3/20/2001 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY Vice Chairman Stanbridge, not to grant the rezoning (later clarified to include not amending the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Designation). Under discussion, Vice Chairman Stanbridge recalled the last time this was brought to the Board, she questioned the property as being in the flow plan of the St. Sebastian River. Also, historically, the canal system that runs along CR 512 actually connects with the flow plan through Vero Lake Estates. Corralling the stormwater in the Vero Lake Estates area is being worked on diligently. Many of those lots are in a flow plain and now the County is having to take care of that situation. She suggested this might be considered sprawl which might create a new village or a new town. She had problems with it and did not want to put anyone else in harm's way. It was established that this project would be located within the urban service area and when developed would be required to meet all stormwater criteria for the site. Vice Chairman Stanbridge understood but felt it would impact other properties. Chairman Ginn observed that several creeks throughout the property empty into the river, and Vice Chairman Stanbridge explained the areas have been channelized, advised of the master stormwater plan in the district, and told how the County is working on Vero Lake Estates drainage problems Tremendous dollars are being spent to get control of the stormwater drainage. To add additional homes in the area does not compute. What the Board allows in this area will affect those living in many of the other surrounding properties. In response to the inquiry, Commissioner Adams clarified that her motion included not amending the Comprehensive Plan in this matter because it would not be appropriate due to the proximity of the headwaters of the St. Sebastian River. Also it would create a domino March 20, 2001