Laserfiche WebLink
!JUL 2 0 1906 <br />Transportation Svstem <br />BOOP( 65 PAGE 236 <br />The subject property has direct access to County Road 512 <br />(classified as an arterial street on the county's Thoroughfare. <br />Plan). The maximum development of the subject property under CG <br />zoning could generate up to 15,836 average annual daily trips. <br />Environment <br />The subject property is not designated as environmentally <br />sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area. The soil <br />characteristics for the subject property include severe wetness <br />and poor drainage. <br />Utilities <br />County water and wastewater facilities are not available for the <br />subject property. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning. <br />Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that this <br />Comprehensive Plan amendment request be denied. Based on this <br />recommendation and the staff's previous recommendation for the <br />boundaries for this node which would not include the subject <br />property, stuff recommends that this rezoning request be denied. <br />Ken Evitt, Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent of <br />the Indian River County School Board, wanted to make the Commis- <br />sion aware of the School Board's plans. He advised that at their <br />last meeting the School Board voted to get an appraisal of a <br />piece of property right next to the Miller/Hamilton property <br />described in Item V, and the School Board plans would make a "U" <br />shape around that piece of property. Mr. Evitt submitted a <br />drawing of their plans to Planner Shearer. <br />Chairman Scurlock informed the Board thatwehave received a <br />copy of a letter written by Superintendent Burns to Mr. Roland <br />Miller clarifying the letter submitted by Mr. Miller at the <br />hearing of July 15th Those letters are as follows: <br />14 <br />