3/20/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LIAR 2 01995 -I BOOB 0 Fk1,JF 20,S "(1) The particular physical conditions, shape, or topography of the specific property involved would cause an undue hardship to the applicant if the strict letter of the ordinance is carried out; (2) The granting of the waiver will not cause injury to adjacent property or any natural resource; (3) The conditions upon which a request for waiver are based are unique to the property for which the waiver is sought and are not generally applicable to other property in the adjacent areas and do not result from actions of the applicant; and (4) The waiver is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Indian River County Zoning Ordi- nance, the Indian River County Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and this ordinance." Staff finds that none of. these conditions have been met. The first condition has not been fulfilled because no physical characteristic of the land would cause an undue hardship on the applicant if the ordinance were strictly applied. The property is physically similar to surrounding properties. The fact that the property fronts on public rights-of-way presents no hardship to legally subdividing the land; rather, it facilitates legal and proper develop- ment. " The second condition may not be met. The Public Works Division has commented that additional road work and paving is needed, proper drainage needs to be constructed, and utility and drainage easements should be established. Failure to provide the necessary improvements could have an adverse impact on surrounding properties. The third condition has not been fulfilled because the application of the new subdivision ordinance 83-24 was and is not unique to the subject property. The ordinance applies to all lands lying within the unincorporated areas of Indian River County. The subdivision ordinance violation is the direct result of the applicant's own action. The forth condition has not been met because the waiver request is not consistent with the subdivision ordinance. If the waiver were granted, adequate provisions for addi- tional road grading or paving would not be provided. The requirements of the Stormwater Management and Flood Pro- tection ordinance 82-28 would also be waived. Granting the waivers would essentially allow the platting of, what is currently a violation of the subdivision ordinance. Granting this request would also set a dangerous precedent. Persons claiming to have unrecorded plats and surveys prepared prior td the adoption of the new ordinance could also apply for a similar waiver. Thus, persons violating the subdivision ordinance could possible rectify their violations by merely having the Board waive_ requirements to the extent that the ordinance's purpose and intent would be circumvented. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners deny the request to waive Section 9 and Section 7, except 7f-3 through 7f-11 of the subdivision ordinance on the subject property. 32