My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013-023
CBCC
>
Ordinances
>
2010's
>
2013
>
2013-023
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/28/2019 12:42:26 PM
Creation date
10/5/2015 9:36:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Ordinances
Ordinance Number
2013-023
Adopted Date
12/10/2013
Agenda Item Number
10.A.3.
Ordinance Type
Land Development Regulations
Code Number
Chapter 913
Subject
Sidewalk Construction Delays
Codified or Exempt
Codified
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
12687
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ORDINANCE NO. 2013- ng -I <br />AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY <br />COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, <br />FLORIDA, CONCERNING AMENDMENTS TO ITS <br />LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDRs) <br />WITH REGARD TO THE DELAY IN THE <br />CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS, AMENDING <br />SECTION 913.09 "DESIGN STANDARDS AND <br />REQUIREMENTS" OF CHAPTER 913 <br />"SUBDIVISION AND PLATS" OF THE INDIAN <br />RIVER COUNTY CODE IN ORDER TO ALLOW AN <br />ADDITIONAL EXTENSION FOR SIDEWALK <br />CONSTRUCTION; AND PROVIDING FOR <br />CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY, AND AN <br />EFFECTIVE DATE. <br />WHEREAS, several subdivisions are operating under the sidewalk <br />bonding -out regulations that were in effect prior to 2009 where the developer is <br />responsible for the construction of the sidewalk segments fronting or contiguous <br />to individual lots; and <br />WHEREAS, the Indian River County Code has provisions for alternative <br />solutions where the developer does not have to "bond -out" by either constructing <br />the sidewalk segments before a residence is constructed or the lots are sold, or <br />by amending the restrictive covenants to transfer the responsibility to the lot <br />owner to construct his individual sidewalk segment fronting or contiguous to his <br />lot prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy. In the first instance, if the <br />sidewalks are constructed, the likelihood of them having to be redone is strong <br />due to heavy equipment and construction traffic breaking the segments during <br />home construction; thus paying twice for the same sidewalk construction. In the <br />latter instance where transfer is an option and the lots have been sold, it has <br />become quite burdensome, challenging or impossible to obtain homeowner and <br />lender consents after the fact. In other instances where some lots have been <br />sold, the developers do not want to amend the restrictive covenants as they want <br />uniformity within the subdivision, that is they do not wish to single out certain lots <br />with a restriction that is not for the entire subdivision; and <br />Coding: Words/letters underscored are additions to text; words/letters in <br />stk-thra format are deletions to text. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.