My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/10/2013AP
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2013
>
12/10/2013AP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2018 11:05:31 AM
Creation date
3/23/2016 9:06:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Date
12/10/2013
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Book and Page
216
Supplemental fields
FilePath
H:\Indian River\Network Files\SL00000G\S0004NX.tif
SmeadsoftID
14238
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
216
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ORDINANCE NO. 2013 - <br />AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY <br />COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, <br />FLORIDA, CONCERNING AMENDMENTS TO ITS <br />LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDRs) <br />WITH REGARD TO THE DELAY IN THE <br />CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS, AMENDING <br />SECTION 913.09 "DESIGN STANDARDS AND <br />REQUIREMENTS" OF CHAPTER 913 <br />"SUBDIVISION AND PLATS" OF THE INDIAN <br />RIVER COUNTY CODE IN ORDER TO ALLOW AN <br />ADDITIONAL EXTENSION FOR SIDEWALK <br />CONSTRUCTION; AND PROVIDING FOR <br />CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY, AND AN <br />EFFECTIVE DATE. <br />WHEREAS, several subdivisions are operating under the si <br />bonding -out regulations that were in effect prior to 2009 where the devel <br />responsible for the construction of the sidewalk segments fronting or con' <br />to individual lots; and <br />WHEREAS, the Indian River County Code has provisions for alter <br />solutions where the developer does not have to "bond -out" by either constr <br />the sidewalk segments before a residence is constructed or the lots are s( <br />by amending the restrictive covenants to transfer the responsibility to t <br />owner to construct his individual sidewalk segment fronting or contiguous <br />lot prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy. In the first instance, <br />sidewalks are constructed, the likelihood of them having to be redone is <br />due to heavy equipment and construction traffic breaking the segments <br />home construction; thus paying twice for the same sidewalk construction. <br />latter instance where transfer is an option and the lots have been sold, <br />become quite burdensome, challenging or impossible to obtain homeownE <br />lender consents after the fact. In other instances where some lots have <br />sold, the developers do not want to amend the restrictive covenants as the) <br />uniformity within the subdivision, that is they do not wish to single out certa <br />with a restriction that is not for the entire subdivision; and <br />Coding: Words/letters underscored are additions to text; words/letters in <br />cirelcoth <br />format are deletions to text. <br />ATTACHMENT 4 <br />walk <br />)er is <br />uous <br />iative <br />acting <br />Id, or <br />ie lot <br />;o his <br />f the <br />trong <br />uring <br />n the <br />t has <br />r and <br />been <br />want <br />n lots <br />178 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.