Laserfiche WebLink
The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (GFC) identifies <br />approximately 2,709 acres of viable scrub habitat remaining in <br />Indian River County; approximately 900 acres (33%) of that total <br />occurs along the St. Sebastian River. The ecological value of the <br />St. Sebastian River area xeric scrub versus other scrub areas in <br />the county is high due to its relatively large size, its <br />association with other complementary habitats, and its presently <br />ungisturbed/unencroached status. Other xeric scrub areas in the <br />developing portion of Indian River County have been largely <br />isolated by urban development, are relatively small in size or are <br />not part of a bigger, diverse ecological system such as the St. <br />Sebastian River area. Thus, the St. Sebastian River area xeric <br />scrub community has been given extra consideration in its. <br />conservation designation. <br />Outside of the St. Sebastian River conservation area, lands <br />designated as C-2 in the existing comprehensive plan are limited to <br />privately owned wetlands and islands associated with the Indian <br />River Lagoon. In such cases, a 1 unit/40 acre development density <br />with a 1 unit/acre density transfer credit is appropriate. <br />Wetlands are inherently not conducive for development based on <br />their environmentally sensitive characteristics. The low density <br />serves to deter development within the C-2 wetlands while still <br />providing relief via the density transfer credit. <br />The intent of the established 1 unit/40 acre C-2 density was <br />primarily to provide needed protection to sensitive wetlands. In <br />reassessing the C-2 density as it applies to the scrub upland along <br />the St. Sebastian River, the appropriateness of the density <br />restriction is subject to scrutiny. Contrary to_ wetlands, xeric <br />scrub upland physical characteristics are highly conducive for land <br />development. The land is "high and dry" and, as such, xeric scrub <br />has been largely developed elsewhere in the county and in Florida <br />as a whole. Thus, the conflict .of development vs. preservation is <br />greater than with wetlands. <br />An increase in the density allowance for the scrub uplands adjacent <br />to the St. Sebastian River, however, may be appropriate in striking <br />a reasonable balance between private development rights and public <br />preservation interest. <br />The 1 unit/21 acre density, as originally proposed by the <br />applicant, is too substantial of a density increase for the uplands <br />of the St. Sebastian River conservation area, particularly as it <br />would apply to the west bank of the south fork. The area west of <br />the river is physically isolated from existing infrastructure and <br />access, and the proposed density would substantially increase <br />development pressure in the face of conservation objectives. <br />A majority of the W.W. Ranch is agriculturally designated with a <br />density of 1 unit/5 acres. The original intent of the C-2 district - <br />around the St. Sebastian River was to provide additional protection <br />for the environmentally significant areas than would be afforded to <br />the agriculturally designated lands. The applicant is proposing a <br />higher density (1 unit/2 J acres) in the conservation area than when <br />the area was originally designated as agriculture (1 unit/5 acres). <br />A 1 unit/5 acre density would be more compatible with the adjacent, <br />similar density of agriculturally designated lands in the vicinity. <br />Moreover, the county would retain its percent set-aside purview <br />over created parcels within the conservation area. <br />Unlike the comprehensive plan's AG designation, the present C-2 <br />designation does not allow agricultural use. The purpose of the <br />agricultural use exclusion is to prevent the unregulated conversion <br />of the environmentally significant natural communities to grove or <br />pasture. Likewise, the proposed C-3 district would exclude <br />agricultural use. <br />ll 18 19,91 <br />85 <br />PpCiK ;� FA -1E 0 i <br />r <br />