4/15/1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

APR 15 im F BECAUSE OF A POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITHIN ATTORNEY COLLINS' FIRM, ATTORNEY JOSEPH CIANFRONE ACTED AS ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DURING THIS PUBLIC HEARING. ART CHALLACOMBE, SENIOR PLANNER, REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING STAFF REPORT: I ZONING CHANGE - STAFF REPORT Vero Shores, Inc., et al j Owner Steve L. Henderson, Esq. Agent 6-6-80 Date of Application IRC-80-ZC-12 File #444 Application Number -P. 0. Box 3406 Rezoning from R-1 to R-20 Address (District) District Vero Beach, Fla. 32960 Preliminary Final Hearing PROPOSED USE AND LOCATION: Subject property, roughly 90 acres, is located just north of Summerplace, and extends north approximately 2 miles on the east 'side of A -1-A. Average width measures approximately 600 ft. EXISTING SITUATION: This parcel is zoned R-1 Single Family, and is currently vacant. The surrounding land uses include to the north and west vacant property, (currently zoned R-1 and A) with a few scattered residences. To the east is the Atlantic Ocean, and to the south is some vacant land and the Summerplace Sub- division:` RECOMMENDATION: This proposed rezoning is not felt to be in keeping with the overall p ng effort now being undertaken in the development of the new Compre- hensive Plan. The staff recognizes that the current land use "guide" does provide for medium density development in this area. As stated previously, however, this adopted plan is not felt to be reasonable or consistent with the land use classi- fications delineated in other areas along the beach. Thus, we would recommend against an upgrading of the zoning in this area for the following reasons: .1) Previous recommendations and discussions have encouraged lower densities in .this area. 2) The proposed rezoning is not felt to be iii keeping with good planning principles when considering the type and amount of existing development, and the relation- ship to surrounding zoning in the area. .3) Municipal type services are'non-existent, and plans to provide them in the future are very uncertain at this point. a: It is not -felt to be in the interest of the County to encourage a proliferat ion of private utility systems particularly with regard to extensive multi -family rezonings.