The City of Stuart had a meeting of the LPA/PAB on July 18th. At that meeting two ordinances were voted on pertaining to the voluntary annexation and the assignment of Commercial Plan Unit Development Zoning to a piece of property north of the Roosevelt Bridge on Federal Highway. As a member of the LPA, I was present. The reason that the owner wanted the property to be annexed by the city was because of the difference in density allowed. Under the county regulations, he could only build a 60-room hotel. Stuart would allow an 80-room hotel plus 10,000 square feet of commercial and office space. Without this greater density, the owner stated the project would not be feasible.
While a member of the public did bring up whether Stuart had the right to annex the property, we, as members, thought the city did have the right to do so. As an aside, I do believe that Stuart and the county should have a more coordinated understanding as to annexation. Ultimately, the ordinances did pass by a 3-2 vote with one abstention. I was one of the no votes.
I had several reasons for my no vote. On a technical note, I don’t believe that the traffic flow issues were addressed adequately. Nor do I believe that the community of over 200 residents was adequately consulted by the developer and their views taken into account. I would have liked to have seen more community residents at the two meetings expressing their points of view. Those few who did come seemed reasonable in their objections. There was nothing that the developer could not have addressed.
I asked the owner’s representatives to tell me the type of hotel property and to explain the economic rationale for building the property. They did not provide the information. Remember they will be adding 29,200 occupancy nights to Martin County. Where is the demand for the increased number of room nights going to come from? Jacqueline Lewis, the president of the Martin County Hotel Association, gave us facts and figures on past, current and future occupancies. The data was not encouraging. It was her belief that another property would hurt a future hotel anticipated in the downtown area. She also went on to express that the three older hotels on Federal Highway would suffer declining occupancy maybe even resulting in one closing.
This is the main reason I voted against the annexation. I don’t see the point of adding a new business to the City if one or more similar businesses close such as the Clarion Inn. There will be no net increase in employment. While we would have impact fees and increased tax revenue, at least theoretically, if another hotel closes and others pay less tax because of less occupancy, where has the city gained?
While I am a complete believer in the capitalistic system of free enterprise, I don’t think we, as a community, should abandon those residents and businesses that exist. If that vacant land was already in the City of Stuart and was zoned for an intended use, I would feel differently. In this instance, government under the guise of annexation, is actually conferring an advantage of a larger hotel to the developer than otherwise would be allowed by Martin County standards. Stuart has essentially allowed the new guy to cannibalize our existing hotels. I believe this is a detriment to the long term welfare of our City.