Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Eggert inquired whether a requirement could be <br />added to plant more trees, and Director Keating replied that when <br />the redesignation and rezoning comes up, the applicant will have to <br />file a site plan for approval. <br />Tom Hammond, of 4111 Shoreland Drive, stated that he is <br />surrounded by M-8 zoning and the fact that his property is not <br />zoned M-8 was an oversight by the planners. He would like to see <br />the whole area zoned M-8 with buffers. <br />The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard in this <br />matter. There being none, she closed the public hearing. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Tippin, SECONDED for <br />discussion by Commissioner Eggert, that the Board <br />accept the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning <br />Commission with the understanding that a 50 foot <br />landscape buffer be included on the north perimeter <br />of the <br />property. <br />County Attorney Vitunac advised that the zoning cannot be <br />conditional, and Commissioner Tippin rephrased his MOTION to accept <br />the recommendation. <br />Commissioner Eggert withdrew her SECOND to the MOTION. <br />MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Eggert, that the Board adopt Resolution <br />96-141 (Hammond) approving the transmittal of a <br />proposed amendment to the Indian River County <br />Comprehensive Plan to the State of Florida <br />Department of Community Affairs for its review. <br />Director Keating commented that there are similar situations <br />in other parts of the County where a 50 foot setback or 25 foot <br />vegetated buffer would be sufficient. This situation is similar to <br />others where the Board would not have an opportunity to examine the <br />project unless the LDR's are changed so that similar situations are <br />all treated the same way. <br />Commissioner Macht felt this would be a rather abrupt change <br />to the Comp Plan for which he could see no reason. <br />THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the <br />Motion passed by a 4-1 vote, Commissioner <br />Macht opposed. <br />NOVEMBER 12, 1996 63 ®ooK 99 F►,cE 728 <br />