9/24/1975 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SAMUEL A. BLOCK, ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE OWNERS AND DEVEL- OPERS OF SEMINOLE SHORES SUBDIVISION, APPEARED AND STATED THAT THEY HAD GONE BEFORE THE SUBDIVISION REVIEW COMMITTEE AS REQUESTED, AND THERE WERE A FEW QUESTIONS MOST OF WHICH HAD BEEN RESOLVED IN A REVISED PLAT, ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS REFERRED THE COMMISSIONERS TO HIS MEMO OF SEPTEMBER 18TH IN REGARD TO THE MEETING HELD BY THE SUBDIVISION REVIEW COMMITTEE ON THIS MATTER IN WHICH THE FOLLOWING SIX POINTS WERE MADE: 1, PLAT SHOULD SHOW NORTH POINT ARROW AND LOCATION SKETCH, 2. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN SHOWS THE EASTERN ONE HALF IN LOW DENSITY AND THE WESTERN ONE HALF IN AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA, 3. NINETY PERCENT OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION LIES IN THE HURRICANE FLOOD ZONE WHICH IS THE BASIS OF FEDERAL FLOOD INSURANCE, 4. ALL BUILDING SITES SHOULD HAVE A MINIMUM OF FIVE FOOT ELEVATION ABOVE M.S.L. 5. ALL SURFACE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE DIRECTED THROUGH HOLDING POND, 6. PROVIDE 12' EASEMENT ABUTTING NORTH AND SOUTH BASELINE, MR, JENNINGS STATED THAT ALL THESE POINTS WERE TAKEN CARE OF BY THE REVISED PLAT EXCEPT FOR ITEMS 112 AND #3, AND THERE WAS NO WAY HE KNEW OF TO RESOLVE THESE ITEMS, AS FAR AS BEING IN THE HURRICANE FLOOD ZONE, HE DID POINT OUT THAT THE LOTS WERE ELEVATED TO 5' WHICH HAS BEEN THE PEAK ELEVATION ALONG THE RIVER FOR MANY YEARS, ATTORNEY BLOCK COMMENTED WITH REGARD TO ITEMS 112 AND #3 THAT MOST OF THE LAND EAST AND WEST OF THE INDIAN RIVER WOULD BE IN THIS SAME SITUATION AND ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE PROJECT WAS THERE BEFORE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN, HE FELT THE BOARD WOULD RUN INTO THIS SAME PROBLEM OF CONFLICT WITH THE LAND USE PLAN TIME AND TIME AGAIN, 1-, COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE FLOOD ZONE AND WONDERED IF WE MIGHT BE JEOPARDIZING OUR FEDERAL FLOOD INSURANCE BY ALLOWING A PROJECT IN A FLOOD ZONE. ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS STATED THAT HE HAD TALKED TO TWO ENGIN- EERS AND TWO LAND SURVEYORS ABOUT THIS, AND THEY DID NOT HAVE ANY ANSWERS.