Laserfiche WebLink
During review of the Grand Harbor project, the County planning staff <br />conferred with Council's staff on all modifications and deletions of <br />Council's recommendations, prior to County consideration of the Dev- <br />elopment Order. It was County staff's understanding that none of the <br />recommendation changes were of the magnitude that appeal of the <br />Development Order (D.O.) would be considered. <br />ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS <br />*Major Concerns <br />The following three issues are deemed by the Council to be major <br />concerns. <br />I. Screening of prospective marina users <br />The Commission expressed reservations about including conditions <br />that would be difficult to enforce or were of dubious effectiveness. <br />The County did not include Council's condition 16(a) (required <br />screening of persons applying to buy or rent marina boat slips to <br />restrict use by persons with boating violations) because the <br />condition seemed difficult to monitor and enforce, and because the <br />condition, if effective at all, would preclude use of the Grand <br />Harbor to some individuals who could utilize other facilities near <br />the site. Also, renters, owners, and lessors would only be screened <br />at the time of application of sale or lease. The prospective buyer <br />or lessor would not necessarily be the user or the boat operator <br />with boating violations, and the condition appeared to be easy to <br />circumvent. Staff felt that better alternative solutions exist, <br />such as having the State restrict boat registration of individuals <br />involved in violations that could be detrimental to the West Indian <br />Manatee. <br />County staff also felt that the reduction in the number of boat <br />slips addressed the impacts the Grand Harbor Development would have <br />on the West Indian Manatee. At such time that the approval of <br />additional slips is considered (this would constitute a substantial <br />deviations: refer to condition 17), further requirements could be <br />added. <br />The deletion of Council's boater screening condition is Council <br />staff's primary concern. County staff does not feel that this <br />condition should be added to the D.O. <br />II. Discharge of untreated surface water run-off <br />County staff feels that all of the concerns raised by the Council's <br />staff are adequately addressed in several conditions within the D.O. <br />The treatment of stormwater run-off management -is .addressed in <br />conditions 25 (stormwater management system final drainage plans) <br />and 26 (surface water management system). These plans must be <br />approved prior to clearing or construction. The stormwater <br />management system final drainage plans "...shall be submitted to the <br />Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, St. Johns River <br />Water Management District, Indian River County, and the Treasure <br />Coast Regional Planning Council." Thus, the Council is included in <br />the stormwater management review. The Council is also included in <br />the approval for the surface water management system plan. The <br />Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission is not specifically <br />mentioned as a consulting agency for either the stormwater <br />management plan review or the surface water management plan review, <br />although the County would consult with the Commission. However, the <br />Commission is specifically mentioned as a reviewing/approving agency <br />for the estuarine waterway and basin system plan, which will address <br />water quality issues (reference condition 8.d). <br />County staff feels that these concerns are already addressed in the <br />D.O. and that no changes or additions are needed. <br />97 <br />d E C 18 1985 <br />BOOK fnf % <br />