My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/2/1993 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1993
>
3/2/1993 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:52 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 12:49:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/02/1993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
Director Boling thought the height notification paragraph in <br />the ordinance is essentially the bare -bones approach and is as <br />streamlined as possible under FS 333. <br />Deputy County. Attorney Collins advised that the State does <br />contemplate height notification if the approach or flight path is <br />pierced, the variance procedure and criteria follows state law, and <br />the nonconforming issue is largely controlled by state law. There <br />is some specific guidance in the statute as to when you can expand <br />on conformity or when you discontinue it, and the statute is more <br />generous than our local law. The point is not to allow things to <br />get worse without analyzing them. <br />Nancy Offutt, Government Affairs Coordinating Officer for the <br />Indian River County -Vero Beach Board of Realtors, reported that she <br />has been following the progress of this proposed ordinance and the <br />Board of Realtors' main objection to the ordinance is the <br />overflight zone. They feel that extending the overflight zone <br />beyond the clear zone is not necessary and cutting it back to the <br />clear zone will eliminate the unnecessary regulations. The <br />av'igation easement is a property right that is being taken without <br />compensation. <br />The Chairman determined that no one else wished to be heard <br />and thereupon closed the public hearing. <br />Vice Chairman Tippin felt that the ordinance is an <br />overreaction. The government is not charged with looking out after <br />everybody's welfare. He did not agree with all the hazards at New <br />Hibiscus Airport and thought it might be safer there than living <br />near a public road. He felt we have gone overboard, probably <br />because of all these federal and state mandates. <br />Commissioner Adams agreed and. felt we are trying to cover too <br />many details. She felt that buying a piece of property gives no <br />guarantee that it can be used for the intended purpose. Buying <br />land is speculative and always will be. This is also true for the <br />airport. We do not know whether there will be a need for that <br />airport in 15 years. Commissioner Adams thought the ordinance <br />needed more study and preferred that it be simplified. <br />Commissioner Eggert asked for clarification of avigation <br />easement. <br />Deputy County Attorney Collins explained that it basically <br />allows the airport operator to continue operation without fear of <br />threat of nuisance suits from the noise or disturbance in the <br />overflight zone. The state law does allow giving the airport <br />authority or political subdivisions the power to acquire easements. <br />19 <br />MBOOK 88 FIVE <br />999 ® 2 19�3 `999 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.