12/1/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Southeast Enterprise November 19, 1982 Page 3 ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: (Continued) Although privately owned lands may be excluded from Aquatic Preserves (Chapter 258.40(1)) the DNR still maintains juris- diction over their uses and may negotiate specific agreements to insure the protection of the Aquatic Preserves. Thus, DNR maintains the authority to review and issue permits for proposed uses of the subject property's 7.0 acres of submerged land. The applicant does have clear title to these 7.0 acres of submerged land; however, there is a low probability that permits would-be issued allowing development of these 7.0 acres. Because this submerged land has only a remote probability to be developed, the County will not allow the transfer of those 7 units associ- ated with submerged lands to the non -environmentally sensitive areas. Administrative Status - The Environmentally Sensitive area is recognized as a wetland both in the Indian River County Compre- hensive Plan and by the Department of Environmental Regulation and Department of Natural Resources. It is recognized that any potential development in the area would be governed by the re- quirements and policies of these three agencies. It is recognized that it would be extremely difficult to develop, dredge, or fill in the Environmentally Sensitive Area. However, it is staff's = position that protection of these Environmentally Sensitive Areas is covered within the Comprehensive Plan and that protection of Environmentally Sensitive Areas is a significant local concern. The enforcement of any drainage requirements which would impact these Environmentally Sensitive Areas will be within the juris- diction and responsibility of Indian River County. Based on these considerations, it is felt that concern for the preservation and protection of this Environmentally Sensitive Area is an appropri- ate issue in the review of any rezoning request or subsequent development proposals. Land Use - Surrounding Land Use. As mentioned previously, in this rezoning analysis, the subject property is located adjacent to River Shores Subdivision. The area south of the subject property is undeveloped. The area.opposite the subject property on the west side of U.S.#1 contains an appliance store and a gift shop. The area north of River Shores Subdivision contains scattered single family development. Tanglewood Mobile Home Park is located approximately 2,000 feet north of the subject property on the east side of U.S.#l. Tommy's Transmission'is just north of the mobile home park and Mecca Convalescent Home is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of U.S.#1 and Oslo Road. A flea market is located on the west side of U.S.#1, just south of Oslo Road. The subject property is located within an urban services district and is designated as -LD -2, Low Density Residential (maximum density 6 units/acre). The subject property is not within the boundaries of an established commercial or industrial node. However, the Comprehensive Plan allows development of neighbor- hood nodes of up to 8 acres. These nodes allow uses which serve the immediate needs of residential areas. Because the subject property presently contains C-1, Commercial zoning, this analysis will review the impacts of a residential development at present residential zoning densities and with a neighborhood node. A second scenario will analyze the impacts of the entire subject property being developed as a single family residential area under the provisions of R-lA, Single Family District. Thirdly, this analysis will address the impacts of the applicant's proposed development. Under the Plan in the present zoning, an 8 acre neighborhood node might be developed on the subject property. The C-1, Commercial District allows apartment uses as an accessory use to commercial development. It is therefore possible to presently develop an area 2 � X 2 PAK ®EC 119 _