Laserfiche WebLink
agreed with Mr. Boling that of the three segments of the proposed <br />ordinance the first two are rather easy because we have a lot of <br />federal and state mandated guidance. The third section is the <br />difficult one and that is determining what is safe and unsafe. <br />Michael O'Haire, attorney representing the owners of property <br />located at the easterly fringe of the overflight zone of the Vero <br />Beach Airport on the east side of U.S. 1, pointed out that the <br />Florida East Coast Railroad tracks and City -owned property are west <br />of U.S. 1. Mr. O'Haire agreed with the recommendation of the <br />Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) and pointed out that Florida <br />Statutes Chapter 333 does not require the Board to limit the uses <br />around the overflight zone. Chapter 333 has been on the books for <br />almost 40 years, and if these uses along the easterly side of U.S.1 <br />are incompatible with airport use, they have been incompatible <br />without problem for the past 40 years. There is no emergency now <br />that dictates that these peoples' property should be limited in <br />use. He conceded that the City of Vero Beach and Mr. Sherry are in <br />a position of having to work around the needs of the airport in the <br />City of Vero Beach. He further pointed out that Mr. Sherry has had <br />considerable success in obtaining the FAA grants without the <br />limitations. He urged the Board to follow the recommendation of <br />the P&Z. <br />Commissioner Macht announced that he was not previously aware <br />but had just noticed on the enlarged map that he owns property in <br />the area affected by the Vero Beach Airport overflight zone. He <br />asked for legal advice from the County Attorney. There was <br />discussion regarding his conflict of interest and what procedure <br />should be followed, but later in the meeting it was discovered that <br />his property would not be affected by the Board's decision. <br />Director Boling specifically addressed the New Hibiscus <br />Airport where the runway comes up just short of a driveway and <br />proceeds over property located immediately north of State Road 60 <br />and the airport property. Those two parcels are zoned general <br />commercial. The New Hibiscus Airport situation entails all six <br />types of restrictions, including motels and hotels, gasoline fuel <br />sales and the amount of building area that can be on a particular <br />piece of property. The property immediately north of the airport <br />is about 14 acres. This is a situation where the overflight zone <br />affects a parcel of property which is both inside the zone where <br />the restrictions would apply and outside the zone where the <br />restrictions would not apply. The restricted zone allows uses such <br />as parking, landscaping, or stormwater retention in conjunction <br />with the building that is just outside of the zone. For instance, <br />a hotel could be built just outside of the zone and the parking for <br />0W <br />BOOK 88 F'.+�f. 9,93� BAR ®2 1993 <br />