Laserfiche WebLink
AR <br />10 <br />� <br />BOOK <br />7 „ 35 <br />Application <br />No. <br />31-130467-4 (Seacrest Estates Inc. <br />Applicant) <br />1) The DER and other appropriate agencies should coordi- <br />nate with the DNR in that the project is located in <br />the Indian River Aquatic Preserve and therefore <br />subject to requirements of Chapter 18-20, Florida <br />Administrative Code. <br />2) The project must undergo County site plan review to <br />address potential impacts prior to County approval of <br />construction. <br />3) The DER and other appropriate agencies should evaluate <br />the potential impact of the project on ecologically <br />significant submerged bottomlands such as seagrass <br />beds in the Indian River. <br />Applicant No. 31-130621-4(Ted and Ruth Zito, Applicants) <br />1) Indian River County requires replanting or replacement <br />of mangroves removed at a minimum of one-to-one <br />on-site mitigation, in accordance with the County <br />Tree Protection Ordinance. <br />2) It is the County's understanding that the applicant <br />has received verbal confirmation from the DER that <br />the project is exempt from DER permitting requirements, <br />in that it is a landlocked wetland previously <br />impacted. <br />Application No 31-130635-4 (Ambrit Development Corp., Applicant) <br />1) The DER and other appropriate agencies should <br />coordinate with the DNR in that DNR representatives <br />have expressed a concern to County staff that the <br />project may be located as part of the Aquatic Preserve <br />and therefore may be subject to requirements of <br />18-20, Florida Administrative Code. <br />2) Permitting in accordance with the County Stormwater <br />Management and Flood Protection Ordinance is required <br />prior to County allowance of the project, to address <br />storage and distribution of the dredged material on <br />uplands adjacent to the canal. <br />Chairman Scurlock recalled that Commissioner Bowman had some <br />questions at last week's meeting about some improvements that <br />might have been made without a permit, and Environmental Planner <br />Roland DeBlois reported that staff questioned the DER on the <br />installation of a sea wall which Sea Oaks was contending was a <br />replacement of a previously existing wall. Today's <br />recommendations are indirectly related in that the proposed dock <br />is in the same area. <br />Commissioner Bowman asked how many mangroves were removed, <br />and Mr. DeBlois explained that they did not see any evidence of <br />12 <br />