10/6/1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

September 12, 1986: The building permit is extended 30 days to expire October 20, 1986. October 17, 1986: The building permit is extended 30 days, to expire November 19, 1986. November 3, 1986: The FSLIC requests preliminary plat extension, since no land development permit has been issued and the develop- ment is in receivership. The preliminary plat extension request has no bearing on the site plan status. November 25, 1986: The Board of County Commissioners grants an 18 1k month extension of the preliminary plat approval, to, -expire June 27, 1988. November.26, 1986: The building permit is extended 30 days, to expire December 19, 1986. December 16, 1986: The building permit is extended 60 days, to expire February 17, 1987. February 4, 1987: The building permit is extended 60 days, to expire April 18, 1987. April 7, 1987:. The building permit is extended 60 days, to expire June 16, 1987. After receiving another extension request,. -.the Building Department brings the request before the Building Board of Adjustment. June 15, 1987: The Building Board of Adjustment grants a 90 day extension to expire September 19, 1987. ANALYSIS: Termination enables the County to ensure that site plans are not reviewed and approved prematurely. Site plan termination precludes a developer from gaining an unfair advantage by "grandfathering -in" indefinitely a project that no longer meets current regulations. Since the approval of the South Vero Square site plan, the follow- ing applicable ordinances have been amended or adopted. Landscape Ordinance amended 8/1/84 Comp Plan amended 8/8/84, 8/15/84, 9/12/84, 4/3/85, 7/10/85 Tree Protection amended 2/20/85 Stormwater Management Ordinance 2/20/85, 4/2/86, 10/14/86 Zoning Conversion 4/11/85 New Non -Residential Districts 7/24/85 Oslo & U.S. 1 Node Established 9/18/85 Lake Policy In addition to local ordinances and policies, regulations adopted by other jurisdictional agencies have changed since the site plan was approved. For example, the FDOT and St. John's Water Manage- ment District have both had substantial changes in their permit- ting criteria which would affect this project. Substantial design changes could occur with regard to U.S. #1 access, stormwater management design, buffering from residential properties, and landscaping. CONCLUSION: This property has changed ownership several times. The County has no indication that a new developer has been found who will diligently pursue the construction of this shopping center, which was the basis for granting the many building permit extensions. 43 0 UT 6 1987 - BOOK W, PAGE 5;;