Laserfiche WebLink
AUG 2 31993 <br />BOOK 9�8� <br />regulation of business. He urged the Board not to approve the 3 - <br />day stay requirement. <br />John Cairns, 11128 Lake Butler Blvd., Windemere, Florida, <br />advised that he is part owner of property north of Indian River <br />Shores that can be zoned at this time for residential resorts with <br />a special exception. He agreed with the Professional Services <br />Advisory Committee that there should be no change to require <br />residential resorts to include or be adjacent to commercially zoned <br />property. They would like to consider a residential resort for <br />their propexty, not a commercial resort. They do not want hotels <br />or motels. Any food or convenience stores in a residential resort <br />are there strictly for the people staying there. Situating <br />residential resorts next to commercial land is not necessary or <br />desirable. Residential resorts are inward oriented residential <br />developments with fewer needs for -commercial facilities since their <br />basic requirements are provided on site. There is no need for a <br />transitional area since the County's planning department has <br />indicated that there are adequate regulations for buffering between <br />residential resorts and regular residential properties. The bottom <br />line is that people want to come to the beaches of Indian River <br />County for a week or two and stay in a residential resort. This <br />could be provided on the barrier island at no increase in <br />residential density with attractive units and amenities. It also <br />would provide year-round employment for many Indian River County <br />residents with no negative effect on surrounding properties. Mr. <br />Cairns asked the Board to reject the adoption of the proposed <br />amendments which would kill any residential resorts on the barrier <br />island. <br />Jacques Brion of Majestic Partners, developer of the remainder <br />of Sea Oaks, pointed out that residential resort zoning doesn't <br />necessarily mean time sharing units, and Director Boling confirmed <br />that there is no requirement for time share. <br />Attorney Vitunac clarified that time share is a type of <br />ownership and resort is a type of use. <br />Mr. Brion wished to clarify that Majestic is not seeking <br />anything less than a 7 -day stay, which is what Sea Oaks is at <br />present. They just want to legitimize what is going on at Sea Oaks <br />today. He extended an invitation to everyone at Sea Oaks to meet <br />with them to discuss Majestic's plans. <br />Chairman Bird asked -why Sea Oaks couldn't continue to do what <br />they have been doing, and Mr. Brion explained that the County <br />notified them in writing that their rental program is in violation <br />of the 7 -day minimum requirement. He understood that all the <br />owners in Sea Oaks received letters notifying them -of the <br />22 <br />