HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-28ORDINANCE NO. 91-28
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY REPLACING A
PORTION OF THE ST. SEBASTIAN RIVER C-2 DISTRICT WITH A NEW C-3
CONSERVATION DISTRICT FOR PRIVATELY OWNED UPLAND AND XERIC
SCRUB AREAS AND AMENDING' THE CONSERVATION ELEMENT, AND
PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS,
SEVERABI-LITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the Indian
River County Comprehensive Plan on February 13, 1990, and
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency held a public hearing on
all comprehensive plan amendment requests on November 15, 1990,
a ter due public notice, an
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency recommended approval of
this comprehensive plan amendment to the Board of County
County held a Transmittal Public Hearing on December 11, 1990,
after advertising pursuant to F.S.163.3184(15)(b)(1) and (c), and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners approved the
transmittal of this comprehensive plan amendment to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs for their review and comment, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners announced at the
transmittal public hearing its intention to hold and advertise a
final public hearing at the adoption stage of this plan amendment,
and
WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Community Affairs received
this Comprehensive Plan .Amendment on December 19, 1990, for the
State review pursuant -to Fes.163.3184(4), and
Indian iv ounty received the Objectiona,
Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) report from the Florida
Department of Community Affairs on April 22, 1991, and
WHEREAS, Indian River—County revised the data and analysis
supporting this comprehensive plan amendment in response to the ORC
report pursuant to F.S. 163.3184(7), and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County held a Comprehensive Plan Amendment Adoption Public Hearing
on June 18, 1991, after advertising pursuant to
SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Friday, August 23, 2013 - 12:00:05 - OfncialDocuments:626, Attachment Id 0, Page 1
ORDINANCE NO 91-28
F.S.163.3184(15 )(b)(2) and (c);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that:
SECTION 1. Comprehensive Plar�Amendment Adoption;«
Transmittal
This proposed amendment to the Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted, and five (5) copies are
directed to be transmitted to the State of Florida Department of
Community Affairs.
SECTION 2. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
The Indian River County Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended .
to replace a portion of the St. Sebastian River C-2 Districtwith
a new C-3 conservation district for privately owned upland and
xeric scrub areas and amending the conservation element by:
o Revision to Future Land Use Map as shown on Attachment
"C', .
o Revision to policies 1.4, 1.5, and 1.31 of the Future
rand Use Element as shown on Attachment "A";
o Addition of policy 6.14 to the Conservation Element as
shown on Attachment "A";
Revision to the data and analysis portion of the Future
Land Use Element as shown on Attachment "A"; and
o Revision to the data and analysis portion of the
conservation Element as shown on Attachment "B".
SECTION 3. Codification
.The provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated into
the County Cod ani the word "ordinance" may -be changed to
"section", "article", or other appropriate word, and the sections
of the ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such
intentions.
SECTION 4. Repeal of Conflicting Provisions
All previous ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida which
conflict With the provisions of-t1fiis ordinance -are -hereby -repealed
to the extent of such conflict. All special acts of the
legislature applying Unly to tile unincorporated portion of Indian
River County and which conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict.
SECTION 5. Severability
It is declared to be the intent of the Board of County
Commissioners that if any provision of this ordinance and
therefore, the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan Amendments
are for any reason finally held invalid or unconstitutional by any
court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed a
separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall
not affect the validity of the remaining provisions.
SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Friday, August 23, 2013 - 12:00:06 - OfficialDocuments:626, Attachment Id 0, Page 2
SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Friday, August 23, 2013
ORDINANCE_IO._ 91-28
SECTION 6. Effective Date
This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption pursuant
to F.S.163.3194.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of
lrrdian-R ver-County�l-orida —orrth s ldtn day of June I
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -iou, rn a- 1
on the 10th day of June 1991 for a public hearing to be
held on the 18th day of June , 1991 at which time it was
moved for adoption by Commissioner Scurlock , seconded.by
Commissioner Eggert and adopted by the following
vote:
Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Vice Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Ahsent.
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS'
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Richard N. Bird;;
SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Friday, August 23, 2013 - 1
05/29/91
CORACI/CPA 116:
Attachment "A"
Amendments to the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan are as
Lollows:
FUTURE LAND—ISE-ELEMENT
Page 86:
Restricted conservation lands include those areas which
because of environmental constraints have limited development
potential or contain remnant natural communities once typical
of the county. This would include land in private ownership
where development within the restricted areas would be limited
to onlylow density uses or would be clustered to protect
functioning natural .systems and communities. Several
alternatives exist for protecting these .lands including the
internal or external transfer of development rights, and the
use of conservation easements or tax incentives to further
limit the impacts of development within the restricted
conservation areas.
PAGE 89:
POLICY 1.4: The conservation land use designations are applied to
those areas which contain or possess lands with qualities and
features which play a vital or essential role in the normal
functioning of the ecosystems and have been so identified in the
conservation element or merit preservation as vestiges of once
common.county ecosystems.
POLICY 1.5: Development of conservation lands shall a limited to
uses as follows.:
C-1 Publicly owned
Conservation uses
Recreational uses
C-2 Privately owned wetland and barrier island
Recreational uses
Residential uses 1 unit/40 acres (on-site)
or 1 unit/l acre (transfer
of development right)
o C-2 areas 'shall be generally designated on the
future land use map; specific boundaries shall be
established pursuant to policy 1.31 of the Future
Land Use Element.
C-3 Privately owned upland and xeric scrub
Conservation uses
Recreational uses
Residentiales-1 unit/ -2.1 acre-(-on=site- internal
transfer of development rights)
or 1 unit/l acre external transfer
of development rights)
D C-3 areas shall be generally designated on the
future land use map; specific boundaries shall be
established pursuant to policy 1.31 of the Future
Arid -Use Element..
2:00:06 - OfficialDocuments:626, Attachment Id 0, Page 4
05/29/91
CORACI/CPA 116 (CON'T)
Attachment "A"
No residential development in C-2 or C-3 areas shall occur unless
such development is approved as a planned development. The county
shall require cluster development and density transfers to limit
the impact of development on conservation lands. Planned
Deye1opments_-andelusterinq-ic not apply to single familyy—Iots
along the St. Sebastian River existing prior to February 13, 1990.
The following criteria shall apply to planned developments in the
C-2 or C-3 areas:
• The
not exceed
wetlands)
areas, as
Im-off=site
shall be
designated lands;
o Lots created through the PD process shall not exceed one
acre in size, with the remainder of the area designated
as open space; "
D Open space areas shall be retained as natural areas;
however, up to ten percent of the open space area may be
used for recreational purposes in C-3 areas.
• Within the C-3, the total area of xeric scrub
disturbed by a planned development project
shall not exceed 208 of the total xeric scrub
area occurring on site.
POLICY 1.31: Conservation land use designations shall be depicted
on the future land use map. The exact boundaries of the C-2 and C-
3 Conservation Districts shall be determined by environmental
survey. Any portion of a property which is depicted as C-2 or C-3
on the future land use map but determined not to be environmentally
sensitive or environmentally important based upon an environmental
survey will have the same land use designation as the contiguous
ad jacent -property, except for land in the C-3 district -east of the
St. Sebastian River which shall have an R Rural land use
designation if determined not to be environmentally sensitive or
environmentally important. (See Conservation Element Policies 6.4
and 6.11 for descriptions of "environmentally sensitive" and
"environmentally important" lands.)
Conservation area boundaries shall be established through
environmental surveys using the following criteria:
•C-2 Areas. C-2 area boundaries shall be established based
upon the extent of wetland areas as defined in Conservation
Element policy 5.1.
•C-3 Areas. C-3 area boundaries shall be established based
upon soil types and xeric scrub vegetative Characteristics
The following soil types shall indicate C-3 areas:
- Orsino fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes; or
- Electia sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes
The environmental survey shall consist of a boundary survey
conducted by the landowner/applicant or his agent, based on the
above referenced criteria, and shall be verified by county
environmental planning staff.
SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Friday, August 23, 2013 - 12:00:06 - OffcialDocuments:626, Attachment Id 0, Page 5
05/29/91
CORACIICFA -116
Attachment "A"
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
PAGE 85
Policy 6.14 (new). The county shall protect the large undisturbed
upland and xeric scrub community abutting the environmentally
sensitive St. Sebastian River. Development in - area shall be
low-density or preferably clustered to preserve significant and
connected expanses of viable xeric scrub habitat. Recognizing the
undi7turbed scenic and natural qualities of the river, any
permitted residential development shall maintain a 100 -foot natural
buffer consisting of undisturbed native vegetation measured from
the mean high water mark of the river or 50 -feet from the landward
boundary of jurisdictional wetlands along the river or any
tributary, whichever is greater. The design of any residential
—developmentt shall restr-ict boat access to the -river -cons i -stent -with
federal, state and local laws and regulations providing for the
protection of manatees. Because of the importance of the community
as an intact natural system, areas designated as set asides" must
contain ecologically adequate habitat to maintain and preserve the
natural functions and character of this community. No off-site
mitigation for such area shall be permitted. The county shall
encourage the conservation of this, xeric scrub community by
establishing density transfer and' cluster. development land use
regulations to limit—the impact ofevelopment on tai s property.
Appropriate infrastructure such as central sewer service and
surface water management systems may be required for the protection
of the St. Sebastian River ecosystem.
u\r\r\atass
SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Friday, August 23, 2013 - 12:00:06 - OffcialDocuments:626, Attachment Id 0, Page 6
05/29/91
Attachment "B"
Coraci/CPA 116
Revisions: Conservation
Element of the Indian
River County Comprehensive
Plan
CONSERVATION
- The -Upper -St_-Johns-RiverBasin_,--including-.h"t,--Johns
Marsh, Fort Drum Marsh, and Blue Cypress Lake in western
Indian River County, is publicly owned by SJRWMD and is
jointly managed by the GFC. The area is therefore a
substantially protected conservation corridor, with
outdoor recreation opportunities available to county and
regional residents.
Land adjacent to the Sebastian River and on the northern
barrier island -is -being -considered for-publi-c acquisition
by state and federal agencies. The establishment of a
county land acquisition plan could further supplement
conservation efforts in these significant resource areas,'
and elsewhere in the county.
Alternatives identified in the "Flora and Fauna" analysis
section of this element such as natural vegetation
percent coverage requirements, wetland vegetation
buffers, transfer or purchase of development rights, and
conservation use incentives would contribute to the
conservation of terrestrial and aquatic resources.
The establishment of a marina siting ordinance would be
an important tool for addressing presentand future
boating recreational needs with consideration of marine
resource impacts.
As previously described in this element, the St. Sebastian River,
associated wetlands, and adjacent xeric scrub communities are
significant natural resources. In combination, the St. Sebastian
River area resources are a unique blend of complementary habitats.
Certain wildlife species such as ospreys, bald eagles, and river
otter benefit from the biodiversity of the area.
The south fork- of the St. Sebastian -River and nearby undeveloped
uplands represent a mosaic of xeric hammock, scrubby flatwoods,
sand pine scrub, dry prairie; pine flatwoods, forested wetlands,
and riverine habitat. The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission (GFC) identifies the St. Sebastian River and nearby
uplands as one of the most valuable natural areas remaining in the
county.
me est=aDlisnment of a conservation land use designation along
St. Sebastlan River would help to protect the water quality
habitat values of the river, associated wetlands and xeric s
ve
-68-
SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Friday, August 23, 2013 - 12:00:07 - OffcialDocuments:626, Attachment Id 0, Page 7
SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Friday, August 23, 2013 - 1
Application of a conservation designation to St. Sebastian River
wetlands and adjacent scrub communities would have the benefit of
promoting land development compatible with resource protection.
Within the St. Sebastian River conservation area, a development
densittrof t unit—per4fl—acres forwetiands would- effectively
protect such resources which are inherently not conducive for land
development. A 1 unit per acre transfer of -deVeIGPMeA".—Si�]'!
credit for wetlands would .provide further wetland protection
incentive.
Unlike wetlands, scrub uplands have physical characteristics prime
for land development. Since xeric scrub areas are "high and dry',
the conflict of development vs. preservation is greater than with
wetlands. For these reasons, a development density of 1 unit per
22 acres on the scrub uplands adjacent to the river would provide
adequate protection in combination with a pro ec xve utter along
the river and a cluster development requirement. While a 1 unit
per 40 acres density application to the scrub upland (as well as
wetlands) would provide substantial development deterrence, a 1
unit per 21 acre density strikes a. more reasonable balance between_
private development rights and upland scrub protection. Moreover,
a 1 unit per 2' acre—density—aubjEct—to—an—upland conse-r-vation
percent set aside requirement would promote conservation
The intent of a St. Sebastian River conservation area is to provide
development control as it pertains to the St. Sebastian River,
associated wetlands, and adjacent xeric scrub communities. While
the conservation designation can be generally depicted on an
overall county land use map, specific boundaries of the
conservation area need to be establishedon a site- y -s a review
basis, reflecting the extent of such natural communities. The
specific extent of xeric scrub communities can be
field verification of existing scrub soils and/or vegetation, using
the Indian River County Soil and GFC,xeric scrub communities report
and survey for reference.
For establishing the general eastern boundary of the St. Sebastian River
conservation area, Roseland-Roadi a sonable cut-off point. Approximately 500-
600 acres of land exist between the river and Roseland Road in the area of concern.
Of this aermee, approximately 300 acre- are classified byAhe GFC as xeric scrub'
using National Wetland. Inventory (NWI) maps, aerial photographs and the county soil
survey as an information base it is estimated that roughly 125 acres of the remaining
200-300 acres between the river and Roseland Road are wetlands.
Thus, it is estimated that approximately 75-175 acres between the St. Sebastian
River and Roseland Road are non -xeric scrub uplands, the specific location of which
could-bedetermine'—�ite-by-site review -basis (as previously mentioned).
land development density of 1 unit per acre on this acreage would be appropriate,
in that it would be consisen —with
the 75-175 number of residential units that could potentially be built on this property
at a 1 unit per acre density is consistent with overall projected population in the
Urban Service Area of the county, in that the density allowance would not create an
unreasonable "supply" of potential homesites beyond the projected population's need
(see the Land Use and Housing Elements for reference information on population and
housing needs projections)
-68.1-
2:00:07 - OfncialDocuments:626, Attachment Id 0, Page 8
A 1 unit per 2; acre density applied to the xeric scrub east of the St. Sebastian
River (with clustering requirements) provides reasonable protection to the scrub
and river, in combination with the 1 unit per 40 acre density (applying to the 125+
acres of wetlands) and a riverlwetland setback buffer. The number of potential
development units within the 300 acres of xeric scrub on the east side of the river
is further reduced -when one accounts for the approximately 125 acres of scrub
The Indian River County Soil Survey identifies "Orsino -fine sand, 0 to 5 per(
slopes" as the soil associated with xeric. scrub east of the St. Sebastian Ri`
Relative to other soils in the county, Orsino fine sand is one of the better soils
septic tank absorption fields, with moderate limitations. Soil modifications;
combination with setback requirements from the river, would minimize ecolog
impacts associated with septic systems. This issue will become moot over time on
east side of the river, however, as public sewer will completely serve the area by
year 2010 (see the Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element for reference information).
A conservation designation on the west side of the St. Sebastian River to pro`
resource protection would cover approximately 600 acres of xeric ser
approximately 150 acres of wetlands border the river on the west side in
unincorporated county as well. The xeric scrub and associated wetlands on the v
is outside of the county's Urban Service Area (USA). At a 1 unit per 22 etre
density, the venin scrub in this area would have a nntential fnr a maximum of
approximately 240 residential units. In that the area is outside of the USA,
individual wells and septic systems would be associated with the residential units.
The county soil survey identifies "Electra sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes" as the soil
associated with the scrub community west of the St. Sebastian River. The soil is
classified as "somewhat poorly drained", and in its unaltered state the soil has
severe limitations for septic suitability—. However, even with its limitations, local
SCS soils scientists identify Electra sand as one of the better soils in indian River
County for septic tank absorptions ie s an m ca e that all of its limitations-=
be overcome. Adequate amounts of suitable fill material would increase the effective
depth to the water table and the restrictive layer and provide needed filtration. The
risk of filtration problems can be reduced by maintaining maximum setbacks from the
river and associated wetlands, and Ph can be raised in the immediate area of a septic
tank to prevent corrosion to the concrete.
The Solid Waste Sub -Element of the Comprehensive Plan substantially describes and
analyzes hazardous waste management practices in Indian River County. The
following points are summarized:
- The County Utilities Department presently has limited storage facilities
att e coup —ylaa—n filr of r eesidenti—generated-iazardous waste. This
facility does not accept such waste from small quantity commercial or
industrial generators.
contract with private hazardous waste haulers for the disposal of waste
materials. A future expansion of the storage facility at the landfill for
temporary storage of hazardous materials is proposed.
- There is apathy or ignorance regarding the impacts of improper
hazardous waste disposal or illegal dumping in Indian River County, in
that illegal dumping continues to be a problem. A program to educate
the public concerning the economic and environmental impacts of such
activities could help to address this matter. Also, an increase int e
consequences of illegal dumping (ie -fine penalties) may help to deter
such problems.
-68.2-
u\rlrlcompre
SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Friday, August 23, 2013 - 12:00:07 - OfncialDocuments:626, Attachment Id 0, Page 9
PROPOSED
C-2
C-3
T - - M • AL 1W
CPA116 - Request to create a new conservation land use (C-3)
for privately owned upland and xeric scrub property in the
area surrounding the St. Sebastian River; this request
involves amendments to the Land Use and Conservation Elements
and the land use map.
• LL.I i.._tir�
i
SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Friday, August 23, 2013 - 12:00:0i- OFticialDocuments:626, Attachment Id 0, Page 10