5/25/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r1 MAY 2 5 1933 aoo�c 0 PAct , could be detached from the committee; the main purpose of the ad hoc committee, i.e., whether they would entirely rewrite the report or just address the issues that affect Indian River County and are significantly different from what we have now, etc.; and Commissioner Scurlock voiced the opinion that the ad hoc committee should have a member from the private sector. Chairman Bird reviewed the history of how we got to this point, noting that it originated with what appeared to be a border dispute between Fort Pierce and Stuart and then escalated to where the Regional Planning Council was asked to look into the possibility of designating an area of critical concern. The area in question was always considered to be the area between Fort Pierce inlet and the Stuart inlet, but the state decided to include Indian River County. The Chairman continued that Dr. DeGrove of the Department of Environmental Regulation explained the intent in putting Indian River County on the committee was because we had been very progressive in our planning, and it was hoped our expertise would enhance the committee's ability to come up with_a plan that would-be compatible for all three counties. He noted that Dr. DeGrove did not believe the final product would cause any significant change in how we handle our Comprehensive Plan; although, it might for Martin and St. Lucie counties. Discussion next ensued as to what occurs after the Planning Management Committee makes their final report. Mr. King reported that once the committee adopts the plan, it goes back to the local jurisdiction to review and identify if the policies in its comprehensive plan implement those in the Management Plan. If not, amendments would have to be made to the Comprehensive Plan. At the end of 6 months, the state would look at the progress each jurisdiction has made with implementation of policies; 10 � A i