8/9/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

parks, on private lots, etc., and he did not believe that is what was intended by staff. He had thought this was to be changed. County Engineer Cain confirmed that he has this down to be changed, but they simply have not had the time to make the change. Director Keating agreed the workload has been the problem, but believed we can have revised drafts out by next week. Commissioner Bird noted this had included the phrase "in high traffic areas" before, and he thought that probably should be left in. Mr. Dill next referred to Page 25 where it says that resi- dential buildings must have the lowest floor elevated to the Flood Protection Elevation for that site and if fill is used, you have to compensate for that fill. Mr. Dill stressed that you have a lot of small single family lots where you don't have room to dig a hole. It was noted that this was discussed earlier, and Mr. Dill agreed that it was, but he did not know what is going to happen on that. Mr. Dill also thought that on Page 28, Line 11/12, "flood will not be increased" should read "floodway will not be increased." Director Keating advised that we only have one regulatory floodway in the County along the St. Sebastian River and this should read "flood." Attorney Collins agreed. Commissioner Bird referred back to the discussion on the fact that the cut and fill balance requirements won't work in the old small lot subdivisions, and felt we are just going to have to forget about it there and apply it on the new subdivisions. Engineer Todd Smith suggested a possible solution to the problem with these smaller lots might be going back to the exemp- tions where it speaks of less than 5,000 sq. ft. or 1006 of the site and raising that percentage a bit - for example, on a 70 x 100 foot lot if that percentage was lifted up to 15%, that would allow a home owner to put in a 1,000 sq. ft. home and be exempt. AUG 0 9 1990 3 7 BOOK � r BIW - J