Martin County LPA recommends approval for 105‑room hotel at Palm Bay Crossing

The Martin County Local Planning Agency on April 16 voted unanimously to recommend approval of a revised master site plan and a final site plan (T175‑012) to allow a three‑story hotel with 105 rooms on Lot 5 of the Palm Bay Crossing development in Palm City.

Luis Aguilar, principal planner for the growth management department, told the panel that the applicant, Bradford Trading Partners LLC, seeks to expand Lot 5 and convert it from the previously approved but unbuilt storage facility into a hotel. Aguilar said staff found the proposal consistent with the county comprehensive plan and land‑development regulations and recommended approval.

Phoebe Pletner, representing the applicant with Cotler and Hearing, said the project returns the site to its originally envisioned hotel use and described a roughly 62,877‑square‑foot, three‑story building with about 105 rooms, parking that meets code and site amenities including an outdoor pool, pathways, a gazebo and seating areas. Pletner said the site design preserves more than 64% of the parcel as open space and integrates stormwater features into the existing master system.

Owner Raj Patel, a self‑identified 25‑year Martin County resident, urged approval and said the franchise agreement for a Hampton Inn has been secured. “I live in Martin County … I wanted to build a hotel that everybody would probably be proud of,” Patel said.

A committee member asked about an alternative compliance request for primary facade transparency (Article 4, Division 20). Staff answered that the code requires 40% transparency on the first floor of the primary facade and that the project falls slightly under that threshold, which is why alternative compliance is requested; staff concluded the design meets the intent of community standards for the site context.

Public comment included support from Pinal Gandhi Saud, CRA director for the City of Stuart, who said he had worked with Patel previously and recommended approval.

A motion to accept staff’s recommendation was made and seconded; the LPA approved the recommendation unanimously by voice vote. The Board of County Commissioners is the final decision‑maker for the application; the LPA’s vote forwards the recommendation to the commission for final action. The LPA adjourned at the close of the meeting.

Next step: The recommendation will be placed on the Board of County Commissioners’ agenda for final consideration; no date for that hearing was specified during the LPA meeting.