5/27/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Chairman Eggert stated that the buffer approved last week has bothered her all week; she felt it to be too extreme. Commissioner Macht remarked that he thought it was excessive and unnecessary. Then he referred to a memorandum in the backup as follows: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO John Wachtel - Staff Planner FROM ILS' William G Collins 11- Deputy County Attorney DATE. April 23, 1997 SUBJECT: Agricultural/Residential Compatibility Nuisance Disclaimers/Nuisance Easements We have had some discussion about the concept of nuisance disclaimers or nuisance easements whereby people developing residential property adjacent to existing agricultural operations would recognize that the agricultural operations were there first and disclaim any right to object to any nuisances associated with agricultural operations, i.e., noise, spray drift odor, etc. 1 don't believe such disclaimers would be legally valid. Local governments have the authority to adopt zoning ordinances that establish minimum standards to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public. That authority cannot be delegated to private individuals to contract among themselves as to what the appropriate minimum standards for health, safety end welfare are. This is usually called an unlawful delegation of a police power. However, it might be possible to have some legally validnD �M restnctions on property through either easements or deed restrictions. There are several ways that this might be accomplished: (1) The developer of a residential subdivision could in the Certificate of Dedication for the residential plat grant an easement over the platted property to the use and benefit of adjoining agncufural operations (with a legal description of the agricultural properties benefited) subjecting the platted property to continued noise, odor, spray drift, etc. affects from adjacent properties. (2) The developer of the residential property could record deed restrictions stating that all subsequent lot owners take properties subject to the pre- existing right of adjacent agricultural operations to continue those operations even though they may involve some spray, odor, noise. etc. which future lot owners might find to be a nuisance. (3) There could be a plat note reflecting an easement recorded off plat of the same nature. I don't think such private arrangements between adjacent property owners should be brought within the local zoning ordinances or land development regulations. Existing agricultural operations are already protected under the Florida Right to Farm Act, Section 823.14, Florida Statutes (attached). If the County, through its land development reguletions, wishes to provide additional protection to newly developed residential properties from existing agricultural operations, then 1 think extending the physical separation between new structures and the agricultural property line as the Board of County .Commissioners suggested, is a better approach. This extended buffer could then be landscaped more intensely than normal to provide noise, odor and spray drift barriers as was suggested by the members of the Agricultural Advisory Committee and the Professional Services Advisory Committee. 23 MAY 27, 1997 r —U -L FAU