Laserfiche WebLink
M M M <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the <br />proposed ordinance containing amendments to the county's land <br />development regulations (LDRs). <br />Residential Resort Regulations <br />Director Boling explained that the 3:1 ratio discussed in Item <br />4 means that 25 percent of the land within a residential resort <br />project would have to be commercially zoned. <br />Chairman Bird requested that the following letters and memo be <br />placed in the record: <br />2 <br />ROBERT A.CAIRNS,INC. <br />R InwdaftWawbSnm mm <br />"0, - <br />JUL 1993 <br />RcGENED <br />utm <br />gppRD <br />COM�iSSIONEO <br />July 26, 1993 <br />Chairman Richard Bird <br />Indian River County Commission <br />1840 25th Street <br />Vero Beach, F1. 32960 <br />Sude206 <br />425 West Colonial Drive <br />Orlando, Rorida32804 <br />Telephone <br />407.649-8745 <br />Re: Resort Land Development Regulation proposed changes to eliminate <br />any more "Residential Resorts", after Disney, in Indian River County. <br />Dear Chairman Bird, <br />The purpose of this letter is to ask that resort developments <br />not be required to include or be next to commercially zoned land. <br />This would eliminate any more resorts in the county. <br />I am involved in the ownership of 180 acres north of the Town <br />of Indian River'Shores and south of Sea Oaks on the Barrier Island. <br />There has been a group, mainly from Indian River Shores, requesting <br />the elimination of further resort development on the Barrier Island. <br />They tailored proposed changes to the LDR that are very effective in <br />eliminating further resort development. The main killer is the <br />requirement that resorts be attached to commercially zoned land. It <br />just so happens that there is no more commercially zoned land on the <br />Barrier Island and, thus, the end of resorts. The talk that there is <br />.land on highway 60 and US#1 that could fit this criteria is true, but <br />no resort developer would want to go there. Also, there is a chance <br />that a golf course, .resort developer would want to develop on the <br />mainland, but would likely not want to be next to commercially zoned <br />land. This would severely restrict the location which increases the <br />land price and availability and, therefore, it's viability. <br />This group would also like to get rid of Disney. They got <br />caught in a rush of pro Disney sentiment and thus said they would <br />support it. Since then, they requested that Disney be considered a <br />DRI and publicly announced they want to be a thorn in Disney's side. <br />It is obvious that.they are thinking of no one but themselves. The <br />county should not think of just one, vocal group's interest when the <br />whole county is at stake. <br />0 <br />� S�� 71993 <br />BOOK 90 PAGF. 419 <br />