5/5/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r MAY 0 51992 BOOK ' RIJE • 0 21 development; therefore, all commercial land use redesignation requests must be reviewed for consistency with that policy. This plan amendment is consistent with policy 1.211 because it would produce in -fill development to the land -locked portion of the subject property. With the Indian River Medical Center abutting the western boundary of the subject property and the future Indian River Boulevard abutting the eastern boundary of the property, designation of the subject property as hospital/commercial would have a square -off, in -fill effect and would not produce a strip pattern. Potential Impact on Environmental Qualitv In contemplating the proposed land use designation amendment, the presence of estuarine wetlands on the subject property is an important factor to consider. Conservation element policy 5.4 of -the comprehensive plan provides that all estuarine wetlands are deemed environmentally sensitive, and shall have a 1 unit per 40 acre development density, with a development density transfer credit of 1 unit per acre (being a C-2 conservation designation). For purposes of identifying the areal extent of wetlands on a site, Policy 5.1 of the conservation element *provides that wetland delineation "shall be consistent with federal, state, and regional Jurisdictional regulatory agencies". Additionally, LDR Chapter 928, Wetlands and Deepwater Habitat Protection, states that the landward extent of wetlands shall be determined "based on the broadest jurisdictional line of reviewing regulatory state and federal agencies" (Section 928.O6(i)(a)). It is important to distinguish between the regulatory agencies' "broadest jurisdictional line" and permitting requirements or exemptions. A wetland that satisfies an agency's criteria for wetland delineation but falls short of the agency's permitting threshold is still deemed an environmentally sensitive wetland for county land use and zoning designation purposes. Future land use element policy 1.31 explains that the exact boundaries of the C-2 conservation district shall be determined by environmental survey. From the standpoint of timing, there are two alternatives regarding site specific determination of C-2 designation boundaries. The first approach would be to require the applicant to conduct an environmental survey (verified by staff) prior to land use amendment approval. The second approach would be to generally approve the land use amendment, with the exact boundaries of the C-2 district determined by an environmental survey prior to site development (as required by coastal management policy 1.4 of the comprehensive plan). The portion of -the property then determined to be federal or state Jurisdictional wetlands shall retain a C-2 conservation designation, with the remainder of the property having the "non - sensitive" upland designation. Environmental planning staff find the second approach acceptable, which is consistent with past county implementation policies. Conservation policy 6.12 of the comprehensive plan provides that 15% of upland native plant community existing on site shall be preserved (reducible to 100 if preserved in one contiguous "clump"). This policy is implemented via LDR Chapter 929, Upland Habitat Protection, at the time of site development. LDR Chapter 929 also implements the policies of conservation objective 7 of the comprehensive plan, by requiring the developer to conduct an environmental survey of the pro rt development, and Pe y prior to by requiring coordination with local, state, and federal agencies to ensure that impacts to listed rare species are avoided or minimized, as applicable. 50