Laserfiche WebLink
M <br />M <br />M <br />applicants for mines in remote areas use of the site perimeter <br />for stockpiling and on-site haul roads. <br />Therefore, the proposed amendment would require that, in <br />addition to existing mining requirements, project applicants <br />satisfy either: <br />(1) A 500' setback between occupied structures and mining <br />pits, material stockpile areas, and on-site haul roads, <br />or obtain a letter(s) of no objection from affected <br />occupants; or <br />(2) A 150' setback from the site perimeter to mining pit and <br />material stockpile areas, and on-site haul roads (except <br />in the area where the on-site haul road connects to the <br />off-site haul route). <br />Reference: PSAC meeting summary: 3/16/95 (attachment #6). <br />Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes (attachment <br />#7). <br />22. Political Sign Regulations. During recent elections, there <br />were numerous candidates, numerous signs, and numerous <br />violations of existing political sign regulations in the <br />county. As a result, many political candidates had their <br />political sign bond money forfeited, and some of those <br />candidates appealed the forfeiture. During its hearing of two <br />such appeals, the Planning and Zoning Commission discussed two <br />primary issues with staff, and requested that staff consider <br />revising the county's current political sign regulations. The <br />two issues raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission were: <br />1. Although political signs are not allowed to be placed in <br />rights-of-way, how do candidates and supporters know the <br />physical limits'of road rights-of-way? <br />2. How are partial forfeitures determined: are forfeiture <br />amounts commensurate to the number or degree of <br />violations? <br />After receiving these comments from the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission, staff initiated amendments to the county's <br />political sign LDRs. In doing so, staff researched how other <br />Jurisdictions regulate political signs, and researched a <br />Planning Advisory Service (PAS) publication on signs. Staff <br />found that other jurisdictions and the PAS publication address <br />the two primary issues raised by the, Planning and Zoning <br />Commission (see attachment #9). <br />In regards to the right-of-way location issue, the City of <br />Vero Beach and City of Sebastian have sign placement <br />prohibitions tied to distances from physical improvements such <br />as a sidewalk or the edge of pavement. In regards to the <br />issue of forfeiture amounts, the City of Sebastian and the PAS <br />model ordinance set a fine or forfeiture amount for each <br />violation; therefore, forfeitures or fines are related <br />directly to specific, individual violations. From this <br />research, staff proposed an initial set of changes to address <br />placement of signs in rights-of-way and relating bond <br />forfeiture amounts to the number of actual violations. <br />At its April 13, 1995 meeting, the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission recommended a few changes to staff's initial <br />proposal, and these recommendations have all now been <br />incorporated into the proposed amendment. <br />MAY 159 1995 13 <br />BOOK 95 FACE 1 3 <br />