The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7/13/1982CLUP - 1 Tuesday, July 13, 1982 The Board of County Commissioners, and the Planning & Zoning Commission of Indian River County, Florida, met in Special Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, July 13, 1982, at 7:00 o'clock P.M. Present from the Board of County Commissioners were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Alfred Grover Fletcher, Vice Chairman; Dick Bird; and Patrick B. Lyons. Absent was William C. Wodtke, Jr., who was out of town. Present from the Planning & Zoning Commission were Carolyn Eggert; John W. Tippin; Richard Parent; and Thomas R. Jones. Absent was Maggie Bowman. Also present were C. B. Hardin, Acting Administrator; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Chris Paull, Assistant Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Patrick Bruce King; Community Development Director; Art Challacombe, Planning Manager; Dewey Walker, Zoning Manager; and Janice Caldwell, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order. The purpose of the public hearing, combining the Board of County Commissioners and the Planning & Zoning Commission, was to discuss the draft of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN The hour of 7:00 o'clock P.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: ro b' 3198 sox 0 rasp 3�� JUL 1 2 J U L 131982 woR 50- Pour 354 r\(7 •LAND USE MAP � ;- •_ LD1 N �° - LI�J • INDIAN RIVER COUNTY '�°• �r' - ---- ----- °� K= LCca, •—•---• ;�. Par+ �88n3e!' Yba —•—• RR2 - 9 OTOLFASr C0NNE:L7AL LD1, �e��tslat.�,+•,6° `PM+''1aiteias •..: _ ,. s ."' L OO ro�rraL o�nm/Fta�aL ANCLSTRAL AG Lb24+;mac 1 . r, . •'i.�r. i♦mvlv6=oAL N93TNE v1'ALIJ' ! d _ LD2 °�°!� gasrn�e USE • . �¢ x � •:' AioxEo usE AG :a`e <'�` sESAsruNa WIMMLLS., CovNSznAL LD2 L r. > °6TFCT :s aY `"a>�`c�• H zy DID Boz LD2 -R- — L raniEp ,R . D , �•�. 1 swoie:s ►', a ,:`i 1 LD2 , AG D �Z s F+'wFm•�T_ t3o,� e�srf ,4? �a�� ati9 '. 3 '+"�. D �d3 a I.. �;.�i<,°a.•�,a G� to yi°�a� Q� I ... ' � .. ... - :. ��s�� •'•ate Pars 4��;;S,w..< •ENvFCCaj WAL mens EASTOF 195 - y t`rs �.+�-,'ati R 0z ARE FR -2 .f!,js:ta AG g i D �A• ENV1R0fa&-NTAL AREAS;1ST of AG- y :'$ s g{ic ,• �° c r 1 ARE nrr - $> � p�ra, a LD1 •L' - JANUARY 8 19 2 aFi. ...'�� 'aivt �. 6i3S"�fr "`d Lro .�fi-•r3-'{> >'*.� ,r.N' rr`.•rAa�.r.-1 r a .�:L- j'��.,'i _�. N r `s".'` ,- .. t .. � � �.q. *-.. � �`a - w+�'Ss.:..�GrJ1e 3='+�, ��,}�4��5��x:n Sa!?: ?y dAis�t;�' � i+'#,%et .Aa,F N:,r '�,a�lis 'sa.sat l�i�� ro`,:cge !+4" .r:.1 ia•� J - eMyit• ... - - , �-r , L:.,. -k,7 :. .. .... . ... ._! .�a.1e',a1-. i`.z .'r - 6-. .a �.£.?, .` : � 7._..• NOTICE OF REGULATION OF LAND US " a verbatim record of the proceedings Is made, which record includes the testimony in .rd of County Commissioners of Indian River County proposes to relate the use of evidence of which the appeal is based. :hin the area shown in the map in this advertisement.Q ` _ . ..:. Indian River County ` ublic hearing on the proposal will be held on Tuesday, July 13, 1982, at 7:00 P.M. at Board of County Commissioners and my Administration Building, 184025th Street, Vero Beach, Florida. The meeting will;Planning and Zoning Commission nt meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local Planning BY: Doug C. Scurlock, Chairman of on the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County. All interested in - The Board of County Commissioners s are invited to attend and comment on the proposal. Consideration will be given to _ Carolyn K. Eggert asted amendments to the following elements of the proposed Crehensive Plan Chairman of the Planning and Land Use ' .,a r ��"i #.' 3 <.� : ftf j, F . c �• :,'; ..a ."�. . ` ' :Zoning Commission Transportation "'; THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE MAPr Conservation/Coastal Zone Protection Housing = r The Future Land Use Map is an intregral part of the Land Use Element of the Com - Recreation 4 tic s prehensive Plan for Indian River County. Its purpose is to designate existing and future land Sewer, Water, Drainage and Solid Waste r s., use patterns for the next twenty years. These activity patterns include residential uses, com- Utilities (Electric) martial uses, industrial uses, institutional uses, open space preservation areas, agricultural Intergovernmental Coordination s `" ` uses, and areal with a mixture of uses. - Urban residential land use districts are shcwn on the map by four population density NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT ORDINANCE classifications. These are designated as: s County Commission shall also hold a second public hearing on the proposed Com- Low Density 1 (LD -1) - to 3 units/acre sive Plan at the County Administration Building, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Low Density 2 -(LD -2) - to 6 units/acre _ on Tuesday, July 27, 1982, at which time the Commission shall consider adoption of Medium Density 1 (MD -1) -• to 8 units/acre" Medium Density 2 (MD -2) - to 10 units/acre nonce entitled; AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF IN- Rural and Agricultural districts are shown on the map by three population density DIAN RIVER COUNTY AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 82-1 AND ADOP• classifications. These are designated as: TING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS Agricultural (AG) - 5 acres/unit OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE Rural -Residential (RR -1) - 2.5 acres/unit "LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ACT OF 1975", _ Rural -Residential (RR -2) - 1 acre/unit ow AS AMENDED, SECTIONS 163.3161, ET. SEQ., FLORIDA STATUTES, PRO- Three areas within the County have developed a historical mixture of residential, com- VIDING FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PURPOSE, VESTED RIGHTS, mercial and industrial land uses. These areas have been classified as mixed-use districts. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, SERVERABILITY AND EFFEC- Within the boundaries of these districts, the existing varletyof uses would be accam- TIVE DATE.: _ modated to develop in the future. pies of the proposed Comprehensive Plan are available at the Indian River County Mixed Use District (MXD) - to 14 units/acre i s - anity Development Department located In Suite S -241B at 1840 25th Street. Vero Future commercial and industrial land uses are designated of strategic locations or• Florida. at a cost of $15.00. `q nodes to accommodate anticipated demands. Each node specified pacified a general activity or ac - my person decides to appeal any decision made on the above matter, he or she will tivities that may be expected to develop within the next twenty years.. The proposed Future record of the proceedings, and for such purposes, he or she may need to insure that Land Use Map also designates the general locations of environmentally sensitive le -ids. VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr, who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being s a in the matter in the / ^Cour/t, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues o Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed befog me t^is da o� A.D. f lYl c�V (SEAL) of the Circuit Manager) River County, Florida) Chairman Scurlock reviewed the procedure that would be followed for the public hearing. He advised that this was the first of the two public hearings scheduled; the next .public hearing is scheduled for July 27, 1982 at 7:00 P.M. in the Commission Chambers. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW- OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN ITEM #1 - Community Development Department Overview of the J U L 13 1982 Comprehensive Plan - Agency comments and proposed changes recommended by the Planning & Zoning Commission at their March 15, 1982 Public Hearing. 2-A k J U L 131982 LAND USE ELEMENT Page 3, Transition Policy, to read: 50 mr 356 "These transition petitions shall be evaluated separately under the 1975 land use map prepared by Adley & Associates and the 1982 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and may be approved if adjudged compatible with either." Page 3, General Policies, to read: "Projects that have received subdivision approval, if necessary under the zoning code, and site plan approval, if necessary under the zoning code, at the date of adoption of this Plan shall be considered to be in conformity with the Plan. ' Projects which have been developed in phases, as shown on the development approval, by a single developer on contiguous property which have received subdivision and site"plan approval, if necessary under the zoning code, at the date of adoption of this Plan shall be considered in conformity with this Plan." Page 4, delete second sentence, third paragraph, starting..."To insure proper allocation of land ......." Page 4, paragraph four, to read: "The Land Use Plan assigns specific maximum density capacities as well as use limitations to various land districts." Page 5, Land Use Map, first paragraph, second sentence, to read: "The map is not a zoning map and does not reflect existing zoning." Page 5, second paragraph, to read: "Development of land pursuant to zoning at the time of adoption of this plan, shall be restricted to the types and densities allowable in the land use element designation assigned to said land on the Land Use Map. All lana that carries zoning classifications that would have allowed development inconsis- tent with this plan -shall be rezoned to zoning classifications consistent with this plan. These actions shall take place within an eighteen month period, commencing with final ATTACIRIENT #1 (1 of 21) _2-B r 0 March 15, 1982 Page 2 adoption. Specific zoning designations and boundaries shall be shown on the official Indian River County Zoning Atlas. Page 5, after Land Use Alan section, new section, General Performance Standards 1) Consider the reclassification of flood prone areas...... 2) Only permit developments......... 3) To read: "Major thoroughfares serving a proposed project during construc- tion of and upon completion of the project shall be maintained at level of service having stable flow characteristics and shall only approach unstable flow characteristics during peak traffic periods." v OBJECTIVE: Maintain level of Service C, or better, on all major thoroughfares in the County. STANDARD: The minimum acceptable thoroughfare level of service shall be level of Service D. Proposed projects shall not proceed which significantly impact a major thoroughfare when existing traffic, the proposed projects' traffic and background traffic on that thorough- fare do not meet level of Service Da In determining the effects of a proposed development on levels of service on a major thoroughfare, the following areas shall be evaluated. 1. Traffic characteristics and levels of service of existing major thoroughfares directly affected by the proposed project. �,• 2. Trip generation and origin --destination projections for the proposed project. 3. The impacts of the proposed project on affected major thoroughfares. 4. Impacts of previously approved projects affecting the same major thoroughfares as the proposed project. 5. The radius of development influence.. 6. Effect of phasing of the prop6sed development. Page 6, Place Urban Service Areas section above Urban Service Area Priorities1980-1990. JUL 13 1982 ATTACHMENT #1 (2 of 21) B®OK -'*50 fAtE35I I March 15, 1982 Page 3 JUL 13 1982 Page 17, Special Policies for Nodal Area, to read: Add: Box 50,u-358 6. "Nodes described as being at an intersection shall have a maximum acreage size. The shape of a node may contain -a distribution of acreage around the intersection or deviate in any direction provided the maximum acreage is not exceeded." "All commercial or industrial uses within a nodal designation shall be specifically defined in the official County Zoning Atlas as to the land boundaries of those uses." 8. "Certain parcels of land which do not conform to the policies for nodal development, but can be demonstrated to be suitable for commercial or industrial development and otherwise meet the performance standards described in this element, may receive consideration by the Board of County Commissioners for commercial or in- dustrial zoning classification." ATTACHMENT #1 (3 of 21) March 15, 1982 Page 4 Page 20, Oslo Road Mixed Use District, second paragraph, to read: "The other area extends 600 feet north of Oslo Road from 32nd Avenue to 43rd Avenue. To the south of Oslo Road and 43rd Avenue the area extends 600 feet and then runs eastward to a point approximtely 200 feet east of 35th Avenue." J U L 13 1989 ATTACHMENT agu . 50PACEATTACHMENT#1 (4 of 21) �'riarch 15, 1982 Page 5' J U L 13 1982 SANITARY.SEWER, POTABLE WATER, DRAINAGE, & SOLID WASTE ELEMENT 69ox 50 P,* 60 , 1 Page 24, top of page, second sentence - Existing Sewer Systems: North County Sewer (Gifford) to read:` "The plant will then be utilized as part of the Gifford System enabling a total treatment of 200,000 gallons per day." Page 26, Existing Water Facilities: South Beach Water System: Eliminate second sentence. Third sentence to read: "The County will supply water to South Beach upon comple- tion of a subaqueous crossing from U.S. #1 across' the Indian River to State Road A -1-A." Page 29, Strategies of Service Expansion, add: "...permitting existing development to take allocation priority over new development." ATTACHMENT #1 (5 of 21) • March 15, 1982 • Page 6 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Page 45, Traffic Service and Demand, Policy Statements; add items 3 and 4: "3. As the level of service on U.S.1 north of S.R. 60 approaches unstable traffic flow characteristics, an appropriate study should be undertaken to develop plans for additional north -south throughfares west of the Indian River which would alleviate those conditions on U.S.1." "4. When unstable traffic flow characteristics are approached on existing bridges spanning the Indian River, appropriate studies should be undertaken to develop pians to alleviate such unstable conditions." Page 45, Traffic Service and Demand, Policy Statements; renumber statement #3-8 to reflect the two previous statements. Page 45, Traffic Service and Demand, Policy Statement 4; to read: "4. Design standards should provide sufficient carrying capacity so that at least 40 MPH in urban areas and 55 MPH in rural areas on arterial and primary collectors can be maintained." Page 46, Safety, Policy Statements; to read: 5. Provide safe crossings at road"and railroad inter- sections in conformance with.F.D':O.T. standards. Page 47, Inter -Modal Coordination, Objective; to read: - "Objective - Coordinate the traffic circulation system with other transportation modes such as bus, taxi, bikeways, and rail." Page 47, Inter -Modal Coordination, Policy•Statement; to read: "6. Rail System - The Florida East Coast (F.E.C.) Rail- road runs north and south for approximately twenty (20) miles along the U.S.1 and Old Dixie Highway corridor. This section of the F.E.C. Railroad serves J U L 13 1982 BOOK 0 PACE 361 ATTACHMENT Al (6 of 91) 5Q FAG JUL 13 1982 S 36 March 15, 1982 Page 7 e b. Continued industrial and commercial uses located along this transportation corridor.'= "7. Bus and Taxi Service - The County has no public mass transit system, but the area is served by one private inter -city bus line and two private taxi companies. The bus terminal is located on U.S.1, south of the City of Vero Beach. There are two private taxi companies operating within the County." - "8. Maintain and develop a system of rail crossings for all arterial and collector roads:" Page 48, Development Impact; to read: "Policy Statements: r 1. It is desirable that arterials and collectors identified in the Thoroughfare Plan maintain a roadway system at levels of service having stable flow characteristics and that these thoroughfares should only approach unstable flow conditions during peak traffic periods. The following road design and capacities should be utilized as a base for assessing the impact of additional proposed developments:" Page 50, Intergovernmental Coordination, Objective, Policy Statement; to read: "The County will cooperate in all A-95 Review* processes and develop internal coordination of local agencies and departments." Page 50, Intergovernmental Coordination; footnote to read: "*See Intergovernmental Element." ATTACHMENT #1 (7 of 21) t. March 15, 1982 Page 8 Page 52, Functional Road Classification, to read: "Sidewalks and Class I Bikeways, a paved facility which is separate and non-contiguous with roadways." "Sidewalks and Class II Bikeways, a designated lane which is part of the raodway." "Class III Bikeways, a signed route shared with traffic." 890K 50 PAGE 363 JUL 13.1992 ATTer'W1vTPNTT 41 rR ,._r 911A J U L 131982 BOOK March 15, 1982 Page 9 CONSERVATION/COASTAL ZONE PROTECTION ELEMENT Page 53, Policy 1, to read: 5-0 wE384 . 1 "The County shall coordinate with the Florida Department of Regulation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to enforce all standards and regulations per- taining to the maintenance of clean air. Page 55, Policy 1, to read: "The County shall coordinate with and enforce the standards and regulations afforded surface waters by the following agencies: The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation The Florida Department of Natural Resources The St. Johns River Water Management District The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency" Page 54, Policy 1, Bottom Page, to read: "The County shall coordinate and cooperate with, and enforce the standards and regulations afforded ground waters by the following agencies: The Florida Department. of Environmental Regulation The Florida Department of Natural Resources The St. Johns River Water Management District The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency" ATTACHMENT #1 (9 of 21) STATE OF FLORIDA :s VEPARTMENT OF VETER-AN t.•. AND CO UNITi AFFAIRS DIVISION OF LOCAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT BOB GRAHAM Govemor JOAN M. HEGGEN MICHAEL C. GARRETSON Secretary Director May 21, 1982 Mr. Arthur D. Challacombe, III Planning Division Manager 1840 - 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Mr. Challacombe: Pursuant to s.163.3184, Florida Statutes, the Department of Veteran and Community Affairs has conducted a review of the proposed comprehensive plan for Indian River County. ' Our review indicated that your proposed comprehensive plan is adequate to meet the requirements of the law except as noted in the attached objections. Specific comments which provide the basis for our objections are shown in the attachment for your consideration and possible use, as well as additional general comments on the proposed plan. We would like to remind you that under the provisions of x.163.3184(2), Florida Statutes, a written reply to our objections must be provided to this office within four weeks. In order for the Department of Veteran and Community Affairs to comply with the provisions of s.163.3184(1)(a), Florida Statutes, we request that you provide us the date, time, and place of public hearings to consider adoption of your comprehensive plan. Further, we request that you provide us a copy of the adopted plan once the adoption process has been completed. If we may be of assistance, please contact oz's. incere , r - )h `. Michael C. Director MCG/RFK/jp Attachments cc: Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Garretson OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR J U L 13 1982 2571 EXECUTIVE CENTER CIRCLE, EAST • TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 323,11 -g) 4WIJ�� E C+Y \ [� V n mm n rvmcrTm Al / fi n —4: 1 1 1 50 d JUL 131982 : DEPARTMENT OF VETERAN AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS CONIZiENTS ON THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY I. OBJECTIONS 1. The transition policy (p. 18) is not consistent with the provisions of s.163.3194(1), Florida Statutes. The law requires that once a plan has been adopted, all development must be consistent with the plan. 2. Under an amendment to the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act that was effective October 1, 1980, each local government is required to include standards, plans, and principles to be followed in the provision of adequate sites for group homes and foster care facilities in the housing element of its comprehensive plan. The proposed plan for Indian River County does not address this planning consideration. II. GENERAL C0N24ENTS 1. The proposed intergovernmental coordination element should be updated to reflect that the Department of Veteran and Community Affairs is responsible for the administration and review of plans under the LGCPA and the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget.is responsible for the A-95 review process. The Division of State Planning was abolished on July 1, 1979. - 2. The drainage portion of the plan contains some good policies and indicates county support for the development of a comprehensive areawide surface water management program. It would be appropriate for the county to, as a minimum, establish a time frame for the completion of the surface water manage- ment program. 3. The solid waste portion of the plan does not address the collection of waste products. While the use of transfer stations is mentioned, we wonder if this is the only method of collection. 4. Several elements contain fiscal proposals for capital improvements; however, no effort is made to consolidate these proposals and to establish their relative priority. In addition, cost for drainage improvements is not included. 5. Under the provisions of s.163.3211, Florida Statutes, the adoption of a local comprehensive plan neither exempts developers from DRI review, nor does it preclude the designation of an Area of Critical State Concern pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. ATTACHMENT #1 (11 of 21) Public Hearing on CLUP March 15, 198? The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing on,the Comprehensive Plan on Monday, March 15, 1982 in the County Commission Chambers located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida. The meeting started at 7:00 P.M. Present were Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert; Board Members, John Tippin, Richard Parent, Tom Jones and Maggie Bowman; Attorney Gary Brandenburg; Art Challacombe, Planning Division Manager; Dewey Walker, Zoning Division Manager; Staff members Janis Johnson, Dennis Ragsdale, Mary Jane V. Goetzfried; Technicians Amy Price and Karen Craver;and Secretary Barbara Scheihing. The Chairman asked if the meeting had been properly advertised and Attorney Brandenburg said it had. Chairman Eggert then called the meeting to order. (See attached ad in back.) Chairman Eggert stated the meeting would -begin with the Planning Department's presentation of any amendments they had of the Land Use Element or any other element as it was given to the public at the time of publication. After the Planning presenta- tion, the meeting would be open to the public and asked those wish- ing to speak, to limit themselves to five minutes. Mr. Challacombe told the Board they had two possible alternatives in reviewing the changes; the most significant changes were typed and distributed to the Board prior to the meeting (he noted the many word changes and offered to go through them page by page). He stated if the Board preferred going through the most significant changes and then hearing the public, the word changes could be discussed at their next regular meeting. Chairman Eggert asked for the later, if the other Board members approved and all were in agreement. Attached to these minutes are the nine pages of additions or corrections that were significant changes to the Compre- hensive Plan. Any discussion or requested changes in the typed attachment will be noted in these minutes. Page 3, Transition Policy - Mr—Challacombe noted this statement was a clarification of the 1975 Map and does not refer to the 1976 Ordinance, gQpK 50 PA6f36 7JUL 131992 ATTACHMENT #1 (12 of 21) J JUL 131982 - �oK 50 Fmcf X368 Page 3, General Policies - Mr. Challacombe told the Board, this,was rewritten to further clarify their position with the old and the new plan, as well as any "transition petitions" they may have before them. The Board was in agreement to the change. Page 4, delete second sentence, third paragraph, starting..."To insure proper allocation of land..." Mr. Challacombe noted this sentence dealt with capital improvement programs, and they have a listing of capital improvements in the Comprehensive Plan, so this sentence was no longer necessary. The Board was in agreement to the change. Page 4, paragraph four - Mr. Challacombe stated be this new change would not only assigning density capacities but would assign constraints on those land uses. The.Board was in agreement to the change. Page 5, Land Use Map, first paragraph, second sentence - Mr. Parent asked if that wasn't what it said now and Mr. Challacombe answered this change may not be one of substance but it'would clarify the issue. Page 5, second paragraph - Chairman Eggert suggested adding "adoption of the implementing ordinances" after the sentence starting "These actions shall take place within an eighteen month period, commencing with....". Mr. Challacombe stated their other alternative would be to begin with the adoption of the plan, then they could give a proposed six months schedule for adoption :of the implementing ordinances after adoption of the plan, extending that date to 24 months. Chairman Eggert felt if Mr. Challacombe thought eigh- teen months would be adequate to bring it.into conformance, it should be good enough time (whatever it is) that they have the implementing ordinance to do that; rather than guess what number of months they -have to do those. The Board was in agreement with Chairman Eggert and Mr. Challacombe's changes. Page 5, after Land Use Map section, a new section called "General Performance Standards" - Mr. Challacombe stated these changes had been given to the Public Works Director for his approval which they had received. He noted the Thoroughfare Plan would be the most difficult one to implement. Mr. -Challacombe said the Thoroughfare Plan transcends all the elements and was a major impetus to development, _ 2- ATTACHMENT #1 (1 21) and the type of development that would occur in the County. Mr. Parent asked how all these specifies came about and Mr. Challacombe told him the existing standards state the County would have to maintain the standard of level service. Mr. Challacombe told him of the general policy of the County Commission, that as much as possible, the County will maintain impact fees and work -through enterprise funding to have development pay for itself; rather than to be a burden on the individual taxpayers. He noted that was the main reason this change was provided for. Mrs. Bowman didn't see how the impact fee had anything to do with the level of service. Attorney Brandenburg explained the way it was now worded, it lead you to believe if he was to go out and build a housing project with 3,000 houses in it, which would severely impact a major thoroughfare, the County has already made a statement that it will, in fact, insure that level of service will be maintained on that thoroughfare by lending of advalorem tax dollars to bring that road to standards. He noted the proposed changes gave more specific guidelines, saying "if a development is going to impact a roadway significantly; so that it degrades a roadway, below level of service D, that either one of two things will occur. #1. Development will not proceed; or,the road will be upgraded to the level necessary, but it doesn't make a statement as to whether the developer is going in to wait until the County gets aroundAits normal course of road im- provements to bring it up to standards; or whether the developer is going to volunteer to make contributions to the County roadway system itself . Mrs. Bowman felt the County should never have to "stoop to level D". She asked if the stop lights -at 12th and 16th on U.S. 1 were that level and stated she didn't know how many of those the County could tolerate. Attorney Brandenburg explained the idea behind the Land Use Plan or Zoning Code, is based on protection to the public health, safety and welfare.- In order to justify imposition of a re- striction, limiting development of an individual property, it has to be justified on those basis. He went on to say if they were to r. limit this to Level C, which was a designed capacity of roadway, the r optimum load conditions that the road was designed for; df you were A _ JUL 131982 -3- ATTArTTmFNT 41 ` (11, of J U L 13 1992 0 to then cut off development at a point and say, "no more development can occur, once the road is beyond level of service C," there is no safety threat created at that point. Attorney Brandenburg stated you would have to have a safety threat creating an actual unsafe condition on the roadway, in order to put a halt to develop- ment that is significantly impacting that roadway. He noted this as a basis for developing recommendation of level of service "D" as opposed to "C". . Air. Challacombe asked to draw the Board's attention to Page 48 where they do have a design criteria in the Transportation Element. He then read the design criteria for two-way highways,at level "C". He stated this was what the County would strive for. Mr. Challacombe said in order to continue the continuity of the draft, on Page 6 they would place "Urban Service Areas" section above the line listing Priorities 1980-1990. Page 17, Special Policies for Nodal Area, to read: #6. He noted he and Mr. Walker can give reasonable and logical (opti- mum) land uses within a node pattern without having to restrain them- selves to 25% deviation limit, using this addition to Page 17. added #8. Mr. Challacombe noted under Special Policies, they had Chairman Eggert asked if he felt this would solve that problem and Mr. Challacombe stated it gives the intent they were looking for; they may have to do some updating on the wording. The Board approved the changes. Page 20, Oslo Road Mixed Use District - Chairman Eggert asked Mr. Challacombe if this was the end of the Land Use minutes and he answered it was. She then asked if anyone would like to speak on anything other than the land use and Mr. Frank Zorc approached the Board. Mr. Zorc told the Board he had put in his request for consideration for a modification of the Land Use Element on a small one acre parcel., immediately adjacent to C-1 Commercial at the point of 7th Avenue and 12th Street (near the Vero Mall). It was his desire to include his property in the C-1 Commercial District. Mr. Gary Wheeler, 1700 14th Avenue, Vero Beach was the next speaker to address the Board. He wanted to talk about his _ OR ATTACHMENT #1 (A=21) l STATE OF FLORIDA DEPAR odl, TNtENT OF Bob Graham. Governor t 1 kL` '. Health & Rehabilitative Services BOULEVARD Mr. Robert Kessler Department of Veteran Community Affairs 2571 Executive Center Tallahassee, Florida Dear Mr. Kessler: and TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301 May 12, 1982 Circle, East 32301 RE: Indian River County Local Government Comprehensive Plan The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services has reviewed the above referenced plan. This plan does not address the planning for group and foster home sites as required by the 1980 amendment to the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act (Section 163.3177(6)(f)4, Florida Statutes). This Department, therefore, recommends that an objection be filled against the plan regarding this particular omission. In July 1981, we reviewed a housing element submitted by Indian River County. That document included a statement under its regulatory policies that, "the county will incorporate provisions into the zoning ordinance to permit group housing facilities." This statement, nor any other similar type of statement, is not included in the current local plan. We recommend that Indian River County reinstate this policy into their plan and expand their discussion to -.include how and when their zoning ordinances would be revised. To assist them in understanding the zoning issues involved, I can make available to them the "Guidelines for Zoning and Special Community Housing." For consultation regarding fulfillment of the above referenced requirement, the appropriate official should feel free to contact me at (904) 488-4311. Sincerely, Jim Hardison Chairperson , HRS Housing`Task Force cc: Mr. Larry Dougher HRS District 9 Administrator mw 50 PACE37 1 JUL 13 1982 ATTArVNT7.NT Al (1 A of 91) rJ UL- 13 1982 - Florida BOB GRAHAM GOVERNOR Boar 50 PAcF.372 Department of 'T'ra'nsportation Maydon Burns Bwl�iing.605 Suwannee Street.Tauanassee Flor,da 32301.8684 Te.epnone(904)488.8541 a PAULN.PAPPAS EARNEST W. ELLIOTT, DIRECTOR SECRETARY DIVISION OF PLANNING May 6, 1982 VAY 13 1932 Mr. Robert F. Kessler Department of Community Affairs Division of Local Resource Management `�:!N r�A SIS.T Bureau of Local Government Assistance CC'lc��Y r551STANC 2571 Executive Center Circle, East Tallahassee, FL 32301 RE: Indian River County Comprehensive Plan Dear Mr. Kessler: The Indian River Community Development Department is to be commended for developing a really comprehensive plan. Orice the draft is published in -final form it should be one of the better ones in the State. Other than a few editorial discrepancies such as 3 different table 1's on pages 7, 57 and 79, we have only 3 comments of substance on the transportation element: EM:sc On page 71, policy statement 4 - we feel that "appropriate studies" should be undertaken as soon as possible instead of when the problem arises. On page 74, Policy Statement 3 - A class 1 bike- way may or may not be the best facility on an arterial. The policy as.stated is quite restric- tive and could be counter productive,. -Perhaps a better expression would be: An apptapriate bicycle facility will be required on selected streets, collectors and arterials near public schools based on need as determined in the 20 -Year Bike Plan. On Page 79, a table number is needed. Under the functional classification, arterials are on the state highway system. Are CR 505A, CR 512 and CR 606 going to be transferred to the state system? If we can be of any further service, please let me know. :Sincer, Ed McNeely, Transp tation Specialist Office of Transpor tation Priorities Division of Planning ATTACHMENT #1 (17 of 21) State of Florida ri;'f r Department of Natural Resources Interoffice Memorandum April 28, 1982 TO: Art Wilde FROAI: Chrys Sullivan SUBJECT: Local Government Comprehensive Plan Review Indian River County COMMENTS: The information in the recreation and open space element was very good as far as it went, but seemed incomplete. . .It was unclear how the public was involved in the planning process and how their wants and needs were identified and included in the element. Recreation standards cited were limited to acreage, and facility standards_(i.e., tennis courts, swimming pools, etc.) appear to have been forgotten. Data was missing from Tables 1-4-. Site locations/addresses were omitted, and acreage and other data were not always included. Without this data it was difficult to understand how an accurate analysis could be conducted to identify specific acreage and facility needs. Correlations between this element and others in this plan were not included, and we found no relationships identified between this element and others such as the..county, region and state, either. With some supplemental data, this element could provide a much more useful and meaningful guide for recreation and open space development in Indian River County.. CS/gb 'JUL 13 1982 ATTACHMENT #1 (18 of 21) �QK 50 P.m 373 r- JUL 131982 State of Florida DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DR. ELTON J. GISSENDANNER Executive Director 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32303 May 11, 1982 Mr. Bob Kessler Department of Community Affairs 2571 Executive Center Circle, E. Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Dear Mr. Kessler: r3 7 4 Governor GEORGI: FIRESTONE Secretary of State JIM SMITH Attorney General GERALD A. LEWIS Comptroller BILL GUNTER Treasurer DOYLE CONNER Commissioner of Agriculture RALPH D. TURLINGTON Commissioner of Education Enclosed please find the Local Government Comprehensive Plan Review for Indian River county . Our Planning Section has prepared this review and is.submitti.ng the enclosed comments. If you have any questions, please advise. Sinr�erely, Betsy onley Comprehensive Plans Coordination ATTACHMENT #1 (19 of 21) DIVISIONS / ADMINISTRATION LAW ENFORCEMENT MARINE RESOURCES RECREATION AND PAItKS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STATE LANDS ®t JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT May 6, 1982 Mr. Bob Kessler Bureau of Local Government Assistance Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida Dear Mr. Kessler: POST OFFICE BOX 1429 0 PALATKA, FLORIDA 32077 9041328.8321 The District staff has examined the Indian River County Local Comprehensive Plan. The Plan appears complete in the areas of potable water, sewage and drainage. The District specifically encourages the implementation of the stated policies for potable water and drainage. The District also encourages Indian River County to review the forthcoming COE-SJRWMD Upper Basin Plan for any features that would affect the local comprehensive plan. If we can be of further service, please contact us. Sincerely, E. D. UERGARA' Executive Director EDU:DMT:sda CC: Howard Muise - TCRPC TJ. { FRANCES S. PIGNONE IDWAL H. OMEN. JR, LYNNE CAPEHART JOHN V D'ALBORA, JR Chairman - Orlando Vice Chairman - Jacksonville Secrettiry - Gainesville Treesu-or • Cocoa FRANK X. FRIEDMANN. JR. MICHAEL BRADDOCK DR. CLAUDE O. GODVVIN MICHAEL E. GRAY RALPH E_ SIMMONS Jacksonvdte Pierson Titusville Sanford Fernandina Beach JUL E D (SONNY) UERGARA Boa 50 P;6E 375 Executive Director r 3 1982 A mm it'l i n n _ r 0 1N �i JUL'131982 STATE OF FLORIDA MCA 50 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION TWIN TOWERS OFFICE BUILDING 2600 BLAIR STONE ROAD TALLAHASSEE, FLORi DA 32301 May 17, 1982 I~ g� `�q►F OF Flylt� Mr. Bob Kessler Senior Planner Department of Veteran and Community Affairs Division of Local Resource Management Bureau of Local Government Assistance 2571 Executive Center Circle, East Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Dear Mr. Kessler: BOB GRAHAM GOVERNOR VICTORIA J. TSCHINKEL SECRETARY Re: Indian River County Comprehensive Plan The Department has reviewed the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Elements and has no adverse comments. We appreciate having the opportunity of reviewing the planning documents. If any further assistance is needed, please do not hesitate to let us know. Sincerely, John B. Outland Intergovernmental Programs Review Section JBO/jb cc: Mr. Arthur D. Challacombe, III ATTACHMENT #1 (21 of 21) Protecting Florida and Your Quality of Life - Planning Manager Challacombe stated that considerable work had been done with the CLUP since adoption of the Land Use Element and the Map on January 6, 1982; final drafts were put together of all the other elements in the CLUP. A public hearing was held on March 15, 1982 by the Planning & Zoning Commission and various changes were proposed and included in the draft plan. Also, they have received letters from the public requesting various amendments, as well as comments from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and the Department of Veteran & Community Affairs. There was an objection by the Department of Veteran & Community Affairs to the Transition Policy on Page 18 of the CLUP, which staff turned over to the Attorney. Attorney Brandenburg explained that their objection to the Transition Policy was moot at this point. It was his opinion that the Transition Policy be left as it was written. He then explained Florida Statute, Section 163.3164 concerning this matter. Mr. Challacombe interjected that the Department of Veteran & Community Affairs also objected to certain wording in the Housing Element. After approval of this wording by the Planning & Zoning Commission, it was included in the CLUP. He continued that when the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and the State look at each plan, they do so in terms of an urban community, and do not take the individual characteristics of the community. He felt it would be premature to put new material into the CLUP without further study, which was staff's response to the State and the Regional Planning Council on this issue. ITEM #2 - Community Development Department - The annexation of 41.4 acres of the north Sebastian commercial JUL- L 13 1982 node by the City of Sebastian. nox 5.0 PA X77 3 JUL 131982 C .50 PA,,- t378 Mr. Challacombe commented that staff was recommending the possibility of taking some of that acreage and transferring it up to the Roseland area. Discussion followed about the area at U.S. #1 and - Roseland Road, and it was determined that it would be pertinent to know what the City of Sebastian would be doing with their annexation. Commissioner Bird commented that when they first discussed commercial nodes, they talked about designating the type of commercial or industrial activity, and about assigning certain acreage numbers to these nodes, -leaving the actual boundaries flexible. He inquired if staff had changed their minds on that issue, and were the nodes going to have definitive boundaries? Mr. Challacombe explained that they still have a degree of flexibility; the public ought to know what the boundaries are of their property, what they can do with their land, and whether they would be permitted to rezone to a commercial or industrial use. Lengthy discussion followed about having the flexibility of moving a node around, and of land use plan change requests. Mr. Challacombe added that if the node was zoned by parcels, then the applicant would have to come in for a change in zoning. The staff would know through the site plan and subdivision process where the growth is, and the area could be better monitored, he explained. Mr. Challacombe recommended withdrawing Item 2 until the City of Sebastian developed that area; then the County could look at it some time in the future. Motion was made by Carolyn Eggert, seconded by John Tippin, that the north Sebastian Node be deleted. Discussion followed, and it was determined this item should be considered after Item #6 had been discussed. Mrs. Eggert withdrew her Motion, and Mr. Tippin withdrew his second. Commissioner Bird pointed out that, for example, the intersection of Route 60 and Kings Highway was being built out at the two eastern corners. He felt an intersection should include all four sides. Mr. Challacombe explained that there were rezonings at that location and they were approved from R-1 to C -1A. If staff feels there should be additional acreage there, then they could 'later recommend expansion. ITEM #3 - Community Development Department - Recommendation to change the southern Sebastian node from a Commercial designation to a Commercial/Industrial designation. Mr. Challacombe explained the rationale concerning this node: Staff had received several site plans that border on this area, and warehouses already exist there. Dewey Walker, Zoning Manager, interjected that they currently have some industrial uses there as well as a few commercial activities. MOTION was made by Carolyn Eggert, SECONDED by John Tippin, that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend to the Board that the south Sebastian node be changed from a Commercial designation to a Commercial/ Industrial designation. Nancy Hines, Sebastian Highlands, came before the Board and agreed with the Motion; it would be most advantageous to have this area designated Commercial/Industrial. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. JUL 13 19925 Boa 50.' rA 379 JUL 13 1992 X80 ITEM #4 - Community Development Department - Recommendation to change the Hobart Road node from Industrial to Commercial/Industrial designation. Mr. Challacombe explained that Hobart Landing was located on the east side of U.S. #1 and staff had approved a site plan for Indian Lake Condominiums; therefore, he recommended the change to Commercial/Industrial designation. MOTION was made by Carolyn Eggert, SECONDED by Richard Parent, that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend to the Board that the Hobart Road node be changed from Industrial to Commercial/Industrial designation. A brief discussion ensued. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. ITEM #5 - Farhat J. Khawaja, M.D. - Request that a two acre parcel fronting on the east side of U.S. #1 and Bay Street be included in the 50 acre Sebastian/ Roseland hospital node. Dr. Farhat J. Khawaja approached the Board and commented that he owned two acres on U.S. #1 and Bay Street and had intended to build professional offices at that location; therefore, he was requesting his property be zoned commercial. Chairman Scurlock noted that they were not here to consider his site plan; that process would come later. Basically, the concern this -evening was to decide the use of the land at that location, the Chairman added. Dr. Khawaja then submitted the following letters of support for his request: ROSELAND PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. P. O. BOX 408 ROSELAND, FLA. 32857 May 26, 1982 Board of County Commissioners: 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Attention: Planning & Zoning Department Gentlemen: Farhat J. Khawaja M.D. has asked our organization to review his plans for placing Medical/Professional office complex on the North- east corner of U. S. 1 and Bay Street. This plan has been reviewed by our 11 member Board of Directors and no adverse comments were received. We appreciate Farhat J. Khawaja 14. D. notifing us of this plan structure because as you are well aware our organization is always interested in commercial development in the North County area. If we may be of further assistance to your good offices, please feel free to call me at 589-3771. Sincerely, 00L,e— "a z. Paul Applegate Vice -President June 24, 1982 Board of County Commissioners Indian River County 1840 25th.Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Gentlemen: •I am advised by Dr. Farhat Khawajaof his request to consider his two (2) acre's of land located at the intersection of Highway U.S. #1 and Bay Street in Roseland, in the North County Medical Commercial node at your meeting to be held on July 13, 1982. I am the owner of adjacent property to Dr. Khawaja.'4 and endorse his request for placing ttedica.l/Professional office complex on his property. The community will be well served if the plan is approved. Thanking you for your consideration, Sincerely yours, JUL 13 1982 7 890K 50 FgE 381 J U L 13 1982 BQQK 50 , PAut 382 June 24, 1982 Board of County Commissioners. Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Gentlemen: I am the owner of property located adjacent to the property of Farhat J. Khawaja M.D. located at the intersection of Highway U. S..#1 and Bay Street in Roseland. I endorse his request for approval of his planned Medical/Commercial building in the North County Medical Commercial node. I appreciate Farhat J. Khawaja M.'D. advising me of his intent to build a Medical/professional office complex on his property. Thanking you for your consideration on his proposal. Sincerley yours, ys X June 24, 1982 Board of County Commissioners Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Gentlemen: I am advised by Dr. Farhat Khawaja of his request to consider his two (2) acre's of land located at the intersection of Highway U.S. ml and Bay Street in Roseland, in the North County Medical Commercial node at your meeting to be held on July 13, 1982. I am the owner of adjacent property to Dr. Khawa.ja.'s and endorse his request for placing Medical/Professional office complex on his property. The community will be well served if the plan is approved. Thanking you for your consideration, Sincerely yours, June 25, 1982 Board of County Commissioners Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Gentlemen: I am advised by Dr. Farhat Khawaja that your good offices will consider the inclusion of Dr. Khawaja's property, located at the intersection of Highway U.S. nl and Bay Street in Roseland, in the North County Medical Commercial node at your meeting on July 13, 1982. I am the owner of property located across from Dr. Khawaja's property and would like you to be aware of my endorsement of Dr. Khawaja's request. His property is suited for medical pro- tessional office use and the community would be well served should the planned use be amended to so provide. Thanking you for your consideration, Sincerely yours, 1,15�., e /s rJ/ Mr. Challacombe commented that Dr. Khawaja's proposal does fit into this node; staff was looking for medical clinics adjacent to the hospital. He advised that staff recommended this property be included in the hospital node. MOTION WAS MADE by Carolyn Eggert, SECONDED by John Tippin, that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend to the Board that the north Sebastian commercial node be deleted and the medical commercial node in Roseland be increased by whatever acreage is required to include the property owned by Dr. Khawaja. Ms. Willie Simonson, Hollywood, Florida, came before the Board and commented that she had had a marvelous opportunity to sell her property to a restaurant chain and lost it because it was not zoned properly for a restaurant. I JUL 13 1982 Lengthy discussion took place regarding this matter. 9 agOK 50 PAGE 383 J U L 131982 ou `50.PA--384 Mrs. Eggert,ADDED TO HER ORIGINAL MOTION, seconded by John Tippin, that the medical commercial node in Roseland not be restricted to just medical offices, but to include Ms. Simonson's piece of property; and that the Planning Department calculate the dimensions, and advise the Board members of the size of the node. Brief discussion took place. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. ITEM #6 - Clarence Wolford - Request to comment on an area along U.S. #1 just north of Sebastian City Limits. Clarence Wolford, Sebastian, came before the Board and explained that he purchased 2h acres a year ago for the purpose of building a dry cleaning plant. He went to the expense of having an architect draw up the site plans, based on the C-1 classification. He continued that his property was across the street from Shady Rest. Mr. Wolford asked the Board to give him the designation necessary to proceed with his dry cleaning plant. Mr. Challacombe pointed out the predominance of mobile homes in the area. He commented that staff could give consideration to a neighborhood node, or as a mobile home use. After some discussion, it was determined that Mr. Wolford could apply to the Planning Department for a neighborhood node. Mrs. Eggert felt no recommendation would be appropriate from the Planning & Zoning Commission at this time. ITEM #7 - Eugene O'Neill - Request that a 20± acre parcel located east of I-95, approximately 1600 feet south of SR 60, to be included in the I-95/Route 60 Industrial/Commercial Node. The Board members reviewed the following material: LAW OFFICES OF GOULO, COOKSEY, FENNELL, APPLE©Y. BARKETT & O'NEILL PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION JOHN R. GOULD BYRON T. COOKSEY DARRELL FENNELL 979 BEACHLAND BOULEVARD FRANK M. APPLEBY VERO BEACH. FLORIDA 32960 LAWRENCE A. BARKETT TELEPHONE (30S) 231.1100 EUGENE J. CYNEILL MICHAEL J. HANLEY Oua FILE NO. June 22,-1982 Mr. Doug Scurlock Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Doug: I am taking the liberty in writing you based on the suggestion of Art Challacombe. I call your attention to a potential" problem our client may encounter concerning the comprehensive use plan and in particular, the commercial/industrial node located at Route 60 and I-95. This firm represents my father, Eugene P. O'Neill, Trustee, the fee owner of twenty acres of property located between I-95 and 90th Avenue, just South of Route 60. My father attended many of the preliminary workshops and hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and was advised that his property would be included in the commercial/industrial node located at Route 60 and I-95. That property is and has been zoned commercial for some time. My dad had an interest in this property prior to becoming the fee owner by being a beneficial owner in the Groiler trust, the previous fee owner, which dates back 9 -years ago. In the past year the property adjacent to my father's property was changed from commercial to industrial.zdhing. We did not oppose the rezoning request based on the assumption that the change would be compatible with the O'Neill commercial property, which my dad was told was to be included in the newly created commercial/ industrial node. J U L 13 1982 11 50` FACE 385 J u L 131982 scox 50 F.,A Gr X386 Recently we learned the flexible/expandable node concept has changed and that the number of acres of land to go into a node was limited. We are now under the impression that which particular limited acreage is included within the node is either decided or recommended by the planning and rezoning department. We were recently advised the O'Neill property was not included in the so called limited acres for the Route 60 node, as the node was used up with other acreage in that area. In our discussions with the planning and zoning department, they appear to be very sympathetic with the appropriateness with my client's property being included within the node, but felt their hands were tied with the limited number of acres. This firm respectively calls to the board's attention the fact that the O'Neill property is ideally suited to be included within the node rather than exluded. With reference to the attached sketch of our property, you will see the property is surrounded by I-95 on the West, the industrial property on the North, a large packing house on the East and a natural and permanent barrier of a sixty foot right-of-way with canal to the South. I understand it makes good planning sense to include the O'Neill property in the commercial/ industrial node. To do otherwise would limit the property to a residential usage once the property is rezoned -and it would have to be. In that event, r.esidential property would then border I-95, industrial property and the packing house, which would seem to be extremely poor planning when the practical answer -the answer we were advised of earlier in the year by the planning department, seems straight forward. We would very much appreciate your consideration of either including us in the node under the present number of acres set aside for that purpose or to add additional acreage in the node. Thank you for your attention and consideration in this matter. Very ruly yours, Eugene J. O'Neill Mr. O'Neill reiterated that they want to be included in the Industrial/Commercial Node at the I-95/Route 60 location. He stressed it would make ideal planning sense to include this property as they were originally advised: He stated that the property is presently zoned commercial. Mr. Challacombe stated that staff was quite surprised that 230 acres did not go very far in that area; they predicted I-95 and Route 60 would be the major industrial -commercial node in that area. He added that staff 'agreed that the most appropriate use for the O'Neill property would be for a light manufacturing or heavy commercial designation. He recommended that staff come back to the Board with an expanded node for that area. MOTION WAS MADE by Carolyn Eggert, SECONDED by John Tippin, that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend to the Board that the I-95 node be extended by a minimum of 20 acres and to include Gracewood Packing House. Tom Jones commented that they were being asked to change the concept, as it applies throughout the County. Discussion followed about the major intersection. Ray Scent, 1605 71st Court, approached the Board and addressed the fact that if an owner had a valid use for industrial, let the boundary line slide, and he should just submit a site plan. He felt it did not make sense to parcel out acreage in advance as the owner may not use it, or possibly he would sell it. The Chairman commented that the Planning staff was going to study expanding this node and give the Board a firm recommendation. Commissioner Lyons commented that he kept getting the feeling that wholesale rezoning was involved; but that was JUL 13 1992 Bou 50. ,wE 387 13 - J U L 131982 Suer 50 �' u ' 4 not the case.' If .,rezoning was required, he thought it would occur at the proper time. Commissioner Bird stated that either through voluntary action by property owners or through Commission -initiated rezoning, they would conform to the CLUP. He did not mind drawing a definitive line, but because it was complicated, it would be advantageous to have flexible lines around commercial. Attorney Brandenburg noted that they could continue to let the zoning remain as it now exists, and the individuals who want it rezoned, take the initiative to do so. Discussion followed, and it was thought this matter would be on a first come, first served, as -needed basis. The Attorney did not feel that by the Board's action tonight, it would .be giving Mr. O'Neill vested rights in commercial. Robert Reider, 1150 Reef Road, commented that if it would. be on a first come, first served basis; as the acreage in the node is used up, a person could be out in left field. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried with a vote of 7 to 1, with Tom Jones voting in opposition. ITEM #8 - Harry Klimas - Request that a commercial designation be given a parcel located on the east side of North U.S. #1, directly south and adjacent to Glenn & Mike's Nursery. The Board reviewed the following information concerning property owned by the Polish -American Club: March 10, 1982 Mr, Art Challacombe Indian River County Planning Department RE: Parcel 03-32- 39 00000 3000 00025. 0 N 1/2 of N 1/2 of SE 1/4 of NW 1/4 Less HWY R/W As in R. Bk. 100 PP. 497 (Or. Bk. 488 P. 789) Dear Mr. Challacombe: I request that The Planning Department please consider keeping the Commerical designation on the above described property. As shown on the attached plat map, this property is sandwiched between two Commerical properties. 03-32-39 00000 3000 00023, 0 occupied. by Pro -Fashion Shop and Parcel 03-32-39 00000 3000 0005. 0 and 0006. 0 occupied by Glenn and Mike's Landscaping. Across US #1 from the subject property are 2 Commerical establishments, Mama Mia's Resturant and the Busy Bee Nursery. Thank you for your consideration. Very respectfully, Harry. lUimas (Agent) "°'�--- -- -' TOWNSHIP T2s • �. , a 1, O ., .i.o • i• S 7C.4Li: l'• to. M 3 „-(:D+ A. O 32 wa 39 t tr12 f it � � _ T "��if—Zww• S , sA f� w._ a• a � off . J U L 13 198Zr 15 6.00K 50 %E 389 JUL 131982 sou 50 ul-IF390 Harry Klimas,.11th Place, representing the Polish - American Club, stated that they have purchased 8.85 acres and are requesting that this be included in the new Hobart node, which would allow them to build their club house. - Mr. Challacombe felt staff would look favorably on this request, and that the use of the Polish -American Club would be an appropriate use. Chairman Scurlock stated that if Mr. Klimas would present a plan and move it through the process, the staff was indicating that they would recommend approval. ITEM #9 - Gary Wheeler - Request that a 1.05 acre parcel located on the east side of North U.S. #1, across from Mama Mia's Restaurant, be included in a Commercial Node. The Board reviewed the following letter dated March 3, 1982 from Mr. Wheeler: March 4, 1982 i Mr. Art Challacombe Indian River County Planning Department County Building Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Mr. Challacombe, Please investigate the Hobart Industrial Node in terms of*how it affects my property described as: WLY 200 ft. of part of S 1/2 of N 1/2 of SE 1/4 of NW 1/4, E of new U.S. Hwy #1 R/W AR Bk 95, pp 47, R Bk 114, pp 30 less N 120 ft. thereof as in OR Bk 460, pp 778. My 1.05 acre lot is next to Pro Fashion and Glenn & Mike's and across the street from Mama Mia's and Busy Bee. Thank you, Gary C. Wheeler Mr. Wheeler stated that it would appear logical that this property should be included in the commercial node. MOTION WAS MADE by Carolyn Eggert, SECONDED by Richard Parent, that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend to the Board that the Hobart node be allowed to take in that area which already has commercial, and which the Planning Department feels is necessary. Leonard Hatala approached the Board and stated that he owned 10 acres at 173rd Street, across the road from Mama Mia's, and was concerned whether or not his property would fall into the same category as the one being discussed. Discussion followed about nodes, and it was determined that a node must develop out from a center point. Attorney Brandenburg suggested that perhaps it would be a better policy to see what properties come in for development, because there is no way of knowing the direction of the development. He clarified that at this public hearing, the Board members are indicating to the people that it appears as though their property will be in the node; however, as the developers come in to the Planning Department, staff would have to look at each one and make a case-by-case determination. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. ITEM #10 - Frank DeJoia - Request that the 5.02 acre parcel JUL 13 1992 located on the west side of 80th Ave., north of 126th St., be designated LD -2, Low Density Residential (6 units/acrd). This property has received preliminary plat approval as Rose Haven Subdivision. 17 Bo 50 rc, E391. J U L 131900 BOOK 50 � �c 302 82. Air. Challacombe read the "Recommendation" from the letter from Frank DeJoia, which requested a change from LD -1 to LD -2, as well as indicating his intention to initiate a petition to change the existing zoning from R-3 to R -2A. He continued that staff has not had enough time to fully explore this matter, and would like to defer this item until the next public hearing. The next CLUP public hearing will be on Tuesday, July 27, 1982 at 7:00 P.M. in the County Commission Chambers. ITEM #11 - Frank Zorc - Request to establish a commercial node which would include a 31,974 square foot parcel located on the north side of 12th St. on the west side of the Forum Health Club. The Board reviewed the following information: February 4th; 1982 Mr. Neil Nelson County Administrator County Administration Bldg. 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Mr. Nelson: At the recommendation of Dennis Ragsdale, I hereby submit to you a formal request for a land use change on the property described on Exhibit A attached here- with. The present zoning is R2 Multiple and is immediately adjacent to Cl Commercial. 'The present land use designation is MD2. We -have commercial or semi - business type development on three sides of the property in question. If there is anything further that we must do to ex- pedite this request, please notify me at your earliest convenience. VERO MALL Certified Survey January 3, 1982 EXHIBIT "A" Deed FROM: Frank L. Zorc Title Policy -on record in Planning Dept. RE: Land Use Plan change request,.per attached letter: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 690 1-2th. Street, Vero Beach, Fla. From the SE corner of the west 1-' acres of the south 5 acres of the east � of the SW ;,-,of the NE % of Section 12, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, thence run west along the south line of said west 1-' acres a distance of 87 feet, thence north 35 feet to exclude road right of way to P.O.B., thence run west 112.69 feet thence run north 319.28 feet, thence run east 146 feet, thence run south 219.28 feet, thence run west 33.64 feet, thence run south 35.72 and -64-28 feet (total 100 feet) to the P.O.B._ C -1 US COMMERC 1. BAirK Now is use Trailer Park 12TH STREET. COMMERC COMMERCIAL STEEL BLDG COPiME RC IAL BUSINESS COMMERC. Tennis Club R 2 Multiple o- • FORUM TE OR -•N HEALTH SPA CrIGE y Steel Building SMALL HOMES 6TH AVE Mr. Zorc commented that he did not feel the land under discussion was suitable for residential, and asked that it be included in the Commercial, which is in the area. Mr. Challacombe stated that this item was previously discussed at the March 15, 1982 Planning & Zoning Commission public hearing, and was denied. He pointed out that there were existing small homes to the south of this property, and staff felt that this request should not be considered. Mrs. Eggert affirmed that they have already denied this request, and would stand by their recommendation. ITEM #12 - C. J. Johnson, D.V.M. - Request that the MXD along Oslo Rd. and 20th St. be extended to include his 23.69 acre parcel located on the SW corner of Virginia Ave. and Oslo Rd. Subject property is designated LD -1 (3 units/acre). J U L 131982 Box L 19 J JUL 131982 g K Mr. Challacombe read the following letter: Lam' 3•, r t INDIAN RIVER ANIMAL HOSPITAL CHARLES B. JOHNSON, D. V. M. Soo SO. U. S. i VERO BEACH, FLA. 32960 OFFICE 567.4324 567.4325 RES. 567.5445 February 25, 1982 Acreage 23.69 26 33 39 0001 0010 00001%0 IND RIV FARMS CO SUB PBS 2 25 E 25 A OF TR 1 ( OR BK 432 PP 97) Dear Sirs, 50 waF 394 I v-j"Ot I. as owner of the property described, write you this letter so as to go on record, opposing any change in zoning in the above described property. Present zoning is approximatly 12 acres front Oslo road as commercial. The remainder ofhe 23.69 acre is zoned as residential./ Wohn 1Json D. V. M. Commissioner Bird pointed out that the property in que.stion is LD -2 and not LD -1, as indicated in the backup material. Mr. Challacombe explained that the subject property is adjacent to the mixed use area, presently in grove and some scattered residential development. He advised that staff thought it would be best for residential and recommended that the request not be considered. ITEM #13 - City of Fellsmere - Request that the Homewood Subdivision be reduced from LD -1 to Agricultural District. The Board reviewed the following material: Cid of Fellsmere spa 14 r.�I INDIAN RIVER COUNTY POST OFFICE BOAC 38 FELLSMERE. FLORIDA - 32948 CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PHONE 571-0116 June 9,1982 Board of County Commissioners 18=0 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 POLICE DEPT. PHONE 571-1360 Re: County Comprehensive Land Plan for Indian River -County, Florida as prepared by Community Development Department. February 24,1982. Dear Sirs; Pursuant to the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning act of 1975, the City Council of Fellsmere reviewed the proposed plan for Indian River County at its regular meeting May 13,1982. The following comments were approved by Council for the Board of County Commissioners prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. On April 15,1981, the City of Fellsmere requested certain properties immediately outside our city limits be considered LD1 (see attached letter and your reply). After many meetings by council and impacts by concerned citizens outside the city, some of our requests are hereby revoked. After studing all the aspects and impacts'on our people within the city, the Homewood Subdivision will cost the city taxpayer a great deal of money in providing services to the unincorporated area should the LD1 concept be approved. Example, approximately 8•miles.of the city dirt roads inter- sect the Homewood Subdivision. This is.the only access this subdivision would have to CR 507. Assuming all property within the subdivision were developed sfte 1080 homes, populas and vehiclular traffic would use 15 streets of concentrated residential area. - Joined with this problem is the police protection these homes would require. Historically,•and by mutual aid agreement with the Indian River County Sheriff Department, the city police would service thses homes in the absence of the County Sheriff Department which is located approximately 20 miles away. This is an added burden that would be placed on the city taxpayer with no additional revenues to support these needs. The RR1 zone west of the City of Fellsmere will impact the city in permitting a home per Z, acres as well, but certainly not as much as the LD1 zone south of our city limits. .ti J U L 13 1982 21 moK 50 -%E 395 J U L 131982 6909 50 NVF 396 x� Both properties are owned by a single trustee for a beneficary of several investors. The Cit; Govcrrr;cnt has on several occasions negotiated with the trustee for the annexation of Homewwod Subdivision. These negotiations were unsuccessful which reduced the cities possibilities of a broaden tax base and revenues to provide the services they will require. Therefore it is the intent of the City of Fellsmere Council to request that the Homewood Subdivision be reduced from LD1 zone to Agricultural and require the developer to provide access roads to CR 507 for the RR1 west of the City of Fellsmere, relieving a great burden on the City Government to provide graded roads to the development: Thanking you for your consideration in this important matter, I am, Si c�erely, Joe B. Suit, r. Mayor Mr. Challacombe commented that staff recommended that this request be denied. Susan Wilson, Fellsmere, came before the Board and explained that Homewood Subdivision is presently platted but has never been documented. She requested that the Board consider making it a RR -1 designation. Dewey Walker, Zoning Manager, noted that Homewood Subdivision had 2h acre lots. Ray Scent commented that if the property, was zoned Agricultural, it would go to one unit per 5 acres. He felt that as long as it was kept in a residential category, there would be no problems. ITEM #14 - Albert H. Kahn, Trustee represented by Irving Herris - Request for Residential Land Use designation for Homewood Subdivision. Mr. Challacombe then presented the following letter from Irving Herris, which also concerns Homewood Subdivision: r pj, ► 1;32 Board of County Commissioners 1840 - 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 June 17, 1982 Ke: County Comprehensive Land Plan for Indian River County, Florida as prepared by Community.Development Department. February 24, 1982. Gentlemen: As the representative of Mr. Albert H. Kahn, Trustee, and a beneficiary under the trust, I received a copy of the letter addressed to you and signed by Joe Suit as Mayor of Fellsmere. The letter was dated June 9th, 1982. Needless to say, we were shocked and dismayed at Joe Suits remarks since it appears he has zeroed in on our holdings in particular. In order for the County Commissioners to be fully informed, I respect- fully request that we be given an equal opportunity to be heard - at your convenience - especially with reference to paragraph two which clearly is untrue. As owners of this and contiguous property for over 23 years, I'm sure we cannot be classified as fly-by-night speculators not interested in the orderly development of that area. Thank you for your consideration in the past and we hope we may ex- plain the underlying motive of the letter you received from Joe Suit. J U L 131982 Yours very truly, Irving Herris Attorney at Law :5 1RVING HERRIS ATTORNEY AT LAW SUITE 109 2S50 DOUGLAS ROAD CORAL GABLES, FLORIDA 33134 (305) 443-2336 �� . a /.`• . Board of County Commissioners 1840 - 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 June 17, 1982 Ke: County Comprehensive Land Plan for Indian River County, Florida as prepared by Community.Development Department. February 24, 1982. Gentlemen: As the representative of Mr. Albert H. Kahn, Trustee, and a beneficiary under the trust, I received a copy of the letter addressed to you and signed by Joe Suit as Mayor of Fellsmere. The letter was dated June 9th, 1982. Needless to say, we were shocked and dismayed at Joe Suits remarks since it appears he has zeroed in on our holdings in particular. In order for the County Commissioners to be fully informed, I respect- fully request that we be given an equal opportunity to be heard - at your convenience - especially with reference to paragraph two which clearly is untrue. As owners of this and contiguous property for over 23 years, I'm sure we cannot be classified as fly-by-night speculators not interested in the orderly development of that area. Thank you for your consideration in the past and we hope we may ex- plain the underlying motive of the letter you received from Joe Suit. J U L 131982 Yours very truly, Irving Herris Attorney at Law Boa 50 PnE 397 :5 23 Boa 50 PnE 397 J U L 131982 box 50 PA.CE 398 After some discussion, Mr. Challacombe stated that staff recommended the property should be designed as RR -1. MOTION was made by Carolyn Eggert, SECONDED by - Richard Parent, that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend to the Board that the Homewood Subdivision be reduced in density from LD -1 to RR -1. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. ITEM #15 - Frank Wilson, represented by Maureen Poole - Request to establish a land use designation which will allow commercial development of a 1.7 acre parcel located along the south side of railroad right-of-way, east of the Park Lateral Canal. The Board read the following letter from Frank Wilson: SZ 2861T lnr 66C 09 1 ,y. � -V) fill (241 77' k 7 /7Y r, Wri,, b 07 '. pq 6` � ��► L�4�1 �?r(f IM rl�12fj J U L 131982 50 [A" 40 Maureen Poolei, representing Frank Wilson, commented that as of today, Mr. Wilson could not get an answer as to how a buyer can utilize his property. She added that Mr. Wilson had a 1.7 acre parcel, the zoning had changed several times over the years, and he would like an answer from the Board. Mr. Challacombe requested that the Board also hear from Mr. Hearndon, since he has property in the immediate area. ITEM #16 - Daniel L. Hearndon - Request to establish a land use designation which will allow commercial development of a 3.02 acre parcel located on the northwest side of SR 512, east of the Park Lateral Canal. The Board studied the following letter from Daniel and Susan Hearndon, and a letter from Harold E. & Willie Bea Royal: Mr. Art 1:1.allecombe Planning & Zoning Suite S 241 18+40 25 th Street Vero Bvach, Florida 32960 Dear Mr, Challecombe: June 24, 19P2 I an writing in regards to the upcoming Ce�rehensive Plan reetin- to be held by the Bard of County Cor-nisioners on Tuesday July 13, 19US2. For the Fellsmere area. I'm requesting your representation at this meeting to help' us .retain the co=ercial zone on our property 4n Fellsmere . of which is E 2 Tract 1463 Less E. 70 ft., Less ,forth 153 ft.,Twp.. 31, Roe. 37, Fe1lsrre Farms Company, Indian River County, Florida Being 270.25 ft. Frit & West,487 ft. North & South, 3.02 acres. This property is presently designated R R 1 as of January 6, 1982. We want to retain the commercial zone on said property to open a Feed & Supply Store. Our long range pians for this store Is to C=and to Western Wear. On said property is an existinn structure of which the dim - are 40 ft. by 25 ft. ground level. And 20 ft. by 25 ft. upper level. In this structure is where we plan to operate this bus- iness, The reason we want to open a business of this type is be. cause there isn't one in Fellsmere. I'm sure the-Yesidents of Fellsmere given the opportunity to do so, will purchase these items in Fellsmere,rather than travel to Vero Beach or Melbourne. It is our belief, that a business of this nature will not change Fellemere but will blend in with it's sr --11 town country atmosphere. Your help in this matter would be greatly appreciated. S cerely yours, /4 K//Daniel L. Hearndon Suzan D. Hearndon July 12, 1982 Board of County Commissioners 1840 25th Street . Vero Beach, Florida` We request that-Fellsmere Farms Company, Sub. Tract 1530, Less N. 30 FT. `& S. 4o FT. And Tract 1531 be retained C. 1. Commercial zoning, as it now stands. As we have plans for future Commercial buildings on it. We give Mr. Daniel Hearad.on our permission to represent us at the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan Meeting to be held on July 13, 1982. JUL 131982 L, Sincerely, ..• C Vti 27 off° AU i JUL 131992 50, 402 Dan Hearndon, commented that he bought the subject property with the intentions of going into business, which will be a feed store and later, also sell western wear. He was informed that he would not be allowed to expand to western wear unless the property was zoned commercial. He then advised that his next door neighbor, Harold Royal,. who is zoned commercial and has a line of trailers, would like to retain his commercial zoning. Mr. Hearndon's and Mr. Royal',s acreage total about 10 acres. Mr. Challacombe stated that there were two alternatives: one would be to designate a node in that area, which would be small. The second alternative would be to leave it as is. Mr. Challacombe noted that the surrounding areas are zoned agriculture, and if the business would pertain to agriculture, then the use would be allowed. He believed a feed store would be a permitted use, and western wear would fall into that category. Tom Jones stated that at a recent workshop, they were told that nobody with a non -conforming lot size would be denied as a residential designation. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding both items, and it was determined that more research would have to be done. Attorney Brandenburg commented that they would bring this matter back to the Board after more study is done. ITEM #17 - Arthur & Mildred Dom - Request to designate Lots 1, 2, and 3 of Tropical Village Subdivision, located on the south side of SR 512, just east of the City of Fellsmere, as commercial land use. Mr. Challacombe read the following letter from Arthur & Mildred Dom: June 26 82 Zoning, Planning Board. Uounty administration suite. 6outh 241 Vero beach Fla. Mr. Art Challaco:ab : In regards to zoning L.D. 1 -- Tropical Village Estate - Block 3 We are the owners of the property 10 years and it was always zoned Co-merical. Now during the changing of the zoning board we understand that its residental at this time. We dont mind, and ghat we like, are the 4 lots in the rear 4-5-&-7 icesidental. liow the 3 lots - 1-2-3 - in the front facing 512 should be no more than right to have it commerical and that is what we want. Hoping to hear from you in return mail . • )UN 2 9 1982 uir, iirs Arthur Mildred Dom. Box 344 Roseland 111a. 32957 J U L 13 1982 29 �oK 50 403 r 1 JUL 131982 50 rnF 404 Mr. Challacombe then stated that staff recommended the 150 acre commercial node at I-95 be reviewed; they felt some of this acreage could be transferred to the SR 512 area near the City of Fellsmere. He continued that in the next 20 years, if Fellsmere builds out, there will be more pressure for commercial use in that area. Mr. Challacombe advised that they would research this item further and come back to the Board. MOTION was made by Carolyn Eggert, SECONDED by John Tippin, that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend to the Board that no new commercial designations be established at Fellsmere at this .4, time, and that future study be completed in one year. Commissioner Fletcher asked the Attorney what Arthur & Mildred Dom should tell their potential buyer in this regard. Attorney Brandenburg commented that the property was zoned commercial, and if they abide by the requirements of the Land Use Plan and prepares a market study, there is a potential for using it in a neighborhood commercial node, even though there is no specification, and the Planning & Zoning Commission has recommended that there be none. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. ITEM #18 - Richard C. Beuttell, Sr.- Request to designate a Commercial Node along SR 60 and 43rd Ave. area. After some discussion, the Board decided to defer this item until the next public hearing. ITEM #1 - Julian W. Lowenstein - Request that Lot B of River Shores Estates, Unit 1, located on the east side of U.S. #1 and the south side of 12th St. SW be given a land use designation which allows commercial development. The Board reviewed the following letter from Mr. Lowenstein dated April 1, 1982: JULIAN W. LOWaNBTBlN 7055 20TH BTRCBT R"'STSM90 VtRO BCAC:l. rLOR1DA 9a940 ASAI. 66TAT6 NOOKe" MOWMAot aROKSR PMONQ AO 208 aOa•asaa April 1, 1982 Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission Attention: Mr. Art Challacome . 1840 - 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Mr. Challacome: Dewey Walker suggested that I write you in regard to the following matter. We are the owners of Lot B, River Shores Estates, Unit One. This lot is located in the original subdivision known as Granada Gardens about one half mile south of Oslo Road. This lot along with the rest of Granada Gardens' lots facing U.S. #1 has always been zoned commercial, and the highway frontage harbors commercial and lower class development from Oslo Road, south to the subject property. At the present time there is a commercial budding directly across the street from this lot, at 12th Street, S -..q., and U.S. #1. It is my understanding that the county is now planning to rezone this area to residential. Since this lot is located in a conspicuously commercial area it would seem prudent to leave it in that catagory, rather than rezone it to residential, where it would stick out like a sore thumb. We are enclosing herewith a brochure of River Shores Estates showing Lots A, and B. Hoping you will take this suggestion under consideration, Sine rely, /=IAN W. LOWENSTEIN JUL 13 1982 s 31 ReaK 5D Ou 45`. JUL 13 1992 s®oK -50 Pr%r 406 Julian Lowenptein discussed the area between Oslo Road and Granada Gardens Subdivision and felt it would be more appropriate to retain the highway frontage on U.S. #1 as commercial and commence with the residential district south; the ditch would act as a natural barrier. He thought that nobody would ever conceive putting in a residence at the subject location. Mr. Challacombe agreed, and thought that staff would definitely look favorably upon any commercial development there. MOTION was made by Carolyn Eggert, SECONDED by John Tippin, that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend to the Board that the Oslo node would contain the Commercial on the east side of U.S. #1 to the second ditch, at the South end of Granada Gardens. Brief discussion ensued. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. ITEM #20 - Steve Henderson - Request Community Development Department to review feasibility of changing subject property designation from MD -1 to LD -1. The Board discussed the following letter: LARRY B. ALEXANDER GEORGE H. BAILEY ROBIN A. BLANTON W. CHESTER BREWER. JR. DAVID A. CAIRNS JAMES R. COLE MARGARET L. COOPER B. JEANE CRIPPEN CHARLES H. DAMSEL,JR. BRUCE A. EPPLE JEFFREY H. FISHER L. MARTIN FLANAGAN WILLIAM A. FOSTER MARJORIE D. GADARIAN THADDEUS D. HARTMAN Joy p,s, FOSTER & Moss MEMBERS OF JONES 6 FOSTER. P. A. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS HAYWARD D. GAY STEVE L. HENDERSON THORNTON M. HENRY THEODORE W. HERZOG PETER S. HOLTON R. BRUCE JONES THOMAS A. KOVAL CLINTON W. LANIER ROBIN A. LLOYD STEVEN A. LONG JOHN BLAIR MCCRACKEN S. CAROL McLEAN BRIAN J. MORRISSEY GEORGE H. MOSS 817 BEACHLAND BOULEVARD P. 0. BOX 3406 VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 (305) 231-1900 PATRICK M. O'HARA RICHARD J. OLACK WILLIAM W. PRICE BRUCE M. RAMSEY CHRISTOPHER J. SCHILLING ROBERT L. SELLARS SIDNEY A. STUBBS, JR. GEORGE P. SUPRAN .ALLEN R. TOMLINSON EVERETT J. VAN GAASBECK KEVIN D. WILKINSON PAUL C. WOLFE Mr. Bruce King Community Development Director Planning Department Dear Bruce: WEST PALM BEACH OFFICE .SONES & FOSTER, P. A. 601 FLAGLLR DRIVE COURT P. 0. DRAWER E WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402 (30S) 6S9-3000 July 8, 1982 By Hand Since the Public Hearings on the adoption of the Master Land Use Plan are coming up soon, I thought I would call your attention to a glaring case of spot zoning (or "spot planning") which I think needs correction. I'm enclosing a map and have outlined thereon the land use plan districts applicable to Sections 35 and 36, Township 32 South, Range 39 East. You will note that Section 36 is in the LD -1 district (3 units per acre) while Section 35 has been designated MD -1. While this rather large gap in permitted densities does not really create a problem with respect to larger portions -of Sections 35 and 36, (those properties are largely undeveloped) the desig- nation of the area marked "subject proper -Ey" as MD -1 creates a very significant conflict between permitted densities and actual densities existing. I should disclose that I have just purchased a residence located on Lots 5 and 6, Arbor Oaks Subdivision, lying adjacent to the subject property near the northeast quarter (see crosshatch). I believe that the subject property is zoned R-3 so that no rezoning would be necessary in order for the property owner to construct 8 units per acre. The designation of the subject property as MD -1 ignores the existing uses and the mandates of Chapter 163 which require coordination of land use zones with the plans adopted by municipalities within the County. I believe the City's plan has adjoining pro- perties at a much lower density. I believe the best solution is to amend the Plan during the upcoming Hearings so as to designate this property as LD -1. If the County does not desire to change the land use desig- nation, at least a rezoning to R -2A should be in order. This would require the land owner to come in and request rezoning to a higher density at the time any project is developed. Further, it would enable the land owner to develop a multi -family project at a reasonable density con- sistent with adjoining properties. I would appreciate it if you would planned designation with respect to let me have your comments on same. Thanks for you assistance. , Kindest regards, JUL 131982 11/__1 S Leve L. Henderson 131 take a hard look at this the subject property and ac�nK : 50. 407 FF- JUL 13 1982 � �8 MOTION was made by Carolyn Eggert, SECONDED by John Tippin, that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend to the Board that no change be made in the Land Use Plan for this item. Brief discussion followed along those lines. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously.. ADDED ITEM - Lou Higgins - Atlantic Properties on U.S. #1 Ms. Higgins discussed Atlantic Properties, located on U.S. #1 south of Granada Gardens Subdivision, and across the highway from Skaggs Appliance. She urged the Board to consider changing the Land Use Map and change the designation to commercial for the subject property. Mr. Challacombe disagreed and referred to the Vista Royale project. He did not feel that just because property is located on U.S. #1 that it is ideally suited for commercial. MOTION was made by Carolyn Eggert, SECONDED by John Tippin, that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend to the Board that no Land Use change be made on this item. Ms. Higgins asked how her land differed from Mr. Lowenstein's land? Commissioner Bird explained that there was no commercial activity on the east side of U.S. #1, north of her property - it was all in groves. He suggested that she t should go to the Planning Department and request a commercial node which would involve establishing a need, and getting a site plan. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. There being no further business, on Motion made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 10:30 P.M. ATTEST: n s Clerk Chairman JUL 1 1982 Agog 50 €.A F 409 35