water supply capacity. The Martin County (North) Sanitary Sewer System has a permitted capacity of 2.760 MGD. Maximum Month Average Daily Flow: 1.469 MGD. Projects with service agreements: 0.063 MGD. Martin County (North) Utilities has 1.228 MGD of available sanitary sewer capacity. No non-recreation development is proposed for the site. The County s concern for concurrency with the water and wastewater code requirements is evaluated through Martin County s development review process and any proposed development would be required to submit an application for Development Review. A preliminary review indicates that excess capacity exists for both water and sanitary sewer service. Page 11 of 19 16 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK 2.5.1.2. Drainage Facilities There is no proposal for any development on the site at this time. The Martin County Land Development Regulations do not allow post-development discharge to exceed pre-development discharge. The post development level of service for drainage must meet or exceed level of service standards. Implementation of the following Plan policies must be done during the site plan review process: Section 13.2.D.(2). All project sites shall control the timing of discharges to preclude any off-site impact for any storm event. The peak discharge rate shall not exceed the predevelopment discharge rate for the 25-year frequency, 3-day duration storm event. Policy 13.1C.3. Enforcement of level-of-service standards.: Martin County shall enforce the level of service standards in section 13.2. through the Land Development Regulations. The design criteria used to reach these levels of service will be the same as those of the SFWMD for all development except single-family residential lots of less than five acres. Policy 13.1C.7. Contribution for off-site drainage improvements.: All new developments shall provide an equitable contribution for off-site drainage improvements necessitated by the development. No new development shall be allowed that reduces services below the level of service standard established for the existing off-site facilities. Section 14.1A.2.(9) Levels of service for on-site improvements, including local streets, water and sewer connection lines, stormwater management facilities and open space shall be as required of the developer in the County Land Development Regulations. 2.5.1.3. Transportation Policy 5.2A.1. Establish a base level of service., CGMP states, The base LOS standard for all roadways is D during peak hour/peak season, except for the Florida Intrastate Highway System roadways on the Strategic Intermodal System and for facilities funded with the Transportation Regional Incentive Program that lie outside the urbanized area where LOS C is assigned, or except where an interim level of service has been assigned as described in Section 5.3.B. The methodology for determining roadway facilities level of service shall adhere to the methodologies identified in the latest FDOTs Q/LOS Handbook. There is no proposal for any development on the site at this time. No additional traffic impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed land use change. 2.5.1.4 Solid Waste Facilities The required LOS in Martin County is 1.06 tons of capacity per weighted average population. The weighted average population (the average of seasonal and full time residents) in Fiscal year 2016 is 160,978 persons. The landfill has 241,467 tons of available capacity or 1.5 tons per weighted person. A contract was signed on August 23, 2002 between Martin County and Okeechobee Landfill Inc., a division of Waste Management Inc., for the disposal of Martin Page 12 of 19 17 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK County solid waste for the next 30 years. When the municipal solid waste facility(ies) falls below the capacity levels stated above or when the remaining life of the facility(ies) reaches two years, Martin County shall immediately commence with a process to ensure no interruption in disposal activities will occur. 2.5.1.5. Parks/Recreation Facilities Parks and recreation facilities are calculated on a countywide basis. The county has a weighted average population of 160,978 persons and a total population in Fiscal year 2016 of 153,800 persons. There are currently 890 acres of active parkland available in the County. The 2016 Capital Improvements Plan provides the following LOS analysis for services. REQUIRED LOS PROVIDED CURRENT LOS ACTIVE PARKLAND 3 acres per 1000 residents 890 acres 5.53 acres per 1000 residents BEACH FACILITIES 9 spaces per 1000 residents 1471 spaces 9.6 spaces per 1000 residents PATHWAYS 5 linear feet per weighted 5.96 linear feet per 959,696 linear feet average resident resident 2.5.1.6. Fire/Public Safety/EMS The minimum water delivery rate for any single fire hydrant is 500 gallons per minute with a minimum pressure in any point within a water distribution system of 20 psi. Emergency Services for Martin County is calculated for the unincorporated area. The levels of service for the unincorporated area of the county are as follows: Advanced life support 8 minutes 90% of time in urban area. Advanced life support 20 minutes 90% of time in rural area. Basic life support 6 minutes 90% of time on urban area. Basic life support 15 minutes 90% of time on rural area. Fire response 6 minutes 90% of time of urban area. Fire response 15 minutes 90% of time of rural area. The existing County Fire EMS services meet or exceed the minimum level of service. FISCAL YEAR WT AVER UNIN POP 1 Apr of FY REQUIRED RESPONSE TIME- ALS/U REQUIRED RESPONSE TIME- ALS/R REQUIRED RESPONSE TIME- BLS/U REQUIRED RESPONSE TIME- BLS/R REQUIRED RESPONSE TIME- FIRE/U REQUIRED RESPONSE TIME- FIRE/R REQUIRED LOS CURRENT LOS FY15 140326 8 20 6 15 6 15 0.9 0.95 2.5.1.7. Schools No additional students are expected as a result of the assignment of the Recreational land use designation to the property. The County must coordinate with the School Board of Martin County for a LOS analysis as provided for under Section 17.7. CGMP. Determination of adequate school capacity for any development, pursuant to the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations, is done during the final site plan review process. Page 13 of 19 18 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK 2.5.2. Non-Mandatory Facilities 2.5.2.1. Libraries Library level of service is calculated on a countywide basis and has a goal of 0.60 gross square feet of library space per resident; and two volumes of reading material per weighted average resident. The 2016 Capital Improvements Plan shows the current gross square footage of library space is 110,026. When the square footage is divided by total population of 153,800 the result is 0.72 square feet per resident. There are currently 370,094 volumes available for a 2016 weighted average population of 160,978 resulting in 2.30 volumes per person. The current Library LOS services meets or exceeds the minimum level of service. 2.6. Criteria for a Zoning Change The request is for a land use change on the parcels to Institutional Recreational with a concurrent change in zoning to a zoning district that implements the proposed land use. The existing zoning designations R-1B (Single-family Residential) and RE-1/2A (Residential Estate) are the residential districts originally assigned to the property. The R-1B (Single-family Residential) is a Category B zoning district, and the RE-1/2A (Residential Estate) is the current zoning district to implement the Estate Density land use. The PR (Public Recreation) is the only zoning district that implements the proposed Institutional Recreational land use. Staff recommends approval of the change from R-1B and RE-1/2A to PR. 2.6.1 Permitted Uses Below are excerpts from Article 3 of the Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code including the permitted use schedule for the various zoning districts. The following land uses in the left column below are implemented by the corresponding zoning districts in the right column. Estate Density 2UPA Institutional Recreational RE-1/2A PR Lands zoned in accordance with this Division shall be limited to the uses indicated as permitted in Table 3.11. A "P" indicates that the use is permitted within that zoning district provided that the use can be developed in accordance with, the requirements set forth in Divisions 3 and 4 and all other applicable requirements of this Article and the LDR. TABLE 3.11 PERMITTED USES USE CATEGORY P R R E ½ A R 1 B Residential Uses Page 14 of 19 19 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK Accessory dwelling units Apartment hotels Mobile homes Modular homes P P Multifamily dwellings Single-family detached dwellings P P Townhouse dwellings Duplex dwellings Zero lot line single-family dwellings Agricultural Uses Agricultural processing, indoor Agricultural processing, outdoor Agricultural veterinary medical services Aquaculture Crop farms Dairies Exotic wildlife sanctuaries Farmer's markets Feed lots Fishing and hunting camps Orchards and groves Page 15 of 19 20 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK Plant nurseries and landscape services Ranches Silviculture Stables, commercial Storage of agricultural equipment, supplies and produce Wildlife rehabilitation facilities Public and Institutional Uses Administrative services, not-for-profit Cemeteries, crematory operations and columbaria Community centers P P Correctional facilities Cultural or civic uses Dredge spoil facilities P Educational institutions P P P Electrical generating plants Fairgrounds P Halfway houses Hospitals Neighborhood assisted residences with six or fewer residents Neighborhood boat launches P P P Nonsecure residential drug and alcohol rehabilitation and treatment facilities Page 16 of 19 21 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK Places of worship P P Post offices Protective and emergency services P P Public libraries P P Public parks and recreation areas, active P P P Public parks and recreation areas, passive P P P Public vehicle storage and maintenance Recycling drop-off centers P Residential care facilities Solid waste disposal areas Utilities P P Commercial and Business Uses Adult business Bed and breakfast inns P P Business and professional offices Campgrounds P Commercial amusements, indoor Commercial amusements, outdoor Commercial day care P P Construction industry trades Construction sales and services Page 17 of 19 22 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK Family day care P P Financial institutions Flea markets Funeral homes General retail sales and services Golf courses P P Golf driving ranges Hotels and motels Kennels, commercial Limited retail sales and services Marinas, commercial P Marine education and research Medical services Parking lots and garages Recreational vehicle parks P Residential storage facilities Restaurants, convenience, with drive through facilities Restaurants, convenience without drive through facilities Restaurants, general Shooting ranges, indoor P Shooting ranges, outdoor Page 18 of 19 23 of 62

MARTIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST 16-8, MAGGY S HAMMOCK PARK Trades and skilled services Vehicular sales and service Vehicular service and maintenance Veterinary medical services Wholesale trades and services Transportation, Communication and Utilities Uses Airstrips Airports, general aviation Industrial Uses Composting, where such use was approved or lawfully established prior to March 1, 2003 3. FIGURES/ATTACHMENTS Figure 1, Location Map Figure 2, Aerial Photograph Figure 3, Future Land Use Map Figure 4, Proposed Future Land Use Map Figure 5, Zoning Map Figure 6, Proposed Zoning Map Figure 7, Composite Wetlands Map Page 19 of 19 24 of 62

CPA I LOCATION MAP ~ \'. B--*Pllk N SW MARTIN HWY SW MARTIN HWY 0 Q'. I <( I- ~ 0... <( _J _J <( ~ I > _J (I) (f) :J Q'. l- o ~ SE BRIDGEJ3.D:-, 25 of 62

26 of 62

Legend ~ Rural Density -up to 0.5 UPA ~ Rural Heritage -up to 0.5 UPA ~ Estate Density -up to 1 UPA ~ Estate Density -up to 2 UPA ~ Low Density-up to 5 UPA Im Medium Density -up to 8 UPA Im High Density-up to 10 U PA Im Mobile Home Density-up to 8UPA ~ Comme rc i a l General Im Comme rcial Limited Im Comme rcial I Office I Res idential Im Comme rcial Waterfront Im Recreational ~ Public Conservation Area ~ General Institutional ~ Industrial ~ Ag ricultural ~ Ag ricultural Ranchette ~ M a j o r Power Generation Fac i l ~y 27 of 62

CON Legend ~ Rural Density -up to 0.5 UPA ~ Rural Heritage -up to 0.5 UPA ~ Estate Density -up to 1 UPA ~ Estate Density -up to 2 UPA ~ Low Density-up to 5 UPA Im Medium Density -up to 8 UPA Im High Density-up to 10 U PA Im Mobile Home Density-up to 8UPA ~ Comme rc i a l General Im Comme rcial Limited Im Comme rcial I Office I Res idential Im Comme rcial Waterfront Im Recreational ~ Public Conservation Area ~ General Institutional ~ Industrial ~ Ag ricultural ~ Ag ricultural Ranchette ~ M a j o r Power Generation Fac i l ~y 28 of 62

Legend o ~ ~"~ c::j >r1(st!"4l1 F$'1'!'1S) c::j >r1a(,"cfl:-;.o.h~ L:] A-2~Jl'.t$l) c::j >r > ~~l:t'.i) c::j AA $.A(~..o.n1~~05~ c::j AA 10A(~..o.t!il~~05~ D N3~(Ge--ier.51/V;f~Jt'.t~o 57-=:/ c::j s- 1 (&.'5~ i:=i S-2 (&Aneu'.\W~:e) - S- > +1".t~&Ar>e:U) 1!11 OOR 1 (C~(C~~::e/Re5'<!e-T.~1 0257':j c::j OOR-2(C~~~::e/R e5'<!e--r.~1 0257 :j - GC (~~C~~O:sJ~ c::j oc.;c~tj~q1 025n;, - H$>1 (U'!l-,.,, 3.ls~) c::j HS-1A(~&IA«-~ c::j HS-1M(~& M«-...tl ~ t.c ('..lt'!'lw:i C~-e100i::J~ D PAf \P'.D:t~ :F~:c.-:es o:sr~ [SJ P.J O-C (~Q) D Sf($.$".W$"~Y~ c::j mc (~o..i:~er.51~-e1o:sr~ - 'MC fn~ R~:~O:S~ - Gl (Ge-">e1'$llrd"A7~0 57-=:/ D U (U'!lw:l lrd"a7~0 57:-:j liiil 1>1 ('..lt'!'l~~~o:sr~ - Hl~)' ~-e1 00i::J~ c::j M 1 (b!m,r.41) - M..Z (hf"ar-4~ D M > (hm,7~~ &:::9 P.J O-l ( N".1$1'~ c::j ;:c.;.~..1:1ot:~>«>:o O:sr~ ~ l'r \P>,bt: Re:" e.s:ixi0 57:-:) ~ ~ <~~ ~o:sr~ - ~ 1 +;.=>..1:1ot:ser~o5~ - PS-2\P>.Ot:serw~057:~ D =<~.!L'OS~~o:sr~ D = 1 (:.s= ei-0 S~ Hoe>e502$7':j D H.'\-1 ( SrQ~..:o'!11" Re5~'..$1057;~ D H."'1A.;s:t"C ~~tj R~-r.a1 0'.s:J~ D H.~ (M\.!tl4'$'!'1t/ 1'es'u.T.~) D H.'\-"J. +)l~ F~tr o...e...~ c::j u i+p +)leo~ Home...,.t o 5n :) L:] M l+s +)ICO!leK:ime S-.IX!.:11 5'«1 05~ CS1 P.JOt.IH(MCOleHOl'!'>e) ~ P.J~(1'e5e!:e..T.~) L:] l'\-1 ( Src"~.$'.!'il\' 1'e5C!e-T.:510 57:-:j (D] l'\-1a {S.ro~~ 1'es~a1o:sr~ D l'\-1 S {S.:t'C.~~t/ 1'es'<!e-T.~1 02$7':j - l'\-1c ( SrQ~..:o'!11" ~~'..$1057;;~ 0 M < Src"~..:o'!llt 1'ese!:e..-r.:510 57-=:/ - i'v'j.~;-~1" 1'e5C!e-T.~ 0 5~ D MS {S.)'.'C.~t:ir!'lt/ Res'ee_-r.~1 0257':) D l'\'-:c ( SrQ~..:o'!11" Re5~'..$l057;~ ee9 MT( SrQ~..$'!11l' 1'ese!:e..-r.~ O:sJ~ - l'\->(mutm'$'!'11"j Rdde--r.a~ - 1'<1-;.A(l..b:r$lM1.1tM'$'!'1tJ) - i:<:->s. +)11.11:~~ 1'e5).!e_T.~ I'\-, (MutM'$'!'1tJ Rdde--r.a~ D l'\-> (M\.!tH'$'!'11"JM ell.o<:>.~jj c::j 1'E 1r..\(1'ese!:e..-r.~ :.S=O'.s:J~ - RE 1A(1'ese!e--r.:sl :.S=o:sr~ c::] RE"'2A(R-.t$l a.=0 57-=:/ CJ AM >( Alloe_-.stJ 1'ese!e>T.~ 0 5~ 0 AtA '(.l'jllcle-"<stj1'esc!e--r.:51057 :-:j CJ Al'A > ( All~tJ 1'ese!e--r.:51057 :-:) - At.1 '6 (M ed:l.l'!'l oe.-.s~ 1'es~T.al 00i::J~ - Al'A-3 (M e4:1.1'!'1~~ 1'es~aio:sr~ c::j AtA-10 (H;n 0e-~..r R~T.&l O:sJ~ - RS->(l.(NI oe..~..r 1'es'u.T.~1 0257':j - R S-, ('All Cle-"$~ Res'<!e--r.~1 0257;:) D RS->(l.(NI oe.."<$.~ 1'es'u.T.~1 0:S7':j c::j Rs.-6 +)1 edl.l'!'l oe.-.stj~c!err.~l 05~ - R* +)l edl.l'!'i Cle--.stJRes~'..$1057;~ - RS-10 +)-l ;t1 oe_-.s~ 1'e5).!e_T.a'JOOi::J~ - RT+)leo-e HomeS.IX!:"1 5lXI 05~ CJ TP+)leo:-eK:ime P to:s7:-:) - 'M 1 fn!nt~ ::s= o 5n ;, - lz lrv.rl!izo-".'irq CSJ P.J O<'N.J \P\.O 'N~.re_-.se_"(j ZONING ATl,AS MAP ~ CPA I \'. B--*Pllk 29 of 62

WetlandComposite.lyr WETLAND Hydric So il NWI Wetland Sat Wetland - So il and NWI - So il and Sat - NWl and Sat So il and NWI and Sat 31 of 62

Application Package CPA #16-8 Maggy's Hammock Park 32 of 62

33 of 62

34 of 62

35 of 62

36 of 62

37 of 62

38 of 62

39 of 62

Correspondence CPA #16-8 Maggy's Hammock Park 40 of 62

41 of 62

42 of 62

43 of 62

44 of 62

45 of 62

46 of 62

47 of 62

48 of 62

49 of 62

50 of 62

51 of 62

52 of 62