4/14/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M M M On the fourth side, however, there is a compatibility concern. That concern relates to the potential impact which an active agricultural operation could have on the Green Acres Estates Subdivision, which lies directly to the east of the subject property. Ranging in size from .52 acres to .62 acres, the ten Green Acres Estates subdivision lots which abut the subject property all are 191.3 feet in depth. With a minimum RS -3 setback of twenty-five feet, these lots will eventually have houses and yard areas bordering the subject property and the proposed agricultural uses. Currently, Indian River County has land development regulation guidelines in Section 911.04(3)(c)5 which require new residential development which is established adjacent to active agricultural operations to provide a buffer between the agricultural operations and the proposed residential uses. The intent is to make the intruding residential uses protect themselves from the adverse effects of active agricultural operations - particularly effects associated with pesticide use and aerial spraying. However, there are no regulations which require a proposed agricultural development to provide the same type of buffer to adjacent residential uses. No such requirements were established because it was thought that agricultural intrusion into residential areas would seldom occur. In this case, however, the rezoning would allow the agricultural conversion to occur with no additional county development approval required. Since the conversion would result in an agricultural/residential interface, the issue of protecting the existing and future residents of the adjacent subdivision from the adverse impacts of grove operations becomes a concern. To address that concern, the staff had recommended to the Planning and Zoning Commission that the easternmost 50 feet of the subject property not be rezoned from RS -3 to A-1. It was staff's position that retention of RS -3 zoning over the 50 feet of property immediately adjacent to the Green Acres Estates Subdivision would preclude conversion of that portion of the property to agricultural use. With an agricultural use restriction, the 50 foot strip would then serve as a buffer from the active agricultural uses to the residential subdivision. The Planning and Zoning Commission, however, disagreed with staff. At its February 17,,1992 meeting, the Commission voted to recommend that the entire parcel be rezoned to A-1, rather than following staff's recommendation to retain RS -3 zoning on the easternmost fifty feet of the subject property as a buffer between the proposed citrus grove and the adjacent Green Acres Estates Subdivision. The Commission's concern focused on whether or not the buffer adjacent to the subdivision was necessary. The Commission felt that general citrus grove design, including a fifteen (15) foot perimeter stormwater/irrigation ditch and a twenty-five (25) foot perimeter access road, would separate grove operations from the adjacent subdivision sufficiently to eliminate any nuisance effects on the Green Acres Estates Subdivision. Notwithstanding the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision, the staff has concerns regarding the -establishment of a grove without a buffer to protect existing, adjacent platted lots. Since the need for a buffer between active agricultural operations and intruding residential development was recognized with the recent adoption of the county's land development regulations, this recognition seems to indicate that there is a compatibility problem between active citrus groves and adjacent single-family subdivisions. However, this recognition also indicates that the compatibility issue can be resolved with installation of a buffer. 41 MOK APR 1. 1