Laserfiche WebLink
..0 <br />Representatives of the Construction Industry Management Council <br />will be present at the public hearing and I would also be available <br />to offer any additional input you may desire. <br />Sincerely, <br />L� <br />a thew L. Gore _ <br />C airman <br />u -- <br />CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL <br />April 25, 1985 <br />Mrs.. Carolyn Eggert, Chairman <br />Indian River County Planning <br />and Zoning Board <br />Vero Beach, Florida 32960 <br />Re: Site Plan Review and Approval Procedures <br />Dear Mrs. Eggert: <br />ICIMCI <br />P.O. BOX 3724 a BEACH STATION <br />VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32963 <br />We appreciate having had the opportunity to workshop this ordinance <br />with county staff, and as a result have few objections to its adoption, <br />as presented. However, there are several areas that we believe should <br />be reconsidered. <br />1. EXTENSIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL <br />This section has been revised to the point that it, in effect, <br />is not an extension, but a resubmittal. Most projects can <br />proceed without requiring an extension, but on some larger <br />projects the preconstruction phase can create the need for <br />additional time. We believe a ONE TIME extension of the site <br />plan, as approved, is reasonable. <br />2. PAVED ROAD REQUIREMENTS <br />A. This provision would require applicants to fund their fair <br />share contribution for adjacent roadway improvements, even if <br />the proposed development does not gain access to said roadway. <br />The County presently has authority to require adjacent property <br />owners to fund these improvements when they are to be constructed. <br />This prepayment seems unreasonable. <br />B. The provision requiring the applicant to pave from the <br />nearest paved roadway can present problems similar to.those that <br />the County revealed last year when a similar requirement• was <br />considered for subdivisions. The responsibility for right-of-way <br />acquisition, and verification, is properly a function of govern- <br />ment, not of the individual property owners, as this requirement <br />would make it. <br />MAY 2 2 1985 <br />L� <br />25 <br />BOOK PACE ?5 <br />